on mandatory inspection of - Parliament of Uganda

PERSONAL S ON MANDATORY INSPECTION OF

VEHICLES IN UGANDA BY ENG. DENIS SABIITI. OF

a

. RUBANDA UIEST

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Honourable Members, the Majority andMinority reports of the Committee on Physical Infrastructure on

Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection made very disturbingobsenrations on my integrity as a person. I, therefore, wish tomake a statement on mandatory Motor Vehicle inspection inUganda, the process of procurement and award of contract toSGS to carry out vehicle inspection in Uganda, highlighting myrole while in the Ministry of Works and Transport.

I joined the Ministry of Works and Transport on July 1"t, 2002 as

an Assistant Commissioner (Safety and Inspection) under theDepartment of Transport Regulation. At that time the process ofprivatisation of Motor Vehicle Inspection had started in 2OOL

under the Directorate of Transport and Communication (DTC)

and was being handled by the office of the Director. A

privatisation policy of Build Own Operate had been adopted andon 30th, April 2OO3 the Contracts Committee at its 95th meetinghad recommended that a Consultant be procured to enable theDirectorate to successfulty execute the privatisation policy.

In Janu ary 2OO4 the function of procurement of companies toconduct vehicle inspection on behalf of Government was

transferred from the office of the Director of Transport andCommunication to the Department of Transport Regulation (User

Department under which I was an Assistant Commissioner). The

User Department assisted by the Road Agency Formation Unit(RAFU) prepared Terms of Reference to procure a Consultantwhich were approved by the Contracts Committee and WorldBank. LEA International of Canada was eventually awarded thecontract to conduct a feasibility study and prepare draft BidDocuments. The feasibility study was completed in 2OO7.

I was asked by the Top Management Team (TMT) to prepare a

concept paper regarding privatisation of motor vehicle services

which was presented at the 9th TMT meeting held on llth1

o

o

September 2OO7 . TMT at the time comprised of Ministers (3),

Permanent Secretary (1), Directors (2) and the Undersecretary (1).

The concept paper was approved with some amendments thatincluded:

a) Instead of several service providers only two (2) serviceproviders should be procured to operate throughout thecountry if the venture was to be viable.

b) Implementation of Inspection services should start andthe establishment of the Master Testing Centre shouldfollow at a later date.

c) A Cabinet Information Paper should be prepared after theprocurement process was finalised.

A minute prouing this was laid on table a.s an annexture to themajority report.

The User Department was directed to expedite the procurementprocess. The User Department prepared a Statement ofRequirements (specific items to be inspected and equipmentrequired to inspect the items). The Procurement and DisposalUnit (PDU) prepared Instructions to Bidders, EvaluationMethodotory and criteria, Provisional Contract and theExpression of Interest (EOI) for pre-qualification/shortlistingpurposes.

Rt. Hon Speaker and Hon Members, the PPDA Act in section 31

(h), (i) and (m) give the PDU the functions of checking andpreparing statements of requirements, preparing bid documents,issuing bid documents and preparing contract documents. The

sarne law in section 34 (1) (b), (c) and (d) mandates the userdepartment to initiate procurement and disposal requirementsand forward them to PDU, to propose technical inputs tostatements of requirements for procurement requirements to thePDU and propose technical specifications to the PDU whennecessary. These are statutory functions that cannot be

circumvented or even wished away.

I

2

o

At the 15th TMT meeting held on 10th November 2008 in which Iwas in attendance (not as a member of TMT but as a technicalofficert, TMT reviewed progress of private vehicle inspectionsenrices and directed that:

a) The exercise had dragged on for long and it wasimportant that the procurement process should avoidmore wastage of time given the outcry about roadaccidents.

b) The btd documents should be carefullg preparedutith strict eaqluation criteria so as to eliminate thecompanies that had no experiettce. Mg oflice urq.s

directed to reuise the bid document and present it toTMT before sttbmission to the Procurement qndDisposal Unit (PDU).

c) The Companies should show capacity to set up, conductand train competent staff to carry out inspections.

