Guidelines For The Awarding Of Services Relating To Architecture And Engineering. (Determines # 4).

Original Language Title: Linee guida per l'affidamento dei servizi attinenti all'architetturae all'ingegneria. (Determina n. 4).

Read the untranslated law here: http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/atto/serie_generale/caricaArticoloDefault/originario?atto.dataPubblicazioneGazzetta=2015-03-14&atto.codiceRedazionale=15A01838&elenco30giorni=false&atto.tipoProvvedimento=DECRETO

The Council of the NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION authorities Nell'Adunanza of February 25, 2015; 1. General framework. The assignment of services related to architecture and engineering and is governed by art. April 12, 2006, 91 of Legislative Decree n. 163 (code of public contracts for works, services and supplies in implementation of directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC) (hereinafter the code), in relation to the amount of their fees: less than or equal to or greater than 100,000 euros. For the assignment of services to more than 100,000 euros, there are two different forms of advertising: for contracts between 100,000 euros and EU threshold is prescribed the commercials nationally, while in the case of contracts over this threshold is prescribed publicity both nationally and at Community level. A first element characterizing the discipline in question is what you are not allowed method of assignment of technical services other than those identified by the code. The art. 91, paragraph 8, of the code, prohibits, in fact, "the assignment of planning, safety coordination during design, construction management, safety coordination during run testing, investigation and support activities through fixed-term contracts or performing procedures other than those provided for in this code". A second key element is that the custodial parent of the preliminary design can legitimately participate in the race for the final and construction design service. Indeed, in the light of articles. 90 et seq. of the code, one can assume that the legislature favored a policy of continuity in the performance of the various stages of design, providing the only ban for subcontractors of planning to participate in the tender for the procurement of works (cf. Avcp, preliminary opinion of February 13, 2014, n. 33). In fact, the discipline of art. 90, paragraph 8, of the code, currently in force, only covers the procurement of works and not the race for the award of the design and does not provide for any incompatibilities for professionals who have treated the previous levels of design for the same form of assistance. However, this legal framework has recently been amended by law laying down ' provisions for fulfilment of the obligations arising from Italy's membership of the European Union-European law 2013-bis ', approved on October 21, 2014 in order to allow the adjustment of national legislation to Community principles relating to free competition and equal treatment and the possible opening of an infringement procedure. Paragraph 8 is amended in the sense of predicting a general prohibition of entrustment of contracts and concessions of public works and any subcontracting and incentives to foster the design subjects. However, they posted the next paragraph 8 bis the provision according to which the prohibition shall not apply where the designers show that the experience gained in the execution of the assignment of designing is not such an advantage that it can distort competition with other operators. In adjustment to community case-law, the new provision grants the custodial parent a chance to try it, specifically, that the experience acquired in the performance of the assignment could not distort competition, through the acquisition of information flows that resulted in an asymmetry of knowledge than the other competitors. In the invitation to tender for the award of the work is to be expected that the competitor, if the person with custody of the design of the contract in question, produce the documentation necessary to establish that the experience acquired in the performance of the assignment could not distort competition. A third basic element is that provided for by art. 91, paragraph 3, of the code, by which we don't allow the subcontracting of services relating to provision of geological-who does not understand, it should be noted, the performance of work involving geotechnical and other performance geognostic and specifically indicated in the aforementioned paragraph 3. Consequently, the notice must provide that, in the design group, there is at least one geologist, where necessary such services (1). In General, moreover, it is useful to recall that, pursuant to arts. 268 and 269 of the October 5, 2010 p.r.Decree, n. 207 (hereinafter the regulation), it can't be no bail, temporary or permanent, to participate in a call for tenders concerning the drafting of planning and coordination and security plan (2), shall be required, with the terms laid down in articles. 75 and 113 of the code, the remaining services under art. 252. the contractor may ask the designer only the provision of insurance coverage for civil and professional responsibility, risks arising in the course of activities ' jurisdiction, within the meaning of art. 111 of the code. From an operational standpoint, once the class and the category or categories of services from Entrust, you need three things: 1. the determination of the consideration to be placed based on race;
2. the establishment of special requirements must meet the competitors in order to participate in the race;
3. the specification-if the race is conducted by the most economically advantageous policy-the content of the offer to be presented, for the purposes of demonstration of professionalism and appropriateness of the offer. Regarding the first point, as will be pointed out better as well, in order to determine the amount of the consideration to be placed based on race for the award of architectural and engineering services, including contract c.d. "integrated", it is obligatory to refer to the criteria laid down by the Decree of the Ministry of Justice of October 31, 2013, n. 143 (regulation on the determination of the fees to be based on race in public procurement procedures of public contracts for services relating to architecture and engineering). In this regard, it is noted that, in accordance with the provisions of art. 9, last sentence, of Decree-Law No January 24, 2012. 