Construction of water supply, sewerage networks and a sewage pumping station in Mangaļsala, Riga

This tender demonstrates good clarity and adherence to basic procedural requirements, but is significantly hampered by a lack of transparency regarding the estimated value and restricted document access, which severely impacts fairness and completeness.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV codes clearly, and the submission deadline is reasonable. It also indicates WTO/GPA compliance. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and there is a flag for restricted document access, which are significant transparency and disclosure concerns under procurement regulations.

The tender description is clear, and AI-extracted requirements are well-structured, pointing to specific documents ('Nolikums', 'Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības') for detailed criteria. Performance conditions are also clearly referenced. The document summary indicates that evaluation criteria are outlined, addressing a potential concern from automated checks.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, description, deadlines, duration, and location are all provided. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a critical piece of information for potential bidders to assess the opportunity fully. The contract start date is also not explicitly stated.

While e-procurement is enabled, promoting equal access, the undisclosed estimated value and the 'restricted document access' flag are major concerns. These issues significantly hinder transparency and the ability of all potential bidders to fairly assess the tender and prepare competitive proposals, raising questions about the objectivity of the process.

Electronic submission is supported via the Latvian Electronic Procurement System, which is a positive aspect for practicality. The contract duration is specified. However, the lack of an explicit document URL (beyond being 'available' but 'restricted'), the unknown contract start date, and the absence of financing information (due to undisclosed value) reduce the overall practicality for bidders.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. There are no disputes or suspensions. However, there are inconsistencies between automated check results and the provided information (e.g., 'No e-submission' vs. 'E-Procurement', 'Missing evaluation criteria' vs. document summary, 'Restricted document access' vs. 'Documents available'). The undisclosed estimated value is also a missing key data point.

The tender does not indicate any focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not identified as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards. Therefore, its contribution to sustainability goals is minimal.