Harju County, Harku Municipality, Harku Small Borough, Construction of Connections at Päikese St 7 and 23, Pikk St 25 (LC2249, LC2251, LC2246, LC2244, LC2245, LC2243, IP7419)

This tender demonstrates good foundational elements with clear project scope and financial terms, but is hampered by significant inconsistencies in evaluation criteria and the inaccessibility of crucial tender documents for comprehensive analysis.

The tender generally complies with legal requirements for a small procurement, with clearly defined procedure type, appropriate CPV codes, and no detected disputes. The payment terms are detailed and standard.

While the project description and most requirements are clear, there is a direct contradiction between the 'relative_weighting' characteristic and the stated '100% total offer cost' evaluation criterion, which significantly impacts clarity for bidders.

Basic information is well-provided, but the inability to access and analyze critical documents such as the 'Projekt' (project design), 'Väikehanke alusdokumendid' (basic procurement documents), 'Kooskõlastused' (approvals), and 'Maksumuse_tabel' (cost table) due to unsupported file formats means the tender, as presented for analysis, is incomplete.

The tender promotes fairness through e-procurement and objective evaluation criteria (lowest price). However, the requirement for key personnel to be registered in Elektrilevi's partner portal and the specific experience requirements (3 similar contracts, one >= 40k EUR for a 113.5k EUR project) could potentially limit competition for new market entrants.

The tender supports electronic submission, provides a clear contract start date, and detailed financing conditions, making it practical for bidders.

A major inconsistency exists between the stated 'relative_weighting' for evaluation criteria and the explicit '100% total offer cost' in the evaluation document. A minor inconsistency is 'Value Classified: Yes' despite the estimated value being disclosed.

While the tender is noted as EU Funded, it lacks explicit green procurement, social, or innovation criteria, representing a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability aspects.