This piece examines what the DNA inquiry means for a contested public tender whose initial winner submitted a substantially higher bid.
An early-stage inquiry, with no named suspects
The DNA office in Bacău has opened an in rem file concerning the award procedure for the Bacău–Piatra Neamț Express Road, the National Anticorruption Directorate confirmed to Economedia. In rem means that investigators are examining possible facts rather than pursuing a named suspect. DNA said the checks are at an early stage and that it cannot confirm whether hearings have taken place. It also said that no person is currently a suspect or defendant. A report by Bacau.net alleged that members of CNIR’s evaluation committee had been called for questioning, but DNA did not confirm that claim. No wrongdoing has been established.
Why the competing bids became contentious
The contract covers the design and construction of approximately 51 kilometres of high-speed road linking Piatra Neamț with the A7 Moldavia Motorway. In December 2025, CNIR initially selected the consortium led by Danlin XXL, whose bid was about 5.17 billion lei excluding VAT. The consortium led by Precon Transilvania had offered about 4.57 billion lei excluding VAT, nearly 600 million lei less, but was removed from the procedure, alongside the consortium led by UMB. The price difference alone does not determine a winner: contracting authorities must also assess whether an offer is technically coherent, deliverable and compliant with the tender requirements.
The unusually low offer and the reevaluation
CNIR considered Precon’s offer apparently abnormally low, at about 67.5% of the contract’s minimum estimated value. It initially rejected the bid, citing an inconsistency between its technical and financial proposals over the cost of 27-metre beams for a bridge over DJ 159. Precon said those costs were included and that the beams would be prefabricated on site using its own resources, while 40-metre beams would be bought from a specialist supplier. In public procurement, an authority may seek explanations for a very low price, but the bidder must show that its method, resources and costs can support the promised work. The dispute concerns how that test was applied here.
Court decisions keep the award process open
The Bucharest Court of Appeal ordered CNIR to reevaluate Precon’s offer. On 1 October 2026, it definitively rejected Danlin XXL’s challenge against a National Council for Solving Complaints decision requiring CNIR to continue that reevaluation. CNIR then requested further information about the production technology, equipment, staff and resources for making the beams. Precon challenged that request, arguing that it went beyond the limits set by the court. CNIR says the procurement procedure remains under way and that the law prevents it from releasing details about the bids until the procedure is complete. The DNA checks now add a separate integrity review to an already disputed evaluation, without proving that the award was unlawful.
IN NUMBERS
For bidders, the case illustrates how a low-price challenge can turn on technical evidence as well as arithmetic, and how court-ordered reevaluation can reopen an award without automatically selecting the cheaper offer. For contracting authorities, the inquiry underscores the importance of recording a clear, reviewable explanation for exclusions, clarification requests and scoring decisions. The tender remains in progress, while DNA’s in rem checks have not produced a named suspect or a finding of wrongdoing.
Reported from economedia.ro, 2026-10-30. The Tender Wire is published by Otnox.
