MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRA by wulinqing

VIEWS: 410 PAGES: 36

									         KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
         NATION RELIGION KING




   MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS
        AND TRANSPORT

           BID EVALUATION REPORT

                         For

   Contract Package PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002

(Construction of two RC Bridges and one Box Culvert on
      PR181-1 and one RC Bridge on PR 181-3 in
              Oddar Meanchey Province)




                      APRIL 2010
                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS


1.    Introduction .....................................................................................page 1
2.    Preliminary Examination of Bids ..................................................page 5
3.    Detailed Examination of Bids .......................................................page 10
4.    Price Evaluation.............................................................................page 10
5.    Post Qualification Evaluation.......................................................page 17
6.    Technical Examination
7.    Conclusions and Recommendation ..............................................page 22
      Table 1. Identification ...................................................................................................1
      Table 2. Bidding Process ..............................................................................................2
      Table 3. Bid Submission and Opening .........................................................................3
      Table 4. Record of Bid Opening ...................................................................................6
      Table 5. Preliminary Examination ................................................................................8
      Table 6. Corrections and Unconditional Discounts ....................................................10
      Table 7. Exchange Rates .............................................................................................11
      Table 8. Currency Conversion (Single Currency) ......................................................15
      Table 9. Additions, Adjustments, and Priced Deviations ...........................................16
      Table 10. Post Qualification .......................................................................................21
      Table 11. Proposed Contract Award ...........................................................................37

attachment 1 – WB NOL on Bid Document
attachment 2 – Invitation
attachment 3 – Addendum to Bid Document
attachment 4 – Bank NOL on addendum
attachment 5 – Minutes of Bid Opening & checklists

Appendix 1 – Working sheets for Preliminary Examination
Appendix 2 – Working sheets for Price Evaluation
Appendix 3 – Working sheets for Qualification Evaluation

Annex to Appendix 2 – Arithmetic Corrections




                                                        0
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General

The Package PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002 for ‘Construction of two RC Bridges and one Box
Culvert on PR181-1 and one RC Bridge on PR 181-3 in Oddar Meanchey Province’ follows
National Competitive Bidding (NCB) method of procurement using single stage single
envelope procedure. The Bidding was open subjected to post qualification. The details are
given in Table 1 below:

                             Table 1. Identification

 1.1     Name of Borrower                       Royal Government of Cambodia
 1.2     Credit/Grant number                    Credit Number 3822-KH
 1.3     Date of effectiveness
 1.4     Closing date
 (a)     original                               September 30, 2007
 (b)     revised                                December 31, 2010
 1.5     Name of project                        Provincial and Rural Infrastructure Project
 1.6     Purchaser (or Employer)
 (a)     name                                   Ministry of Public Works and Transport
 (b)     address                                3rd Floor Building of General Department of
                                                Transport, Road 598, SK Chraing Chamreah,
                                                Khan Russey Keo, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
 1.7     Contract number (identification)       PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002
 1.8     Contract description                   Construction of two RC Bridges and one Box
                                                Culvert on PR181-1 and one RC Bridge on PR
                                                181-3 in Oddar Meanchey Province
 1.9     Cost estimate                          USD780,957.30
 1.10    Method of procurement                  NCB
 1.11    Prior review required                  Yes
 1.12    Domestic preference allowed            Not Applicable
 1.13    Fixed price contract                   Yes
 1.14    Co financing, if any:
 (a)     agency name                            NIL
 (b)     percent financed by agency


The Royal Government of Cambodia represented by the Ministry of Economy and Finance
has appointed Charles Kendall & Partners (CKP) as Procurement Agents for selected World
Bank funded projects in Cambodia. The CKP acting for and on behalf of the Ministry of
Public Works and Transport (MPWT) is handling the procurement of this package.


1.2 Bid Documents

The Bid documents were prepared using Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) standard
Bidding Document, following World Bank’s (Bank) guidelines and grant agreement

                                            1
conditions, and submitted for prior review by the Bank. Following no-objection from the
Bank vide its letter dated January 22, 2010 (attachment 1), Invitation for Bids were
published in national News Papers on February 3, 2010 (copy in attachment 2) and the bid
documents were issued to the following thirteen (13) prospective bidders who purchased the
bid documents:
 No. Company Name                    Address                            City/ Country
                                     No. 60, 3rd floor Room 309,
       Daun Penh Construction                                           Phnom Penh,
 1                                   Monivong Blvd, Sangkat Wat
       Group Ltd                                                        Cambodia
                                     Phnom
                                                                        Phnom Penh,
 2     Tan Kim Eng Co., Ltd          Phnom Penh II, BMC district
                                                                        Cambodia
                                     # 31A, St 204, SK Teoul Laak 3,    Phnom Penh,
 3     Mohaprum Co., Ltd
                                     Khan Tuol Kok                      Cambodia
       KHMER DÉCOR                   #4A, St.353, Sangkat Boeng Kak     Phnom Penh,
 4     Construction Co., LTd         I, Khan Toul Kork                  Cambodia
                                     No. 101B, Ground Floor Hong        Phnom Penh,
 5     Zhong Hai (Cambodia) Ltd
                                     Kong Center, Preah sothearos       Cambodia
       Taing Cheng Oing              #46, St. 594, Sk Boeng Kak II,     Phnom Penh,
 6     Construction Co., Ltd         Toul Kork                          Cambodia
                                     #15BEo, St. 284, Olympic           Phnom Penh,
 7     Chhortevuth Construction
                                     Chamkarmon                         Cambodia
                                     No. 02G, St New, Chrouy Charng     Phnom Penh,
 8     T.S.K Construction Co., Ltd
                                     Va, Roussey Keo                    Cambodia
       SEAK CHHEAV LENG              #621, St. 357, Chbar Ampov 2,      Phnom Penh,
 9     Enterprise Co,. Ltd           Mean Chey                          Cambodia
                                     National Raod No.4, Pome           Kom Pong
       S.P.C (Samnang Peanich
 10                                  Trapang Om Perl, Khom Trapang      Sper,
       Construction Co,. Ltd)
                                     Kong, Srok Som RongTong            Cambodia
       Leang Bou Construction                                           Battambong,
 11    Co., Ltd
                                     PreyKonsack, Khom Ouchow,
                                                                        Cambodia
       Sopear Ratanak                                                   Phnom Penh,
 12                                  #63, St. 361, Chbar Ampov
       Construction Co., Ltd                                            Cambodia
                                     #4 Vogo Village, Prey Chisak       Phnom Penh,
 13    VoGo Co., Ltd
                                     Village Chaom Chao, Dangkor        Cambodia

An addendum to Bid Documents was issued on February 17, 2010 to amend the reference to
the guidelines being followed for procurement. The addendum is shown in attachment 3 and
the Bank’s NOL for the addendum is in attachment 4. The details of the bidding process are
shown in table 2 below:
                               Table 2. Bidding Process
 2.1     General Procurement Notice
 (a)     first issue date                          November 2003 Issue No 619,
 (b)     latest update                             updated in Issue No. 723 March 2008
 2.2     Prequalification, if required
 (a)     number of firms prequalified              Not Applicable
 (b)     date of Bank’s no-objection
 2.3     Specific procurement notice
 (a)     name of national newspaper                Cambodia Daily, Phnom Penh Post and
                                                   Rasmei Campuchea
 (b)     issue date                                February 3, 2010
 (c)     name of international publication         Not Applicable
 (d)     issue date                                Not Applicable
                                               2
 (e)     number of firms notified                Not Applicable
 2.4     Standard Bidding Document
 (a)     title, publication date             RGC Standard Bidding Document for NCB,
                                             September 2005
 (b)     date of Bank’s no-objection         January 22, 2010
 (c)     date of issue to bidders            February 3, 2010 to March 3, 2010
 2.5     Number of firms issued documents 13
 2.6     Amendments to documents, if any
 (a)     issue date                          February 17, 2010
 (b)     date(s) of Bank’s no-objection      February 17, 2010
 2.7     Date of pre-bid conference, if any Bank did not agree for Pre-Bid meeting
 2.8      Date minutes of conference sent to Not Applicable
          bidders and Bank


1.2 Submission of Bids and Opening

Of the thirteen (13) bidders who purchased the bid documents, six (6) have submitted the bids
before the deadline. The names of the bidders who submitted the bids are:


Bidder Name of the Bidder                                 Submission Status
No.
1        Taing Cheng Oing Construction Co., Ltd.          4 March 2010, 8:47 AM
2        Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd                  4 March 2010, 8:59 AM
3        Seak Chheav Leng Enterprise Co., Ltd.            4 March 2010, 9:05 AM
4        Mohaprum Co., Ltd.                               4 March 2010, 9:38 AM
5        Samnang Peanich Construction Co., Ltd.           4 March 2010, 9:52 AM
         (SPC)
6        T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.                    4 March 2010, 9:56 AM


The Bid Opening Committee opened the bids publicly at 10:00 AM on March 4, 2010 at
CKP-IPA office, as specified in the bid document. The bids were initialed by the committee.
The bid prices were read out and the bid opening checklist and minutes of bid opening
showing the record of Bid opening were prepared. The minutes of the bid opening were
signed by the bidders’ representatives present in the bid opening. The Minutes of Bid
Opening and the checklists are in attachment 5. The details of the bid submission and
opening are shown in table 3 below:

Table 3. Bid Submission and Opening
 3.1   Bid submission deadline
 (a)   original date, time                         March 4, 2010, 10:00 hrs Cambodia time
 (b)   extensions, if any                          NIL
 3.2   Bid opening date, time                      March 4, 2010, 10:00 hrs Cambodia time
 3.3   Record of bid opening, date sent to         March 4, 2010

                                             3
     Bank
 3.4 Number of bids submitted                       6 (Six)
 3.5 Bid validity period (days or weeks)
 (a) originally specified                           90 days
 (b) extensions, if any                             NIL
 (c) date of Bank’s no-objection, if                Not applicable
     required1


Table 4: Record of Bid Opening

                                    Bid Form                             Bid
 Seq
           Name of Bidder          Signed and   Read Out Price        Securing        Remark
 No
                                    stamped                          Declaration
 1     Taing Cheng Oing                                                            Letter of
       Construction Co., Ltd.         Yes          USD413,484.38      Enclosed     discount 5% of
                                                                                   total amount
 2     Leang Bou Construction
       Co., Ltd
                                      Yes       USD298,260.95         Enclosed     NIL
 3     Seak Chheav Leng
                                      Yes          USD721,413.65      Enclosed     NIL
       Enterprise Co., Ltd.
 4     Mohaprum Co., Ltd.             Yes          USD518,626.18      Enclosed     NIL
 5     Samnang Peanich
       Construction Co., Ltd.         Yes          USD543,558.75      Enclosed     NIL
       (SPC)
 6     T.S.K. Construction
                                      Yes          USD465,800.11      Enclosed     NIL
       Co., Ltd.


2. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION
The details of preliminary examination for each of the bidders are provided in the working
sheets in Appendix 1. The summary is as follows:

2.1 Verification

All the six bids were checked for completion of the Bid form, signature on the Bid
form, authority/ authorization, joint venture agreements/ intent to enter into join
venture as applicable. Four of the six bidders have minor deviations as follows:


(a) The Bidder number 1-Taing Cheng Oing Construction Co., Ltd., has submitted the
Bid form (Contractor’s Bid), signed by Taing Cheng Oing, Managing Director, but
did not choose the option of accepting or not accepting the proposed adjudicator.
However, since this does not affect the Bid and the option can always be ascertained
at the time of letter of acceptance if the bidder turns out to be the winner, this is
considered as a minor deviation.
                                            4
(b) Three Bidders, (i) Bidder number 2-Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.; (ii) (iv) Bidder
number 4-Mohaprum Co., Ltd.; (v) Bidder number 6-T.S.K,. Construction Co., Ltd., have
submitted the Bid form, not on the letter head of the respective companies, but are stamped
with the company seal containing the name of their companies. Since company stamp is
available, not using the letter head is considered as a minor deviation.


(c) Three Bidders, (i) Bidder number 1-Taing Cheng Oing Construction Co., Ltd.; (ii)
Bidder number 2-Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.; and (iv) Bidder number 4-Mohaprum
Co., Ltd.; did not specify whether they accept or does not accept the adjudicator appointed by
the Employer. However, since this does not affect the Bid and the option can always be
ascertained at the time of letter of acceptance if the bidder turns out to be the winner, this is
considered as a minor deviation.


(d) The Bid of Bidder number 4-Mohaprum Co., Ltd., is signed by Chan Pisey, Director.
The Bid also consists of a power of attorney signed by Chan Pisey transferring the
responsibility Sarim Sampeay, General Manager for signing and making decision during bid
validity on any modifications from the company. However, since Chan Pisey is the President
of the company as per the registration with Ministry of Commerce, his signature of the Bid is
accepted.


2.2 Eligibility

The Nationalities of all the Bidders and the joint venture partners were checked and found
eligible. No Bidder or partners have provided related consulting services on the project. None
of the six bidders are government owned enterprises. None of the firms are declared ineligible
by the bank as per the Bank’s website and none are excluded by UN Security Council.

2.3 Bid Securing Declaration

All the six bidders submitted the Bid Securing Declaration, but two bidders did not comply
with the requirement as explained below:


(a) The Bidder number 1- Taing Cheng Oing Construction Co., Ltd., has the following
deviations from the format for Bid Securing Declaration stipulated in the Bid Document:
        (i) The three year suspension clause in case of breach of obligations has been
        modified to start from 4 march 2010 instead of date of expiry of the bid validity,
        which is 2 June 2010;
        (ii) The Penalty clause (2% of the total bid amount) in case of breach of obligation
        has been omitted in the declaration;
        (iii) The expiry condition of Bid Securing Declaration omitted the case when the
        bidder is successful.


                                                5
Since this is a major deviation violating clause ITB 16.3 of Section I of the Bid Document
and ITB16.1 of Section II Bid Data Sheet of the Bid Document, the Bidder is considered
non-responsive.


(b) The Bidder number 3-Seak Cheav Leng Enterprise Co., Ltd., has the following
deviations from the format for Bid Securing Declaration stipulated in the Bid Document:
        (i) The expiry condition of Bid Securing Declaration omitted the case when the
        bidder is successful.
        (ii) The validity of the bid securing declaration has been modified to 28 days after the
        expiration of the bid instead of 30 days after expiration of the bid.
Since this is a major deviation violating clause ITB 16.3 of Section I of the Bid Document
and ITB16.1 of Section II Bid Data Sheet of the Bid Document, the Bidder is considered
non-responsive.


2.4 Completeness of Bid

2.4.1 Documents comprising the Bid


ITB 13.1 of the Bid Data Sheet mandates that the Bid submitted by the Bidder shall comprise,
(i) The signed Bid form; (ii) Statement of Ethical Conduct, Fraud and Corruption; (iii) Bid
Securing Declaration; (iv) Priced Bill of Quantities; and (v) Qualification information form
and supporting documents.


The signed Bid form; statement of ethical conduct, fraud and corruption; and Bid securing
Declaration are submitted by all the bidders (though two bidders deviated from the
requirement of the bid securing declaration).


While the Bid form is signed by all the Bidders, three of the six Bidders did not choose the
option of either accepting or not accepting the Adjudicator proposed by the Employer. Since
this does not have any impact on the Bid and can always be finalized before signing of the
contract, this is considered as a minor deviation and if any of these three Bidders becomes
lowest evaluated substantially responsive, the acceptance or non-acceptance of the adjudicator
can be ascertained at the time of letter of acceptance.


2.4.2 Submission


The Bidders were required to submit one Original, two copies of the Bid and one CD
containing the priced BOQ in excel format. Two Bidders, Bidder number 2-Leang Bou
Construction Co., Ltd.; Bidder No.5- Samnang Peanich Construction Co. Ltd., did not submit
the BOQ in CD, however this is a minor deviation.




                                                6
2.4.3 Qualification Information Form and supporting Documents


None of the six bidders submitted the copies of approved invoices/ paid vouchers/ tax receipts
in support of the average annual construction turnover, instead submitted copies of the
contract agreements and income statements.


Of the six bidders, only one bidder (Bidder number 5-T.S.K.Construction Co., Ltd., has
submitted the authority to seek Bank reference.


One Bidder, Bidder number 4 – Mohaprum Co., Ltd., has submitted work permit (license)
which is expired in September 2009. Clarification was sought on the license and the bidder
has responded by submitting the copy of the valid work permit (license) which was obtained
before the bid submission date.


One Bidder, Bidder number 5 – Samnang Peanich Construction Co. Ltd., did not submit the
copies of financial statements, though in the index it is mentioned. However, since this is
historical information, clarification was sought from the Bidder and the bidder responded by
submitting the financial statements for three years (2007,2008 and 2009).

