Call for tender BUDG11/PO/01 INF. Answers to a second set of questions. Question 50: Could you please explain in more detail what you mean with the term “equivalent expertise recognized by the European Commission”, which is requested as a alternative to the mandatory certification for the Certified Senior Sap SOA specialist profile (page 63 of the Service Requirements)? Does this term refer to proven experience of the candidate CV in similar tasks for projects of the European Commission? If, yes, how many years this experience should be to cover the profile requirements? Answer: The equivalent expertise should prove in depth experience in the tasks examined by the certification Question 51: Could you please clarify the following in relation to the Senior Analyst profile and specifically to the specific knowledge and skills for SAP profiles?:

1) Please confirm that the requested 5 (or 10 for non university degree holders) years of experience in 2 of the SAP functional areas or subareas, refer to consolidated years of experience in the 2 areas or subareas and not experience for each one of them.

2) What is the experience expected (in years) in the specific area or subarea for which the CV is proposed (e.g. in PSM-FM, or in PSM-GM, or in FI-AA-CO, etc.) for the different rows under the Senior Analyst profile in the table of section 4.4.3.1 “Number of CVs” of the technical part of the questionnaire.

For part 1) of the question, see answer to question 3. Answer: As stated in Annex 2 "Service Requirements", 10.2.3, "At least 5 years (if holding a university degree) or 10 years (if not holding a university degree) in 2 of the SAP functional areas or subareas mentioned in the description". The experience should be at least 5 years covering at least 2 of the areas/subareas. For instance, with a university degree: - 5 years are required covering FI-AA and CO - 5 years are required covering PSM-FM and PSG-GM Question 52: Q2.1 Annex 0 Guidebook for tenderers, §4.2.5 p. 7 We are ready to rely on a few freelancers that are currently in place should they be considered as key for the European Commission We understand that the freelancing does qualify as subcontracting.

- Given that freelancers have generally difficulties in filling/providing in the requested documentation, would it be sufficient to have the freelancers filling the letter of intent only?

- In the letter of intent, the freelancer must confirm her/his intention to collaborate with us if we win the contract. Can the freelancer sign a letter of intent with more than one tenderer?

See answer to question 5. A freelancer can sign a letter of intent with more than one tenderer. Question 53:

In Annex 0, Guidebook for tenderers, section 4.2.5 on page 7, It is indicated : “Freelancing, drawing on the activities or staff of any other entirely different legal entity than the contractor, independently of its exact legal form (and independently of the applicable national law), does qualify as subcontracting.” Question 1: Could you clarify if, however, in case of freelancers, presenting their CVs are sufficient to prove relationship for further collaboration in case awarding of the contract? Question 2: If you answer to the first question is negative, does it required, at this stage of the procedure, additional information to be filled in by the freelancers such as a letter of intent authorizing the presentation of their CVs? See answer to question 5. Question 54: In the Invitation Letter, page 2, point 6, it is referred that offers must be signed by an authorised representative. Could you please specify if the whole offer should be signed on each page separately or where necessary (only specific declarations, forms, annexes etc)? In case the whole offer should be signed on each page could you please specify whether a full name signature is required or just the initials of our legal representatives, and if electronic initials are allowed? Answer : The minimum parts of the tender which need to be hand signed are : the cover letter, the financial offer and all official documents / declarations asked by the Commission. Question 55: In the Guidebook for Tenders, page 6, section 5.3.1 is stated that “The working language for the performance of the services will be English and/or French”. Though in the Service Requirements, page 10, section 4.1 is stated that “The required services must be at least provided in French and English”. We understand that the required services must be at least provided in French and / or English. In addition, we understand that the knowledge of English language is sufficient for the CVs. Please confirm that our understanding is correct. See answer to question 28.

Question 56: In the Guidebook for Tenders, page 8, section 5.3.4.3 is mentioned that replies that need additional space than those provided, could be given in a separate file, clearly referenced that should not exceed two pages per question. Could you please clarify if this applies to the sections of the exclusion and selection criteria, since there is already a requirement for the maximum of 16 pages regarding the SLA (award criteria)? If so, and in case of a joint tender should the limit of 2 pages be applied in total OR for each partner separately? See answer to question 12. Apart from the cases mentioned in there, also for the questions of section 3.2 of the economic and financial capacity (in Annex 3 of the tendering specifications, Questionnaire Administrative part) references longer than 2 pages can be provided, i.e. for balance sheets and results. For a joint tender, the limit can be interpreted as for each partner separately.

Question 57: In the Service Requirements, section 10.2. “Description of different profiles”, and sub-section of “Required Experience”, it is requested experience (depending on the profile) in ALL tasks listed in “Nature of the tasks” sub-section for the correspondence profile. 1. Should every individual CV cover all the tasks, or the tasks could be covered by the set of the

provided CVs for the profile, as a whole? For example, for the profiles of Analyst Programmer and Senior Analyst Programmer with specific expertise in the areas (3), (4a), (5) & (6) which are not SAP depended, should the candidates cover also the task of “Programming, SAP customizing”?

2. It is our understanding that it is not required the candidate to have the requested amount of years’ experience with every single task, but as a total professional IT experience. Could you please confirm? For example, for the profiles of Analyst Programmer and Senior Analyst Programmer it is required the candidates to have accordingly 3 & 5 years of experience in total, but not necessarily 3 & 5 years experience in each task separately i.e. 3 years in Prototyping and 3 years in Testing and so on. Is our understanding correct?

3. If our understanding in the previous question is not correct (each task should be covered by every proposed CV), we understand that the 3 years of experience can be counted in parallel for some of the tasks. For example, it is sufficient if 3 years in programming and 3 years in prototyping are demonstrated by a project where both tasks were implemented in parallel. Please confirm that our understanding is correct.

Answer: 1. All tasks should be covered by a CV. For the task "Programming, SAP customizing", SAP customizing is only relevant for SAP profiles. 2. Yes 3. Yes

Question 58: In the Service Requirements , section 10.2. “Description of different profiles”, should the required time of experience be counted for every single tool/technology of a group OR as a whole? For example, for the profiles of Analyst Programmer and Senior Analyst Programmer with specific expertise in the area (3, Financial applications development) should the candidates have 3 years of experience in each technology mentioned in the Specifications (i.e J2EE, BEA / Oracle Weblogic, BEA Aqualogic / Oracle ESB, Spring and Hibernate or Coldfusion) OR 3 years consolidated experience in the aforementioned technologies is sufficient? Answer: 3 years consolidated experience in the mentioned technologies Question 59: Furthermore, if the latter assumption is correct, could you please clarify if is it necessary all the mentioned technologies to be covered? At the previous example, if a candidate has more than 3 years of experience with the rest technologies but the open source frameworks, should the Candidate be considered competitive as Analyst Programmer with expertise in Financial applications development?