d) The Companies should also demonstrate proof ofexistence of suitable facilities for the purpose.

e) Strong financial capacity and not from InsuranceCompanies

0 Since this was a pre-qualification exercise meant forshortlisting, the post-qualification should be carefullyand critically conducted.

g) The Companies that had submitted Insurance Companiesas credit guarantors are disqualified as this was notacceptable as per PPDA regulations.

h) The technologz to be used should be carefully statedincluding the ICT component, specifically how it wouldinterface with Police, URA and the Ministry.

i) The bid document should include clauses ono Performance guarantee. Performance indicatorso Penalties for non-performance ando At the time of signing the contract the joint

venture should be effective

o

3

o

o

fl The TMT, NOT ME, rescinded the earlier decision toausard the contract to two Companies and insteadagreed that onlg one comPdng utould be autarded thecontract for a period of ftae (5) gears after ushich thesitrrtation would be reuieu)ed. This u)as afier realisingthat the aolume of business utould not be adequate

for the two Companies to realise return on theirinuestments.

k) Mr. Francis Kavuma should be investigated to ascertaino Which Company he worked for or which of the

Companies he had given his CVo Whether it was the same Kavuma since the years of

experience cited were conflicting ando On the basis of the findings a decision would be

taken whether to disqualify the two companies orone of them

U The User Department would write to the ContractsCommittee about the TMT's observation regarding

o The Companies which had indicated InsuranceCompanies as the credit guarantors

. The Companies that had submitted Mr. FrancisKavuma as their key staff.

m) The procurement should proceed after the UserDepartment and Contracts Committee have sortedout the issues above.

A copg of the minutes of the TMT Meeting of lgtn Nouember 2008 isherewith attached as Appendix 33A"

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Honourable Members, on page 37 of theMajority report the 2"d paragraph states that-

"While the Top Management Team IMD of the MoWT onTuesdag 71th September 2007 resolued that two (2)

seruice prouiders be procured to operate throughout thecountry, this was later dropped bg the time the contract

for the mandatory inspection of uehicles was drautn, not

4

o

bg the Attorneg General as required by Article 1 19 (4) (b)

of the 1995 constihttion, but by Eng. Sabiiti Denis."

This is definitely not true! As I have indicated above, it was

the 15th TMT meeting held on loth November 2OO8 at1O:3Oam in the MoWT Kampala Board Room that took thedecision to have one senrice provider. The decision of TMT atthis stage did not require the input/approval of the AttorneyGeneral because internal processes in the Ministry had to be

completed before approval by the PPDA and AttorneyGeneral.

It is imperative to note that all Accounting Officers had earlierbeen guided on 15th November 2006 on the conditions forapproval of contracts by the Attorney General. The guidance wasalso reiterated on lOth February 2OLl. The gist of the gUidance is

that the Attorney General shall not approve any contract withmissing documents. It is clear that the Attorney General does notdraw but approves draft contracts submitted to his or her office

by Procuring and Disposal Entities (PDEs). The guidance ishereto attached and marked Appendix A1.

The minority report, on page 10 also referred to this sa.me

meeting and obserued that-

"The 7 Sth meeting of the Top Management Team ffMD of theMinistry of Works and Transport sitting on 7 )th Nouember2008 at 1O:30 am in Kampala Boardroom inter-aliadiscttssed the re-introduction of and prtuatisation of themotor uehicle inspection seruices project. Despite the factthat SGS was mainlg inuolued in setting up Motor uehicletesting plants in Iuory Coast, the said TMT noted that SGS

seemed the most credible CompanA for the mandatorymotor uehicle testing seruices in Uganda and resolued thatbid doa.tments be carefutly prepared with strict eualuationcriteria so as to eliminate all the would be comoetitors ofSGS. Eng. Denis Sabiiti was then directed to reuise the biddocuments to that effect, which instruction he effectiuelyexeanted."

o

5

o

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Honourable Members, it is not true-

1. That the TMT resolved that the bid documents becarefully prepared with strict evaluation criteria so as

to eliminate all the would be competitors of SGS.

