1

Contract notice no. 2017/S 126-255736

Date of publication in Tenders Electronic Daily: 5 July 2017

TENDER CONDITIONS CONCERNING THE DESIGN,

PRODUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF A CLIMBING WALL AT

AMAGER BAKKE – NEGOTIATED PROCEDURE

2

APPENDIX TABLE

Phase 1: Prequalification

Appendix 1: Electronic version of ESPD (MUST BE COMPLETED BY

APPLICANT)

Appendix 2: Letter of support (MUST BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT

IF RELEVANT)

Appendix 3: Consortium statement (MUST BE COMPLETED BY

APPLICANT IT RELEVANT)

Phase 2: Tender phase

Appendix 4: Contract

Contract appendix 1: Functional requirements

Contract appendix 2: Design book

Contract appendix 3: Technical requirements

Contract appendix 4: Time schedule for performance

Contract appendix 5: Plan for health and safety

Contract appendix 6: Description of the building project

Contract appendix 7: General Conditions for the provision of works and supplies

within building and engineering (in Danish “AB 92”)

Appendix 5: Financial offer (MUST BE COMPLETED BY TENDERER)

Appendix 6: Examples of undesired solutions of climbing walls

3

1. TENDER PROCEDURE

The Amager Bakke Foundation has initiated this procurement procedure concerning the design,

production and installation of a climbing wall at the waste-to-energy plant named “Amager

Bakke”. The roof and parts of the façade of the plant will be used to create an outstanding

recreational facility, including the climbing wall, which is subject to this tender procedure.

The procurement will be completed as a negotiated procedure with publication of a contract

notice in accordance with the Danish Procurement Act (in Danish “Udbudsloven”) (Act no. 1564

of 15/12/2016), which implement Directive 2014/24/EU (hereinafter the ”Procurement Act”),

cf. Contract Notice 2017/S [●].

The tender procedure will be carried out in two phases:

• Phase 1: Pre-qualification of tenderers

• Phase 2: Tender phase, including negotiations

Based on these tender conditions the contract will be awarded to one contractor for the delivery

of the works on the terms and conditions that are set out in the in the contract in Appendix 4

(hereinafter the “Contract”).

Only applicants being pre-qualified by The Amager Bakke Foundation during phase 1 will be

invited to submit a tender during phase 2.

The Foundation of Amager Bakke will award the contract to the most advantageous tender

based on the criterion ”best ratio between price and quality” including sub-criterions as further

described below in section 15.

2. CONTRACTING ENTITY

The contracting entity is:

The Amager Bakke Foundation

Business Registration No. (CVR): 37234338

c/o I/S Amager Ressourcecenter (”ARC”)

Kraftværksvej 31

4

2300 Copenhagen S

(hereafter called the ”Foundation”)

The Foundation receives legal assistance from Lundgrens Law Firm P/S and the law firm also

acts as contact person during the tender procedure:

Lundgrens Law Firm P/S

Tuborg Havnevej 19

DK-2900 Hellerup

Contact person: Majse Jarlov, Attorney-at-Law

Phone.: +45 25 24 51 68

Mail: maj@lundgrens.dk

3. THE ASSIGNMENT

The Foundation is established with the purpose of creating a recreational area for the benefit

of the general public in connection with I/S Amager Ressourcecenter’s (“ARC”) waste-to-energy

plant “Amager Bakke”.

The recreational area will be built on the roof of the waste-to-energy plant and parts of the

recreational facilities will be placed at ground level adjacent to the plant.

The decision to establish the recreational area was made based on a unified plan for the en-

tire project including an overall financing plan. The project consists of several contracts which

are functionally connected and which constitute an integrated part of the overall project. For

this very reason, the contracts are put up for tender on a parallel basis over the coming year

aiming at a completion and operational start of project Amager Bakke in mid-2018.

To ensure adequate competition on the completion of the project and focus on the demand for

different qualifications and expert knowhow for the various contracts, the Foundation has de-

cided to split the building and construction project into several sub-contracts which are offered

in separate EU tenders.

The project is divided into the following sub-contracts:

5

Assignment 1: Roof park

Assignment 2: Skiing surfacing

Assignment 3: Skiing centre

Assignment 4: Climbing wall

Assignment 5: Surface lift

These tender conditions concern the tender of Assignment 4: Climbing wall.

4. DESIGN, PRODUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF THE CLIMBING WALL

These tender conditions describe the conditions for participation in the tender procedure con-

cerning the award of a contract for the delivery of a turnkey solution that includes design,

production and installation of a climbing wall which enables the Foundation to obtain the nec-

essary approval by the relevant Danish authorities for usage of the climbing wall by the public.

The turnkey solution shall comply with the Functional Requirements set out by the Foundation

in Contract appendix 1 and the Technical requirements as described in Contract appendix

3.

The utmost goal is to create an outstanding climbing experience. The Foundation is open to

solutions that incorporates a traditional triax-wall as well as a structure wall with a “real rock

appearance” and has no preferences in regards to the tender’s choice of solution.

5. TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE TENDER PROCEDURE

The tender procedure is expected to take place in accordance with the following estimated time

schedule:

Date Activity

30 June 2017 Publication of tender notice in Tenders Electronic

Daily (TED) including publication of tender docu-

ments on http://lundgrens.dk/offentlig-virksom-

hed-forvaltning

6

7 August 2017 Deadline for submission of questions to the ten-

der documents in phase 1: Prequalification of

tenderers.

18 August 2017, at

noon (fixed date)

Deadline for submission of request for prequalifi-

cation.

Week 33 Expected selection of prequalified candidates and

invitation to submission of tender.

23 August 2017, 12 –

14 p.m. (fixed date)

Site visit of I/S Amager Ressourcecenter

(”ARC”)s waste-to-energy plant ”Amager Bakke”,

Kraftværksvej 31, DK-2300 Copenhagen S.

20 September 2017,

at noon

Deadline for submission of first Indicative Offer

(INDO1).

Week 39 Preliminary evaluation of INDO1 and invitation to

negotiation.

Week 40 Negotiations based on the INDO1.

16 October 2017, at

noon

Indicative deadline for submission of additional

INDO’s (if relevant) with subsequent negotiations

based on the additional INDO’s (if relevant).

20 October 2017, at

noon

Indicative deadline for submission of the Best

and Final Offer (BAFO) and opening of tenders.

Week 43 Evaluation of BAFU

Week 44 Collection of documentation for suitability of the

winning tenderer and possibly completion of the

process for self-cleaning, see section 138 (1-4)

of the Procurement Act.

Week 46 Expected notification to tenderers on the results

of the tender evaluation.

November 2017 Expected signing of Contract after expiry of

standstill period of 10 calendar days.

6. TENDER DOCUMENTS

The tender documents consist of the following documents with indication of when the document

is relevant in the tender procedure:

7

Phase 1 and phase 2

• Contract notice no. 2017/S 126-255736

• Tender conditions

Phase 1: Prequalification

Appendix 1: Electronic version of ESPD (MUST BE COMPLETED BY

APPLICANT)

Appendix 2: Letter of support (MUST BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT

IF RELEVANT)

Appendix 3: Consortium statement (MUST BE COMPLETED BY

APPLICANT IF RELEVANT)

Phase: Tender phase

Appendix 4: Contract

Contract appendix 1: Functional requirements

Contract appendix 2: Design book

Contract appendix 3: Technical requirements

Contract appendix 4: Time schedule for performance

Contract appendix 5: Plan for health and safety

Contract appendix 6: Description of the building project

Contract appendix 7: General Conditions for the provision of works and supplies

within building and engineering (in Danish “AB 92”)

Appendix 5: Financial offer (MUST BE COMPLETED BY TENDERER)

Appendix 6: Examples of undesired solutions of climbing walls

7. GENERAL ON COMPLIANCE WITH TENDER PROCUREMENT RULES

The Foundation is required to comply with several formal rules and procedures in connection

with the tender. In this connection, the Foundation directs the tenderer’s attention to the fol-

lowing:

8

• The Foundation is entitled and obligated to disregard a tender if the tender does not

comply with the tender conditions, for instance if terms of these tender conditions are

not complied with, or if the tender contains reservations for basic elements and such

reservations cannot be priced.

• The Foundation is obligated to disregard tenders received after expiry of the submission

deadline, see section 8.10.

• The Foundation is obligated to disregard tenders or changes to tenders received after

expiry of the submission deadline, see section 12.

It is the tenderer’s responsibility that tender is submitted in accordance with these tender

conditions. Any risks and consequences of possible reservations or uncertainties in the tender

submitted by the tenderer are solely the responsibility of the tenderer.

8. PHASE 1: PREQUALIFICATION

8.1 General

Only the applicants who have been prequalified by the Foundation will be invited to submit a

tender for the Contract. Prequalification is conditioned on the applicant meeting the require-

ments as set out below and thereby deemed qualified by the Foundation.

8.2 Compulsory grounds for exclusion

The applicant must observe the compulsory grounds for exclusion as stated in sections 135 –

136 of the Procurement Act. As documentation for the applicant not being in an excluding

position under sections 135-136 of the Danish Procurement Act, the winning tenderer must

present the following documentation:

1) As documentation for the tenderer or persons related to the tenderer, see section 135

(2), are not affected by the compulsory grounds for exclusion according to sections 135

(1) or (3) of the Procurement Act:

a. An extract from the relevant register or similar document issued by a competent

legal or administrative authority showing that the tenderer is not comprised by

9

one or more of the compulsory grounds for exclusion, see section 135 (1) of the

Procurement Act.

b. A certificate issued by a competent authority in the country in question as doc-

umentation of the tenderer not being comprised by the grounds for exclusion in

sections 135 (3) of the Procurement Act.

For Danish tenderers, the documentation can be in the form of a service certificate from the

Danish Business Authority. If the country in which the tenderer is domiciled does not issue such

certificates or documents, or if these do not cover all instances mentioned in sections 135 (1

and 3) of the Procurement Act they can be replaced by a declaration under oath. If declaration

under oath is not a possibility in the country in question, a solemn declaration can be given

instead in accordance with section 153 (2) of the Procurement Act.

