Rénovation du viaduc de Little Petherick - Camel Trail près de Padstow, Cornwall

This tender for the Little Petherick Viaduct Refurbishment is generally well-structured with clear requirements and a reasonable evaluation methodology. However, it lacks explicit detail on evaluation criteria and sustainability aspects.

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, including the use of a proper CPV code and an open competition procedure. Deadlines are provided, though the submission deadline's adequacy for a project of this scale could be debated. No disputes are indicated. The procedure is 'Below threshold - open competition', which implies adherence to specific regulatory frameworks for such procurements.

The description of the works is clear, outlining the scope of refurbishment, the contract type (NEC3 ECC Option A), and the collaborative approach expected. Key requirements for experience and capability are documented. The evaluation weighting (70% Price, 30% Quality) is specified, contributing to clarity.

Most basic information is present, including title, organization, estimated value, contract duration, and start date. The CPV code is provided. However, the 'Full Scope of Works' is mentioned as attached but no content is available in the provided text, and specific evaluation criteria beyond the price/quality split are missing.

The tender is open to all qualified contractors, and the estimated value is disclosed. The evaluation criteria are based on a clear price/quality split, which is objective. Access to documents is facilitated by expressing interest and clicking a button, suggesting a standard e-procurement process. No requirements appear to be tailored to specific companies.

The tender specifies an e-submission process via an online platform. The contract start date and duration are provided. Financing information is not explicitly detailed, and while the contract duration is 19 months, the financing source (e.g., EU funding) is not specified, impacting the sustainability score.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. There are no indications of suspension or disputes. The dates provided (submission deadline, contract start) appear logically sequenced, with the contract start date well after the submission deadline.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is not indicated as EU funded. This lack of specific sustainability considerations results in a moderate score.