法国开发署贷款腾冲市大盈江流域生态保护和修复示范项目第三包河道综合治理和生态修复中标候选人公示

法国开发署贷款**市大**流域生态保护和修复示范项目第三包：河道综合治理和生态修复评标结果公示

项目名称：法国开发署贷款**市大**流域生态保护和修复示范项目第三包：河道综合治理和生态修复

招标编号：****

选择方法：技术标与财务标综合评估

业主名称：****

招标代理：****

一、评标情况：

1. 投标人名称：******公司

技术综合得分：0.34分

财务综合得分：0.27分

综合得分：0.61分

投标报价（不含税/欧元）：26,693,573.69

评标价（不含税和暂列金/欧元）：23,120,592.06

未中标理由：实质性响应招标文件要求，但综合得分排名第三。

注：根据招标文件第二章ITB 15.1（2）和（4）的规定，评标委员会经评审发现，该投标人汇总后的以人民币表示的“投标总价（不含增值税）”和“增值税总额”在折算成欧元时，未使用招标文件第二章ITB 32.1中规**期和来源的汇率。因此，评标委员会根据正确的汇率（1欧元=7.6332元）对该投标人的投标价格进行了调整，调整后的投标报价为26,526,765.09欧元。

2. 投标人名称：****

技术综合得分：0.70分

财务综合得分：0.27分

综合得分：0.97分

投标报价（不含税和暂列金/欧元）：26,608,194.40

评标价（不含税/欧元）：23,106,857.65

中标理由：实质性响应招标文件要求，且综合得分最高。

注：根据招标文件第二章ITB 15.1（2）和（4）的规定，评标委员会经评审发现，该投标人汇总后的以人民币表示的“投标总价（不含增值税）”和“增值税总额”在折算成欧元时，未使用招标文件第二章ITB 32.1中规**期和来源的汇率。因此，评标委员会根据正确的汇率（1欧元=7.6332元）对该投标人的投标价格进行了调整，调整后的投标报价为26,513,030.68欧元。

3. 投标人名称：长江水利水电工程建设****公司

技术综合得分：/

财务综合得分：/

综合得分：/

投标报价（不含税/欧元）：/

评标价（不含税和暂列金/欧元）：/

未中标理由：

该投标人递交的投标保函是由“******公司”出具，****公司，非招标文件规定的“****银行”。根据招标文件第二章ITB 19.3“投标保证金可以根据投标人的选择，采用如下形式：（1****银行出具的无条件保函，按第四章规定的****银行保函）开具，投标保函的受益人应为：****......”。评标委员会一致认为，该投标人的投标文件未能实质性满足招标文件第二章ITB 19.3的规定，未通过初步审查。并且根据招标文件第一章ITB29.4“如果投标没有实质性响应本招标文件的要求，它将被业主拒绝。...”。

同时，根据招标文件第三章“资格标准”“5.3 类似经验”中的要求，投标人在“过去5年中（自2019至投标文件递交截止时间），实施过2个建设相关的合同，其中ESHS实施办法令人满意并符合国际标准。”。****委员会评审发现，该投标人针对上述招标文件要求仅提供了1个相关合同业绩，不能满足招标文件规定的“2个”相关合同的数量要求，未能通过资格审查。

综上，该投标人未能实质性响应招标文件要求，其投标被拒绝。

4. 投标人名称：****集团****公司

技术综合得分：/

财务综合得分：/

综合得分：/

投标报价（不含税/欧元）：/

评标价（不含税和暂列金/欧元）：/

未中标理由：该投标人在中文版投标文件技术标书中提供的是“投标函财务标书”，未提供“投标函技术标书”，该“投标函财务标书”中体现了该投标人的投标总价。根据招标文件第二章ITB 11.1.2“技术标书应包含以下各项内容：a) 根据ITB 12编制的投标函-技术标书；......”和第二章ITB 21.2(e)“......3）技术标的纸质版和电子版均不得包含财务标或与投标报价有关的内容，否则可能导致投标被拒绝。”的规定，该投标人的投标被拒绝，未能通过初步审查，不进入后续资格审查。