A contracting entity may not exclude a tenderer which has provided sufficient documentation

that the tenderer is reliable, even if the tenderer is subject to one or more of the grounds for

exclusion stated in section 135, see section 138 of the Procurement Act (self-cleaning).

8.3 Voluntary grounds for exclusion

The voluntary grounds for exclusions under section § 137 of the Procurement Act do not apply

to this tender.

8.4 Requirements for suitability

8.4.1 Minimum requirements for economic and financial ability

a. It is a minimum requirement that the applicant has a positive equity (i.e. the

ratio between assets and liabilities) for the last (1) financial year.

b. It is a minimum requirement that the applicant has a positive solvency ratio

(equity x 100/liabilities) for the last (1) financial year (based on publicly avail-

able and audited accounts).

The applicant must complete an ESPD with information on the requested financial key figures.

For more details, see section 8.9.

10

As documentation for compliance with the minimum requirements, the winning tenderer must

provide a statement certified by an auditor (either an annual report or a statement) document-

ing the required equity and profit ratio.

Regarding section 151 (2) of the Procurement Act, the contracting entity reserves the right at

any given time to request that a participating tenderer provides the requested documentation

within an appropriate deadline when this is deemed necessary to ensure correct completion of

the tender procurement process.

8.4.2 Minimum requirements for technical and professional ability

It is a minimum requirement that the applicant has delivered and installed a minimum of 2

outdoor climbing walls within the past five (5) years.

The applicant must complete an ESPD describing the applicant’s most significant references for

delivery of outdoor climbing walls made within the past five (5) years. For further details on

ESPD see section 8.9.

The Foundation requires that the applicant states the following for each reference made:

- Description of assignment with focus on the company’s specific role in the solution

- Name of customer

- Time of completion

- Number and difficulty of routes

- Information about features and formations on the climbing wall

- Height and width of the climbing wall

- Contract value

In case than more than four (4) applicants meet the minimum financial and technical require-

ments, selection of the four (4) best suited applicants will be based upon an evaluation of the

best references and financial ability as further described in section 8.8

A maximum of five (5) references must be included and it is up to the applicant to select the

best and most relevant references.

As documentation for compliance with the minimum requirement and for selection of the best

suited applicants, see section 8.8, the Foundation is entitled to request that the applicants

prepare supplementary reference descriptions including picture documentation according to

11

section 151 (2) of the Procurement Act. Moreover, the Foundation reserves the right to contact

the customers to verify the information stated in the reference description.

8.5 Applicants based on the abilities of other entities

Applicants can base themselves on the financial and/or technical abilities of other entities re-

gardless of the legal connection between the applicant and these other entities, see section

144 of the Procurement Act.

If the applicant bases itself on the financial ability of another entity, this supporting entity is

jointly and severally liable with the applicant for the fulfilment of the contract in accordance

with section 144,6 of the Procurement Act.

If an applicant decides to contract out part of the assignment to sub-contractors and to rely on

the abilities of these sub-contractors to perform part of the assignment and to comply with the

Foundation’s minimum requirement for selection, the application must include a separate ESPD

for this sub-contractor, see Appendix 1.

The information which must be included appears from section II.A: Information on the financial

participant, and section II.B: Information on the representatives of the financial participant,

and section III: Grounds for exclusion. For further details on the ESPD, please see section 8.9.

Moreover, the request must include a declaration stating that the applicant in fact has the

abilities of the supporting the entity at its disposal and that this entity is legally bound towards

the applicant, see Appendix 2.

8.6 The use of sub-contractors

If the applicant uses sub-contractors on which the applicant does not base its abilities, the

information in ESPD, section II and section III is not required to be filed for such sub-contrac-

tors meaning that a separate ESPD is not required for such sub-contractors.

8.7 Application filed by a consortium

There are no specific requirements in terms of the legal form of an applicant’s organization and

the applicant may also be a consortium. All participants in a consortium must be directly, jointly

12

and severally liable for the tender and completion of the awarded Contract. A joint representa-

tive must be appointed by the severally liable participants. The participants in a consortium

must complete and submit the declaration in Appendix 3 at the same time as the request for

prequalification.

Moreover, each participant in the consortium must complete a separate ESPD, see Appendix

1 with the information required according to sections II – V.

8.8 Selection in case of limited number of participants in the prequalification

The Foundation intends to pre-qualify a maximum of four (4) applicants who will be invited to

submit a tender. If the number of suitable applicants exceeds four (4), the Foundation will

select the best suited companies based on an overall assessment of the described reference

projects and the financial ability, meaning that the four (4) applicants with the most relevant

references and the best financial ability will be selected and prequalified.

The references will be assessed based on the following objective and non-discriminating selec-

tion criteria:

1) References illustrating a solution that ensures a climbing experience with even

difficulty within each route section

2) References illustrating a solution with route design that create a varied, adven-

turous and seamless climbing experience, and that encourages various range of

climbing techniques that you use when you climb in nature (dihedrals, overhangs,

roofs and deep cracks/splitters)

3) References illustrating a solution that consists of broken faces in an inhomogene-

ous pattern with varied inclinations and no perfectly vertical parts.

8.9 Completion of ESPD

The applicant must complete the electronic joint European tender document called “ESPD”. The

ESPD is in the form of a declaration constituting preliminarily documentation of the applicant

complying with the terms and conditions set out in the tender notice in respect of exclusions,

suitability and selection.

