This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

8th meeting of the Digital Agency Bid-Rigging Surveillance Commission

Overview

  • Date: March 9, 2026 (Monday)
  • Place: Digital Agency Public Meeting Room
  • Names of committee members (honorifics omitted, in Japanese alphabetical order):
    • Ryota Kaneko Professor, Graduate School of Accounting, Waseda University
    • Yoshiko Kawazawa Representative Director, Social Policy Lab, Inc.
    • Yuichi Mochinaga Certified Public Accountant
  • Period for deliberation: April 1, 2025 to September 30, 2025
  • Number of extracted projects: 3 (279 projects)
  • Number of deliberation items: 3

Material

Summary of the Proceedings

Operation and maintenance of the support information base and registry system in fiscal 2025

  • Serial No.: 26-03-01
  • Contract method: General competitive contract (lowest price bidding method)
  • Counterparty: Densan System Co., Ltd,
  • Contract amount: 17,061,000 yen
  • Contract Date: April 1, 2025
Opinions and questionsAnswer
In the previous fiscal year, bids from one party were changed to bids from four parties. Is this due to the fact that the main task is to abolish the system? The reason for the increase in the number of bidders is considered to be that the procurement was limited to the operation and maintenance of the system from this fiscal year, excluding any modification.
I think it is more in line with Digital Agency's basic policies to enhance the Support Information Base / Registry. Why did Child-Rearing Support Registry's information not go through the Support Information Base / Registry? When the information to be registered is frequently changed, both Mynaportal and the Support Information Base Registry System need to be modified through the Support Information and Base Registry System, which leads to a lack of modification cost and flexibility. Therefore, it was decided that the Support Information Base Registry System can be used only by Mynaportal.
Why did the contract amount remain the same even though the term was shortened by four months and the content was changed? How was the face value of the contract changed? The contract price has not changed because instead of shortening the operation and maintenance period, the corresponding personnel will be used to shut down the system, including the Government Cloud. When changing the contract, an estimate based on the change specifications is obtained from the business operator, and the details are carefully examined and examined.
The reason given for the abolishment was that it was to be implemented in Mynaportal, but this may have resulted in waste due to duplication of investment. The Support Information Base / Registry System and Mynaportal had been operated independently of each other, but with the inauguration of Digital Agency, the overlapping relationship between them was sorted out, and the Support Information Base / Registry System was sorted out as a data-providing function for private sector, and cooperation and integration have been promoted based on the Priority Plan in 2023 and 2024. At this time, it was decided to completely abolish the Support Information Base / Registry System after further consideration of consolidation. Therefore, what had been invested separately before the inauguration of Digital Agency was gradually consolidated to reduce the budget, and finally one of them was completely abolished, so it is recognized that "waste due to double investment was avoided."
The same business operator received an order from the system construction stage. Do you think there was no improvement in quality due to competition? Until the previous fiscal year, modification work was added to operation and maintenance work because it was necessary to carry out modification while operating the system. However, it may have been difficult for other operators to enter the market. Since it is not possible to foresee everything from the beginning of system development, it is considered necessary to carry out modification while operating the system.
The specifications seem to be complicated and difficult to read. The specifications are very important for proper procurement activities. I would like you to consider whether it is necessary to prepare them more appropriately. On the other hand, since the items to be included in the procurement specifications have been expanded and the attachments have been complicated, the Government of Japan considers that it is necessary to make the procurement specifications as a whole easier to understand.

Technical Verification of the Utilization of generative AI in Legal Affairs

  • Serial No.: 26 - 03 - 02
  • Contract method: Discretionary contract (planning competition)
  • Counterparty: Polimill Co., Ltd.
  • Contract amount: 39,560,000 yen
  • Contract Date: May 16, 2025
Opinions and questionsAnswer
As the reason for choosing a discretionary contract, it is stated that "it is required to conduct a technical verification of the function, etc. that reduces the administrative burden on the generative AI, etc. by utilizing the government officials, etc., with a sufficient understanding of not only the function of the common information retrieval system but also the administration of legislation and the preparation of bills." How did you evaluate the three participating companies, especially with regard to the "sufficient understanding of the administration of legislation and the preparation of bills"? In the Review Standards Table, evaluation is conducted by establishing multiple evaluation items related to the content of procurement and the degree of understanding of contractors. For example, the item "Understanding of business purpose and background" evaluates comprehensive understanding of the content of procurement specifications, and the item "Scope of business" evaluates specific proposals based on the characteristics of this procurement. In the process of evaluating these items, the degree of understanding of the legislative work and bill preparation work of contractor candidates is also evaluated.
I think that such efforts should be actively promoted because they are highly valuable as AI. I think that it will lead to the interests of the people if it can be done not only by the government but also by local governments in the future. In addition, regarding the process of incorporating the field awareness of the team in charge into the law, I think that you will be able to understand the problem awareness of the law, so I would like you to consider how to use the data.
Since "each company's original proposals" are evaluated in the proposals, the selected vendor's original technology is likely to be placed at the core of the system. As a result, there is a risk of vendor lock-in. Does the proposal of Polimill, which is the contractor, include its own technology or a AI model / tool that only Polimill can handle? The content of the company's proposals does not use proprietary technologies, etc., but shows proposals based on general know-how of AI tool development. In addition, it is considered that there is no risk of vendor lock-in because it is arranged with an easy handover method.
Are you concerned about a new level of vendor lock-in on systems running Interface, where users don't want to change the interface? Although it is important to maintain the continuity of the interface, we will continue to pay attention so that the system can be built even if the service provider changes.
Regarding the tool for creating draft articles, when a laws and regulations is established, I think it may be necessary to revise it because it will affect other laws and regulations. Can such a revision be made? By utilizing the AI, it will be possible to estimate the relationship between the laws and regulations. Therefore, we would like to arrange and present the possible impacts on the laws and regulations under the jurisdiction of other ministries and agencies.
The specifications specify the use of RAG (Reference to External Information) technology. In legislative affairs, sensitive information such as "draft articles before publication" is expected to be handled. How is "access authority" designed in the verification of RAG? For example, is the risk of "information leakage," in which an AI refers to a bill under consideration by A government agency and outputs the information as an answer when an employee of B government agency asks a relevant question, included in the verification items? In the prototype developed in fiscal 2025, laws and regulations e-Gov and government websites in the go. jp domain obtained from AI laws and regulations Search are created and processed on the contractor's public clouds with learning of input and output content prohibited (opt-out setting). Therefore, it is considered that there is no risk that certain input content will be learned by data and output for a different use.