5. 投标人名称：中国****公司

技术综合得分：0.62

财务综合得分：0.30

综合得分：0.92

投标报价（不含税/欧元）：24,120,528.00

评标价（不含税和暂列金/欧元）：20,714,355.06

未中标理由：实质性响应招标文件要求，但综合得分排名第二。

注：根据招标文件第二章ITB 15.1（2）和（4）的规定，评标委员会根据招标文件第二章ITB 32.1中规**期和来源的汇率（即1欧元=7.6332元）对该投标人的投标价格进行了调整，调整后的投标报价为24,120,528.09欧元。

二、中标人及合同授予情况：

三、提出异议的渠道和方式：

各投标人或其他利害关系人如对以上公示结果存有异议，请在本项目公示期结束前，即自本结果发出起三（3）个日历日内（至2025年4月24日午夜止），以书面形式（投标授权代表签字并加盖公章）将相关异议提交至业****公司（联系方式如下）。

客户：****

地址：**省腾****社区滨河小区17号

联系人：许茂兴

联系电话：0875-****462

电子邮箱：****@126.com

****公司：****

地址：**市**区东三环中路京城机电大厦18层1817

联系人：郭欣悦

电话：010-****5198-510

电子邮箱：guoxy@ck.****.com

****

二〇二五年四月二十一日

Publication of Bid Evaluation Results of Lot 3: Civil Works of Comprehensive River Treatment and Ecological Restoration of Ecological conservation and restoration of the Daying river and its watershed in Tengchong,Yunnan Province

Project Name: Ecological conservation and restoration of the Daying river and its watershed in Tengchong,Yunnan Province Lot 3: Civil Works of Comprehensive River Treatment and Ecological Restoration

IPC No.: ****

Selection method: Evaluation of Combined Technical and Financial Bids

Employer: Tengchong Water Authority

Procurement Agent: CITIC International Tendering Co., Ltd

I. Evaluation Situation:

1. Name of the Bidder: Zhejiang Wanli Construction Engineering Co., Ltd.

Technical Comprehensive Score: 0.34 points

Financial Comprehensive Score: 0.27 points

Comprehensive Score: 0.61 point

Bid Price (excluding taxes/ Euro): 26,693,573.69

Evaluated Bid Price (excluding taxes and provisional sum/ Euro): 23,120,592.06

Reasons for why not selected: The bid is substantially responsive but the comprehensive score ranked third.

Note: In accordance with ITB 15.1(2) and (4) in Section II of the bidding documents, the Bid Evaluation Committee identified that the bidder did not use the exchange rate of the date and source specified in ITB 32.1 in Section II of the bidding documents when converting the "total bid price (excluding VAT)" and "total VAT" expressed in RMB into Euro. Consequently, the bid evaluation committee adjusted the bid prices of the bidder using the correct exchange rate (1 EUR=7.6332 RMB) as stipulated in the bidding documents, the adjusted bid price is 26,526,765.09 euros.

2. Name of the Bidder: PowerChina Zhongnan Engineering Corporation Limited

Technical Comprehensive Score: 0.70 points

Financial Comprehensive Score: 0.27 points

Comprehensive Score: 0.97 point

Bid Price (excluding taxes/ Euro): 26,608,194.40

Evaluated Bid Price (excluding taxes and provisional sum/ Euro): 23,106,857.65

Reasons for why selected: The bid is substantially responsive and got the highest comprehensive score.

Note: In accordance with ITB 15.1(2) and (4) in Section II of the bidding documents, the Bid Evaluation Committee identified that the bidder did not use the exchange rate of the date and source specified in ITB 32.1 in Section II of the bidding documents when converting the "total bid price (excluding VAT)" and "total VAT" expressed in RMB into Euro. Consequently, the bid evaluation committee adjusted the bid prices of the bidder using the correct exchange rate (1 EUR=7.6332 RMB) as stipulated in the bidding documents,the adjusted bid price is 26,513,030.68 euros.