Answer: For the profiles of Analyst Programmer and Senior Analyst Programmer with specific expertise in the area (3) (Financial applications development), are at least required: - 3 years of experience in J2EE development on BEA/Oracle Weblogic - or 3 years of experience in development in Coldfusion

Question 60: Could you please confirm that no university degree is required for the:

• Analyst Programmer • Senior Analyst Programmer

profiles? Answer: Yes, we confirm Question 61: Could you please confirm that university degree is indeed mandatory for the:

• Senior IS Architect (at Section “knowledge and skills”, 8th bullet there is a discrimination in years of experience when holding or not a university degree)

• High level expert in Information System Architecture & Governance • Junior System Administrator (since a Senior System administrator, may or may not hold a

university degree) profiles? Answer: For Senior IS Architect see answer to question 4. For High Level Expert in IS Architecture & Governance, the university degree is mandatory. For the Junior System Administrator, the university degree is mandatory. A Senior System Administrator without a university degree must have a longer experience.

Question 62: For all the profiles of:

• Certified Senior System Administrator SOA • Certified Senior Sap SOA specialist • Certified System Administrator SAP - Oracle

that a mandatory certification is requested, is also provided the alternative option of “equivalent expertise recognized by the European Commission” to replace the certification in subject. Could you please clarify what you consider as equivalent expertise recognized by the European Commission, per case? Answer: The equivalent expertise should prove in depth experience in the tasks examined by the certification (see answer to question 50)

Question 63:

For all the profiles of: • Certified Senior System Administrator SOA • Certified Senior Sap SOA specialist • Certified System Administrator SAP - Oracle

that a complementary certification is requested, is also provided the alternative option of “in depth experience” with various tools/technologies to replace the complementary certification requested. Could you please clarify how many years you consider as “in depth experience”? Answer: At least 3 years of experience

Question 64: For all the profile of High level expert in Information System Architecture & Governance you have not specified how many CVs you would like to cover the correspondence requirements and how many experts you would like to be available. Answer: #CVs: See answer to question 27 # experts: 2

Question 65: In the Invitation to Tender, point 6, page 2, it is referred that “Tenders must be: signed by the tenderer or his duly authorised representative”. We understand that the tenderer should sign only where necessary and is requested to do so e.g. specific declarations, forms, financial offer, etc. and not the whole offer in each page. Could you please confirm? See answer to question 54.

Question 66: In the Tendering Specifications, point 6.1 Exclusion of Tenderers, pages 7-8 and ANNEX 3, 3.1 Administrative Part-Questionnaire “Tender Form”, point 2, pages 6-7, we understand that the evidences for the exclusion criteria must not be provided at this stage of the procedure; a declaration by the Tenderer signed/stamped by the Legal Representatives is sufficient. Please confirm. Answer : See section 6.1 of the tendering specifications. Requested evidence will only have to be provided by the awarded contractors within 5 working days of the sending of the specific request by the European Commission.

Question 67: With reference to the Questionnaire “Tender Form”, ANNEX 3, 3.1 Administrative Part-Questionnaire “Tender Form”, page 4, we understand that the Freelancers (individuals) should not be identified (i.e. Surname/First Name) in this Form and not included in the requested “List of Subcontractors”. Please confirm. See answer to question 5. Question 68:

4.5.3 Project References Three different clients are requested for SAP related T&Ms project references and three different clients for non-SAP. Could you please specify, if this implies that six different clients are requested for T&Ms project references OR three clients are requested per category? In the later case, the same client should be presented in SAP and non-SAP projects. The same applies also for the FPs project references. Answer: The same client can be used in different categories Question 69: Guidebook for tenderers p.7 4.2.5 Freelancing. …Freelancing …does qualify as subcontracting If we combine this statement with the §4.2.2 and §4.2.3 of the same document, it would mean that each freelancer should submit a complete exclusion and selection file (annex 3.1 of the call for tender) as well as the documents requested in the §4.2.2 of the guidebook. This seems quite unusual and not very practical. Can you confirm our understanding ? See answer to question 5. Question 70: Can we provide freelance resources trough a subcontractor or an affiliated company? Answer : Yes Question 71: Length of answers (guidebook P 8 §5.3.4.3 replies should not exceed two pages per question) Is this rule systematically applicable to all questions of Administrative and Technical questionnaires ? This might be very short to provide you correct answers to some more descriptive questions. Please confirm See answers to question 12 and 56 Question 72: Selection of tenderers: Tendering specifications 6.2.2. Technical and professional capacity …. Please note that the same tenderer, can use the same staff only for one profile. Tenderers are requested to provide a number of examples of standardized CVs for staff for each profile. A given CV may only be used for one profile.

annex 3.2 questionaire technical part page15 4.4.3.1 Number of CVs Taking into account the profile needs of the Commission, enclose CVs such that the

different indicated expertise areas / subareas are covered by at least the indicated number of CVs. If an expert has expertise in several areas or subareas, the same CV can be counted in each of those. The 2 documents seem in contradiction. Please explain the correct understanding. Can a same single CV be used several times to reach the threshold requested at § 4.4.3.1 of the technical questionnaire?

See answer to question 43 Question 73: Service Requirements – Senior Analyst - Specific knowledge and skills p.58 “In addition to this, the following is required for the SAP profiles: • at least 5 years (if holding a university degree) or 10 years (if not holding a university degree) in 2 of the SAP functional areas or subareas mentioned in the description. • At least 5 years experience with projects based on SAP software” Our understanding of these requirements is that the proposed Senior Analyst SAP Profiles must prove at least 5 Y experience in SAP projects and 5 Y (if university degree) experience in 2 of any of the SAP modules mentioned in the SAP profiles list page 16 of the technical questionnaire

Example: the 3 SAP:PM Senior Analyst CVs requested as threshold in the questionnaire must prove some SAP:PM experience AND at least 5 Y experience in SAP projects AND 5 Y (if university degree) experience in 2 of any of the following SAP modules: SAP: PSM-FM SAP: PSM-GM SAP: FI-AA-CO SAP: SEM, EC-CS SAP: FSCM, CFM SAP: MM SAP: PM SAP: QM SAP: SD SAP: CATS SAP: SRM SAP: CRM SAP: MDM SAP: BI) Can you confirm that our understanding is correct? If not, please provide extra information on the correct meaning

Answer: The list of functional areas and subareas is given in paragraph 9.3 of the Service Requirements document. The Senior Analyst must have at least 5 years experience covering 2 of the areas/subareas. For example, a SAP:PM Senior Analyst with a university degree should have 5 years of experience in PM and another area or subarea (for example MM).

