Public procurement · Separate award from delivery

Ningguo rural charging EPC

Award 18 September 2026 · planned duration 360 days

Selected findings reviewedReview snapshot 2026-10-24Independent review not established4 original files available ↓

WHAT THE HELD EVIDENCE SAYS

An original award names a consortium for CNY 16,176,773.51. The tender specifies a 10% advance per started project excluding design.

The award establishes the announced consortium and price. It does not establish each member’s revenue, installed capacity or payment.

What remains open

Award dated 18 September 2026; planned duration 360 days. No acceptance or payment established; absence at this early stage does not demonstrate delay.

01 · IMPLEMENTATION

Evidence at each step

Recorded stages describe the review snapshot. An open stage means it is not established here; it is not a finding of failure.

Call / rulesRecorded
Original annexRecorded
Award / allocationRecorded
ContractNot established
AcceptanceNot established
Reported executionNot established
Bank paymentNot established

STRESS-TEST THE CONCLUSION

Can I make this claim?

Reasoning checks grounded in the reviewed case. Open a claim to see what supports it, what it would overstate and the next test.

“The project has installed 142 chargers.”

Not established

The 142 chargers are planned equipment in the tender. An award is held, but acceptance and actual delivery have not been established.

Planned capacity cannot be reported as installed capacity.

Next test: Obtain acceptance records and equipment-level delivery evidence.

Inspect S109 ↗Inspect S127 ↗

Editorial reasoning aid based on the 2026-10-24 review snapshot; not a new independent adjudication.

“Each consortium member won CNY 16.18m of revenue.”

The source does not support this claim

CNY 16,176,773.51 is the total consortium award, not an amount attributable to each member and not recognised revenue.

Allocating the full award to every member would duplicate the value and change its accounting meaning.

Next test: Obtain member work shares and the relevant revenue-recognition evidence.

Inspect S127 ↗

Editorial reasoning aid based on the 2026-10-24 review snapshot; not a new independent adjudication.

CLAIM → CLAUSE → ORIGINAL

Evidence receipts

3 receipts

Text matching checks the saved wording. It does not establish that a claim is true or that an event occurred.

01Planned equipment: 142 chargers—10×240kW,24×60kW,108×40kW—and four storage cabinets.S109 · PDFpage3, section2.8

Quote found in saved textSource metadata matches review

安装充电桩142套

Stage / meaning: specifies planned equipment
Entity or object: 142 chargers / four125kW-261kWh cabinets
Review date: 2026-10-24

Planned quantities; no installed-capacity or acceptance claim.

Read source S109 ↗Download original ↓

Provenance & review basis

Not established; original review snapshot and automated text check are distinct.

Receipt receipt-3b906c5394445e3b

Source SHA-256 3173b3f9999fcc5c381bcd1200b4620ca05d3c716212e1d5f5cafcc583393bad

Review SHA-256 3173b3f9999fcc5c381bcd1200b4620ca05d3c716212e1d5f5cafcc583393bad

02Tender advance is 10% of each started project, excluding design fees.S109 · PDFpage75, clause 14.2.1

Quote found in saved textSource metadata matches review

单项开工项目总价（不含设计费）的10%

Stage / meaning: has tender payment condition
Entity or object: 10% per started project excluding design
Review date: 2026-10-24

Different denominator from Guangde; a contractual condition, not realised financial support.

Read source S109 ↗Download original ↓

Provenance & review basis

Not established; original review snapshot and automated text check are distinct.

Receipt receipt-e76438ea2a3e5a7b

Source SHA-256 3173b3f9999fcc5c381bcd1200b4620ca05d3c716212e1d5f5cafcc583393bad

Review SHA-256 3173b3f9999fcc5c381bcd1200b4620ca05d3c716212e1d5f5cafcc583393bad

03The 18 September award names an Anhui Xinchen-led consortium for 16,176,773.51 yuan; design and construction components reconcile.S127 · Award table: winning bidder and price

Quote found in saved textSource metadata matches review