rettelsesblad / supplerende …leverandorportal.vejdirektoratet.dk/lists/tenderdocuments...can you...

Vejdirektoratet

Guldalderen 12

2640 Hedehusene

Telefon +45 7244 3333

[email protected]

vejdirektoratet.dk

SE 60729018

EAN 5798000893450

Dato 5. juli 2016

Sagsbehandler Stine Kirkeskov

Mail [email protected]

Telefon

Dokument 15/10041-89

Side 1/75

RETTELSESBLAD / SUPPLERENDE MEDDELELSER NR. 15

CORRECTION SHEET/ SUPPLEMENTARY NOTICE NO. 15

Fjordforbindelsen Frederikssund,

Dual carriageway Marbækvej - Skibbyvej, inclusive of a High Bridge

Udbud 14210.001 Vej- og broarbejder

This correction sheet sets out the corrections and additions to all the tender material as defined in the Document List (Contractual documents, Tender documents and Information Room documents). Queries from bidders with the associated answers are attached as an appendix. Corrections are shown in bold italics and highlighted in grey.

Corrections and additions:

Bidders are hereby notified of the following corrections and additions to the tender documents for the

above-mentioned contract:

To the Bidders

2

Bestemmelser om udbud og tilbud (BUT):

No additions or corrections.

Særlige betingelser (SB):


Særlig arbejdsbeskrivelse/Special Work Specification (SAB/SWS):

Correction to Special Work Specification (SWS) 20 – Foundation

Section 4.5

For all piles going down to rock, and where end bearing resistance is to be considered in the design, coring of the lower part of the concrete shaft is required and contact between the pile base and rock shall be investi-gated. The coring shall be used to demonstrate the cleanliness of the contact (concrete to rock) and that the rock is undisturbed. Core recovery shall be 100%. Core dimensions shall be at least 0.5 metres of concrete fol-lowed by 1.5 metres of rock both with a diameter of at least 100 millime-tres. The resulting bore shall be backfilled with cement grout of an equivalent strength to the concrete.

SWS20-00-4.5-040 MR

Is replaced with:

For all piles going down to rock, and where end bearing resistance is to be considered in the design, coring of the lower part of the concrete shaft is required and contact between the pile base and rock shall be investi-gated. The coring shall be used to demonstrate the cleanliness of the contact (concrete to rock) and that the rock is undisturbed. Core recovery shall be 100%. Core dimensions shall be at least 0.5 metres of concrete fol-lowed by 1.5 metres of rock both with a diameter of at least 100 millime-tres. The resulting bore shall be backfilled with cement grout of an equivalent strength to the concrete. In the event that core recovery below the pile base is <100%, geo-physical and OATV testing shall be carried out in open (uncased) holes below the pile base.

SWS20-01-4.5-040 MR

Tilbuds- og afregningsgrundlag (TAG):


Tilbudsliste (TBL):


3

Udbudsbetalingsplan:


IKT specifikation:


Tegninger/Drawings:

Updated Definition Design Drawing 14210-27034 (Miscellaneous) and Drawing List (Miscellaneous)

will be made available on the Supplier Portal.

Models:


Protocols


Other data files:


Geotechnical Reports:


Other Information Room Documents


Document list:

The document list has been updated to Rev. 15 and will be made available on the Supplier Portal.

1

14210.001, Fjordforbindelsen Frederikssund Bilag til rettelsesblad 15 Appendix to Correction Sheet 15

Tender Queries:

Vejdirektoratet has received the following queries on the tender material for the above-mentioned tender. The queries and their accompanying

answers appear below:

This is the last Correction Sheet for this tender.

RET = Rettelsesblad/ Correction Sheet.

2

Nr. Query Answer Answer in Ret no.

Tender Correcti-ons

1. According to the Document list the following docu-ment should be available for download, but we cannot find it on the VD webpage. Please advice when these document will be available.

- dokument 1.4.9 - Principiel tilladelse til etablering af midlertidig arbejdshavn i forbindelse med etable-ring af ny motortrafikvej i Roskilde Fj

- dokument 3.3.30 - Miljø

This document and model will be made available on the Supplier Portal.

RET 1 No

2. The following document does not seem to appear on the Document List. Please advice if or where this document is to be placed on the document list.

- Kvalitets-og miljøledelseskrav til totalentrepriser - 14210.001

Bidders are referred to item number 1.2.4 on the Document List.

RET 1 No

3. According to the document list, some of the docu-ment should also be available in English as a ser-vice translation. As far as we can see the following document does not appear to be translated as of yet. Please advice when we can expect the follow-ing documents to be available in English.

- 1.1.2 - Special conditions (SB)

- 1.1.3 - Pricing document (TBL)

- 1.1.6 - Method of measurement (TAG)

- 1.5.1 - Water protocol (Vandsynsportokol)

Bidders are advised that the service trans-lations for the following documents will be made available on the Supplier Portal.

Special Conditions (SB)

Pricing document (TBL)

Method of measurement (TAG)

There will be no service translations made available for the other documents.

RET 1 No

3


Tender Correcti-ons

- 1.6.2 - ICT description (IKT beskrivelse)

4. In several documents a reference to a payment plan is mentioned, e.g. SB, ad § 2, stk. 2, item F "Udkast til betalingsplan af 4. december 2015". Could VD please clarify where we can find this payment plan (udbudsbetalingsplan).

Bidders are advised that this document will be made available on the Supplier Portal with this addendum.

RET 1 No

5. Can you provide us with the Inroads/ NovaPoint road model files (DTM, ALG) for all roads within the project?

The relevant Inroads files will be made available to bidders on the Supplier Portal. In relation to the DTM files, bidders are referred to the 3D road geometry model.

RET 1 No

6. Can you provide us with the 3D alignment for the high bridge, it has been left out in the digital road alignment file (14210_0200_8200_f4.cl.dgn)? The pdf drawings showing the same are also missing but they are shown in the drawing list

Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponse to Tender Query 005. The files made available will allow generation of the 3D alignment for all roads including the expressway.

RET 1 No

7. Can you provide us with English service transla-tions of the Danish national annexes if you have these available?

Bidders can see new service translations in the updated Document list

RET 1 No

8. Can you clarify the thickness of the boundary to apply stainless steel in the tidal and splash zone for the high bridge (see SWS01-00-4.6-040)?

The bidder is requested to clarify the exact nature of the query. Bidders are referred to SWS-24 Concrete in relation to require-ments for cover to reinforcement.

RET 1 No

9. Will all bridge specific annexes and guidelines be translated in to English?

Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponse to Tender Query 007 and the up-dated Document List. These documents will be uploaded as they become available.

RET 2 No

4


Tender Correcti-ons

All documents that are currently available are on the Vejregler website: http://english-vejreg-ler.lovportaler.dk/SearchResult.aspx?t=%2fV1%2fNavigation%2fVejreglerEnglish%2fConstruc-tion+and+planning%2fBridges+and+Highway+Structures%2fEurocodes%2f

10. We urge Vejdirektoratet to consider postponing the deadline for delivering material for the first dialogue meeting for 4 weeks (subsequently also the dialogue meetings). Can that be accomplis-hed?

Bidders are referred to the new programme provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 2 Yes – see correc-tions in RET 2

11. Regarding BUT, Theme 1 in the first dialogue meeting: Vejdirektoratet has, in accordance with our beliefs, stated that the tenders cost for tendering are to be minimized and that the tender process has been designed with that in mind. Hence, we urge Vejdirektoratet to make the quantities from the illustrative design available for the tenders (no liability). It will reduce the cost for all 5 tenders as neither will have to derive quantities form the same models with the sole purpose of verifying Vejdirektoratets price. We kindly ask Vejdirektoratet please, to make the quantities from the illustrative design available.

Bidders are referred to the models and data made available as part of the Information Room in relation to the calculation of quan-tities. No additional data will be made available by the Employer.

RET 2 No

http://english-vejregler.lovportaler.dk/SearchResult.aspx?t=%2fV1%2fNavigation%2fVejreglerEnglish%2fConstruction+and+planning%2fBridges+and+Highway+Structures%2fEurocodes%2f%20







5


Tender Correcti-ons

12. When will DRD publicize changes to the tender material after the first dialogue round?

The DRD expects to publicize an updated version of the Tender Material approxi-mately 2 weeks after the last meeting in the first dialogue round.

RET 1 No

13. We ask Vejdirektoretet, please to supply XML files for all road alignments in order for the tenders to increase the quality of our assessment of quanti-ties. Vejdirektoratet has previously made XML files available in amongst others the Herning - Holstebro tender.

These files will be made available to bid-ders as soon as possible.


14. All annex' (bilag) to the Vandsynsprotokol seems to be missing. Please forward these annex'.

For the annex ’Godkendelse i henhold til Miljøbeskyttelsesloven §§ 28, Frederiks-sund Kommune’, bidders are referred to the Document List, items 1.4.8-1.4.15.

The remaining annexes will be made avail-able on the Supplier Portal.


15. Under interim deadline 2a [of the SB] a reference to Appendix 5 in SWS - Design is mentioned, con-taining the Client's design packages. SWS01 - Design only contains up to Appendix 4 (see page 151 in SWS01 - Design). Could VD please provide us with Appendix 5.

It is confirmed that there are only 4 appen-dices to SWS01 – Design. Bidders are referred to section 3.2 of ’Quality and envi-ronment management requirements for turnkey contracts, appendix to SWS Man-agement and Cooperation (“Kvalitets- og Miljøledelseskrav til totalentrepriser, bilag til SAB Styring og Samarbejde") in relation to the design packages.


16. According to interim deadline 2a [of the SB] the design packages for foundations and pillars have to be submitted 8 months after contract signing and according to interim deadline 2c the result of

Bidders are advised that interim deadline 2c only applies in relation to deviating ground conditions, as further set out in

RET 3 No

6


Tender Correcti-ons

the geotechnical investigations for the high bridge have to be submitted after 12 months. In our in-terpretation there is conflict between these two interim deadlines as we need the result of the geotechnical investigations in order to complete the design for foundations and pillars, ie. 2c comes before 2a. Should the two interim dead-lines have been switched timewise or is interim deadline 2a only dealing with design for founda-tions and pillars for land-based bridges. Please clarify.

clause 15(4) of the SB.

17. The partial sum of the percentages under HP1 "Projektering" only add up to 50%, whereas in all other HP-groups they add up to 100%. Please clarify.

Bidders are advised that a new version of the Udbudsbetalingsplan will be made available on the Supplier Portal. It should be noted that further changes form part of this document.


18. Please confirm that we have understood the fol-lowing correctly. Every single time we pass under the transmission lines at st. 2.2 with a vehicle taller than 3m we have to call the owner of the transmission line, even though we have estab-lished portals for protection of the transmission line?

This might be many times a day and from 6am to 18pm.

What happens if we cannot get hold of the owner of the transmission line?

How does the Client and/or the owner entend to handle semi-permanent works, like excavation

Bidders are referred to requirement IDs SWS03-00-5.1-030 and SWS03-00-5.2-020 in SWS03-Arbejdsplads, as well as section 9 of SWS 02 – Styring og Samarbejde.

The Employer and the utility owner have agreed the permanent situation, which is to be in accordance with the alignment re-quirements shown on Definition Design Drawing no. 14210-5028.

RET 3 No

7


Tender Correcti-ons

and building up of the road, underneath the transmission linis?

How does the Client and/or owner entend to han-dle the permanent situation with normal traffic taller than 3m passes under the transmission lines?

19. According to SAB03-1.5.1 (p.2) contract 14210.100 being the road for ch. 8.200-9.100 is complete Nov. 2017, however according to SAB03-3.1.3.1 (p.11) access to the same road is stated as being Nov. 2016 (access to site), being one year before. Please clarify.

In case this access road (ch. 8.200-9.100) is not ready before Nov. 2017, how do the Contractor get access to the site compound at Freder-ikssundsvej and the complete site area between Marbækvej and Roskilde Fjord already in Nov. 2016 (which is necessary) when Marbækvej is not allowed for heavy traffic. Please clarify.

It is assumed for the purposes of this query that the bidder is referring to contract 14210.200. Bidders are referred to the up-dated version of requirement ID SWS03-00-1.5-010 in Section 1.5 of SWS 03 - Ar-bejdsplads (SWS 03 – Worksite) provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 3 Yes – see correc-tion in RET 3

20. In "SWS01 - Design" it is given in Clause 4.2.11 that "The design shall allow for a sacrificial thick-ness for the designated design life of the struc-ture. No corrosion protection shall be provided".

The Employer is kindly asked to inform which corrosion rates shall be used for sheet pile walls (design life 120 yrs) as these can not be found in the SWS's.

For corrosion rates to be used in design, bidders are referred to Section 1.1 of Gen-eral Work Specification (GWS) - Founda-tion (Almindelig Arbejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) Betonbro – Fundering).

RET 3 No

8


Tender Correcti-ons

21. The SWS specifications and the definition draw-ings do not define the Highest Astronomical Tide, Mean Sea Level or the Lowest Astronomical Tide. The information is provided in the document 14210-ARP-TN-CM-XX-00001. Kindly confirm that these are the levels to be taken for the project.

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment IDs SWS01-A1-00-2.2-030 and SWS01-A1-00-2.2-040 in Appendix 1 of SWS01 – Design, which are provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 4 Yes - see correc-tion in RET 4

22. The SWS specifications and the definition draw-ings do not outline the sea level rise which is to be used in the project to account for climate change over the service life of the bridge. The document 14210-DHI-RP-CM-22-00001 outlines a study which was done but no definite value is given. Kindly confirm the maximum sea level rise which is to be accounted for during the 120 serivce life of the bridge. Currently the report gives values to year 2100.

Bidders are referred to the response to Tender Query 021.

RET 4 No

23. In Clause SWS01-00-4.3-1200 it states that the navigation clearance is to be +22.2 DRV90. Kindly confirm that this clearance takes allowance for the future sea level rise.

The minimum clearance requirements de-fined in requirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-1200 of SWS01- Design are confirmed and no additional sea level rise needs to be taken into account.

RET 4 No

24. Clarification of query no. 8 answered in RET1:

In Clause SWS01-00-4.6-040 it is stated than stainless steel is to be provided between the tidal zone and splash zone of the piers. In clause SW01-00-4.6-070 it is stated that stainless steel shall be provided as skin friction. Kindly clarify further the boundary section thickness in which stainless steel is to be placed and what is intend-

Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement IDs SWS01-00-4.6-040, SWS01-00-4.6-050 and SWS01-00-4.6-060 in Section 4.6.1 of SWS01 – Design pro-vided as part of this correction sheet.

The term ‘skin friction’ is not used any-where in the tender documentation. It should be noted that the Contractor shall determine as part of his design the required

RET 3 Yes- see correc-tions in RET 3

9


Tender Correcti-ons

ed by the term skin friction. cover and type of reinforcement within the requirements of section 4.6.1.

25. Kindly confirm that it is the aesthetic intention that the integral piers in the high bridge will not have a cross tie. Therefore some piers will have one and others will not as per definition drawing 14210-21416-050

Bidders are advised that it is not a particu-lar requirement to have a cross tie beam. Bidders are referred to the additional re-quirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-505 in Table 4-5 of SWS 01 – Design, which forms part of this correction sheet.

