2024-06-19+00:0008:32:04+00:0016https://www.fmi.dkORG-0001Danish Ministry of Defence Acquisition and Logistics OrganisationLautrupbjerg 1-5Ballerup2750DK012DNKORG-16287180Camilla Brøchner Tirsgaard+45 91 17 97 0500503690@mil.dkhttps://naevneneshus.dk/start-din-klage/klagenaevnet-for-udbud/ORG-0002The Danish Complaints Board for Public ProcurementToldboden 2Viborg8800DK041DNKORG-37795526Klagenævnet for Udbud+45 72405600klfu@naevneneshus.dkhttps://www.kfst.dkORG-0003Danish Competition and Consumer AuthorityCarl Jacobsens Vej 35Valby2500DK011DNKORG-10294819Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen+45 41715000kfst@kfst.dkhttp://mercell.com/ORG-0004Mercell Holding ASAAskekroken 11Oslo0277NO081NOR980921565eSender+47 21018800+47 21018801publication@mercell.com00366724-2024119/20242024-06-20Z2.3eforms-sdk-1.10bbf36ce3-c400-41d3-9611-c6d2b9a808b3f12ed5e8-e6f9-485e-8c87-40007a74990c2024-06-19+00:0005:43:36+00:000132014L0024cn-standardENGcgadefenceORG-0001ted-esenORG-0004The Danish Public Procurement Act (Act no. 1564 of 15 December 2015, as amended.The Danish Public Procurement Act implements the Public Procurement Directive (2014/24/EU) in Danish law. corruptionHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for corruption, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? As defined in Article 3 of the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union, OJ C 195, 25.6.1997, p. 1, and in Article 2(1) of Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA of 22 July 2003 on combating corruption in the private sector (OJ L 192, 31.7.2003, p. 54). This exclusion ground also includes corruption as defined in the national law of the contracting authority (contracting entity) or the economic operator.crime-orgHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for participation in a criminal organisation, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? As defined in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42).finan-laundHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for money laundering or terrorist financing, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? As defined in Article 1 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L 309, 25.11.2005, p. 15).fraudHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for fraud, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? Within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests (OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 48).human-trafficHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for child labour and other forms of trafficking in human beings, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? As defined in Article 2 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1).misrepresentCan the economic operator confirm that: a) It has been guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying the information required for the verification of the absence of grounds for exclusion or the fulfilment of the selection criteria, b) It has withheld such information, c) It has not been able, without delay, to submit the supporting documents required by a contracting authority or contracting entity, and d) It has undertaken to unduly influence the decision making process of the contracting authority or contracting entity, to obtain confidential information that may confer upon it undue advantages in the procurement procedure or to negligently provide misleading information that may have a material influence on decisions concerning exclusion, selection or award?nati-groundOther exclusion grounds that may be foreseen in the national legislation of the contracting authority's or contracting entity's Member State. Has the economic operator breached its obligations relating to the purely national grounds of exclusion, which are specified in the relevant notice or in the procurement documents?partic-conflIs the economic operator aware of any conflict of interest, as indicated in national law, the relevant notice or the procurement documents due to its participation in the procurement procedure?prep-conflHas the economic operator or an undertaking related to it advised the contracting authority or contracting entity or otherwise been involved in the preparation of the procurement procedure?prof-misconductIs the economic operator guilty of grave professional misconduct? Where applicable, see definitions in national law, the relevant notice or the procurement documents.socsec-payHas the economic operator breached its obligations relating to the payment social security contributions, both in the country in which it is established and in Member State of the contracting authority or contracting entity if other than the country of establishment?tax-payHas the economic operator breached its obligations relating to the payment of taxes, both in the country in which it is established and in Member State of the contracting authority or contracting entity if other than the country of establishment?terr-offenceHas the economic operator itself or any person who is a member of its administrative, management or supervisory body or has powers of representation, decision or control therein been the subject of a conviction by final judgment for terrorist offences or offences linked to terrorist activities, by a conviction rendered at the most five years ago or in which an exclusion period set out directly in the conviction continues to be applicable? As defined in Articles 1 and 3 of Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3). This exclusion ground also includes inciting or aiding or abetting or attempting to commit an offence, as referred to in Article 4 of that Framework Decision.openfalse2023/022604Framework agreement regarding magnetrons to radar systems The Danish Defence Acquisition and Logistics Organization (DALO) wishes to enter into af framework agreement with one supplier regarding delivery of magnetrons used in the following radar systems operated by the Danish Defence: - SCANTER 2001/2001VTS - RX/TX240100 - Northrop Grumman BridgeMaster E - Consilium RTM25X-M/VTS - Kongsberg 30kW s band - Furuno FAR-2117 and FAR-2218 - JSF364C radar As part of surveillance of Danish waters, the Danish Defence is operating SCANTER2001/2001VTS, RX/TX240100, Northrop Grumman BridgeMaster E, and JSF364C radar systems, and on Danish shooting ranges the Danish Defence are operating Consilium RTM25X-M/VTS, Kongsberg 30kW s band radars, and Furuno FAR-2117/FAR-2218 radar systems. The magnetrons which are compatible with the radar systems and thus can be integrated in the radar systems are the following types of magnetrons: 1. Type MG5230T or equivalent 2. Type M5089T or equivalent 3. Type MG5239T or equivalent 4. Type MG5242T or equivalent 5. Type MG5231T or equivalent 6. Type T91003496-2, MG5424 or equivalent 7. Type M1475A, MG5459 or equivalent 8. Type MG5223, M1555 or equivalent 9. Type MAF 1425B, MG4010 or equivalent 10. Type FNE 1201 or equivalent 11. Type MAF 1611B, MG4004 or equivalent suppliesThe mandatory exclusion grounds set out in sections 134a, 135 and 136 of the Danish Public Procurement Act apply for this procurement. The exclusion ground in section 134a of the Danish Public Procurement Act is a specific national exclusion ground. The provision stipulates that the contracting entity shall exclude a candidate or tenderer from participation in a procurement procedure where the candidate or tenderer is established in a country that is included in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes and has not acceded to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement or other trade agreements committing Denmark to open the public procurement market to tenderers established in that country. However, for reasons of overriding public interest, the contracting entity may refrain from excluding a candidate or tenderer that is subject to the ground for exclusion. It is stressed, however, that the voluntary grounds for exclusion in section 137 of the Danish Public Procurement Act do not apply for this procurement, irrespective of whether the text in "Participation, Exclusion grounds" (which is system-generated) may suggest this. No particular legal form is required. If the agreement is awarded to a group of suppliers (e.g. a consortium), the participants shall undertake joint and several liability and appoint one supplier to represent the group. The agreement is not divided into lots since a division of the agreement will undermine the economies of scale obtainable by one agreement and entail disproportionate costs due to subsequent contract administration. As part of its offer, the tenderer must submit the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD). Please note that a tenderer may rely on the capacity of other entities (e.g. a parent or sister company or a subcontractor), irrespective of the legal nature of the relations between the tenderer and the entity or entities on which the tenderer relies. In this case, the tenderer must ensure that an ESPD from the entity or entities on which the tenderer relies is submitted along with the tenderer’s own ESPD. The ESPD of the entity or entities in question must include equivalent information. A tenderer may only submit one offer. The tenderer and, if relevant, the participants in the group of entities and/or entities on which the tenderer relies, must use the ESPD, see section 148 of the Danish Public Procurement Act, as preliminary evidence that the participants are not subject to any of the exclusion grounds set out in sections 134a, 135 and 136 of the Danish Public Procurement Act, and that the tenderer fulfils the suitability requirements. It is not necessary for the tenderer to sign the ESPD document. If the tenderer is a group of entities (consortiums), the participants not submitting the offer must sign their ESPD document. Any entities relied on must also sign the ESPD. It is pointed out that this procedure is subject to Article 5k of Regulation (EU) no. 833/2014, as amended. The provision contains a prohibition against award of contracts to Russian companies and Russian-controlled companies etc. (reference is made to Article 5k, section 1 for the exact delimitation of the operators that are subject to the prohibition). DALO reserves the right at any time during the tender process to require tenderers to prove that they are not subject to the prohibition, for example by requiring documentation regarding the tenderers’ and any subcontractors’ place of establishment and ownership. If a tenderer relies on the capacity of other entities, see "Participation, Selection criteria" , the candidate shall upon request provide statements of support or other documentation proving that the candidate has access to the necessary economic and financial standing, and that the entity referred to has a legal obligation to the candidate. If such documentation is not provided, DALO cannot take into account the economic and financial standing of such entity