Contract Issues 1
Two Alternative Contract Strategies Contract issues discussion Strength - Weakness 2
If you like challenges, try an interface 3
Why EPC contract Single point responsibility for safety, progress, quality and warranties Potential for reduced execution time Potential for reduced investment costs Few contractual interfaces Multi discipline execution and coordination 4
EPC alternatives Main alternative EPC Contracts: FIDIC, NTK/NF and NS 8407 FIDIC: «no» tradition in Major Norwegian Industry Companies NTK/NF: used extensively by Major Norwegian Industry Companies in Norway and abroad, onand offshore (Statoil, Hydro, Norske skog, etc.) NS 8407: used by JBV, Statsbygg, SVV and construction generally in Norway. FIDIC: Fédération Internationale Des Ingénieurs-Conseils NTK/NF: Norsk totalkontrakt/norsk fabrikasjonskontrakt NS: Norsk standard 5
NS 8407 1938: NS 401 1952: NS 401 A. 1969: NS 3401 1991: NS 3430 1992: NS 3431 (totalentreprise (EPC)) 2004 :NS 8405 2006: NS 8406 («enklere variant» av NS 8405) 2008: NS 8405 (mindre revisjon) 2011: NS 8407 (totalentreprise (EPC)) Merk: NS 3431 og NS 8407 er totalentrepriser, øvrige NS er byggherrestyrte kontrakter. 6
NTK/NF 1974: Norsk Hydro contract for Ethylene Plant, Rafnes 1977: Norsk Hydro Model Contract 1983: North Sea Offshore Lump Sum Construction Contract (MVL (=Norsk industri) and NIFO) 1987: Norsk Fabrikasjonskontrakt 1987 (NF 87) 1992: NF 92 2000: Norsk Totalkontrakt 2000 (NTK 2000) 2005: NF 05 2005: NTK 05 2007: NF 07 2007: NTK 07 Note: NTK is EPC («design-build»); NF is PC («design-bid-build») 7
NTK/NF vs NS NTK07/NF07 Structured with Attachments. Used by major Norwegian industry companies domestically and abroad. Good experience. More Owner friendly than NS 8407, e.g. NO preclusion regarding changes. NS 8407 Layer-on-layer principle («mountain» of contradictory pages). Not used by major Norwegian industry companies. Not Owner friendly, e.g. preclusion regarding changes. Conclusion: FB will use NTK07 modified; NS 8407 is too risky. 8
The Approved Contract Strategy 9
The Appoved Contract Strategy 10
Requirements on our Contractors High safety standard Documented excellent safety record at previous projects Bidders to describe in detail how to obtain top class safety standard at FB sites Ability to perform the work according to agreed quality, schedule and cost Experienced and competent organization Ability to cooperate with client Construction close to tracks in operation 11
Requirements on Ourselves High Quality ITT s and Contacts High Quality Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) Fair sharing of risk Fair and clear compensation mechanisms Walk-to-Talk Role model on safety issues Keep our sheet clean (e.g. no delay on approvals of drawings, etc.) We keep what you promise Make the Contractors good Enable the Contractors to excel 12
Main Follo Line Contracts Oslo S D&B Tunnel TBM Ski EPC Oslo S EPC D&B EPC TBM EPC Ski Substructure (~ 2 mrd. NOK) Substructure (~1 mrd. NOK) Substructure (~ 7 mrd. NOK) Substructure (~ 2 mrd. NOK) + Railway Systems (~ 0,5 mrd. NOK) + Railway Systems (~ 1,2 mrd. NOK) + Railway Systems (~ 0,7 mrd. NOK) Signal (Oslo S GS extension) (~ 0,4 mrd. NOK) EPC Signal (Thales) (~ 0,5 mrd. NOK) 13
Clean interface to Main EPC s & Enhancement of Owner organisation Type of Scope Oslo S Langhus-Ski Oslo - Ski Clean Interface to Main EPC s Preparatory Work Demolition Technical Scope Demolish: Borgen Garasjen Presenningtørka Fyrhus Locate and relocate cables Prep. Work for track and rail tech. Modify part of Skeidarbygget Demolish Omformerhall Locate and relocate Cables Extend Cable bridge Establish power supply to Åsland for 4 TBM and segment prefab. Rig Areas, adit tunnels Rig area Oslo S Rig area Langhus Rig area Åsland Adit tunnel Åsland Prep. Work Sydhavna (soil transp.) Enhancement of Owner Organisation Project Service Agreement (PSA) Technical resources Technical resources Technical resources 14
Questions? Follobanen Langhus Ski og Ski hensetting Informasjonsmøte 24. oktober 2012 15