Question 74: Project References -§4.5.3.1 p20 of technical questionnaire Each project reference should demonstrate one or more of the following tasks, skills and tools: - SAP ABAP in 4 references - Financial Accounting (SAP FI) in 2 references - Public Sector Industry Component, Funds Management (SAP PSM-FM) in 2 references - Plant maintenance, material management (SAP PM, MM) in 2 references - SAP MDM, CRM, SRM in 1 reference - etc…. Specially for the latest reference requested here above can we understand that a reference with any of the 3 mentioned module is sufficient ? Answer: Yes Question 75: Annex 5 Service Level Agreement p.2 Instruction for completion of the SLA … The size of the SLA shall not exceed 16 A4 pages, using a fontsize not smaller than 11 Considering the importance of this document which basically is the evaluation criteria (70%) of the whole offer, could you confirm the size limitation mentioned in the instruction § ? 16 pages to cover in a single document both the T&M and the QTM / Fixed Price services description is quite a challenge ! Answer : This size limitation is confirmed. Question 76: Questions related to T&C of the proposed framework contract

a) Article II.1.9 of the Framework Agreement provides :"Should the Contractor fail to perform his obligations under the Contract in accordance with the provisions laid down therein, the Commission may - without prejudice to its right to terminate the Contract - reduce or recover payments in proportion to the scale of the failure. In addition, the Commission may impose penalties or liquidated damages provided for in Article II.16." This clause means that the European Commission is entitled to unilaterally reduce amounts in proportion of the "scale of the failure" => because of the vagueness and the unilateral character of this clause, we believe this clause is not reasonable. The "standard" procedure in the event of contractual breaches of Supplier is that European Commission proves and claims its damages from Supplier, in accordance with the contractual agreed provisions (such as liability clause). Therefore we kindly request the European Commission to remove this clause from the Framework

Agreement. If this is not acceptable, we believe it is reasonable to ask to render this clause at least "not applicable" for time and means services.

Answer: The clause is a standard clause in use in all Commissions contracts. Indeed, the Commission reduces proportionally payments only when able to prove proportionate shortcoming in contract implementation (regardless how services are quantified).

b) Article II.2 of the Framework Agreement provides in an unlimited liability: as a

professional company, risk mitigation is one of our duties to be able and to continue to be able to serve our customers in the longer term. Therefore we believe it is appropriate, fair and reasonable to request a liability limitation for direct damages to be included in the Framework Contract and an exclusion of indirect damages. We suggest to include the following clause in Article II.2: "For any type of direct damages, Supplier's aggregate liability for any and all damages or losses under a Specific Contract/Order Form is limited to an amount equal to the total contract value of such Specific Contract/Order Form. Supplier is not liable for any type of indirect and/or consequential loss, including loss of profit, loss of data, damages to third parties etc." If the suggested clause is not acceptable, we would much appreciate any other clause that protects Suppliers' interests more than the current article II.2 of the Framework Contract.

The articles II.2.2 and II.2.3 are completed as follows : II.2.2 … Notwithstanding the above, the Contractor shall not be liable for consequential loss and/or

indirect damage and/or direct damage exceeding the sum as set out for his professional risk insurance provided that this sum is no less than three times the total price/total amount of the Specific Contract(s)/Order Form(s) the execution of which is relevant for the loss or damage. The Contractor shall remain liable without any limitation as to the amount if the damage or loss is caused by the gross negligence or wilful conduct of the Contractor or by its employees, and for death caused by negligence or wilful conduct of its employees.

II.2.3 Subject to the maximum amount provided in II.2.2, …

c) Article II.16 of the Framework Agreement provides in a system of liquidated damages. We have the following questions/suggestions in this respect: • It is not unusual to include a maximum cap of the penalty; from a risk

management perspective this is necessary. Are you willing to include a sentence that the amount of liquidated damages shall in any event not exceed 5% of the value of the relevant Specific Contract (or a higher cap than the 5%)?

Answer : this would require automatic termination of the contract, once the cap is reached and it is not the Commission's intention to introduce a mechanism of automatic termination • For fixed price and capped time and means engagements it is comprehensible for

us why and how this penalty can apply. However, we don't see the need and possibility to apply this for time and means services. In our view, the only possible application of this clause for time and means services is that it can apply in the event Supplier does not submit invoices 6 months after consignment note (article 1.5.1. of the General Terms and Conditions for Information Technology Contracts). Do you agree that that is the only event in which this clause II.16 can apply for time and means services? If your answer is negative, can you than

please provide examples how this penalty can apply for time and means services?

Answer: Other cases are possible although in practice there is little probability that this will occur. Article 7.2.1 of the General Terms and Conditions for Information Technologies Contracts states for Time-and-means Contracts : "…; this may involve an obligation for the Contractor to achieve a specific result." If e.g. exceptionally, due to critical circumstances, the time and means contract explicitly states that a particular result is expected by a certain date, and if it is clear that the delivery of the service did not take reasonable care to respect this date, then this can be considered as an event for applying the article.

d) Article 8 of General Terms and Conditions for Information Technology Contracts ("specific provisions regarding development and maintenance of commissioned software"): article 8.2 (acceptance), 8.3 (guarantee) and 8.5 (user manuals and documentation) are typically clauses that are not applicable for time and means services since it is not possible to calculate this in the pricing, which is basically a daily rate. Does the Commission agree that these clauses are not applicable for time and means services? If not, how will this then apply for time and means services? How is it considered reasonably possible to calculate this in our pricing?

In general, maximum time periods and other requirements provided in referred articles apply to all type of specific contracts and can be waived only through relevant provision in specific contract or addendum to the contract. Article 8.2.1 states : "… shall, be developed in accordance with its specifications as agreed upon under the Specific Contract, and the maintenance Services shall be provided in accordance with the conditions specified in the Specific Contract. In case a time and means contract, exceptionally also includes specifications, quality criteria or other conditions e.g. concerning guarantee or documentation, then these clauses are relevant, otherwise they are of no use for time and means contracts.

e) Article I.5 of the Framework Contract provides between [ ] that payment requests

may not be made (by Supplier) if payments for previous orders or Specific Contracts have not been executed as a result of default or negligence on the part of Supplier. This is something we consider to be unbalanced and therefore unreasonable. We perfectly understand that to the extent certain defaults or negligences are attributable to Supplier, the related amounts are protested. However, we don't see any objective and fair reason why a particular default or negligence should also have an impact on other unrelated invoices that are issued later on and the services of which are not subject to a default or negligence attributable to Supplier. We therefore kindly request the Commission to remove the sentence between [ ].