The Foundation has prepared an electronic ESPD-file (xml-format) attached as Appendix 1 to

these tender conditions. The ESPD-file must be completed electronically as the applicant should

initially save the ESPD file on its own computer. The applicant must subsequently open the

13

ESPD-file through the following web site: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-data-

bases/espd/welcome, and the applicant must subsequently respond to the relevant ques-

tions and provide the information requested. The completed xml.file should subsequently

be exported and filed as part of the application. It is not a requirement that the electronic

version of the ESPD is signed. Moreover, a PDF version of the signed ESPD must be at-

tached when submitting the application.

For advice on completion of ESPD please refer to the Danish Competition and Consumer Au-

thority’s (in Danish Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen) guide which can be downloaded at

http://www.kfst.dk/Offentlig-konkurrence/Udbud/Udbudsregler/ESPD.

8.10 Deadline

Deadline for submission of request for prequalification is on 18 August 2017, at noon.

The request should be sent to:

Lundgrens Law Firm P/S

Tuborg Havnevej 19

DKK-2900 Hellerup

Att.: Majse Jarlov, Attorney-at-Law

The request should be submitted in a sealed envelope marked “Request for prequalification –

Assignment 4: Climbing wall”. The request in the form of the completed ESPD file should be

submitted in two (2) signed copies and an electronic version (xml-format) on a USB stick. It

should be noted that the request cannot be submitted electronically by mail.

9. PHASE 2: TENDER PHASE

9.1 Tender Phase overview

The tender procedure is sequential and begins with the submission of a first Indicative Offer

(INDO1). Based on the INDO1, the Foundation will initiate negotiations with the tenderers in

accordance with the guidelines set out below, see section 13. During the negotiations, the

Foundation might ask the tenderers to submit additional Indicative Offers (e.g. INDO2, INDO3).

14

After the conclusion of the negotiations, the tenderers are expected to submit their Best and

Final offer (BAFO). The BAFO is subject to the evaluation by the Foundation using the contract

award criteria set out in section 15.13

The tender phase may be illustrated as follows:

Please note that the number of INDOs mentioned in the illustration is indicative and may be

subject to changes as described in the following sections

The tender-ers re-ceive the invi-tation to ten-der and the prepa-ration of the offer starts

The Founda-tion hosts a site visit of the waste-to-en-ergy plant Amager Bakke

The tender-ers have the op-por-tunity to ask ques-tions in writing

Negoti-ations on the basis of INDO1

The Founda-tion may make revi-sions of the ten-der ma-terial and re-quest for sub-mission of INDO2

Negoti-ations on the basis of INDO2

The Founda-tion may make revi-sions of the ten-der ma-terial and re-quest for sub-mission of BAFO

The Founda-tion will evalu-ate the BAFOs based on the contract award criteria

Notice of the contract award to all tender-ers and begin-ning of the stand-still pe-riod

Submission of INDO1 Submission of INDO2 Submission of BAFO Contract signing

Submission of indo1 INDO1 Negotiations INDO2 Negotiations Preparation phase Evaluation

15

10. SITE VISIT

A site visit to the construction field situated at Vindmøllevej, DKK 2300 Copenhagen S will be

arranged for all prequalified tenderers on 23 August 2017, 12 – 14 p.m.

Registration for site visit including company name, name of participant(s) and number of par-

ticipants must be made no later than 21 August by email to Foundation’s managing director

Patrik Gustavsson at pgu@fondenab.dk. A maximum of four (4) participants from each tenderer

may participate in the site visit. Patrik Gustavsson will give information about meeting point to

the participants.

Please note that participation in the site visit is subject to the condition that all participants

wear mandatory safety vest, safety shoes and safety helmets. The participants must bring their

own safety equipment.

Questions may be asked during the site visit which will be answered to the best of the con-

tracting authority’s ability and merely on a preliminary basis. Considering the contracting au-

thority’s obligation to observe the non-discrimination principle, all questions should also be

made in writing in accordance with section 18 as only the contracting authority’s response to

questions in writing will form part of the tender documents.

Depending on the need, the tenderers may get the opportunity to have individual site visits as

per agreement.

11. REQUIREMENTS AND RESERVATIONS

11.1 Introduction

Contract appendix 1 outlines the Functional requirements for the climbing wall. Contract

appendix 3 outlines the technical requirements for the climbing wall. Both the Functional re-

quirements and the Technical requirements are considered mandatory requirements.

The Mandatory Requirements characterize the nature of the procurement at hand. Conse-

quently, Mandatory Requirements are not subject to negotiations.

16

The INDO1 (and any subsequent INDOs) should preferably be in compliance with all Mandatory

Requirements. Non-compliance with any Mandatory Requirements in the INDO1 (or any subse-

quent INDOs) will, however, not automatically lead to disqualification.

If the Foundation decides to award the contract based on INDO1 or any subsequent INDOs, see

section 13.2 below or if the Foundation makes use of its right to shortlist, see section 13.4

below, non-compliance with any Mandatory Requirement will lead to disqualification of the ten-

derer.

