The award of an $865 Million contract for the construction of a Pump Station at Belle Vue, West Bank Demerara, has been coming under scrutiny, with the APNU+AFC Opposition claiming that the company awarded the contract did not meet the requirements set out by the same Tender Board.

The company that won the bid is linked to social media commentator Mikhail Rodrigues aka “Guyanese Critic”.

In defending the contract award, the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) said there was no breach in the award of the contract, adding that the contract award was above board.

In a release, the Tender Board said simply because the lowest bidder did not get the contract, does not mean that the evaluation and awarding process was flawed. It explained that the bid price announced at the opening of the bid cannot be used to adjudge the winning bidder.

“Specifically, with regards to the construction of the Belle Vue Pump Station project, twenty-six (26) companies tendered for that project. Thirteen (13) bids were deemed non-responsive and were therefore not considered for award. Of the thirteen (13) substantially responsive and compliant bids, the lowest priced responsive bid was awarded the Meeten-Meer Zorg Pump Station, while the second lowest responsive bid was awarded the Jimbo /Grove Pump Station. Tepui was the third lowest priced responsive bidder and was awarded the Belle Vue Pump Station,” NPTAB explained.

But the Procuring entity went on to describe the concerns raised against the contract award as “whimsical;” and “political gimmickry”.

It further explained that in accordance with the standard procedure, an award is made to the lowest priced responsive bid. Responsiveness in this regard, NPTAB said is subject to the stated criteria in the bidding document and nothing else.

“Subject to the award of any contract, and in accord with provisions in the Procurement Act, any bidder can appeal an award subject to it being done in the specified form and manner. NPTAB is not in receipt of any appeal to its award from any bidder. And were there to be an appeal, it will be dealt with in the prescribed manner consistent with the Law,” NPTAB said.

NPTAB sought to explain that that body alone is not responsible for the awarding of contracts, noting that the board’s award is subject to a no-objection of Cabinet, if the value of the award is above G$15 million.

The Tender Board was silent on the company’s track record in construction and its experience in construction.

Related posts:

Opposition eyes legal action against Government over “shady” procurement contracts AFC calls on Public Procurement Commission to probe large contracts issued by Tender Board Statement Construction Inc. pushes back on questions of experience and competence for Bamia School project Public Health Ministry defends drug contract with US Company as it questions “sinister motive”