Summer grading of gravel roads in Setomaa municipality 2026-2028

This tender for gravel road grading in Setomaa municipality is generally well-structured and clear, with comprehensive documentation and fair evaluation criteria. However, the allowance for negotiation within an open procedure and the broad CPV code present potential legal ambiguities.

The tender defines an 'Open' procedure (Type A), yet lists 'Negotiation Allowed' as a characteristic, which is unusual and potentially non-compliant with standard EU/Estonian open procedure regulations. The assigned CPV code (6679) is too broad for the specific service of gravel road grading. Deadlines are reasonable, and mandatory disclosure requirements appear met.

The tender description is clear, and requirements are well-documented and understandable, supported by detailed annexes like technical descriptions and maps. Evaluation criteria are explicitly stated as 'lowest hourly cost' in Document 4, contradicting the automated check's flag.

All basic information, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and deadlines, is provided. The contract duration (2026-2028) and location details (Setomaa municipality roads, maps) are clearly specified across the documents, correcting the automated check's erroneous flags.

The tender ensures full document access, discloses the estimated value, and provides reasonable deadlines. Evaluation criteria based on the lowest hourly cost are objective and transparent. E-procurement is enabled, and requirements appear generic, not tailored to a specific company.

Electronic submission and e-procurement are supported, enhancing practicality. The duration of the contract (2026-2028) is clearly specified. While a specific contract start date isn't given, the period is clear. A direct document URL is not explicitly provided but implied by the e-procurement portal.

Key fields are mostly populated, and dates are logical and consistent. The contract duration in the title and description aligns with the tender period. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include 'Value Classified: Yes' despite the estimated value being disclosed, and the missing NUTS code.

The tender does not explicitly include any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus criteria. It is also not EU funded, which often drives higher sustainability standards.