Answer : The request is accepted to remove [Payment requests may not be made if payments for previous orders or specific contracts have not been executed as a result of default or negligence on the part of the Contractor.]

f) Article II.17.2 of the Framework Contract: this provides that the Commission can

engage an "outside body of its choice" to conduct audits for contractual compliance. To avoid any issue of objectivity and neutrality, we would like to ask the Commission to confirm that such outside body shall never be a competitor of the Contractor and

that the Contractor shall be reasonably entitled to require that outside body to sign a non-disclosure agreement?

Answer : Yes, we confirm that the outside body cannot be in the situation of the conflict of interest (as even potential competitor would be) and yes we confirm that referred outside body shall be obliged to respect confidentiality of information it got insight to and that the letter is to be verified by auditee.

g) Article 2.10 of the General Terms and Conditions for Information Technology

Contracts: this provides in a quite unilateral benchmarking provision. To make this clause more reasonable, fair and balanced, we kindly request the Commission to include that the Benchmarker shall never be a competitor of Contractor. Further we don't see the objective reason why this benchmarking clause should apply to time and means services. Does the Commission agree it does not apply for such services? If not, we would like to ask for including the following reasonable clause: "in the event Contractor does not agree with the outcome of the Benchmarking, the Parties shall first try to reach an agreement on the consequences within a 30 days period, and, should such agreement not be reached, Contractor shall be entitled to terminate the Framework Contract, without being obliged to any further compensation to the Commission."

Answer : In relation to your remark about competitors, article 2.10 already contains a clause stating "The Benchmarker shall be a qualified and objective third party selected by the Commission through an appropriate market procedure." To make the benchmarking reasonable, fair and balanced, it also contains a clause "In order to guarantee that a valid comparison is made, …". Benchmarking can also have value for time and means services. Termination of the contract is governed by article I.10 of the framework contract, allowing either party, without being required to pay compensation, to terminate the contract with a formal prior notice period of 6 months (this is the value which will be used, for the option left open in the model contract).

h) Article 6.3 of the Specific Contract Fixed Price, the Specific Contract Quoted Time and Means extra muros and the Specific Contract Quoted Time and Means intra muros: the reference to clause II.12 of the General Terms and Conditions is not correct. Can you please adjust the reference to the exact article this is supposed to refer to?

Answer : The reference is to be replaced by reference to II.15 of the General Conditions in the Framework Contract. Question 77:

In the RFP, 2 Cvs templates are proposed. Do you accept that we use the 2 templates in the same proposal, meaning that part of the CVs will be within the standardized CV Form and part of the other Cvs will be in the European Curriculum Vitae Form.

Answer : Yes this is accepted

Question 78: In the guidebook for tenderer, in item “5.3.4.3. Your answers must be concise and clearly drafted.”

It is mentioned that “we should answer in the space provided on the questionnaire form. However, if we need additional space, the reply should be made on a separate sheet and annexed to the questionnaire. Such replies (which should not exceed two pages per question) must be clearly referenced, and the reference noted on the questionnaire in the space provided for the reply.” Does it mean that we cannot attach an annex to the 2 pages foreseen for the reply referenced? ….. Is this statement also valid for the administrative part of the proposal ? Tender form ? Sub-contractor information ? questionnaires 1-2-3 ….The reference form ? the technical and professional capacity ?

See answers to question 12 and 56 Question 79: In section 3.2 of Annex 5 – ‘Service Level Agreement”, it is requested to “Describe how the proposed project management methodology (which was mentioned in 4.5.3 of the questionnaire...” Can you please clarify to which questionnaire should we refer to, since in section 4.5.3 of the “Capacity & Evaluation Questionnaire” there is not a reference to a particular project management methodology?

Answer : This was a mistake. Text to be replaced by "Describe how a project management methodology will be applied … ". Also add a reference to a document describing the project management methodology. This document can be more than 2 pages.

Question 80 : Upon detailed analysis of the RFP, we came across the following question related to the Software expertise form Page 32 contains the instructions for the Software expertise form Page 33 and beyond contain the template for the expertise form. The instructions refer to the columns (4a) to (4f) for the various profiles, but these are not present in the template itself. Should we add them? According to the template, the profiles are added as separate rows. Which one is correct? In both cases, we should only have one SEF document for all profiles. Correct? The instruction refers to column (5), but this does not appear in the template or in the instruction. Please clarify.

See answer to question 14. Ignore the reference to a column (5).

Question 81.

Tender Form, Subcontracting Should individuals working as freelancers for a Tenderer (non-permanent staff) be declared as Subcontractors? If yes, does each one of them need to provide a letter of intent? See answer to question 5

Question 82.

Section 4 Is there a page limit applicable to the Section 4 documentation? Answer : in relation to section 4, see answer to question 12.

Question 83.

Section 4, Organisation, Agreements and/or partnerships with any third party Please confirm that all agreements and/or partnerships that they are non-SAP but they are related to this call for tenders will be accepted by the contracting authority. Answer : There are parts in section 4 which are not restricted to SAP. Concerning the question on Agreements and/or partnerships with any third party however, this is question 4.3.2.2 specifically asked related to problems in SAP systems, and being part of 4.3.2 entitled "Core expertise in SAP technologies."

Question 84.

Section 4, Training Centre Under this sub-section, what is only required is the name of the person responsible for our training program together with an overview of our existing technical trainings. Could you please clarify what “reference” under box 4.3.4.1.1.a) corresponds to? Furthermore, could you confirm that we are allowed to provide the relevant training courses in an annex so that the Questionnaire remains readable and easy to follow? Answer : the description of the question asks for more than the name. Furthermore, if several persons are involved, this information may better be provided on a separate sheet, to be referenced in that case.

Question 85.

Section 4, Software Expertise Form (SEF) – Attachment 2 a) We understand that the SEF that Tenderers must fill corresponds solely to the Table of page 34 of the

Questionnaire-Technical Part and not the one of page 32. Could you confirm this? b) If not, please clarify how Tenderers should fill the cells named “expertise 1..expertise n” as well as what

the cells under columns (4a), (4b),…(4f) correspond to. (ref. Table of page 32) c) Page 12 states that expertise in a tool is defined as (at least) 12 months of working experience with the

tool whereas page 32 mentions that expertise corresponds to 2 years. Which of the two is valid?

