Public procurement notice: Contract Award Notice
Published: 2025-03-26
Buyer: DIN Forsyning Overskudsvarme/Køl A/S
Country: DK
Region: DK032
Contract type: Works
Procedure: Competitive dialogue
CPV classification: 09323000 | 31140000 | 34931000 | 39715210 | 42131320
Estimated value: 1000000000 DKK
Award criteria: price, quality

Technical requirements: The Contracting Entity will invite each of the prequalified Tenderers to dialogue meetings. Initially, the Contracting Entity has planned for three (3) rounds of dialogue meetings as well as the Tenderer to propose a solution description to form the basis for the last dialogue round. The purpose of each of the dialogue meetings are expected to be: First meeting to present the Contracting Entity’s current ideas for the solution and the Tenderer to provide feedback; to have a dialogue about the solution in separate breakout sessions in respective disciplines a. This could e.g. include cooling towers, legionella control, technical requirements in general, civil works including building design, limitations, electrical requirements, SCADA, contractual terms etc. to clarify any misunderstandings, concerns and/or uncertainties the Tenderer or the Contracting Entity might have Second meeting to have an in-depth dialogue about the Contracting Entity’s adapted material, including any opportunities for improvement or suggestions for changes to the material to have a dialogue about the solution in separate break outs in respective disciplines to clarify any misunderstandings, concerns and/or uncertainties the Tenderer or the Contracting Entity might have Third meeting to have a presentation and a dialogue about the Tenderers initial proposed solution and price breakout sessions for each discipline a review of the solution description, including any ambigui-ties for the Contracting Entity Next step in the process Prior to each meeting, the Tenderer will receive an invitation containing an agenda with specific topics for that meeting. At each meeting, the Contracting Entity reserves the right to request and determine which people with specific knowledge from the Tenderers that must participate in the meeting. The Contracting Entity reserves the right to call for additional rounds of dialogue meetings, if the Contracting Entity deems this relevant and necessary. When the Contracting Entity considers that the dialogue phase shall end, it will notify the Tenderers and call for Tenders based on the final tender documents submitted by the Contracting Entity. Therefore, all three (3) meetings will not necessarily be held. The Tenderer should note that the tender documents form the Contracting Entity’s proposal for dialogue during the dialogue process and does not constitute the final material with the final requirements. Requirements are dialogue requirements that the Contracting Entity has in principle decided on, but the Tenderers may as part of the dialogue meetings propose the requirements to be adjusted in accordance with Tender conditions section 9.3. When submitting a Tender, the requirements will no longer be understood as dialogue requirements, and if a Tenderer has reservations about a requirement in its Tender, this will be handled in accordance with tender conditions section 8.9.
The City of Esbjerg is at the forefront of the green transition in Denmark. This project has been undertaken by DIN Forsyning with the purpose of securing a circular and sector coupled approach to the undergoing PtX development locally in the City of Esbjerg. Efficient cooling is a necessity for PtX and DIN Forsyning intends to ensure that as much excess heat from PtX production as possible, finds its way to reutilization as district heating, supplied to homes and industry in the City of Esbjerg. DIN Forsyning shall deliver a system capable of integrating excess heat from the PtX Facilities into the district heating system and/or cooling the excess heat effi-ciently from the facility that cannot be utilized in the district heating System. The Contract is for the delivery of a turnkey process cooling plant for rejection of the excess heat from two Power-to-X plants (PtX plants) located on two different sites in the Måde area of Esbjerg, as well as supplying these PtX-plants with cooling water at specified maximum cooling water temperature to the Contract-ing Entity (the “Project”). The Project is a further development and expansion of the Contracting Entity’s district heating portfolio. The Contract consist of a common infrastructure project as specified in Employer’s Technical Requirements tender conditions section 2.1 and 2.2. Besides the common infrastructure, the Contract consist of different options as further listed in tender conditions section 1.3. The two PtX-plants have slightly different time schedules and to handle this within the project, the process cooling systems of the Works are split up into two options (option 1 and 2) designated Velbæk and Måde. The excess heat from the PtX-plants to be handled are approx. 250 MW from option 1: Cooling plant 20 Sahara, and 600 MW from option 2: Cooling plant 21 Måde The expected start date for construction is 10 June 2026 and with a completion date of 1 March 2029.