or entities. DALO has prepared a template (available in the electronic tender system) to be used to confirm the legal obligation. Regarding "Participation, Contract terms": As part of the submission of offer, the tenderer must submit a self-declaration on compliance with labour clauses, CSR obligations and international sanctions. In this connection, DALO reserves the right, at any time during the tender process, to let the tenderer rectify a missing or inadequately completed self-declaration. DALO has uploaded a template (available in the electronic tender system) which must be used as declaration. Where groups of entities (e.g. consortiums), including temporary joint ventures, participate jointly in the tender procedure, the self-declaration must be submitted separately for each of the participating entities. DALO reserves the right – but is not obliged – to use the remedies provided for in section 159(5) of the Danish Public Procurement Act if offers do not fulfil the requirements of the tender documents. It should be noted that irrespective of the wording of the requirements of the tender documents to the effect that information, declarations and documentation must be submitted, e.g. concerning a description of the deliverables put up for tender, DALO is not prevented from obtaining additional information, etc., pursuant to section 159(5), cf. section 159(6) of the Danish Public Procurement Act. Prior to decision on award of the agreement, DALO requires that the tenderer to whom DALO intends to award the agreement presents documentation for the information stated in the ESPD, see sections 151-155 of the Danish Public Procurement Act. DALO demands that the tenderer and each of the legal entities on whose economic and financial capacities the tenderer relies undertake joint and several liability for the performance of the agreement. The estimated value of the framework agreement is 10.000.000 DKK, and the maximum value of the agreement is 15.000.000 DKK. The reason for the difference between the stated values is the uncertainty regarding the final value of the agreement, see below. Hence, the estimated value constitutes DALO’s most qualified estimate of the value of the agreement at the present moment, while the maximum value constitutes the maximum value of purchases under the agreement in its duration. The uncertainty regarding the final value of the framework agreement is primarily caused by uncertainty regarding the operational needs of the Danish Defence through the duration of the agreement, including in particular uncertainty about specific deployments and mission areas, which is not possible to foresee for the entire span of the agreement. Thus, changes to the operational needs of the Danish Defence compared to the existing situation and needs may cause a significantly larger expenditure under the agreement than what is expected at the moment. 150000001000000031000000The delivery shall be at the Supplier's place of business (FCA INCOTERMS 2020).DK012DNKLOT-0000ef-standThe equity ratio (calculated by dividing the tenderer’s equity with the tenderer’s total assets (equity/total assets x 100) at the end of the last 2 financial years available.The tenderer must have had an positive equity ratio in each of the last 2 financial years available. The tenderer and other entities, if any, must state the 1) equity, 2) total assets and 3) equity ratio as key figures in the ESPD. The equity and total assets must be stated in DKK. If the tenderer is composed of a group of entities (e.g. consortium), including temporary joint ventures, the equity ratio will be calculated by dividing the sum of the equities of all participants with the sum of the total assets of all participants (the sum of equities/the sum of total assets x 100) in each of the last 2 financial years available. If the tenderer relies on the economic and financial standing of an entity or entities (e.g. a parent or sister company or a subcontractor), the equity ratio will be calculated by dividing the sum of the tenderer’s and the entity’s/entities’ equity with the sum of the tenderer’s and the entity’s/entities’ total assets (the sum of equities/the sum of total assets x 100) in each of the last 2 financial years available. Upon request from DALO, the tenderer must submit the following documentation: Annual reports or excerpts thereof or other documentation stating the tenderer’s equity and total assets at the end of the last 2 financial years available if publication of annual reports is required under the law of the country in which the tenderer is established. Where groups of entities (e.g. consortiums), including temporary joint ventures, participate jointly in the tender procedure, the documentation must be provided for each of the participating entities. If the tenderer relies on the economic and financial standing of another entity or other entities (e.g. a parent or sister company or a subcontractor), the documentation must also be provided for each such entity or entities. usedsui-actn-usedtp-abiln-usednot-allowedno-eu-fundsnot-allowedfalseENG2024/80 (All tender documents)non-restricted-documenthttps://www.ethics.dk/ethics/eo#/0947a6a4-2315-4090-8db2-72fe8bb5e5f6/publicMaterialPayment shall take place no later than 30 days after the supplier has forwarded a satisfactory invoice to DALO. The specific payment terms will be included in the tender documents. nonefalserequiredfalsenonot-allowedfalseperformanceThe agreement contains requirements regarding