3. Name of the Bidder: Yangtze River Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering Construction(Wuhan)Co., Ltd

Technical Comprehensive Score: /

Financial Comprehensive Score: /

Comprehensive Score: /

Bid Price (excluding taxes/ Euro): /

Evaluated Bid Price (excluding taxes and provisional sum/ Euro): /

Reasons for why not selected: the Bid Security (Demand Guarantee) submitted by the bidder is issued by “Qinghai Guoxin Financing Guarantee Co., Ltd.”, which is a guarantee company, instead of a “bank within China” as stipulated in the bidding documents. According to Section II ITB 19.3 of the bidding document “The Bidder can choose either of the following manners to furnish the bid security:(1) unconditional bank guarantee issued by bank within China as per the Form of Bid Security (Bank Guarantee) in Section IV. The beneficiary of the bid security shall be Tengchong Water Authority;......”. Therefore, the Bid Evaluation Committee unanimously agreed that the bidder failed to substantially meet the requirements of ITB 19.3 in Section II of the bidding document and failed to pass the preliminary examination. And According to Section I ITB 29.4 of the bidding document “If a Bid is not substantially responsive to the requirements of the Bidding Documents, it shall be rejected by the Employer ......”.

In the meanwhile, according to the requirements in "5.3 Similar Experience" of "Qualification Criteria" in Section 3 of the bidding documents, “Experience of two (2) construction contracts over the last 5 years (from 1st January 2019 to the bid submission deadline), where major ESHS measures were carried out or are on progress satisfactorily and in compliance with international standards”. After evaluation by the Bid Evaluation Committee, it was found that the bidder’s bid only provided one (1) relevant contract performance in response to the above requirements of the bidding documents, which cannot meet the quantity requirement of "two (2)" relevant contracts stipulated in the bidding documents; thus, the bidder’s bid failed to pass the qualification examination.

In view of the above, this bidder fails to be substantially responsive to the requirements of the bidding documents; thus its bid is rejected.

4. Name of the Bidder: HUNAN WISH.N CONSTRUCTION GROUP CO.,LTD.

Technical Comprehensive Score: /

Financial Comprehensive Score: /

Comprehensive Score: /

Bid Price (excluding taxes/ Euro): /

Evaluated Bid Price (excluding taxes and provisional sum/ Euro): /

Reasons for why not selected: The bidder provided “Bid Submission FormFinancial Bid” in its Chinese version of the Technical Proposal, but does not provide “Bid Submission FormTechnical Bid”, which indicates the its total bid price. According to the provision in Section II ITB 11.1.2 of the bidding documents “The Technical Bid shall comprise the following: a) Bid Submission Form-Technical Bid prepared in accordance with ITB 12;......” and Section II ITB 21.2(e) “......3) Both the paper version and the electronic version of the technical bid must not contain the contents of the financial bid or the contents related to the bid price; otherwise the bid will be rejected”, the Bidder’s Bid is rejected, failed to pass the preliminary examination and did not enter the subsequent qualification examination.

5. Name of the Bidder: China International Water and Electric Corporation

Technical Comprehensive Score: 0.63 points

Financial Comprehensive Score: 0.30 points

Comprehensive Score: 0.93 points

Bid Price (excluding taxes/ Euro): 24,120,528.00

Evaluated Bid Price (excluding taxes and provisional sum/ Euro): 20,714,355.06

Reasons for why not selected: The bid is substantially responsive but the comprehensive score ranked second.

Note: In accordance with ITB 15.1(2) and (4) in Section II of the bidding documents, the Bid Evaluation Committee adjusted the bid prices of the bidder using the exchange rate specified in ITB 32.1 in Section II of the bidding documents (i.e. 1 EUR=7.6332 RMB), the adjusted bid price is 24,120,528.09 euros.

II. The Successful Bidder and Contract Award Information:

III. Channels and Methods for Raising Objections:

If any bidder or other interested party has any objections to the above publicity results, please submit the relevant objections in writing (signed by the authorized bid representative and stamped with the official seal) to the Employer and Procurement Agent (contact information is as follows) within three (3) calendar days (until midnight on April 24, 2025) from the issuance of this result before the end of the publicity period of this project.

Employer: Tengchong Water Authority

Address: 17 Binhe Community, Guanyintang, Xiyuan Street, Tengchong, Baoshan, Yunnan

Attention: Mr. Xu Maoxing

Telephone: 0875-****462

Email: ****@126.com

Procurement Agent: CITIC International Tendering Co., Ltd.

Address: Room No.1817, 18/F, Building 59, East Third Ring Middle Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing

Attention: Ms. Guo Xinyue

Telephone: 010-****5198-510

Email: guoxy@ck.****.com

CITIC International Tendering Co., Ltd.

April 21, 2025