RET 3 Yes see correc-tions in RET 3

26. Clause SWS01-00-4.5-030 of SWS01 Design states that the edge beams are permitted to be precast concrete. However clause SWS01-00-4.3-1320 states that a longitudinal construction joints between the deck slab and edge beam for rein-forced concrete construction is not permitted. Additionally in SWS01-00-4.3-450 it is stated that no visible construction joints shall be allowed at the edge beam face. Kindly confirm that all of these clauses are correct.

Bidders are referred to the updated ver-sions of requirement IDs SWS01-00-4.5-030 and SWS01-00-4.5-450 in Section 4.5.1 of SWS01 – Design, and requirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-450 in section 4.3 of SWS01 – Design provided as part of this correction sheet.


27. In the Geotechnical Factual Report we find CPT data included as printouts in the pdf.

Can CPT raw data (recordings) be provided digi-tally ?

Document 1.3.6 - Report 1; Rev 1.0; Geotechnical Factual Report by GEO. Geo Project No. 38042 2015-05-05

- Enclosure 1D.01 (Borehole Logs)

Bidders are referred to the AGS files made available on the Supplier Portal to access the digital version of the CPT and other geotechnical factual data in digital format.

RET 3 No

10


Tender Correcti-ons

- Appendix 1D.I (Interpreted CPT Logs)

28. Yesterday [15.07.2016] we received the mail at-tached below regarding new documents on the DRD portal. When activating the imbedded link, no new documents do however appear.

It is confirmed that no new or revised Ten-der Documents were uploaded on the 15

th

January 2016. Please disregard this notifi-cation, which was due to some minor text updates on the webpage.

RET 3 No

29. Topic 2 for the first dialogue meeting, regarding optimized design: It is our understanding that the optimized design for “High Bridge” and “Other Structures” are clearly linked to our status in the Compliance matrix with regard to the “PMR’s”. Can you elaborate on your expectations to, what role the solving of status for the PMR’s in the Compliance Matrix is to have in the dialogue meeting?

Bidders are referred to sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the Bestemmelser om Udbud og Tilbud (Instructions to Tenderers) (BUT/ITT) in relation to the status of mini-mum requirements, preliminary minimum requirements and requirements.

Bidders are referred to section 5.4 of the BUT/ITT in relation to the written submis-sion requirements for themes 1 and 2 as well as the focus for themes 1 and 2 for the dialogue meetings.

RET 3 No

30. In SWS-Design table 2-3 "Requirements for roundabouts" the minimum radius for the central islands of the roundabouts are specified. A review of the expropriated areas has shown that very little space is left for the actual drivable road area. Is it possible that the amounts shown in table 2-3 are the diameter of the roundabouts instead of radius?

Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement ID SWS01-00-2.3-270 pro-vided as part of this correction sheet.


31. SAB 03-Workplace, section 1.6.3, describes the excavation of the archaeological investigations, which should be finished before the start of the

The current status of the archeological works is that the preliminary archeological investigations are ongoing on the western-

RET 4 No

11


Tender Correcti-ons

work. The requirement SWS02-00-3.1-660 de-scribes the archaeological work on the west side of the fjord, which will start early 2017, which is after the start of the execution work November 1st 2016. If these descriptions are correctly under-stood, they are thought to be in conflict with each other, could VD please clarify this?

most part of the site and are expected to be complete in spring 2016. Bidders may as-sume that all archeological investigations and excavations will be completed on the areas made available to the Contractor at contract start in accordance with Definition Design Drawing no.14210-9004. Bidders may assume that the remaining areas will be made available no later than end of March 2017.

The requirements in SAB02-Styring og

Samarbejde and SAB03-Arbejdsplads will

be updated before the publishing of the

final tender documents based on the status

of the archeological investigations at that

time.

32. In SWS 0.1 - Design Section 2.3.13.2, a require-ment states that the ABB layer on the express-way, connector roads and roundabouts should be placed with the following quantity: 150km / m3 (50 mm). The unit "150 km / m3" is believed to be a mistake and it is therefore desired to be clarified?

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement ID SWS01-00-2.3-660 provided as part of this correction sheet.


33. Where is the approved 'klappeplads' in the Katte-gat?

Bidders are advised that the klapplads (disposal site) is Hundested Klapplads (ap-proximate coordinates (WGS 84): 56°03,372' N, 11°53,964' E).

The klapningstilladelse (dumping permit) will be made available on the Supplier Por-

RET 4 No

12


Tender Correcti-ons

tal when received from Naturstyrelsen.

34. Any form-bearing scaffolding:

A. If there is no traffic under the construction, must the inspection handbook for formwork scaffolding then be followed?

B. If the inspection handbook for formwork scaf-folding must be followed, can the contractor in that case select the assessor? And is the contractor therefore also responsible for the approval of the scaffolding project by 3rd parties?

A. Bidders are referred to the updated ver-

sions of requirement IDs SWS21-00-1.0-

030 and SWS21-00-1.0-080 in SWS21-

Scaffolding and Formwork provided as

part of this correction sheet. Bidders are

also referred to requirement ID SWS21-

00-0.0-010. Bidders should note that

these requirements constitute Prelimi-

nary Minimum Requirements (PMRs).

B. Bidders are referred to section 1.7.1 of

SWS01-Design, in particular require-ment ID SWS01-00-1.7-070.


35. Who establishes and maintains the Project web? The client or the contractor?

It is confirmed that the Projectweb will be established and maintained by the Employ-er.

RET 4 No

36. Are there any requirements for the Project web? Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponse to TQ035.

RET 4 No

37. Is the Danish Road Directorate going to provide any further English service translation of tender documents? And, if this is the case, of which doc-uments, and when?

Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponses to TQ003 and TQ009. It is con-firmed that no further English service trans-lations will be made available.

RET 4 No

13


Tender Correcti-ons

38. Document 1.1.5 of Document List, namely "Con-tract Document", is marked as "Available at later stage". Could you inform us about when this doc-ument will be made available?

The Contract Document (Totalentreprisek-ontrakt) will be made available to bidders on the Supplier Portal.


39. Reference is made to.alg files which have been published on the Supplier Portal with Correction sheet/Supplementary notice Nr. 2. These files contain vertical profiles with parabolic curves ra-ther than circular curves, as it would be usual in Denmark. Is this a conversion issue, so the de-signed values should be circular, or are the verti-cals intentionally designed with parabolic curves?

Bidders are advised that all Inroads files have been issued for information only and there is no conversion issue. All vertical curve detailed design shall be carried out in accordance with Section 6.3 of ‘Handbook, Layout in Open Country (Håndbog, Tra-céring i Åbent Land)’.

RET 4 No

40. In case there are discrepancies between the com-pliance matrix and the different documents re-ferred to in the Compliance matrix. Which are we to consider correct?

From an contractual point of view, we know that the Compliance matrix out rank i.e. the SWS’es, however we believe that in some cases, the in-formation given in the tender documents may in fact be the correct one.

It should be noted that the purpose of the Compliance Matrix is to identify the Bidder's compliance with the requirements of the tender documents and that it only contains requirement IDs.

In case of any discrepancy, bidders are referred to the document hierarchy in SB ad § 2, stk. 2.

RET 4 No

41. Full application and full permissions, including enclosures are needed [for Application of Excep-tion to the Nature Protection Act concerning pro-tected areas related to the new Fjord link located

It is assumed that the bidder is referring to document no. 1.4.2 of the document list (Dispensation fra Naturbeskyttelseslovens §3 til nedlæggelse og påvirkning af §3 na-


14


Tender Correcti-ons

by Frederikssund] tur).

The permit and all appendices to the permit are available on the Supplier Portal and the application is included in appendix 1 (Bilag 1) of the permit. Some of the appendices to the application are missing, and these will be made available on the Supplier Portal.

42. Referring to PMR reference SWS01-0-1.8-010. Does the 0.5ha requirement applies to all pilecaps and footings along the High Bridge, or only to those exposed pilecaps (i.e. seabed level below -3.2m DVR90) within Roskilde Fjord.



43. Referring to PMR reference SWS01-00-4.3-450 Please provide more detailed definition of a visible construction joint. What concrete surface finishing requirement is required for an invisible construc-tion joint? Is it permitted to apply external clad-dings to cover up the visible construction joints?

Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponse to Tender Query 026 and the up-dated requirement ID SWS01-01-4.3-450 in Section 4.3 of SWS 01 – Design, provided as part of Rettelsesblad Nr. 3.

RET 4 No

44. Referring to PMR reference SWS01-00-4.3-510, please clarify whether the use of combination of bearings and monolithic pier which belongs to the same pier shape group is permitted.

Bidders are advised that there is no re-quirement that restricts a combination of articulated and integral piers within one pier option. Bidders are also referred to the previous response to Tender Query 025 in relation to this query.

RET 4 No

45. Ship Impact Load as defined in SWS01, Appendix 1, Section 2.3.8.1 Table 2, Please define in which areas seabed level <-1.10m and seabed level >-1.10m shall be assumed.

Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS03-00-1.0-010 in SWS03 – Ar-bejdsplads.

Relevant models have been made availa-

RET 4 No

15


Tender Correcti-ons

ble as part of the Information Room Docu-ments. Bidders are reminded that Infor-mation Room Documents are non-contractual documents that are issued as a service to bidders and provide background information on the Fjord Link Frederikssund Project.

46. Iceload as defined SWS01, Appendix 1, Section 2.3.3 PMR reference SWS01-00-4.3-510. Please define at which level Ice loading shall be assumed

Bidders are referred to requirement IDs SWS01-A1-00-2.3-180 to SWS01-A1-00-2.3-240 inclusive in Section 2.3.3 of SWS01 - Design – Appendix 1; as well as the response to Tender Query 021 provid-ed as part of this correction sheet.

RET 4 No

47. Please advise whether there is any highest and lowest design sea level for the design of High Bridge.

Bidders are referred to the response to Tender Query 021 provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 4 No

48. Referring to PMR reference SWS01-00-4.6-070. Please clarify whether there is any minimum or maximum rebar size requirement for stainless steel rebar. Please clarify whether the skin rein-forcement refers to outermost layer of rebar at the pier section, or the outermost layer of rebar at each directions.

In relation to size requirements for stainless steel reinforcement, bidders are referred to General Work Specification (GWS) – Con-crete (Almindelig Arbejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) – Beton) and to General Work Specification (GWS) – Reinforcement (Almindelig Ar-bejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) – Slap armering), particularly the references in Section 1.1 of both of these documents.

Bidders should note that these references set out further requirements for the design of skin reinforcement (also known as sur-face reinforcement).

RET 4 No

16


Tender Correcti-ons

49. Can Vejdirektoratet provide dwg and/or dgn ver-sions of the Illustrative Design Drawings – Struc-tures. This will save time in the tender phase.

Dgn files for the Illustrative Design Draw-ings – Structures will be made available on the Supplier Portal as soon as possible.


50. Clause SWS01-00-4.3-080 refers to pre-stressed reinforcement. Please clarify whether in this Clause for pre-stressed reinforcement it is in-tended post-tensioned strand tendons as well as post-tensioned bars (f.ex. Macalloy bars)

For the purposes of this response, it is as-sumed that the bidder is referring to re-quirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080 rather than -4.3-080.

Bidders are referred to the scope of Gen-eral Work Specifications (GWS) – Post tensioned and prestressed reinforcement (Almindelig Arbejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) – Spændt armering).

RET 5 No

51. Clause SWS01-00-4.3-030 refers to prestressed reinforcement and prestressing steel. Please con-firm that in this Clause for prestressed reinforce-ment it is intended pre-tensioned strand tendons, and with prestressing steel it is intended both post-tensioned strand tendons and post-tensioned bars, as well as pre-tensioned strand tendons .

For the purpose of this response, it is as-sumed that the bidder is referring to re-quirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-030, rather than -4.3-030. Bidders are advised that the referenced SWS should be read in con-junction with the corresponding GWS. Bid-ders are also referred to the response to Tender Query 050.

RET 5 No

52. As it can be understood from the two queries above, it appears that the words prestressed rein-forcement in Clause SWS01-00-4.3-030 and pre-stressed reinforcement in Clause SWS01-00-4.3-080 are not used consistently. Please clarify.

For the purpose of this response, it is as-sumed that the bidder is referring to claus-es SWS01-00-4.6-030 and SWS01-00-4.6-080. Please refer to the updated version of requirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080 provid-ed as part of this correction sheet.


17


Tender Correcti-ons

Bidders are also referred to the response to Tender Query 050.

53. Please confirm that in Clause SWS01-00-4.3-080 for "high voltage" it is intended "high stress". Please clarify what is the criteria to define a "volt-age/stress" as being high or low.

For the purpose of this response, it is as-sumed that the bidder is referring to re-quirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080. Please refer to the updated version of requirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080 provided as part of this correction sheet.

The Contractor will be required to assess high stress variations as part of his design.


54. With reference to Clause SWS01-00-4.3-080 please clarify whether for "….any given section" it is intended only the sections in areas with high stress variations.

For the purpose of this response, it is as-sumed that the bidder is referring to re-quirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080. We con-firm the requirement ID SWS01-00-4.6-080, with reference to the correction provided as part of this correction sheet. The require-ment applies for any section, independent of stress variation.


55. Please confirm that the intention of Clause SWS23-00-3.9-010 is to:

1) not allow the removal of the formwork "before that the concrete strength has reached the 28-days value", rather than "before the day no.28";

2) not allow the removal of the formwork until the 100% of compressive strength is achieved, de-spite the compressive strength is suffient to allow the prestressing transfer and to withstand the

Bidders are referred to the correction to requirement ID SWS23-00-3.9-010 provid-ed as part of this correction sheet.


18


Tender Correcti-ons

selfweight load effects.

56. SWS01-00-4.3-1270 Figure 11 outlines the span to depth ratio. Kindly confirm that the intention of the graph is to define a span-depth of 1:21 for spans up to 73.5m and for spans greater than this the maximum depth permitted is 3.5m.

We confirm that Figure 11 in requirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-1270 defines the span-depth ratio as 21:1 for spans up to 73.5m, and a maximum girder depth of 3.5m for spans longer than 73.5m.

RET 5 No

57. SWS01-00-4.2-1400 States that bearings are to be of the "same type". Kindly confirm that this statement relates to being from the same manu-facturer rather than all bearings having the same type of allowable articulation i.e fixed, guided, free



58. In SWS01, Section 7.2.5 it is given that the Con-tractor in his design of the retaining walls at Tørslev Hage is to design it for 20 kN/m2 placed on the terrrain behind the walls.

Do the Contractor in his design of other structures, e.g. for the approach ramps (embankments) for the high bridge, need to consider any surface loads applied to the terrain outside the roads?

The requirement SWS01-00-7.2-150 only applies for the retaining structure at Tørslev Hage. Bidders are referred to SWS 01 – Design – Appendix 1 for general requirements for applied loads for the design. This does not relieve the Contractor from his responsibility for complying with loads in accordance with all other requirements of the Contract.