labour clause, CSR requirements, international sanctions as well as provisions regarding risk assessment and follow-up actions; reference is made to the tender documents for further information. In the procurement of the agreement, the risk profile is assessed to the following follow-up action (risk level): B.per-exa100priceLowest priceLowest priceORG-0001ORG-0001https://www.ethics.dk/ethics/eo#/0947a6a4-2315-4090-8db2-72fe8bb5e5f6/homepageORG-0001ORG-00016Pursuant to the Danish Consolidation (Act no. 593 of 2 June 2016, as amended) on the Complaints Board for Public Procurement, the following time-limits for filing a complaint apply: 1) 45 calendar days after the contracting entity has published a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union that the contracting entity has entered into an agreement. The deadline is calculated from the day after the day when the notice was published. 2) Thirty calendar days calculated from the day after the day when the contracting entity has notified the candidates concerned that an agreement based on a framework agreement with reopening of competition or a dynamic purchasing system has been entered into if the notification has included an explanation of the relevant grounds for the decision. 3) Six months after the contracting entity entered into a framework agreement calculated from the day after the day when the contracting entity notified the candidates and tenderers concerned, see section 2(2). The complainant must inform the contracting entity of the complaint in writing not later than simultaneously with the lodging of the complaint to The Complaints Board for Public Procurement stating whether the complaint has been lodged in the standstill period, see section 6(4) of the Act on The Complaints Board for Public Procurement. If the complaint has not been lodged in the standstill period, the complainant must also state whether it is requested that the appeal be granted suspensory effect, see section 12(1). The Complaints Board for Public Procurement’s own guidance note concerning complaints is available on the Complaints Boards website. ORG-0003ORG-0002ENGDANfalsetruefalserequiredtrue2024-09-05+00:0011:00:00+00:002024-08-22+00:0011:00:00+00:00The offers will be opened in the electronic procurement system. Tenderers do not have the opportunity to be present when the offers are opened. false1buyer-categoriesThe agreement is entered into by DALO. However, all divisions of the Danish Ministry of Defence, including all units of the Danish Defence subject to the command of the Chief of Defence, is entitled to use the agreement for procurement on the terms and conditions of the agreement.nonefa-wo-rc2023/022604Framework agreement regarding magnetrons to radar systems The Danish Defence Acquisition and Logistics Organization (DALO) wishes to enter into af framework agreement with one supplier regarding delivery of magnetrons used in the following radar systems operated by the Danish Defence: - SCANTER 2001/2001VTS - RX/TX240100 - Northrop Grumman BridgeMaster E - Consilium RTM25X-M/VTS - Kongsberg 30kW s band - Furuno FAR-2117 and FAR-2218 - JSF364C radar As part of surveillance of Danish waters, the Danish Defence is operating SCANTER2001/2001VTS, RX/TX240100, Northrop Grumman BridgeMaster E, and JSF364C radar systems, and on Danish shooting ranges the Danish Defence are operating Consilium RTM25X-M/VTS, Kongsberg 30kW s band radars, and Furuno FAR-2117/FAR-2218 radar systems. The magnetrons which are compatible with the radar systems and thus can be integrated in the radar systems are the following types of magnetrons: 1. Type MG5230T or equivalent 2. Type M5089T or equivalent 3. Type MG5239T or equivalent 4. Type MG5242T or equivalent 5. Type MG5231T or equivalent 6. Type T91003496-2, MG5424 or equivalent 7. Type M1475A, MG5459 or equivalent 8. Type MG5223, M1555 or equivalent 9. Type MAF 1425B, MG4010 or equivalent 10. Type FNE 1201 or equivalent 11. Type MAF 1611B, MG4004 or equivalent suppliesThe mandatory exclusion grounds set out in sections 134a, 135 and 136 of the Danish Public Procurement Act apply for this procurement. The exclusion ground in section 134a of the Danish Public Procurement Act is a specific national exclusion ground. The provision stipulates that the contracting entity shall exclude a candidate or tenderer from participation in a procurement procedure where the candidate or tenderer is established in a country that is included in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes and has not acceded to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement or other trade agreements committing Denmark to open the public procurement market to tenderers established in that country. However, for reasons of overriding public interest, the contracting entity may refrain from excluding a candidate or tenderer that is subject to the ground for exclusion. It is stressed, however, that the voluntary grounds for exclusion in section 137 of the Danish Public Procurement Act do not apply for this procurement, irrespective of whether the text in "Participation, Exclusion grounds" (which is system-generated) may suggest this. No particular legal form is required. If the agreement is awarded to a group of suppliers (e.g. a consortium), the participants shall undertake joint and several liability and appoint one supplier to represent the group. The agreement is not divided into lots since a division of the agreement will undermine the economies of