Geodaten-Import-Pipeline (WFS/CSV ? PostgreSQL)

Regarding what the bidder must submit and minimum qualification requirements, the input shows that the THB “Formularsatz UVgO Verfahren BbgVergG” (7 Seiten) is mandatory: it comprises (such as) the Angebotsdeckblatt (with firm name, address, offer binding, cartel declaration, Berufsgenossenschaft membership, Haftpflichtversicherung information including coverage sum, KMU-Status, and any planned subcontracting), the “4.1 Eigenerklärung Ausschlussgründe” (criminal, tax, social security, insolvency, serious misconduct, MiLoG/Schwarzarbeit/LkSG compliance, including obligation to obtain equivalent declarations from underauftragnehmer), and the “5.3 Vereinbarung Mindestanforderungen BbgVergG” (commitment to pay at least the applicable Mindestentgelt/Mindestlohn, allow inspections, provide anonymised payroll evidence, and impose identical obligations down the subcontracting chain). In addition, CSX 43 requires (such as) “Angebotsdokument mit konkreter Produktbezeichnung und -beschreibung” and an Eigenerklärung/Nachweis von Referenzen (preferably in the higher-education sector) as proof of technical and professional capacity. A separate Russia-sanctions Eigenerklärung (VA‑TH Brandenburg, Stand 04/2022) must also be signed, confirming that the bidder and key subcontractors (>10 % Auftragswert) have no prohibited Russia nexus under EU Reg. 833/2014. Turnover figures are not requested explicitly; the only financial capability element is the existence of a liability insurance and general compliance declarations.

On the scope of the contract, the Leistungsbeschreibung for the Geodaten-Import-Pipeline defines in detail what, how much, where and when. The subject-matter is the development and delivery of a software-based pipeline that imports geodata from WFS and CSV sources into a PostgreSQL/PostGIS database, including (such as) a fully documented open-source code base (Repository, Git versioning), Docker images/Compose configuration with a PostgreSQL/PostGIS service, a configuration mechanism to add new WFS/CSV sources without code changes, automated import reports per run, documentation (installation, operation, development, data model) and a licence overview of all third-party components. The Leistungsverzeichnis lists one service item (“Leistung Geodaten-Import-Pipeline … Menge 1”) with details deferred to the Leistungsbeschreibung. Place of performance is implicitly TH Brandenburg (deployment into their environment; meetings and inspections at their premises). The delivery deadline for all “Liefergegenstände” is specified as 30.11.2026; Abnahme is tied to complete delivery, a successful end‑to‑end test covering at least one WFS and one CSV source, and correct automated report generation. The contractual ZVB-Bbg/VOL/B clauses then provide a general framework on how the service must be executed (e.g. adherence to DIN/VDE/RAL norms and safety rules current at the date of the Ausschreibung, own responsibility of the contractor, change management, handling of hindrances, shipping terms if physical goods were involved).

For award criteria and weighting, CSX 42 and the Leistungsbeschreibung section 10 state that the evaluation uses a “Preis‑Quotienten‑Methode”, with price weighted at 40 % and quality criteria at 60 %. Within the qualitative 60 %, two criteria are applied: (such as) “Technisches/fachliches Konzept (Architektur, Technologiewahl Python/Node‑RED)” weighted at 30 % of the qualitative score (18 % of the overall score), and “Qualität der Referenzen / Erfahrung im Bereich Geodatenverarbeitung” weighted at 70 % of the qualitative score (42 % of the overall score). Both qualitative criteria are “graduell” and must be answered in free-text as mandatory fields; there are no formal minimum thresholds defined other than the obligation to submit answers. Economic evaluation is therefore a weighted combination of price (net lump sum) and qualitative assessment of the concept and proven experience, with PR Nr. 30/53 applying to check price lawfulness.

In terms of risks and special conditions, the ZVB-Bbg/VOL/B provisions introduce multiple contractual risk allocations. There is an explicit regime for Vertragsstrafen: if agreed in this contract, they must be capped, generally at 5 % of the relevant part of the performance (in special individually agreed cases up to but not exceeding 8 %), and daily/weekly calculations follow § 339–345 BGB with each workday in an incomplete week counted as 1/6. Security (Sicherheitsleistung) may be required only from 50,000 € order value upwards (§ 18), and if agreed must follow BGB §§ 232–240; acceptable forms are (such as) cash deposit on a blocked account or a surety from a licensed EU/EWR/GATS financial institution, with strict formal requirements (German law, waiver of certain defences, no “Zahlung auf erstes Anfordern”). The contract also contains detailed clauses on Güteprüfung (technical quality inspection by the client, normally at the contractor’s works and also covering subcontracted partial performances), including obligations to notify production stages, pre-inspect outputs, promptly rework non-conforming items, and replace rejected delivered parts at the contractor’s cost (including removal/reinstallation). Subcontracting is permitted only with prior consent for essential parts; the contractor must (such as) treat subcontractors no worse than itself in terms of payment and security, involve SMEs appropriately, and pass down all BbgVergG labour obligations and bidder declarations. The Angebotsdeckblatt fixes an offer-bindingsfrist (validity period) drawn from the Aufforderung zur Angebotsabgabe; failure to sign the combined 7‑page form set, or to provide required starred information (kartellerklärung, Berufsgenossenschaft, Haftpflicht, KMU) leads to automatic exclusion. Question deadlines and site visits are not described in the extracted text; they would typically appear in the separate Aufforderungsschreiben or Vergabeplattform notice, not in the included excerpts.

As to contradictions or corrections within the documents, the ZVB‑Bbg clarify a hierarchy for resolving inconsistencies: in case of conflict, the following order applies: (a) Leistungsbeschreibung, (b) Besondere Vertragsbedingungen, (c) Ergänzende Vertragsbedingungen, (d) Zusätzliche Vertragsbedingungen, (e) allgemeine Technische Vertragsbedingungen, (f) Allgemeine Vertragsbedingungen VOL/B. Thus, such as statements in the project-specific Leistungsbeschreibung for the Geodaten-Import-Pipeline override generic VOL/B where they differ. The 5.1 Ergänzende Vergabebedingung BbgVergG explains that Formular 5.3 is already integrated into the THB “Angebotsformulare-UVgO-Bietererklaerungen.rtf”; bidders must therefore use that combined set, not separate legacy forms, and its closing signature covers all its internal declarations. Social/labour clauses specify that BbgVergG Mindestentgelt rules are displaced temporarily when the federal MiLoG minimum wage (13.90 € ab 1.1.2026) is higher; in that period, only the MiLoG level applies and the BbgVergG-specific enforcement provisions “finden keine Anwendung” but will re-apply once the BbgVergG minimum surpasses MiLoG. Overall, where overlapping provisions exist (such as general price rules vs. project-specific Pauschalpreis, or general abnahme clauses vs. the specific end‑to‑end test requirement in section 11), the more specific statements in the current Vergabeunterlagen and Leistungsbeschreibung prevail according to the stated hierarchy.