ILO Meeting #20 Specific Points raised by ILOs. 20 th March Toulon/IBF2013


Loading.... (view fulltext now)





Full text


ILO Meeting #20

Specific Points raised by ILOs


ILO Meeting #20 - Agenda

09h00: Welcome, General information and update on F4E and ITER 10h00: Questions previously sent by ILOs

11h15: Coffee break

11h30: Status update on on-going and forthcoming calls for tender 13h00: End of meeting

Reminder: specific questions related to a company in a given procedure will not be answered, as


The contractual Bank Guarantee and Liability values are so high that the banks, at least in Scandinavia, do not accept them for middle size and relatively big size companies.

For big international companies – with deep pocket – very heavy liabilities are typically not acceptable, especially in non-strategic business areas (as ITER).

As a consequence, the readyness of the banks to accept guarantees and liabilities turns out to be the dominating issue in the competition.

F4E answer and comment

Following the modification of the policy of the European Commission, F4E is revising his policy on the matter. F4E will waive the submission of the bank guarantee for contracts below 10 M€.

With regards to liability, F4E has adopted as a standard approach the policy to proportionate the liability to the contract value [up to 2x contract value], but it might also be proportionate to the maximal risk assessed by F4E.

There are exceptions where this topic is subject to Negotiation.

Model Contract Bank Guarantee and Liability Values


1. Should be possible to have an update?

2. Additional request to be informed when a debriefing is planned with unsuccessful tenderer.

F4E answer and comment

1. Yes

2. BI shall be informed by PPO when a debriefing is organized with unsuccessful tenderer. ⇒ BI to inform then ILOs

Attendance of ILO will be subject to the tenderer’ agreement.

Success rate statistics by country

ILOs informed of debriefings vs. unsuccessful tenderers


In relation to the procurement process in which companies don’t succeed in reaching the minimum threshold and are disqualified from a technical point of view

why is F4E opening the economic offer if not going to evaluate it?

why is requested to send the economic offer in a different envelope from the technical one if F4E is opening both the economic and the technical one at the same time)

F4E answer and comment

F4E opens Economic envelope and this is justified to check the completeness of the offer. F4E keeps the confidentiality and does not give this information to EXCO in case the company is not compliant with technical award.

There is a single opening committee, and then the envelopes are dispatched within the

evaluation committee members, to be assessed in parallel by different members in consideration of time efficiency. If the technical evaluation is non-conclusive, to avoid any bias, the financial

evaluation result is not granted to the other members of the evaluation committee.

Transparency and best practices


There were some comments in the F4E Poland Infoday presentation about F4E Industrial Policy in favor of SMEs in Horizon 2014-2020 ; please could you explain us this?

F4E answer and comment

SME participation is part of our Industrial Policy and F4E is implementing guidelines in that respect.

SMEs policy


1. ILOs understand that there is an exchange of Info between IO and F4E in relation to the EU awarded companies in the IO procurement process => to be given to ILOs

2. F4E is the contact point at the first step of the IO CfN, and represents the EU interest on the ITER project; as you know, sometimes there are delays in the foreseen schedule or cancellations and European companies need to have a contact point for these cases.

F4E answer and comment

1. F4E does not have information from IO despite several attempts. We receive some statistical data from Agence ITER France. ILO may help F4E in this action. F4E should request this info from Euratom who is attending the ITER Council, to be checked internally F4E.

2. Contact point for CFN is Ines Ceceres + back-up Michaela Trbolova.. Yet please use the generic email address for any inquiry.

Remark: When we have transmitted nominees we do not have more news except when we receive a notification of cancellation for example. We can distribute the list of EU companies nominated, on-demand, case-by-case, covering the country of origin of the ILO.

IO Information


More information about the Divertor RH Competitive Dialogue process and in particular I´d thank to have more details about the scope and schedule of the “Business case study” and the economic compensation.