scale obtainable by one agreement and entail disproportionate costs due to subsequent contract administration. As part of its offer, the tenderer must submit the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD). Please note that a tenderer may rely on the capacity of other entities (e.g. a parent or sister company or a subcontractor), irrespective of the legal nature of the relations between the tenderer and the entity or entities on which the tenderer relies. In this case, the tenderer must ensure that an ESPD from the entity or entities on which the tenderer relies is submitted along with the tenderer’s own ESPD. The ESPD of the entity or entities in question must include equivalent information. A tenderer may only submit one offer. The tenderer and, if relevant, the participants in the group of entities and/or entities on which the tenderer relies, must use the ESPD, see section 148 of the Danish Public Procurement Act, as preliminary evidence that the participants are not subject to any of the exclusion grounds set out in sections 134a, 135 and 136 of the Danish Public Procurement Act, and that the tenderer fulfils the suitability requirements. It is not necessary for the tenderer to sign the ESPD document. If the tenderer is a group of entities (consortiums), the participants not submitting the offer must sign their ESPD document. Any entities relied on must also sign the ESPD. It is pointed out that this procedure is subject to Article 5k of Regulation (EU) no. 833/2014, as amended. The provision contains a prohibition against award of contracts to Russian companies and Russian-controlled companies etc. (reference is made to Article 5k, section 1 for the exact delimitation of the operators that are subject to the prohibition). DALO reserves the right at any time during the tender process to require tenderers to prove that they are not subject to the prohibition, for example by requiring documentation regarding the tenderers’ and any subcontractors’ place of establishment and ownership. If a tenderer relies on the capacity of other entities, see "Participation, Selection criteria" , the candidate shall upon request provide statements of support or other documentation proving that the candidate has access to the necessary economic and financial standing, and that the entity referred to has a legal obligation to the candidate. If such documentation is not provided, DALO cannot take into account the economic and financial standing of such entity or entities. DALO has prepared a template (available in the electronic tender system) to be used to confirm the legal obligation. Regarding "Participation, Contract terms": As part of the submission of offer, the tenderer must submit a self-declaration on compliance with labour clauses, CSR obligations and international sanctions. In this connection, DALO reserves the right, at any time during the tender process, to let the tenderer rectify a missing or inadequately completed self-declaration. DALO has uploaded a template (available in the electronic tender system) which must be used as declaration. Where groups of entities (e.g. consortiums), including temporary joint ventures, participate jointly in the tender procedure, the self-declaration must be submitted separately for each of the participating entities. DALO reserves the right – but is not obliged – to use the remedies provided for in section 159(5) of the Danish Public Procurement Act if offers do not fulfil the requirements of the tender documents. It should be noted that irrespective of the wording of the requirements of the tender documents to the effect that information, declarations and documentation must be submitted, e.g. concerning a description of the deliverables put up for tender, DALO is not prevented from obtaining additional information, etc., pursuant to section 159(5), cf. section 159(6) of the Danish Public Procurement Act. Prior to decision on award of the agreement, DALO requires that the tenderer to whom DALO intends to award the agreement presents documentation for the information stated in the ESPD, see sections 151-155 of the Danish Public Procurement Act. DALO demands that the tenderer and each of the legal entities on whose economic and financial capacities the tenderer relies undertake joint and several liability for the performance of the agreement. The estimated value of the framework agreement is 10.000.000 DKK, and the maximum value of the agreement is 15.000.000 DKK. The reason for the difference between the stated values is the uncertainty regarding the final value of the agreement, see below. Hence, the estimated value constitutes DALO’s most qualified estimate of the value of the agreement at the present moment, while the maximum value constitutes the maximum value of purchases under the agreement in its duration. The uncertainty regarding the final value of the framework agreement is primarily caused by uncertainty regarding the operational needs of the Danish Defence through the duration of the agreement, including in particular uncertainty about specific deployments and mission areas, which is not possible to foresee for the entire span of the agreement. Thus, changes to the operational needs of the Danish Defence compared to the existing situation and needs may cause a significantly larger expenditure under the agreement than what is expected at the moment. true150000001000000031000000The delivery shall be at the Supplier's place of business (FCA INCOTERMS 2020).DK012DNK4