2.5 Substantial Responsiveness

All the bids are checked for deviations in the conditions, such as, price adjustment and
construction period; proposed sub-contracting; changes in performance guarantee; advance
requirement; percentage retention; insurance coverage and applicable law; and any other
substantial deviations. None of the Bidders have any deviations.


2.6 Results of Preliminary Examination

Four of the Six bids meet the requirements of the preliminary examination of bids and were
accepted for detailed examination.

The summary of the results of preliminary examination is in Table 5 below:




                                              7
                                                    Table 5. Preliminary Examination

Bidder                        Bidder                          Verification      Eligibility      Bid        Complete   Substantial   Acceptance
Number                                                                                         Securing       ness     Responsive    for Detailed
                                                                                              Declaration    of Bid       ness       Examination
                                (a)                                (b)              (c)              (d)       (e)            (f)        (g)
  1.     Taing Cheng Oing Construction Co., Ltd.           Pass                Pass           Fail          Pass       Pass             NO
  2.     Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.                  Pass                Pass           Pass          Pass       Pass             YES
  3.     Seak Chheav Leng Enterprise Co., Ltd.             Pass                Pass           Fail          Pass       Pass             NO
  4.     Mohaprum Co., Ltd.                                Pass                Pass           Pass          Pass       Pass             YES
  5.     Samnang Peanich Construction Co., Ltd.            Pass                Pass           Pass          Pass       Pass             YES
  6.     T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.                     Fail                Pass           Pass          Pass       Pass             YES

Note: for details, please refer to working sheets for preliminary examination (Appendix 1)




                                                                         8
3. DETAILED EVALUATION OF BIDS
Four of the Six Bidders who passed the preliminary examination of bids were considered for
detailed evaluation and the details are as follows:

3.1 PRICE EVALUATION

The details of price evaluation are in working sheet for price evaluation in Appendix 2. The
summary of the findings are presented below:

3.1.1 Non-material non-conformities and deviations

All the four bids were examined for any non-material non-conformity and other deviations
and the possibility of quantification for loading the prices. One bidder, Bidder number 4 –
Mohaprum Co., Ltd, has three non-material non-conformities as follows:


        (i) no rate for item 6.9(1) of section A; (ii) quantity of item 4.1(1) of section B is
        wrongly taken as 302 instead of 302.5; (iii) quantity of item 5.1(3) of section B is
        wrongly taken as 118.59 instead of 115.58 used quantity of 180.55 cum for item
        5.1(3) instead of 185 cum stipulated in the Bid Document.


        Following the Bank’s instructions, price loading was not done for evaluation purpose
        for the item not quoted by the bidder. The price is corrected for (ii) and (iii) and
        according to the correct quantity and the correction is (-)USD559.26.


3.1.2 Correction of Errors

The bid prices are checked for arithmetical errors and the following errors were corrected:

    (a) The Bidder number 2-Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd., made a multiplication
        error in item 4.1(1) of section D. The correction is (+)USD249.60
    (b) The Bidder number 5-S.P.C. Construction Co., Ltd., made a decimal error in total
        and the correction is (-)USD0.03.
    (c) Bidder number 9-T.S.K,. Construction Co., Ltd., made (i) a multiplication error in
        item 9.7(1) of Section D where unit rate is mentioned but the total column is empty.
        The correction is (+)USD2,620; (ii) contingency 10% is wrongly calculated on
        provisional sum instead of total. The correction is (+)USD28,475.85

3.1.3 Unconditional Discounts

No Bidder has offered any unconditional discounts.

The details of correction of errors and unconditional discounts are shown in the table 6 below:




                                                9
                                         Table 6. Corrections and Unconditional Discounts


Bid                        Bidder                     Read-out Bid             Corrections           Corrected Unconditional        Corrected/
der                                                      Price(s)                                   Bid Price(s)  Discounts2        Discounted
Nu                                                 Curr Amount(s)     Computation Provisional                    Perce Amount       Bid Price(s)
mb                                                 ency                al Errors1   Sums                          nt
 er                                                (ies)
                             (a)                   (b)      (c)              (d)          (e)       (f) = (c) + (d) -   (g)   (h)   (i) = (f) – (h)
                                                                                                           (e)
2.    Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.             USD   298,260.95        +249.60     31,509.14      267,001.41        nil   nil    267,001.41
4.    Mohaprum Co., Ltd.                           USD   518,626.18           0        77,876.45      440,749.73        nil   nil    440,749.73
5.    Samnang Peanich Construction Co., Ltd.       USD   543,558.75         -0.03      122,387.16     421,171.56        nil   nil    421,171.56
6.    T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.                USD   465,800.11       +31,095.85   124,679.54     372,216.42        nil   nil    372,216.42




                                                                     10
                              Table 7. Exchange Rates

Currency Used for Bid Evaluation: USD

Not applicable as all the bidders have quoted in USD and no foreign currency requirements
are mentioned.




.




                                            11
                            Table 8. Currency Conversion (Single Currency)
                                           Specify Evaluation Currency: IDR

Bidder   Corrected/Disc       Payment Composition1                    Exchang      Amounts in        Exchang             Evaluation Currency
             ounted                                                       e                              e
            Bid Price   Currency Percent of Amount in                 Rate Used    Currency of        Rate for        Bid Prices        Total3
          (in specified    of     Total Bid Evaluation                by Bidder1    Payment          Evaluation
            currency)   Payment              Currency                                                    2
 (a)           (b)             (c)         (d)      (e) = (b) x (d)      (f)       (g) = (e) x (f)      (h)       (i) = (g) x (h)        (j)


          Not Applicable as all the rates quoted are in USD and no foreign currency funds are sought by the bidders




                                                             15
                                      Table 9. Additions, Adjustments, and Priced Deviations
                                                   Specify Evaluation Currency: USD


Bidder                        Bidder                     Corrected/     Additions     Adjustments    Priced            Total Price
number                                                   Discounted                                 Deviations
                                                          Bid Price
                                (a)                          (b)           (c)            (d)          (e)       (f) = (b) + (c) + (d) + (e)
  2.     Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.                 267,001.41        nil           nil           nil             267,001.41
  4.     Mohaprum Co., Ltd.                               440,749.73     -559.26          nil           nil             440,190.47
  5.     Samnang Peanich Construction Co., Ltd.           421,171.56        nil           nil           nil             421,171.56
  6.     T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.                    372,216.42        nil           nil           nil             372,216.42




                                                                   16
3.1.4 Ranking:         The ranking of the bidders (The lowest evaluated bidder is rank
1 and the highest evaluated bidder is rank 4) is shown below. The calculation sheets
of arithmetic corrections are shown in Appendix 2.

        Bidder                       Name of the Bidder                        Ranking
        Number

           2.     Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd.                                 1
           6.     T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.                                    2
           5.     Samnang Peanich Construction Co., Ltd.                           3
           4.     Mohaprum Co., Ltd.                                               4


3.2 POST QUALIFICATION EVALUATION

The post qualification evaluation was carried out for the lowest evaluated substantially bidder
While the evaluation details are provided in ‘Appendix 3-working sheets for post qualification
evaluation’, the summary is as follows:


3.2.1   Bidder number 2- Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd (The first ranked lowest
        evaluated Bidder):


The Bid Data Sheet ITB 6.3 (f) (Amendment 1) specifies that if a bidder participates in more
than one of the following bidding packages, viz., (i) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001; (ii) PRIP-
CKP-09-NCB-W-002; and (iii) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-003 that are being tendered
concurrently, in order to be qualified to be awarded multiple contracts, the bidder will be
required to cumulatively meet the qualification criteria stated in Clause 6.3 (a), (c), (d), and
(e) in the Bid Data Sheet of the bidding documents of the respective bidding packages.


The Bidder number 2- Leang Bou Construction Co., Ltd has participated in the following two
of the three packages mentioned in ITB 6.3 (f):
    (i) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001
    (ii) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002
and the evaluation was carried out accordingly.


3.2.1.1 Criteria ITB 6.3 (a)-Minimum average annual turnover: [The average annual
volume of construction work for the successful Bidder over the last 3 years (2006, 2007 and
2008) shall be for (i) USD 400,000; (ii) USD 500,000; and (iii) 250,000 or equivalent value.]