F4E answer and comment

The Business Case (BC) preparation is in parallel to the Dialogue phase The BC belongs formally to the Tendering phase in order to

- reduce overall procedure duration

- provide tenderers enough time to perform a reasonably complete exercise. The BC payment (please note it is a prize, not a compensation):

- To reward effort of tenderers in preparing a complex and long BC (5 months) - improve Fusion for Energy’s capability to judge and select the offers

- Min: 45k€ - Max: 128k€, depending on relevance of the offer.

- Is proportional to the score achieved in BC (No payment if minimum thresholds are not reached).

Divertor RH.


For instance, contracts above 20M€

F4E answer and comment

See next slide + Please check Work Programme and Project Plan last update December 2012.

Budget and WP for next years are not yet approved.

Update on the status of PA and a list of the large contracts for the

next years


Tentative signature dates

Buildings & Power Supplies

TB06 Contract for Procurement, Install. and

Commissioning PPEN/SSEN Equipments & Cables from July 2013 to August 2013 TB07 - Contract for Design & Built Bigs 67,68,69 from May 2013 to June 2013

Tokamak Seismic Isolation Pit - Additional Activities

(Due to IO Design changes) for 2013 from Jan. 2013 to March 2013

TB11 - Contract for Final Construction Works from Jan. 2014 to Dec. 2014 TB03 - Contract for Civil Works and Finishing -

Amendment 2013 Jan-13


TF Winding Pack Manufacture-Stage #02/ 1 TFWP from Oct 2013 to Sept 2013

TF Winding Pack Manufacture-Stage #03/ 9 TFWPs Oct-13 Site and Infrastructure Support contract for on-site

management of PF coil facility Jul-14

PF Coils Engineering & Integration May-13

Procurement Activity (Activity name in Primavera) Primavera end January 2013 Vacuum Vessel

Procurement of Main Vessel - Stage 2M - Materials confirmed 2013

Procurement of Main Vessel - Stage 7M - Materials confirmed 2013

Procurement of Main Vessel - Stage 8M - Materials confirmed 2013

Procurement of Main Vessel - Stage 9M - Materials confirmed 2013


Procurement for Fabrication of Divertor Cassette Body From July 2013 to Nov. 2013

Procurement of Test facility for Heat Flux testing of

In-Vessel components Jun-13

Manufacture of full-scale First Wall prototypes Nov-13 Remote Handling

Divertor RH Procurement from Jan. 2013 to Nov. 2013

Cryoplant & Fuel Cycle

Design,mfg, on-site delivery and supervision of install'n

& test of LN Plant & Auxiliary Systems Oct-13 NBTF - Manufacturing of the MITICA Cryopump Apr-14


F4E answer and comment

We do not have such documents.

Please check Project Plan last update December 2012

Should it be possible to have a document as the “ Buildings

Strategy” for other areas as IVC, HCDS, NB Test Facility, Diagnostics,



“If any of such figures is deemed to be abnormally low in value, Fusion for Energy reserves the right to reject the Final Tender on these grounds alone…”

Recently this kind of clause appeared in one F4E Model Contract; the problem is that you´re not giving references for applying this criteria and this can´t be a subjective matter.For instance in the Public contracts Spanish Law, it´s established a reference for abnormally low in value prices ( < 50% of the price resultant of making the average of the prices submitted by all the bidders).

In the same model contract is also stated “As regards financial quotations, tenders quoting EUR 0 (zero), nil, included or equivalent will be treated as 1 (one) eurocent for the purpose of the evaluation”. In my opinion, there is a contradiction between this statement and the previous clause.

It´s not a fair practice to apply this kind of clauses at random, only in one model contract; and what is worse.

F4E is not establishing this kind of clauses in the new CfT for the “Diagnostic Port plug integration” that was previously cancelled due to a zero quotation case in one of the tenders.

F4E answer and comment

“Prices abnormally low” clauses.


Previous questions

Tenderers can contact PPOs via email or on the phone to be

assisted on how to formulate their question on the Portal.

Then F4E answers on the Portal.

Clarify the regime for contacts with F4E during the tendering phase.

Are direct contacts with the PPOs allowed?


Follow us on:





Related subjects :