1, converted, with amendments, by law No 27 March 24, 2012, the consideration shall not result in an amount based on race higher than that resulting from the application of professional fees in force. In the interests of transparency and fairness is obligated to bring in the tender documents the procedure adopted for the calculation of compensation places based on race (article 264, paragraph 1, lett. d) of the regulation). This will allow potential competitors to verify the appropriateness of the amount fixed, the absence of any errors or calculation, while allowing to ensure that the process does not result in higher rates to those resulting from the legacy system. For the second operation-requirement definition of special character must possess your competitors to join the race-you must identify the works they belong to the object assignment, according to interventions in table Z-1 of the aforementioned ministerial Decree 143/2013 and the corresponding classes and categories referred to previous tariff provisions, because: i) the job requirement to possess it is constituted by carrying out technical services for assistance in those specific classes and categories; II) the extent of the said requirement is determined by applying to the amount of intervention covered by the service, a weighting, to be laid down in the invitation to tender, between the minimum and maximum established by the regulation. The same need for identification shall also apply to the third step: determining the best professionalism or better adequacy of supply. And that's why the candidate/competitor must know what joint interventions, identified by classes and categories, will be performed the evaluation of contractor, since an element of positive evaluation will be constituted by the greater homogeneity among the intervention referred to the service and those already performed. In relation to custody of assets to support the design, please remember that they can adhere to purely instrumental design activities (geological, geotechnical and seismic, polls, surveys, measurements and picchettazioni, preparation of elaborate detail and, with the exception of geological reports, as well as the only graphic design of projects). The "advice" of public works design AIDS in national regulatory framework is not covered; This follows from the general principle according to which the responsibility of the design must be able to be traced back to a single decision-making centre, namely the designer; among other things, article. 91, paragraph 3, of the Code expressly prohibits subcontracting of planning, within the limits referred to in that subparagraph, specifying that, however, without prejudice to the responsibility of the designer. In this connection it should be noted that the procedure is entrusted with the responsibility, supervision and coordination of the procurement cycle (design, foster care, execution), so that it is conducted in a unified way, in relation to time and to budget. In particular, in the field of design, which is solely to the proceedings is assigned the task of drawing up the preliminary document to design and coordinate the activities necessary for the preparation of preliminary, final and enforceable. Therefore, any external parties identified can support the person responsible of the proceedings in its activity of coordination and supervision of the design, still remaining that the design is the sole responsibility of the designer. Instead, allowed the assignment of activities in support of the proceedings, with the terms already indicated by 3/2004 n. determination Avcp. 2. Appointments of less than 100,000 euros. The art. 91, paragraph 2, of the code sets out principles and rules for the awarding of contracts of less than 100,000 euros. The obligation to comply with the General principles, such as the principle of non-discrimination, equal treatment, proportionality and transparency, is directed to a procedure, even ' negotiated (cf. art. 57, paragraph 6, of the code) to be conducted between individuals selected on the basis of information from the market, relating to their financial and organizational-technical qualification, and inviting at least five competitors, without prejudice to the right of the contractor to use the ordinary open or restricted procedures. In accordance with art. 57, paragraph 6, of the code, in addition, the selection of economic operators must comply with the principles of competition and rotation. Further details are then provided by art. 267 of regulation. First, the provision states that the choice of subjects to invite must be made through the lists of economic operators, established for that purpose, or on the basis of market surveys aimed at individual expectations, ensuring full respect for the principle of rotation (see paragraph 2). To expressly in art. 267, paragraph 3, in accordance with the principle of transparency, it is necessary for the establishment of the list of economic operators will achieve adequate publicity, according to the terms of art. 124, paragraph 5, of the code, by means of a notice containing criteria and requirements for the formation of the list itself, such as, but not limited to: the reference to the provisions of art. 253 of regulation, which prohibits the participation of professional individually and as part of a group of professionals, as well as the simultaneous participation in more than one pool;
the principle of rotation in the selection of names entered in the register, at which point the RFP;
the prohibition on cumulation of offices above a certain total amount;
correlation of previous experience with professional design request provided for Administration, as identified in the schedule, so that the professionalism required to respond concretely to classes and categories of work to be carried out. In the notice the contractors indicate the articulation of the list on the basis of classes and categories of work from design and the amount on which you are trying to split the list; the alert can also be requested a minimum requirement of prior experience related to the sum of all jobs belonging to each of the classes and categories in which you want to split the list. The contractors must then provide for periodic updating of the lists, by adopting, in any case, appropriate forms of advertising, so that it is guaranteed to professionals possess the prescribed requirements the right to subscribe to the list itself, without time limitation. The market survey must be conducted upon notice, to be published in accordance with the same terms of the list of operators. If you do not wish to invite all those who are in possession of the prescribed requirements listed or discovered through market research, the selection of subjects should be done after an indication of the number of persons to be invited, with methods of objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate choice, such as rotation and the draw. In the selection of economic operators to be invited, whether effected by the list or through market surveys, please note the great importance of compliance with the General principles referred to in art. 267, paragraph 2, of the rules: transparency, non-discrimination and proportionality. Therefore, the notice of selection should be shows the minimum requirements demanded by the contractor that will enable the professional--through a list of the services provided in previous years-the proof of possession of a professional experience appropriate to the type and amount of the assignment. The art. 267, paragraph 9, provides that the choice of the subcontractor should be made known through the publication of selection results on information sites under art. 66, paragraph 7, of the code, within a period not exceeding that indicated in art. 65, paragraph 1, of the code. Assignments of less than 40000 euros can be entrusted in accordance with the procedure referred to in art. 125, paragraph 11, of the code (see article 267, paragraph 10, of the regulation and its interpretation determination Avcp # 8/2011). In this case, the rebate on the amount of the benefit is negotiated between the head of the proceedings and the economic operator which they will entrust the contract, based on the specificity of the case. 3. Appointments of exceeding 100,000 euros. The art. 263, paragraph 1, of the regulation lays down the requirements to require participants to procurement procedures of technical services in excess of 100,000 euros. In particular, adequate experience in carrying out similar services is proven by reference to: a) of overall turnover for the services referred to in art. 252 of regulation carried out over the last five years preceding the publication of the notice, the amount varying between 2 and 4 times the amount based on race;
