Degvielas iegāde Liepājas valstspilsētas pašvaldības iestāžu, aģentūru un kapitālsabiedrību vajadzībām

This tender is generally well-structured with comprehensive documentation, but the undisclosed estimated value is a primary concern impacting transparency and fairness. The lack of explicit sustainability criteria is also a notable area for improvement.

Legal compliance is generally good, with reasonable deadlines and a clearly defined open procedure. The main drawback is the non-disclosure of the estimated value, which is crucial for transparency. Minor issues include 'N/A' codes for type/procedure and a slightly malformed CPV code.

The tender description is clear, and requirements are well-documented, referencing specific documents like 'Nolikums' and 'Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības'. Evaluation criteria and performance conditions are stated to be specified within these documents, ensuring good clarity for bidders.

Basic information, deadlines, and contract duration are provided. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission. While all necessary documents are listed and summarized, the absence of this key financial detail reduces the overall completeness.

The non-disclosure of the estimated value significantly impacts fairness and transparency, making it difficult for potential bidders to assess market viability. While e-procurement is enabled and deadlines are reasonable, this lack of financial transparency is a major concern. The 'Restricted document access' flag, if true in practice, would further reduce fairness.

The tender supports electronic submission via the E-Procurement system, which is a strong positive for practicality. While a specific contract start date is not explicitly mentioned, the duration is clear. Financing information is limited due to the undisclosed estimated value.

Data is mostly consistent, with logical dates and no reported disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include the 'N/A' codes for type/procedure and the format of the CPV code. The contradictions between automated flags (e.g., 'No e-submission', 'Missing evaluation criteria') and document summaries are noted but resolved by prioritizing document content.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability considerations.