1. The Subject Of The Order Is The Implementation Of The Following Investment Tasks: Adaptation And Reconstruction Of The Building For The Needs Of The State Music School Of The 1St And 2Nd Degree In Zduńska Wola And The Task Entitled Expansion And Adaptation Of The Former Primary School Building For The New Seat Of The State Music School Of The 1St And 2Nd Degree In Zduńska Wola.2. A Detailed Description Of The Subject Of The Order Can Be Found In Annexes 8, 9, 10 To Swz.3. Employment Based On An Employment Relationship, In Accordance With Art. 95 Section 1 Of The Public Procurement Law.1) Pursuant To Art. 95 Section 1 Of The Public Procurement Law Requires That, Throughout The Entire Period Of Execution Of The Works, The Contractor Employs, On The Basis Of An Employment Relationship, Persons Performing Activities Related To The Execution Of The Contract, If The Performance Of These Activities Involves Performing Work In The Manner Specified In Art. 22 § 1 Of The Act Of June 26, 1974 - Labor Code (Consolidated Text: Journal Of Laws Of 2023, Item 1465, As Amended). The Requirements In This Respect Concern The Employment By The Contractor On The Basis Of An Employment Relationship, In Particular Of Manual Workers (Construction Workers), Performing Works Directly Related To The Performance Of Works Under Supervision, And Operators Of Mechanical Equipment With The Help Of Which The Subject Of The Order Will Be Implemented (This Requirement Does Not Apply To, Among Others, Construction Managers Or Suppliers Of Construction Materials And Situations When These Works Are Performed Personally By A Natural Person Running A Business On Their Own Under A Subcontracting Agreement). The Type Of Activities Necessary To Complete The Order By Persons Employed Under An Employment Contract By The Contractor Is The Performance Of Construction Works Specified In Detail In The Order Documents. 2) The Number Of Employees Necessary To Complete The Subject Of The Order Is Determined By The Contractor, Taking Into Account The Deadline And The Complexity Of The Design Documentation. At Every Stage Of Contract Implementation, The Contractor Is Entitled To Introduce Additional Employees Or Replace Those Already Registered.3) The Provisions On Employees Employed Under An Employment Contract To Perform The Subject Of The Order Apply Accordingly To Subcontractors Employees. 4) The Method Of Employment Control And Verification Is Regulated In The Draft Contract.4. If The Contractor Finds That The National Standards Or European Standards Or International Standards Used In The Swz And In The Annexes To The Swz May Indicate The Producers Of The Products Or Their Sources Of Origin, The Ordering Party Allows Equivalent Solutions In This Respect. This Means That The Technical Parameters Of The Products Indicated In This Way Determine The Minimum Expectations Required By The Ordering Party As To The Quality Of The Products To Be Used To Perform The Subject Of The Contract. Moreover, In Each Case, Stating That The Description Or Feature Of The Described Product, Which May Indicate The Source Of Origin Or Manufacturer, The Contractor Is Also Entitled To Use Equivalent Products, Which Means Those With Technical Parameters Not Worse Than Those Indicated In The Swz And/Or In The Annexes To The Swz. It Is Also Possible To Demonstrate This Equivalence With Standards Equivalent To Those Indicated In The Procurement Documents. The Burden Is On The Contractor To Indicate Equivalence. When Selecting Equivalent Materials, The Contractor Is Also Obliged To Ensure That The Indicators Specified In The Procurement Documents Are Achieved.5. The Ordering Party Does Not Plan To Submit Partial Offers. Justification For Not Dividing The Contract Into Parts: 1) Comprehensive Execution Of The Contract Results From The Nature Of The Contract. Dividing The Contract Into Parts Could Significantly Jeopardize The Timely And Qualitative Execution Of The Contract Due To The Inability To Coordinate The Cooperation Of Several Contractors Precisely And In Time. The Order Was Not Divided Into Parts For The Following Reasons: A) The Subject Of The Order Is The Performance Of Functionally Related Works. Separating The Works Would Pose A Risk Of Organizational Problems That Cannot Be Eliminated, Related To The Responsibility For Individual Elements Of The Works Performed By Different Contractors. B) The Subject Of The Contract Should Be Implemented In Stages And In The Order Of Stages. Moreover, In The Case Of This Type Of Works Performed By Different Contractors, A Delay By One Of The Contractors Would Negatively Affect The Timely Completion Of Other Elements Or Stages Of The Investment - Dependent On The Timely Performance Of The Works By Another Contractor. C) In The Case Of This Type Of Work Performed By Different Contractors, It Would Be Impossible To Clearly Define The Principles Of Third-Party Liability Insurance (E.G. In The Event Of Simultaneous Performance Of Works By Many Contractors, It Would Be Difficult To Determine The Entity Responsible For Damage Covered By The Third-Party Liability Insurance Policy). D) Contractors Would Duplicate The Costs Of Work, Which Would Affect Investment Costs. In Each Partial Offer, The Contractor Would Have To Provide A Separate Valuation For The Use Of The Same Type Of Equipment, In A Situation Where, When Submitting One Offer, The Contractor Would Price The Use Of The Equipment Once. The Design Documentation Indicates Solutions Requiring The Use Of Multi-Type Construction Equipment. E) Each Contractor Would Include Separate Insurance Costs In The Price, Which Would Increase The Level Of The Ordering Partys Expenses. To Sum Up, The Ordering Party Did Not Divide The Contract Into Parts Due To The Fact That Such A Division Would Pose A Risk Of Excessive Technical Difficulties And Excessive Costs Of Contract Execution. The Need To Coordinate The Activities Of Various Contractors Implementing Individual Parts Of The Contract Could Seriously Jeopardize The Proper Execution Of The Contract. F) Failure To Divide The Contract Into Parts Was Therefore Dictated By Technical, Organizational Reasons And The Nature Of The Subject Of The Contract.2) It Should Be Emphasized That Any Division Of The Contract Into Parts Would Not Increase Competitiveness In The Sector Small And Medium-Sized Enterprises Due To The Fact That The Scope Of The Contract Is Typical, Enabling The Submission Of An Offer From A Group Of Small Or Medium-Sized Enterprises. The Contracting Authority Did Not Specify Excessive Threshold Requirements Regarding Experience For Potential Contractors Interested In The Contract. The Conditions For Participation In The Procedure Have Been Adjusted In Such A Way That Small And Medium-Sized Contractors Can Submit Offers. Potential Contractors From The Small And Medium-Sized Enterprise Sector, If They Are Not Interested In Completing The Entire Order, May Submit A Joint Offer, E.G. By Creating Consortiums. In Such A Situation, A Declaration Should Be Submitted Specifying The Scope Of Services Provided By Each Of Them. 3) The Ordering Party Requires The Contractor To Provide A Warranty For The Subject Of The Order For A Period Of Not Less Than 36 Months And Not More Than 60 Months. Regardless Of The Warranty, The Contractor Is Liable Under The Warranty. The Warranty Period Is Set For A Period Equal To The Warranty Period.6. In The Event Of Discrepancies In The Required Subjective And Objective Conditions And The Required Subjective And Objective Evidence In The Opz And Swz, The Provisions Of The Swz Are Binding.