b) accomplishment over the last ten years of services under art. 252, related to work pertaining to each of the classes and categories of work covered by the services to be contracted, identified on the basis of the lists contained in current professional fees, for a total amount for each class and category of between 1 and 2 times the estimated amount of the work covered by the provision, calculated with respect to each of the classes and categories;
c) in the past decade mobilities of two services under art. 252, about jobs that belong to each of the classes and categories of work covered by the services to be contracted, identified on the basis of the lists contained in current professional fees, for a total amount of not less than one value between 0.40 and 0.80 times the estimated amount of the work covered by the provision, calculated with respect to each of the classes and categories related to types of work are similar in size and technical characteristics to those in respect of custody of children;
d) average annual number of technical staff used in the last three years (including active members, employees and consultants with continuous and coordinated collaboration contract annually enrolled in related professional bodies, where they exist, and with VAT number and sign the project to sign the project audit reports are part of the Office of construction supervision and turnover in respect of the bidder an interest of more than fifty percent of the its annual turnover, resulting from the last VAT return, and the contractors in the event of non-trades and professions), to an extent of between 2 and 3 times the estimated earnings in the contract for the performance of the assignment. Under the current wording of art. 253, paragraph 15 bis of the code, until December 31, 2015, for the demonstration of the technical and professional capacity requirements and viability, the period of activity documented is that relating to the best three years of the previous five years or at the best five years of the decade preceding the date of publication of the notice. The provision in art. 253, paragraph 15 bis of the Code therefore has an impact on requirements to let. a) and d) of art. 263 of regulation, allowing you to evaluate the overall turnover for services performed in a ten-year period (in the best 5 years of the previous decade), instead of the five-year period, and to consider the average annual manpower of technical staff used on five-year basis (in the best three years of the previous five years) instead of the three-year period provided for in regulation. With reference to the revenue requirements, it should be noted that, with respect to service contracts and supplies, administrative law and the appropriate and proportionate Avcp have always indicated as a requirement not exceeding twice the amount based on race (3). It is believed that this address is also extensible to the revenue requirement under art. 263, paragraph 1, lett. a) of the regulation. In essence, it is considered reasonable secure revenues in an amount equal to twice the amount based on race, it being understood that, in accordance with art. 41, paragraph 2, of the code, any more stringent requirements must be justified in relation to specific and detailed requirements, and cannot in any event be in excess of 4 times the amount of the race (corresponding to the upper bound predicted by lett. that statement is also consistent). with art. 58, para. 3, paragraph 2 and recital 83 of Directive 2014/24/EU, according to which the requirement should not normally exceed, at most, twice the estimated value of the contract, except in duly justified circumstances. Circumstances which-according to the norm and recital called-may for example, follow these steps to the high risks associated with the performance of the contract or the fact that its timely and correct implementation is crucial since it is a necessary precondition for the execution of other contracts. This is certainly the case of the design of the works. For the purposes of demonstration of the requirements, it should be noted that the Regulation, while referring to the amounts typically entity works particularly high, refers generically to services under art. 252 — «services relating to architecture and engineering also integrated and others technical services concerning the drafting of the preliminary design, final design and Executive as well as the technical and administrative activities related to the design. " In the generic definition it is reasonable to assume that they are covered by the feasibility studies related to public works undertaken, including through project financing, and any other preparatory service design that has led to the creation of a public work or public interest. Therefore, the requirement in question cannot be intended to restrict sales to only those services specifically places based on race. It follows that, for example, in the case of entrusting the design and construction supervision for the purposes of demonstration of specific prior experience, even for services called «punta», in relation to each of the classes and categories of work covered by the services to be contracted, those requirements are demonstrated with the completion of a previous planning and construction management, design-only or single project management. You must consider that, to settled case-law, the rationale behind the requirement of "rush service" is that of carrying out individual services of a certain entity altogether considered and not carrying out services which are identical with those from Entrust (cf. ex multis, Avcp, preliminary opinion of February 13, 2014, n. 33). Thus, for example, in the case of entrusting the design and construction supervision is necessary and sufficient that the contestant demonstrating that he has made, in relation to each of the classes and categories and amounts of work shown, or planning and construction supervision, or just planning or construction management positions only. (4) to this end, it is necessary that the notice required competitors to attach to my request for participation in the list of jobs for which they have carried out services related to architecture and engineering, also integrated in the decade prior to the date of publication of the notice. Regarding procurement planning and execution of the work, it should be clarified that the "approval" invoked by art. 263, paragraph 2 of regulation for the purposes of assessable service discovery refers to the approval by the contractor as defined by art. 168 and 169, of that regulation. For projects entrusted to private clients, the approval could be referred to the granting of authorization by the title of the public authority concerned (i.e. building permit issued by the municipality). As for units that are part of the average annual manpower (5), to fasten to varying degrees between 2 and 3 times the estimated earnings in the contract notice, the standard should be interpreted in the light of the provisions of art. 90, paragraph 1, lett. d) of the code, under which it is allowed the participation of professionals (individual or associate), who, by virtue of their legal status, they do not have a staff of personnel/technicians. The aforementioned requirement of staff must therefore be given a reading due to the different types of participants in the race. The requirement should therefore be understood as an average annual manpower over the past three years for people organized in corporate form (professional society and society of engineering) and as possessing the minimum unit estimated in the contract for freelancers. The latter can reach the number of units set out in the notice of invitation to tender through the establishment of a temporary consortium of professionals. It highlights the need for contractors to carry out a careful evaluation regarding the minimum required units to competitors. This analysis should aim to balance the need for a workforce suitable to carry out the assignment with the need to ensure the widest participation in the race. Finally, it should be recalled that where the design within class I categories a), b), c), d) and e) concerns properties of historical and artistic interest subject to cultural links design, pursuant to art. 52, of the Royal Decree of October 23, 1925, # 2537, is reserved for graduates in architecture (Cons. St., section VI, September 11, 2006, 5239). 