lng import & trans-shipment terminal and regasification ... · • design, finance, build, own...

© POTEN & PARTNERS 2008 CONFIDENTIAL

Prepared for

LNG Import & Trans-shipment Terminal and Regasification Unit in CuraçaoRequest for Proposals Evaluation Report

RdK/MDPT

May 2017

MONTH 2009


© POTEN & PARTNERSMAY 2017 Page 1

The confidentiality of this report and its contents are contractually protected by the Agreement executed effective October 18th, 2014 and shall be held in strictest confidence by, and solely for the use of The Refineria Di Korsou N.V. (RdK) and Multi-Disciplinary Project Team (MDPT), their officers and employees, for no other purpose than internal planning.

Poten & Partners Inc. ©Copyright 2017

Poten & Partners Inc.805 Third Avenue

New York NY 10022-4875

USA

Prepared for RdK/MDPT

LNG Import & Trans-shipment Terminal and Regasification Unit in CuraçaoRequest for Proposals Evaluation Report

MONTH 2009



Contents

Section Page Number

1 - Introduction 3

2 – Technical Proposal Evaluation 7

3 – Pricing Proposal Evaluation 20

4 – Proposals Details 31

MONTH 2009



1 – Introduction

MONTH 2009



Curacao plans to import natural gas to displace heavy fuel oil

• Curacao plans to import natural gas to displace heavy fuel oil to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions and environmental impact

• The Refinery currently produces a heavy residual fuel oil which is used as fuel within the Refinery and also by power plants at the Refinery and the BOO Utilities Plant.

• The combustion of this residual fuel oil is producing visible and significant particulate and acid gas pollution. • This is not compatible with GoC’s promotion of Curaçao as a premier tourist destination, nor is it beneficial to the

health of its population

• Modernization of the Refinery to ensure that the Refinery remains viable for at least 20 to 30 years, and replace residual fuel oil with natural gas

• MDPT is mandated to negotiate a new lease agreement for the Refinery, considering that the current refinery lease expires on December 31, 2019.

• In June 2016, RdK/MDPT issued the RFP to invite interested companies, joint ventures or consortia to submit proposals to act as “Natural Gas Supplier”. The Project consists of:

• Design, finance, build, own and operate the LNG Import & Trans-shipment Terminal and Regasification Unit and all associated infrastructure (“Project Facility”) under Build Own Operate (“BOO”) structure

• Design, financing, construction, operation and ownership of an onshore natural gas pipeline connecting the Project Facility to the Delivery Point, under BOO structure

• Supply of LNG shipments to/from the Project Facility• Supply of natural gas to selected buyers under various Gas Sales and Purchase Agreements• Target start-up date in the 2nd Quarter 2021 or earlier

MONTH 2009



RdK/MDPT engaged Poten to assist in the RFP development, preparation, issuance and evaluation

Feasibility Study

Review

Oct 2014

RFP Preparation

Jan 2015

RFP Issuance

Jun 2016

RFP Evaluation

2016-2017

On-going Engagements between Curacao RdK/MDPT and Poten

LNG Import & Trans-shipment Terminal and Regasification Unit in Curacao

Poten reviewed and updated the 2012 Curacao CNG-LNG Terminal Feasibility Study•Curacao natural gas demand projections•LNG sourcing and pricing analysis•LNG terminal and infrastructure costs•LNG terminal storage and FSRU size analysis•Marine and Jetty

Preparation of RFP Bidding Package•RdK/MDPT and Poten prepared the required information and RFP documents including Instruction to Bidders, Exhibits, Attachments, Terms of Reference

•Poten conducted a one-day workshop in Curacao to discuss with RdK/MDPT on RFP preparation, schedule, evaluation processes and criteria

Issuance of RFP Public Notice and RFP Package• Poten directly

advertised RFP to 30 companies worldwide

• Poten assisted RdK/ MDPT to release RFP publicly via newswire and trade publications

Bidders’ site visit and clarification meeting in Curacao• Answered clarification

questions from bidders• Re-issued revised

sections of RFP

Opening & Evaluation of Technical Proposals•Poten reviewed and evaluated Technical Proposals•Poten conducted a RFP Technical Evaluation Meeting in Curacao

Opening & Evaluation of Pricing Proposal•Poten reviewed and evaluated Pricing Proposals

MONTH 2009



RdK/MDPT and Poten agreed approach to the selection of the Preferred Bidder

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION

•The Technical Assessment was performed by evaluating Bidder’s Technical Proposal and based on a grading and pass-fail system•Bids passing the Technical Assessment will be evaluated based on the Pricing Assessment

PRICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION

•The Pricing Assessment was performed by evaluating Bidder’s Pricing Proposal

SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER

•The bidder with most economic Proposal assessment will be selected as the Preferred Bidder

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION

PRICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION

SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER(S)

Opening & Evaluation of Technical Proposals•Poten review and evaluate Technical Proposals•Technical Evaluation Meeting in Curacao

Opening & Evaluation of Pricing Proposal•Poten review and evaluate Pricing Proposals

RFP Evaluation

2016-2017

MONTH 2009



2 – Technical Proposal Evaluation

MONTH 2009



Curacao received a total of 16 bid proposals in response to the RFP

• In Nov 2016, Curacao RdK/MDPT received 16 bid proposals in response to the RFP issued in Jun 2016

• New Fortress Energy• BP Gas• Shell• Trafigura• Cheniere• Socar• Gas Porto• Golar

• Poten evaluated the technical proposals based on grading and pass/fail system

• Kogas and Mitsui & Co.• Gas Natural Fenosa• Excelerate• Promigas, Hoegh LNG and Repsol• AES• Titan and GZE• Centrica• Equipment Solutions and CHEC

GRADING SYSTEM

0 : No clear evidence to support field/category1 : Limited evidence to support field/category2 : A fair amount of detail provided to support field/category3 : In-depth expertise/strength to support field/category

GRADING SYSTEM PASS/FAIL SYSTEM

Pass : Pass to progress to the Technical Evaluation StageFail : Fail to progress to the Technical Evaluation Stage

A bidder will only pass if it fulfills the following:- The company has no zero associated with any field/category in the technical evaluation- The company has a mathematical average equal or greater than the minimum score (2.0)

