FAQ BAN PLANETARY BODY

QUESTION 1.1 – With regard to the procedure described in this question, we ask whether the procedure involves only a tender for supplies and services or is there also work involved.

QUESTION 1.2 – If so, please specify the amount of work and any SOA category required and the amount of supplies.

QUESTION 2 – With regard to the possession of the economic-financial and technical-organizational capacity requirements, paragraph 7.2.2 (global turnover) of the tender specifications requires: “declaration certifying the global turnover in an amount not less than € 3,300,000.00 to be calculated with reference to the best 3 years of the 5-year period (2010/2014) preceding the date of publication of the notice of this tender” and likewise paragraph 7.2.3 (specific turnover) “statement certifying the specific turnover related to similar supplies, in terms of complexity and type, not less than € 2,200,000.00 to be calculated with reference to the best 3 years of the 5-year period preceding (2010/2014) the date of publication of the notice referred to in this tender.” Considering that the tender notice was published in January 2016, it is evident that the five-year period prior to the date of publication of the tender appears to be 2011-2015 and not 2010-2014, as stated in another above-mentioned fragment of the tender specifications, probably due to a typo. It is therefore requested to confirm that the five-year period prior to the tender on the basis of which to calculate global and specific turnover refers to the period 2011-2015.

QUESTION 3.1 – paragraph 21 of the tender specifications, it is expressly provided that “Payments shall be made, subject to verification of the contractor’s contributory regularity, and upon issuance of an invoice, as follows:- 10 % within ten days of the conclusion of the contract;- 30 % upon delivery of the projector;- 30 % upon completion of the installation;- 40 % upon certification of successful completion of the operational tests and upon the acquisition of all the authorizations provided for the use of the Planetarium.The payment of each SAL is however subject to the actual procurement of the financial resources needed for this purpose by the Campania Region according to the rules of the Cohesion Development Fund. The articulation of payments obviously refers to the individual supplies made.” Consider that in the present case, the main object of the contract is the supply of a planetarium and that pursuant to Article 307, paragraph 2, of Presidential Decree 207/2010, “Payments shall be arranged within the period specified in the contract, subject to verification by the director of execution, confirmed by the person in charge of the procedure, of the performance carried out, in terms of quantity and quality, with respect to the prescriptions set out in the contract documents, it is the right of the executor to submit written objections at the time of payments. In the case of late payment, the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 231 of October 9, 2002 remain unaffected.” Therefore, confirmation is requested that payments will be made in accordance with the timeline indicated in paragraph 21 of the Tender Specifications, which is also to be reported in the contract. The foregoing is also because, as Legislative Decree 231/2002 on “Implementation of Directive 2000/35/EC on combating late payment in commercial transactions” finds application in this case, failure to comply with the contractually agreed terms would entail the application of default interest and constitute grounds for claims for damages for the recovery of expenses.

QUESTION 3.2 – As a supplement to the previously submitted application, we ask whether the specified funds from the Campania Region according to the rules of the Cohesion Development Fund, are already fully available to this Administration or whether there are already timelines of scheduled availability.

QUESTION 4.1 – In order to assess the time available for the production and installation of the dome, we ask your Administration to set a deadline, indicated with a specific date, for the signing of the contract. Otherwise, it is impossible to set a delivery date by November 30 if we do not actually know what time frame will be available for production.

QUESTION 4.2 – A projection dome is required whose joints between panels have no overlaps. Domes so constructed are very expensive. We ask if it would be possible for this Administration to consider a projection dome with panels that have surmounted joints (even if minimal), while maintaining the other required characteristics. This solution would be more economical.

QUESTION 4.3 – The Invitation to Tender does not refer to seating which we therefore believe will be provided by your Administration. If so, we ask for confirmation that the planetarium hall bleachers will be free and totally clear of seating as otherwise the projection dome would not be installable (seating would obstruct scaffolding).

QUESTION 4.4 – The Call for Tenders calls for a video surveillance system. Given the many types available, it is requested to better specify the intended use in order to identify the right product and whether such a video surveillance system is limited to the planetarium hall and whether there are any specifications to be met.

