Staţia de Epurare a Apelor Uzate din Chişinău va fi reabilitată!

S.A. ,,Apă-Canal Chişinău” informează despre finalizarea licitaţiei internaţionale Nr. 8282-IFT-44027 ,,Reabilitarea Staţiei de Epurare a Apelor Uzate şi Linia Nouă de Tratare a Nămolului” din cadrul Programului de Dezvoltare a Serviciilor de Alimentare cu Apă din municipiul Chişinău, implementat cu suportul Băncii Europene pentru Reconstrucție și Dezvoltare (BERD), Băncii Europene de Investiţii (BEI) şi Facilitatea de Investiţii pentru Vecinătate (FIV).

Amintim că depunerea ofertelor a avut loc pe data de 10 Noiembrie 2016 la care au participat 15 companii internaţionale din 13 ţări: România, Ucraina, Austria, Franţa, Germania, Italia,  Turcia, Bulgaria, Polonia, China, Israel, Slovenia, Cehia.

Ca urmare a procedurii de evaluare a ofertelor, realizate în strictă conformitate cu Politicile şi Regulile de Achiziţie BERD, Contractul a fost atribuit către Consortium PASSAVANT ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT GmbH & LUDWIG PFEIFFER Hoch-und Tiefbau GmbH & Co. KG, cu suma de 24.243.479,61 Euro.

Ţinem să menţionăm că compania câştigătoare s-a conformat tuturor cerinţelor stipulate în Caietul de Sarcini, este pe deplin capabilă să îndeplinească lucrările, iar preţul oferit se plasează în limita bugetului estimat conform Planului de Procurări al Programului de Investiţii Prioritare.

Notificarea de atribuire a contractului a fost publicată pe site-ul oficial al Băncii Europene pentru Reconstrucție și Dezvoltare (BERD) pe data de 14.08.2017.

http://www.ebrd.com/work-with-us/procurement/project-procurement/contract-awards-notification.html

Contractul prevede reabilitarea structurilor existente pe linia apei (decantoare primare, bazine de aerare cu nămol activ, decantoare secundare), construcţia  unei noi staţii de pompare a apelor uzate şi a deznisipatoarelor, precum şi construcţia  liniei noi de tratare a nămolului (îngroşătoare, metantancuri, centrifuge).

Durata de executare a contractului este de 900 de zile.

CONTRACT AWARD NOTICE

Name of Project: Chisinau Water Development Program

Country: Moldova

Project Number: 44027

Tender/Contract Reference No and name: 8282-IFT-44027 Rehabilitation of Wastewater Treatment Plant and new Sludge Treatment Facilities

Scope of Contract: Detailed design, manufacturing, delivery, installation of new mechanical and electrical equipment for the Chisinau WWTP and sludge digestion facility. Rehabilitation of existing civil works and any civil structures including buildings required for the new sludge treatment facility. Testing, pre-commissioning and commissioning of all new supplied and installed equipment and training of Chisinau Water Utility (ACC) staff in operation and maintenance of installed equipment.

Duration of Contract: 900 days from the commencement date including testing and commissioning followed by 1 years Defects Notification Period.

Evaluation Currency: EUR

Successful tenderer: Consortium PASSAVANT ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT GmbH & LUDWIG PFEIFFER Hoch-und Tiefbau GmbH & Co. KG

Contract price: 24.243.479,61 EUR

Other Tenderers

Tender prices at Tender Opening:

Evaluated Tender Prices

Evaluated tender prices including Operating costs/NPV calculation and any corrections/adjustments in Euro

Name of Tenderers who did not pass post qualification and reasons

1. TAHAL Consulting Engineers

Tenderer is unable to provide evidences about completion of projects comparable to the  proposed contract. Tender Document specifies requirement that tenderer shall have experience in design and construction of the anaerobic digesters at least in two projects. Information provided by the tender as response to the clarification request was checked.

2. Alke İnşaat Sanayi ve Ticaret Ş. & GÜNSAYIL İnşaat Ticaret ve Sanayi Ltd. Şti. JV

Based on the data provided by the Tenderer in Form 4 Financial Situation as the lead partner cannot meet requirements  set  in  the  qualification  criteria  (turnover  over  the  last  three  years  of  not  less  than

€20,000,000 equivalent). No evidences submitted confirming that Works of 2 sludge digestion plants are performed being as prime contractor.

Name of Tenderers rejected and reasons for rejection:

The following tenders were rejected for a material deviation during the detail review stage due to no statement in technical offers or inclusion in price schedule for the hygienization/pasteurisation of sludge as required by Moldovan Authorities:

• Consortium Suez International SAS & C. Elsaco Electronic S.R.L.
• Buildings Development Holdings Ltd (Main and Alternative offers)
• Chisinau KP Ria and Ferrmont

In accordance with Volume I.ii Tender Data Sub-Clause 10.3 Alternative Offers allowed alternative offers for the sludge digestion only so long as supporting information provided in the offer. Alternative offers would be considered on their own merit during evaluation. Results are presented below:

• STRABAG A/G Alternative 1 (€24,458,662.74): The offer proposes the relocation of both the sludge treatment building and digesters, however this requires the relocation also of the pre- treatment building containing fine screens and grit removal system to space currently allocated for primary settlement tanks, this in turn limits the options for Phase 2 which STRABAG have resolved by constructing 2 new primary tanks rather than simple rehabilitation of the old 3 tanks as
• STRABAG A/G Alternative 2 (€24,599,145.60): The offer makes full use of those proposed for alternative 1 and introduces a change to the water line process by providing a high load tank before primary settlement to reduce the biological load in aeration tanks reducing the blower power which is covered in the New approach and proposed process design is in conflict with requirements set in the Tender Document.
• JV Emit Group Coral Alternative (€22.712.429.34). The offer makes use of the batch pasteurization of sludge prior to anaerobic digestion and reducing the digestion time from 20 to 15 Clarifications were requested to provide supporting information for the reduction in sludge digestion capacity. No specific European experience was provided and the alternative was rejected on the basis that the offer was not compliant with the requirements of the Tender Document.