The Evaluated Price consists of the following amounts: (a) the Total Contract Price which includes the following; a. Price of the works b. Price of the listed options c. Price of evaluated guaranteed performance/consumption parameters d. Schedule of rates & materials (b) and the converted monetary value of reservations to the Schedule of Payment and payments terms under the Contract Data. The Tenderer shall with its Tender submit rates and prices in the form provided in Annex F (Schedule of Rates) and the Contracting Entity will base its evaluation on the amount set out in Annex F. Note: When calculating the total evaluation price, the price of the works is corrected with additions or deductions for the performance of the solution in ques-tion. This means that the total evaluation price is only used for the evaluation and is therefore not an expression of the actual contract sum. Note: If the Tenderer does not complete all requested input for the Evaluated Price, the Contracting Entity will complete the missing input in Annex F – Schedule of Rates and Prices with the highest bid received from a Tenderer for the rel-evant input plus 20%. If an item in Annex F is deliberately priced at DKK 0, the Tenderer is asked to state this in order to avoid pricing of the relevant input plus 20%.
Apart from Evaluated Price the evaluation consists of the sub-criterion Quality. The sub-criterion Quality consist of the following sub-sub-criteria; 1) Technical solution 2) Project solution; Process- and time schedule, Organizations, culture and competences 3) Contractual terms Evaluation of Technical solution In the assessment of the sub-criterion, the Contracting Entity will regard the following as positive; a) That the Tenderer's proposal is suitable to support the Project's success criteria and at the same time demonstrates an understanding of the outline proposal's choice and functional requirements. b) That the Tenderer's commissioning plan demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the commissioning requirements set out in the Contract and is suitable for ensuring that the facility will immediately meet the agreed requirements and be fully functional after delivery and commissioning. c) That the description and evaluation of the collaboration demonstrates knowledge and understanding of engage in an integrated collaboration as described in the cooperation agreement, including i. in particular utilization of the competencies of the key persons involved, ii. how sustainability can enrich the decisions in the early phases of the design as concretely as possible, iii. how the Tenderer's knowledge of process, constructability and economy can enrich decisions in the early phases of the project, and iv. whether the evaluation contains concrete suggestions for improving the collaboration between the Tenderer and the Contracting Entity Evaluation of Project solution; Process- and Time schedule, Organization, culture and competences 7.3.2 In the assessment of the sub-criterion, the Contracting Entity will regard the follow positive; a. A process- and time schedule showing a detailed program and test, which appears responsible and well described. Furthermore, a plan that supports the fastest possible delivery and supports a high degree of quality management during the delivery and test phases. b. An organizational plan showing a robust organization with clear and logical competencies and responsibilities, which through the phases supports the collaboration model and the Contracting Entity’s organization as described in the Contract, including Collaboration Agreement. i. The more detailed, project specific (and relevant), coherent, and designed for continuous implementation the management and les-sons learned procedures are, the better. It is also considered posi-tive if the proposal includes examples from previous projects and how this is applied to this project. c. That the key personnel offered have as specific and relevant education, experience and skills as possible in relation to their role in the organization, and that these are utilized in the organization, including through the assumed allocation to the Project. The Contracting Entity will pay particular attention to the key persons performing the following roles and tasks: i. The Tenderer's project managers (primary contact persons for the Contracting Entity) ii. The Tenderer's engineering design, including in particular regarding seawater and cooling tower systems and handling of biological fouling and