Lieferung von Metallprofilen und Stahlteilen

✓In the Plataforma de Contratación notice, solvency documentation is marked “no aplica” at the initial stage and will be requested from the best-ranked bidder before award, in accordance with LCSP articles 140 and 150.2.

✓On the scope of the contract (what, how much, where, when), the object is strictly the supply (contract type: suministro) of metallic profiles and steel pieces, not their installation or fabrication by MARE.

✓Based on historical data, annual needs amount to 30,500 EUR without VAT (El Mazo 10,500 EUR, Vuelta Ostrera 10,000 EUR, San Pantaleón 10,000 EUR).

✓The Presupuesto Base de Licitación (PBL) for the initial two-year term is 61,000 EUR net (73,810 EUR with 21% VAT).

✓The value structure includes possible prórrogas (extensions) of two additional one-year periods for another 61,000 EUR (PME 122,000 EUR), plus a 20% modification margin (12,200 EUR) to cover potential increases in quantities, giving a Valor Máximo del Contrato (VMC) of 134,000 EUR (the Acuerdo de inicio uses 134,200 EUR, see contradictions below).

✓The execution takes place in Cantabria (subentidad territorial ES130, Spain), at MARE’s installations, and the overall SDA validity is two years from the day after the publication of the initial notice (05/02/2024–05/02/2026), with up to two one-year extensions possible.

✓A subsequent document announces a specific prórroga of one year (05/02/2026–05/02/2027) with a value of 30,500 EUR net for the SDA.

✓The Plataforma notice shows a “Plazo de Ejecución” from 06/02/2024 to 06/02/2028 with an observation “DOS (2) AÑOS, CON POSIBILIDAD DE DOS PRÓRROGAS ANUALES”, which reflects the base term plus two one‑year extensions.

✓Concerning award criteria and weighting, the procedure is defined as a restricted SDA with multiple criteria (though all are quantitative and formula-based).

✓The general “Criterios de valoración” document sets: (1) an economic criterion “Oferta económica – Precio” measuring the percentage discount offered on the PBL of each specific tender; this criterion has a minimum score of 80 and a maximum of 100 points.

✓(2) “Otros criterios” (also quantitative), with minimum 0 and maximum 20 points.

✓The detailed formulas for both are to be defined in each individual Documento de Condiciones Técnicas Particulares for each SDA-based tender.

✓The number of bidders to be invited in each tender is limited with a minimum of five.

✓The Tribunal Administrativo Central de Recursos Contractuales is identified as the body for appeals, and there is no EU co‑financing.

❓On risks and special conditions, the texts mention several aspects but not detailed penalty tables.

✓Subcontracting is allowed for partial execution of the supply, provided the subcontractor meets the same solvency and professional habilitation requirements as the main bidder; however, “partidas esenciales o críticas” cannot be subcontracted and must be executed by the adjudicatario.

✓Such essential items will be specified, if relevant, in each Documento de Condiciones Técnicas Particulares.

✓It is mandatory for bidders to indicate in their offer the part of the contract they intend to subcontract, in line with Cantabria’s Decreto 75/2019 on social clauses.

✓Contract assignment (cesión del contrato) is permitted, but only with prior communication and authorisation by MARE, and only to third parties that meet all requirements of the technical specifications and administrative terms.

✓Environmental special conditions apply: the awarded company must promote the use of recyclable or recycled packaging materials.

✓The SDA is considered concluded either when the time limit expires or when the economic limit of the maximum authorised amount is reached.

✓Procedurally, missing or defective documentation can be corrected (subsanación) within three working days from notification, but only with documents existing before the end of the participation deadline; otherwise, the bidder will be excluded.

❓The texts do not explicitly describe penalties for non-performance or specific guarantees (fianzas), so these likely appear in the PCA, which is referenced but not fully reproduced here.

✓As for contradictions or corrections within the documents, there are some numerical and date inconsistencies.

✓For instance, the Acuerdo de inicio states a Valor Máximo del Contrato of 134,200 EUR without VAT, while the detailed “Criterio utilizado para la fijación del importe de licitación” and “Criterios de valoración” documents fix the VMC at 134,000 EUR.

⚠Since the latter includes a clear breakdown (PBL 61,000 + prórrogas 61,000 + modifications 12,200 = 134,200), the 134,000 EUR appears to be a rounded or slightly inconsistent figure; the Acuerdo de inicio, being a formal opening and containing the detailed decomposition, would usually prevail for the exact value, pending confirmation by the PCA.

❓Similarly, the SDA duration is consistently described as two years with two possible annual extensions, but one document (Plataforma data) technically lists a four-year execution period (06/02/2024–06/02/2028), while another (14‑placsp‑19) refers to an SDA period 05/02/2024–05/02/2026 with possibility of two annual prórrogas, and then explicitly records a prórroga from 05/02/2026 to 05/02/2027.

❓In practice, the consistent legal statement is: base term 2 years from publication plus up to two annual extensions, up to a maximum of 4 years or until the economic maximum is reached; the individual prórroga decision for 2026–2027 is a specific application of this framework.

✓Finally, the Plataforma notice flags the solvency fields as “no aplica” at the initial stage, whereas the Memoria justificativa sets strict solvency thresholds – this is not a contradiction but reflects the LCSP practice that actual proof is only required from the bidder ranked first in each award process.