QUESTION 5.1 – In the tender specifications, it is stated in paragraph 1 that “In addition to providing the warranty for each equipment and service performed, the awarded company shall ensure the maintenance service of everything supplied and installed for a period of not less than three years from the final testing,” while in paragraph 14 it is stated that “A warranty of not less than 24 months is required on all equipment supplied, starting from the date of favorable testing accepted in contradictory, including the following services: – telephone support every day, including holidays, from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m:00; – highest level in the support service; – maintenance related to hardware equipment must be provided by the manufacturers themselves; if the latter intend to use third parties, the companies appointed and the related activities entrusted to them must be indicated in the offer; – email support; – production support; – software maintenance must provide for correction services,updating (including to main releases) and assistance, i.e. it is intended to receive, for the duration of the maintenance service indicated in the offer, each new product release made available by the software manufacturer, and the related documentation; – replacement of hardware parts that do not work, excluding consumables such as lamps; – maintenance of all hardware, software supplied and wiring made, for the purpose of restoring its normal operating characteristics that have failed as a result of defects, failures, malfunctions or behavior that does not meet functional specifications.” Clarification is requested as to whether the warranty coverage period is two or three years.

QUESTION 5.2 – For the requirements in item 7.2.3, we ask whether it is possible to cover part of the missing specific turnover through the requirements held by the foreign company we represent in Italy and Europe, for this purpose using the institute of outsourcing.

QUESTION 5.3 – …..omissis……, please confirm that the financial resources already allocated by the Campania Region, will be made available so that payments to the contractor can be made according to the timeline already indicated in paragraph 21 of the Tender Specifications, also to be reported in the contract.

QUESTION 5.4 – Paragraph 14 of the tender specifications states that “Functionality restoration work must be successfully performed within the next eight working hours. A penalty equal to 2 percent of the value of the defective component will be charged for each hour of delay in restoring operability. Where the failure of the component is blocking, i.e. affecting the operation of the system, the penalty will be 0.5 percent of the total contract value.” On this point, it is represented that a penalty clause is aimed at fixing in advance and binding for the parties to the contract the amount of compensation for damages and has, in addition to the compensatory one, the function of strengthening the contractual bond, favoring its fulfillment. It therefore does not have a sanctioning or punitive nature and purpose. That being said, in the case at hand, the amount of the penalty fixed, both in terms of time (8 working hours) and pre-established amount (2% of the value of the defective component and 0.5% of the total value of the contract)appears to determine a contractual imbalance, unrelated to the function of the penalty clause itself and which appears likely to create an unjustified disproportion between the amount possibly imposed by way of penalty and the damage actually suffered by the administration. In light of these principles, it is therefore requested that the said clause be eliminated or at any rate remodeled in order to avoid possible unjustified contractual imbalances.

QUESTION 6 – By way of further clarification regarding answer 4.2, please clarify that the joints between panels would be visible with hall lights on, projections of very bright and homogeneous content (e.g., the projection of a blue daytime sky or a full dome film with light-colored and homogeneous backgrounds), while they would be practically invisible during projections of starry night skies or medium bright or articulated images. According to your response we understand that a dome with overlapping junction panels would NOT meet your requirement being the junctions visible in certain situations. In light of these conditions, then, is it possible for the Administration to indicate whether the dome is acceptable with such surmounted and thus visible junctions, or is the solution with side-by-side, non-surmounted, practically invisible panels (however, more expensive) required? We ask for confirmation in order to consider the correct product.

QUESTION 7 – The inspection provided for in Article 4 of the tender specifications stipulates, in the case of a grouping that has not yet been formed, that the Contracting Authority “will verify that all members of the grouping, albeit completely independently, have carried out the inspection.” In this regard, it is asked, as is customary in tenders, whether the inspection can be carried out by only one of the companies in the grouping whose representative will have a proxy from the other companies.

QUESTION 8.1 – We hereby request what video surveillance system is in use, so that we can offer cameras for the planetarium that are compatible, so that they fully interface with the video recording system already available to this Administration.

QUESTION 9.1 – For a grouping of companies not yet formed, is it still necessary to submit, under penalty of exclusion, a certified copy of the irrevocable collective mandate with representation conferred on the principal by public deed or notarized private contract ? (page 8 of the tender specifications)

QUESTION 9.2 – In case of participation of a foreign company, should documents such as: bank reference, document corresponding to our Chamber of Commerce registration, etc., be accompanied by sworn translation ?

QUESTION 9.3 – Still in the case of participation of a foreign company, should it still register with the AVCPASS system in order to then be able to acquire the PASSOE to be produced when participating in the tender ?

