Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.
Login15 requirements across 5 categories
Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis
6 documents available with AI summaries
The contracting authority requires bidders to comply with conditions, including submitting a joint bid authorization, describing trade secrets, and confirming bid compliance with tender terms.
The tender evaluation criteria include the cost of conducting the pilot test (80% weight) and the bidder's location relative to the contracting authority (20% weight), with the lowest price receiving the maximum score.
The procurement pass is an initial self-declaration by the economic operator, containing the contracting authority's conditions and expected response formats, but is not intended for completion.
Tender documents provide information on the procurement of enzymatic processing tests for fish filleting waste, including details on the contracting authority, tender object, submission conditions, and evaluation criteria.
This document is a draft of the service contract, outlining the terms of service provision, remuneration, and payment conditions, and is an integral part of the tender documents.
The bidder must conduct up to 10 pilot tests for enzymatic processing of fish filleting waste, providing materials, premises, water, electricity, and equipment security.
Sign up to view document summaries and analysis
This tender for enzymatic treatment tests of fish filleting residues is generally well-structured, with clear objectives and evaluation criteria. However, it could benefit from more explicit details on sustainability aspects and a slightly more streamlined submission process.
The tender adheres to standard procurement procedures, including a clear CPV code and a reasonable timeline. No immediate legal disputes or regulatory non-compliance issues are apparent. The procedure type (LM) suggests a negotiated procedure, which is permissible.
The description of the service and the project objectives are clear. Technical requirements are outlined, and evaluation criteria are specified, although the weighting of the location criterion could be more transparently justified.
Most basic information is present, including estimated value, duration, and contract start date. However, the absence of specific details regarding the 'ESPD_v2.0_laiendatud.xml' file's content and the exact nature of 'Alusdokumendid' could be improved. The location information being determined post-award is a minor completeness gap.
The evaluation criteria, particularly the weighting of cost (80%) and location (20%), are disclosed. The inclusion of bidder location as a significant factor (20%) might be perceived as potentially favoring local bidders, though not explicitly tailored to a single company. E-submission and e-procurement are indicated.
The tender specifies electronic submission and e-procurement. The contract start date is provided. However, details on financing are not explicitly stated, and the duration of the contract is implied by the project end date rather than a defined contract term.
Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided are logical and do not indicate any suspension or disputes. The tender status is clearly indicated.
The tender mentions 'Green Procurement' and 'EU Funded', which are positive indicators. However, there are no specific social criteria or explicit innovation objectives detailed within the provided text, limiting the score in this category.
Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis
No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes
Our procurement experts prepare everything. Proven to work — you review, approve, and submit.
Hello! I'm your AI assistant for this tender. I can help you understand requirements, deadlines, eligibility criteria, and provide strategic insights.
No credit card required