Supply of film dosimetry system and phantom

This tender for a film dosimetry system and phantom demonstrates good structural organization with detailed requirements and forms, benefiting from EU funding and e-procurement. However, the undisclosed estimated value and potential issues with document access significantly reduce its transparency and fairness.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements with a clear procedure, appropriate CPV code, and reasonable submission deadline. The 'EU Funded' characteristic suggests compliance with higher standards. However, the undisclosed estimated value and the 'Restricted document access' flag from the automated check are potential concerns regarding full transparency and compliance with disclosure requirements.

The description is clear, and the AI-extracted requirements are detailed, covering mandatory exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial, and submission aspects. The presence of specific forms and templates for technical and financial proposals, along with draft contracts, contributes to overall clarity. The mention of a 'scoring system for additional functionalities' and 'evaluation criteria' in document summaries suggests that evaluation methods are specified, despite an automated flag to the contrary.

The tender provides all essential basic information, including title, reference, organization, procedure type, deadlines, duration, and location (NUTS code). A comprehensive set of 11 documents, including regulations, forms, technical specifications, and draft contracts, is indicated. The primary deficiency is the 'Estimated Value: Not disclosed', which is a significant omission for a complete tender.

E-procurement and a reasonable submission deadline contribute positively to fairness. However, the undisclosed estimated value significantly hampers transparency, making it difficult for bidders to assess the opportunity fairly. The 'Restricted document access' flag, if it translates to actual barriers for bidders, would severely compromise equal access. The requirement for 'manufacturer authorization' could also be a minor barrier to competition, though common for specialized equipment.

The tender supports electronic submission ('E-Procurement') and is EU Funded, which are practical advantages. The contract duration is clearly specified. However, the lack of a specific contract start date is a minor drawback. The 'Restricted document access' flag, if it indicates practical difficulties in obtaining full tender documents, represents a significant practical hurdle for potential bidders.

The tender exhibits strong data consistency, with key fields largely populated, logical dates for reveal, submission, and opening, and no reported disputes or suspensions. The only minor inconsistency is the missing estimated value, which is more of a completeness issue.

The tender explicitly lacks specific green procurement, social, or innovation criteria, as indicated by automated checks. While this is a weakness, its 'EU Funded' characteristic suggests adherence to broader EU principles, which often encourage higher standards, potentially including indirect sustainability considerations, even if not explicitly detailed in the tender documents.