In any case, non-compliance to Mandatory Requirements in the INDO1 (or any subsequent

INDOs) may lead to disqualification if the Foundation deems that it is not viable to amend the

tender due to the nature and extent of the non-compliance. Thus, tenderers are strongly en-

couraged not to make reservations to Mandatory Requirements in the INDO1 (or in any subse-

quent INDOs).

The BAFO must be in compliance with all Mandatory Requirements. BAFOs that do not comply

with all the Mandatory Requirements will be considered as “non-compliant offers” and will

therefore not be taken into consideration.

11.2 Categorisation of the tender documents and reservations

The Contract, see Appendix 4, is a Mandatory Requirement in its entirety excluding the fol-

lowing clauses:

- Clause 2.3

- Clause 4

Contract appendix 1, is considered Mandatory requirements as a whole. Contract appendix

2 – Contract appendix 7 are also considered Mandatory Requirements.

12. SUBMISSION AND DETAILED DESCRIBTION OF INDO(S)

12.1 Submission of first Indicative Offer (INDO1)

After having carefully read the tender documents, including possible questions and answers,

the tenderers are requested to submit their first Indicative Offer (INDO1).

17

The INDO1 shall be submitted no later than:

20 September 2017, at noon

Offers received after this deadline will not be considered.

The INDO1 must be submitted to the following address:

Lundgrens Lawfirm P/S

Tuborg Havnevej 19

DK-2900 Hellerup

Att.: Attorney-at-Law Majse Jarlov

The Foundation requests that the INDO1 (as well as any subsequent offers) is submitted in five

(5) paper copies as well as an electronic offer on USB-stick in a sealed envelope marked:

“Offer (INDO1) Amager Bakke, assignment 4: climbing wall, Att.: Majse Jarlov"

In case of discrepancy between the hardcopy offer and the electronic offer the hardcopy offer

shall take precedence.

The INDO1 (as well as any subsequent INDOs and the BAFO) cannot be submitted by e-mail.

12.2 Detailed description of INDO1

The INDO1 shall comply in full with the tender documents.

As the Foundation reserves the right to award the contract on basis of INDO1, see section 13.2

below (or any other INDOs), the INDO1 should to the greatest extent possible be drafted in

such a way that it is possible to conclude the Agreement with a tenderer based on the INDO1.

This is also important since the INDO1 may serve as basis for the shortlisting of tenderers if

the Foundation decides to do so, see section 13.4.

12.3 Structure and language

18

The INDO1 must be in English. The INDO1 is to be drafted and priced based on the enclosed

Contract and the Contract Appendices (Contract appendix 1 – Contract appendix 7) which

contain the requirements and expectations of the Foundation regarding the tenderers’ pro-

posals.

12.4 Fee

The tenderers will not receive a fee for their participation in the tender procedure, including in

respect of preparation of tender and participation in negotiations. The tenderers ’ costs in con-

nection with tender procedures are of no concern to the Foundation.

12.5 Offer period

The tender must be kept valid and open for six (6) months from the expiry of the deadline for

submission of tenders regardless of whether the Foundation may have entered an agreement

with a different tenderer.

The notification of the tender decision does not entail that the tenderer at this time is no longer

bound by its tender. The offer period applies to all tenders submitted by the tenderer regardless

of whether the tender submitted is a INDO1, INDO2 or BAFO.

12.6 Content of INDO1

The INDO1 must contain the following documents and samples prepared by the tenderer:

1) Financial offer

2) Description of solution

3) Drawings and/or illustrations

4) Samples

Re. Financial offer:

The tenderers must prepare and complete a financial offer in accordance with Appendix 5.

Re. Description of solution:

The tenderers must prepare a detailed description of the offered solution, including the name

of the responsible route builder and a description of execution of the project, including time-

schedule, quality assurance and description of mounting procedure (cranes, hoists etc.) .

19

The description of the solution must be structured in the same way as the Foundation’s require-

ments in Contract appendix 1 and Contract appendix 3, e.g. the solution description shall

be divided into separate sections covering the tenderers ’ compliance with foundations vision

and purpose (Contract appendix 1 – section 1), Functional requirements (Contract appendix 1

section 3) and Technical requirements (Contract appendix 3).

It is important that the solution description explicitly covers information about how and to what

extent the proposed solution meets the Mandatory requirements (Contract appendix 1 and

Contract appendix 3), as well as the specific circumstances which are weighted positively during

the tender evaluation as described further below in section 15.

Re. Drawings and/or illustrations:

The tenderer must prepare drawings and/or illustrations of the offered solution to enable the

Foundation to understand the offered solution and to support the tenderer’s Description of

Solution.

Re. Samples

As part of the INDO1, the tenderers must submit one (1) sample concerning the following:

• Pictures and/or parts of a climbing wall that correspond to the type of solution(s) pro-

posed by the tender

• Description and pictures of the type of holds that will be supplied as part of the solution

• Description and pictures of the belay setup (anchor bolts, chains and anchor points)

12.7 Submission of subsequent INDOs

The submission of any subsequent INDOs must comply with the provisions stated above con-

cerning INDO1.

13. NEGOTIATIONS

13.1 Introduction

After having received INDO1s submitted by the tenderers, negotiations will be conducted with

each tenderer to adapt the INDO1 in accordance with the Foundation’s requirements.

20

All tenderers having submitted INDO1 in due time will be invited to participate in the

negotiations.

The negotiations will take place at Lundgren Law Firm P/S’ premises, see section 2, in

accordance with the indicative time schedule set out in section 5.

The Foundation will inform each tenderer of the exact dates on which the negotiation with the

tenderer will take place after having received the INDO1s.

The negotiations will focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the INDO1 and will be based

on the contract award criteria referred to in section 15. The Foundation will choose the subjects

of the negotiations and will forward an agenda in advance. The Foundation expects to conduct

two negotiation rounds. However, the negotiations may take place in few or more rounds of

negotiations.

Each tenderer will be invited to the same number of negotiation rounds (unless the Foundation

reduces the number of candidates, see section 13.4) and will be given the same time for

negotiation in each round. Since the time allowed for negotiations is limited, it is important

that the teams conducting the negotiations on behalf of the tenderers consist of persons with

the ability to make decisions quickly, i.e. that decisions do not necessarily have to be approved

of at the tenderer’s headquarters. This will most likely lead to more effective negotiations.

The Foundation will maintain the principles of non-discrimination and transparency during the

entire negotiation phase. Thus, the Foundation will not reveal any technical or financial part of

the submitted offers from one tenderer to another during the negotiations. Nor will the

Foundation reveal any other confidential information without specific and written consent.

The Foundation will take brief minutes of all meetings, and the tenderers will receive a copy

hereof concerning his own meetings.

13.2 Absence of negotiations

The Foundation reserves the right to award the contract based on INDO1 or any other INDOs.

The award of contract can only take place to a tenderer who has submitted a tender in compli-

ance with the Mandatory Requirements.

21

13.3 Written negotiations

The Foundation may request the tenderers to reply to written questions after the negotiations

or between each round of negotiations as part of the ongoing dialogue.

13.4 Shortlisting

During the negotiation process (before or after the negotiations) the Foundation reserves the

right to shortlist, i.e. to reduce the number of tenderers to two (2) or three (3), based on the

initial evaluation of the INDO1 (or INDO2, INDO3 etc.) in accordance with the contract award

criteria, see section 15.

If a tenderer is non-compliant to any Mandatory Requirement in the INDO at the time of

shortlisting, this will lead to disqualification.

The purpose of the shortlisting is to limit the costs and time consumption for the Foundation

and tenderers with a limited chance of being awarded the contracts.

The Foundation expects that at least two tenderers will be asked to submit a BAFO, see section

14.

13.5 Additional INDO’s

After having conducted the negotiations, the Foundation may issue a revised set of tender

documents (including Contract and Appendices etc.) based on the experiences from the

negotiations, including the tenderers’ identification of possible cost drivers and risk factors and

suggestions for changes.

On such basis, the tenderers may be asked to submit additional INDOs (INDO2, INDO3 etc.) if

deemed necessary by the Foundation.

The request for additional INDOs and subsequent negotiations will follow the same procedure

as for INDO1, see section 12.

22

14. SUBMISSION OF BEST AND FINAL OFFER (BAFO)

Subject to section 13.2, the tenderer is asked to submit a Best and Final Offer (BAFO) based

on the revised tender documents issued by the Foundation.

The BAFO must be submitted no later than the specified deadline set out by the Foundation.

Offers received after this deadline will not be considered.

The BAFO must be submitted to the following address:

Lundgrens Law Firm P/S

Tuborg Havnevej 19

DK-2900 Hellerup

Att.: Attorney-at-Law Majse Jarlov

The Foundation requests that the BAFO is submitted in 5 paper copies as well as an electronic

offer on USB-stick in a sealed envelope marked:

“Offer (BAFU) Amager Bakke, assignment 4: climbing wall, Att.: Majse Jarlov"

In case of discrepancy between the hardcopy offer and the electronic offer, the hardcopy offer

shall take precedence.

The BAFO cannot be submitted by mail.

15. CONTRACT AWARD CRITERIA

The Foundation will prepare an evaluation of all the tenderers based on the most advantageous

tender and the criterion ”best ratio between price and quality” and the following sub-criterions:

Sub-criterions Weighting

Price 40%

The ultimate climbing experience 30%

Quality and Architecture 30%

23

Re. ”Price”:

The Foundation’s evaluation of the tenderer in relation to this sub-criterion is based on the

tenderers’ completion of the Financial Offer, see Appendix 5. The tenderer with the lowest

price will obtain the most positive evaluation.

Re. ”The ultimate climbing experience”:

The Foundation’s evaluation of the tenderer in relation to this sub-criterion is based on a cu-

mulative evaluation of the following tender information:

1) Description of solution

2) Drawings and/or illustrations

3) Samples

In case drawings and/or illustrations and/or samples contain information, which deviate from

the description of solution and render the tender unclear, this matter may be weighted nega-

tively.

The evaluation of the tenderers in relation to this sub-criterion will focus on the elements de-

scribed below.

Furthermore, the Foundation has chosen some pictures of climbing walls which illustrate either

positive or negative examples of what kind of climbing wall and climbing experience the Foun-

dation’s seeks to avoid. These examples are enclosed in Appendix 6.

