Conception du réseau d'eau potable dans le village de Klibiai, municipalité du district de Kretinga

This tender for engineering design services for drinking water networks is generally well-structured, with clear documentation and a reasonable process. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on financial aspects, impacting completeness and practicality.

The tender adheres to general EU procurement directives (2014/25/ES) and uses a standard open procedure. The CPV code is appropriate. While deadlines are present, the submission deadline might be considered short given the complexity of engineering design, though not explicitly flagged as unreasonable. No disputes are noted. The legal form of the organization is clear.

The title and description clearly indicate the subject of the tender. The presence of a technical specification document and contract draft contributes to clarity. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves a significant gap in understanding how proposals will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including the organization, reference number, and contract duration. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission. While numerous documents are attached, the lack of explicit eligibility, technical, and financial requirements within the main tender notice means these details must be sought within the attached documents, reducing overall completeness in the primary interface.

The tender is open to all eligible bidders, and the use of e-procurement is a positive indicator of fairness. The value is not disclosed, which can sometimes hinder fair competition by not providing a benchmark. There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies, suggesting a good level of fairness. Objective criteria for evaluation are missing, which is a concern.

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which is a positive aspect. However, the lack of explicit information regarding e-submission procedures and the contract start date reduces practicality. The financing information is not detailed, and the contract duration is specified. The absence of a clear reveal date for submissions is also a practical drawback.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and CPV code are populated. The dates provided (submission deadline, opening date) are logical. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. The contract duration is consistent with the nature of design services.

The tender is marked as 'EU Funded', which often implies adherence to certain standards. However, there are no specific mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided information, indicating a lack of explicit sustainability focus.