RET 5 No

59. In accordance with SWS01, Section 4.3.2 all per-manent structures (exept one) shall be designed in consequence class CC3 (KFI = 1.1) and reliabil-ity class RC3.

Firstly, does the given consequence class also apply for temporary structures and permanent structures in temporary stages or is the Contractor

Bidders are referred to requirement ID

SWS01-00-4.1-020 in SWS 01 – Design, in

particular, Section 6.17 of the document

‘Vejledning Til Belastnings- Og Beregnins-

grundlag For Broer’, with regard to assign-

ing consequence classes to temporary

structures. Bidders should note that this is

a Preliminary Minimum Requirement

RET 5 No

19


Tender Correcti-ons

free to design these in CC2?

Secondly, the reatining wall at Tørslev Hage is also to be designed in CC3. The Contractor do not understand the reason for this as the retaining wall in general has a low wall height, the soils are not complex and there are no great risk for loss of human life or economic consequences. Are the Employer willing to change it to CC2 for the retain-ing wall at Tørslev Hage?

(PMR).

Bidders should also refer to Requirement

IDs SWS21-00-1.3-010 and SWS21-00-

1.3-020 in relation to this.

The consequence classes in Table 4-3 of SWS 01 – Design remain as specified.

60. Can the digital data in the Employer´s inves-tiogation for the geophysical logging be delivered?

The digital data will be made available on the Supplier Portal.


61. Reference to document ABT 93 - General Condi-tions for Turnkey Contracts, article 8 "Insurance", which states that "at the request of the contractor, the contractor or any sub-contractor shall be in-cluded as insured under the insurance policy [of the employer]". Reference also to Re 8(2) of document "SB - Ser-vicetranslation - 14210.001" which states that "The employer is self-insured. The cover provided for in clause 8(1) of ABT 93 in respect of the con-tractor and subcontractors, if any, is comprised by the self-insurance". May we kindly ask that the Danish Road Direc-torate to provide the bidders with copies of the applicable insurance(s)?

As stated in ABT 93 and SB Re 8(2) the Employer is self-insured. This means that it is not possible to provide a copy of this insurance.

In case of a loss applicable under clause 8, the Employer itself will provide cover if all the requisite conditions are met.

RET 5 No

62. Reference to the Dialogue Topics listed in clause 5.3.4 of Instructions to Tenderers, and to the Pre-liminary Structure of Dialogue Rounds set forth in clauses 5.4.4 and 5.4.7 of the same document,

Bidders are referred to the correction to the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.


20


Tender Correcti-ons

this is to ask if it would be possible to add other topics which the Tenderers may wish to discuss, and in such case how these additional topics should be dealt with for both submission and dia-logue purpose (for instance, would they be subject to any word/page limitation in the submission, and should the tenderer propose a revised structure of dialogue round to fit the additional topic(s)?).

63. Question concerning the award model. Under the header 'Evaluation of the sub-criterion A - Price’ VD mentions that the calculation model will be published after completion of the dialogue stage. However it would be appreciated to have an im-pression of the weighing of the documents B, C, D and E that have to be submitted in July. Therefore we kindly ask VD to define the calculation prior to the dialogue phases?

The Employer will take the question into consideration after the first dialogue round when the Employer has a better overview of the indicative prices. This is to ensure the most correct evaluation model.

RET 5 No

64. The contractor would like a clarification on wheth-er the minimum asphalt thickness of 150 mm (Re-quirement SWS01-00-2.3-690) is with or without the 10 mm adjustment of the MMOPP2013 calcu-lation from Table 2-10 (Requirement SWS01-00-2.3-650), or said otherwise; is the actual minimum asphalt thickness 150 or 160, given the MMOPP2013 requirement?



65. Nature Protection Act (Naturbeskyttelsesloven)§ 3 determines the need to establish compensation for the loss of nature areas. Is it the contractor or client who should establish these? See also: 'Di-spensation fra Naturbeskyttelsesloven § 3 til ned-læggelse og påvirkning af §3 natur ved etablering

The Employer will be responsible for estab-lishing the compensation areas.

RET 5 No

21


Tender Correcti-ons

af Ny Fjordforbindelse over Roskilde Fjord,' date August 20, 2015, see pages 1 and 2.

66. In SWS-Design, table 2-12, is the minimum pavement thickness for the bicycle paths required to be 500 mm minimal. In table 2-11, of the same document, is the minimal pavement thickness required to be 600 mm in total (20mm PA + 80mm GAB + 200mm SG + 300 mm BL). Which of these thicknesses are correct?

The requirements of table 2.12 in SWS-

Design are confirmed. Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement IDs SWS01-00-2.3-620 and SWS01-00-2.3-700 provided as part of this correction sheet.


67. No description of the general pavement in the middle reserve can be found. Could the client please clarify if the middle reserve will be laid with top soil, or an SG pavement, and what pavement type/build-up is preferred for the section at Tørslev Hage

In relation to the requirements for shoulder

and central reserve pavement, bidders are

referred to the updated version of require-

ment ID SWS01-00-2.3-700 provided as

part of this correction sheet.

For pavement on the central reserve at

Tørslev Hage, bidders are referred to re-

quirement IDs SWS01-00-2.3-080 and

SWS01-00-2.3-720.


68. Drawing 14210-9004 contains areas at Onsvedvej, marked as temporary expropriated (At Onsved) and permanently expropriated (At the intersection between Onsvedvej and Tørslevvej). What works are carried out at these locations, and are they a part of this tender?

Bidders are advised that there will be no requirement to carry out works in these areas under the Contract.

Enabling works under contract 14210.200 will include an upgrade of the junction Tørslevvej-Onsvedvej, to improve access for construction traffic.

RET 5 No

22


Tender Correcti-ons

69. Regarding general requirement for bridge materi-al: As we see the requirements it still leaves it open to design something else than a concrete bridge. Is this correctly understood. Please clarify?

Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-1180 in SWS01-Design and should note that this is a Minimum Re-quirement (MR). Bidders are also referred to the Contract Notice II.1.5.

Requirement ID SWS01-00-4.3-1180 should be read in conjunction with the other relevant requirements of the Contract.

RET 5 No

70. SWS05-Earthworks, §5.4.1. Could you please define the term "filling coefficient"? If possible with a formula.

Bidders are referred to the updated re-

quirement ID SWS05-00-5.4-020 provided

as part of this correction sheet.


71. SWS05-Earthworks, §7.1. In paragraph 7.1 you refer to "§19 (Other Documents - Authority Ap-provals (Andre documenter - Myndighedsgodken-delser))". We could not find that document. Could you tell us the title and/or name of the document on the document list or your web site or, in case it is not there, provide us with that document on short notice?

The Employer is still in the process of ob-taining the §19 permit. This permit will be made available once obtained by the Em-ployer.

RET 5 No

72. SWS03-00-1.0-030: This requirement states that the contractor has to comply with all protocols and requirements resulting from the expropriation, in so far as they relate to the design, construction and completion of the works, but without knowing these protocols and requirements. Can you give us some reasonable assumptions we can use for our offer?

Bidders should assume that the site boundaries are in accordance with the Def-inition Design Drawings for the purpose of their tender. It may also be assumed that, in the event of any changes to the tender requirements as a result of the expropria-tion, these will be considered under clause 14 of the ABT93 and SB.

RET 5 No

23


Tender Correcti-ons

73. In many requirements it is stated that we have to submit documents to the "Employer's Supervisor" prior to the realization. After submitting the Em-ployer's Supervisor has to approve the document. Can you indicate a standard procedure with the maximum number of days for the Employer's Su-pervisor to answer? And if the maximum number of days to respond depends on the requirement, please indicate per requirement the maximum response time. Can you indicate which criteria the Employer's Supervisor will use for approval? "

In relation to the maximum time for review of the Employer’s Supervisor, bidders are referred in particular to “Kvalitets- og miljøledelseskrav til Totalentrepriser”. This does not relieve the Contractor from his responsibility for complying with time limits in accordance with all other requirements of the Contract.

RET 5 No

74. Reg. SWS20-00-2.3-010: Could you explain to what inspection document you refer?

Bidders are referred to section 2.3 of Gen-eral Work Specification (GWS) Concrete Bridge – Foundation (Almindelig Ar-bejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) Betonbro – Funder-ing).

RET 5 No

75. Reg. SWS20-00-3.6-090 : Could you please de-fine the term "hard pile driving"?

Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS20-00-1.1-050 in Section 1.1 of SWS 20 – Foundation.

RET 5 No

76. Reg. SWS20-00-3.7-150 & SWS24-00-4.5-040: The mentioned requirement in SWS20 seems to allow Tremie pipes under water and requirement in SWS24 does not allow this. Can you explain this?

Bidders are referred to the new require-

ment ID SWS24-00-4.5-045 provided as

part of this correction sheet.


77. Reg. SWS20-00-4.5-040 : This requirement de-scribes that the core recovery has to be 100%. What if this is not the case, but we do comply with the 50cm concrete and 150 cm bed rock?

The bidder may assume the following: in the event that core recovery below the pile base is <100%, geophysical and OATV testing will need to be carried out in open (uncased) holes below the pile base.

RET 5 No

24


Tender Correcti-ons

78. Reg. SWS21-00-2.2-020 & SWS01-00-4.2-430 & 440: The requirement from SWS21 ""Board form shall be used on all visible surfaces"" seems to contradict with the requirements from SWS01 ""Exposed vertical surfaces with a surface area greater than 10 m2 shall receive a pattern profiled finish."" and ""If a pattern profiled finish is to be provided, the Contractor shall submit the pro-posed pattern profile finish to the Employer’s Su-pervisor for acceptance before the work is carried out, within a timeframe which shall be agreed with the Employer’s Supervisor. The formwork lining shall leave no stain on the concrete and shall be so joined and fixed to its backing that it imparts no blemishes." A pattern could produce a blackened surface over the years. What is your vision on this item?"

Bidders are advised that there is no con-

tradiction between these requirements.

Read together, the overall requirement is

for the concrete surface to be left with a

pattern profiled finish by the boards, typi-

cally arranged vertically or horizontally.

With regard to blackened surfaces, bidders

are referred to section 2.2.2 of SWS21 –

Scaffolding and Formwork, which requires

smooth form for the High Bridge. This

would include piers in water most suscepti-

ble to discoloration.

RET 5 No

79. Reg. SWS21-00-2.2-040: How should we interpret "For the High Bridge, forming boards (an engi-neered formwork system) shall be used."

Bidders are referred to the updated version

of requirement ID SWS21-00-2.2-040 in

SWS 21- Scaffolding and Formwork pro-

vided as part of this correction sheet.

Bidders should note that this requirement

applies to both superstructure and sub-

structure.

For the definition of an engineered form-

work system, bidders are referred to the

addition to SWS 01 – Design, Appendix 3

included as part of this correction sheet.


80. Reg. SWS22-00-3.7-020: "Welding of reinforcing steel on site or any casting yard shall not be per-

Requirement SWS22-00-3.7-020 is con-firmed. No welding of reinforcing steel is

RET 5 No

25


Tender Correcti-ons

mitted." Are there any specific conditions possible under which we can weld reinforcement steel? "

permitted.

81. Reg. SWS22-00-4.0-020: "Testing shall be per-formed by a testing agency accepted by Employ-er’s Supervisor." Can you confirm that this re-quirement refers to all tests to be performed on reinforcement steel within this contract? "

It is confirmed that Requirement SWS22-4.0-020 in SWS22 – Reinforcement applies for all reinforcement steel in the Contract.

RET 5 No

82. Reg. SWS24-00-2.1-100: "The addition of calcium chloride, accelerators, retarders or set controlling admixtures and air reducing agents are not per-mitted." If we cannot use retarders, the use of concrete in the pile caps and piles may be influ-enced negatively

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment ID SWS24-00-2.1-110 in SWS24 - Concrete provided as part of this correction sheet.


83. Reg. SWS24-00-3.1-010: "To ensure proper aera-tion and frost resistance of the concrete, the con-crete cover zone shall not be vibrated using rod vibrators for surfaces which are cast against formwork." Could you please explain at what dis-tance we CAN use rod vibrators to ensure the quality surface cast against formwork?"

There is no specific distance requirement

behind the cover zone for where the rod

vibrator can be inserted.

The Contractor will be required in his de-

sign and execution to take into considera-

tion the requirements of the minimum cov-

er zone when using the rod vibrator and

demonstrate that its use will not reduce the

quality of the surfaces which are cast

against the formwork.

Bidders should also note the requirements for trial casting (prøvestøbning) in section 4.3 of the General Work Specification (GWS) – Concrete (Almindelig Ar-bejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) – Beton).that its use will not reduce the quality of the sur-

RET 5 No

26


Tender Correcti-ons

faces which are cast against the formwork.

84. Reg. SWS24-00-3.2-030 "Vertically, the pier shall be inclined at 1 in 1000 mm from the top of the foundation." However in the design drawings tell us an inclination of 1:20, 1: 16 and 1: 80. How should we interprete this requirement? "

Bidders are advised that the requirement ID SWS24-00-3.2-030 in SWS24 - Con-crete refers to tolerances. Please refer to the updated version of this requirement as part of this correction sheet.


85. Reg. SWS24-00-3.2-040: Refering to the founda-tion: ""In plan, the location of the pier shall be within ±50 mm of the specified location in orthog-onal directions."" and ""The levels shall be within ±25 mm of the specified level."When we define pile as the bottom part of the foundation. On top of the piles is the pile cap and the piers are between the pile cap and girder, can we assume that the word ""pier"" must be replaced by ""pile""?"

Bidders are referred to the revised re-quirement ID SWS24-00-3.2-040 in SWS24 – Concrete provided as part of this correction sheet.


86. The scope of casings and irrigation pipes, de-scribed in chapter 1 of SWS18-Miscellaneous works, is not clear. Would the client please clarify the works of these pipes?

Bidders are referred to the new require-ments IDs SWS01-00-3.3-1120, SWS01-00-3.3-1130, SWS01-00-3.3-1140 and SWS01-00-3.3-1150 in SWS 01 – Design which are provided as part of this correc-tion sheet.

Bidders may assume that the casings and hydrants are to be redesigned, relocated, dismantled and coordinated at the follow-ing locations:

Field irrigation pipe at Ch. 2.65 comprises rerouting in casings.

Field irrigation pipe at the Nylanderslevvej roundabout Ch.


27


Tender Correcti-ons

2.9 comprises rerouting in cas-ings, dismantling and relocation of two hydrants.



The final requirements for the scope and extent of all relocations will be provided after the detailed inspection has been car-ried out.

87. Does VD have any requirements to the material used on the "wide" shoulder?


RET 5 No

RET 6-8


Tender Correcti-ons

88. Reference to document “Requirements for marine works from the permit (Danish Coastal Authority, § 16 a) for Bridge construction at Roskilde Fjord between Tørslev Hage and the area south of Mar-bæk Harbour, and for minor deepening of the navigation channel”, could you please confirm/ clarify the quantities as stated: The area of dredg-

Bidders are advised that requirements in relation to the existing navigation channel shall be in accordance with Section 10.3 of SWS01 – Design. Dredging may be nec-essary if the Contractor designs the navi-gational channel to be moved further east.

