Poland – Solar photovoltaic modules – Zielona energia – Budowa instalacji OZE w Gminie Bieruń

The subject of the contract is the supply and installation of complete photovoltaic micro-installations for 8 public utility buildings, the installation of energy storage for 9 buildings, the modernization of existing fire extinguisher installations, and the execution of necessary accompanying general construction works as well as an energy production monitoring system. 2. The scope of the contract and its description are in the SWZ and in the annexes to the SWZ, i.e.: the detailed description of the subject of the contract (OPZ), the draft contractual provisions. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Article 95(1) of the Public Procurement Law, the Contracting Authority informs that it sets requirements regarding the employment by the Contractor or Subcontractor, on the basis of an employment relationship, of persons performing tasks within the scope of the contract implementation, consisting in the performance of work in the manner specified in Article 22(1) of the Labour Code of 26 June 1974 (i.e. Journal of Laws of 2020, item 1320, as amended). Details regarding the above requirements, the method of verifying employment and the powers of the Contracting Authority in the scope of control are contained in the draft contractual provisions, which constitute an annex to the SWZ. 4. The contract is subject to financial support: The project is co-financed from funds from the European Union within the framework of the European Funds for Śląskie 2021-2027 (Just Transition Fund) for the Priority: FESL.10.00-European Funds for transformation for the Action: FESL.10.06-Development of decentralised energy based on renewable energy sources. 5. The Contracting Authority does not allow the possibility of submitting a variant offer. 6. The Contracting Authority does not allow the possibility of submitting partial offers within the subject contract. Despite the dispersion of the objects, the contract constitutes a functional and technically interrelated whole. The scope of the work includes the execution of photovoltaic installations according to uniform technical requirements, including the supply of devices and materials, the assembly of structures and photovoltaic modules, the execution of electrical installations, connection to the existing infrastructure, configuration of systems and the execution of necessary measurements and post-construction documentation. The lack of division of the contract into parts is also justified by the need to ensure a uniform standard of execution of all installations, compatibility of the devices used and unambiguous assignment of responsibility for the correct functioning of the entire scope of the contract to one contractor. Dividing the contract between several contractors could cause difficulties in coordinating work, determining responsibility for possible irregularities and in terms of warranty and service. Individual locations do not constitute separate functional subjects of the contract, but elements of one investment project, implemented according to common assumptions and requirements. Additionally, conducting one procedure allows for efficient coordination of implementation, cost reduction and ensuring uniform warranty and service conditions for all completed installations. In view of the above, it is considered that the lack of division of the contract into parts is justified by technical, organizational and economic reasons, and the implementation of the entire scope of the contract within one procedure will allow for maintaining the technical and organizational coherence of the project and the implementation by the Contractor of integrated monitoring of all installations covered by the subject contract. Furthermore, in the opinion of the Contracting Authority, the lack of division of the contract into parts does not limit the quantitative and qualitative possibilities of participation of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. The decision on the division of the contract into parts is within the competence of the Contracting Authority, in accordance with the Pzp and the provisions contained therein obliging the contracting authorities to divide the contract into parts. However, Article 91(1) of the Pzp should be interpreted together with Article 91(2) of the Pzp in order to examine whether the reasons for not dividing the contract do not violate the principles of procedure expressed in Article 16(1) of the Pzp. The lack of division of the subject contract into parts in no way limits the principle of fair competition. Article 91(1) of the Pzp indicates that the Contracting Authority may award the contract in parts – it does not therefore constitute a source of obligation for the Contracting Authority and on this basis it is not possible to formulate a complaint against the Contracting Authority, which does not make such a division. However, Article 91(2) of the Pzp creates an obligation to include in the procedure documents a justification in the event of not dividing the contract. This is an information obligation, the implementation of which can be verified. Therefore, the content of the justification presented by the Contracting Authority is important.