Construction of Tootsi School Solar Power Plant

This tender for a solar power plant at Tootsi school presents a comprehensive set of documents and utilizes e-procurement, but is significantly undermined by critical data inconsistencies regarding project scope, evaluation criteria, and a non-standard CPV code.

The tender generally adheres to national procurement principles and utilizes the ESPD. Deadlines are reasonable. However, the assigned CPV code (11809) is not a standard 8-digit code, which is a significant non-compliance issue affecting searchability and proper classification.

While the overall project description is clear, there is a critical discrepancy in the project scope: the main description states a 30 kW solar plant, but the 'Liitumisleping' (Document 6) refers to a 15 kW plant. Additionally, the school name varies slightly. There is also a contradiction regarding evaluation criteria ('relative_weighting' vs. 'total cost of works is the sole criterion'). These inconsistencies significantly reduce clarity.

The tender provides all essential basic information and a comprehensive set of 10 documents, including technical specifications, draft contract, and project documentation. Requirements and evaluation criteria are defined. However, the inconsistency in project scope (15kW vs 30kW) also impacts the completeness of the project definition.

The tender promotes fairness through full document access, disclosed estimated value, and reasonable deadlines. Electronic submission and e-procurement are enabled. The evaluation criterion, if indeed solely based on the lowest total cost, is objective and transparent. Requirements appear generic and not tailored to a specific company.

The tender supports electronic submission and e-procurement, enhancing practicality. Contract duration is clearly specified, and financing information (estimated value) is available. The requirement for an on-site visit is practical for a construction project.

This category presents significant concerns due to multiple critical inconsistencies: the CPV code (11809) is non-standard; evaluation criteria are contradictory; and the project scope is inconsistent (30 kW vs. 15 kW solar plant, and slight school name variation). These issues can lead to confusion and potential disputes.

The core subject of the tender is the construction of a solar power plant, which is inherently a green procurement initiative, directly contributing to renewable energy. While the tender documents do not explicitly detail additional green, social, or innovation criteria beyond the project's nature, the project itself is a strong sustainability effort.