Sunday, December 17, 2017

Design/build tender sent to 7 firms

 The Sunday Express learned the request for proposals for the project was design/build. 

Investigations revealed tender TT-99-110583 for the interior design and furnishing of the temporary Ministry of Local Government’s office at 1 Alexandra Street was prepared and sent out on September 14, 2011, to seven contractors that were selected by the Palo Seco Agri­cultural Enterprises Ltd (PSAEL) board. They were:

• Action Marketing Ltd

• COSL Office Supplies 


• ECCA School and 

  Office Supplies Ltd

• 2S Enterprises 

  Company Ltd

• Ramdeen’s Industrial 

  and Safety 

  Supply Ltd

• Elvis Marketing Ltd

• Next Generation 

  Computing Centre

The pre-bid meeting, the Sunday Express learned, was held at Alex­­-

andra Street site on Sep­tember 20, 2011. 

Only five contractors attended the pre-bid meeting. 

Due to written re­quests from bidders, the Ashmeed Ghany-led board at PSAEL took a decision to extend the initial ten­der closed date from October 12 to Octo­ber 27, 2011. However, bidders were also unable to meet the deadline and a second extension was granted up until November 17, 2011. 

A public tender open­ing was held on the same day at PSAEL’s Pointe-a-Pierre office. 

Only three bidders were able to meet the deadline. They were:

• Elvis Marketing Ltd

• COSL Office Supplies Ltd

• 2S Enterprises 

  Company Ltd

However, the Sunday Express learned only Elvis Marketing Ltd and COSL Office Supplies Ltd met the complete guidelines as outlined by PSAEL. 

According to PSAEL’s evaluation report dated November 29, 2011, ob­tained by the Sunday Express, the rep­resentative of 2S Enterprises Com­pany Ltd arrived at 10.20 a.m. and the bid was not accepted because the tender box was closed at 10 a.m.. Elvis Marketing Ltd, the evaluation report said, did not submit a bid security and as a result was not further assessed. 

Companies were required to submit a $100,000 bond with their proposals. The evaluation report said COSL Office Supplies Ltd met the key components for the job and as a result was also evaluated in the technical category. 

COSL Office Supplies Ltd received 76.9 per cent out of 100. 

In its request for consideration, PSAEL, in the evaluation report, said: “It is concluded that the sole qualifying bidder for the technical evaluation was COSL. COSL’s technical proposal met most of the critical project requirements and has been determined to be substan­tially responsive. 

“It is therefore recommended that the board of directors review the above findings and give directive to allow the evaluation committee to open and review the financial bid for COSL only while the financial bid for Elvis Marketing Ltd is to be returned unopened to the bidder as per tender policy.” 

However, the Sunday Express learned the bid package was not returned to Elvis Marketing Ltd, and by letter dated January 20, 2012, the company’s CEO, Elvis Seelochan, queried the reason for the tender being disqualified. 

The letter obtained by the Sunday Express read: “Further to our letter dated December 6, 2011 when we raised a sus­picion that our tender document may have been tampered with. We now enclose a copy of the bond document from GTM Insurance Company Ltd in the amount of $100,000, which was submitted with the tender documents.” 

The Sunday Express obtained a copy of the bond document number A064749, dated November 2, 2011. 

Contacted yesterday, Seelochan said, to date, the tender package has not been returned to his company. 

Asked if Elivis Mar­keting Ltd was given reasons for the tender being dis­qualified, Seelochan said: “I have been trying to get the truth but PSAEL is not co-operating. We are in March of 2014 and the tender package has not been returned to Elvis Marketing Ltd. We submitted all documents as requested.”

Evaluation team

The evaluation team consisted of several staff members of PSAEL and a ministry representative:

Dianne Arjoon (management accountant, 

finance)—financial evaluation only

Indranee Rodriguez (accountant, finance)—

financial evaluation only 

Lynda Mahabir (supervisor, PEMD)

Hugh Aberdeen (project engineer, PEMD)

Jason Farrell (engineer, Ministry of local govt) 

Sizwe Jackson (project manager)—(observer) 

Technical criteria

The criteria for the technical 

category were as follows:

Section I: Experience of the 

contractor—15 points

Section II: Technical approach, 

work plan, staffing—60 points

Section III: Key professional staff

—20 points

Section IV: Financial stability

—five points