RET 6 No

28


Tender Correcti-ons

ing is about 50 m2 and excavation volume is esti-mated to be approximately 25 m3.

Bidders are advised that the quantities referred to in the Projektbeskrivelse section of the s.16 permit are given as assump-tions only.

89. Compensation areas for grassland referring to the § 3 permit. It seems that not all compensation areas for grassland has been acquired yet. Will the DRD acquire the rest of the needed areas (71.940 m2)?

The Employer will acquire the required areas.

RET 6 No

90. § 3 permit – The permit requires 11.460 m2 as compensation area for salt marshes. It seems that all together 13.505 m2 for salt marshes has been acquired. Could the DRD please help to clarify this?

It is confirmed that additional land was ac-quired in order to facilitate maintenance, access and landscaping.

RET 6 No

91. SAB 03 – section 7.2 – Noise, e.g. SWS03-00-7.2-190 PMR. Here both the activity and limit val-ue is regulated. If the limit value is complied with, why a requirement for a given activity also?

Requirement ID SWS03-00-7.2-190 is de-leted as part of this correction sheet.

Bidders are advised that other deviations to the standard noise limits (in section 7.2.1), as well as special requirements in sensitive areas apply, as specified in 7.2.2 and 7.2.3 of SWS 03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Ar-bejdsplads).


92. Can the Client please provide a draft in english to avoid diviations in the translations and the risk accosiated with that [related to the Contract doc-ument].

Bidders are advised that a service transla-tion of the Totalentreprisekontrakt (Contract Document) has been made available on the Supplier Portal.

RET 6 No

93. We would like to request the data set behind the The data from the calculations and model-ling in the report “ Støj og vibrationer I

RET 6 No

29


Tender Correcti-ons

report:

Støj og vibrationer i anlægsperio-den_Rapport_14210-NRS-RP-YA-ZZ-00003 (pre-pared by Niras and ARUP)

For modelling different noise profiles for different types of machinery

anlægsperioden” are based on high level assumptions made by the Employer as part of the preliminary dialogue with the authori-ties and will not be made available to the bidders.

The Contractor will be required to develop his own documentation based on the con-struction methodology, equipment, noise reducing mitigation measures, etc. of his choice, in order to ensure compliance with the noise requirements stated in sections 7.2 and 7.3 in SWS 03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Arbejdsplads).

94. [Related to SWS02-00-6.2-070] What precisely must be certified? Organisation, work, Project?

As stated in requirement ID SWS02-00-6.2-070 in SWS02 Styring og Samarbejde, the Contractor´s Environmental Management System must be certified in accordance with ISO 14001.

RET 6 No

95. Para 5.3.2 of BUT states "The Tenderers should not bring more than 5 participants per dialogue meeting as the Danish Road Directorate prefers a focused process. However, the individual partici-pants of the meetings may be replaced as re-quired in order to allow the Tenderer to adjust the group of participants according to the topics to be discussed."

Considering that different disciplines are encom-passed in a single Topic, could you please confirm

Bidders are referred to the correction to the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.


30


Tender Correcti-ons

that the Tenderer will be allowed to adjust the group of participants also within the discussion of a single Topic?

96. In the SAB03 item 1.7 it is stated that we, the con-tractor, "shall take account of other contractors’ requirement/wishes for access to the Worksite for their activities. The contractor shall in his planning and coordination cover the Health & Safety (H&S) on the worksites." Shall all access, work site are-as, health and safety measures etc. for these con-tractors be part of this contract, or will we get paid for the necessary measurements?

If these works form part of this contract please clarify in specific quantities what has to be deliv-ered, including but not limited to work areas, roads, side huts, usage of electricity and water, fencing etc.

Bidders are referred to section 7 of SAB 02 – Styring og Samarbejde (SWS 02 – Man-agement and Cooperation), specifically section 7.2.

Construction compounds (e.g. site huts), H&S measures and utility connections re-quired by third parties to carry out their works will be provided by third parties.

RET 6 No

97. In the SAB03 item 7.4.3 it is stated that we cannot use fjord og seawater to prevent dust from the site. We can only resue collected surface water.

If it is not possible to collect enough surface water needed to prevent dust from the site, can we then drill wells and take out the necessary water from these works or do we need to use water from Frederikssunds Forsyning thus having to pay all delivery and discharge fees?

When the contractor has to pay the fees for the necessary water it will be a substantial increase of the site installation cost.! The contractor requested

The Contractor shall comply with SWS03-00-7.4-050 in relation to collected surface water or alternatively shall obtain any nec-essary approvals from Frederikssund Kommune for drilling of wells, in accord-ance with SWS03-00-3.1-010.

RET 6 No

31


Tender Correcti-ons

the owner for clarifying this requirement.

98. [For SAB03 item 7.7.3.] Does the temporary am-phibian fence have the same extent as the fence between the work site area and the §3 areas?

Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS03-00-7.7-135 in the updated version of SWS 03 - Worksite (SAB 03 - Ar-bejdsplads).

RET 7 No

99. SB Ad §2.2 Priority of documents, does not in-clude the “BUT” document, however it is refer-enced in §2.5, in this case shouldn’t the “BUT” document also be considered a Contract docu-ment and included in the Priority of documents.

Bidders are referred to BUT section 1. General.

The clauses in the SB referring to the BUT are provisions for the tender phase and not the contract phase.

RET 6 No

100. SB Ad §2.2Priority of documents. SAB Manage-ment and cooperation: Quality and environmental management requirements for turnkey contracts of 4 December 2015 also referred to as SWS02 is mentioned under item G but SWS03 Worksite is not included. In this case shouldn’t the “SWS03” document also be considered a Contract docu-ment and included in the Priority of documents.

It is confirmed that all Special Work Speci-fications (SWSs), including appendices, are included in point G of SB Ad §2.2.

RET 6 No

101. SB Ad §2.2 Priority of documents. The Specific Conditions are contained under item E, whereas the General Condition’s are only considered under item R. In this case therefore everything above item R would take priority if conflicting, please consider moving the General Conditions under Item E.

The priority of documents in SB Ad §2.2 is confirmed. This priority has been agreed between industry representatives and the Danish Road Directorate.

RET 6 No

102. SAB03 9.1 states: Permits and approvals obtained by the Employer are set out in SB, section 2(2). It is not evident under SB, section 2(2) where this

Bidders are referred to the list of permits and approvals in point M, SB Ad §2.2. All relevant permits and approvals are ob-

RET 6 No

32


Tender Correcti-ons

information is provided; please clarify whether this is the correct reference.

tained and available on the Supplier Portal.

103. SB Ad §2.3.1 states 90 days but SAB02 states no later than 2 months after project start up, please clarify which is correct.



104. Ad §2.3.1 [of the SB] states the Contractor should calculate 20 days for client approval, SAB02 states The Employer has 10 working days to re-view the programme and issue comments. Please clarify which is correct.

In relation to SB Ad §2.3.1, bidders are

advised that the period of 20 working days

applies for all the documents requested.

Bidders are referred to the update to sec-

tion 3.1 of SWS 02 – Management and

Cooperation (SAB 02 – Styring og Samar-

bejde), provided as part of this correction

sheet.


105. Please clarify whether the Client intends to ap-prove or review submissions of the dialogue phases?

The Client intends to review the submis-

sions and give the bidders outline feedback

in relation to their proposals.

The Client will not approve any submis-sions. Please refer to section 5.4.4 of the BUT in relation to the focus for the dialogue themes.

RET 6 No

106. SB Ad § 16 stk. 1. The nature and scope, etc. known monuments listed in the SAB – Workplace, None listed, please advise, whether the reference is correct.

Bidders are referred to section 1.6 in SWS 03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Arbejdsplads). Furthermore attention is drawn to other relevant worksite conditions as described in section 1 of SWS 03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Arbejdsplads).

RET 6 No

33


Tender Correcti-ons

107. SB Ad § 24, stk. 1 states “If the volume is in-creased beyond the extent set out in the agree-ment basis”, Please advise what basis as Ad § 14, stk. 4 deleted.

Bidders are referred to the corrections to the SB Ad § 24, stk. 1, provided as part of this correction sheet.


108. Ad 24, stk. 1, nr. 6, [of the SB] Point deleted, so what time should be allowed as sufficient.

The Employer has done its utmost to se-

cure the major permissions from authorities

though not all have been possible to re-

ceive.

Therefore the Contractor shall assume this

risk and will not be compensated for time.

RET 6 No

109. SB Ad § 25, stk. 2 Steering committee SAB02, Agreeing on the use of profits insurance. Please clarify that this is the correct reference.

Bidders are referred to the ruling Danish versions of SAB 02 – Styring og Samar-bejde and the SB, which state bonus or incentive scheme (bonusordninger).

Bidders are also referred to the corrections to the service translations of SAB 02 – Styr-ing og Samarbejde, provided as part of this correction sheet.


110. [SWS20-00-4.5-050] Does the Client mean that a minimum of 1% of all woring piles used for by example noise barriers shall be subject to static load testing?

It is confirmed that requirement ID SWS20-00-4.5-050 applies to all working bored piles.

RET 6 No

111. It is stated, in SWS20-00-5.2-010 (MR), that moni-toring results for a given structure shall be report-ed on min. weekly basis, but it do not explain if this is valid for both temporary and permanent monitoring of structures. urthermore the section

In relation to temporary and permanent structures, bidders are referred to require-ment ID SWS20-00-5.1-010.

For the frequency of reporting, bidders are

RET 6 No

34


Tender Correcti-ons

only explain that more readings should be done when required but do not consider if reporting due to stabilized readings can be done on a fortnight or monthly basis. In addition to this and with re-spect to permanent monitoring a weekly monitor-ing report for the entire life time of the structures far exceeds the needs. For stabilized conditions it would be expected that any readings will be ad-justed due to expectation and revious progress in monitoring history for instance with respect to settlements. Thus it is suggested to distinguish between the need for monitoring during temporary work period and the actual service life of the per-manent structures which are subjected to monitor-ing.

referred to requirement ID SWS20-00-5.2-010. Reduced frequency may be agreed with the Employer’s Supervisor if appropri-ate.

Bidders are advised that requirement ID SWS20-00-5.2-010 only applies for the duration of the Contract.

112. [SWS20-00-5.3-050] The Client lists a lot of in-strumentation for monitoring. The Client is kindly asked to define which instrumentation he expects to be used for which separate structure?

The list under requirement ID SWS20-00-5.3-050 relates to monitoring instrumenta-tion that the bidders shall expect to provide.

It is the responsibility of the Contractor to determine the instrumentation needed for monitoring each structure.

RET 6 No

113. It is stated in SWS20-00-5.4-010 (MR) that need for monitoring shall be considered for all struc-tures, thus it doesn’t specify which structure exact-ly have to be monitored. The requirement can be understood as “critical tructures” shall be moni-tored. Please specify.

The requirement ID SWS20-00-5.4-010 is confirmed.

The bidders are also referred to require-ment IDs SWS20-00-5.1-010 and SWS20-00-5.1-020.

RET 6 No

35


Tender Correcti-ons

114. The requirement defined in SWS20-00-5.4-020 (PMR) is considered to be very strict and unnec-essary. It is recommended that only the most criti-cal and most deep seated section located at Tørslev Hage should be monitored as required. Typical for these retaining walls, i.e. single sup-ported sheet pile wall using pre-stressed ground anchors, is that very small horizontal wall move-ment will be expected, thus also limited ground movements. If the Client maintains the require-ments, there should also be requirements con-cerning maximum deflections etc. Please specify.


Bidders should note that requirement ID SWS20-00-5.4-020 is a Preliminary Mini-mum Requirement (PMR).

Bidders are responsible for determining maximum deflections to meet the require-ments in SWS01 – Design, Eurocodes and any other requirements of the Contract. Bidders are referred to section 7.2.6. of SWS 01 – Design for requirements regard-ing ground movements and damage as-sessment, and to requirement ID SWS01-00-7.2-650 for the link between the design and the monitoring plan.

RET 6 No

115. [SWS20-00-5.4-040] The preliminary requirement from the Client seems too strict. An assessment of ground movements (based on calculations) can be considered in order to identify the damage category of potential structures or building sub-jected to expected movements/crack develops. Based on an assessment a monitoring plan can become relevant for critical structures. It is be-lieved that monitoring of five buildings/structures is not needed due to the very small wall height to building distance ratio. All buildings lie outside the failure mechanisms for the retaining walls. Please respond to this.



RET 6 No

116. [SWS20-00-5.2-010] It is not described how the handling or handover of the temporary monitoring

The Bidder is referred to the existing re-quirement ID SWS20-00-5.1-010 MR in

RET 10 Yes – see correc-

36


Tender Correcti-ons

database shall be performed, neither the respon-sibility period for which the reading is considered as temporary and when a permanent reading is defined. Plese specify.

section 5.1 of SWS 20 - Foundation.

The Bidder is also referred to the new re-quirement ID SWS20-00-5.2-020 in Section 5.2 of SWS 20 – Foundation, provided as part of this correction sheet.

tion in RET 10

117. [SWS20-00-5.4-030] The use of load cells is con-sidered as a very abnormal requirement and only serves as verification of anchor performance al-ready tested. This should only be considered for if any very critical structures are within the vicinity of possible ground movements. Please reconsider and specifiy - in case of insisting on the require-ment - the interval for monitoring the permanent anchors.



RET 6 No

118. Reg. SWS21-00-3.1-020 "Scaffolding structures shall be water-tight. Water accumulated in the structure shall be collected and directed to a drainage system. Contaminated water shall be treated and shall not be directed into any envi-ronmentally protected areas or the fjord”. It is as-sumed that this requirement especially applies to the bridge deck and girder and that is does not apply to piles, pile cap, piers and abutments. Is this correct?

The requirement SWS21-00-3.1-020 is confirmed. Bidders are advised that this requirement applies to all structural ele-ments of the High Bridge including pile caps, piers, abutments, deck, etc.

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment ID SWS21-00-3.1-025 provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 6 No

119. Reg. SWS20-00-5.3-050 "For monitoring, the Contractor shall use the following instrumentation as a minimum: extensometers, inclinometers (tor-pedo or non-torpedo type), load cells, pressure cells, strain sensors, 3D optical points, Surveying,

Bidders are responsible for determining the necessary parameters to meet the re-quirements in SWS01 – Design, Eurocodes and any other requirements of the Contract.

RET 6 No

37


Tender Correcti-ons

precise surveying"

The instrumentation depends on the parameters we have to produce. Knowing the parameters and conditions, the Contractor should determine the tests and instrumentation. It is requested to re-place instrumentation with the parameters the Client wants to know.

120. SWS24-00-3.8-140, SWS01-00-4.6-050 & SWS01-00-4.6-060: SWS24: "Early age cracking may not occur in the splash zone (level -3 m to +8 m). In the other zones, early age cracking is per-mitted with a crack width, wmax, of up to 0.2 mm." However, in SWS01, the following definition are given:

"The tidal zone is defined as 1.5 m below DVR90 level"

"The splash zone is defined as 2.2 m above DVR90 level, taking into account future sea level rise."