The evaluation of the tenderers will focus on the following elements:

1) Varied features and formations

It is weighted positively, if

• the climbing wall use various features that creates a varied, adventurous and seamless

climbing experience,

• the climbing wall is challenging for both experienced climbers as well as intermediates.

• specifically, if the design is based on a structure wall:

o The climbing wall that encourages various range of climbing techniques that you

use when you climb in nature

o if the design of the climbing wall incorporates different formations like dihedrals,

overhangs, roofs and deep splitters (cracks),

24

• specifically, if the design is based on a traditional panel/triax wall:

o the climbing wall includes y giant volumes and/or cracks, dihedrals or other

formations

o undulating surfaces with organic shapes and no 90 degree corners

o the climbing wall consists of broken faces in an inhomogeneous pattern with

varied inclinations and no perfectly vertical parts, and

• the climbing wall deviates from the examples of undesired solutions given in Appendix

6.

2) The route design

It is weighted positively if:

• the design of the various layers and corresponding route sections, (including the layout

of difficulty of each route section), ensures a total number of many different routes

• the design of each route section ensures a climbing experience of even difficulty within

the route section

• the various routes are easy to identify, for example by the usage of holds in different

colours.

3) Extra holds

It is weighted positively if the tender includes minimum 25% of the featured holds as extra

holds for backup and general maintenance.

4) The Foundation’s vision

It is weighted positively if the offered solution illustrates a good understanding of the Founda-

tion’s vision and purpose as described in Contract appendix 1, section 1.

Re. ”Quality and Architecture”:

The Foundation’s evaluation of the tenderer in relation to this sub-criterion is based on a cu-

mulative evaluation of the following tender information:

1) Description of Solution

2) Drawings and/or illustrations

2) Samples

In case drawings and/or illustrations and/or samples contain information, which deviate from

the description of Solution and render the tender unclear, this matter may be weighted nega-

tively.

25

The evaluation of the tenderers in relation to this sub-criterion will focus on the elements de-

scribed below. Furthermore, the Foundation has chosen some pictures of climbing walls which

illustrates solutions that the Foundation sees as undesired. These examples are enclosed in

Appendix 6.

The evaluation of the tenderers will focus on the following elements:

1) Consistency with existing facade pattern

It is weighted positively if the conceptual facade pattern of the surrounding facade is continued onto

the climbing wall, where the climbing wall appears to be a part of the existing facade, but not ex-

cluding the criteria mentioned above in “The ultimate climbing experience”.

2) Looks and appearance

It is weighted positively that the look of the climbing wall appears coherent with the look of the

surrounding facade regarding coloring and appearance.

3) Transparent sections

In order to optimize daylight into the building and increase views from the inside, it is weighed

positively if the climbing wall includes transparent sections that are placed in front of a number of

the windows of the main facade.

An overview of the architecture of the energy plant is included in Contract appendix 2.

16. EVALUATION TEAM

The team that will evaluate the solutions consists of representatives for the Foundation as well

as selected Danish climbing experts, appointed by the Danish Climbing Federation. The climbers

represent the following disciplines: Competition/sports climbing, alpin/traditional climbing,

mountain guide/expertise of development of northern Europe’s largest climbing facility. Fur-

thermore, the owner of the energy plant (ARC) and the architects (BIG) will be represented

during the procedure.

26

17. METHOD OF EVALUATION

17.1 Introduction

The Foundation will carry out a cumulative evaluation of all compliant tenderers into one order

and with the listing of the tenderer of priority.

The Foundation will evaluate the tenderer on an individual basis meaning that each tenderer is

subject to an individual assessment based on the content of the tenderer and its ability to

comply with the Requirements as set out in Contract appendix 1 and Contact appendix 3.

The award of contract will take place to the tenderer which has been awarded most points

overall (the total sum of all awarded points for each weighted sub-criterion) and has submitted

the most advantageous tender.

17.2 Evaluation of price

To support the Foundation’s evaluation in relation to the sub-criterion ”Price”, the Foundation

will award points on a 0-10 point scale and on a linear basis.

Primary evaluation methods – linear model (50%):

The evaluation of price is based on the general contract price, see Appendix 5 which is the

price being evaluated.

The evaluation of price is based on linear interpolation as prices will be translated into points

where the lowest price is given 10 points on the scale.

A spread of 50% is applied meaning that a price which is exactly 50% higher than the lowest

price will be awarded 0 points. The other prices will be awarded points proportionately and

based on their individual spread from the lowest price and based on the following formula:

(1-((offered price – lowest price) / ((1,5 x lowest price) – lowest price)) x 10 = awarded points

Secondary evaluation method:

If, contrary to expectation, the spread between the prices in the received tenders is larger than

can be comprised in the primary method, i.e. that the offer with the highest price is more than

50% higher than the offer with the lowest price, the primary evaluation method is not suitable

to identify the financially most beneficial offer. In this case a secondary method is used.

27

The evaluation of price is also in this case made by linear interpolation. The prices are translated

into points as the lowest price gives 10 points while a price which is 100% higher than the

lowest price is given 0 points.