2. That the person of Eng. Denis Sabiiti was directed torevise the documents. On the contrary, the TMTdirected the Oflice of the Assistant Commissioner(Safety and Inspection) to revise the bid document soas to eliminate companies that had no requiredexperience in vehicle inspections NOT TO ELIMINATECOMPETITION.

It is therefore clear from the above that the TMT minuteswere misquoted or misinterpreted with the sole desire ofimplicating my person. In the unlikely event that they werecorrectly interpreted, and I submit that they were not, I stillwouldn't be held responsible for decisions of TMT because Iwas never a member of TMT but a technical officer undertheir direction. The impugned minutes can be examined toprove this.

Following the TMT directive, the User Department on 1 lth,November 2008 wrote to the contracts committee regarding theabove TMT concerns. The Contracts Committee, in turn, referredthe TMT concerns to the Evaluation Committee for re-evaluation.The Evaluation Committee sought guidance from PPDA and on5th January 2OO9, PPDA advised as follows:

a) Insurance Companies are not permitted to guaranteeIinancial capabilities of bidders but only institutions thatare wholly acceptable to the Bank of Uganda inaccordance with Regulations 232 of PPDA Regu1ations.l

b) The Ministry had not specified the acceptable form forbidders to prove credit of US$ 500,000 (usually in theform of bank statements or bank guarantees and

'these regulations have since been amended

I

6

a

therefore it is difficult for the Evaluation Committee to

evaluate different forms submitted by the bidders.c) The PPDA law does not specifically prevent professional

staff from submitting their CVs to different firms in thesa.rne procurement. Instructions To Bidders (ITB) 5.2 (e)

of the Standard Bidding Document (SBD) forOpen/Restricted Bidding Documents refers.

d) Ministry had used the wrong Standard Biddingdocuments (SBD) in the pre-qualification/shortlistinginstead of Open/Restricted Solicitation Document.The Ministry should use the correct SBD in theprocurement.

Upon receiving the above findings from PPDA, the UserDepartment through the PDU wrote to the ContractsCommittee requesting to;

a) Cancel the procurement process as per PPDA findings;b) Authorise the User Department to restart procurement

using International Open Bidding without pre-qualification;

c) Approve the Bidding Document under International OpenBidding;

d) Authorise PDU and the User Department to forward theBidding Document under International Open Biddingwithout pre-qualification to PPDA to seek for guidance onthe procurement procedures and documents as this is aBuild Own Operate (BOO) project (as required underRegulatron 243 of the PPDA Act 2003)

The Contracts Committee at its 37 4th meeting held on 16th

January 2OO9-

a) cancelled the procurement processb) Authorised the User Department to restart the

procurement process using International Open Biddingwithout pre-qualification

c) Advised PDU that all bidders who participated in thecancelled tender should be informed accordingly

o

7

o

d) Advised PDU and the User Department to first get

clearance of PPDA and then submit the tender documentfor approval by Contracts Committee before running theadvertisement.

My office participated in the preparation of the Modified BiddingDocument for procurement of Mandatory Motor vehicle

Inspection senrices and the Bid Document was submitted toPPDA on 12th February 2OO9.

A copA of the submission letter authored bg the PermanentSecretary dated 4th February 2009 is attached as Appendix 33Ey'.

On receipt of the letter from the Permanent Secretary, the PPDA

studied the Bid Document and recommended some adjustmentsas shown in their letter dated 3'd March 2OO9 which is attachedas Appendix nC'.

Subsequently, the PPDA and the Ministry officials had meetingswhich I attended and an agreement was reached on theadjustments to be made. A copg of the letter dated 8th Apil 2009

from PPDA shouting the agreed adjustments is attached as

Appendix "D".

On 14tt' Aprll 2OO9 the Bid Documents as required by law were

sent to the Solicitor General for approval. A copy of the letter ofthe Permanent Secretary forutarding the Bid Documents is hereto

attached as Appendix ccDu.

On 2I't May 2OO9 the Solicitor General returned the BidDocuments recommending some amendments as contained inthe letter dated 21"t May 2OO9 attached hereto as Appendix nF'.

