Fuel Procurement for the Needs of Liepāja State City Municipality Institutions, Agencies, and Capital Companies

This tender for fuel acquisition demonstrates a well-structured process with clear documentation, but is significantly hampered by the undisclosed estimated value and potential restrictions on document access, impacting fairness and completeness.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements with a clearly defined open procedure, reasonable submission period, and appropriate CPV classification. It also indicates compliance with WTO/GPA. However, the non-disclosure of the estimated value, while potentially permissible under specific national regulations, is generally not considered best practice for full transparency.

The tender provides a clear description of the subject matter and outlines requirements comprehensively across various documents like "Nolikums" and "Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības". Evaluation criteria and performance conditions are explicitly stated as being detailed within these documents, ensuring bidders understand expectations.

Most essential information, including title, organization, reference, deadlines, duration, and location, is provided. All relevant documents are listed and summarized, indicating a comprehensive set of instructions. The primary deficiency is the non-disclosure of the estimated contract value, which is a critical piece of information for potential bidders.

The tender promotes fairness through an open procedure, reasonable deadlines, and the use of an e-procurement system. Evaluation criteria are stated to be defined in the tender documents. However, the undisclosed estimated value significantly hinders fair competition as bidders cannot adequately assess the opportunity. The "Restricted document access" flag, if it implies barriers to obtaining full documentation, also negatively impacts equal access.

The tender supports electronic submission, which enhances practicality for bidders. The contract duration is clearly specified. However, the absence of a disclosed estimated value and a specific contract start date reduces the practical information available for bidders to prepare comprehensive proposals. The "Restricted document access" could also pose practical challenges.

The core data fields are largely consistent, with logical dates and no reported disputes or suspensions. While there were minor contradictions with automated flags (e.g., e-submission, evaluation criteria), the explicit tender characteristics and document summaries provide a consistent narrative. The main gap is the consistently undisclosed estimated value.

The tender does not include any explicit requirements or considerations related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not indicated as EU-funded, which often drives higher sustainability standards.