PASS/FAIL SYSTEM

MONTH 2009



Technical Proposal Assessment Criteria

1. Evaluation and Qualification Criteria

•1.1. Natural Gas and LNG Experience

•1.2. Access to natural gas supply

•1.3. LNG Trans-shipment Plan •1.4. Technical Know-How•1.5. Financial Strength•1.6. Management Capacity•1.7. Technical feasibility

2. Project Implementation Plan

•2.1. Level of detail and comprehensiveness of project implementation plan

•2.2. Capability and experience to support Project Implementation

•2.3. Bidder Financial Position to execute project

3. Schedule of Project Implementation

•3.1. Detailed implementation schedule, clarifying major milestones and providing detail of the critical activities in the schedule

•3.2. Detailed duration, impact on overall schedule and implementation plans

4. Operational Availability and System

Reliability

•4.1. Provide specific reliability parameters that RdK/MDPT can rely on

•4.2. Reliability and maintenance assessment and analysis to support the proposed levels of availability

5. Agreement/ Deviation from GSA Term Sheet

•5.1. Any deviations or exceptions to the Term Sheet

6. General Project and Bidder Information

•6.1. Form of legal entity for Bidder

•6.2. Description of any material legal proceedings

•6.3. Information on project insurance plan during construction and operation

7. Natural Gas Quality

•7.1. Fulfill requirements for Gross Heating Value, Net Heating Value and WobbeNumber/ Index

•7.2. Components and Substances

•7.3. Contaminants•7.4. Delivery pressure

MONTH 2009



Technical Grading

MONTH 2009



1. Evaluation and Qualification Criteria

1. EVALUATION AND QUALIFICATION CRITERIA

New Fortress Energy BP Gas Shell Trafigura Cheniere Socar Gas Porto Golar

1.1. Natural Gas and LNG Experience 1.7 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0

1.2. Access to natural gas supply 1.3 3.0 3.0 1.3 2.5 2.3 1.3 2.5

1.3. LNG Trans‐shipment Plan 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0

1.4. Technical Know‐How 1.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0

1.5. Financial Strength 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0

1.6. Management Capacity 2.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0

1.7. Technical feasibility 2.0 3.0 3.0 1.7 3.0 2.7 1.3 2.3

1. EVALUATION AND QUALIFICATION CRITERIA

Kogas and Mitsui & Co

Gas Natural Fenosa Excelerate

Promigas, Hoegh LNG and Repsol

AES Titan and GZE CentricaEquipment

Solutions and CHEC

1.1. Natural Gas and LNG Experience 3.0 2.3 3.0 3.0 2.7 1.3 2.0 0.7

1.2. Access to natural gas supply 3.0 3.0 1.3 2.3 1.3 2.0 3.0 2.3

1.3. LNG Trans‐shipment Plan 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 0.0

1.4. Technical Know‐How 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 0.0

1.5. Financial Strength 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0

1.6. Management Capacity 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0

1.7. Technical feasibility 3.0 2.7 3.0 3.0 1.7 2.7 1.7 1.7

MONTH 2009



2. Project Implementation Plan

2. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN


2.1. Level of detail and comprehensiveness of project implementation plan

1.9 2.7 3.0 1.7 2.9 2.1 1.0 1.9

2.2. Capability and experience to support Project Implementation 1.8 2.5 3.0 2.3 3.0 1.8 1.0 1.5

2.3. Bidder Financial Position to execute project 3.0 2.3 2.8 1.5 2.8 2.3 0.3 2.0

2. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN





Solutions and CHEC

2.1. Level of detail and comprehensiveness of project implementation plan

2.7 2.3 1.9 2.4 1.7 2.4 2.1 0.3

2.2. Capability and experience to support Project Implementation 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.3 1.3 2.8 1.3

2.3. Bidder Financial Position to execute project 2.8 3.0 1.8 2.8 1.5 1.0 2.3 0.5

MONTH 2009



3. Schedule of Project Implementation

3. SCHEDULE OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION


3.1. Detailed implementation schedule, clarifying major milestones and providing detail of the critical activities in the schedule

2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0

3.2. Detailed duration, impact on overall schedule and implementation plans

2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0

3. SCHEDULE OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION





Solutions and CHEC

3.1. Detailed implementation schedule, clarifying major milestones and providing detail of the critical activities in the schedule

2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0

3.2. Detailed duration, impact on overall schedule and implementation plans

3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 0.5

MONTH 2009



4. Operational availability and system reliability

4. OPERATIONAL AVAILABILITY AND SYSTEM RELIABILITY


4.1. Provide specific reliability parameters that RdK/MDPT can rely on

2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0

4.2. Reliability and maintenance assessment and analysis to support the proposed levels of availability

2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0

AVAILABILITY (%) 98% 98% 98.4% 98% 98% 99.5% 97% 98.4%

4. OPERATIONAL AVAILABILITY AND SYSTEM RELIABILITY





Solutions and CHEC

4.1. Provide specific reliability parameters that RdK/MDPT can rely on

3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 0.0

4.2. Reliability and maintenance assessment and analysis to support the proposed levels of availability

3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.0

AVAILABILITY (%) 99.922% 99% 97.8% 98.5% 98% 100% 98.5% Not provided

• Maintenance schedule affects the operational availability, overall fuel consumption and costs.

MONTH 2009



5. Agreement/Deviation from GSA Term Sheet

5. AGREEMENT/DEVIATION FROM GSA TERM SHEET


5.1. Any deviations or exceptions to the Term Sheet 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 2.0

5. AGREEMENT/DEVIATION FROM GSA TERM SHEET





Solutions and CHEC

5.1. Any deviations or exceptions to the Term Sheet 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

MONTH 2009



6. General Project and Bidder Information

6. GENERAL PROJECT AND BIDDER INFORMATION


6.1. Form of legal entity for Bidder 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0

6.2. Description of any material legal proceedings 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

6.3. Information on project insurance plan during construction and operation

2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0

6. GENERAL PROJECT AND BIDDER INFORMATION





Solutions and CHEC

6.1. Form of legal entity for Bidder 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0

6.2. Description of any material legal proceedings 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.0

6.3. Information on project insurance plan during construction and operation

3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0

MONTH 2009



7. Natural Gas Quality

7. NATURAL GAS QUALITY New Fortress Energy BP Gas Shell Trafigura Cheniere Socar Gas Porto Golar

7.1. Fulfill requirements for Gross Heating Value, Net Heating Value and Wobbe Number/ Index

3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0

7.2. Fulfill requirements and provide information for Components and Substances

2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0

7.3. Fulfill requirements and provide information on Contaminants

3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0

7.4. Fulfill requirements and provide information on delivery pressure

2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0

7. NATURAL GAS QUALITY Kogas and Mitsui & Co




Solutions and CHEC

7.1. Fulfill requirements for Gross Heating Value, Net Heating Value and Wobbe Number/ Index

3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

7.2. Fulfill requirements and provide information for Components and Substances

3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

7.3. Fulfill requirements and provide information on Contaminants

3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

7.4. Fulfill requirements and provide information on delivery pressure

3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0

MONTH 2009



A total of 12 bidders passed the technical assessment and progressed to the next round of price assessment


