Provision of the coal chute optimization - Eskom

Returnable Documents: Proof of previous guided flow (consolidates Signed off “issued for construction” design drawing of Guided flow characteristics of chutes to be material and load central to receiving belt) guided flow chute. Client details and contact reference modified is of utmost importance to ensure chute design, manufacturing, construction to be provided where chute is currently still operational cleaning requirement is reduced, and belt central and commissioning experience. and successful. loading is ensured., Proof of registration as professional Registered professional name, surname and ECSA ECSA registration is critical for all design work as mechanical engineer with ECSA. registration number. per ECM process. Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Chute Optimisation Project Unique Identifier: N/A Revision: 1 Page: 3.4 QUALITATIVE TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA Table 4: Qualitative Technical Evaluation Criteria Qualitative Technical Criteria Reference to Technical Specification / Criteria Weighting Criteria Sub Description Tender Returnable (%) Weighting (%), Technical Expertise and Experience 80% 1.1 Proven number of years’ Relevant documentation to be provided for all 50% experience in design, references: More than 10 years relevant experience 100% = 5 manufacturing, construction and • Company name Between 5 and 10 years relevant 80% = 4 commissioning of guided flow • Contact person details experience chutes. • Contract value Between 1 and 5 years relevant 40% = 2 experience, Contract start date Less than 1 year or experience in not for 0% = 0, Number of guided flow chutes in guided flow chutes project 1.2 Proven number of successful Relevant documentation to be provided for all 50% projects executed for the design, references: More than 3 relevant projects executed 100% = 5 manufacturing, construction and • Company name commissioning of guided flow • Contact person details 2 or 3 relevant projects executed 80% = 4 chutes. • Contract value 1 relevant project executed 40% = 2, Contract start date No projects or projects not for guided flow 0% = 0, Number of guided flow chutes in chutes project, DEM design capability 20% 2.1 Proven DEM use in design to Simulation reports / samples showing integral More than 3 relevant reports / samples 100% = 5 optimise chute design of guided use of DEM in design process for 2 or 3 relevant reports / samples 80% = 4 flow chutes optimisation 1 relevant report / sample 40% = 2 No relevant report / samples 0% = 0 TOTAL: 100 Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Chute Unique Identifier: N/A Optimisation Project Revision: 1 Page: 3.5 TET MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES Table 5: TET Member Responsibilities

The Medupi Power Station Coal Plant Chutes design deficiencies has contributed to the reduction of load and in some cases the shutting down of generating units in the past due to lack of coal supply. A project, with defining Scope of Works, has been initiated to redesign, manufacture, construct and commission several of the chutes. 2. SUPPORTING CLAUSES 2.1 SCOPE The document describes the acceptable and unacceptable risks and qualifications and /or conditions. The Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy will define the following technical evaluation criteria: • Mandatory Evaluation criteria • Qualitative Evaluation criteria • TET Member Responsibilities • Acceptable/Unacceptable Qualifications 2.1.1 Purpose The purpose of this tender technical evaluation strategy is to define the Mandatory Evaluation Criteria, Qualitative Evaluation Criteria and TET member responsibilities for tender technical evaluation. The technical evaluation strategy serves as basis for the tender technical evaluation process. 2.1.2 Applicability This document applies to the Tender Evaluation Team for Regulators in accordance with the authorised procurement strategy. 2.2 NORMATIVE/INFORMATIVE REFERENCES Parties using this document shall apply the most recent edition of the documents listed in the following paragraphs. 2.2.1 Normative [1] 240-168966153: Generation Tender Technical Evaluation Procedure [2] 241-2022963 Medupi Power Station Coal Plant Chute Optimization Scope of Work 2.2.2 Informative [3] N/A 2.3 DEFINITIONS 2.3.1 Classification Controlled Disclosure: Controlled Disclosure to external parties (either enforced by law, or discretionary). CONTROLLED DISCLOSURE When downloaded from the EDMS, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorised version on the system. Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Unique Identifier: N/A Chute Optimisation Project Revision: 1 Page: 2.4 ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation Description DEM Discrete Element Method ECSA Engineering Counsil of South Africa ECM Engineering Change Management 2.5 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES As per 240-168966153: Generation Tender Technical Evaluation Procedure for Generation 2.6 PROCESS FOR MONITORING N/A 2.7 RELATED/SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS N/A 3. TENDER TECHNICAL EVALUATION STRATEGY 3.1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION THRESHOLD Mandatory Technical Evaluation Criteria (gatekeepers) are ‘must meet’ criteria. These criteria shall not be weighted or point scored but shall be assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether or not the criteria are met. An assessment of ‘No’ against any criterion shall technically disqualify the tenderer and shall not be further evaluated against Qualitative Criteria. Qualitative Technical Evaluation Criteria are weighted evaluation criteria used to identify the highest technically ranked tenderers after determining that all the Mandatory Evaluation Criteria have been met. The Qualitative Evaluation Criteria are weighted to reflect the relevant importance of each criterion. The minimum weighted final score (threshold) required for a tender to be considered from a technical perspective is 70%. The tenders must achieve a weighted score of 70% or more to qualify for further evaluation. The table used for scoring is given in Table 1 below: Table 1: Scoring Table Score (%) Definition 5 100 Fully Compliant 4 80 Compliant with associated qualifications 2 40 Non-compliant 0 0 Totally deficient or non-responsive 3.2 TET MEMBERS Table 2: TET Members TET number TET Member Name Designation TET 1 Johann Claassen System Engineer TET 2 Louis Snyman Senior Engineer TET 3 Hardus van Biljon Senior Engineer CONTROLLED DISCLOSURE When downloaded from the EDMS, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorised version on the system. Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Chute Optimisation Project Unique Identifier: N/A Revision: 1 Page: 3.3 MANDATORY TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA Table 3: Mandatory Technical Evaluation Criteria Mandatory Technical Criteria Description Reference to Technical Specification / Tender Motivation for use of Criteria

TET 1 TET 2 TET 3 Criteria Number 1 X X X 2 X X X Qualitative TET 1 TET 2 TET 3 Criteria Number 1.1 X X X 1.2 X X X 2.1 X X X CONTROLLED DISCLOSURE When downloaded from the EDMS, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorised version on the system. Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Chute Unique Identifier: N/A Optimisation Project Revision: 1 Page: 3.6 FORESEEN ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE QUALIFICATIONS 3.6.1 Risks Table 6: Acceptable Technical Risks Risk Description N/A Table 7: Unacceptable Technical Risks Risk Description N/A 3.6.2 Exceptions / Conditions Table 8: Acceptable Technical Exceptions / Conditions Risk Description Should a separate DEM consultant be utilised by the main tenderer for modelling of guided flow chutes, an agreement shall be in place between main tenderer and consultant. This agreement shall be provided on tender submission. Table 9: Unacceptable Technical Exceptions / Conditions Risk Description N/A CONTROLLED DISCLOSURE When downloaded from the EDMS, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorised version on the system. Tender Technical Evaluation Strategy for Coal Plant Chute Unique Identifier: N/A Optimisation Project Revision: 1 Page: AUTHORISATION This document has been seen and accepted by: Name Designation Signature Louis Snyman Senior Engineer Hardus van Biljon Senior Engineer REVISIONS Date Rev. Compiler Remarks October 2025 1 JF Claassen Document required to define technical evaluation strategy for project tender submissions DEVELOPMENT TEAM The following people were involved in the development of this document: Louis Snyman Hardus van Biljon ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS N/A CONTROLLED DISCLOSURE When downloaded from the EDMS, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorised version on the system.