The amendments recommended by the Solicitor General were

duly effected and a final Bid Document was approved by theContracts Committee. Copies of the approual and the final BidDocument are attached as Appendix "G" dnd "H" respectiuely.

On 24th July 2OO9 and 27th July 2OO9 a new procurementprocess for the tender for provision of motor vehicle inspectionservices was advertised in The Monitor and New Vision

8

o

a

respectively. It was also advertised in the East African BusinessWeek of 27th July to 2"d August 2OOg.Bid opening was held on23,d September,2OO9 at 11:30 am and six firms submitted theirbids. The Contracts Committee on tts 423'd meeting held 6n I2thMarch 2OlO approved the technical evaluation report andresolved that the financial bids for Environmental SystemProducts Holding (ESP) (92.6%l and SGS (86.29%) had passedthe technical valuation stage and recommended the opening oftheir financial bids. On 29th March 2OLO, the financial bidopening for the two firms was held and on 15th April 2OlO,financial evaluation was concluded and SGS scored 90.4oo/o whileESP scored 72.79o/o.

The Contracts Committee of the Ministry of Works and Transportwent through the procurement process on 9tn July 2OlO and itawarded the tender for provision of mandatory Motor vehicleinspection services to SGS. Copies of the contracts Committeedecision and the Best Eualuated Bidder Notice are attached asAppendix ulu and o,.f'. It should be noted that on everyContracts Committee in any Ministry the Attorney General isalways represented and is part of the decision making and thatwas the case in this particular procurement. A review of theirminutes can attest to this.

Rt. Hon. Speaker, it is important to note that-

1. At this stage of award of Contract to SGS, I wasneither a member of the Evaluation Committee nor amember of the Contracts committee and therefore, Icould not have influenced the award of the Contract.

2. All communications relating to this procurementwere made by the Permanent Secretary of theMinistry of Works and Transport and not me.

After the Best Evaluated Bidder Notice was issued,Environmental Systems Products Holdings (ESP) made a requestfor Administrative review to the Accounting Officer Ministry of

o

9

o

Works and Transport on 7th September 2OLO. A copA of the

request is attached as Appendix "K".

The Permanent Secretary Ministry of Works and Transportconsidered the requested Administrative Review by ESP and uponcarrying out the review he found no merit in the complaints. AcopA of the letter from the PS Ministry of Works and Transport to

ESP dated September 30th 2010 is attached as Appendix "L".

ESP was not satisfied with the findings of the PermanentSecretary Ministry of Works and Transport and on 7th October2OLO, it wrote to the PPDA appealing against the AdministrativeReview findings of the PS. A copA of tlrut appeal is attached as

Appendix 33Mu.

The PPDA started the process of Administrative Review and helda meeting on l"t November 2OIO which I, together with othertechnical officers, attended on the invitation of the PPDA. In fact,the Ministry delegation was led by the Under Secretary. On 4th

November 2010, a report was made containing the results of theAdministrate Review carried out by the PPDA. Copies of the letterand the report from PPDA to the PS Ministry of Works andTransport are attached as appendix ut{'.

In the said report on pages 27 and28, PPDA found as follows:

"Influence Peddling by M/ s SGS:

On page 1 of the daily Monitor Newspaper dated -Z"r

Nouember, 2010 alleged that Mr. Ferdinard Bitanihirute a

former Country Manager af SGS at the time, u)as in collusionwith Eng. Denis Sabiiti of MoWT and he had sent him anemail proposing that for anA Companies to qualify, theys?tould haue operated in at least 3 Continents and must haueat least capital inuestment worth 12 million Euros (Shs. 38.3biltion) and operation for uehicle inspection seruices in threeContinents.

n ls indicated in the Neuspaper that Eng. Denis Sabiiticonfirmed receipt of the email but said that the information

o

10

o

from Mn Ferdinard Bitanihira)e was unsolicited and was not

used in the bid doanment. The Authoitg noted that Eng.

Sabiiti did not disclose to the Accounting officer that he hadbeen contacted bg the bidder M/ s SGS during thepreparatory process.