4. Classes, categories and professional fees. For the purpose of qualifying for participation in the race, it is considered that the criteria to be adopted should be similar to those already supplied with the previous determination Avcp n. 5/2010. Therefore, within the same category construction, activities performed for works similar to the object of the services to be contracted (not necessarily of the same functional destination) are to be considered such as to substantiate the requirements when the degree of complexity is at least equal to that of the services to be contracted. Exemplifying, carrying out engineering services for the construction of hospitals (E-10), characterized by the degree of complexity of 1.20, can be considered eligible to establish requirements for technical services characterized by equal complexity, such as the creation of courts (16), or lesser complexity, such as the construction of schools (e. 09 with degree of complexity equal to 1.15). This criterion is confirmed by art. 8 d.m. 143/2013, where it stated that "degrees of complexity higher qualify also for works of lower complexity within the same category of work". The above considerations, applicable to works classifiable under current categories «building», «structures», «traffic», do not appear to stretch additional categories («plants», «plumbing», etc.), as within the same category together functional purposes featuring different specificity; for example, the completion of services for electrical systems does not appear eligible to qualify the design engineer for the construction of thermal power plants, although they are characterized by low degree of complexity in table Z-1, as shown by the references, in the same table, classes, and categories referred to in law no 143/1949. In relation to the requirements for the purposes of demonstration comparison between current classifications and those of law no 143/1949, there was the requirement that contractors avoid overly formal interpretations that could lead to unjustified restrictions on participation. In particular, for the works of hospital building, identified by Ministerial Decree 143/2013, in category E. 10, must be match with the works previously classified by law no 143/1949 which I/d (to which they were attributable in general all relevant technical and architectural buildings); It is noted, however, as, according to the classification of table art. 14 of law No. 143/1949 hospitals found to be caused by the class and category I/c, with an assessment of the complexity of the works considered from time exceeded. In determining that question # 5/Avcp 2010 was already addressed, pointing out how ' many contractors in the past have interpreted article 14 of law No. 143/1949, questionably, to reduce the fees below the minimum tariff then design imperatives. For example, hospitals were considered as belonging to the class I category c) and not to the category d) [...]. Therefore, in notices it should be made clear that the requirements were not only with projects valued from contractors class I category d), also based on designs of works that the contractors are often considered to be classified as class I, category c)». This policy should be extended for the purposes of assessing the qualifications for participation, even to other categories of works, by pointing out that, in case of uncertainties in the comparison, must always prevail, in relation to the identification of the works, the objective content of professional performance breakthrough. Finally, it is recalled, in the light of the provisions involved, the obligation for contractors to determine the fees for the services of engineering and architecture by applying strictly the rates referred to in the Ministerial Decree 143/2013; This determination must be the result of an analytical framework performance by Entrust and charges to be placed based on race. What, other than for obvious reasons to allow appropriate and adequately evaluated offers from competitors, also to avoid an underestimation of the amount of services by Entrust's elusive amount thresholds provided for in the code and the rules for the use of more stringent procedures imposed by the correct determination of the amount to be based on race. 5. award criteria. For submission over 100,000 euros the most economically advantageous policy, as expressly indicated in art. 266 of regulation, appears the most appropriate for ensuring proper evaluation of the quality of services offered by economic operators. The same premise of order, reads, inter alia, that "considered that, with respect to article 266, paragraph 4, the arrangement that configures the most economically advantageous policy as the only award criteria applicable for the award of architectural and engineering services, is necessary because these are specific services that require an assessment of the offer is not limited to the price element but also extended to elements related to the technical aspect of the offer and that the arrangement is the primary ranking rules cover in the article 81, paragraph 1, of the code, the implementation of articles 55 and 53 respectively of Directive 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC, which is without prejudice to provisions relating to regulatory and other remuneration of specific services». (6) this criterion is seen also by the Community legislature which, under art. 67 of Directive 2014/24, encourages the use of the criterion of best ' value for '/prezzo '. One of the controversial aspects of the use of the criterion of the most economically more advantageous, or best value for/prezzo according to the new directive, was linked to the previous experience, subjective element attributable to the requirements to be evaluated by the admission that the jurisprudence has also attributed features of type «objective» by chance, then, of its assessment in the award. With particular reference to the engineering services, the latter interpretation was already confirmed by the prediction contained in art. 266, comma 1, lett. b), # 1) of the regulation, according to which the technical offer must be documented by "a maximum of three services related to interventions deemed significant by the candidate's own ability to produce technically performance, selected from among eligible interventions similar to those in respect of custody." Further confirmation comes from the new Directive 94/24, 2014, recital, expressly admits that possibility, then confirmed by art. 67, paragraph 2, lett. b). It is considered, therefore, that any technical assessment criteria related to past experience are eligible even if technical services, authorizing have a direct influence on the offer and are linked to the subject-matter of the provision. 