Statsbygg constructs the new Life Sciences Building (LVB) for the University of Oslo and Oslo University Hospital on behalf of the Ministry of Education and Research and South-East Health as the co-contracting authority. The building shall be the workplace for approx. 1,600 employees and 1,600 students. Start up for the excavation and ground work was the second quarter of 2019 and the planned completion is at the end of 2026. Various professional environments shall work multi-disciplinary here to develop new solutions for major challenges within health and sustainability with access to the best and most modern equipment required to carry out world class research, teaching and innovation.Hovedtrekkene i prosedyrenTables, floors, high-speed, ultra- and vacuum centrifuges with different specifications for laboratory use. The procurement is divided into sub-contracts for the above mentioned groups. For this procurement, the exclusion provisions in PPR § 7-9 (4) are used: "The award criteria in accordance with the second and third paragraphs can be replaced with climate and environmental requirements in the requirement specification, if it is clear that this provides a better climate and environmental effect." In DFØ ́s "Guidelines for rules on climate and environmental considerations in public procurements", the climate and environmental impact of the category is referred to as main CPV 33 – Medical equipment, points 1 and 2. It is emphasised that the load mainly lies in the extraction of raw materials and production and production of individual components and products. The production involves pollution, possibly reduced nature diversity and consumption of scarce resources. The main measure for reducing the climate and environmental impact is to take measures that ensure the equipment a longer lifetime. Minimum requirements for the equipment ́s lifetime, warranty period, as well as repairability and access to spare parts are suitable for affecting the lifetime. We aim to procure equipment with a longer lifetime through the general requirement and assessment of the functional and professional quality of the equipment. This gives more secure and better environmental effect than the use of an award criteria for an environment that is weighted 30%. The use of the environmental award criteria does not guarantee that the tender that scores highest on the environmental criteria is anticipated. An award criteria for the environment also produces several unpredictable effects; the environmental information that tenderers provide and on which the contracting authority ́s evaluation shall be based, can be uncertain and difficult to test. There is also a risk that the environmental gains achieved will be in significant disparity with the additional cost paid when giving a tenderer a higher score on an environmental allocation criteria that is weighted 30%. Through the set requirements and the award criteria quality, climate and environment effects are ensured better than by using an award criteria for an environment that is weighted 30%.