Construction d'un bâtiment de garage rue Vilniaus 19, Švenčionys

This tender for garage construction in Švenčionys is generally well-structured with clear documentation, but lacks specific evaluation criteria and detailed financial information, impacting its overall completeness and practicality.

The tender adheres to open procedure (2014/24/ES) and uses a proper CPV code. While deadlines are present, the submission deadline might be considered short given the scope. No disputes or suspensions are noted. The primary concern is the absence of specified evaluation criteria, which is a significant legal requirement for transparency.

The description of the procurement object is clear. Several key documents like technical specifications, special conditions, and contract draft are provided. However, the lack of explicit eligibility, technical, financial, and submission requirements makes it difficult for potential bidders to fully understand all necessary qualifications and procedures.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, and contract duration are present. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission. While several documents are attached, the absence of detailed requirements in the AI-extracted section reduces the overall completeness of the information available to bidders.

The tender is conducted via e-procurement, promoting accessibility. All documents appear to be accessible, and the procedure is open. There are no indications of requirements tailored to specific companies. The main concern is the lack of disclosed estimated value and the absence of specified objective evaluation criteria, which could lead to perceived unfairness.

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which is positive. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and financing information is absent. The contract duration of 10 months seems reasonable for a construction project of this nature. The lack of detailed requirements in the AI-extracted section also impacts practicality for bidders.

Key fields like title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided (submission and opening) are logical. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The contract duration is specified. The main inconsistency is the lack of a 'reveal date' for the opening of bids.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is not indicated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of emphasis on sustainability criteria.