# Procurement of HTLS Conductors

- **Source:** TED · `215188-2025`
- **Buyer:** Energinet Eltransmission A/S
- **Published:** 2025-04-03
- **Deadline:** —
- **Estimated value:** 1,500,000 EUR
- **CPV codes:** 31321100, 31321000
- **Place-of-performance NUTS:** DNK
- **Buyer-address NUTS:** —
- **Notice type:** can-standard / 30

## Procedure details

Source lists may span several lots; list positions do not establish relationships.

### Procedure Types

- neg-w-call

### Award Criterion Names

- Price
- Technical Requirements
- Delivery Time
- Sustainability
- Social Sustainability
- Contract Terms

### Award Criterion Descriptions

- Prices must be stated in the attached Price List and the defined price elements must be completed herein. Prices must be stated exclusive of VAT but inclusive of all other expenses associated with the purchase. Prices must be stated in EUR. When evaluating 'Price', the Contracting Authority will evaluate the total cost (for evaluation purpose), cf. the Price List.
- The evaluation will be based on the submitted documentation in terms of data sheets for offered conductors in relation to technical topics and the data typed in cells marked with blue in the Price List. Deviations must be stated in Clarification List doc. 24/09989-7 in the document folder in EU-Supply. The reservations in the clarification list should be explicit and with explanation as to why the deviation is made. The fulfillment of technical requirements and design of conductors will be evaluated based on the delivered datasheets of the different conductor types and the data typed in the Price List. In the evaluation of technical requirements, the Contracting Authority will emphasize the following: The extent to which the tenderer complies with the Contracting Authority specifications, including the scope and content of any deviations in the clarification list in relation thereto. In this context, the elements listed below are of particular importance: - Minimum current capacity for phase conductors and calculation of it - Maximum load on towers for phase conductors and calculation of it - Minimum breaking load - Required documentation - Maximum diameter for phase conductors - Lifetime expectancy in heavy salt polluted environments and the evidence for the postulated - Long term experience with the offered conductor type - Offered solution follows the standards in chapter 2 in Appendix 2 - Creep information - Description of test method including AC resistance test - Method to ensure HSE - Method to ensure Quality A minimum score of 4 must be achieved, cf. sub-section 3.7.1.
- The tenderer is to present a time-schedule which indicates procurement, manufacturing, and delivery time of the order. When evaluating ‘Delivery Time’, the Contracting Authority will evaluate whether the tenderer can by or before June 30, 2025. If the tenderer cannot deliver by or before June 30, 2025, the following reductions in the score will be made. If the submitted delivery time is between the reductions below, the Contracting Authority will use a linear scale. 14 days delay = 1 point reduction in score 28 days delay = 2 points reduction in score 42 days delay = 3 points reduction in score 56 days delay = 4 points reduction in score 70 days delay = 5 points reduction in score 84 days delay = 6 points reduction in score 98 days delay = 7 points reduction in score 112 days delay = 8 points reduction in score 126 days delay = 9 points in reduction in score 140 days delay = 10 points in reduction in score Delivery time of more than 140 days delay will result in the tender being excluded from the competition.
- The amount of materials must be stated in the ‘Carbon footprint tool’, doc. 24/09989-9. and must be stated in kilogram (KG) per meter. The type of transportation and number of kilometres estimated for the transportation must be specified in the ‘Carbon footprint tool’, doc. 24/09989-9. For further information on the Carbon footprint tool see ‘Rules regarding Carbon Footprint tool’. When evaluating ‘Sustainability’ the contracting authority will evaluate the cell marked ‘Sum of climate change impact’ in the sheet ‘Summary’ in the ‘Carbon footprint tool’. The Climate change impact is scored on a linear scale from 0 to 10. The tender with the lowest Sum of climate change impact will be given the highest score, 10. All other tenders are then scored on a linear scale, using the interpolation percentage of 100%, and as a result the tender with the lowest Sum of climate change impact will be given the score of 10 and a tender which is 100% higher will be given the score of 0. If 1 or more of the compliant tenders comprise a Sum of climate change impact which is higher than the initial percentages, the contracting authority will use the alternative scale with the same scores, but with greater span. As a result, the span will be set at the actual difference in percentage between the lowest calculated Sum of climate change impact among all compliant tenders and the highest calculated Sum of climate change impact among all compliant tenders. The contracting authority will not expand beyond 150% and as a result tenders which comprise a Sum of climate change impact which is equal or higher than this percentage will be scored 0. All scores from 0-10 may be used (including decimals).