The Bidder has mentioned in the Qualification information sheet the annual amounts of
construction works performed in each of the last three years as follows:
   2006 – USD184,146.01; 2007 – USD1,684,878.10; and 2008 – USD914,669.18



                                              17
The Bidder did not enclose any documentary evidence other than the income statements
(signed by Mr. Chham Oeum and Mr. Tang Seng Bou, no designations were mentioned in the
financial statements, but it is known from the Bid Form that Mr. Tang Seng Bou is the
Director), which show the following construction revenue:
        2006 – USD184,146; 2007 – USD1,684,878.10; 2008 – USD914,669.18.
Clarification was sought from the Bidder requesting the records of payment received or
approved invoices or tax certificates etc. and copies of agreements/final invoice/completion
certificates for the works under taken in the years 2006, 2007 & 2008. The Bidder responded
by submitting the invoices/payment vouchers for one work costing USD184,146.01 and
copies of contract agreements. But one contract for work ‘Road rehabilitation Ampil Pem-
Trapeang Snoul, Chas – Chress, and Proveuk Pong-Sre Morn’, the agreement was signed
between Ministry of Rural Development and Hout Chhoeun Construction Co., Ltd., and no
mention of the name of the Bidder any where in the agreement. But the Bidder has provided a
letter of Joint Companies request for joint companies, signed by both the Directors of Hout
Chhoeun Construction and Leang Bout construction Co., Ltd. The letter did not mention
scope of joint venture. The letter did not contain any date. This cannot substantiate the JV
partnership for the work claimed and hence cannot be considered as part of the turnover of the
Bidder. The average annual construction turnover calculated from the documents submitted is
as follows:
        2006 – USD824,979.68; 2007 – USD124,771.04; 2008 – USD481,549.32.
Since the documentary evidence is not matching with the statements, a further clarification
was sought from the bidder on the construction turnover as well as the JV claim on particular
contract. The Bidder responded by stating that they have approved incovices and practical
completion report only for one work (O’Sngout and O’Treng bridges construction) and all
other works, they have submitted the contract copies. The Bidder also stated that for the
evidence of JV for the contract mentioned, they have only the letter of joint partner submitted
to MRD/ TPIT IV. The Bidder also attached new Income statements and Balance sheets for
the three years (signed by Mr. Chham Oeum and Mr. Tang Seng Bou, no designations were
mentioned in the financial statements, but it is known from the Bid Form that Mr. Tang Seng
Bou is the Director), which indicate the construction revenue as follows:
        2006 – USD824,979.68; 2007 – USD124,771.04; and 2008 – USD481,549.32.
It is obvious that the Balance sheets and income statements were changed according to the
calculations based on the agreement copies, which is not a sound/acceptable financial
practice. The audited statements or signature of the certified accountant on the financial
statements is not established.


Ignoring the financial statements, considering the experience through contract copies, the
average annual turnover in three years is USD477,100.01, which qualifies the Bidder for this
qualification criteria for only one package, PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001 and neither for
package PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002 or both packages together.



                                              18
Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criteria.


3.2.1.2 Criteria ITB 6.3(b)– Experience: [Experience as prime contractor in the construction
of at least two works of a nature and complexity equivalent to the works within the last 5
years (to comply with this requirement, works cited should be at least 70 percent complete,
billed and paid)]


In the ‘Qualification Information’ sheet, in the table under point 1.3, it is written ‘see attached
list’, but the list of experience is not provided and no documentary evidence is provided.
Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the experience of substantial completion of the
works of similar nature and complexity by submitting the copies of agreements, completion
certificate or final invoice, etc., along with the list of works. The Bidder responded by
submitting copies of the contract agreements and practical completion certificate for one work
with invoices and payment receipts.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification cretirion.


3.2.1.3 Criteria ITB 6.3 (c) – cash flow requirements [The minimum amount of liquid
assets and/or credit facilities net of other contractual commitments of the successful Bidder
shall be for (i) USD60,000; (ii) 100,000 and (iii) 30,000]:


The Bidder neither submitted any information on availability of financial resources nor
documentary evidence. Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the access to financial
resources with documentary evidence of the documents established/signed before the bid
submission date. The Bidder did not respond to this clarification request.


Hence the financial resources availability cannot be established and the financial statements
can also be not taken into consideration due to change in figures in two submissions and
hence the Bidder is considered non-responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.1.4 Criteria 6.3 (d) –: essential equipment
The requirement is as follows:
                    Equipment                        (i)         (ii)        (iii)
       Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)                1           2            1
       Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                      1           2            1
       Truck (minimum 4 cum)                         4           7            3
       Pile driving machine                          1           2            1
       Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)              2           3            1
       Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                 4           4            3
       cum capacity
       Laboratory testing equipment                  1           1           1
       (complete set)
                                                19
The bidder has provided a list of equipment owned by him and the availability is as follows:
                    Equipment
       Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)                  2
       Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                        1
       Truck (15 tonn capacity)                        2
       Pile driving machine                            0
       Mobile crane (0.2 cum bucket                    2
       capacity)
       Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                   4
       cum capacity
       Laboratory testing equipment                    1
       (complete set)

Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the ownership/hiring of the equipment by
submitting the copies of purchase vouchers or Bills or inventory certificates or intent to lease
or lease agreements etc., which are before the bid submission date. The Bidder responded just
by re-submitting the same list provided in the Bid Document, but no- documentary evidence
nor any explanation.


Hence the Bidder is considered non-responsive to this criterion.


3.2.1.5 Criteria 6.3 (e) –: Key Personnel [For each of the package, the contract manager
should be with Civil Engineering background and should have at least 5 years experience in
Road cross drainage works]


The Bidder provided a list of 18 personnel in the organization. Under t point 1.5 of
‘Qualification Information’, the bidder mentioned that Contract Manager is Mr. Tang Seng
Bou, General Manager having 11 years experience; and the Bridge Engineer is Mr. Koy Deth,
site engineer having 6 years experience. But the CVs of the personnel are not provided.
Clarification was sought and the Bidder provided the CVs of both the personnel which suit
the requirement The qualification is mentioned as Bachelor degree, but engineering
background is not mentioned. However, the experience shows of civil engineering
construction.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion.


3.2.1.6 Criteria ITB 6.4 -: History of litigation [A consistent history of litigation or
arbitration awards against the Applicant or any partner of a joint venture may result in
disqualification]


The Bidder indicated in the Qualification Information sheet that there is no history of
litigation or arbitration awards against the Bidder.

                                               20
Hence, the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.1.7 Result: The bidder failed to meet the qualification criteria 6.3(c) and 6.3(d) even for a
single package. Hence the Bidder is considered not qualified.


The qualification evaluation of the second lowest evaluated responsive bidders is as follows:


3.2.2    Bidder number 6- T.S.K Construction Co., Ltd (The second ranked lowest
        evaluated Bidder):


The Bid Data Sheet ITB 6.3 (f) (Amendment 1) specifies that if a bidder participates in more
than one of the following bidding packages, viz., (i) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001; (ii) PRIP-
CKP-09-NCB-W-002; and (iii) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-003 that are being tendered
concurrently, in order to be qualified to be awarded multiple contracts, the bidder will be
required to cumulatively meet the qualification criteria stated in Clause 6.3 (a), (c), (d), and
(e) in the Bid Data Sheet of the bidding documents of the respective bidding packages.


The Bidder number 6- T.S.K Construction Co., Ltd has participated in all the three packages
mentioned above and the evaluation was carried out accordingly.


3.2.2.1 Criteria ITB 6.3 (a)-Minimum average annual turnover: [The average annual
volume of construction work for the successful Bidder over the last 3 years (2006, 2007 and
2008) shall be for (i) USD 400,000; (ii) USD 500,000; and (iii) 250,000 or equivalent value.]


The Bidder has mentioned in the Qualification information sheet the annual amounts of
construction works performed in each of the last three years as follows:
   2006 – USD856,116.73; 2007 – USD970,650.90; and 2008 – USD1,500,029.84
The Bidder enclosed the copies of contracts and income statements (signed by Mr. Kao
Sophan, Financial Manager and Mr. Tep Sokha, Director). The annual construction turnover
from the work experience through contract agreement copies is as follows:
   2006 – USD863,013.62; 2007 – USD565,860.39; and 2008 – USD1,171,107.40
And the income statement shows the following income from construction:
   2006 – USD817,420; 2007 – USD870,243; 2008 – USD1,000,910.