These two definition seem to contradict each oth-er. Could VD give the bidders one uniform defini-tion for tidal zone and splash zone?

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement ID SWS24-00-3.8-140 in SWS24 – Concrete provided as part of this correc-tion sheet.


121. SWS24-00-4.5-070: "Location of thermal sensors as well as calculation of mean tempera-tures/weighted average temperatures shall be carried out in accordance with the guidelines stat-ed in HETEK report no. 125, Hærdestyring (Hard-ening control) (Danish Road Directorate), section


Bidders should note that this requirement constitutes a Preliminary Minimum Re-

RET 6 No

38


Tender Correcti-ons

3.2. See link: http://www.teknologisk.dk/hetek/rapporter-paadansk/35490,9?cms.query= hetek+rapport"

Is other software also allowed to use?

quirement (PMR).

122. SWS25-00-3.9-010: "No visible cracks in any pre-cast elements shall be permitted in the casting yard."

This is an impossible requirement. Concrete (pre-cast or not) has always cracks and if you look close enough, they are visible. Please, change this requirement into a measurable one.

The requirement ID SWS25-00-3.9-010 is confirmed and the related amended gen-eral requirement in GWS- Concrete Ele-ments, Section 3.9 should be noted. The aim of the requirement is to protect against shrinkage, plastic and thermal cracking in concrete during hardening. It relates to the cracks visible to the naked eye and found to reach into the depth of the element. Very fine micro cracking with no substantial depth is not classified as a crack in this respect.

RET 6 No

123. SWS25-00-3.11-110 "All cracks between 0.15 mm and 0.3 mm in width shall be repaired by epoxy injection in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions."

This requirement seems to contradict the require-ment in the previous question, SWS25-00-3.9-010. Please, clarify this.

The requirement SWS25-00-3.11-110 is confirmed.

Bidders should note that the requirement SWS25-00-3.9-010 refers to cracking in the casting yard only.

RET 6 No

124. SWS25-00-3.11-140 "Cracks wider than 0.1 mm in the bearing area of a girder shall be deemed unacceptable and will result in the rejection of the precast concrete element."

Could VD please specify the dimensions of the

Bidders are referred to section 3.11.1 of SWS25 – Precast Concrete Elements, where the ‘bearing area’ of the girder is defined.

RET 6 No

39


Tender Correcti-ons

bearing area?

125. SWS03-00-3.5-215:"The Contractor’s vessels and floating plant shall be equipped with Automatic Identification System (AIS), display appropriate day and night signals, markings that shall be readable at a distance of 100m and the Contractor shall ensure that a look-out is kept at all times."

Should the look-out be a person?

Is this required for each floating object of the Con-tractor?

Must this be 24 h per day and 7 days per week?

Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement ID SWS03-00-3.5-215 in SWS 03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Ar-bejdsplads) provided as part of this correc-tion sheet.

Bidders should note that this requirement constitutes a Preliminary Minimum Re-quirement (PMR).


126. SWS03-00-3.5-400: "Prior to construction start, the Contractor shall enter negotiate an agreement between him, the Employer, the local marina as-sociation (Roskilde Fjordudvalg), the Danish Mari-time Authority (Søfartsstyrelsen) and other stake-holders, for the development, approval and circu-lation maritime warnings and information."

Who is responsible when, despite of good efforts from the side of the Contractor, for non-approvals or delays?

The Contractor shall be responsible for the risk of associated non- approvals or delays.

Bidders are referred to requirement IDs

SWS01-00-10.2-030 in SWS01 – Design

and SWS02-00-3.1-560 in SWS02 – Styr-

ing og Samarbejde (Management and Co-

operation).

RET 6 No.

127. Reg. SWS01-A1-00-2.8-020: "Unless otherwise stated, the Clauses, Tables and Figures referred to in this section 2.7 are to Clauses, Tables and Figures in the Standards and National Annexes referred to above."

Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement ID SWS01-A1-00-2.8-020 provided as part of this correction sheet.


40


Tender Correcti-ons

Should 2.7 not be 2.8?

128. E Lizards, (Markfirben, erstatningsbiotoper for mark-firben). Will the contracter be responsible for the establishment of replacement habitets for these lizards?

The replacement habitats have already been established by the Employer. The Contractor will not be responsible for these.

RET 6 No

129. Toads and bats, Establishment of 12 ponds for toad population: does the contractor need to es-tablish the 12 ponds or are they part of another project/contract? See SAB 03 paragraph 1.5.3

The Contractor will not be responsible for establishing these 12 ponds.

RET 6 No

130. Is the contractor responsible for establishing guide lines (ledelinjer) for bats?

The Contractor will not be responsible for establishing guide lines for bats.

RET 6 No

131. On page 92 in SES01 under Table 4-4 is a refer-ence made to designation of Major and Minor roads in section 2. Could VD please specify the reference since no such designation is to be found in section 2 of the SWS01?

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement IDs SWS01-00-4.7-190, 200 and 210 in SWS01 - Design provided as part of this correction sheet.


132. Concerning the design live of 120 years in the requirement: SWS01-00-4.2-040 'Design life- A bridge working design life of 120 years (design working life cate-gory 5 to Eurocode 0 (DS/EN 1990)) shall be as-sumed in the design for all structures.' We can’t find the description in the DS/EN1990 for a design live of 120 years. The DS/EN1990 + NA states a design live of 100 years only. Could VD clarify this?

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement ID SWS01-A1-00-2.2-010 in-cluded as part of this correction sheet.

Bidders are advised that requirement ID SWS01-A1-00-2.1-030 applies and the bridge design life of 120 years may current-ly be found in DS/EN 1990 DK NA: 2015.


41


Tender Correcti-ons

133. What is DS/INF 146 for document and where can we find it?

The requirement ID SWS01-00-4.2-260 is confirmed. DS/INF 146:2003 Robusthed - Baggrund og principper - Information – 2003 can be found on, for instance,

https://webshop.ds.dk/da-dk/standard/ds-inf-1462003

RET 6 No

134. There are two requirements concerning the sliding material in the bearings: SWS01-00-4.2-1450 'Bearings composed of stain-less steel sliding surfaces, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and mechanical components shall be pro-tected by a rubber shroud which can be easily removed for inspection.' SWS30-00-1.2-130 'The sliding material shall be ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) or equivalent, covered by a European Technical Approval (ETA 06/131 or equivalent) and shall have passed without wear, a 50,000 m wear test carried out by an approved independent laboratory.' These are contradictionary requirements due to the fact that PTFE and UHMWPE are complete-ly different materials. Please clarify?

The bidder is referred to updated require-ment ID SWS01-00-4.2-1450 provided as part of this correction sheet.

RET 6 Yes –see correc-tion in RET 6

135. Regarding SWS01-00-4.7-240 'Areas around support A paved surfacing around all supports shall be established in order to ensure that water runs away from the supports.' & SWS01-00-4.7-250 'The Contractor shall ensure that the surfacing covers and extends beyond the area of the foundations.'

Requirements SWS01-00-4.7-250 and SWS01-00-4.7-260 are confirmed. A paved surfacing is needed for drainage purposes as per requirement ID SWS01-00-4.7-240. There are no specific execution require-ments.

Bidders should note that requirements




42


Tender Correcti-ons

& SWS01-00-4.7-260 'The paving shall be de-signed and executed in such a way to ensure design life requirements, according to Table 4-1, are fulfilled.' The areas around support should be paved. Can VD explain the reason for this and how have VD thought of the execution of this?

SWS01-00-4.7-240 and SWS01-00-4.7-250 constitute Preliminary Minimum Require-ments (PMRs).


136. Would the client please specify where the shoul-ders in the project needs to be SG, topsoil or as-phalt paved?


RET 6 No

137. Could the client please make document no. 41 in Appendix 2 of SWS01-Design available to the tenders?

Bidders are referred to the correction to SWS 01 – Design, Appendix 2 (Relevant Codes and Standards) provided as part of this correction sheet.

Bidders are advised that functional re-quirements for pumping stations will be added to SWS 01 – Design in due course.


138. Section 2.1 and 2.3, in the ICT Specification doc-ument (IKT Specifikation), describes that the client (VD) wants the road design system and models delivered in Microstation DGN file format. Would VD accept files submitted in other acknowledge formats (f.ex. DWG) as well?

In accordance with the requirements in sections 2.1 and 2.3 of the ICT Specifica-tion (IKT Beskrivelse), the road design sys-tem and models shall be delivered in DGN format.

RET 6 No

139. [SWS03-00-3.5-310] How do the Client see this PMR in relation to safety? It seems wrong to let "vulnerable road user" be in the area with very heavy equipment.

Bidders are advised that requirement ID SWS03-00-3.5-310 has been removed in the updated version of SWS 03 - Worksite (SAB 03 - Arbejdsplads).

RET 7 No

43


Tender Correcti-ons

140. In the document "Tilladelse til broanlæg Roskilde Fjord mellem Tørslev Hage og området syd for Marbæk Havn, samt mindre uddybning af sejlrende" it is stated, that the authorisation is given on the basis of the apllication. Could the Client make this application available in the tender documents?

Bidders are advised that the applications, § 16 Havmiljøloven Permanent Works - Ap-plication and § 16 Havmiljøloven Tempo-rary Works - Application, have been made available on the Supplier Portal.

RET 7 No

141. [SWS24-00-4.3-060] The Client is requested to specify the size of the full-scale testing speci-mens, because is it a full cross section of the su-perstructure and how long does it need to be etc.?

Bidders should note that the shape and size of the specimens will depend on their detailed design and their proposed con-struction methodology. The shape and size of the full-scale test specimens shall be agreed with the Employer’s Supervisor as per requirements in Section 4.3 of General Work Specification (GWS) - Concrete (Almindelig Arbejdsbeskrivelse (AAB) – Beton).

RET 7 No

142. [SWS24-00-3.8-140] Early age cracking may not occur in the splash zone. Does this mean that the contractor can use up to 100 % of the current concrete splitting tensile strength in his simula-tion?

Bidders should note that the intention of requirement ID SWS24-01-3.8-140 is to protect against shrinkage, plastic and ther-mal cracking in concrete during hardening. Bidders are also referred to requirement IDs SWS24-00-3.8-150 through SWS24-00-3.8-190 in relation to this. It is up to the Contractor to determine the tensile strain capacity.

RET 7 No

143. [SWS01-00-4.2-1430] Dowels for bridge bearing are normally fully embedded in concrete/mortar and are therefore always produced in black steel, why is the requirement stainless steel, this must

Bidders are referred to the amended re-quirement SWS01-01-4.2-1430 provided as part of this correction sheet.


44


Tender Correcti-ons

be a mistake.

144. According to SAB03 article 7.3.2, The Employer has obtained a project-specifict dispensation from the applicable vibration comfort limits and the dispensation is a part of the tender documents. We cannot localize the dispensation, please clari-fy.

Bidders are advised that the dispensation, “Dispensation - komfortvibrationer endelig”, has been made available on the Supplier Portal.

RET 7 No

145. Could you please provide us with the InRoads – Storm & Sanitary drainage database files (SDB) relevant for this project?

The relevant XPSolutions Microdrainage files will be made available to bidders on the Supplier Portal.


146. Regarding BUT section 6.2.4 subsection “2. Other Works”, could you please clarify the requirements for the last bullet point, i.e. ”Plan and section drawings in accordance with the requirements stipulated"?

This will be included in the updated BUT no later than in the final tender document is-sue on the 10

th June.

RET 10 No

147. Expressway at Torslev Hage: Given the cross section of the road and the road design criteria, we cannot confirm that stopping sights are availa-ble in a curve in the reference design between ch. 5+444 and 5+738 with a radius of 1820 m. Ac-cording to our calculations the curve should be changed to R = 1865 m. The consequence of a change will be a horizontal offset of 0.352 m to the north in the center of the curve. Could you please clarify/confirm?

The Bidder is advised that the Danish Road Directorate (DRD) standards allow various solutions to achieve the required Stopping Sight Distance (SSD).

In order to determine the relevant design parameters for road equipment within the central reserve to achieve the required SSD, the bidder is referred to the following DRD design standards:

• Handbook. Cross sections in rural areas. Construction and Planning, June 2013, section 3.3 and 4.4.3;

RET 7 No

45


Tender Correcti-ons

• Handbook. Basis for Designing Traffic Areas. Planning and Construction, October 2012

• Håndbog. Autoværn Og Tilhørende Ud-styr, Oktober 2015

148. According to the document list (Revision 5), a number of utility protocols should be available however, the zip file on the DRD udbudsportal is empty.

Can I ask you, please to upload the files?

Bidders are advised that the utility protocols have been made available on the Supplier Portal. It should be noted that further up-dates will be made available in due course.

RET 7 No

149. As we find the missing revised documents and subjects mentioned below very important we would like to know when we can expect these? • All of the following are currently subject to further

review:

o The requirements for ice loading, ship impact

loading, pile cap levels and bridge drainage in

SWS01- Design

o The requirements for sediment release in

SWS03- Arbejdsplads

o The requirements for pile load testing in

SWS20- Foundation

o The mechanisms for management of boulders

o Possible baselines for CPTs as part of the Ge-

otechnical Baseline Report

Bidders are referred to section 5.4.6 of the BUT in relation to the requirements for submissions for the second dialogue round. It should be assumed that all updates will be made available no later than the date of issue of the final tender documents.

RET 7 No

46


Tender Correcti-ons

150. Further we have recognized that you have in-creased the requirements to the content for our submission before the next dialogue meeting in-tensively and down to details which we find unu-sual for a tender phase.

We would like to know if you have considered to raise the symbolic fee for participation in the sec-ond dialogue phase to a more realistic figure and if you are ready to postpone the submission date two weeks.

DRD will not raise the fee, as the strategy for dialogue submissions remains un-changed. Bidders are referred to sections 5.3.6 of the BUT in relation to the develop-ment of the Conceptual Design during the dialogue. Furthermore, bidders are referred to section 5.4.6 in relation to the use of track changes for the second dialogue submission. Bidders are also referred to the updated section 5.4.6 of the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.


151. A mail was sent from Vejdirektoratets tender por-tal, on the 7th of April at around 09:00 am, warn-ing about changes in the project from the DRD homepage. The latest new project material was uploaded on the 5th of April, and no other chang-es is to be found regarding the deadlines or other information. Could the client please clarify what the change or new information was?

The folder entitled “SBB2” from 4th De-cember 2015 was deleted, as it was dupli-cated.

RET 7 No

152. SWS01-00-1.7-040 MR: For Third Party (Category III) design checks the Contractor shall employ a suitably experienced and competent organisation (Third Party Checker) to carry out a fully inde-pendent design check of the detailed design of each nominated structure and certify that the de-tailed design is fully compliant with the require-ments of the Contract, including this Specification; Appendix 1, the Definition Design drawings; and associated design standards.

