Contract 61 - Pool Plant Maintenance

This tender for pool plant maintenance services is generally well-structured, with clear basic information and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and submission requirements, impacting its completeness and practicality.

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations for below-threshold open competitions. The CPV code is provided, and there are no immediate indications of disputes or regulatory non-compliance. The deadline, while potentially short, is within a typical range for this type of procedure.

The description of the required services (pool plant maintenance, routine and responsive) is clear. The scope of the works and the location are well-defined. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves potential bidders uncertain about how their submissions will be assessed.

Essential information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration is present. However, the lack of detailed requirements for exclusion, eligibility, technical capability, financial standing, and submission, along with no available document content, significantly reduces completeness.

The tender is an open competition, suggesting a fair process. The value is disclosed, and the procedure is below threshold, implying a focus on accessibility. There are no apparent tailored requirements for specific companies. The main concern is the lack of transparency regarding evaluation criteria.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration. However, the absence of information regarding e-submission, document URLs, and financing details limits its practicality for potential bidders. The deadline might also be perceived as short for preparing a comprehensive bid.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided are logical and consistent within the tender information.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation requirements. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a limited focus on sustainability criteria.