Answer : For a and b, see answer to question 14. For c, see answer to question 23.

Question 86.

Section 4, Curricula Vitae (CVs) a) Are Tenderers required to provide anonymous CVs (with a Connection Table in a separate envelope)?

If yes, should this connection table also include the contact details of the individuals, as requested under sub-section 4.4.3?

Answer : Names can be indicate in CVs or in a separate connection table. Contact details need to be provided as well, within the CV or in a separate table. b) We would like you to confirm that no CV for the profile “High level expert in Information System

Architecture & Governance” is required (reference the table provided under sub-section 4.4.3.1).

See answer to question 27.

Question 87.

Section 4, Reference Track a) Tendering specifications, section 4.5.1.1 “The bidder must provide an ordered list of its biggest clients

(Sap and non Sap) in monetary terms, for the year of 2010”. To our understanding, the contracting authority requests from the bidders to provide a list of clients (at least 5 for SAP and 5 for non-SAP) ordered by the amount of revenue acquired only within year 2010. Please confirm that our understanding is correct.

See answer to question 37. b) Under sub-sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3, Tenderers are required to present only their projects completed in

2010.

Such requirement excludes a significant number of recent (completed after 2008) and/or on-going contracts, and thus, it refrains Tenderers from presenting their actual technical capacity in relation to the DG Budget tender. Such project could include: (i) projects that have been recently (last 1-3 years) completed successfully; (ii) projects that have been recently completed but are part of large framework contracts that are still on-going; (iii)projects that are still on-going. One example could have as follows: A Tenderer has a multi-annual framework contract with a European public agency for the provision of SAP and/or non-SAP IT services. The contract ends in 2013; however the Tenderer has already executed several specific contracts under its umbrella. Could you please confirm that such contracts shall be acceptable by DG Budget under these sub-sections?

See answer to question 7.

Question 88.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, Attachment 2, p.32] The model table given in this section seems to be missing a column (5) for off-site services. Can you confirm that tenderers should add this column to the table?

See answer to question 14. Ignore the reference to a column(5).

Question 89.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, Attachment 2, p.32] The second bullet refers to a split of available staff per profile (4a-4f), but it is unclear what profiles these codes refer to, in particular since the number of required profile types is higher than 6 (i.e. a=1, f=6). Could you please clarify this point?

See answer to question 14.

Question 90.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, Attachment 2, SEF Table p.34] From our understanding, tenderers must submit a minimum number of CVs (116) that is lower than the minimum number of experts that the tenderer must have (146), which is lower than the minimum total number of staff (working in the field of IT consultancy related to the call for tender) that the tenderer must declare to have (150). Can you confirm that formally a tenderer can submit 116 CVs in so far as the organisation(s) can prove to have at least 150?

Answer : The number of CVs to be submitted is not necessarily equal to the minimum of 150 staff as mentioned in the beginning of section 4.4

Question 91.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, Attachment 3, p.37] “Use of standardised CV form or of the European Curriculum Vitae format is mandatory”: do tenderers have to choose in which form ALL CV’s are submitted or can some be submitted using one and the rest using the other?

See answer to question 77.

Question 92.

[Ref: Annex 2, Service Requirements, 10.2.5 High level expert in Information System Architecture & Governance, p.59] The profile of a “High level expert in Information System Architecture & Governance” is indicated in Section 10.2 “Description of different profiles”, but it does not appear in the tables summarising the staff requirements and CVs to be submitted (in the SEF and other similar tables) and there is no indication of how many CVs for that profile should be submitted. Can you advise on how to proceed?

See answer to question 27 and 64.

Question 93.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical part, 4.3.1.1, p.4] The mentioned point of the questionnaire asks whether the tenderer has described its “organisational structure… and allocated number of staff”. The answer box foresees a YES/NO answer and the label “Reference:” below it. Should the full answer/description be included within the box following the said label, or should the box only include the page or section where the relevant document or description has been placed within the offer? In other words, should the entire offer be contained within the given template, or is the template more of a checklist to be incorporated within the offer document?

Answer : See section 5.3.4.3, page 9 of the Guidebook for tenderers, i.e. Annex 0 of the tendering specifications

Question 94.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 & 3.2, General question] How strictly must tenderers stick to the given application forms: can they be modified to fit a given graphical layout (e.g. of the tenderer, including cover page, say) or should it be used as it is without altering it in any way (including font type and size, etc.)? Can sections be added? Are tenderers free to structure each answer with sub-titles as they consider appropriate?

Answer : It is not allowed to alter the numbering or structure of the questionnaire. Answers themselves can be subdivided. Font type and size can be altered as long as the text remains easily readable on paper. When replies are given on separate sheets and referenced, they can be in a given graphical layout chosen by the tenderer.

Question 95.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 & 3.2, General question] In the case of a bid in English language, can you confirm that some of the submitted CVs can be in French (or do they need to be translated)?

Answer : CVs in French are accepted.

Question 96.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 Administrative part] Can you confirm that when asked to “provide [a certain supporting document] on request”, tenderers are not expected to submit those with the offer, but they will be specifically requested to provide the EC with those if selected?

Answer : This is confirmed.

Question 97.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 Administrative part, 3.4] Could you confirm that this point (and declaration) concerns parent or sister companies as well as any subcontractor or partner in a joint tender?

Answer : Yes. See also answer to question 20.

Question 98.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical part, 4.4.1 Staffing tables] From the guidelines on joint bids and subcontracting (Guidebook for Tenderers, Section 4, p.7) in relation to the evaluation of tenders, I understand that the figures for staffing tables within section 4.4.1 must be consolidated to include resources of other companies/entities in both cases of a joint tender or a sub-contractor. In case of a sub-contractor the repartition of resources between the tenderer and the sub-contractor must be clearly shown. Can you confirm or rectify this understanding?

Answer : See also answer to question 1. In 4.4.1, permanent staff are people with an indefinite term, full-time, employment contract with the bidder. In a joint offer, all partners are considered as belonging to the bidder. Subcontractors are not considered as bidder. Therefore, their staff (as well as partner staff without an indefinite term, full-time, employment contract as well as freelancers) have to be indicated as non-permanent. Furthermore questions 4.4.1.5 and 4.4.1.6 have to be answered in relation to subcontracting.

