On the rights to carry out biological waste removal from Liepāja state city cemeteries

This tender for biological waste removal services exhibits significant transparency and accessibility issues, notably the undisclosed value and restricted document access, alongside critical inconsistencies regarding e-submission and evaluation criteria.

The tender generally adheres to basic legal requirements with a reasonable submission deadline, clear procedure type, and appropriate CPV code. However, the undisclosed estimated value and restricted document access are significant concerns regarding transparency and equal treatment, which are fundamental principles of public procurement law.

The tender's title, description, and AI-extracted requirements for bidders are generally clear. However, the explicit flag indicating 'Missing evaluation criteria' creates significant ambiguity for potential bidders regarding how their offers will be assessed, despite a document summary mentioning them.

While essential information like title, organization, deadlines, and duration is provided, the tender is incomplete due to the undisclosed estimated value, restricted document access, and the absence of clearly specified evaluation criteria in the main tender information or AI-extracted requirements.

Fairness is severely compromised by restricted document access and the undisclosed estimated value, which prevent bidders from fully understanding the scope and commercial viability. The absence of clearly specified evaluation criteria further undermines transparency and objectivity. The contradiction regarding e-submission also raises concerns about equal access.

Practicality is significantly hampered by the reported lack of e-submission, which is a standard expectation in modern procurement, and restricted document access. The undisclosed value also makes it difficult for bidders to make informed decisions.

The tender exhibits notable data inconsistencies, particularly the contradiction between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the 'No e-submission' flag. Furthermore, the summary of a document mentioning 'evaluation criteria' conflicts with the explicit flag of 'Missing evaluation criteria' in the main tender information. The undisclosed value also represents an unpopulated key field.

The tender does not integrate any explicit sustainability considerations, such as green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus, nor is it indicated as EU-funded, which typically encourages higher sustainability standards.