AVERAGE GRADING 2.2 2.7 2.9 1.8 2.5 2.4 1.4 2.0

OVERALL PASS/FAIL PASS PASS PASS FAIL PASS PASS FAIL PASS

Condition 1: The company has no zero associated with any field/category in the technical evaluation

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL PASS

Condition 2: The company has a mathematical average equal or greater than the minimum score*

PASS PASS PASS FAIL PASS PASS FAIL PASS





Solutions and CHEC

AVERAGE GRADING 2.8 2.8 1.9 2.8 2.0 2.1 2.4 1.1

OVERALL PASS/FAIL PASS PASS FAIL PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL

Condition 1: The company has no zero associated with any field/category in the technical evaluation

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL

Condition 2: The company has a mathematical average equal or greater than the minimum score*

PASS PASS FAIL PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL

MONTH 2009



4 Bidders failed the technical assessment and did not progress to the price assessment

• Trafigura, Gas Porto, Excelerate and Equipment Solutions & CHEC failed the technical evaluation

BIDDERS AVERAGE GRADING CONDITION 1 CONDITION 2

Trafigura 1.8 PASS FAIL

Gas Porto 1.4 FAIL FAIL

Excelerate 1.9 PASS FAIL

Equipment Solutions & CHEC 1.1 FAIL FAIL

MONTH 2009



3 – Pricing Proposal Evaluation

MONTH 2009



Key parameters in the price evaluation

1Capacity Charge

•Capacity Charge will be a fixed component that reflects the fixed costs estimated in delivering services, including recovery of capital cost

•Capacity Charge is independent of actual usage of infrastructure

•Capital Expenditure (CAPEX)•Operational Expenditure (OPEX)

•Inflation method proposed

2. Commodity Charge

•The Commodity Charge will reflect both the variable costs estimated for delivering services, AND the commodity charge for delivered gas

•Inflation method proposed

3. Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee

•Annual fee for use of site•Fixed amount payable annually in advance for the lease of the site

•Could not apply to the evaluation process because many bidders did not provide the details and amounts, and differed to later negotiations

4. Trans-shipment Concession Fee

•Monthly variable concession fee based on the level of Trans-Shipment business.

•Could not apply to the evaluation process because many bidders did not provide the details and amounts, and differed to later negotiations

MONTH 2009



Poten’s assumptions in evaluating the price proposals

• Poten performed Net Present Value calculations (NPV) to compare proposals• Petroleum product (HFO/Diesel) alternative prices are assumed to be oil-linked

• Petroleum product (HFO/Diesel) prices are assumed to be the same price as crude oil prices.• Fuel prices are converted from $/Barrel to $/MMBtu based on oil parity.

• The evaluation and results are sensitive to some key assumptions such as the following:• Brent Oil and Henry Hub price levels• Penalty value due to terminal downtime (for example HFO/Diesel oil purchased in lieu of LNG)

• Maintenance schedule is an important factor in determining the HFO/diesel consumption for power plants

• Maintenance schedule affects the operational availability, overall fuel consumption and costs.• When the terminal is under maintenance downtime, alternative petroleum fuel (HFO/diesel) is used to replace LNG

as fuel to power• This will account for the difference in fuel costs across the bidders and thus added to the overall costs for RFP bid

comparison purposes

• Penalty is calculated based on petroleum product alternative prices (HFO/diesel used to run gas turbines) minus LNG costs (LNG not consumed at gas turbines) during the terminal downtime

MONTH 2009



Henry Hub Indexed

MONTH 2009



Titan/GZE provides the lowest price formula, but it seems unrealistically low compared to industry standards

Grading of Price Proposal(Henry Hub Indexed for Tranche A)

Bidders Proposed Design NPV of Total Costs(in US$ Mil) Rank

Titan and GZE Onshore 2,374 1

Cheniere Offshore 3,685 2

Shell Offshore 3,729 3

AES Offshore 3,756 4

BP Gas Offshore 3,780 5

New Fortress Energy Offshore 3,826 6

Kogas and Mitsui & Co Onshore 3,907 7

Gas Natural Fenosa Offshore 4,085 8

Promigas, Hoegh LNG and Repsol Offshore 4,180 9

Socar Offshore 4,230 10

The above grading and ranking are based on the following assumptions: Brent Oil price at $50/barrel, Henry Hub price at $3.20/MMBtu, NPV discount rate of 8%.

MONTH 2009



Titan’s offer is unrealistically low compared to industry standards

• Titan/GZE proposed Commodity Charge formula is unrealistically low compared to industry standards. The pricing term covering liquefaction tolling fees seems missing. As provided, the Price Formula seems unsustainable in the short and long-term.

• It is therefore misaligned with the other Price Proposals, including BP’s Commodity Charge offer which Titan claims as their source of LNG.

• Titan/GZE indicated that as GZE would be the biggest off-taker of the LNG for the Refinery and CRU (power plant) operations, they will absorb some of the cost in their refinery business model

• This was not considered when the RfP was issued. The HoA signed between RdK, GZE and Government of Curacao is dated November 19th 2016

• On this date the RFP process was already under-way

MONTH 2009



Brent Indexed

MONTH 2009



Centrica and Golar price proposals provide the lowest NPV of total costs

Grading of Price Proposal(Brent Indexed for Tranche A)

Bidders Proposed Design NPV of Total Costs(in US$ Mil) Rank

Centrica Onshore 3,293 1

Golar ‐ Proposal 2 Offshore 3,403 2

Golar ‐ Proposal 1 Offshore 3,467 3

Kogas and Mitsui & Co Onshore 3,788 4

BP Gas Offshore 3,864 5

The above grading and ranking are based on the following assumptions: Oil price at $50/barrel, Henry Hub price at $3.20/MMBtu, NPV discount rate of 8%, Technical and Price Proposal evaluation weightage of 50%-50%.

MONTH 2009



Scenario Analysis

MONTH 2009



0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

NP

V o

f To

tal C

ost

s (U

S$ M

illio

n))

Henry Hub Price ($/MMBtu)

New Fortress Energy

BP Gas

Shell

Cheniere

Socar


Gas Natural Fenosa

Promigas, Hoegh LNGand RepsolAES

Titan and GZE

Scenario 1: Variance in NPV of Total Costs for HH price range from $2/MMBtu to $5/MMBtu

At HH $3.50/MMBtu,1. Titan & GZE2. Cheniere3. Shell4. AES5. BP Gas6. New Fortress Energy7. Kogas and Mitsui8. Gas Natural Fenosa9. Promigas, Hoegh &

Repsol10. Socar

NPV of Total Costs – Henry Hub Indexed (US$ Million)

MONTH 2009



2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

40 50 60 70 80 90

NP

V -

Bre

nt P

rice

Ind

exed

fo

r Tr

anch

e A

(US$

Mill

ion)

Brent Price ($/Barrel)BP Gas Golar Proposal 1 Golar Proposal 2 Kogas and Mitsui & Co Centrica

Scenario 2: Variance in NPV of Total Costs for Brent Oil Prices from $40/Barrel to $90/Barrel

At Brent $50/Barrel,1. Centrica2. Golar (Proposal 2)3. Golar (Proposal 1)4. Kogas and Mitsui5. BP Gas

At Brent $70/Barrel,1. Centrica2. Golar (Proposal 2)3. Golar (Proposal 1)4. BP Gas5. Kogas and Mitsui

At Brent $90/Barrel,1. Centrica2. Golar (Proposal 2)3. Golar (Proposal 1)4. BP Gas5. Kogas and Mitsui

NPV of Total Costs – Brent Indexed (US$ Million)

MONTH 2009



4 - Proposals Details

MONTH 2009



Summary of Bidders’ Proposals (HH Indexed)

MONTH 2009



Shell

Base Proposal

Proposed Solution • Offshore

Description • FSRU (Leasing, Conversion or New-Built)• Dedicated jetty with mooring and berthing• Onshore 13km natural gas pipeline• Onshore small fenced facility containing a

maintenance vent and space for connecting pig launcher facility (pipeline maintenance)

Storage Size (m3) • 135,000-170,000

Reliability Parameters • 98.4% availability (Three days planned and three days unplanned maintenance/outage)

Proposed Start up Date • Q2 2021

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Due to the location of Curacao, Shell will likely deliver LNG from its 23+mtpa Atlantic Basin portfolio. From these supply points LNG can be delivered to Curacao in as little as 1 day from Atlantic LNG in Trinidad (~6 mtpa), 4-5 days from Elba Island (~2.5 mtpa) or Sabine Pass (~5.5 mtpa), and 11-12 days from Nigeria (~5.6 mtpa) or Equatorial Guinea (~3.5 mtpa)

LNG Trans-shipment Plan

• Shell provides information on the viability of trans-shipment and LNG bunkering in the Caribbean, proposed application in the region, and its partnership with the Government of Gibraltar to develop a small-scale LNG import solution

Proposed Terminal Layout and Berth Orientation

FSRU Marine Infrastructure and Non-FSRU Facilities

MONTH 2009



Shell

EVALUATION CRITERIA UNIT BASE PROPOSAL BIDDER’S REMARKS

Capacity Charge (in real 2016 basis)

Capacity Charge US$/Day 129,000 The capacity charge is in Real Terms 2016, the whole of which is subject to inflation.

‐ Capital expenditure (CAPEX) US$/Day 100,000

‐ Operational expenditure (OPEX) US$/Day 29,000

‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 79,000 The charter rate for the FSRU is included in the Capacity Charge

Rate of Return (in real 2016 basis) % 9.8%

Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ US CPICPI Basis will be Dec 2018. December 2018 is the basis for CPI inflation as this is when SPA negotiations are expected to be finalized.

Commodity Charge (in 2016 US$ basis)

Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH+$3.50

27% of the $3.50 alpha would be subject to US CPI (inflation). CPI basis on Dec 2018. However, as the market has evolved from initial offer, Bidder would like to discuss a potential price improvement for the next round of short listings.

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD Tranche B to be outlined in the SPA/GSA

Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee (in 2016 US$ basis)

Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 150,000

Based on proposal FSRU design minimum land use requirements of approximately 2600m2, and suggested market price at $40‐$60/m2, which result in annual lease of $100,000‐$150,000. This fee is not currently included in the capacity charge and will be negotiated.

Variable Concession Fee (in 2016 US$ basis)

Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 0.05 Proposed a fixed fee of $0.05/MMBtu but this number is subject to different factors and can be discussed.

MONTH 2009



BP Gas

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU, new built membrane type LNG vessel, with 4 cargo tanks. FSRU will utilize DFDE propulsion technology.

• T-shaped jetty, double banking operations• Terminal can load smaller vessels in the

range of 10,000m3 to 40,000m3• 12"13km sendout pipeline to RdK refinery

Storage Size (m3) • 174,000

Reliability Parameters

• 98% Availability• A preliminary RAM study carried out by BP

suggests a potential jetty availability between 90.5-96%

Proposed Start up Date • Q2 2021 or earlier

LNG SPA Term Sheet • BP will be supplying LNG from its global LNG portfolio, with a focus on BP's existing LNG supply from Trinidad

• Currently, BP has an LNG supply portfolio of approximately 3.4 mtpa.


• The proposed design is to berth the small LNG carriers utilised for transshipment alongside the FSRU in a double berthed arrangement

Proposed FSRU and Jetty

Proposed FSRU STS Operations

MONTH 2009



BP Gas



Capacity Charge US$/Day 215,500 Values are stated in 2016 US Dollars



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 110,000 Based on newly built 174,000 m3 / day FSRU. None of the FSRU Charter Rate is subject to inflation.


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ US CPI


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH+$3.2675For HH, 10% of K is subjected to inflation. BP can offer LNG or natural gas indexed to other indices to meet the needs of the Buyers to be negotiated in the GSA.