Clarification was sought from the Bidder requesting the records of payment received or
approved invoices or tax certificates etc. for the years 2006, 2007 & 2008. The Bidder
responded saying that the amount indicated in the form is in reference to the contract
agreements signed in those years and that they do not keep the payment received or approved
invoices, etc. The bidder also stated that they lost some of the agreements and could not find,



                                               21
but the balance sheet reflects these amounts and the bidder confirms the annual turnover as
indicated in the form.


Considering the given situation, the construction experience with documentary evidence of
contract agreements is taken for the computation of the average annual turnover for the
purpose of evaluation. Thus the average annual construction turnover for three years (2006,
2007 and 2008) is USD866,660.47.


The requirement for all the three packages together is USD1,150,000. The requirement for
package (i) + (ii) is USD900,000; for package (i)+(iii) is USD650,000 and for package
(ii)+(iii) is USD750,000.


Hence the Bidder qualifies for any one of three packages or for combination of packages
(i)+(iii) or combination of packages (ii)+(iii).


3.2.2.2 Criteria ITB 6.3(b)– Experience: [Experience as prime contractor in the construction
of at least two works of a nature and complexity equivalent to the works within the last 5
years (to comply with this requirement, works cited should be at least 70 percent complete,
billed and paid)]


The Bidder claimed similar experience in past five years in four contracts by providing
contract copies, but completion status was not mentioned. Clarification was sought from the
Bidder on substantial completion of the works and the Bidder responded by providing the
completion certificates.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.2.3 Criteria ITB 6.3 (c) – cash flow requirements [The minimum amount of liquid
assets and/or credit facilities net of other contractual commitments of the successful Bidder
shall be for (i) USD60,000; (ii) 100,000 and (iii) 30,000]:


The Bidder has submitted a copy of the letter from CAB Bank addressed to Ministry of
Commerce indicating that the Bidder has credit balance of USD100,000 as of 2 March 2010.


Hence the Bidder qualifies for any one of three packages; or for combination of (i)+(iii).


3.2.2.4 Criteria 6.3 (d) –: essential equipment
The requirement is as follows:
                    Equipment                           (i)     (ii)       (iii)
       Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)                   1       2           1
       Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                         1       2           1
       Truck (minimum 4 cum)                            4       7           3
                                                   22
       Pile driving machine                           1         2          1
       Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)               2         3          1
       Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                  4         4          3
       cum capacity
       Laboratory testing equipment                   1         1          1
       (complete set)

The bidder has provided a list of equipment owned by him and the availability is as follows:
                   Equipment                         No.    Owned/
                                                             hire
     Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)                   2     owned
                                                      4      hire
     Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                         2     owned
                                                      4      hire
     Truck (minimum 4 cum)                            4     owned
                                                      9      hire
     Pile driving machine                            1      owned
                                                      4      hire
     Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)                 1     owned
                                                      4      hire
     Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                   12     owned
     cum capacity
     Laboratory testing equipment                    2       owned
     (complete set)

Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the ownership/hiring of the equipment by
submitting the copies of purchase vouchers or Bills or inventory certificates or intent to lease
or lease agreements etc., which are before the bid submission date. The Bidder responded by
providing copies of receipts of import tax paid for the equipment owned by him and a
statement that the contract for hiring is not yet entered for the equipment intended to be hired,
but will be done once the contract is awarded.


Hence the Bidder is considered responsive to this criterion for any one of the three packages
or combination of (i)+(iii) or combination of (ii)+(iii).


3.2.2.5 Criteria 6.3 (e) –: Key Personnel [For each of the package, the contract manager
should be with Civil Engineering background and should have at least 5 years experience in
Road cross drainage works]


List of staff of the company signed by the Director and copies of the qualification certificates
are provided. There are six civil engineers, 3 hydraulic engineers and one architect & urban
planner available with the company. There is no particular mention of the person who will be
the contract manager for this package.




                                                23
Clarification was sought from the Bidder as to who among the list of personnel provided will
be the contract manager for each package. The Bidder responded by mentioning the names of
the personnel who are qualified.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion.


3.2.2.6 Criteria ITB 6.4 -: History of litigation [A consistent history of litigation or
arbitration awards against the Applicant or any partner of a joint venture may result in
disqualification]


The Bidder indicated in the Qualification Information sheet that there is no history of
litigation or arbitration awards against the Bidder.


Hence, the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.2.7 Results: The Bidder is qualified to be awarded any of the three packages or
combination of package (i)+(iii).


3.2.3    Bidder number 5- S.P.C.Co. Ltd. (The third ranked lowest evaluated Bidder):


The Bid Data Sheet ITB 6.3 (f) (Amendment 1) specifies that if a bidder participates in more
than one of the following bidding packages, viz., (i) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001; (ii) PRIP-
CKP-09-NCB-W-002; and (iii) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-003 that are being tendered
concurrently, in order to be qualified to be awarded multiple contracts, the bidder will be
required to cumulatively meet the qualification criteria stated in Clause 6.3 (a), (c), (d), and
(e) in the Bid Data Sheet of the bidding documents of the respective bidding packages.


The Bidder number 5- S.P.C. Co., Ltd., has participated in all the three packages mentioned
in ITB 6.3 (f) and the evaluation was carried out accordingly.


3.2.3.1 Criteria ITB 6.3 (a)-Minimum average annual turnover: [The average annual
volume of construction work for the successful Bidder over the last 3 years (2006, 2007 and
2008) shall be for (i) USD 400,000; (ii) USD 500,000; and (iii) 250,000 or equivalent value.]


The Bidder mentioned in the form of qualification information as, the average annual
construction turnover in 2006 is USD307,664.92; in 2007 is USD239,203.76 and in 2008 is
USD533,596.37 and thus the average is USD360,155.02.


When verified the financial statements provided by the Bidder, the construction revenue in
2007 is USD239,204; in 2008 is USD533,596.00. The financial statements for year 2006 were
not provided.       Clarification was sought from the Bidder requesting the records of

                                               24
payment received or approved invoices or tax certificates etc. for the years 2006, 2007
& 2008. The Bidder responded and provided the contract agreements copies and paid
invoices/receipts as documentary evidence. The financial statements were not
submitted by the bidder for cross verification. Clarification was sought from the
bidder, and the bidder responded by submitting the audited financial statements of
years 2007, 2008 and 2009 (audited by APV (Cambodia) Co., Ltd., and the bidder
also stated that year 2006 statements are not yet provided by the audited firm.
Hence the Bidder meets the average annual turnover requirement only for package
(iii).

Hence the Bidder qualifies for only package (iii), but not for package (i) or package (ii).


3.2.3.2 Criteria ITB 6.3(b)– Experience: [Experience as prime contractor in the construction
of at least two works of a nature and complexity equivalent to the works within the last 5
years (to comply with this requirement, works cited should be at least 70 percent complete,
billed and paid)]


The Bidder has provided contract copies as documentary evidence of his experience and most
of the works carried out were school buildings and optical fibre cable laying. There are two
bridge works carried out in 2003, which cannot be considered for experience in past 5 years.
The similar works carried out in past 5 years are as follows:
     •   Construction of two Box culverts in commune Lumhach, Kandal Province; value –
         USD106,500; Employer – commune council, Lumhach, Ongsnool District, Kandal
         Province; agreement – 9 January 2007; completion – 9 June 2007; Document –
         contract agreement.
     •   Construction of two bridges at Tropang Kong commune, Samrong Tong District,
         Kampong Spue Province; value – USD135,650; Employer – commune counsel,
         Tropang Kong commune; agreement – 22 February 2008; completion – 15 May 2008;
         Document – contract copy
Clarification was sought from the bidder on the evidence of substantial completion of the
works and the bidder had responded by submitting the approved invoices/receipts and
completion certificates.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion.


3.2.3.3 Criteria ITB 6.3 (c) – cash flow requirements [The minimum amount of liquid
assets and/or credit facilities net of other contractual commitments of the successful Bidder
shall be for (i) USD60,000; (ii) 100,000 and (iii) 30,000]:




                                               25
The Bidder has provided a Bank confirmation letter dated 3 March 2010 from ACLEDA
Bank Plc., confirming that the bidder has a deposit balance of USD29,045.00; trade finance
limit of USD100,000 and revolving commitment line of USD30,000. Hence the bidder
qualifies for any two of the three packages only.