Bidders are advised that the Kfi value shall be consistent with the consequence class (CC) and reliability class (RC) stated in Table 4-7 of SWS 01 - Design and Euro-code DS EN 1990 NA requirements, Annex B3. None of the clauses in the Eurocode DS/ EN 1990 NA, Annex B, section B3.3 sup-port the Bidder’s statements that:


47


Tender Correcti-ons

According to the Eurocode DS EN 1990 NA a design supervision differentiation results in achiev-ing a reliability differentiation. According to Annex B of this Eurocode a thorough external checking (a 3rd party checking as required in this project) can also ensures a CC3/RC3 class structure with-out the need of using a Kfi = 1,1. Is it allowed to not use the Kfi = 1,1 due to the 3rd party checking of the design?

”a design supervision differentiation results in achieving a reliability differentiation”, and/or “a thorough external checking (a 3rd party checking as required in this project) can also ensures a CC3/RC3 class structure without the need of using a Kfi = 1,1” Annex B, section B3.3 of Eurocode DS EN 1990 NA does not refer to 3

rd party check-

ing as a means of ensuring a consequence class (CC) or reliability class (RC). Section (3) merely states that it can constitute an accompanying measure. Bidders are also referred to the updated version of requirement ID SWS01-A1-00-2.2-010 in Section 2.2.1 of SWS01 – De-sign – Appendices, Appendix 1 provided as part of this correction sheet.

153. SWS23-01-3.9-010 MR: Formwork for post-tensioned elements shall generally not be re-moved until the concrete has reached the speci-fied 28-day cylinder strength. In the case that veri-fications for the execution stages are carried out according to DS/EN 1992-2, 113.3.2 (101), (103), and (104), earlier removal of formwork is permit-ted. The value of k used in the verification shall be 0.9. In the DS/EN1992-2 we find the following: 48 - 113.3.2 (103) Requirements for tensile stresses for quasi-permanent load combinations during execution. - No national choice. The question is where are the requirements

The requirement ID SWS23-01-3.9-010 is confirmed. It should be noted that k = 0.9 is a particular value selected for this contract.

The Bidder is informed that requirements 113.3.2 (101) and (104) can be found in EN1992-2.

Regarding the naming of section 113.3.2 in DS/EN 1992-2, this is the numbering used in EN1992-2, which is the referenced doc-ument. Any comments regarding number-ing within the Eurocodes should be directed to CEN TC250/SC2.

RET 8 No

48


Tender Correcti-ons

113.3.2 (101) and (104)? Further the question, why is the requirements in the DS/EN 1992-2 called 113.3.2 although thy connect to the requirements of the EN1991-2 par-agraph 13.3.2?

154. Please refer to attached SWS01 – Design Appen-dices, appendix 1, Section 2.3.8.1 (ship impact). In correction sheet 5 (dated 09-02-2016), VD add-ed 2 PMR’s regarding the ship impact loading; However in the new documents we received in week 14 from VD these 2 PMR’s are not included. They’re also missing in the compliance matrix from VD. [Attached: Addition to SWS 01 – Design, Appen-dix 1, Section 2.3.8.1 (Ship impact): After requirement ID SWS01-A1-00-2.3-400, the following is added: “For the purposes of deriving ship impact load patterns, the Roskilde Fjord shall be classified as a sea waterway. The design vessel shall be con-sidered to have an overall length of 40 metres. SWS01-A1-00-2.3-402 PMR Ship impact loading shall be considered at any water level between HAT plus the sea level rise allowance, and LAT. SWS01-A1-00-2.3-407

The Bidder is advised that the requirements from correction sheet no. 5 (RET 5) in rela-tion to ship impact are still applicable.

RET 7 No

49


Tender Correcti-ons

PMR”]

155. In accordance to the new SB, AD§2, stk. 2 – Prior-itisation of documents are item Q., T. And U now stating that documents, which was applicable from the date of the submission of the offer is the legal binding version. This poses a risk for the contrac-tor, if documents are updated last minute and can therefore not be incorporated into final bid, due to the lack of time. It is suggested that a fixed date for the update of these documents, approx. 14 days before submission is used instead, in order to mitigate this risk.

There will be no change to this standard clause of the SB.

RET 7 No

156. SWS03-00-7.2-105; At Torslev Hage the period in which sheet piling and noise barriers can be in-stalled has been extended by 1 month (SWS03-00-7.2-105) but the matching deadline 2b (SB) has not been changed accordingly. Will this dead-line be changed to match the extended execution period? In the Errata sheet no. 6 it was mentioned that the Archaeological studies would continue on the western side of the Fjord until March 2017. This has not been changed in the revised docu-ments. Does this mean that archaeological studies are certain to be finalized before the start of the project?

Bidders are referred to the corrections to the SB Ad § 2, stk. 3, provided as part of this correction sheet.

With regards to the current status of archaeological works, Bidders are referred to the response to Tender Query 31.


50


Tender Correcti-ons

157. (PMR) SWS02-00-3.1-520 in regard of the noise restriction of 70 dB, has been taken out, but in SWS-03 the same requirement remained (SWS03-00-7.2-050). Can this demand be further clarified in the text or taken out as well?

This noise restriction requirement remains applicable, as stated in SAB03 – Ar-bejdsplads (SWS03 – Worksite) require-ment ID SWS03-00-7.2-050.

RET 7 No

158. The PMR SWS02-00-3.1-530 in regard of the risk of sediment spill has been taken out of SWS-02, but is implemented in SWS-03 as SWS03-00-3.5-185. Unfortunately no clarification of the PMR was implemented with the new requirement into the new submission of documents due to which the PMR remains unclear. Can this demand be further clarified in the text?


RET 7 No

159. Which party is expected to handle the checking of the Scaffolding projects? Will this be the contrac-tor in accordance to PMR SWS01-00-1.7-070 Design of Temporary works or will this be the em-ployer in accordance to the scaffolding handbook?

Bidders are referred to the new require-ments ID SWS21-00-0.0-020 and SWS21-00-0.0-030 provided as part of this correc-tion sheet.


160. PMR SWS01-00-4.-170 in regard of application of insulation on all surfaces in touch with made-up ground. Will VD reconsider to remove or adjust this requirement in order to follow common used standard in Denmark?

Bidders are advised that requirement ID SWS01-00-4.7-170 in Section 4.7 of SWS01 Design remains unchanged as a PMR for the second round of competitive dialogue. Bidders are referred to section 5.4.5 of the BUT in relation to inclusion of their proposed changes, additions or dele-tions of the preliminary minimum require-ments for the second dialogue round. The current requirements are not deemed to be contrary to common practice in Denmark.

RET 8 No

51


Tender Correcti-ons

161. PMR SWS01-00-4.7-210 in regard of application of an additional asphalt layer on top of the tunnels. We can see in the new submission that this PMR has not been changed or removed, will this be changed in a later stage of the tender?

Bidders are advised that requirement ID SWS01-00-4.7-210 in Section 4.7 of SWS01- Design will remain unchanged as a PMR for the second round of competitive dialogue. Bidders are referred to section 5.4.5 of the BUT in relation to inclusion of their proposed changes, additions or dele-tions of the preliminary minimum require-ments for the second dialogue round.

RET 8 No

162. It is stated, in section 1.1 of SWS13_Street Light-ing Equipment, that the client will supply the col-umns and luminaires at the main road of Mar-bækvej in accordance to the input from the con-tractor. No specific demands can be found for the lighting system at Marbækvej, which would sepa-rate the design of its lighting from the rest of the project. Could the client please clarify the reason for this interface?

Bidders are referred to section 2.3 of SWS 03 – Worksite - Appendix 2: Contract Inter-faces in relation to the Contract Freder-ikssund Kommune and to the Definition Design Drawings in relation to the relevant contract boundaries. The interface is de-fined to ensure uniformity between the street lighting equipment for the two con-tracts.

RET 8 No

163. .7.1.1 Third Party Checking - SWS01-00-1.7-040 MR and the Eurocode (DS EN1990 NA annex B4) does not correspond. The eurocode is stating following: "NOTE Design supervision is to contribute to en-suring: – that the assumptions of the design brief are correct and are used as a basis for the structural design; – that the assumptions made in the static calcula-tions have been correctly incorporated into any other project material; – that drawings and execution specifications are adequate for the execution of the load-bearing

As per Appendix 4 to SWS 01 Design, the Third Party check only relates to the rele-vant elements of the works, which are scheduled in Section 3 of the above men-tioned Appendix.

In accordance with Section 1.5 of SWS 01 - Design, subject to the other provisions of the Contract, the design of the works shall comply with both the Eurocodes including the Danish National Annexes and the Certi-fication Procedure (amongst other things).

The Bidder should also note the require-ments of section 1.7.1 and Appendix 4 of

RET 9 No

52


Tender Correcti-ons

structures.” According to the above from the Eurocode, it is already a check if the structure, resulting from the design, is statically fit for purpose. Thus, if the structure fulfils the requirements given in the Eu-rocode and the applicable national annexes and regulations. It is not a check if all contractual re-quirements are fulfilled. The requirement of a third party checker also checking on fulfilling the con-tractual requirements significantly enlarges it’s work and thus cost. We would therefore like to ask if it is possible to delete or change this part as a task of the 3rd party checker and change to a requirement, which we, as a contractor, use as prove that all contrac-tual requirements are fulfilled?

SWS 01- Design, which define which De-sign Checking and Certification Procedures the Contractor has to follow.

Any proposed amendment to these re-quirements is not accepted.

164. (SWS21-01-1.0-080) Which execution methods for the High bridge are estimated to be designed and executed in accordance to the scaffolding handbook and which are not?

The handbook is intended to apply to scaf-folding and formwork for cast-in-situ con-crete only. Bidders are referred to the up-dated version of requirement ID SWS21-01-1.0-080 provided as part of this correc-tion sheet.


165. Reference to SWS13-00-1.1-010, will the Employ-er provide the necessary electrical connection boxes for each lighting column the Employer is set to provide?

Bidders are advised that the street lighting equipment to be supplied by the Employer is limited to that specified in requirement ID SWS13-00-1.1-010. Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS 13-00-1.4-070 in rela-tion to requirements for electrical connec-tion boxes.

RET 8 No

166. In the BUT submission for Dialogue 2 topic 4 (Page 19) for it is mentioned that the extent of the

No change to the text is deemed neces-sary.

RET 7 No

53


Tender Correcti-ons

material must be limited to. Shouldn’t the wording be The extent of the material is requested to be limited to

167. Related to DRD's Compliance Matrix and the SWS02 (SAB02) Management and Cooperation updated on 05-04-2016. It is stated in the Compli-ance Matrix under SWS02 following PMRs: - SWS02-010-2.12-010 - SWS02-010-2.12-020 Above mentioned requirements cannot be located in the SWS02 (SAB02) Management and Cooper-ation. Pleas clarify.

Bidders are referred to the correction to the Compliance Matrix provided as part of this correction sheet.


168. According to PMR SWS01-00-4.2-490 all under-pass structures must be fully integral.Can you clarify how this is expected to be carried out if the element solutions shown in the illustrative design drawings are used?

Bidders are advised that the term ‘integral’ refers to structures with no bearings. Bid-ders are reminded that the Illustrative De-sign forms part of the information room data and is non-contractual.

RET 9 No

169. According to SWS01 section 4.7.1.2 a paved area around all supports are required to ensure water runs away from the supports and the paved area must extend beyond the area of the founda-tions.Are there any special requirements for this area where the supports are placed at the bottom of embankments as it is the case for structure 21415 and 23448?Are there special requirements for connecting the paved area around the sup-ports to the roads where the support foundations stretches out under the road surfacing?

Bidders are referred to the response pro-vided to Tender Query 135.

RET 9 No

170. Please confirm that Clause SWS01-00-4.2-430 only refers to truly vertical surfaces.



54


Tender Correcti-ons

171. In accordance with SWS01, Section 7.2.1 the geotechnical category for the retaining walls at Tørslev Hage is 3.The Contractor does not under-stand the reason for this as the retaining wall should be placed in geotechnical category 2 ac-coriding to guidlines given in DS/EN 1997-1 and tDK NA to DS/EN 1997-1. Is the Employer willing to change the geotechnical category to 2 for the retaining wall at Tørslev Hage?

It is confirmed that the geotechnical catego-ry of the retaining walls at Tørslev Hage is 3.

RET 9 No

172. According to MR SWS01-A1-00-2.4-100, deflec-tions of structures under permanent and variable loads must be such that "the appearance and performance of the structure is not adversely af-fected".The performance of structures will often be adversely affected by deflections, however this will be build in the design of the structure. Further, the statement about appearance seems a bit vague as this is very subjective. Who will determine whether or not a structures appearance is ad-versely affected by a given deflection?Would the client consider giving a set of limits for the deflec-tions instead i.e. L/200 for decks, H/400 for col-umns/walls etc.?

Bidders are referred to requirement IDs SWS01-A1-00-2.4-110 and SWS01-A1-00-2.4-120 regarding pre-camber in Appendix 1 of SWS01- Design, as well as the new requirement SWS01-00-4.8-015, provided as part of this correction sheet. Bidders are referred to DS/EN1990 for further details on deflection criteria, performance of structure and appearance including, but not limited to, section 3.4 (Serviceability limit states) of this document. Bidders are advised that specific deflection limits such as those pro-posed will not be incorporated in the re-quirements.


173. With regards to SWS01-00.3.3-130: Does the discharge from the groundwater-drainage count in the discharge permits given for the project ?

Discharge permits cover discharges from the internal drainage only.

RET 9 No

174. "Kvalitetsledelseskrav til totalentrepriser. APPEN-DIKS." Cannot be found. Kindly make this availa-ble.

Bidders are referred to page 1 of ”Kvalitets- og miljøledelseskrav til Totalentrepriser”.

RET 8 No

55

175. Kindly specify how the 50 m sight distance for wildlife under the new PMR SWS01-00-3.3-1111 is to be measured



176. The documents released on 05-04-2016 included a folder called Illustrative Design Drawings. This folder was empty. Is this intentional or should this folder contain drawings.

No new Illustrative Design Drawings were released on 05-04-2016. This folder will be removed.

RET 9 No

177. The documents released on 05-04-2016 did not contain any further requirements for the trans-formers to be housed in the operation room within the abutments. Kindly confirm the required access zones around these transfomers so that the room can be adequately laid out.

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment ID SWS01-00-9.3-271 in Section 9.3.4.2 of SWS 01 - Design provided as part of this correction sheet.


178. It stated in MR SWS-S01-00-9.3-610 that all pumps should be fitted with hardend stainlesssteel cutting fittings. Pumps with a greater yield than approx. 6 l/s. Futhermore it's stated in PMR SWS-S01-00-9.3-611 that channels should be greater than 60 mm. Is it corretly understood that PMR SWS-S01-00-9.3-611 is inserted as an require-ment to pumps that are so big that there not fitted with cutting parts ?

Bidders are advised that the requirement ID SWS01-00-9.3-610 is deleted.


179. Is it correctly understood, that it is not required to have a guard vessel in connection to the work at sea?

Bidders are referred to section 3.5.2 of SAB03 – Arbejdsplads (SWS03 – Worksite) for the requirements of the safety (guard) vessel.

RET 9 No

180. In order to better understand the geotechnical conditions expected in the Fjord we kindly ask you to provide access to the field logs of the borehole drills (feltjournal) from the geotechnical investiga-tions related to Geotechnical Report 5 “Geotech-nical Factual Report Final Report, Report 1, Rev. 1.0”.