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD To be discussed. BP can offer a fixed price, a price linked to one or more indices or price linked to spot quotes


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year TBD To be discussed.


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu TBD To be discussed.

MONTH 2009



Cheniere

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU• Jetty permanently moor the dedicated FSRU• Send-out pipeline to delivery points• Gas metering or reduction station• Equipment enabling FSRU to provide LNG

trans-shipment services to smaller vessels



• 98% Availability (7 days per year)• FSRU can be allowed to remain on station

for 10-20 years without dry-docking, with Class notation to FSRU


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Cheniere will have approx. 27mtpa export capability from Sabine Pass and 22.5mtpa from Corpus Christi. Approx. 88% of Sabine Pass Trains 1-5 committed, and 8.42mtpa committed from Corpus Christi.

• Cheniere looking to retain full flexibility on supply but nominally Corpus Christi Train 3


• Cheniere outline a role for Curacao as one of the LNG break-bulking hubs for the Caribbean region and LNG bunkering

Proposed FSRU Jetty Conceptual Design

Illustration of LNG bunkering/transport vessel

MONTH 2009



Cheniere



Capacity Charge US$/Day 157,916 Values are stated in 2016 US Dollars basis


‐ Operational expenditure (OPEX) US$/Day 46,699 OPEX include $22,500/day for FSRU OPEX and $24,199/day for Terminal Infrastructure OPEX

‐‐‐ Terminal Infrastructure OPEX US$/Day 24,199

‐‐‐ FSRU OPEX US$/Day 22,500

‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 71,000


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ Curacao CPI, Belgium CPI and US CPI

Terminal Infrastructure OPEX shall be indexed annually starting in 2017, based on Curacao CPI. FSRU OPEX shall be indexed annually starting in 2017, based on Belgium CPI.


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 119%*HH+$3.15 11% of K ($3.15) component shall be indexed annually starting in 2017, based on changes to US CPI starting 2017

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu Tranche B value will be the greater value between (i) 118% x HH + $5/MMBtu and (ii) 14% of Brent




Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 4% Vcfn = 0.1725*[X%]* Brent Oil

MONTH 2009



Kogas and Mitsui & Co.

Base Proposal

Proposed Solution • Onshore

Description • Land area of 335 m × 232 m (w/o Jetty and Pipeline area)

• One (1) above ground storage tank • Jetty and unloading system• 14″ 12.9 km pipeline


Reliability Parameters• The availability of Gas Send-out System

and LNG Unloading system is 99.922% and 99.961%, respectively


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Kogas has a supply portfolio of 30 mtpafrom nine projects. Kogas's US LNG would be likely available source for the project in Curacao. Kogas listed 2.8 mtpa of LNG from US in the proposal.

• Mitsui can secure approx.10%-15% of 4.5 mtpa from Cameron LNG (depending on delivery year) to supply to Curacao.

• If needed, Kogas and Mitsui will cooperate and mutually adjust the supplying volume.


• Bidders proposed a feasibility study of reloading full and small-scale LNG cargo to the Latin America and Caribbean region

Proposed Plot Plan for Jetty

Proposed Preliminary Plot Plan by Consortium

MONTH 2009






Capacity Charge US$/Day 210,040

Kogas and Mitsui quoted the values on a nominal basis for our Price Proposal. And CPI (Comsumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers) we proposed for the inflation method is published by US Bureau of Labor Statistics also on a nominal basis. For the avoidance of doubt, CPIº is CPI final value published for Jan 2017.



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day N/A FSRU is not proposed thus bidder have not included a charter rate for the FSRU in this Price Proposal


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ CPIm/CPI0 CPIm is US CPI for latest available month preceding month M of delivery and CPI0 is CPI final value published for Jan 2017.


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115.64%*HH+ 3.12 + 0.53*(CPIm/CPI0)

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD Bidder is open to discuss a Tranche B for the Commodity Charge, once more precise estimation of Buyer's demand profile is available.


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 1

Bidder temporaily offers US$1/year as a Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee, since the bidder is open to working with the preference of RdK/MDPT between higher Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee and lower Capacity Charge.


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 1%The Concession Fee of Tran‐shipment is not reflected in this Price Proposal. Further study will be needed for the estimate of annual quantity of LNG that will be re‐exported

MONTH 2009



Gas Natural Fenosa

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU moored in newly constructed jetty• LNG flexible hose discharge system• Storage tanks• Regasification units in mix mode (open,

close, intermediate sea water loop)• High pressure NG connection to shore• NG Reception Facilities• Utilities and ancillary services• Pipeline gas connection from the jetty to

battery limits

Storage Size (m3) • 125,000-138,000

Reliability Parameters • 99% Availability

Proposed Start up Date • Dec 2019

LNG SPA Term Sheet • LNG will be supplied from GNF Portfolio:Qatar (1.5 mtpa), Nigeria (3.0 mtpa), Trinidad & Tobago (4.0 mtpa), USA Sabine Pass (3.0 mtpa)

• Bidder state that today they have spare capacity in at least 4 of the above sources to supply on a standalone basis 100% of Curaçao needs


• LNG trans-shipment plans using an FSRUincluding STS Small scale vessels; FSRU to trucks; FSRU to the terminal

LNG Facilities (Simplified Diagram)

LNG Terminal Layout (Preliminary Layout)

Proposed Conventional Jetty of Piled Construction

MONTH 2009



Gas Natural Fenosa







Rate of Return (in real 2016 basis) % 8.3% Real rate provided for information purposes as GNA works with nominal rates

Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ CPIy/CPIr

CPIy is CPI at 31 Dec year n, CPIr is at 31 Dec 2016. Inflation method for the capacity charge is 72.36%* Capacity Charge + 28%* Capacity Charge*CPIUSAy/CPIUSAr. The reason it does not add up to 100% is that some of our opex will be partially indexed to other currencies different from USD. In financial model, bidder assume a slightly different evolution in both currencies and the related CPIs, resulting in the aforementioned percentages.


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115.8%*HH+ 4.0 + 0.5*(CPIx/CPI0)

CPIx is CPI 12 months preceding the Contract Year, CPI0 is 12 months period between Jan 1 and Dec 31 2018.

