Reconstruction of Rõngu-Valguta 15 kV electricity network in Elva rural municipality, Tartu County (IP7028)

This tender for electricity network reconstruction is generally well-structured with clear requirements and transparent evaluation criteria, but its full quality assessment is hampered by unanalyzed critical project documents.

The tender defines the procedure type (LM - Simplified Procurement) and assigns an appropriate CPV code. Deadlines are reasonable, and no disputes are reported. The tender states it is EU-funded, implying adherence to broader EU/national regulations. Payment terms, including a factoring program with a 95-day option, are clearly disclosed, though potentially less favorable for some suppliers.

The project description is clear, and requirements are well-structured and understandable, categorized into exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial, and submission criteria. Evaluation criteria are explicitly defined as 100% lowest price. Performance conditions are linked to the contracting authority's management system documents.

Basic tender information, financial details, and timeline are provided. While a list of 12 documents is included, critical project-specific files (e.g., project plans, cost table) are in formats (ZIP, XLS) that were not processed for content analysis, limiting a full assessment of their internal completeness from the provided summary.

The tender promotes fairness through electronic submission and transparent evaluation criteria (100% lowest price). The estimated value is disclosed. While the technical capability requirement for prior experience (three similar contracts, one valued at least 80,000 EUR) is substantial for a simplified procedure, it does not appear to be tailored to a specific company.

Electronic submission is supported, and financing information is detailed. The contract start date is provided, but the tender text allows for flexibility, which could introduce minor planning uncertainties for bidders. The inability to analyze critical project documents (ZIP, XLS) also impacts the practical assessment of the project scope.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. However, there is a contradiction where the estimated value is disclosed, but the field 'Value Classified' is marked 'Yes'. This is a minor data entry inconsistency.

The tender is identified as EU-funded, which often implies higher standards. However, it lacks explicit criteria or focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided details.