Complete operation of government solution services in fiscal 2025

  • Serial No.: 26 - 03 - 03
  • Contract method: Discretionary contract (non-negotiable)
  • Counterparty: NEC Corporation
  • Contract amount: 23,116,662,386 yen
  • Contract Date: July 1, 2025
Opinions and questionsAnswer
What is your analysis of the reasons for this? We surmise that there were two main reasons. First, it was difficult for business operators to secure SE resources as required by the procurement specifications. Second, the range of operations required by the procurement specifications was too broad. Third, it was considered that the entry barrier was higher for new business operators than for existing business operators.
It says that 14 operators were invited to participate, but was the invitation made to major operators? Small - and medium-scale operators were included in the call, but some operators responded that it was difficult to respond to the call due to the wide scope of work and lack of personnel, etc. As a result, many operators who responded to the call were operators with a large number of SEs or operators with a large scale that could gather personnel.
Since the same business operator has been receiving orders continuously for a long time, it may be difficult for other operators to enter even if they are major operators. What was the situation of other companies? At the time of procurement, there was interest from parties other than contractors, and they were willing to view the materials. However, it is presumed that the bidding did not take place due to the unavailability of personnel, etc. In preparing the procurement specifications, consideration was given to making the specifications available to a wide range of parties other than current contractors, and the viewing materials were also enhanced.
With regard to the "deviation" between the estimated and actual effort, there seems to be a desire to reduce the "deviation" as much as possible because there is no room for personnel. Is it possible to eliminate the concerns of business operators about this "deviation"? Based on the opinions, etc. of business operators, efforts have been made to resolve the concerns of each business operator by showing the work, etc. that can be assumed in the procurement of this case in reference to the "Record of work, etc. that occurred under the current contract" in the reference materials. It is hoped that the concerns of each business operator can be further resolved in the next procurement.
Are there any initiatives or initiatives currently being considered to promote the participation of multiple business operators in contracts after fiscal year R11, when the contract is due to end? As a result of interviews with entities considering bids after the completion of this procurement, there were opinions that (I) there are many operations required by the procurement specifications, and it is difficult to secure a large amount of SE resources, and (ii) the scope of operations required by the specifications is wide, and new entrants may consider that the entry barrier is higher than that of current entities. With regard to (I), although it is considered that the scope of the specifications is the minimum unit at present, we will continue to consider the possibility of further dividing the operations. With regard to (ii), we will strive to further reduce the entry barrier by further specifying the description in the procurement specifications, further improving the materials to be viewed, and securing an appropriate handover period. In addition to the above, we will continue to seek opinions from each business operator and seek further improvements.
What is the maintenance system for this procurement? As a general rule, the maintenance system required by procurement specifications does not require permanent residence (i.e., it is not prohibited to perform services at the base of a business operator). However, Operation Managers, etc. who need to communicate closely with Digital Agency employees are exceptionally required to be permanently stationed at Digital Agency bases.
It is said that it is difficult to divide the contract unit, but is it possible to divide the work such as help desk and management? Responses to user support are classified into Tier1, Tier2, and Tier3 by level. Among them, so-called help desk and service desk operations that respond as the primary contact point for users are classified into "Tier1" and are extracted (divided) as procurement separate from the procurement in question. In addition, inquiries, etc. that have been escalated from Tier1 to Tier2 according to the contents of inquiries from users shall be responded to in the procurement in question.
I understand that it is difficult for a company other than the successful bidder this time to bid for a large-scale project, but I would like you to continue to consider whether the successful bidder this time is appropriate and whether there is room for further improvement. We are aware of this and will continue to respond.