3.2.3.4 Criteria 6.3 (d) –: essential equipment
The requirement is as follows:
                    Equipment                       (i)          (ii)    (iii)
       Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)               1            2        1
       Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                     1            2        1
       Truck (minimum 4 cum)                        4            7        3
       Pile driving machine                         1            2        1
       Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)             2            3        1
       Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                4            4        3
       cum capacity
       Laboratory testing equipment                 1            1       1
       (complete set)

The bidder has provided a list of equipment owned by him and the availability is as follows:


                 Equipment                    No.         Owned/hire
     Vibrating roller (15 tonne)               3          To be leased
     Tyre roller (10 tonne)                    3          To be leased
     Truck (5 tonn cap)                        8            owned
     Pile driving machine                     3           To be leased
     Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)          3          To be leased
     Concrete mixers                          15            owned
     Laboratory testing equipment             1           To be leased
     (complete set)

The Bidder mentioned that majority of the equipment is to be leased from Sok Sokha
Company. Clarification was sought from the Bidder to provide documentary evidence of
ownership or lease. The Bidder responded by submitting the receipts of import tax as proof of
ownership. The bidder also provided a letter stating that he is intending to lease some of the
equipment if he wins the contracts and provided the company name, address and telephone
number of the company from whom he is intending to lease vibrating roller, tyre roller, pile
driving machine, mbile crane. For laboratory equipment, still contacting the leasing company.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion for any one of the
three packages.


3.2.3.5 Criteria 6.3 (e) –: Key Personnel [For each of the package, the contract manager
should be with Civil Engineering background and should have at least 5 years experience in
Road cross drainage works]

                                              26
The bidder proposed Sin Savy as contract manager, who is 44 yrs old, 8 years experience as
project manager, but the experience mentioned in the CV is only in building construction, not
in road works or road cross drainage works.


Hence the Bidder is considered non-responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.3.6 Criteria ITB 6.4 -: History of litigation [A consistent history of litigation or
arbitration awards against the Applicant or any partner of a joint venture may result in
disqualification]


The Bidder indicated in the Qualification Information sheet that there is no history of
litigation or arbitration awards against the Bidder.


Hence, the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.3.7 Result: The bidder is non-responsive.


3.2.4    Bidder number 4- Mohaprum Co., Ltd (The fourth ranked lowest evaluated Bidder):


The Bid Data Sheet ITB 6.3 (f) (Amendment 1) specifies that if a bidder participates in more
than one of the following bidding packages, viz., (i) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001; (ii) PRIP-
CKP-09-NCB-W-002; and (iii) PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-003 that are being tendered
concurrently, in order to be qualified to be awarded multiple contracts, the bidder will be
required to cumulatively meet the qualification criteria stated in Clause 6.3 (a), (c), (d), and
(e) in the Bid Data Sheet of the bidding documents of the respective bidding packages.


The Bidder number 4- Mohaprum Co., Ltd., has participated in all the three packages
mentioned in ITB 6.3 (f) and the evaluation was carried out accordingly.


3.2.4.1 Criteria ITB 6.3 (a)-Minimum average annual turnover: [The average annual
volume of construction work for the successful Bidder over the last 3 years (2006, 2007 and
2008) shall be for (i) USD 400,000; (ii) USD 500,000; and (iii) 250,000 or equivalent value.]


The Bidder mentioned in the form of qualification information as, the average annual
construction turnover in 2006 is USD190,732.56; in 2007 is USD2,905,268.83 and in 2008 is
USD1,293,990.81 and thus the average is USD1,463,330.73.
When verified the financial statements provided by the Bidder, the construction revenue in
2006 is USD38,524.59; in 2007 is USD1,655,987.06; and in 2008 is USD2,992,411.90 and
the average is USD1,562,307.85. Further, when the experience of the bidder is verified
through the contract agreement copies provided by him, the turnover works out to


                                                27
USD1,047,211.35 in 2006; USD1,832,050.16 in 2007; and USD2,435,762.02 in 2008, thus
the average is USD1,771,674.51.


Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the different figures of annual
construction turnover evaluated from the documents provided and sought for the
approved invoices or payment certificates or receipts or tax payments as documentary
evidence. The Bidder responded by providing completion certificates of three
contracts.

Since the Bidder meets the requirement of the turnover of all the three packages cumulatively
with any of these figures, the Bidder is considered responsive.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criteria for all the
three packages.


3.2.4.2 Criteria ITB 6.3(b)– Experience: [Experience as prime contractor in the construction
of at least two works of a nature and complexity equivalent to the works within the last 5
years (to comply with this requirement, works cited should be at least 70 percent complete,
billed and paid)]


The bidder has experience in Buildings, Roads, Bridge and Irrigation works. The road and
cross drainage works are listed below:
    •   Road Rehabilitation KCM02 Kompong Cham province; value-USD2,13712.60; start
        date – 6 Feb 2007 and completion date – 6 July 2007; Employer – Ministry of Rural
        Development (TRIP IV); Document – contract agreement, completion certificate
    •   Bridge at Srey Nouy 1, Siem Reap province; value – USD74,669.81; start date – 8
        July 2007; completion – 3 Aug 2008; Employer – Ministry of Rural Development
        (ADB financed); Document – contract agreement
    •   Large scale structure (30 m)-Srae Nouy 2 at Siem Reap Province; value –
        USD84,059.74; Employer – Ministry of Rural Development (ADB financed); start –
        8 Aug 2007 and completion – 3 sep 2008; Document – contract agreement


Clarification was sought from the Bidder on documentary evidence of substantial completion
of the works and the Bidder responded by providing the completion certificates.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion.


3.2.4.3 Criteria ITB 6.3 (c) – cash flow requirements [The minimum amount of liquid
assets and/or credit facilities net of other contractual commitments of the successful Bidder
shall be for (i) USD60,000; (ii) 100,000 and (iii) 30,000]:


                                               28
The Bidder has submitted a Bank confirmation letter dated 19 January 2010 from ACLEDA
Bank Plc., confirming the credit line of USD182,000 which will be expiring in January 2011.
The cumulative requirement for three packages is USD190,000 and hence the bidder qualifies
only for combination of any two packages.


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion for any
two packages combined.


3.2.4.4 Criteria 6.3 (d) –: essential equipment
The requirement is as follows:
                   Equipment                       (i)        (ii)       (iii)
      Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)               1          2           1
      Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                     1          2           1
      Truck (minimum 4 cum)                        4          7           3
      Pile driving machine                         1          2           1
      Mobile crane (15 tonne capacity)             2          3           1
      Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                4          4           3
      cum capacity
      Laboratory testing equipment                 1           1          1
      (complete set)

The bidder has provided a list of equipment owned by him and the availability is as follows:
                   Equipment
      Vibrating roller (15-25 tonne)               3
      Tyre roller (8-10 tonne)                     4
      Truck (15 tonn capacity)                     9
      Pile driving machine                         5
      Mobile crane (0.2 cum bucket                 4
      capacity)
      Concrete mixers (minimum 0.25                10
      cum capacity
      Laboratory testing equipment                 2
      (complete set)

Clarification was sought from the Bidder on the documentary evidence of the ownership of
the equipment. The Bidder sought for some more time to submit the clarification (5 days time
was given), but was allowed only one day more. The Bidder provided the statements of the
details of equipment


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion for combination of
any two packages.




                                              29
3.2.4.5 Criteria 6.3 (e) –: Key Personnel [For each of the package, the contract manager
should be with Civil Engineering background and should have at least 5 years experience in
Road cross drainage works]


The Bidder provided a list of company personnel and CVs, but did not mention who will be
the contract manager. Clarification was sought and the Bidder responded by providing the
Detailed CVs of (i) Mr. Sarim Sampeay, 36 yrs, diploma in civil engineering, 13 yrs of
experience, 8 years with the company, has experience in road cross drainage works; (ii) Phay-
Vongsa, ager 37 yrs; worked in ministry of rural development, experienced in road works,
diploma in rural engineering; (iii) Mourn Sokhom, age 34; qualification-civil engineering;
experience 7 years in road and other civil works;


Hence the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this criterion for all the three
packages cumulative.


3.2.4.6 Criteria ITB 6.4 -: History of litigation [A consistent history of litigation or
arbitration awards against the Applicant or any partner of a joint venture may result in
disqualification]


The Bidder indicated in the Qualification Information sheet that there is no history of
litigation or arbitration awards against the Bidder.


Hence, the Bidder is considered substantially responsive to this qualification criterion.


3.2.4.7 Result: The bidder is qualified for combination of any two packages or for any single
package among three packages he bid for.




                                               30
                                                       Table 10. Post Qualification


   Bidder         Minimum avg.     Experie     Cash flow             Equipment (ITB        Personnel      Historical           Results
               annual construction nce (ITB requirement (ITB             6.3 (d))        (ITB 6.3 (e))    Financial
                turnover (ITB 6.3 6.3 (b))       6.3 (c))                                                Performanc
                       (a))                                                                              e (ITB 6.4)
     (a)                 (b)              (c)           (d)                 (e)               (f)            (g)                 (h)
Leang Bou     Qualified only for          Pass         Fail                 Fail         Qualified for      Pass            Not Qualified
Construction one package, either                                                           both the
Company       package (i) or (ii)                                                        packages (i)
                                                                                            and (ii)
T.S.K.           Qualified for any        Pass   Qualified for any   Qualified for any   Qualified for      Pass       Qualified for any one
Construction      one of the three               one of the three    one of the three    all the three                 of the three packages;
Co., Ltd.          packages; or                    packages; or        packages; or       packages                       or combination of
                  combination of                  combination of      combination of                                           (i)+(iii)
               (i)+(iii); or (ii)+(iii)              (i)+(iii)          (i)+(iii) or
                                                                      combination of
                                                                         (ii)+(iii)
S.P.C. Co.,     qualifies for only        Pass   Qualified for any   Qualified for any       Fail           Pass          Not Qualified for
Ltd.           package (iii), but not            two of the three      one package                                     Package (i) or Package
                for package (i) or                  packages                                                           (ii). Qualified only for
                    package (ii)                                                                                             package (iii)
Mohaprum         Qualified for all        Pass   Qualified for any   Qualified for any   Qualified for      Pass       Qualified for any single
Co., Ltd.         three packages                 single package or   two of the three    all the three                        package or
                                                  combination of        packages          packages                       combination of any
                                                   any two of the                                                          two of the three
                                                   three packages                                                              packages




                                                                       31
3.3       ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CONTRACT AWARD

Since there are two options to award the contract, an economic analysis was done to decide
the best economic recommendation for contract award. The details are in the following table:


            PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-001               PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002              PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-003
             Bidder          Qualification       Bidder        Qualification          Bidder       Qualifiction
 Rank 1    Leang Bou             Failed        Leang Bou           Failed          T.S.K.          Qualified for
           Construction                        Construction                        Construction    any of the
           Co., Ltd                            Co., Ltd                            Co., Ltd.       three
                                                                                                   packages; or
                                                                                                   combination
                                                                                                   of (i)+(iii)
 Rank 2    T.S.K.           Qualified for      T.S.K.         Qualified for        Mohaprum        Qualified for
           Construction     any of the three   Construction   any of the three     Co., Ltd.       any two of
           Co., Ltd.        packages; or       Co., Ltd.      packages; or                         the three
                            combination of                    combination of                       packages
                            (i)+(iii)                         (i)+(iii)
 Rank 3    Mohaprum         Qualified for      S.P.C.          Failed              S.P.C.Co.,      Failed
           Co., Ltd.        any two of the     Construction                        Ltd.
                            three packages     Co., Ltd.
 Rank 4    S.P.C.Co.,        Failed            Mohaprum       Qualified for
           Ltd.                                Co., Ltd.      any two of the
                                                              three packages



                                     Option description                     Total Bid Price 
      Option I          Package 1 & 3 to T.S.K. Construction Co.,                   962,865.50  
                        Ltd., and package 2 to Mohaprum Co., Ltd. 

      Option II         Package 2 to T.S.K. Construction Co., Ltd.,             1,000,149.88  
                        and package 1 & 3 to Mohaprum Co., Ltd. 


Hence it is recommended to go for Option I and accordingly, the contract award
for package PRIP-CKP-09-NCB-W-002 is recommended to Mohaprum Co., Ltd.

3.4 TECHNICAL EXAMINATION of the Lowest Evaluated Substantially
Responsive Bid:

3.3.1 Work Schedule

The work schedule proposed by the bidder is meeting the requirement of construction period.
All the activities shown in the schedule of works are well scheduled and meets general
requirements of the civil works construction.

3.3.2 Method Statement:

The construction method is not provided by the Bidder. However, as per clause 27.1 of the
General Conditions of Contract and related Special Conditions of Contract, the Contractor


                                                  32
         shall submit to the Project Manager for approval, a Program showing the general methods,
         arrangements, order, and timing for all the activities of the works. This need to be emphasized
         in the letter of acceptance.

         3.3.3 Price

         The price quoted by the lowest evaluated substantially responsive Bidder is compared with
         the cost estimate to check any substantial variations or front loading of prices. The estimated
         cost (revised) is USD780,957.30 and the price quoted by the bidder is USD518,010.96, thus
         the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder’s price is 33.67% less than the estimated
         cost.

         Since the Bid price is much lower than the estimated cost, the rates of the high value items are
         analyzed in comparison with the estimate. It is observed that (i) It is observed that the major
         difference is in the cost of steel and cement, where the estimate considered much higher price
         of steel and cement and the bidder has considered much less rate. When compared with the
         market prices, the price of steel and cement were much higher at the time of preparation of the
         estimate in third quarter of 2009 (Bank NOL in October 2009), but the prices came down
         drastically by the time of bidding in early 2010; (ii) The price for embankment is quoted very
         low compared to the estimated cost. Probably the estimate cost was based on the manual labor
         and when the equipment is used, the cost will be reduced for larger quantities of work; (iii)
         another item where the prices are quoted far low is the maintenance of the roads, which
         probably the bidders know already. The difference of prices between the lowest evaluated bid
         and the estimated cost for major value items is shown in table 11 below. Further, the rates for
         these items quoted by other bidders are also in the same range, which are shown in table 12
         below:

                            Table 11 - Comparision of Est. cost and Winning Bidder cost
                                                                       Estimate                     Bidder 4
                                                                                                                 %age
Spec.
                                                                                                                diff.wit
Clause                  Description            Unit    Quantity    Rate      Amount       Rate      Amount
                                                                                                                 h est.
 No
                                                                                                                  cost
2.6(1)      Embankment, 90% MDD                cu.m    1,909.50      8.04    15,352.38      4.80     9,165.60      -68%
5.1 (3)     Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)        cu.m      118.59    175.92    20,862.23    186.00    22,057.74       5%
5.2 (1)     Reinforcment Grade 300             tonne       3.00   1,761.79    5,285.36    850.00     2,550.00    -107%
5.2 (2)     Reinforcment Grade 400             tonne      21.00   1,761.79   36,997.54    860.00    18,060.00    -105%
5.3 (1)     RC pile 300mmx300mmx9000mm          m        396.00     45.00    17,820.00     37.00    14,652.00     -22%
5.6 (1)     Steel railing                       m         29.80     94.66     2,820.87     65.00     1,937.00     -46%
5.12 (1)    Foundation investigation            nos        2.00   3,000.00    6,000.00   1,200.00    2,400.00    -150%
9.5 (1)     Maintenance of diversion road      month       5.00   1,000.00    5,000.00    120.00       600.00    -733%
9.5(2)      Construction of diversion road      LS         1.00   5,000.00    5,000.00   2,500.00    2,500.00    -100%
2.6(1)       Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m    2,280.00      8.04    18,331.20       4.80   10,944.00     -68%
5.1 (3)     Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)        cu.m      115.58    175.92    20,332.71    186.00    21,497.88       5%
5.2 (2)     Reinforcement Grade 400            tonne      21.00   1,761.79   36,997.54    860.00    18,060.00    -105%

                                                        33
5.3 (1)    RC pile 300mmx300mmx9000mm         m       396.00      45.00    17,820.00     37.00    14,652.00   -22%
5.6 (1)    Steel railing                      m        29.80      94.66     2,820.87     65.00     1,937.00   -46%
5.12 (1)   Foundation investigation                     2.00    3,000.00    6,000.00   1,200.00
                                            number                                                 2,400.00   -150%
9.5(2)     Maintenence of diversion road      LS         1.00   5,000.00    5,000.00   1,080.00    1,080.00   -363%
2.6(1)     Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m    3,320.18       8.04   26,694.21       4.80   15,936.84   -68%
5.1 (3)    Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m     135.30     175.92    23,801.83    186.00    25,165.80     5%
5.2 (1)    Reinforcement Grade 300           tonne       3.00   1,761.79    5,285.36    850.00     2,550.00   -107%
5.2 (2)    Reinforcement Grade 400           tonne     25.37    1,761.79   44,696.55    860.00    21,818.20   -105%
5.3 (1)    RC pile 300mmx300mmx9000mm         m       252.00      45.00    11,340.00     37.00     9,324.00   -22%
5.6 (1)    Steel railing                      l.m      47.72      94.66     4,517.18     65.00     3,101.80   -46%
5.12 (1)   Foundation investigation                     2.00    3,000.00    6,000.00   1,200.00
                                            number                                                 2,400.00   -150%
9.5 (1)    Maintenence of diversion road     month       5.00   1,000.00    5,000.00   2,500.00   12,500.00    60%
9.5(2)     Construction of diversion road     LS         1.00   5,000.00    5,000.00   1,080.00    1,080.00   -363%
2.6(1)     Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m    1,245.00       8.04   10,009.80       4.80    5,976.00   -68%
5.1 (3)    Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m     188.50     175.92    33,160.72    186.00    35,061.00     5%
5.2 (1)    Reinforcement Grade 300           tonne       3.00   1,761.79    5,285.36    850.00     2,550.00   -107%
5.2 (2)    Reinforcement Grade 400           tonne     18.20    1,761.79   32,064.53    860.00    15,652.00   -105%




                                                      34
                                            Table 12 – Comparison of prices of high value items between the Bidders


                                                                  Bidder 2                Bidder 4             Bidder 5            Bidder 6
Spec.
Clause              Description             Unit   Quantity   Rate     Amount          Rate     Amount      Rate    Amount     Rate      Amount
  No

2.6(1)    Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m                                         4.80                                    3.20 
                                                   1,909.50     2.50   4,773.75                 9,165.60     5.00   9,547.50              6,110.40
5.1 (3)   Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m                                       186.00 22,057.74  200.00 23,718.00       95.00 
                                                   118.59     100.00 11,859.00                                                           11,266.05
5.2 (1)   Reinforcment Grade 300           tonne                                       850.00                                  780.00 
                                                     3.00     700.00   2,100.00                 2,550.00  750.00    2,250.00              2,340.00
5.2 (2)   Reinforcment Grade 400           tonne                                       860.00 18,060.00  800.00 16,800.00      780.00 
                                                    21.00     700.00 14,700.00                                                           16,380.00
          RC                 pile
5.3 (1)                                      m                                          37.00 14,652.00                         58.00 
          300mmx300mmx9000mm                       396.00      50.00 19,800.00                              50.00 19,800.00              22,968.00
5.6 (1)   Steel railing                      m                                          65.00                                  270.00 
                                                    29.80      25.00    745.00                  1,937.00    45.00   1,341.00              8,046.00
 5.12
          Foundation investigation          nos                          40.00 1,200.00                             1,600.00 2,000.00 
  (1)                                                2.00      20.00                            2,400.00  800.00                          4,000.00
9.5 (1)   Maintenance of diversion road                                                120.00                                  120.00 
                                           month     5.00     100.00    500.00                   600.00  350.00     1,750.00               600.00
9.5(2)    Construction of diversion road     LS                         200.00 2,500.00                              800.00 1,200.00 
                                                     1.00     200.00                            2,500.00  800.00                          1,200.00
2.6(1)    Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m                                         4.80 10,944.00                          3.20 
                                                   2,280.00     2.50   5,700.00                              5.00 11,400.00               7,296.00
5.1 (3)   Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m                                       186.00 21,497.88  200.00 23,116.00       95.00 
                                                   115.58     100.00 11,558.00                                                           10,980.10
5.2 (2)   Reinforcement Grade 400          tonne                                       860.00 18,060.00  800.00 16,800.00      780.00 
                                                    21.00     700.00 14,700.00                                                           16,380.00
          RC                 pile
5.3 (1)                                      m                                          37.00 14,652.00                         58.00 
          300mmx300mmx9000mm                       396.00      50.00 19,800.00                              50.00 19,800.00              22,968.00




                                                                                  35
5.6 (1)   Steel railing                      m                                           65.00                                  270.00 
                                                     29.80      25.00    745.00                  1,937.00    45.00   1,341.00              8,046.00
 5.12
          Foundation investigation                                        40.00 1,200.00                             1,600.00 2,000.00 
  (1)                                      number    2.00       20.00                            2,400.00  800.00                          4,000.00
9.5(2)    Maintenence of diversion road      LS                          200.00 1,080.00                              800.00 1,200.00 
                                                     1.00      200.00                            1,080.00  800.00                          1,200.00
2.6(1)    Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m                                          4.80 15,936.84                          3.20 
                                                    3,320.18     2.50   8,300.44                              5.00 16,600.88              10,624.56
5.1 (3)   Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m                                        186.00 25,165.80  200.00 27,060.00       95.00 
                                                    135.30     100.00 13,530.00                                                           12,853.50
5.2 (1)   Reinforcement Grade 300           tonne                                       850.00                                  780.00 
                                                     3.00      700.00   2,100.00                 2,550.00  750.00    2,250.00              2,340.00
5.2 (2)   Reinforcement Grade 400           tonne                                       860.00 21,818.20  800.00 20,296.00      780.00 
                                                     25.37     700.00 17,759.00                                                           19,788.60
          RC                 pile
5.3 (1)                                      m                                           37.00                                   58.00 
          300mmx300mmx9000mm                        252.00      50.00 12,600.00                  9,324.00    50.00 12,600.00              14,616.00
5.6 (1)   Steel railing                      l.m                                         65.00                                  270.00 
                                                     47.72      25.00   1,193.00                 3,101.80    45.00   2,147.40             12,884.40
 5.12
          Foundation investigation                                        40.00 1,200.00                                         50.00 
  (1)                                      number    2.00       20.00                            2,400.00  800.00    1,600.00               100.00
9.5 (1)   Maintenence of diversion road    month                         500.00 2,500.00 12,500.00  350.00                      120.00 
                                                     5.00      100.00                                                1,750.00               600.00
9.5(2)    Construction of diversion road     LS                          200.00 1,080.00                              800.00 1,200.00 
                                                     1.00      200.00                            1,080.00  800.00                          1,200.00
2.6(1)    Embankment, 90% MDD               cu.m                                          4.80                                    3.00 
                                                    1,245.00     2.50   3,112.50                 5,976.00     5.00   6,225.00              3,735.00
5.1 (3)   Concrete class B1, (32 Mpa)       cu.m                                        186.00 35,061.00  200.00 37,700.00       75.00 
                                                    188.50     100.00 18,850.00                                                           14,137.50
5.2 (1)   Reinforcement Grade 300           tonne                                       850.00                                  720.00 
                                                     3.00      700.00   2,100.00                 2,550.00  750.00    2,250.00              2,160.00
5.2 (2)   Reinforcement Grade 400           tonne                                       860.00 15,652.00  800.00 14,560.00      720.00 
                                                     18.20     700.00 12,740.00                                                           13,104.00




                                                                                   36
4         CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

After careful evaluation of the bids, it is recommended to award the contract to Bidder
number 4- Mohaprum Co., Ltd., at his corrected bid price of USD518,010.96. The details
of proposed contract award are in Table 11 below:

                         Table 11. Proposed Contract Award

    1.    Lowest evaluated responsive bidder
          (proposed for contract award).
          (a) name                                     Mohaprum Co., Ltd.
          (b) address                                  # 31A, St. 204, SK Toeklaak III, Khan
                                                       Toulkork, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
    2.    If bid submitted by agent, list actual
          supplier.
          (a) name                                     Not Applicable
          (b) address
    3.    If bid from joint venture, list all
          partners, nationalities, and estimated       Not Applicable
          shares of contract.
    4.    Principle country(ies) of origin of          Cambodia
          goods/materials.
    5.    Estimated date (month, year) of              30 April 2010
          contract signing.
    6.    Estimated delivery to project                30 January 2011
          site/completion period.
                                                             Currency(ies)              Amount(s) or %
                                     1
    7.    Bid Price(s) (Read-out)                                USD                  518,626.18
    8.    Corrections for Errors2                                USD                  -559.26
    9.    Discounts3                                                                  Nil
    10.   Other Adjustments4                                                          Nil
    11.   Proposed Award5                                         USD                 518,010.96
    12.   Disbursement Category6                       1. Works
1
    From Table 6, columns b and c.
2
    From Table 6, column d.
3
    From Table 6, column h. Include any cross-discounts. See Annex I, para. 7(b).
4
    All adjustments should be explained in detail.
5
    Sum of the prices in Items 7–10. For single currency bids, express secondary currency amounts as
    percentages.
6
    From the Grant Agreement.




                                                  37

								
To top