Repair of FLIR Cameras for Watercraft

This tender for FLIR camera repair services is generally well-structured with clear requirements and transparent evaluation criteria, but raises concerns regarding limited competition due to the single-participant framework and brand-specific nature. It lacks explicit sustainability or social criteria.

The tender demonstrates good legal compliance with reasonable deadlines, appropriate CPV codes, and explicit adherence to EU sanctions and mandatory exclusion grounds. However, the 'Max Participants: 1' for a framework agreement without reopening competition, while legally permissible under specific conditions, warrants robust justification not fully evident in the summaries, slightly impacting the score.

The tender's description is clear, and the AI-extracted requirements are well-structured and understandable. The evaluation criteria, being 100% price-based, are exceptionally clear and unambiguous, contributing to a high score in this category.

All essential information, including title, organization, financial details, timeline, and classification, is comprehensively provided. Key requirements and evaluation criteria are defined, and all listed documents are attached, ensuring a high level of completeness.

While the tender offers full document access, discloses value, sets reasonable deadlines, and uses objective 100% price-based evaluation, the 'Max Participants: 1' for a framework agreement without reopening competition, coupled with the brand-specific 'FLIR cameras' for repair, significantly limits potential competition. This raises concerns about whether the requirements are tailored or if the market is genuinely so restricted, thus impacting fairness.

The tender supports electronic submission and e-procurement, and clearly specifies the contract duration and EU funding. However, a direct general document URL is not explicitly provided, and the exact contract start date is not immediately apparent, slightly reducing the practicality score.

The tender exhibits excellent data consistency, with all key fields populated, no detected disputes or suspensions, and logical, consistent dates across the timeline and contract duration. This indicates a well-managed and accurate data entry process.

The tender scores low on sustainability as it explicitly lacks green procurement, social criteria, or an innovation focus, as indicated by automated checks. While it is EU-funded, this does not compensate for the absence of specific sustainability considerations.