The Authoritg noted that there was a similqr requirement inthe bidding doanment contained under Appendix 3, a.l @i) -Management of Mandatory Motor Vehicle inspection for Roadworthiness uthere the requirement for annual sales reuenueis (minimum USD tutelue Million). This amounts fo unethicalconduct and interference in the bidding process by SGS

thereby giuing the firm undue aduantage ouer other bidders".

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Hon Members, findings made by the PPDA

in respect to influence peddling were never introduced at theadministrative review hearing. While I attended the reviewhearing I was never questioned at any one moment on theallegations of influence peddling. The author of the defamatoryarticle in the Monitor Newspaper was never invited to supporttheir malicious allegation nor was the SGS, which stood indicted,invited to address the issue. The alleged Ferdinand Bitanihirwewas never invited to corroborate or deny the newspaperpublication. No wonder therefore, that he swore an affidavit in asubsequent court case (Miscellaneous Cause No. 43 of 2O1l: SGS

u. PPDA and Attorneg General) denying any knowledge of theemail. A mere invitation of the alleged author of the email wouldhave dispelled the allegations contained in the MonitorNewspaper but this was not done by an Authority hell bent oncancelling the process. The finding of the Authority was notbased on any evidence but an unverified newspaper articleclassically placing it in the category of hearsay. In relation to theemail, the fact of the matter is my email account had beenhacked into by unscrupulous people who sent this damagingmessage and then sent it to the Monitor. How else would theDaily Monitor publish an email allegedly received by me when Ihad not given it to them?

o

11

O

Was I a whistle blower against myself or what? A copa of theNewspaper article is attached as Appendix uou.

The Permanent Secretary Ministry of Works and Transport wroteto me and others to respond to the findings of the PPDA reportand I made my response clearly denying the allegations andfindings in the PPDA report. Copies of the letters from the PS andmy replies dre attached as Appendices uPTu and oP2'.

Upon receiving my response the PS, MoWT wrote to PPDA andsought its advice as regards my complaint that I was not heardand PPDA replied insisting on the findings of the report. Copies ofthe letter of the PS and the replg from PPDA are attached asappendices uQlu and uQ2'.

As a result of these baseless findings I was under threat ofdisciplinary action and I was condemned unheard contrary to thelaw and rules of natural justice in flagrant violation of articles 28,42 and 44 (c) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda,1995. As a consequence, through my advocates, I wrote to thePPDA informing it of my intended actions but they replied andinsisted on the report. Copies of notice to PPDA and the replA areattached as appendfces uRlu and uR2u. As a result of thedilatory conduct of the PPDA, I filed a Motion for Judicial Reviewin the High Court of Uganda on 9th March 2OlL underMiscellaneous Cause No. 36 of 2OLl. Similarly, on 16th M"y,2OIl SGS also filed a Motion for Judicial Review against PPDA

and the Attorney General under Miscellaneous Cause No. 43 of2OLT.

On 25th January, 2Ol2 the High Court per Hon. Justice EldadMwangusya held at page L4 of the judgement that-

"The report does not indicate hou the unethical conductcame about except at page 27 and 28 uthere a" newspaperarticle mentioned the applicant to haue receiued an email

from one Ferdinand Bitanihine proposing what to include

for qualification for proanrement seruices. The report lstherefore based on findings that affect the applicant utho

o

72

o

wa.s neuer giuen an opportunity to be heard. Section 91 (3)

of the PPDA Act and Regulation 347 (4) of the PPDA

Regulations require that a hearing be made before the

respondent (PPDA) makes a decision. The Authority did not

complg utith the requirements of the law. The applicant hasproued the requisites required before grant of judicialreuiew as stated... The findings of the report on the

applicant's unethical conduct should therefore be

quashed.... Hauing found that the respondent IPPDA]denied the applicant [utho u)a"s me] an opportunitg to be

heard it follows that the part of the report relating to the

alleged unethical conduct of the applicant cannot be

allowed to stand and it is quashed."

The ruling of the High Court dated 25tti, January 2Ol2 is heretoattached and marked as Appendix "S".

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Hon. Members, the above facts speakfor themselves. It is clear that the Majority report on Pages

29 and 3O and the Minority report on pages 1O and 11 cameto a wrong conclusion about possible connivance betweenSGS staff and I. The Committee members based theirconclusions on the PPDA report which was quashed by theHigh Court and does not form any record having beenquashed under the judicial remedy of certiorari.

On 22"d June 2012, SGS won their application for JudicialReview in the High Court and an order was made stopping theMinistry of Works and Transport from cancelling theprocurement process and the re-tendering.

On l7tln February 2OL3,lonq after the award of the contract inissue bv the Contracts Committee.2 I was appointed ChairmanContracts Committee of the Ministry of Works and Transport andin May 2OL3, following a good service record; I was promotedfrom Assistant Commissioner to Commissioner (TransportRegulation).

o

2 The contract was awarded in 2010

13

O

Following the pronouncements of the High Court in the two

Judicial reviews the Head of Procurement and Disposal Unit(HPDU) wrote to the Permanent Secretary Ministry of Works andTransport on 7th November 2Ol4 detailing the status of theprocurement of the Private Motor Inspection Services and made

the following recommendations-

a) The Contracts Committee should resume its work inorder to conclude the procurement process.

b) Communication of Award by the Permanent Secretary.c) Contract Signing and Contract Implementation.d) Due diligence to be conducted with the key emphasis on

the following (Terms of Reference)(i) The technolory that has been proposed vis-dr-vis the

applicable or current technolory on the market.(ii)The price for inspections as guided by the price

indices in the bid document which provided forreview of prices after every two years.

(iii) The number of inspection stations (testingcentres) proposed vis-a-vis the current vehiclepopulation size.

(i") A list of countries where the provider is currentlyoffering the same services.

(v) Enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance.e) Submissions to be made to the Contracts Committee.

The letter from the Head of PDU addressed to the PS wasapproved by the PS and inscribed with the instructions "proceedas proposed" on 1 lth November 2OL4. A copA is here withattached as Appendix 33T".

On 24th November, 2OL4, Contracts Committee approved theresumption of the procurement, the due diligence team, andTerms of Reference (ToRs) which had been submitted by PDU. On10th February 2015, the Due Diligence Report submitted by PDU

was approved by the Contracts Committee.

A copy of the minutes of the 641"t Contracts Committee meeting of1}th February 2015 is hereto attached as Appendix uuu.

1.4

o

o

o

Rt. Hon. Speaker and Hon. Members, page 1 1 of the minorityreport states as follows;

"The Minister of fr.ate for Works and Transport in charge oftransport in a confidential dossier to the committee gaue achronologA of hou.t Engineer Sabiiti Denis then CommissionerTransport Regulation had maintained underhandoperations which not onlg fauoured SGS during theprocurement process but deliuered the mandatory MotorVehicle Inspection Seruice Contract to the firm as euidencedto the follouing turn of euents:

1. In December 2014, Eng. Sabiiti Dennis, (then

Commissioner Transport Regulation and ChairmanContracts Committee) approued a team to do duediligence on SGS without terms of reference.

2. On 10tn Febntary 2015, Eng. Sabiiti as ChairmanContracts Committee approued the Due DiligenceReport."

It is important to note that at the time of the procurementin issue, the current Minister of State for Transport was notin Cabinet and was not in political leadership of the Ministryto be in position to come to such serious, though maliciousconclusions.

As pointed out above, the Contracts Committee Meeting ofl0th February, 2015, upon the submission of PDU' approvedTerms of Reference and the names of the due diligence team.Let me reiterate that the approval was by the ContractsCommittee and NOT, by me as the chairman or Eng. SabiitiDenis.

Hon. Members, The PPDA (Procuring and Disposing Entities)Regulations, 2OI4 (Statutory Instrument No. 7 of 2ol4l inRegulation 13 provides for submissions to Contracts Committees.

15

O

It states-

"13. Submissions to the Contracts Committee

(1) A request by a Proanrement and Disposal unit to theContracts Committee shall be made using theapproprtate Forms specified in the Regulations madeunder the Act.

