Obras de mejora y acondicionamiento de caminos rurales públicos. (3 lotes)

❓Technical–professional solvency is by list of similar works executed in the last five years in the same group/subgroup, with maximum annual accumulated amount at least 70% of the estimated value of each lot (Lot 1: 759,942.28 EUR; Lot 2: 752,227.43 EUR; Lot 3: 225,749.75 EUR), certified by certificates of good execution.

✓For Lot 3 specifically, since its estimated value is under 500,000 EUR, new companies (less than 5 years old) may accredit technical solvency instead via a declaration of available machinery and material, with technical specifications and supporting documentation when required.

❓Insurance is not detailed in the provided text; if any requirement exists it is said only as “Ver pliegos”.

✓Such as for award criteria and weighting, only mathematically quantifiable criteria are applied (best quality–price), totalling 100 points: Price (up to 60 points), evaluated by “Fórmula A” based on percentage discount against the tender budget; the cheapest offer gets 60 points, and others are scored proportionally.

✓Abnormally low bids are defined by thresholds depending on the number of bidders (e.g. more than 25 percentage points below the budget when only one bidder; 7 points below the mean with 3 or more bidders; general rule: any discount >25 points is abnormal).

✓Further criteria, each up to 10 points, are: (i) extension of the guarantee period above the minimum 12 months in the PCAP, with an “umbral de saciedad” of 12 additional months (offers at or above this get the full 10 points and no extra obligation beyond that cap); (ii) measures in occupational safety and health beyond minimum legal standards, specifically financing additional diagnostic tests (ECG, spirometry, cancer‑related examinations) for workers; the bidder stating the highest economic amount (up to 0.60% of the lot’s base budget: Lot 1 max 6,513.79 EUR; Lot 2 6,447.66 EUR; Lot 3 1,935.00 EUR) gets 10 points, with others proportional; (iii) measures to promote employment, committing to use, in new hires/turnover/sustitutions, more than 5% of young people enrolled in FP Dual programmes, valued up to 10 points between >5% and 10%, using the proportional formula Pi = Po/PoM × P; and (iv) environmental measures for fire prevention, such as installation of two S‑900 warning signs at high‑risk points (5 points) and/or a 10,000‑litre water tank, permanently installed for forest‑fire response, altogether up to 10 points; these measures are valued by the commitment itself, not by cost.

❓Such as in relation to risks and special conditions, the contract is financed with EU FEADER funds (PEPAC 2023‑2027), which typically implies strict compliance and controls.

❓Special conditions of execution (art. 202 LCSP and Ley 12/2018) include: mandatory compliance with labour, social security, equality, health and safety, rural/juvenile employment, and environmental regulations; submission of a detailed list of workers assigned to the contract before start and notification of any changes; proof of social security registration and coverage under at least the sectoral collective agreement; and extension of these obligations to all subcontractors.

✓The contracting authority may request documentation to verify these obligations and can control strict compliance with payments to subcontractors and suppliers; in certain cases (art. 28.4 LCPSREx) direct payment to subcontractors is obligatory.

✓Data‑protection obligations, where applicable, are expressly declared “obligación esencial”; violation can trigger serious consequences.

✓Subcontracting and assignment of the contract are allowed (“procede la cesión: SÍ; procede la subcontratación: SÍ”), but subject to conditions and penalties for infringements.

❓The question deadline and site visit, if any, are not specified in the extracted text and are referred to generically as “Ver pliegos”; bidders must check the full PCAP/PPT.

✓Such as for penalties and contradictions, the regime of penalties is extensively detailed under LCPSREx art. 16: graduated sanctions (1%, 3%, 8%, etc. of the contract price) for various types of breaches—total/partial non‑performance, defective execution, breach of special conditions (especially labour/social/environment), sub‑contracting infringements, late submission of compliance reports, generic harmful conduct, and delay in completion (daily penalty of 0.60 EUR per 1,000 EUR of price, with the option of contract termination).

✓Total penalties cannot exceed 50% of the contract price; above 10% the contracting authority may resolve the contract or impose further penalties.

✓One notable contradiction appears in the classification of Lot 3: the general category table defines Category 2 as >150,000 EUR and ≤360,000 EUR, consistent with Lot 3’s estimated value 322,499.64 EUR, but the specific description of G4‑2 classification for Lot 3 is annotated as “valor estimado >360.000 € ≤ 840.000 €”, which matches Category 3, not Category 2. Given the official tender data (estimated value clearly 322,499.64 EUR and external notice specifying classification “G4‑2 Con firmes de mezclas bituminosas (superior a 150.000 euros e inferior o igual a 360.000 euros)”), the value‑range note “>360.000 ≤840.000” for Lot 3 in the Memoria appears to be an error; the applicable statement is the one aligned with the published value and the standard category definition, i.e.

⚠Lot 3 is Category 2 (150,000–360,000 EUR) with classification G4‑2.