Renovation works of the office building at Jaani tn 10, Haapsalu

This tender demonstrates good clarity and completeness with comprehensive documentation. However, concerns arise regarding the narrow CPV code, high financial qualification relative to contract value, and limited sustainability scope beyond green procurement.

The primary concern is the CPV code 'Uste paigaldamine' (9298), which appears too specific and narrow for general 'remonttööd' (renovation works) of an office building. This could lead to misclassification and limit competition. Other aspects like reasonable deadlines, defined procedure, and compliance with national legal requirements (e.g., site visit under RHS § 111 lg 6) are satisfactory. No disputes or suspensions are noted.

The tender description is clear, and the detailed technical specification (Lisa 1) provides comprehensive scope. Requirements are well-documented across multiple forms and documents, and the AI-extracted requirements are precise. Evaluation criteria (100% price) are unambiguous. Performance conditions are outlined in the contract draft and technical description.

All essential basic, financial, timeline, classification, and location details are provided. A comprehensive set of 11 documents, including qualification requirements, tender conditions, evaluation criteria, technical specifications, contract draft, and various submission forms, ensures thoroughness.

Document access, disclosed value, reasonable deadlines, and objective evaluation criteria contribute positively. However, the financial turnover requirement (170,000 EUR for an 86,910 EUR contract) is relatively high, potentially disadvantaging smaller enterprises. The mandatory site visit with strict pre-registration, while legally compliant, can pose a practical barrier. The narrow CPV code also impacts fairness by potentially misdirecting or excluding relevant bidders.

Electronic submission is supported, enhancing practicality. The contract duration is clearly specified. A minor drawback is that the contract start date is stated as 'presumptive' with no legal meaning, introducing some ambiguity. Document URLs are not explicitly provided in the summary but are assumed to be available via the e-procurement portal.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. The only minor inconsistency is the simultaneous indication of 'Estimated Value: 86,910.00 EUR' and 'Value Classified: Yes,' although the value itself is clearly disclosed.

The tender explicitly includes 'Green Procurement' characteristics, which is a positive step. However, it lacks explicit social criteria and an innovation focus, which are integral components of a comprehensive sustainability approach. It is also not EU funded.