6. information on the implementation of the economically most advantageous tender. 6.1. Fixing the threshold and formula for the price. The art. 83, paragraph 2, of the code provides for the possibility of fixing a minimum score that contestants must reach on one or more criteria. This allows the contractor to select, for subsequent evaluation phase of just the competitors who have offered design solutions that meet certain quality standards. Particular care should be taken in determining the threshold. Too low might kill off the effects, while too high may lead to exclusion of technical bids still adequate in relation to the objectives of the contractor. On the assessment of the price, you must refer to the formula laid down in Annex M to regulation. The formula limits the coefficient (the score) assigned to offers low above the arithmetic mean of the tenders submitted, corrected by a factor X. The purpose of this limitation is to discourage contestants to make excessive markdowns and to whom they may be poor quality projects (see the No 7 November 24, 2011 Avcp determination). Beside the possibility to provide for minimum thresholds of the barrier to the technical score, we highlight the need to proceed to c.d. «riparametrazione» technical scores If no competitor reaches the highest technical score provided in the contract notice (cf. Annex M to Regulation). The operation meets the need to ensure an invariable ratio between the price factor and the quality factor set out in the contract notice (cf. Cons. St., sect. V, June 12, 2009, n. 3716). In the absence of riparametrazione, in fact, since the economic score awarded to the best price offer is always equal to the maximum expected economic score while it doesn't occur to the technical score, you are likely to give the economic offer an actual weight greater than that originally set out in the contract notice. With reference to the disposition pursuant to art. 266, comma 1, lett. c), paragraph 1) of the regulation concerning the percentage fixed in the notice, it is believed that bear this limit cannot be expected. While I understand the purpose of the provision to contain any excess fall within the race, it is considered that the present enforcement profiles with Community legislation and that the selection of quality projects can effectively be done by adopting the following strategies: limiting the weight of the component of the price that, pursuant to art. 266, paragraph 5, of the rules can vary between 10 and 30 points. Attach, for example, a weight of 10, means greatly reduce the tendering on price relative to quality;
setting a coefficient X (0.85 or 0.9) in the calibration of the formula set out in Annex M;
inserting a threshold to the technical score, so select only offers that meet certain quality standards;
the described riparametrazione technical scores, which reward offers of higher quality. A higher quality can be obtained also through more stringent controls on the appropriateness of the bids submitted and with the preparation of the document prior to starting the configuration, the competence of which is solely the proceedings, punctual, prescriptive and complete with all the necessary elements to achieve the goals specified therein. 6.2. Information and motivational criteria. The art. 266, paragraph 4, of the rules of procedure, bid evaluation criteria are as follows: a) the adequacy of the offer as provided for in paragraph 1, lett. b) point 1);
b) methodological characteristics of supply taken from the illustration of the method of carrying out the performance object Office;
c) economic decline only percentage indicated in the tender;
d) percentage reduction indicated in the quotation with reference to time. The next paragraph 5, art. 266, stipulates that the evaluation criteria should be assigned the weights within the limits of the forks mentioned below: 1) for the policy a) (professionalism or adequacy of offer): from 20 to 40;
2) for criterion b) (methodological and qualitative characteristics of the offer or methodological features of offer): from 20 to 40;
3) for criterion c) (fall): from 10 to 30;
4) for criterion d) (percentage reduction): from 0 to 10. The regulation provides also that: 1. the professionalism or the adequacy of the offer (criterion a) is assessed on the basis of documentation submitted by competitors established (article 266, paragraph 1, letter b), point 1) from A3 or A4 format into a number between three and five, in the case of A3 size sheets, and between six and ten in the case, A4 card (article 264, paragraph 3, letter. a) of a maximum of three services related to interventions deemed significant by the candidate's own ability to produce technically performance, selected from among eligible interventions similar to those in respect of custody, according to the criteria which might be derived from professional fees (art. 266, comma 1, lett. b), paragraph 1);
2. the qualitative methodological and methodological features of the tender or of the offer (criterion b) are evaluated on the basis of a technical report consisting of a maximum number of folders, between twenty and forty (article 264, paragraph 3, letter b)), illustrative of the modalities with which will be carried out the performance of the task object with reference, for example, organisational-functional profiles morphological, structural and plant engineering, as well as those related to security and cantierabilita ' of the work (article 266, paragraph 1, letter b), point 1). Where performance concerns works characterized by more aspects, for example, in the case of integrated projects, and projects involving architectural, structural and plant engineering services, the assessment criterion a) (professionalism or adequacy of the offer) should be divided into sub-criteria and its sub-weights (professionalism or adequacy of the offer in terms of architecture, professionalism or adequacy of the offer on the structural plan, professionalism or adequacy of supply on the plant floor). As observed by Avcp in determining # 7/2011, the construction of the scale of assessments in relation to both the evaluation criteria a) (professionalism or adequacy of the offer) and evaluation criteria b) (methodological and qualitative characteristics of the offer or performances of the assay) requires that the tender regulations establish the criteria that will enable the Commission to evaluate race motivational when an offer is better than another. Documentation of the offer and motivational criteria laid down in the tender documents must, for both criteria a) and b), differ depending on whether the services to be contracted only relate to provision of design, the only provision of construction management or both performance. The regulation sets out clearly and exhaustively what content must have documentation of the offer. Does not contain, however, no indication on the possible contents of the criteria to be used in the evaluation of tenders stage motivational. You offer some guidance on this matter: a) regarding the assessment criterion a), the motivational policy should provide that will be considered more adequate ones offered for which documentation allows to estimate, to more specific aspects, the level of professionalism, reliability and quality of the competitor, as it shows that the competitor has drawn up projects that , in terms of technology, functional, environmental input, respond better to the objectives that pursues the contractor and who are believed to be studied in order to optimize the total cost of construction, maintenance and management throughout the lifecycle of the work;
