Reconstruction of Tagametsa dam and construction of a fish pass

This tender for dam reconstruction and fish pass construction is generally well-structured and transparent, benefiting from EU funding and clear evaluation criteria. However, the absence of a specified contract duration and some minor ambiguities in procedure classification slightly detract from its overall quality.

The tender demonstrates good legal compliance, adhering to national acts and EU funding requirements, including specific sanction-related clauses. The CPV code is appropriate, and no disputes are noted. The procedure type codes being N/A is a minor point.

The project description, requirements, and evaluation criteria are clearly articulated. The mandatory site visit and performance conditions are well-defined.

While most essential information is present, a significant omission is the explicit contract duration, which is crucial for bidders' planning. Some attached documents were not AI-analyzable.

The tender exhibits high fairness with a disclosed value, objective lowest-price evaluation criteria, and support for e-procurement. Requirements appear generic and not tailored.

Electronic submission and a clear contract start date enhance practicality. However, the lack of a specified contract duration significantly hinders bidders' ability to plan and resource effectively.

Key data fields are largely consistent and logical, with no detected disputes or suspensions. Dates are sequential and make sense.

While the project itself (fish pass) has inherent environmental benefits and is EU-funded, the tender documents do not explicitly include specific green procurement criteria, social clauses (beyond the RF subcontractor rule), or an innovation focus in the evaluation.