The field logs of the borehole drills (feltjournal) from the geotechnical investi-gations related to Geotechnical Report 5 will be made available on the Supplier Por-tal as part of the Information Room Docu-ments (non-contractual).

RET 9 No

56

181. In section 2.2 of SWS01_Design, it is stated that edge profile may not vary more than 5‰ / 6 ‰ (expressway / other roads) from the axis of rota-tion of the carriageway (MR SWS01-01-2.2-100). Could the client please clarify what is meant by this requirement?

Bidders are referred to section 8.4.7 of the standard ‘Layout in rural areas (Tracering i åbent land)’.

RET 10 No

182. Where can we find the 'Standardformular for sik-kerhedsstillelse' exactly, as mentioned in SBB, B Sikkerhedsstillelse og forsikring, AD § 6, sect. 1. The mentioned link doesn't seem to exist.

Bidders are advised that the “Standardfor-mular for sikkerhedsstillelse” is available in the TBL folder on the Supplier Portal and was uploaded on 04.12.2015.

RET 10 No

183. Concerning the document "handbook - design basis for bridges - construction and planning": 1) On page 17 of this document is stated that “Un-less otherwise agreed, the documentation should be in Danish”. In the Roskildefjord contract it is not specific stated what the language of the engineer-ing documents should be. The question is what is the language of the engineering documents for the Roskildefjord bridge?

Bidders are referred to Clause 1, Section 6 of the Special Conditions for Contract (SB) with regard to working language and con-tract language.

Bidders should also note that where there are specific requirements in the contract for documents to be supplied in Danish and/or English, these shall apply.

Bidders should assume that majority of the design documents shall be submitted in English.

RET 10 No

184. Concerning the document "handbook - design basis for bridges - construction and planning": 2) On page 29 of the document is written “For joint structures with rubber elements ('strip seal'), the joint gab should not exceed 80 mm for road bridg-es”. This is an extraordinary small allowed gab. Normal an allowed maximum gab of 100mm is defined.

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment ID SWS01-00-4.2-1185 provided as part of this Correction Sheet.


57

185. Could the client please clarify the definition of "upstream manholes" and "downstream man-holes" described in requirement SWS01-00-3.2-130?

This requirement shall be read together with requirement ID SWS01-00-3.2-120.

The direction of flow within the pipe indicates the location of manholes in relation to the vertical alignment of the pipe as follows:

- Upstream manhole – manhole located at the higher end of the pipe, start point for flow crossing the road,

- Downstream manhole – manhole locat-ed at the lower end of the pipe, end point for flow crossing the road.

RET 10 No

186. Regarding SWS01-00-4.2-1340: What is meant with this stainless steel plate to prevent fauna access? It is not clear where this plate should be installed. Could a sketch or standard detail be given from which the position and purpose be-comes clear?

Bidders are referred to the new require-ment ID SWS01-00-4.2-1345 provided as part of this Correction Sheet.


187. In the drawing material sent out on the 5th of April, a new set of definitive design drawings is at-tached, replacing the old pdf-file, as far as it is understood. When looking to the compliance ma-trix is drawings from the old file still applicable also (f.ex. Drawing 14210-9027-000), so it would be good to get clarified if the new set replaces the old drawings or is just add-ons to old drawings? Could VD make one applicable PDF-portfolio containing all applicable Definitive Design Drawings?

Bidders are referred to the drawing lists (tegningslister) that were published on 05.04.2016 on the Supplier Portal. The List is combined with each package of the up-dated Definition Design Drawings. The drawing lists show which drawings and revisions are current.

RET 10 No

188. Reference to SB 6 The Contractor’s performance bond. Could the bidder consider to provide the bonds required by different guarantees replacing each other instead of only guarantee for the whole period ?

The Contractor shall provide one guarantee for the project as per SB Re 6 (1). When reducing the bond after handing over, the bond can be substituted.

RET 11 No

189. Reference to SB22.4 Withholding of payments, Could the bidder consider to replace cash with-holding by a bond?

The Employer does not find a bond suitable for the purposes of this clause. In accord-ance with SB Re 22 (4), the amount with-held will be disbursed when all documenta-

RET 11 No

58

tion for the work included in the individual sub-item has been received and approved.

190. Reference to SB22.4 Withholding of payments, please clarify if retention money relevant to De-sign package can be released upon Third Party Checker’s approval of design.

This will be updated when issuing the final tender material on 10 June 2016.

RET 11 No

191. Reference to SB22.4 Withholding of payments, "The security for advance payments may be writ-ten down to 50% 12 months after conclusion of contract and written down to 0% 24 months after conclusion of contract", please clarify if this provi-sion is subject to amortization of advance pay-ment.

This is not subject to amortization. The final amortization of the advance payment can be agreed in the detailed payment plan.

RET 11 No

192. Reference to SWS01-01-3.3-240 (MR) Carrier pipes shall be laid with a minimum cover of 1.5 m below the finished road surface. In exceptional cases 1.0 m depth shall be allowed, subject to suitable protection being provided and the pro-posals for same being accepted by the Employer’s Supervisor. Comment: Carrier pipe at the deepest point of the expressway, at chainage 8.850, will be laid with a cover depth of 1,0 m below the finished road surface. This is because the deepest point of the expressway is moved from 8.500 to 8.850 outside the retaining wall area. Please confirm if this situation is considered compliant.

Bidders are referred to requirement SWS01-01-3.3-240 in Section 3.3.2.6 of SWS 01 – Design. Where a suitable solu-tion can be justified by the Contractor dur-ing the detailed design phase the cover can be reduced to 1.0 m, where also ensuring that all other requirements of the Contract are met.

RET 11 No

193. Reference to SWS02-00-3.1-255 (PMR), that the programme includes sufficient time for the Em-ployer's review of documents, drawings, calcula-tions, draft applications etc., as referred to in this SWS, including appendices, could you please provide a more detailed review procedure and relevant timing (e.g. submission for approval of relevant documents - 20 days DRD’s review - DRD sends comments - how many days for amendments? - how many days for DRD’s second review? And, will there be Third Party Check Cer-

The design review procedure shall be in accordance with section 10.2 of ‘Quality and environment management require-ments for turnkey contracts’ (‘Kvalitets- og miljøledelseskrav til til Totalentrepriser’). As specified, the timelines given are per round of review by the Employer. Assuming that the Contractor’s submission is compliant with the contract requirements, one round of review by the Employer is required.

RET 11 No

59

tification and DRD’s review as well?) Timelines for the Contractor to carry out amendments shall follow the Contractor’s programme.

Third party checking and certification shall be the Contractor’s responsibility, in ac-cordance with SWS01 – Design, Appendix 4.

Bidders are referred to section 6 of ‘Quality management requirements for turnkey con-tracts, Appendix’ (‘Kvalitetsledelseskrav til totalentrepriser, Appendix’) for an example flow chart for the design review and com-menting process.

194. Reference to SWS03-00-3.1-380 (PMR) The Con-tractor shall provide all necessary utilities for the Worksite during the period of the Works, including periods where other contractors are granted ac-cess to the Worksite. Please confirm this provision applies during the period when the Contractor is already mobilized on site.

Bidders are referred to the updated version of requirement ID SWS03-01-3.1-380 and the new requirement ID SWS03-00-3.1-385 provided as part of this correction sheet.


195. Reference to SWS03-00-3.1-380 (PMR) … The Contractor shall prepare the necessary calcula-tions, drawings and obtain all Authority Approvals necessary for the execution of the works. Please confirm this provision applies to the execution of the Contractor’s works only, and not to the works of other contractors.

Bidders are referred to the response to TQ194.

RET 11 No

196. Reference to SWS23-00-3.12-010 (MR) The achieved tightness shall be documented by con-ducting an analysis in accordance with DS 423.43 and DS 423.44 on a core drilled across the con-struction joint. The paste homogeneity in and around the construction joint shall achieve a max-imum grade of 1.The quantity of paste and adhe-sion cracks in and around the construction joint

Requirement ID SWS23-00-3.12-010 ap-plies for tightness of the construction joints around anchor recesses. It will not be re-quired to test cores drilled at every con-struction joint. The Bidder should note that in accordance with this requirement the location, and thus the number of the drilled cores shall be agreed with the Em-

RET 11 No

60

shall meet the requirements of DS 2426 Annex Y. The location of the drill core shall be agreed with the Employer’s Supervisor. Please clarify this requirement. We understand that cores should be drilled at any construction joint with PT anchors?

ployer’s Supervisor.

197. The Contractor shall adhere to the requirements stipulated under the Nature Conservation Act §3 application and permit. - approx. 12 ponds (for amphibian) around/near the new road. Responsi-bility of RBAI or Covered by paragraph 1.5.3 of SWS03?

The responsibilities for specific require-ments arising from the Nature Conservation Act (Naturbeskyttelseslovens) §3 applica-tion and permit will be clarified in the final version of SWS03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Arbejdsplads).

Bidders are referred to section 1.5.3 of SWS03 – Worksite (SAB 03 – Ar-bejdsplads) in relation to the 12 ponds for amphibians. These are not part of the scope of Contract 14210.001.

RET 11 No

198. Some requirements in SWS19 (paragraph 3.2.2 PE Welding) have an SWS06 requirement num-ber, The requirement numbers SWS06-00-3.2-120/130/140/150 also exist in the SWS06 but with a different text. Could you please clarify?

Bidders are advised that the requirements in SWS19 should all have SWS19 re-quirement ID numbers. These requirement numbers will be updated in the final tender documents.

RET 11 No

61

199. SWS24-01-4.5-320, Where the environmental class A is mentioned the w/c-ratio is still set to 0,40 but AAB & DS 2426 says 0,45. Please clarify

Bidders are referred to the revised Table 1 in SWS – Concrete (SAB – Beton) pub-lished on 10

th June 2016.

RET 12 No

200. In the tender document BUT - 14210.001 - 04-04-16 chapter 6.2.4, it is stated that for the high bridge, GIR+supplementary investigations and testpiles must be limited to 7000 words/20 pages. Furtermore, it seems that there is no requirement to deliver GIR+Supplementery investigations and Risk for the landworks structures and roads. In the previous submissions for the dialogue meetings the allowable numbers were 7000+5300 = 12.300 words /20+15 = 35 pages. Kindly verify whether the current wording in the BUT is correct and whether the submission is to cover the high bridge only or landworks as well. If DRD wishes to include both high bridge and landworks a limit on 20 pages will not allow enough space for what is requested as can be seen from the previous submissions.

Bidders are referred to the BUT of the 10th

June 2016 in relation to the requirements of section 6.2.4. The geotechnical submis-sion will relate to the High Bridge only.

RET 12 No

201. Regardless that the illustrative drawings are not contractual documents and for sake of argument it is pointed out that there is a discrepancy between the illustrative drawings for the minor structures and the roads where structures are carrying the expressway. For instance it is shown on road drawing 14210-7013 that the road safety barriers are placed 32 m apart, just outside the road crown (expressway with auxiliary lanes). On the structur-al drawings for UP Marbækvej (14210-21415-020) it is shown that the safety barriers are placed 27 m apart and hence placed inside the road shoulders. The 5 m deviation of the safety barriers are the same for all three structures carrying the ex-pressway (21415/23448, 21422 and 21423/23450). MR SWS01-01-4.2-300 states that the full width of the carriageway, incl. shoulders must be contin-

Bidders are advised that the requirement ID SWS01-01-4.2-300 MR shall apply.

RET 12 No

62

ued in its entirety across each structure. Can DRD kindly verify that this requirement is applicable? If so and if the illustrative road drawings are correct please also confirm that this means that the above mentioned structures each needs to be widened 2,5 m's in each side, compared to what is shown in the illustrative bridge drawings. If on the other hand the illustrative drawings for structures are correct, is it then possible to place the road safety barriers along the expressway 27m's apart at the edge of the paved surface for the roads as well, or else how is the transition from bridge to road ex-pected to be carried out?

202. Please confirm that table 2-5 in SWS01 overules MR SWS01-01-2.3-210 as there seems to be contradicting requirements

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirements in SWS – Design (SAB – Pro-jektering) issued on the 10

th June 2016.

RET 12 No

203. At the illustrative drawings concerning the under-passes shown on drawing no. 14210-21425-020, 14210-21535-020, 14210-21426 and 14210-21536 is shown a solution with a box cross sec-tion. The underside of the box appears to be lo-cated approximately 0,6 m under the synthetic pavement, which is not in frost free depth. Would this solution be accepted for the underpasses?

The foundation type, depth, etc. shall be selected by the Bidders to comply with all relevant requirements, including the dura-bility and design life requirements. Bidders are reminded that the Illustrative Design forms part of the information room data and is non-contractual.

RET 12 No

204. In the BUT section 6.2.4, 2. Other works, is written ”Design basis and assumptions” after the upper bullet. What is meant by this? Does it means that norms, standards etc. that applies should be listed? Kindly elaborate.


June 2016 in relation to the requirements of section 6.2.4. Furthermore, the Bidders are referred to Appendix 3 of SWS-Design (SAB-Projektering) in relation to the defini-tion of the design basis.

RET 12 No

205. In the BUT section 6.2.4, 2. Other works, is written ”Number and location. What is meant by this? Does it means that ”bygværksnummer” and “regis-treringsnummer” should be stated?


June 2016 in relation to the requirements of section 6.2.4. Structure no. is defined in table 4-3 of SWS-Design (SAB – Projekter-

RET 12 No

63

ing).

206. Is it correct to interpret that the below mentioned text deals with the control cabinet, as other instal-lations are below ground? The plant shall be protected as necessary against damage from freezing using a means of insulation / trace heating which has been accepted by the Employer’s Supervisor.

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement ID SWS01-00-3.3-750 provided as part of this Correction Sheet.


207. Is it correctly understood that the following shall be interpreted as applying to small valves fitted to the pipe system , such as ball valves and others similar valves, while the shut-off valves and check valves follow the requirements of SWS 19 2.2.4 ? Valves shall be the same corrosion-resistant ma-terial as the pipes. - All moving parts shall be delivered in acid-free stainless steel. Coated parts shall not be accept-ed.

Bidders are advised that the requirements apply to all type of valves.

RET 13 No

208. Check valves is described as swing check valves with arm and lod. Is it permissible to use ball check valves instead If the check valves if the check valves are vertical mounted ?

Bidders are referred to the updated re-quirement ID SWS19-01-2.2-310 in Sec-tion 2.2.3 of SWS 19 – Mechanical and Electrical Installations issued to Bidders on 10 June 2016.

RET 13 No

209. Is it permissible to use valve cabinet instead of valve wells if this is considered as advantageous?

Bidders are referred to requirement ID SWS01-00-3.3-810.

This requirement should be taken as the assumption for the tender stage.

RET 12 No

210. We assume that the scheduled service cars does have a crane. Is it possible to specify to what ex-tent to be delivered lifting equipment in the form of " lifting davids " and / or socket for installation of such by pumping stations regarding SWS19 Sec-

Bidders are advised that service cars are not provided with cranes or lifting devices. Bidders are referred to the requirements for lifting points specified in Section 2.2.5 of SWS 19 – Mechanical and Electrical

RET 13 No

64

tion 2.2.2 - Lifting points. Installations issued to Bidders with tender documents on the 10 June 2016.