b) as regards criterion b), the motivational policy should provide that will be considered better that offered for which the report establishes that the conception of organization and technical-organizational structure provided for in the offer, as well as the overall times will the competitor for the realization of the performance are coherent with each other and, therefore, offer a high quality assurance in the implementation of the provision. As regards the assessment of the best professionalism or adequacy of the offer, a competitor who, demonstrating their professional skills, presents projects of not only the same class and category but that are instrumental to the provision of a specific service (for example, the project is for a middle school and the competitor has three projects that belong equally to the Group of measures instrumental to the provision of education services) , might have a better rating. In the case of entrustment of performance design-only, for the evaluation criterion b), motivational criteria must specify who will be considered better that relationship that will illustrate a more precise, more convincing and more exhaustive: a) the main themes that characterize the competitor's performance;
b) any proposals for improvement that the competitor in relation to the needs of the client, to those of end users and to the General territorial and environmental context in which should be added to the works to be carried out, considers possible preliminary design document;
c) what actions will be developed in relation to specific issues, related constraints and interference existing in the territory where they will carry out the works;
d) modalities of execution of the service with regard to the articulation of the various temporal phases highlighting, inter alia, modalities of interaction/integration with customers in different locations (conference services, acquisition, validation and approval of the project, expropriation procedures, etc.), as well as measures and actions aimed at guaranteeing the quality of service provided;
and human and material resources) made available for the conduct of the service, through the drafting: the list of professionals personally responsible for carrying out the various parts of the service, indicating the position of each bidder's structure (Member, administrator, employee), their professional qualifications, major experiences similar to the object of the contract and registration details in the relevant professional bodies, as well as the contact , the professional title and registration details to the relevant professional register of the person in charge of the integration of the various specialist;
the organization chart of the working group dedicated to the performance of the different phases of the implementation of the provision. In the case of assignment of single construction management, motivational criteria must specify who will be considered better that relationship that will illustrate a more precise, more convincing and more exhaustive: a) the method of execution of the service in the implementation of works designed with regarding the Organization of the Office of construction management, security and control activities;
b) modalities of interaction/integration with the client;
c) the consistency and quality of human and material resources made available to the service, through the drafting: the list of professionals personally responsible for carrying out the various parts of the service of site supervision, indicating the position of each bidder's structure (Member, administrator, employee), the respective qualifications of the main experiences similar to the object of the contract and registration details in the relevant professional associations;
Summary of the working group dedicated to the performance of the different phases of the implementation of the service. In case of joint custody of planning and construction management logically motivational policies must be designed taking into account the above mentioned for both performances. 7. Verification and validation of design. Verification and validation of projects by regulation has acquired an importance in the field of public contracts, peculiar importance that was only implicitly recognized by previous d.P. R December 21, 1999, # 554. The role of design verification and was further strengthened by Decree-Law May 13, 2011, n. 70, which introduced paragraph 1-bis under art. 240-bis of the code, which States that ' cannot be the subject of reserve design aspects that, according to article 112 of regulation, were subject to audit ". The authority has consistently held (see for all deliberation Avcp of March 18, 2009, n. 22) an obligation for contractors to proceed to the award of works contracts based on plans drawn up and validated in accordance with current legislation and that of the person responsible of the procedure to verify, in discussion with the parties, the final design is in accordance with the rules, and the preliminary design document. Reflecting the importance attached to the process of verification and validation of projects is the fact that the Regulation devotes to the subject well 16 articles (from 44 to 59). In accordance with Regulation «the check is designed to ensure the conformity of the chosen design solution to specific functional, performance, regulatory and technical provisions contained in the feasibility study, preliminary design document or in the planning of the levels already approved. " Verification ensures in particular: a) the completeness of design;
b) the coherence and completeness of the economic framework in all its aspects;
c) appaltabilita ' of the chosen design solution;
d) preconditions for the durability of the work over time;
and introduction of risk minimization) variants and litigation;
f) a chance to complete the work within the time limits laid down;
g) the safety of workers and users;
h) the suitability of the unit prices are used;
s) the manutenibilita ' of the works, if required. In accordance with art. 55 of regulation: "validation of the draft based on race is the formal act that shows the results of the checks. Validation and is signed by the head of the proceedings ' and is based on the final report that the person in charge of the check must draw up in accordance with art. 54, paragraph 7, of the rules and any counterclaims of the designer. When validating the responsible of procedure can differ from the conclusions of the Verifier, in such a case, the formal act of validating or non-validating the project must include specific reasons. The race place design validation is an essential element of the notice or in the invitation letter for the award of the works. Regarding the persons who may carry out verification activities, regulation, like planning, predicts that the check is carried out by the internal structures of the contractor or of other administrations that can avail according to art. 33, paragraph 3, of the code (7). The following art. 48 provided that in the case of impossibility of entrusting internal structures, the verification process may entrust the service contract concerning the verification of planning to a third party with certain requirements. Both those provisions provide for different characteristics that must own topics in the following table, summarized verifiers for cost of the works.