(2) A Contracts committee shall consider each requestbased on the information contained in the Formsubmitted and supporting doanments, and maA approueor reject the request.

(3) Where a contracts committee maA reject a request, theContracts committee shall indicate the rea.sons forrejecting the request.

(4) A Contracts Committee maA giue a conditional approualto a. submission, where there ls a corcection to be

effected.(5) A decision of the Contracts Committee shall be

unanimous but, where unanimitg cannot be achieued,the decision shall be bg a simple majoritg of themembers present."

What is brought before a Contracts Committee by the PDU iswhat is approved or rejected and no single member can approveor reject. Sub regulation (5) is instructive that a decision of theContracts Committee shall be unanimous but, where unanimitycannot be achieved, the decision shall be by a simple majority ofthe members present. It is therefore, erroneous for one toconclude that simply because I was the appointed chairman, I

solely took the decision.

On l7th February 2OL5, my contract as Chairman ContractsCommittee expired and I handed over to a new Committee.

On 2"d March 2OL5, as the head of the User Department, I was

requested by the Permanent Secretary to write a letter forwardingthe contract (prepared by PDU) and approved by the ContractsCommittee to the Solicitor General. A copg of the letter is hereto

O

16

o

attached as Appendix 36V". Whereas the Evaluation Committeehad recommended negotiations in 2OLO, the PPDA Act was

amended in 2Ol4 and in section 7 4 prohibited negotiationsexcept where-

(a) The competitive procurement was used and only one bidwas received in response to the call for bids;

(b) The direct procurement method was used; or

(c) The procurement is for Consultancy Services.

The procurement in issue did not fall in this category. It was

not a procurement for consultancy senrices, a directprocurement method had not been used and indeed six bidsand not one as provided for in the provision had beenreceived. Therefore, negotiations were inapplicable andexpressly barred by section 74 of the PPDA Act.

It is therefore erroneous for the minority rePort to concludeon page 11, based on item 3 of the Minister's (Aggrey Bagiire)dossier that I foruarded the contract to SolicitorGeneral clearance in total disreodrd of bu

o

the Eaa team. The letter I wrote was on theinstructions of the Permanent Secretary and indeed is signed

"for the Permanent Secretaty". Further, 4s alreadydemonstrated there was no legal requirement fornegotiations.

As head of the User Department, on LTtr. March 2015, I was

called upon by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Works andTransport to come and witness the signing of the Contractbetween the Ministry of Works and Transport and SGS.

On ITth April 2OL5, in compliance with article 80 (4) of the

Constitution, provisions of the Parliamentary Elections Act andthe relevant provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section (F-p)

and Appendix F-5 (5.0) of the Uganda Public Service StandingOrders, 2OlO I wrote to the Permanent Secretary Ministry ofPublic Service requesting to disengage my employment to the

77

o

Government of Uganda in order to serve my country at anotherlevel by joining elective politics in my home Constituency ofRubanda County West. A copg is hereto attached as Appendix33Wr.

On 30th April 2OL5, my request was granted by the PermanentSecretary Ministry of Public Service and on 10th May 20L5, Ihanded over the office of Commissioner Transport Regulation andI embarked on mobilisation campaigns in my constituency. AcopA of acceptance by the PS Public Seruice is hereto attached as

Appendix "X".

At the beginning of July 2OI5, like any other crttzen withexperience in a technical field, I was approached by SGS to assistthem in relation to legislation and regulations needed for MotorVehicle inspection services and other road safety related services

in Uganda. Through BDST Investments Ltd where I'm a Director,I signed a contract with SGS to offer Consultancy Services for aperiod of one year. on condition that I work for a minimum of 10

days a month at a consideration of USD 3000 per month. Duringthis period of the consultancy, I provided the following services;

(a) Code of practice for inspection and testing of usedmotor vehicles for road worthiness;

(b) Items to be tested and reasons for failure of inspection;

(c) A traffic and road safety (Motor Vehicle Inspection)regulations, 2Ol5;

(d) Advice was also rendered on Managing relationshipsamong stakeholders involved in Vehicle Inspection inUganda.