QUESTION 10.1 – In the case of participating as a single bidder not in possession of the SOA certificate, since we intend to subcontract the required construction works to a third party company in possession of the above-mentioned certificate, is it possible to use the SOA certificate of the contracting company, including it in Envelope A along with the subcontracting declaration, as proof of possession of the required requirement, or is it sufficient to declare that the subcontracting company is in possession of the SOA necessary to perform the construction works being subcontracted?

QUESTION 10.2a – In relation to the answer regarding Faq 5.4 we need further clarification. Bearing in mind that the type of supply is highly technological and that some products (such as computers, projectors or the dome itself) can only be repaired by specialized technicians sent by the manufacturer: – we ask you to specify or indicate the type of “restoration of functionality interventions” subject to the 8 hours, as indicated in point 14 of the tender specifications;

QUESTION 10.2b – in addition, clarification is requested as to whether within 8 hours of the report, the contractor is only required to take charge of the fault report and in case to ship the relevant spare parts (where possible), carrying out the repair later or as soon as possible. In that eventuality, we are asked to specify the timeframe within which the repair should be carried out, distinguishing between the hypothesis of intervention by the manufacturer’s specialized personnel (in the case of projector, computer or dome failures) and intervention by the contractor’s technicians.

QUESTION 10.2c – Finally, in the case of breakages of exceptional parts, not normally subject to breakage or wear and tear, including those due to entirely accidental causes, or breakages due to fortuitous events or force majeure, clarification is requested as to whether or not the hypotheses fall under “interventions to restore functionality” provided for in point 14 of the tender specifications, or whether for such exceptional or unforeseeable events the methods of intervention can be agreed upon on a case-by-case basis with the Contracting Authority.

QUESTION 10.3 – In relation to the response regarding Faq 5.3, it is clarified that the same appears to refer exclusively to the timing of payment, which may be delayed in the event that the Funds arrive late to this administration. Therefore, please confirm that there is no assumption of non-payment due to lack of funds.

QUESTION 10.4 – Point 22 of the Tender Specification refers to the termination of the contract, specifying that in the event of termination of the contract, the contractor will only be entitled to consideration for work already performed. We are asked to confirm that within the term “work already performed” also includes supplies already ordered from manufacturers, considering, for example, that a dome specifically designed for the planetarium in question could not be resold to other parties, as well as other technological products ordered specifically.

QUESTION 10.5 – Also regarding the technical question sent this morning about the video surveillance system, it is asked if there are already provisions in the walls in the Planetarium hall for the passage of the Lan cable needed to connect the video cameras. In other words, whether there are already planned points for the placement of the cameras and whether these are indicated on the plan drawings.

QUESTION 11.1 – Are there 3D drawings of the Planetarium in CAD format and is it possible to have them?

QUESTION 11.2 – With respect to the documents posted on the site related to the electrical installations part, can you confirm that indeed the work done complies with those drawings ?

QUESTION 12 – “In the application for participation in point 17 of requires: “statement certifying the specific turnover related to the field of supply and installation of interactive exhibits (hands-on) of scientific type in museums in an amount not less than € 2,200.000.00 to be calculated with reference to the best 3 years of the 5-year period preceding(2010/2014) the date of publication of the notice referred to in this tender.”
There is an error in the text in that the specific turnover should be related to supplies similar to those covered by the tender, as correctly stated in the specifications, and not to museum exhibits. Therefore, signing the declaration as indicated in the application would be mendacious.
Given that the deletion of any item in the template is prohibited at the beginning of the application, please indicate how the bidder can declare the specific turnover requirement in point 7.2.3 of the specification.”

QUESTION 13 – Participating in RTI with a foreign entity, it is almost impossible for us to submit the guarantee in the form of insurance, so we would like to proceed with the payment in cash.
In this regard, we ask for clarification regarding the payment to a provincial treasury, in particular:
– Is there a dedicated account number with the provincial treasury?
– Could you better specify the mode of payment to the provincial treasury with the minimum contents?
– Could you provide us with the list of authorized companies as stated in the first paragraph on page 11 of the specification?
– Is there a possibility of making a deposit to a dedicated bank account at a banking institution?
– If so, can you provide the supporting data and the content of the description?

QUESTION 14 – in order to assess the structural impact of the projection dome on the existing dome, we request the availability of the calculation report and graphical drawings of the structural executive design of the dome itself.
These data are needed to assess the bearing capacity of the steel elements