Procurement of organized waste transport services for Tartu Rural Municipality

This tender for waste management services in Tartu municipality is generally well-structured with comprehensive documentation and fair processes, but it suffers from an incorrect CPV code and some minor ambiguities in procedure classification and data consistency.

The tender benefits from reasonable submission deadlines and the appropriate use of the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD). However, the assigned CPV code (15649) is incorrect and not a valid standard code, which is a significant compliance issue. The procedure type 'KE' is also not clearly defined with a standard code, leading to some ambiguity.

The tender description is clear, and the requirements, including technical capabilities, financial aspects, and submission details, are well-documented and understandable through the provided documents and AI-extracted summaries. Evaluation criteria are explicitly stated as lowest cost per cubic meter.

The tender provides all essential information, including title, reference, organization, deadlines, estimated value, and contract duration. A comprehensive set of 10 documents is attached, detailing technical specifications, qualification criteria, contract terms, and evaluation methods. However, the procedure type and code are not fully specified, and there's a minor contradiction regarding value classification.

The tender demonstrates good fairness with a reasonable submission deadline (54 days), clear and objective evaluation criteria based on the lowest price, and the enablement of e-procurement for equal access. Requirements appear generic and not tailored to a specific company, and the estimated value is disclosed.

Electronic submission and e-procurement are supported, and the contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, an explicit document URL is not provided in the tender information, which could pose a minor practical hurdle for bidders. Financing information is limited to the estimated value.

Key fields are populated, and all dates (reveal, submission, opening, contract start) are logical and consistent. There are no detected disputes or suspensions. The primary inconsistency is the contradictory statement regarding the estimated value being both disclosed and classified.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social criteria, or innovation focus beyond the inherent environmental benefits of organized waste management services. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.