The deliverables outlined above are substantive and highlytechnical.

The Majority report on page 30 last paragraph and Minorityreport page L2 erroneously insinuate that SGS offered me thisconsultancy contract as an incentiue for mg inuoluement in theprocurement process which deliuered the contract to SGS. The

18

o

o

denotative meaning of the word "incentive" is 'a thing thatmotivates or encourages someone to do something.' Indeed itssynonyms include 'inducement, motivation, motive, reason,stimulus, stimulant, spur, impetus and encouragement'. Itconnotes a motivator or inducement to do something. Thequestions therefore are-

1. What was I being motivated to do having already ceased

being an employee of the MoWT?

2. Of what use would I be having left the Ministry?

3. How would I influence a Ministry I had already left?

4. What would be the motive for inducing me?

The insinuation here is that having worked for the Ministry ofWorks I should never get work and therefore fend for my family.Indirectly, the committee seems to say that it is wrong for me towork and seemingly imputes that my attained skills should be

left to rot.

Having been successful on the political front, on 4th April 2016,Icommunicated a notice of termination of contract with SGS owingto my election to the 10th Parliament which plays an oversightrole on Government Projects including Motor Vehicle Inspection.My continued engagement with SGS would lead to a conflict ofinterest. A copA of mA letter to SGS is hereto attached asappendix "Y'.

On the LTth May 2016, prior to my subscribing an oath as aMember of Parliament, I terminated my consultancy services toSGS.

In conclusion, Rt. Hon. Speaker and Hon. Members-

1. I did not act unethically during my entire service at theMinistry of Works and Transport including when I

participated in the procurement of a service provider toprovide Motor Vehicle Inspection Senrices.

o

19

a

2. The decision to privatise motor vehicle inspection services

was taken before I joined the Ministry of Works andTransport.

3. The process to procure the service provider was commencedby the office of the Director of Transport andCommunications before I joined the Ministry.

4. By the time the function of procurement of the serviceprovider to carry out vehicle inspection was put under myDepartment of Transport Regulation, the PPDA Act hadbeen enacted. I did my level best, playing my part andstrictly observing the principles and the spirit of theprocurement law.

5. The cancellation of the procurement process and revision ofthe bid documents were done at the direction of the PPDA.

6. My attendance of meetings was as a technical officer of theMinistry and on the invitation of the relevant members.

7 . The process that sought to indict me was found to have

been illegal, not based on any evidence and indeed quashedby the High Court of Uganda for violation of a plethora ofprovisions of the PPDA Act and the Constitution of Uganda.It is therefore, wrong for the committee, whether by majorityor minority report, to indict me basing on evidence that wasfound to be uncorroborated and unsubstantiated by a courtof Iaw.

I thank you Rt. Hon. Speaker and Honourable members for theopportunity granted to make this personal statement.

d

ENG. DENIS SABIITI, MP

RUBANDA WEST

o

pot{20

APQe*>

Hon. J. NasasiraHon. J. ByabagambiMr. C. MuganziMr. J. G.ItaziEng. S. BagonzaMr. A. Kakooza

In Attendance:

Eng. Mugisa ObyeroEng. K. KagrinaEng. Bisuti BalamuEng. M.M. OdongEng. D. Sabiiti -Ms E. Kamba

Absent

1. Hon. S. Ejua

Agenda:

Trv\T Me6 1n-4 EfNorr 6"*LHZ_ ?OOg

MEETING HELD ON loth NOVEMBER

d4"'

MINUTES OF2OO8 AT 1O:3O A.M. IN I{AIYIPALA BOARDROOM

Present: Designation

,1

2.3.4.5.6.

1

23456

MoW&TMS/w&r (w)PSDoTErc/DEus/F&A

ChairmanMemberMemberMemberMemberMember

o

Ag. CRACE/DURACEIRMACE /Materials/Ag. CeMACl SIPAS/ F&A - Secretary

)o

S/W&T (T) - