By Kit Bagaipo
Posted: The Bohol Chronicle
A Japanese heavy equipment dealer complains on the alleged rigged bidding for the purchase of some P168-milllion worth of heavy equipment conducted by the provincial government recently.
International heavy equipment trader Kowa Tsusho Ltd. failed to qualify in the multi-million bidding but said the procurement process “gave undue advantage to preferred suppliers” which threatens to explode into another anomaly bigger than Capitol’s alleged overpriced purchase of a backhoe and air-conditioning units two years ago.
Atty. Salvador Grupo, counsel of the Japanese firm, has formally filed a protest action to the chairman of the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) of the provincial government, General Services Officer Engr. Rosalinda Yu.
According to Grupo, his client was unable to beat the deadline for the submission of bids as the BAC conducted the bidding process with haste contrary to the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA 9184, the Government Procurement Act.
Under Sec. 17, Rule VI of the law’s IRR, prospective bidders should be given ample time to examine bidding documents and prepare its respective bids.
“To provide ample time, the concerned BAC shall promptly issue the bidding documents for the contract to be bid out at the time the Invitation to Apply for Eligibility and to Bid (IAEB) is first advertised,” Grupo cited.
The provincial government will purchase an all brand new fleet of heavy equipment that includes 2 units of backhoe/hydraulic excavators with breakers; 2 units of bulldozers with ripper; 2 units payloaders; 10 units of 6-wheeler dump trucks; 4 units motor road grader; 4 units road roller/vibratory compactor; 1 unit 6-wheeler water truck with pump; and a 6-wheeler fuel tanker with pump.
These heavy equipment has an overall approved budget contract (ABC) of P168,296,000.
Based on records, Grupo said that the bidding was advertised on January 7, 2009 but bid documents were made available only on January 23 “which is contrary to the provisions of the law.
The dropping of the bids, Grupo added, was done last February 9 which did not gave enough time to Kowa Tsusho to comply with all the “voluminous requirements”.
“As a result, my client has been disenfranchised and suffered because of the failure of the BAC to observe the appropriate bidding procedures,” the lawyer said.
In a letter to Yu last February 4, the supplier requested for the dropping, screening and opening of bids to be deferred.
In its letter to Yu, the Japanese supplier noted “defects in the manner” the bidding has been conducted by the BAC.
Aside from the unavailability of bid documents, the amount to be paid for the said requirement was not stated for the reason that the technical working group of the bids committee “still needed to come up with the final and definite specifications”.
As shown in the minutes of the pre-bidding conference, “the BAC secretariat could not furnish the interested bidders at that time any of the required documents,” Grupo disclosed.
He said there were “serious concerns and questions raised by participating suppliers and interested bidders” that were not completely resolved by the BAC and that it “needed further time to deliberate and settle” the issues.
PREFERRED BIDDER?
During the said pre-bid conference, Grupo bared that the BAC “openly admitted they already had preferred brands” which is improper under the procurement law.
“Due to the unresolved issued that surfaced during the conference, the time frame for the submission of the required documents by the interested bidders, were now very much shortened, and there was hardly enough time for the interested bidders to comply,” he explained.
Grupo denounced how the BAC proceeded with the opening of bids despite the protests of his client.
He added the guideline on publicizing the IAEB was not followed as the BAC only advertised the items for bidding in two local newspapers. The procurement law requires the invitation for bids to a local and a national newspaper of general circulation.
“Dates of publication and the newspapers were carefully chosen and the specifications for the equipment were tailor-suited to favor a particular brand or model,” Grupo added further.
“This situation creates the impression that there are favored parties who have given advantages in this bidding,” the lawyer stressed.
SUPPLIERS
As of February 4, six suppliers were already listed by the BAC to participate in the bidding. These were Camec JCB Corporation, JVF Commercial, Civic Merchandising, RDAK Transport Equipment, Pasahero Motors Corporation and Isuzu Cebu, Inc.
Of the six bid participants, only RDAK could supply all the 8 items stated in the contract.
Moreover, Kowa Tsusho also questioned the BAC for allowing the other seven contractors to supply only some of the items to be bidded out instead of the 8 items specified in the IAEB. This was confirmed in the amounts paid by said suppliers which were based on a per item basis.
A provincial ordinance sets the amount to be paid for the purchase of bid documents on contracts over P10-million at P10,000. However, each of the eight suppliers paid separately for each of the items offered for bidding.
Grupo likewise revealed that the maximum period to be given to prospective bidders from the time of publication of the invitation for bids should have been 50 calendar days instead of just 30 days.
“Infrastructure projects involving P50 million and above should allow suppliers and contractors at least 50 days from the last publication of the invitation to submit their bid requisites,” he said.
According to Grupo, the dropping of bids last February 9 was illegal since it did not comply with the prescribed period in the procurement law.
BAC EXPLAINS
In her reply, Engr. Yu said the accusations of the Japanese heavy equipment supplier that the bidding was “rigged and craftily manipulated” is “totally unfounded, baseless and unfair”.
Yu clarified that the invitation for bids was published not only in the Bohol Chronicleon January 15, 2009 but also in the Sun Star Daily on January 8, 2009 and in the Cebu Daily News on January 15.
Moreover, the IAEB was also posted in the website of the provincial government and in three conspicuous places in the province, according to Yu.
The BAC chair also disproved the claim of the supplier that the maximum period to be allowed should be 50 days saying that the said provision in the procurement law applies only to infrastructure projects and not to the procurement of goods.
“Quite obviously, the procurement of various heavy equipment falls under the category of goods and not infrastructure project,” she added.
Yu justified that “the inability of Kowa Tsusho to submit its bid documents on time” cannot be given consideration as it would “unduly put the bidding process in bad light”.
“We cannot give special treatment to [Kowa Tsusho] because this would be unfair to the other bidders who dutifully labored to submit their bid documents on time,” Yu concluded.
FLAWED FROM THE START
However, Grupo, who said he personally attended the pre-bid conference, stressed the multi-million peso purchase by the provincial government, the biggest single purchase by far, has led some sectors to question its timing.
“This is not an issue of an interested bidder asking for a special consideration and not being granted such accommodation,” according to Grupo stressing that provisions of the procurement law and its IRR are violated.
“The BAC despite our vehement protests continued its conclusion to the bidding process by conducting a post-qualification on the submitted bids,” he said.
According to Grupo, this serves to bolster suspicions that “the transaction from the very beginning stinks”.
“The purchase from the start of the advertisement to the schedule of activities was done in haste,” he stressed.
It can be recalled that two years ago, a similar purchase of heavy equipment (backhoe) also generated controversy which ended in the supplier offering a donation to the province “as a gesture of goodwill” for bagging the contract.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment