Design of the water pipeline loop at Tööstuse 95 and Kopli st 96a
ClosedKey facts
- Estimated value
- €8,000
- Deadline
- Expired
- CPV Code
- 71322200-3 — Pipeline design services
Original Tender Description
Run Risk Analysis
Identify potential risks, inconsistencies, and red flags across all tender documents. Get a detailed risk report with severity levels and mitigation recommendations.
LoginWin Strategy
Get an AI-powered winning strategy tailored to this tender. Includes win probability score, key opportunities and challenges, recommended bid focus areas, competitive positioning insights, and actionable recommendations to maximize your chances.
LoginCompetitors
Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.
LoginRequirements & Qualifications
15 requirements across 4 categories
Requirements Preview
Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis
Documents
7 documents available with AI summaries
This document outlines the conditions for submitting a tender, including rules for marking business secrets, the requirement to confirm bid compliance, the structure for presenting costs, and principles for equivalence.
This is an offer cost form (Annex 3) requiring bidders to provide a detailed breakdown of costs for water pipeline loop design services, including other necessary works, design tasks, and permit applications, stating the total price excluding VAT.
Tender offers will be evaluated solely based on price, with the lowest-priced offer receiving the maximum number of points.
This document specifies exclusion grounds and requires bidders to confirm their absence, as well as to include at least a Level 7 diploma-level water supply and sewerage engineer specializing in external water supply and sewerage design, providing their qualification details.
No summary available for this document.
This document outlines the technical requirements for the design of the water pipeline ring main at Tööstuse 95 and Kopli tn 96a, including topo-geodetic surveys, construction geological studies, coordination, and building permit applications.
This document is a small procurement bid submission proposal, outlining general bid requirements, including evaluation based on the lowest cost, prohibition of conditional bids, and restrictions for companies from the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.
Documents Preview
Sign up to view document summaries and analysis
Tender Quality Score
This tender for water pipeline design services is generally well-structured for a small procurement, providing clear technical requirements and basic information. However, a critical inconsistency regarding the evaluation criteria and the unavailability of the full contract draft for analysis are notable drawbacks.
Score Breakdown
The tender demonstrates good legal compliance with reasonable deadlines, appropriate CPV codes, and the inclusion of 'or equivalent' clauses as per national regulations. Restrictions on companies from Russia and Belarus align with current legal frameworks. The only minor formal issue is the use of non-standard procedure type codes.
The project description and technical requirements are clear and well-defined. However, a significant clarity issue arises from the direct contradiction between the 'relative_weighting' stated in the basic information and the 'lowest price' evaluation specified in the tender documents. This ambiguity can confuse bidders regarding the actual evaluation method.
Most essential information, including title, organization, deadlines, estimated value, and location, is provided. Key requirements and forms are also included. A notable gap is the unavailability of the full contract draft (Document 4) for analysis, which is referenced for crucial details like financing and performance conditions.
The tender promotes fairness through electronic submission, e-procurement, and the inclusion of 'or equivalent' clauses for technical specifications. The estimated value is disclosed, and deadlines are reasonable. The primary concern for fairness is the inconsistency in evaluation criteria, which could undermine transparency.
Electronic submission and e-procurement enhance practicality. The contract duration and start date are clearly specified. However, the financing conditions refer to the unanalyzed contract draft, which could make it less practical for bidders to fully understand financial terms without access to the full document.
While most basic data fields are consistent, there is a critical inconsistency regarding the evaluation criteria. The tender states 'relative_weighting' in one section and 'evaluated solely based on price' in others, which is a direct and significant contradiction that needs immediate clarification.
The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement principles, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU-funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards. This represents a missed opportunity for promoting sustainable practices.
Strengths
Concerns
Recommendations
AI Scoring Preview
Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis
No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes
AI Copilot
Hello! I'm your AI assistant for this tender. I can help you understand requirements, deadlines, eligibility criteria, and provide strategic insights.
No credit card required