Repair of asphalt pavement on Valkas city streets in 2026

This tender for asphalt repair in Valka is generally well-structured with clear basic information and electronic submission, but significant concerns exist regarding restricted document access and the clarity/availability of evaluation criteria, impacting fairness and transparency.

The tender defines the procedure type as 'open' and the submission deadline provides a reasonable timeframe (22 days). Basic compliance elements are present. However, the 'Restricted document access' flag is a serious concern for transparency and adherence to public procurement principles, which are fundamental to legal compliance.

The project description is clear, and the AI-extracted requirements are well-structured and reference specific documents. However, the contradiction between the automated check flagging 'Missing evaluation criteria' and Document 3's summary stating it outlines 'evaluation criteria', combined with restricted document access, significantly reduces overall clarity for potential bidders.

Essential information such as title, organization, estimated value, and deadlines are provided. While 'execution time' is mentioned in document summaries, an explicit 'contract duration' field is not clearly stated. The accessibility and completeness of evaluation criteria are questionable due to the restricted document access.

The tender utilizes an open procedure, discloses the estimated value, and supports e-procurement, which are positive for fairness. However, the 'Restricted document access' and the ambiguity surrounding the availability and transparency of evaluation criteria are major impediments to fair competition and equal opportunity among bidders.

Electronic submission is clearly supported, which enhances practicality. However, the lack of an explicit contract start date, specific financing details beyond the estimated value, and the issue of restricted document access reduce the practical ease for bidders to prepare and submit a comprehensive proposal.

Key dates (reveal, submission, opening) are logical and consistent. Most essential fields are populated. However, there is a notable inconsistency between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the automated check's 'No e-submission' flag, as well as conflicting information regarding the presence of evaluation criteria.

The tender does not include any specific green, social, or innovation criteria, nor is it indicated as EU-funded. While common for smaller local works, this indicates no proactive focus on sustainability aspects within the procurement.