- The two cases (doc. no. 24/09989-6) both focuses on supply chain transparency and communication of Code of Conduct to all stakeholders, associated with the tendered contract. The tenderer must use the template (doc. no. 24/09989-6) for the description of “Social Sustainability”. Case 1: The evaluation of case 1 will be based on the tenderer’s description of the supply chain management. Case 2: The evaluation of case 2 will be based on the tenderer’s description of ensuring Code of Conduct throughout the supply chain. Both descriptions should be thorough and detailed, describing the tenderers handling of the elements described in the cases. Evaluation of case 1 will focus on the tenderer’s description of the supply chain management, within the specified key materials. Of particular importance is: The degree of traceability for the raw material used in the production will be evaluated positively. Further, it will be evaluated positive to the extend the supply chain is visible from extraction to final product. Ensuring ethical sourcing and fundamental human rights thorough the supply chain from extraction to final product, will be evaluated positively. Evaluation of case 2 will focus on the tenderer’s description of management of Energinet’s Code of Conduct throughout the supply chain. It will be evaluated positive if: The description includes clear, comprehensive, and easily accessible Code of Conduct throughout the supply chain. Description on how relevant parts of the Code of Conduct is incorporated into contracts throughout the supply chain, and further, how these parts are identified as relevant. How anonymous and accessible reporting channels for sub-suppliers to report Code of Conduct violations are implemented. Further, if the description includes clear procedures for handling reports of violations. The description includes robust and risk-based audits with suppliers and sub-suppliers throughout the supply chain. An overall evaluation will be conducted.
- If the tenderer includes a list of proposed deviations to the attached contractual terms: • Contract Agreement for Purchase (doc. no. 24/09989-3) • Appendix 1: General Terms and Conditions for Purchase (doc. no. 24/09989-4) the tenderer should use the Clarification List (doc. no. 24/09989-7) The proposed deviations to the contractual terms should be stated in the spreadsheet marked “Legal clarification” and should be explicit and with explanation as to why they are made. The Contracting Authority explicitly note that Code of Conduct - Contract Clause and Self-assessment Questionnaire will not be part of the evaluation. The tendered assignment must be performed on the basis of the attached contract terms. The tenderer may, however, suggest explicit and well-explained deviations to the contractual terms which the Contracting Authority has identified as competitive criteria’s below: • Contract Agreement (doc. 24/09989-3): o Section 4, sub-section 4.2 b) (CAR Insurance) o Section 5, sub-clause 8.1 (Time of delivery) o Section 5, sub-clause 12.1 (Late-delivery or non-delivery) o Section 5, sub-clause 13.1 and 13.4 (Defects and remedies) o Section 5, sub-clause 14.2 (Limitation of liability) o Section 5, sub-clause 16.1 (Insurance) o Section 5, sub-clause 18.1 + 18.3 (Performance Guarantee) o Section 5, sub-clause 20.3 (Code of conduct and HSE requirements) o Section 5, sub-clause 24.3 (Termination) • Appendix 1: General Terms and Conditions for Purchase (doc. 24/09989-4): o Clause 2 (Requirements), except for sub-clause 2.3 o Clause 9 (Time of Delivery) o Clause 11 (Intellectual property rights) o Clause 12 (Late-delivery or non-delivery) o Clause 13 (Defects and remedies) o Clause 14 (Limitation of liability) o Clause 15 (Product liability) o Clause 16 (Insurance) o Clause 17 (Indemnification) o Clause 18 (Performance guarantee – except for what is stated as mandatory parts of the Tender Documents, cf. sub-section 2.7.1 above) o Sub-Clause 20.3 (HSE requirements) o Clause 24 (Termination) • Appendix 1A: Insurance Exhibit (doc no. 24/09989-15) These will be included in the evaluation of the sub-criterion "Contract terms" and it is noted that any deviations may lead to a reduction to the score depending on the content, clarity, and consequence. In this regard it is explicitly noted that deviations which intend to limit liability and shift the financial risk in favor of the tenderer will be of particular importance in the evaluation. No deviations, and thereby absolute fulfillment of the contract terms, will result in the maximum score of 10. An overall evaluation will be made of this sub-criterion. A minimum score of 4 must be achieved, cf. sub-section 3.7.1.

## Description

For the refurbishment of the northern AC 132 kV two-systems KYV-LUP overhead line, the Contracting Authority wants to purchase HTLS conductors with thermal-resistant aluminium wires of RW, TW, or ZW and either single or multi-stranded composite cores.

## Award result

- **Published notice total:** 1,361,997 EUR
- **Contract concluded:** 2025-03-27
- **Winner:** LAMIFIL NV (CVR BE0422050265) · value 1,361,997 EUR
Published values may cover multiple lots, options and frameworks; they are not supplier revenue. Unlinked notice summaries do not assign each value or expiry to each winner.

## Original notice

https://ted.europa.eu/da/notice/-/detail/215188-2025