Question 99.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical part: 4.3.2.1 Permanent dedicated structure, 4.6.2 Infrastructure Description Form, Attachment 6 - Infrastructure Description Form] The text makes many references to outsourcing, hosting, communication networks, BPO - would it be the intention to outsource the hosting of the infrastructure, and would this encompass the SAP components as well as the non-SAP components (e.g. Java application portfolio and any related databases)? How would this be incorporated in the framework contract?

Answer : It is not the intention to outsource the hosting of the infrastructure for production, training and certain test environments. For development and part of the testing this might be envisaged, although no

plans or intentions for this exist yet. If done, this would be arranged with fixed price specific contracts. It could encompass SAP as well as non-SAP components.

Question 100.

[Ref: Annex 5 (SLA), 3.2 Application of project management methodology] This paragraph references a section 4.5.3 of the questionnaire with regards to project management methodology. However, there is no text on Project Management in that section. Moreover, PM profiles are not part of the PRICE TABLE. What is expected in the domain of Project Management for the framework agreement, and what information needs to be provided in the proposal document?

Answer : See answer to question 79.

Question 101.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical part, 4.4.2.2 Certifications, p.14] With reference to the explanatory text, following the certifications table on p.14, concerning the number of certified staff to have, can you confirm or clarify our understanding: within its staff the bidder must have at least 4 certified experts with at least 1 of the indicated certifications (as of 1/5/11) and overall the bidder’s proposed certified staff will cover at least 8 of the indicated certifications.

Answer : Your understanding is correct.

Question 102. Although in point 4. Collaborating with other companies (page 5) of the Guidebook, says that we can consider two ways of collaborating in an offer: either as join partners in the offer or through subcontracting" and in Annex 3, Part 3.1 Administrative Section 3: Selection of the strain-Economic and Financial capacity in point 3.4 (page 8) Tender form, are expected to use (the use) of the standing of another company. It is correct to assume that for the validity of the tender documents can we use the capabilities of a third company (auxiliary) even if that company will not form part of the group, either will be a subcontractor, and it is not a company of the same group?

Answer : You can only rely on capabilities of a third company if that company is declared as partner or subcontractor. Question 103. If yes, could you confirm that: • we can assume that capacity of the another entity (a company auxiliary) means the relevant references for the tender and their CVs resources. • to use their capacities it is enough to present a statement from the Company which provides his ability to support our offer?

Answer : see answers to question 102 and question 20, as well as various other questions about subcontracting. Question 104. With reference to the document Annex 3, Part 3.2 Technical - Questionnaire, p.. 25, par. 5.1.1 can you confirm that if it is sufficient to provide only the reference to the chapter "2. SERVICE: TIME & MEANS "the document drawn up under Annex Annex 5 - Service Level Agreement.

Answer : yes the reference is sufficient.

Question 105.

With reference to the document Annex 3, Part 3.2 Technical - Questionnaire, p.. 25, par. 5.2.1 can you confirm that if it is sufficient to provide the only reference to the chapter "3. SERVICE: QUOTED TIME & MEANS AND FIXED PRICE "the document drawn up in accordance with Annex Annex 5 - Service Level Agreement.

Answer : yes the reference is sufficient.

Question 106. With reference to the document Annex 3 paragraph. 4.3.4.1.1 (b), would you please clarify wish time period must be referred in the schedule of training courses.

Answer : training / education program 2010 till 1/06/2011

Question 107.

With reference to the document Annex 3, page 32, Attachment 2, the profiles are not shown in the table (4a) to (4f). Could you indicate where these profiles are explained.

Answer : see answer to question 14.

Question 108.

With reference to the document Annex 3, page 32, Attachment 2,could you please indicate in which position of the table must be added the contents referred to as "premises of the tenderer (5)".

Answer : see answer to question 14.

Question 109.

With reference to the document Annex 3, page 32, Attachment 2, is requested to identify the exact coding of the items "Expertise 1 ..... Expertise n "in the first column of the first table.

Answer : Expertise 1 … Expertise n stand for rows of the profiles and skills table on pages 34 and the top of page 35.

Question 110.

With reference to the documents: - Annex 3, Part 3.2 Technical - Questionnaire, p.. 12, par. 4.4.2.1, which defines "to have expertise in a product to have means-Worked with the specified product or software for at least one year (12 months)" - Annex 3, Part 3.2 Technical - Questionnaire, p.. 32, Attachment 2, which defines "'to have expertise' means-in the context of this form:" To Have Worked with the specified product for at least two years' " you could clarify which of the two time periods above It is the minimum period for having "expertise in a product or software."

Answer : see answer to question 23.

Question 111.

• is it necessary to send our request of clarifications even by fax? In the guidebook pag. 7 point 5.2 Clarifying the tendering specifications it is written that: “send your objections and /or questions by

fax and by e mail” but we do not find the fax number. If yes, would you please sending us the number?

Answer : it is not necessary to send requests for clarifications even by fax. Request received by email only, are treated as well. The fax number was specified in the contract notice published in the Official Journal (Official Journal 2011/S 109-179071).

Question 112.

• Could you please confirm that in case we intend to submit a joint offer in a consortium or similar entity, we must ONLY mention this fact in our offer. It seems that the power of attorney based on the annexed model, must be provided ONLY in case we should be awarded the contract.

Answer : The power of attorney only has to be provided before contract signature. See 4.1.3 of the guidebook for tenderers (Annex 0 to the tendering specifications).

Question 113.

• Referring to: Annex 3.2 - Par. 4.4.3.1(number of CVs); pag. 15 Annex 2 – Service Requirements ; Par. 10.2..5 (High Level Expert In Information System Architecture & Governance) Annex 3.2 – BUDG11/PO/01,Price Table; pag. 27 Could you confirm that isn’t required any CV for the “High Level Expert In Information System Architecture & Governance” profile ?

Answer : See answer to question 27.

---- we would be grateful if you could provide clarifications on the points below. All questions apart from the last one refer to Annex 3.2 Technical part.

Question 114.

Question 1 In section 4.2 Joint Bids, it is stated: "In case of a joint bid by a consortium, provide the information for each company of the consortium." then "In case of a joint bid by a consortium, and in the absence of any specific information to the contrary, any required information should be provided for the group of tenderers as a whole". Thus, the first statement requires each company in the consortium to provide the information, and the second statement requires the information to be provided by the consortium unless otherwise stated. Can you please clarify the apparent contradiction between these two statements?

Answer : See answer to question 1.

Question 115.