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 115.8%*HH+ 4.7 + 0.5*(CPIx/CPI0)


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 409,314 Fee in 2019 as the assumed first complete year of the land lease agreement. This value will be adjusted yearly according to US CPI


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 0.97Fee will be US$0.97/MMBtu (in 2016) paid monthly in arrears. Inflation method for VCF = 72.36%*Fee + 28%*Fee*CPIy/CPIr. CPIy is CPI at 31 Dec year n, CPIr is at 31 Dec 2016

MONTH 2009



New Fortress Energy

Base Proposal


Description • FSU permanently moored• An LNG unloading single berth structure• An onshore regasification skid• Natural gas pipeline to delivery point

Storage Size (m3) • 126,000-128,000

Reliability Parameters • 98% Availability• NFE estimate 7-10 days of potential

downtime and would expect to have stand-by fuel sources to cover this downtime.

Proposed Start up Date • Q2 2021 or earlier• Can build and commission as early as 2018

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Term sheets for SPA with multiple LNG suppliers for 1 MTPA of LNG supply on a Delivered Ex Ship “DES” basis


• Bidder is also bidding on Aruba’s LNG supply RFP.

• If they win both Curaçao and Aruba, they would explore using Curaçao as a trans-shipment hub to deliver LNG into Aruba

Proposed LNG Import Terminal

MONTH 2009



New Fortress Energy



Capacity Charge US$/Day 112,500The price proposal values quoted are stated in 2016 $ basis. The quoted values are fixed at the 2016 $ basis until the expected start date of the terminal.



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day N/A




Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu HH + 4.75 The percentage of the constant that will be subjected to inflation will be no more than 1%.

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu HH + 5.00




Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu TBD

MONTH 2009



AES

Base Proposal


Description • FRU permanently moored (new build)• FSU (existing conventional LNGC)• Accompanying mooring facilities• Onshore pipeline to buyers• Onshore LNG truck loading station• Partner Gasfin for infrastructure and

technical provider

Storage Size (m3) • 125,000-155,000

Reliability Parameters • 98% Availability• Dry-docking of FSU will occur every 5 years.

During this time a similar sized LNG ship will substitute the FSU to ensure continuous LNG supply. The FRU will be designed to stay permanently onsite for the project duration without removal for dry docking

Proposed Start up Date • 2Q 2021

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Partner ENGIE for supply of LNG• ENGIE offtake with Cameron LNG can

provide flexibility in the supply contract with Curacao


• AES has the capability to trans-ship LNG in small vessels to Caribbean islands

• Current trans-shipment capacity in Dominican Republic and Panama

Proposed FSU/FSRU Concept Overview

Preliminary Site Overview

MONTH 2009



AES






‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 78,000 Charter rate for the FSRB and FSU (included in the Capacity Charge)


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ 100%CPI


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 116.38%*HH + 2.60 + 0.90* USCPI/CPI2016

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 600,000 This fee is not included in the proposed Capacity Charge.


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 6% Vcfn = 0.1725*[X%]* Brent Oil

MONTH 2009




Base Proposal


Description • FSRU (new built) permanently moored• An above sea pipeline from sea to shore• A 13.5km natural gas pipeline• Onshore facility installations


Reliability Parameters • 98.5% Availability (5.5 days/year)• No dry docking will be necessary for a

period of 20 years


LNG SPA Term Sheet • LNG to be supplied by Repsol. Repsolstrategy to supply LNG volumes to Curacao is based on its own LNG portfolio which is mainly sourced from the US (US upstream reserves and Cameron LNG referenced as potential sources)


• Repsol conducted a survey of potential Caribbean and Central American markets, and estimated demand potential around 3 MMt/y. Repsol also estimated trans-ship volumes could be around 2 MMt/y - with potential demand from trans-shipment available to Curacao at around 1 MMt/y

Process Flow Diagram

Preliminary FSRU Layout

LNG Vessel Bunkering Activity

MONTH 2009






Capacity Charge US$/Day 186,824 Real values 2016.





Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ CPIus/CPI0 CPIus is US CPI for the 1st Jan of the relevant contract, and CPI0 is US CPI for 1st Jan 2016.


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH + 3.05 + 1.15*CPIus/CPI0

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH + 3.55 + 1.15*CPIus/CPI0 Alternative option: 12%*Brent + 1.1


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 641,095This value is included in the capacity charge of the price proposal. Fee to be further discused and adjusted in the GSA negotiations. Bidder estimated land area of aprox. 50,000 m2 for the facilities


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 0.1For Brent < $80/Bbl, then Vcf = $0.10/MMBtuFor $80/Bbl <Brent < $120/Bbl , Vcf = 0.005 X Brent ‐ $0.3/MMBtuFor Brent > $120/Bbl, then Vcf = $0.30/MMBtu

Variable Costs (in 2016 US$ basis)

Variable Costs of Gas Used for Terminal US$/MMBtu;US$/Day Csp*Gci/Gdi

Variable costs of the gas used for the Terminal operation, Vc = Csp * Gci/Gdi, whereby Gci means the gas consumed in the FSRU operations including loss and Gdi means the gas send out

MONTH 2009



Socar

Base Proposal


Description • FSU permanently berthed• Onshore regasification plant• A separate LNG bunkering jetty• Note: Socar proposed 2 breasting dolphins

for the berth, which may result in pressure on hull plating in excess of allowed 15-20 t/m2. Four breasting dolphins will be required to adequately support FSU and LNGC. Socarstated that four breasting dolphins do not seem necessary at this stage since only one type of vessel (the FSU) is expected to berth directly to the jetty. Further studies required.


Reliability Parameters • 99.5% Availability (with account of tropical cyclones) and 99.9% (without account of tropical cyclones) for total LNG terminal

Proposed Start up Date • Aug 2020

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Initialized term sheet with Petronas with dedicated volumes to Curacao


• Socar is interested to use Curacao as a trans-shipment hub to serve the Caribbean region. Identified five potential "customer" locations in the neighborhood

Proposed Jetty Layout

Island Berth Configuration

MONTH 2009



Socar




Please note that the Capacity Charge of USD180,822/day indicated in Pricing Proposal in addition to Opex, Capex and Charter rate, also includes interest to be paid on financing borrowed for the project realization as well as equity returns to shareholders.


‐ Operational expenditure (OPEX) US$/Day 40,479 FSU O&M costs are included in the total OPEX quoted within the Pricing Proposal. Of the FSU O&M Costs, $22,000 subject to inflation

‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 50,000 FSU Charter Rate presented in the price proposal represents just the CAPEX for the hire of the vessel. Only OPEX cost subject to inflation.