part of measure in graphic format According to the European norm UNI CEI EN ISO/IEC 17020 «conformity assessment, requirements for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection ' means a) type A inspection body must be independent of the parties involved; does not have to be part or be connected to a legal entity that is engaged in the design, manufacture, supply, installation, purchase, ownership, use or maintenance of the items inspected; neither he nor his staff must engage in activities that may conflict with their independence of judgement and integrity;
b) type B inspection body can perform services only on behalf of the Organization of which it is part (or the contractor); should be a clear separation of the responsibilities of the inspection staff from responsibility of staff employed in the other functions; neither he nor his staff must engage in activities that may conflict with their independence of judgement and integrity;
c) type C inspection body is a structure that can be embedded within organisations carrying out design activities; However, it must have, within the Organization, safeguard mechanisms to ensure adequate separation of responsibility and accountability between the inspections and other activities; the design and inspection of the same item, carried out by an inspection body of type C, should not be performed by the same person. Article 49, paragraph 2, of the regulation provides that: "The design verification activity, with exclusion of the activity check design levels checked internally if it is entrusted to external subjects to the contractor, it is entrusted as a unit." The standard establishes that if the contractor wants to outsource the business of verification, the Verifier topic should be selected with a single race for all levels and all sectors (environmental, architectural, structural, systems, etc.) the contracted design. Does not appear, then, can outsource the design verification activities in different subjects. With regard to procurement procedures, refer to the content expressed in art. 51 of regulation, apply the provisions relating to custody of engineering and architecture, already discussed in another section of these guidelines, referred to. Peculiar is the rules governing participation requirements. The art. 50, paragraph 1, provides that the financial and technical-organizational requirements for participation in contracts are defined by contractors with regard to the following elements: a) turnover for verification services, made over the past five years, for an amount to be determined to any extent not less than twice the estimated contract value of service;
mobilities, b) over the past five years, at least two service contracts to work projects criteria each amount at least equal to 50% of that subject-matter of the contract by Entrust and analogous thereto. To identify similar verification services refers to classes and categories provided by law no 143/1949. The requirements referred to in point a), for the reasons already set out in part design requirements for participation, must now be understood to an extent not exceeding twice the amount based on race. It should be noted that the total turnover required is that which relates to verification services. With regard to the preparation of calls for tenders, these should contain all the necessary documentation to allow competitors to make a careful assessment of technical and temporal and economic implications associated with the activities of evaluating the project place based on race. This is to guarantee the possibility to access the document on the level below that of the design for applied for verification (preliminary design document and/or the feasibility study for the preliminary draft; the preliminary draft for the final project; the final design for the Executive project), as well as to the list of entries for the level to be checked. 8. assignment of design contests and ideas. Next to the procedures for the identification of a designer, the code provides for procedures aimed at identifying a project design ideas and competitions. The art. 3, paragraph 41 of the code provides that ' design contests are procedures which provide the contractor, especially in the field of spatial planning, urban planning, architecture and engineering or data processing, a plan or design selected by a jury after being put out to competition with or without the award of prizes ". The design competition and the competition are procedures which end with the purchase of a product of ingenuity — the project, judged best on floor quality and cost by a Special Commission, in connection with a preindicata requirement, distinguishing himself in what the service contract design in which the object of the contract is a workmanlike effort aimed at an outcome , for which the procedure is aimed at the selection of their designer (see decision No 125 of Avcp May 9, 2007). In the context of the acquisition of performance relevant to architectural and engineering services for the construction of public works, the art. 91, paragraph 5, of the code, States that, when the performance involves the design of works of major importance under the architectural, historical, artistic and environmental preservation, the contractors estimate as a priority the opportunity to apply the procedure of the competition or the competition of ideas. Procedural viewpoint, it should be recalled, first, that articles 102 and 103 of the Code establish the visa should be issued ' of notices, as well as their contents. Such notices shall be published in accordance with art. 66, paragraphs 2 et seq of the code. In the notice or warning you must specify the cost assumed that the contractor provides for the realization of the work placed in competition, given that competitors should refer the drafting of project proposals. This data must be related to physical and dimensional data of the work to be carried out and shall be reported as a result of a detailed study and assessment of merit, which must be able to be seen in a clear manner in the preliminary document design. Its indication is in General of the competitions, but becomes indispensable whenever the selection