Question 2 The following sections - 4.4.2.1 Thresholds for experts, 4.4.3.1 Number of CVs, Attachment 2 Software Expertise Form, Attachment 4 Connection Table - make reference to Specific knowledge and skills (1), (2), etc. We can find no explicit reference to the meaning or definition of these 'Specific knowledge and skills'. The Price Table appears to use a similar categorisation (1a, 1b, etc) but there is no full correspondence with the categorisation used for 'Specific knowledge and skills'. Can you please provide definitions of the 'Specific knowledge and skills' categories?

Answer : Section 4.4 of the technical questionnaire states : "An Expert: in the context of this section 4.4, and in the absence of any specific differing information, is someone that has enough experience to match the profile descriptions, as specified in the Service Requirements. See specifically pages 54 bottom and 55 of the Service Requirements (Annex 2 to the tendering specifications).

Question 116.

Question 3 In section 4.5 Reference Track, it is stated "If the reference client is not contactable or does not reply to our enquiry, the corresponding client reference will be declared void." While we accept that the tenderer must provide valid and current client contact details, we cannot ensure that the client contact is contactable or responds to your enquiry, and we therefore consider it to be unacceptable that a reference could be declared void for reasons which are wholly outside of our control. Can you please reconsider this condition?

Answer : This rule is part of the procedure. The Commission reserves the right to use it.

Question 117.

Question 4 In section 4.5.3.1, it is stated: "Sub-divisions of a same organisation (e.g. departments) cannot

be considered as separate clients." A number of major DGs of the European Commission operate with a large degree of autonomy and frequently award large contracts for their own internal purposes, therefore treating the EC as a single client could severely restrict a tenderer's ability to accurately present the range of relevant services that he provides. Can you please clarify if different DGs can be considered as separate clients? Equally, could this current restriction be removed for other major EU institutions?

Answer : This rule is part of the procedure. The Commission reserves the right to use it.

Question 118.

Question 5 Section 4.5.3.1 requires that the tenderer provides references for 6 SAP consulting TM contracts and 6 non-SAP consulting TM contracts, in both cases for at least 3 different clients; also 4 SAP consulting FP projects and 4 non-SAP consulting FP projects, in both cases for at least 2 different clients; and moreover all of these contracts must have completed in 2010, and there is also a list of tasks, skills and tools which these references must include. We feel that few, if any tenderers, will be able to provide 20 such references with these very strict constraints all of which completed in the same year. Please could you consider relaxing these constraints?

Answer : See answer to question 8.

Question 119.

Question 6 In the preamble to Attachment 2 Software Expertise Form, there is an example presenting a table. However, the format of the table in this example does not correspond to the format of the SEF that the tenderer must complete. Moreover, the example makes reference to a column (5), which is not present in the example table. Please clarify. See answer to question 14. Ignore the reference to a column(5).

Question 120.

Question 7 At the end of Attachment 4 Connection Table, it is stated: "Erase supplied example (CV identity ‘1’), and fill and expand table as needed." However, the column for CV 1 is empty and contains no example. Please clarify. Answer : This is an error. Ignore the phrase.

Question 121.

In the question 4.5.1.1 it is requested to “supply at least 5 references for SAP and 5 for non SAP…….” But in the table to be completed there is no field to indicate if a reference is related to SAP or not. Can we make the assumption that a column needs to be add to the table of the questionnaire ?

Answer : Yes you can use an additional column to indicate whether it is a reference for SAP or for non-SAP.

Question 122.

In the question 4.5.3.1, it is requested to provide references:

• time and means contracts / fixed price projects … this information is not in the field of the table and not on the form (PRF) to be completed … we make the assumption that we could add a column in the table of the questionnaire and repeat this information in the reference form in the description of the project? Do you agree with this approach

• in the table, we need to complete the field “Use of SAP MM and PM Modules (Y/N)” where the “and”

following our understanding is meaning that the 2 modules need to be used in the project we are presenting as reference.

• in this table there is a field “Use of SAP MDM, SRM, CRM (Y/N)” we understand that only one of the SAP module needs to be used in the project presented as reference, same question related to the field “Use of SOA, WS, XML, BPM, BRMS, ESB (Y/N)” the comma is then to be assimilated to a “or”. Can you please confirm that this understanding is correct?

Answer: 1. Yes 2. Yes, that's correct 3. Yes, that's correct

Question 123.

For the development and test environment of DG Budget, could you provide us the following information ? - total number of servers and the configuration of each server - total number of instances and the size of each instance (# of saps) - configuration of the instance - which solaris OS - which modules - which middleware - dimensions of DB for each instance in Gigabytes - back-up policies on client side

Answer : Concerning the Sap systems, For the development, we have 3 environments (a pure development, one for unit testing for the developers, another for integration testing) and we have 3 Sap instances by environment (2 ERP instances and one PI instance). For the further tests, we have two environments (one for testing by key users, another for pre-production) We have got 3 Sap instances for each Test environment (2 ERP instances and one PI instance). The configuration of the instances is indicated below. Note that we have different servers for the Sap instances, one server may host different Sap instances. The question of the Saps is not relevant in this context but we have got 15 Sap instances. Configuration of the instance : Solaris 9 and 10 Sparc 64 bits; Oracle 10gR2; for the ERP instances, the modules have been indicated in the call for tender (e-g Fi, PSM-FM, CO, MM, PM, SD, and for the PI instance the necessary modules for running PI); we cannot answer at the question for the middleware as a middleware is not uniquely defined, note that we use PI, we use also other tools and interfaces for the communication between the different Sap instances. Dimension of the Database for each instance in GB : Development Environment 1 : 170 GB, 162 GB,: 50 GB according to the instance Environment 2 : 1150 GB, 240 GB, 60 GB according to the instance Environment 3 : 1350 GB, 293 GB, 100 GB according to the instance Test Environment 1 : 1365 GB, 304 GB, 83 GB according to the instance Environment 2 : 1348 GB, 302 GB, 89 GB according to the instance Back-up policies on client side : we back-up the different instances with the RMAN tool (full and incremental backups).

Question 124.

[Ref: Annex 0 Guidebook to tenderers, 4.2 Subcontracting] Can you confirm that sub-contractors, by being required to fill in Sections 1 & 2 of the Administrative Questionnaire, are required to provide supporting documents indicated in the Tendering Specifications 6.2 Selection of tenders necessary for the economic and financial capacity compliance?

Answer : see question 20.

Question 125.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 Administrative Part, 2 Exclusion of the tenderer, 2.7, 2.8 and Appendix A “Declaration by the tenderer”] Can you confirm that points 2.7 and 2.8 of the administrative questionnaire are fulfilled by signing Appendix A?

Answer : yes.