‐ Interest on financing borrowed and equity returns to shareholders US$/Day 46,672


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ US CPI Inflation method is US CPI as proxy, never a negative and not lower than 2%


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 120%*HH + 4.3

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 118%*HH + KK is a fixed amount in US cent/MMBtu determined annually at ADP (Annual Delivery Programme) Process. Note that Bidder proposed 90 days notice nomination period, instead of 60 days.




Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 0.05Bidder proposed a flat fee of US$ 0.05/MMBtu re‐exported from Curacao. The fee excludes cost of transhipment (OPEX increase due to reloading) which will be a pass through.

MONTH 2009



Titan and GZE

Base Proposal


Description • One (1) LNG storage tank• One (1) marine jetty (can receive LNG carrier

up to 174,000m3)• BOG handling system• LNG pumping and vaporization system• Control and safety system• Electrical power generation system and

utility system• Building road, fence and civil related items• Onshore natural gas pipeline


Reliability Parameters • 100% Availability

Proposed Start up Date • 1Q 2021 or earlier

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Draft non-binding Term Sheet from BP (BP will deliver DAP)


• The Terminal facility design has included the provision for load-out operation

• The main player to take-off LNG trans-shipment is expected to be Curoil

• Market LNG to region such as Panama, Caribbean islands, Colombia, Cuba etc.

Proposed General Layout

Mooring Layout of LNG Berth

MONTH 2009



Titan and GZEEVALUATION CRITERIA UNIT BASE PROPOSAL BIDDER’S REMARKS


Capacity Charge US$/Day 125,654 Value is on 2016 US$ basis



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day N/A Charter rate not provided because it is not applicable


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ Median CPI


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH + 0.26

Tranche A will not be subject to inflation. Tranche A represents a fixed amount of Commodity Charge controlled by long term gas supply contractTitan/GZE indicated that as GZE would be the biggest off‐taker of the LNG for the Refinery and CRU (power plant) operations, they will absorb some of the cost in their refinery business model.This was not considered when the RfP was issued. The HoA signed between RdK, GZE and Government of Curacao is dated November 19th 2016. On this date the RFP process was already under‐way

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 0.07 Exclusive Access Period = $0.07/MMBtu. Open Access Period = $0.39/MMBtu


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year TBD


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu TBDCurrently 200,000 ton/y LNG is available for trans‐shipment as offered by BP. More quantity will be available on request by Curoil or other parties.

MONTH 2009



Summary of Bidders’ Proposals (Brent Indexed)

MONTH 2009



Centrica

Base Proposal


Description • Onshore LNG storage tank and regasification unit

• LNG pump and LNG pipeline between tank and jetty (bi-directional for future trans-shipment operations)

• Natural gas pipeline• Minor dolphin modifications to range of

small vessels to be re-loaded at the jetty

Storage Size (m3) • 125,000• Note: 125,000m3 is much smaller than size

of proposed LNG carrier (180,000m3) and tank is Single Containment so larger plot must be reserved for larger safety zone

Reliability Parameters • 98.5% Availability


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Centrica has LNG SPA with Sabine Pass Liquefaction LLC for 1.75 million tonnes per annum on an FOB basis


• Experience in LNG trans-shipment from Isle of Grain regasification terminal

• Based on the number of Curacao cargoes being approximately 18-20 p.a., the jetty should be available for trans-shipment operations during ~300-320 days per year

Mooring Arrangement of the LNGC

Proposed General Layout

MONTH 2009



Centrica



Capacity Charge US$/Day 81,900 Values are stated in 2016 $ basis



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day N/A


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ CPI(y‐1)/CPI0

CPI(y‐1) is CPI for 12 months preceding the relevant Jan 1st determination date and CPI0 is CPI for the 12 month period between Jan 1st and Dec 31st year when Curacao LNG terminal becomes operational


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 11.5%*Brent

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 115%*HH + 3 + 1.45*CPI(y‐1)/CPI0


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 1,000,000


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 1.75%The quantity of LNG expected to be tran‐shipped is not certain hence the Variable Concession Fee is an estimate of a resaonable government take for such services.

MONTH 2009




Base Proposal


Description • Land area of 335 m × 232 m (w/o Jetty and Pipeline area)

• One (1) above ground storage tank • Jetty and unloading system• 14″ 12.9 km pipeline


Reliability Parameters• The availability of Gas Send-out System

and LNG Unloading system is 99.922% and 99.961%, respectively


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Kogas has a supply portfolio of 30 mtpafrom nine projects. Kogas's US LNG would be likely available source for the project in Curacao. Kogas listed 2.8 mtpa of LNG from US in the proposal.

• Mitsui can secure approx.10%-15% of 4.5 mtpa from Cameron LNG (depending on delivery year) to supply to Curacao.

• If needed, Kogas and Mitsui will cooperate and mutually adjust the supplying volume.


• Bidders proposed a feasibility study of reloading full and small-scale LNG cargo to the Latin America and Caribbean region

Proposed Plot Plan for Jetty

Proposed Preliminary Plot Plan by Consortium

MONTH 2009









‐ Charter Rate US$/Day N/A FSRU is not proposed thus bidder have not included a charter rate for the FSRU in this Price Proposal


Inflation Method for Capacity Charge ‐ CPIm/CPI0 CPIm is US CPI for latest available month preceding month M of delivery and CPI0 is CPI final value published for Jan 2017.


Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 12.37%*Brent + 0.08

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD Bidder is open to discuss a Tranche B for the Commodity Charge, once more precise estimation of Buyer's demand profile is available.


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 1

Bidder temporaily offers US$1/year as a Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee, since the bidder is open to working with the preference of RdK/MDPT between higher Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee and lower Capacity Charge.


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 1%The Concession Fee of Tran‐shipment is not reflected in this Price Proposal. Further study will be needed for the estimate of annual quantity of LNG that will be re‐exported

MONTH 2009



BP Gas

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU, new built membrane type LNG vessel, with 4 cargo tanks. FSRU will utilize DFDE propulsion technology.

• T-shaped jetty, double banking operations• Terminal can load smaller vessels in the

range of 10,000m3 to 40,000m3• 12"13km sendout pipeline to RdK refinery



• 98% Availability• A preliminary RAM study carried out by BP

suggests a potential jetty availability between 90.5-96%

Proposed Start up Date • Q2 2021 or earlier

LNG SPA Term Sheet • BP will be supplying LNG from its global LNG portfolio, with a focus on BP's existing LNG supply from Trinidad

• Currently, BP has an LNG supply portfolio of approximately 3.4 mtpa.