board should also formulate their assessments on the basis of the "cost" for the realization of the proposed project. It is important, also, to inform the competitors, specifying it in the contract, the binding force or less than that amount. In the latter case, the competitors must motivate adequately a forecast of expenditure related to the project and the deviations from the amount shown. It also highlights the importance of a clear indication of the object of the competition with regard to the feasibility study based on the three-year planning and preliminary design document. In this regard, in the case of design contest, art. 15, paragraph 7, of the rules provides that the preliminary document is integrated with the preparatory documents of the contest, prepared by the head of the proceedings, and that such documents are drafted in order to achieve more at the design to the identification and quantification of the needs of the contracting authority, and defining the content of the competition (see art. 128, paragraph 1, of the code). For competitions under the EU threshold, article. 110 precise code that must be carried out in compliance with the General principles of transparency, equal treatment, non-discrimination and proportionality, in accordance with the procedure referred to in art. 57, paragraph 6, of the code; the invitation must be turned in at least five subjects. On the principles mentioned, will draw upon the considerations and recommendations carried out with reference to contracts of less than 100,000 euros and the provisions of art. 66, paragraph 15, of the code. Under the current legislation, therefore, procedures, through which you can carry out a design contest, are: a) open procedure, allowing all those who are in possession of the minimum requirements in the notice and regulations;
b) restricted procedure, which allows participation only in selected subjects with one of the following methods: subjective appraisal and selection carried out by competitors;
selection of character design, by carrying out a competition of ideas without formation of ranking. In relation to the restricted procedure, the legislature intended to make optional the chance to finalize or not the competition procedure to grant access to subsequent assignments and what both in competition and in the context of insolvency proceedings in two degrees. This right, however, must be exercised in the contract notice (article 109 of the code). Needs to be specified that the design competition can also be considered the first phase of a procedure for the award of a design service (article 99, paragraph 2, letter a), of the code). In this case, since the assignment of levels next design is done by negotiated procedure, lawmakers have focused on the need to bring in the competition announcement the requirements for the conduct of such provision (article 108, paragraph 6, of the code) and to consider applicable art. 62 of the code. For the selection of the contestants should refer to the criteria of the Annex L in regulation. In competitions, whether by design or ideas, it is necessary to adopt assessment criteria basically qualitative and specifically related to the project according to the objectives set out in the preliminary document design. Remember, in this regard, the Authority stated that cannot be predicted in the prequalification phase elements of an economic nature (cf. Avcp, preliminary opinion of April 23, 2008, # 124). All that being said and considered;
Determines as expressed in the foregoing points. Approved by the Council at its meeting of February 25, 2015.
The President: Canton filed with the Secretariat of the Council on March 4, 2015. Secretary: Esposito (1) in this respect, reference is made to the determination of February 27, 2002 Avcp n. 3, «geological» where are clarified the modalities with which the Administration acquired geological and, in particular, it clarifies that "the relationship between custodial and geologist may be either independent in nature, in the form of temporary Association, is subordinate in nature, as the employee, and employment, through coordinated and continuative professional collaboration forms '. (2) see, on this point, determining Avcp of July 11, 2007 # 6. (3) see deliberations Avcp of December 19, 2013, n. 40, November 7, 2012, # 92; opinion on the regulation of May 7, 2009, # 59. (4) In this regard, with a view to identifying appropriate and proportionate requirements on the provision and to permit wider participation of professionals, for the designation of testing would be restrictive of competition require a professional experience with exclusive reference to testing, regardless of other activities that have similar or related aspects such as construction management, design, coordination of safety on construction sites (see determining Avcp # 2/2009). (5) it is recalled that that number should be understood as the sum of the staff employed in the years under review (three years) divided by the number of years (three). (6) The use of the criterion of the lowest price is permissible only for loans of less than one hundred thousand euro and in case of simplicity of performance. It is believed that the reasons for the use of the criterion of the lowest price must still be well substantiated in the letter of invitation.
In the case of use of the criterion of the lowest price, to avoid that the savings achieved as a result of strong rebates on price can have negative effects on the quality of the work, you can resort to automatic exclusion from the bidding of tenders under art. 124, paragraph 8, of the code. (7) The cited art. 33, paragraph 3, provides that ' contracting authorities and entities referred to in article 32, paragraph 1, letter b), c), f), cannot rely on public or private subjects the functions and activities of contractor of public works. However, contracting authorities may entrust the functions of public works contractor to integrated services, infrastructure and transport (SIIT) or provincial governments, based on specification which provides also the reimbursement of the costs incurred by them for the activities carried out, as well as central purchasing bodies».