211. We do not find it useful that dimensions of roads, edge lines, shoulders / roadsides, minimum di-mensions, etc. is to be displayed on both plans and typical cross section. Is it acceptable that they only appear on normal cross sections where these information usually belongs.

It is acceptable to present the dimensions of roads, edge lines, shoulders, etc, only on the typical cross section. Bidders are referred to the updated section 6.2.4 of the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.


212. How should the term "plantegninger" which shows changes in occupancy types mean? Is it just to show the appearance of and where the different types of coating is on the line?

It is assumed that the Bidder’s query is inaccurately translated from Danish to Eng-lish, and therefore we set forward the fol-lowing response based on the assumption that the query is in fact as follows:

“How should the bidder interpret the re-quirement for “Plan drawings indicating changes in types of pavement?”

Bidders are advised that changes in types of pavements can be presented on plan drawings using colours, hatches or other ways of clearly and unambiguously pre-senting the Final Conceptual Design.

Bidders are also referred to the response to Tender Query 217.

RET 12 No

213. At the illustrative drawings concerning the under-passes shown on drawing no. 14210-21425-020, 1421021535-020, 14210-21426 and 14210-21536 is shown a solution with a box cross section. The underside of the box appears to be located ap-proximately 0,6 m under the synthetic pavement, which is not in frost free depth. Would this solution

Bidders are referred to the previous re-sponse to Tender Query 203.

RET 12 No

65

be accepted for the underpasses?

214. Can DRD confirm that requirement SWS01-00-2.3-630 stating that MMOPP2013 software shall be used to design the pavement implies that is is only allowed to use the standard road layers de-fined within MMOPP2013 as part of the design?

Bidders are advised that MMOPP2013 software shall be used as a design tool for the pavement design, in accordance with SWS01-00-2.3-630. Guidance for using the software is provided on http://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/DA/vejsektor/ydelser/programmer/Sider/Dimensioneringsprogram.aspx. Bidders are advised that the pavement design shall be in accordance with the tender requirements.

RET 13 No

215. The Contractor is unable to identify items 1.3.10 and 1.3.11 from the document list within the up-dated tender material (relates to new groundwater data). Kindly release these documents or add a reference to where they are located.

The groundwater monitoring readings (14210-EXT-RC-CG-ZZ-00009) that were made available with Correction Sheet No. 10 (RET 10) are now superseded with the groundwater monitoring data included in the report “14210.R04 Roskilde Fjord-Forbindelsen Ch. 0.200 – 9.700 Groundwa-ter measurements, Attachment Report” provided as part of this Correction Sheet No. 12.

Bidders are referred to the updated Docu-ment List Rev. 12.

RET 12 No

216. We have objection to the change of requested documents to be enclosed in the tender concern-ing the 'Other Works'. Based on the BUT up to the version of 4 April and information in the dialogue we were prepared to deliver a Design statement to inform you about critical assumptions and princi-ples of our technical solutions for the design of the other structures, roads, drainage and pavement. The tender is about acquiring a contract for design


RET 12 No

http://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/DA/vejsektor/ydelser/programmer/Sider/Dimensioneringsprogram.aspx



66

and construct. DRD has defined an extensive set of detailed requirements to which we will state explicitly to comply fully. With the change in the BUT of 10 June it is demanded to deliver a full Final Conceptual Design for the 'Other Works'. We are convinced that for the judgement of the quality of our fulfilment of the requirement con-cerning the Other Works, the earlier requested Design Statement, limited to 20 drawings is suffi-cient. Please reduce the requirements for documents to be enclosed in the tender concerning the 'Other Works' to the level as stated in the BUT version of 4 April.

217. In the updated BUT requirements DRD is asking for a long list of new drawings to be delivered (in total estimated at 120-130 drawings), some of which are not represented in DRDs illustrative design drawings (IDDs) and hence would require a lot of work to deliver (referring to section 5.3.6 of the BUT that IDDs do not need to be incorporated in the submission). Can DRD consider revising the required drawings to be delivered for the following parts: Noise barriers: Remove the requirement to deliver longitudinal profiles. These provide no further value to the plan, sections and elevations that are part of the IDDs. Roads: Remove the requirement to deliver gen-eral arrangement plans of the road connections, these do not add further value to the drawings already part of IDDs Drainage: Remove the requirement to deliver sec-tions through the basins. The current IDDs and protocols should provide sufficient information

Bidders are reminded of the following:

the number of drawings requested in section 6.2.4 of the BUT for the final tender submission is a maximum number of drawings

the requirements referring to the Il-lustrative Design in section 5.3.6 of the BUT refer to the dialogue sub-missions only

section 5.3.6 of the BUT also in-cludes an obligation for tenderers to develop a Final Conceptual Design for the tender stage

The Illustrative Design is non- con-tractual and provided for information purposes only

We also note that the current Illustrative Design already includes the following:

- longitudinal profiles of noise barriers (drawing nos. 14210-21417-020 and 14210-21418-


67

Pavement: Remove the requirement to deliver drawings or replace with requirement that the information on pavement design can be delivered as a single table for all stretches within the project as a whole.

020) - General arrangement plans for

the road connections. Bidders are also referred to Appendix 3 of SWS – Design (SAB – Pro-jektering) in relation to the defi-nition of road connection (con-nector road).

With respect to drainage, cross sections shall be provided as stated in section 6.2.4 of the BUT.

With respect to pavement, the pavement design shall be presented on drawings or in a single table which defines the details of the pavement buildup. Bidders are referred to the updated part of section 6.2.4 of the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.

218. We noticed that with the latest issue of the defini-tion design drawings, the Mademose Å geometry has been locked, but also relocated compared to the previous release. Will you please provide new digital model with the new river stream geometry?

Bidders are provided with a digital model of Mademose Å for information purposes only as part of the non-contractual models.


219. The number of drawings asked for in the updated

BUT requirements on drawings to deliver for other works is estimated at 120-130 drawings (as can easily be seen from the number of illustrative de-sign drawings that are set up in the same scale, i.e. just for presenting the longitudinal profiles for the roads DRD has used 37 drawings). On the contrary the limit is set at a maximum of total 40 drawings. How shall these contradicting require-ments be interpreted.

Bidders are referred to the updated part of section 6.2.4 of the BUT provided as part of this correction sheet.

Bidders are advised that some information requested in the submission may be com-bined onto a single drawing. For example:

A single drawing may contain multiple typical road cross-sections.


68

The Contractor believes that 40 drawings is a high number of drawings to deliver so this query is not aimed at raising the allowable number. Kindly revise the BUT requirement for the other works drawings such that it matches the maximum of 40 drawings. DRD refers to drawings 14210-21417-020 and 14210-21418-020 in terms of longitudinal profiles of noise barriers. These drawings show Tørslev Hage only, other noise barrier stretches are not represented by drawings. DRD refers to appendix 3 to SWS01 in relation to the requirement to deliver general plans. How shall this response be understood?

A single drawing may contain multiple retention pond cross-sections.

A single drawing may contain all plan, cross-section, elevations and details for one minor structure.

Appendix 3 to SWS01 provides a definition of the terminology “connector road”.

220. Construction of road and bridges in relation to Fjordforbindelsen Frederikssund will result in sev-eral cases of groundwater lowering.

Do DRD, in relation to this, have any knowledge of requirements concerning limit values for pollutants etc. (e.g. pesticides and nitrogen) for pumped groundwater/fjordwater being discharged to the fjord, lakes, streams and wetlands?

The question is asked because construction works will be carried out in/near Natura 2000 area. This could possibly affect the standard limit values found in the general announcement from authori-ties regarding limit values for pollutiants in dis-charged water. Furthermore it is seen in the VVM from tender material, that discharge of groundwa-ter with relativily high content of nitrogen is ex-pected. Will this cause any special demands in relation to limit values of nitrogen in groundwater

Bidders shall follow current laws and regu-lations in regards to groundwater discharge and are responsible for preparing the per-mits required for their chosen construction method.

RET 14 No

69

discharged to fjord, lakes, streams and wetlands?

221. According to the illustrative drawings UP Mar-

bækvej (North, South), OP Tørslevvej, UP Made-mose Å and UP Ny Landerslevvej (North, South) all have a longitudinal slope between 2 and 5,4 promille. SWS Design 4.2.7 states that the longi-tudinal slope at the drainage centre line shall be designed and constructed according to Projekter-ingsgrundlag for Broer when <10 promille.

Will DRD accept the magnitude of the longitudinal slopes, as stated on the illustrative drawings, in conjunction with this requirement? If not, how should “optimising the longitudinal alignment” be quantified?

Bidders are referred to ID SWS01-01-4.2-390 and ’The Design Basis for bridges – building and design’ (‘Projekter-ingsgrundlag for broer - Anlæg og planlægning’). Bidders are reminded that the Illustrative Design forms part of the information room data and is non-contractual.

RET 13 No

222. Could you please forward the report marked with yellow in enclosed document?

[reference made to the NJL letter from 9/06/2016 and report titled: "Ny Fjordforbindelse, Forunder-søgelse af trace og anlægsområde for ny bro over Roskilde Fjord, MAJ 2533"]

Bidders are advised that the report titled: ”Ny Fjordforbindelse, Forundersøgelse af trace og anlægsområde for ny bro over Roskilde Fjord, MAJ 2533”, has been made available on the Supplier Portal.

RET 14 No

223. Can DRD confirm whether the preventive plan for handling of invasive species to minimize spread-ing in § 3 areas along the road facilities is part of the Contractor's deliverables or whether this is handled by DRD as with some of the other envi-ronmental components from “Dispensation fra naturbeskyttelseslovens § 3 til nedlæggelse og påvirkning af §3 natur ved etablering af Ny Fjord-forbindelse over Roskilde Fjord(Frederikssund Kommune)”

Bidders are referred to clause SWS03-01-7.7-110, and to the subsequent clause SWS03-01-7.7-115 which lists out DRD’s retained responsibilities.


70

224. Updated SWS 01-02-4.2-430 states "Exposed surfaces which are vertical or within an inclination of 15 degrees to vertical , with a surface area greater than 10 m2, shall receive a pattern profiled finish." Kindly confirm that this requirement does not apply to the piers for the High Bridge.


RET 14 No

225. Regarding SB, page 21 of 35:

“Spunsvægge i Tørslev Hage

Bygherren har for spunsvægge i Tørslev Hage inkluderet et krav i udbudsmaterialet om forboring for spunsvæggene med henblik på at fjerne gener under udførelsen fra store sten/boulders. På den-ne baggrund skal entreprenøren bære den tids-mæssige og økonomiske risiko for alle sten/boulders uanset størrelse.”

It is not clear to the Contractor what the purpose of the predrilling is. If stones/boulders are met during predrilling, will the Contractor then be com-pensated (costs and time)? If not what is then the purpose of predrilling?

Bidders are referred to section “Spunsvægge i Tørslev Hage” (Sheet piling in Tørslev Hage) in SB §15.

RET 14 No

226. The new 2016 groundwater data received with the new tender document ” 14210.R04 Roskilde Fjord-Forbindelsen Ch. 0.200 – 9.700 Groundwa-ter measurements, Attachment Report” shows groundwater levels that are significantly higher than the current data in the tender material from 2014 and 2105 (raised in the order of 0,5-1,0 m). Shall these data be taken as representative when defining design groundwater levels within the pro-ject compared to the previous readings from 2014 and 2015?. Also, how shall the climate factor be accounted for in defining the design groundwater levels during the tender stage? (i.e. should both

The addendum mentioned in the tender query provides additional factual data which the Contractor shall interpret to de-rive the characteristic groundwater levels for the relevant limit state in accordance with SWS01 Design and other Contract documents.

The responsibility of defining any climate change factors, whether they relate to groundwater levels or rainfall, also rests with the Contractor and shall be consistent

RET 14 No

71

climate factors for sea level rise in the Fjord (loca-tions close to the coastline) and for increase in rainfall be accounted for)

with the design life of the permanent works.

227. We have been studying and working with the pro-ject for some time and noticed the great complexi-ty, challenges and the employers demands for submitting the documents for the project. Further there have been some major changes for the final round with regard to ice load, groundwater etc. We mean the proposed payment for tendering is not in accordance with the contractor works to be done during tendering. We kindly asked for the following payment: Tender fee should be raised from DKK 1,5 mio. to 3 mio. DKK

DRD have noted the request for rising of the Tender Fee and will take it into consid-eration.

RET 14 No

228. For findings of unknown UXO's Employer has a clear set of terms for compensation. What are the terms for findings of unknown ancient monuments and unknown utilities?

Ancient monuments and unknown utilities will be considered as circumstances relat-ing to the employer as regulated in ABT93, §24 (2)

RET14 No

229. Risk models for large boulders: In both models 1 and 2 it is stated: The contractor shall be entitled to an extension of time in accordance with the provisions regarding clause 24. No other claims shall arise out of the occurrence of large stones/boulders larger than 1 metre in diameter than those stated above. This shall also apply to the contractor's claim for extension of time. These sentences seem to be ambigious regarding 'ex-tension of time'. Please clarify what is meant.

The contractor can have a justified claim for extension of time under clause 24(1) if the contractor can justify an extension of time-limits to the extent that they, in terms of time, if a delay is caused by a boulder larg-er than 1m in diameter and is having a delaying effect on critical activities in the work plan and therefore delay the work exceeding respectively 5 boulders (Risk model 1) or 10 boulders (Risk model 2). Financial compensation for such a delay is included in the fixed compensation rate as stated in the Risk models (1 and 2) in SB clause 15(4).

RET 15 No

230. Additional questions regarding longitudinal profile on the smaller structures: 1) Is it correctly under-

Bidders are referred to the response to RET 14 No

72

stood, that the longitudinal slope of 2-5 pro mille at the smaller bridges, shown on the illustrative drawings, is incorrect?2) If DRD confirms 1) or refers to the text in SWS, how does DRD foresee the change in the longitudinal profile should be handled with respect to the expropriation limits at either sides of the bridges?3) If DRD confirms 1), a consequence is likely that the span length of the bridges will increase. Can DRDs confirm that this consequence is desired?

TQ221.

231. English:Other works:Design basis and assump-tions that include the following: What is meant by the "description" of the road plans, routing, cross section, alignment and longitudinal profile, as well as plans for intersections. The text seems unclear and these elements will also appear on the specif-ic drawings. What is meant by "descriptions" of the drainage plans?. The text seems unclear and the drainage system will appear on the drawings. What is meant by the "description" of the pave-ments? The text seems unclear and both types and thicknesses will appear on the pavement ta-ble.

The descriptions are intended to supplement the drawings and show the bidders’ under-standing of the tender documents, and how these are addressed in the design solutions submitted. Descriptions may include, but are not limited to: Existing conditions that affect the design: Considerations of particular issues which are governing the design: Design approach: Design solutions which are not visible on drawings: Solutions pro-posed for key issues identified: Strengths and weaknesses of proposed solutions: O&M considerations: Etc...

Bidders are advised to the clarifications included in this correction sheet.
