Purchase of scientific laboratory robots for Narva College

This tender for scientific laboratory robots demonstrates strong legal compliance, clarity, and fairness, particularly through the use of the 'or equivalent' clause in technical specifications. While comprehensive, minor gaps exist in the main overview regarding explicit contract duration and location details, and sustainability aspects are not explicitly addressed.

The tender adheres to national and EU procurement regulations, utilizing the ESPD and explicitly allowing for 'or equivalent' solutions in technical specifications. The procedure type is clearly defined, CPV codes are appropriate, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. The submission period is reasonable, exceeding the minimum requirements.

The tender description is clear, and requirements are well-documented across various annexes and AI-extracted summaries. Evaluation criteria are explicitly stated as the lowest price (100%), contradicting the automated check's flag. Performance conditions are clearly linked to the provided draft contract, ensuring transparency.

Most essential information, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and deadlines, is provided. All 17 tender documents are attached and summarized. However, the NUTS code is missing, and explicit contract duration is not readily available in the main tender overview, though likely detailed in the draft contract.

The tender ensures fairness through full document access, transparent disclosure of the estimated value, and objective evaluation criteria (lowest price). The inclusion of the 'or equivalent' clause for technical specifications is crucial in preventing requirements from being tailored to a specific company, promoting broader competition. E-procurement is fully supported.

Electronic submission and e-procurement are fully supported, enhancing accessibility. While the e-procurement portal URL is provided for opening, an explicit document URL is not listed in the basic information. The contract start date and specific financing source (e.g., EU funding) are not explicitly detailed in the main overview.

Key fields are largely populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. A minor inconsistency exists with 'Value Classified: Yes' despite the estimated value being openly disclosed, but this does not hinder clarity.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement principles, social aspects, or an innovation focus beyond the inherent nature of purchasing advanced robotics. It is also not indicated as EU-funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.