• The proposed design is to berth the small LNG carriers utilised for transshipment alongside the FSRU in a double berthed arrangement

Proposed FSRU and Jetty

Proposed FSRU STS Operations

MONTH 2009



BP Gas



Capacity Charge US$/Day 215,500 Values are stated in 2016 US Dollars



‐ Charter Rate US$/Day 110,000 Based on newly built 174,000 m3 / day FSRU. None of the FSRU Charter Rate is subject to inflation.




Tranche A (Under a fixed firm quantity) US$/MMBtu 11.25%*Brent + 0.8075 30% of 0.8075 subject to inflation

Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu TBD To be discussed. BP can offer a fixed price, a price linked to one or more indices or price linked to spot quotes


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year TBD To be discussed


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu TBD To be discussed

MONTH 2009



Golar – Proposal 2 (Existing 125,000m3 Golar Spirit)

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU (Use the existing FSRU Golar Spirit, currently operating in Brazil but could be available for the Curacao project )

• Natural gas pipeline (Note: Golar has no prior experience building onshore pipelines and will manage this through engineer advisors and potentially partnering Ocean LNG or ExxonMobil)


Reliability Parameters• 98.4% Availability (6 days of maintenance

per year plus another 6 days every 5 years)


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Provided term sheet with OLNG (JV between ExxonMobil and Qatar Petroleum) from primarily the Golden Pass facility and other portfolio sources prior to the start-up of Golden Pass for a volume of 1.1 mtpaover 15 years beginning in 2H2021


• Trans-shipment plan include (1) STS LNG fuelling to other vessels of different sizes, (2) STS transfer to smaller regional shuttle vessels that will require LNG for regional market and (3) cool down services to LNG carriers that require LNG to cool their tanks down ahead of a future loading

Golar Spirit berthed at Pecem terminal in Brazil

Proposed Concept of FSRU moored to jetty

MONTH 2009



Golar – Proposal 2 (Existing 125,000m3 Golar Spirit)







Rate of Return (in real 2016 basis) % 11%




Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 11.8%*Brent


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 365,000 Bidder offered Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee of $1000/day, but can be negotiable and would need to be added on the overall CAPEX


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 1% Bidder offered 1‐3% subject to further discussion and agreement by both parties.

MONTH 2009



Golar – Proposal 1 (Conversion of 160,000m3 Golar Celsius)

Base Proposal


Description • FSRU (Conversion of the Golar Celsius with open-loop vaporization system)

• Natural gas pipeline (Note: Golar has no prior experience building onshore pipelines and will manage this through engineer advisors and potentially partnering Ocean LNG or ExxonMobil)


Reliability Parameters• 98.4% Availability (6 days of maintenance

per year plus another 6 days every 5 years)


LNG SPA Term Sheet • Provided term sheet with OLNG (JV between ExxonMobil and Qatar Petroleum) from primarily the Golden Pass facility and other portfolio sources prior to the start-up of Golden Pass for a volume of 1.1 mtpaover 15 years beginning in 2H2021


• Trans-shipment plan include (1) STS LNG fuelling to other vessels of different sizes, (2) STS transfer to smaller regional shuttle vessels that will require LNG for regional market and (3) cool down services to LNG carriers that require LNG to cool their tanks down ahead of a future loading

Proposed Mooring of Golar Celsius

Proposed Concept of FSRU moored to jetty

MONTH 2009



Golar – Proposal 1 (Conversion of 160,000m3 Golar Celsius)







Rate of Return (in real 2016 basis) % 11%




Tranche B (60 day notice nomination period) US$/MMBtu 11.55%*Brent


Fixed Land‐Lease Annual Fee US$/year 365,000 Bidder offered Fixed Land Lease Annual Fee of $1000/day, but can be negotiable and would need to be added on the overall CAPEX


Fixed Fee US$/MMBtu 1% Bidder offered 1‐3% subject to further discussion and agreement by both parties.

MONTH 2009



Alternative Proposals (not part of the evaluation)

MONTH 2009



New Fortress Energy – Alternative proposal to start Q1 2018

Alternative Proposal


Description • FSU permanently moored• An LNG unloading single berth structure• An onshore regasification skid• Natural gas pipeline to delivery point

Storage Size (m3) • 126,000-128,000

Reliability Parameters • 98% Availability• NFE estimate 7-10 days of potential

downtime and would expect to have stand-by fuel sources to cover this downtime.

Proposed Start up Date • Q1 2018• Supply Aqualectra 117MW of power plant

with natural gas starting Q1 2018, with Minimum Volume Commitment of 21,000 MMBtu/day, 18 year contract

LNG SPA Term Sheet • Term sheets for SPA with multiple LNG suppliers for 1 MTPA of LNG supply on a Delivered Ex Ship “DES” basis


• Bidder is bidding on Aruba’s LNG supply RFP. If they win both Curaçao and Aruba, they would explore using Curaçao as a trans-shipment hub to deliver LNG into Aruba

Proposed LNG Import Terminal

MONTH 2009



Promigas, Hoegh LNG, Repsol – Alternative proposal

Alternative Proposal


Description • Alternative Non-binding Mid Scale LNG Solution to supply LNG to Curacao through SPEC LNG Import Terminal located in Cartagena (Colombia) owned and operated by Promigas

• The rationale recalls on a hypothetical assumption that the upgrade and modernization of the Refinery does not take place according to the schedule expected to RdK. In such case, this solution can meet the forecasted gas demand of CRU and Aqualectra

Estimated Fee • This solution considers a estimated fee based on formula:

• Estimated fee = Commodity Charge + Capacity Charge + Variable Costs where Commodity Charge = 115% X HH + 1.15 X CPIus/CPIus0 + 3.05

MONTH 2009



NATURAL GAS & LNG CONSULTING CONTACTS:

AMERICAS (NEW YORK)Contact: Majed Limam

Email: [email protected]: +1 212 230 2000

EUROPE, M. EAST, AFRICAContact: Graham Hartnell


ASIA PACIFICContact: Stephen Thompson


AMERICAS (HOUSTON)Contact: Doug Brown


lng import & trans-shipment terminal and regasification ... · • design, finance, build, own...

Documents