Question 126.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, 4.3.2.2: “do you have agreements and/or partnerships with any third party to ensure rapid and successful response to problems in SAP systems?”] Could you clarify why agreements/partnerships you are referring to: long standing agreements with technology providers (independent) from the present CFT, or agreements/partnerships specific for this CFT (e.g. a sub-contractor or partner)?

Answer : We assume you ask to clarify "which" agreements … We refer to long standing agreements however allowing to obtain rapid response to resolve technical problems in SAP systems.

Question 127.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, 4.5:Reference Track] Could you confirm that the references indicated in the table under 4.5.1.1 are the same as those for which a PRF has been filled in?

Answer : 4.5.1.1 and 4.5.2.1 concern the same clients. For 4.5.3.1 (Project reference forms), projects for other clients can be used.

Question 128.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, Section 5: technical criteria evaluation] Could you confirm that section 5 (i.e. SLA) must be provided once for the tender?

Answer : Yes. We expect one SLA for the tender as a whole, and not per partner or subcontractor …

Question 129.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 Administrative Part, 2 Exclusion of the tenderer, 2.1-2.6] Can you confirm that documents mentioned under points 2.1 to 2.6 do not need to be submitted with the tender, but which will be requested by the EC to the tenderer in a second phase of the selection procedure?

Answer : See question 66.

Question 130.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 & 3.2 Questionnaires] Can tenderers adapt the format of the questionnaires’ pages in order to match another layout (or to include additional information concerning the bid and tendering team), or should the questionnaire not be altered in any way apart from filling in missing information?

Answer : See question 94.

Question 131.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Questionnaire, 4.6 Development infrastructure environment, 4.6.2 / Attachment 6 Infrastructure Description Form] Is the IDF an official document that needs to be registered by some authority? Why does question 4.6.2 ask for an IDF number?

Answer : No. An official document registered by some authority is not required. Question 4.6.2 only is asking for a reference number allowing to find back easily the related document within the tender.

Question 132.

Q3.1 Annex 0 Guidebook for tenderers, §5.3.4.3 p. 8 AND Annex 3.2 Technical Questionnaire § 5 p.25 AND Annex 5 SLA In 5.1.1 and 5.2.1, we understand that the two-pages limitation per question apply to every single question of the SLA. Please confirm our understanding is correct. Answer : A two-page limitation per question will not be strictly applied for the SLA. What counts for the SLA is the total limitation of 16 pages as mentioned on the second page of the SLA template.

Question 133.

In the question 4.3.4.1.1 b) it is requested to give overview of the courses in the training/education program(s) by providing for each course the following information….

(For technical training only in relation with the field of the tender) - As we understand from the services requirements (item 9.1 and 9.2) and from the profiles

description the list of technologies that could be useful for the service delivery is quiet impressive, and not only related to SAP, modules , solutions . Do you want to see in our reply the most possible complete set of technologies and modules for which training are available? Or only a focus on SAP ?

- Can you please clarify what do you consider as technical training ? only training related to ICT technologies and tools or could it be training as examples for project management? software architecture? Methodologies? ….

Answer : the requested overview of training concerns also non-SAP subjects. The description of the contract as announced in the contract notice states: "Provision of on- and off-site information technology assistance for financial management systems mainly based on SAP ERP, Business

Objects, Oracle Database and Weblogic. The services cover the different types of activities related to an information project, especially architecture (SOA), analysis, development/maintenance, system administration and security. Training related to these different type of activities is also relevant.

Question 134.

Regarding the modifications to be made in the questionnaire 3.2 and its appendixes, do you intent to provide a new version of the questionnaire 3.2 or is it up to the tenderer to modify the file downloaded from the website ?

Answer: the tenderer is allowed to modify the file downloaded from the website in line with answers published to specific questions.

Question 135.

Can you confirm that a person who successfully completed a 4 year tertiary study of 240 ECs (European Credits) such as the Dutch Master HBO, is considered holding a ‘university degree’? Answer : A person who success fully completed a 4 year tertiary study of 240 ECs can be considered as a 'university degree' . The Dutch Master HBO can be considered as a university degree.

Question 136.

Could you please indicate roughly which percentage of the call concerns services for SAP and which percentage ae non- SAP Answer : 50 % for each

Question 137.

[Ref: Annex 2, Service Requirements, 10.2 Description of different profiles, 10.2.8 Certified Senior System Architect SOA] The certifications specified under profile 10.2.8 are the same SAP certifications that are required under the 10.2.9 Certified Senior SAP SOA specialist. Can you confirm this is a clerical error and indicate which certifications the (non-SAP) profile requires?

Answer : there is no error. There is a difference in 10.2.8 and 10.2.9 because e.g. the mandatory certification is not the same. Instead of the "complementary" certifications an expert is allowed to have in-depth experience with certain products like mentioned in the profile description (e.g. BI administration and installation)

Question 138.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.1 Administrative Part, 1.1 & 1.2] Can you confirm that in the case of a sister/parent company that is involved as a subcontractor field 1.1 must be left empty and both boxes under 1.2 must be ticked (as the company in question is both a parent company and involved as subcontractor).

Answer : In 1.1 you should indicate the name of the tenderer for whom the company will act as subcontractor. There is an error in the title of 1.2. It should be read as "In case of subcontracting or group; please specify company name of subcontractor or partner". In 1.2 you then indicate the company name of the subcontractor itself, or the company name of a company acting as partner in a group, mentioning then if it is acting in the role of main contact or as normal partner.

Question 139.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, 4.4.2.2 Certifications] The 8th and 9th certifications indicated in the table are the same certification. Can you confirm whether this is a duplicate or if DG Budget intended to indicate an additional certification? If it is the latter, could you please specify which certification it should be?

Answer : The 9th certification is indeed a repetition of the 8th. This was an error. No additional certification is required.

Question 140.

[Ref: Annex 3, 3.2 Technical Part, 4.3.2.1.1 c)] Can you please clarify the question “how do you provide access for your staff to the services of your core SAP expertise structure” as it seems very similar to question 4.3.3.2 c) “how does the bidder provide access for his staff to this knowledge base(s)?” Our understanding is the former refers to “people” issues and the latter to more “technical” issues. Could you clarify our understanding and differentiate between the two points?

Answer : Your understanding is correct. The first relates to the support by people and exchange of competence other than by tools.

Question 141.

A question with regards the Infrastructure Description Form: In the event of a consortium or group of tenderers, does the infrastructure description form needs to be provided for each member of the consortium or for the consortium as a whole?

Answer : the infrastructure description form can be provided as a whole for the consortium or can be provided for each member with a summarised view for the consortium.