The other prices are awarded points proportionately and based on their individual spread from

the lowest price and based on the following formula:

(1-((offered price – lowest price) / ((2,0 x lowest price) – lowest price)) x 10 = awarded points.

17.3 Evaluation of quality

To support the Foundation’s evaluation in relation to the sub-criterion ”The ultimate climbing

experience” and “Quality and Architecture”, the Foundation will award points on a 0-10 point

scale, where 10 points is the best available evaluation and 0 point is the lowest available eval-

uation. Points will be awarded in relation to each sub-criterion and with due respect to the

tenderers’ ability to fulfil the Foundation’s requirements.

The following scale is used for points:

Point Wording Contents

0 No completion No completion. The tender does not comply

with requirements made and/or the solution

is not described.

1 Extremely poor

completion

The tender illustrates an entirely unac-

ceptable completion of the Foundation’s re-

quirements. The tender does not consider

the information requested and/or the solu-

tion is poorly described.

2 Very poor com-

pletion

The tender illustrates a very poor comple-

tion of the Foundation’s requirements. The

tender does not consider the information

requested and/or the solution is poorly de-

scribed.

3 Poor comple-

tion

The tender illustrates a poor completion of

the Foundation’s requirements. The tender

28

lacks significant parts of the information re-

quested and/or the solution is poorly de-

scribed.

4 Sub-standard

evaluation

The tender illustrates a slightly acceptable

completion of the Foundation’s require-

ments. The tender lacks significant infor-

mation requested and/or the solution is

poorly described.

5 Standard eval-

uation

The tender illustrates an acceptable com-

pletion of the Foundation’s requirements.

The tender lacks certain information re-

quested. The description of the solution is

not entirely well documented and appears

unclear in certain aspects.

6 Above stand-

ard evaluation

The tender illustrates a more than accepta-

ble completion of the Foundation’s require-

ments. The tender lacks certain information

requested, however, not the critical parts.

7 Good evalua-

tion

The tender illustrates a good completion of

the Foundation’s requirements. The tender

comprises far the most part of the infor-

mation requested. The description of the

solution is well documented and clearly de-

scribed.

8 Very good

evaluation

The tender illustrates a very good comple-

tion of the Foundation’s requirements. The

tender only lacks little of the information

requested. The description of the solution is

very well documented and clearly de-

scribed.

9 Extremely

good evalua-

tion

The tender illustrates a very good comple-

tion of the Foundation’s requirements. The

tender comprises the information re-

quested. The description is elaborate, well

documented and clearly described.

29

10 The best possi-

ble evaluation

The tender illustrates the best possible

completion of the Foundation’s require-

ments. All requested information is de-

scribed in a well-documented and clear way

and the description illustrates that the so-

lution complies with the Foundation’s re-

quirements in the best possible way.

17.4 Award of contract

The contract will be awarded to the highest ranked tenderer among all the tenderers.

18. QUESTIONS TO THE TENDER DOCUMENTS

To ensure that the tender is performed in accordance with requirements made, it is possible to

ask questions in writing to the tender documents regarding phase 1: Prequalification as phase

2: Tender phase.

Questions should be directed in writing by email to:

Lundgrens Law Firm P/S

Att.: Majse Jarlov

E-mail: maj@lundgrens.dk

Questions must be sent no later than 7 August 2017 regarding phase 1.

In respect of phase 2, it will be possible to ask questions during the negotiation phase. Ques-

tions will be answered on an ongoing basis as response will be given not later than six (6) days

before the deadline for submission of BAFO. Questions received after six (6) days before this

deadline will not be answered.

If some the questions asked give rise to specific clarifications, adjustments or additions to the

tender documents, information will be given hereon in the response to the questions asked.

30

Answers to the questions will be uploaded to the following web-site: http://lundgrens.dk/of-

fentlig-virksomhed-forvaltning

19. COMPETITIVE TENDERING AND OPENING OF TENDERS

For the purpose of the negotiation process, the tenderer will not have access to attend the

opening of INDO1 or any additional INDOs.

However, the tenderer will have access to attend the opening of BAFO and will be made aware

of the tender sums and any reservations. The opening of tenders will take place at Lundgrens

Law Firm P/S, Tuborg Havnevej 19, DK-2900 Hellerup, Denmark.

If the Foundation utilises its right to award the contract based on INDO1 or an additional INDO,

see section 13.2 above, the Foundation will inform the tenderers in writing of the tender sums

and any reservations.

20. NOTICE OF OUTCOME AND STANDSTILL PERIOD

When the authorised entity in phase 1: prequalification has selected the suitable companies

and in phase 2: tender phase has identified the tender which is financially most advantageous

compared with the criterion ”best ratio between price and quality”, a thorough explanation of

the selection will be sent out to all tenderers as soon as possible, see section 171 of the Pro-

curement Act.

Notice of the outcome of the tender procurement process will be published in the European

Union’s Journal in accordance with the current legislation.

Pursuant to the Danish Act on the Procurement Complaints Board (act no. 492 dated 12 May

2010 with subsequent changes), the Foundation may not sign the Contract with the selected

tender until after expiry of the standstill period which is ten (10) calendar days from the day

when the Foundation gives notice to the tenderers of the tender decision made.