legionella. iii. Overall responsibility for design carried out by the Tenderer or its subcontractors/suppliers iv. The Tenderer's construction management d. That the description of the collaboration between the Contracting Entity and the Tenderer in both the design and execution phases shows an understanding of and provides concrete proposals for solving the challenges and opportunities presented by the form of collaboration offered, including in particular: i. how the right skills, including from the Tenderer's key subcontractors and suppliers, are involved at the right time - without unnecessarily complicating or delaying the processes, - how, in the period from the Contracting Entity approval of the project proposal to de-livery, it is ensured that the intentions of the outline proposal and project proposal realized, including in particular how the Contracting Entity and the Tenderer are ensured real influence on how the Tenderer works with the project's finances without this leading to unclear roles and responsibilities, and; ii. how the Tenderer will, towards the milestones work together to ensure that the delivered material appears coordinated and coherent, without leading to unclear roles and responsibilities The Contracting Entity will make an overall evaluation under this sub-sub-criterion. Evaluation of Contractual Terms The documents listed below (the “Draft Contract Documents”) will be included in the evaluation of “Contractual Terms”: B.00A Contract Agreement B.00B General Conditions of Contract (FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Plant and Design-Build) B.00C Particular Conditions, Part A - Contract Data B.00D Particular Conditions, Part B – Special provisions B.03 Schedule 3 - Parent Company Guarantee B.04 Schedule 4 - Performance Security B.05 Schedule 5 - Advance Payment Guarantee B.07 Schedule 7 – Schedule of Rates and Prices B.08 Schedule 8 – Collaboration Agreement If the Tender includes proposed changes: - to any other contract documents than listed above as a Draft Contract Document; - to the payment terms under the Contract; or - to any clauses listed in Section 7.4.3 such proposed changes will not be subject to evaluation under Contractual Terms
Klagevejledning: https://naevneneshus.dk/start-din-klage/klagenaevnet-for-udbud/vejledning/ Nævnets klagefrister: Ved et udbud med prækvalifikation efter udbudsloven, ved forsyningsvirksomhedsdirektivet eller tilbudsloven skal en klage over ikke at være blevet prækvalificeret indgives inden for 20 kalenderdage. Dette er regnet fra dagen efter ordregivers afsendelse af underretning om prækvalifikation. Andre klager over udbud eller beslutninger, f.eks. tildeling af kontrakter, omfattet af udbudslovens afsnit II eller III eller forsyningsvirksomhedsdirektivet skal indgives 45 kalenderdage regnet fra dagen efter ordregiverens offentliggørelse af en bekendtgørelse i EU-Tidende om indgåelse af kontrakt. Hvis klagen handler om overtrædelser af tilbudsloven eller udbudslovens §§ 191 og 192, er klagefristen på 45 kalenderdage regnet fra dagen efter ordregiverens underretning om tildelingsbeslutningen. Klager over indgåelse af rammeaftale efter udbudsloven (afsnit II, III og §§ 191 og 192), forsyningsvirksomhedsdirektivet eller tilbudsloven skal være indgivet til klagenævnet inden 6 måneder regnet fra dagen efter ordregiverens underretning om tildelingsbeslutningen. Klager over indgåelse af en kontrakt baseret på en rammeaftale med genåbning af konkurrence eller et dynamisk indkøbssystem omfattet af udbudslovens afsnit II eller III eller forsyningsvirksomhedsdirektivet skal være indgivet til klagenævnet inden 30 kalenderdage regnet fra dagen efter ordregiverens underretning om tildelingsbeslutningen. Klager over en ordregivers beslutning om at videreføre en kontrakt (udbudslovens § 185, stk. 2) skal indgives til klagenævnet inden 20 kalenderdage regnet fra dagen efter, at ordregiveren har offentliggjort sin beslutning (udbudslovens § 185, stk. 2, 3. pkt.). Har ordregiveren fulgt proceduren i lov om Klagenævnet for Udbud § 4, skal en klage over, at ordregiveren i strid med udbudsdirektivet eller forsyningsvirksomhedsdirektivet har indgået en kontrakt uden forudgående offentliggørelse af en udbudsbekendtgørelse indgives til klagenævnet inden 30 kalenderdage regnet fra dagen efter ordregiverens offentliggørelse af en bekendtgørelse i EU-Tidende om indgåelse af kontrakt. Reglerne om klagefrister findes i § 7 i lov om Klagenævnet for Udbud.


Winner: Mercell Holding ASA
Number of bids: 1