In response to ESPD: Question Ref. 4C.1 Economic Operators are required to insert suitable responses to;
(i) LOT 1 - Provide suitable responses to statements (A),(E),F),(G),(H),(I),(J) and (K), set out in the attached supplementary document ref "III.1.3 Technical and Professional Ability Statements - Lot 1" demonstrating that they have the required minimum standards of eligibility and technical and professional ability and LOT 2 Provide suitable responses to statements (A),(B),(C),(H),(I),(J),(K),(L), (M) and (N), set out in the attached supplementary document ref "III.1.3 Technical and Professional Ability Statements - Lot 2" demonstrating that they have the required minimum standards of eligibility and technical and professional ability.
These statements shall be answered by single Economic Operators and by groups of Economic Operators (group members should not respond individually).
A "group of Economic Operators" is defined as an unincorporated consortium or joint venture.
Responses to Lot 1 Statements (A) – (D) and Lot 2 Statement (A) – (G) shall be assessed on the basis of PASS or FAIL. Economic Operators who fail to satisfy these minimum standards (either they answer ‘No’ or fail to provide an acceptable answer) shall be excluded from the procurement competition.
The responses to Lot 1 Statement (E) – (K) and Lot 2 Statements (H) – (N) shall be assessed (following all evaluators individual scores being averaged), using the following scoring mechanism:
— Nil or Inadequate response. Fails to demonstrate previous experience/capacity/capability relevant to the criterion (0 Unacceptable)
— Response is inadequate. The response fails to demonstrate elements of relevance to the criterion, insufficient/limited detail or explanation to demonstrate previous relevant experience/capacity/capability (1 Inadequate)
— Response is partially relevant but generally poor. The response shows some elements of relevance to the criterion but contains insufficient/limited detail or explanation to demonstrate previous relevant experience/capacity/capability (2 Poor)
— Response is relevant and acceptable. The response demonstrates broad previous experience, knowledge and skills/capability/capacity but may lack in some aspects of similarity e.g. previous experience, knowledge or skills may not be of a similar nature(3 Acceptable)
— Response is relevant and good. The response is sufficiently detailed to demonstrate a good amount of experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients (4 Good)
— Response is completely relevant and excellent overall. The response is comprehensive, unambiguous and demonstrates thorough experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients (5 Excellent)
Lot 2 only - In response to ESPD Question 4C.1 Economic Operators shall be required to insert a response to statement (G) demonstrating competence in the role of Principal Contractor and Principal Designer under CDM 2015 and also confirm that they are willing to accept these roles under the Contract.
Under ESPD Question Ref 4C.7 & 4D.1 Economic Operators shall be required to insert suitable responses to Lot 1 statements (B),(C) and (D) and Lot 2 statement (D), (E) and (F) demonstrating that they have in place an appropriate quality, environmental and health and safety management systems. Economic Operators should specify their recognised accredited system which ultimately shall be adopted if awarded the contract. Subsequently, under ESPD, Question Ref. 4D.1 Economic Operators are required to confirm their compliance and be able to provide the appropriate certification.
The responses to Lot 1 statements (B),(C) and (D) and Lot 2 statement (D), (E), (F) and (G) shall each be assessed on the basis of PASS or FAIL. Economic Operators who obtain a FAIL in either of their responses shall not be considered further in this procurement competition.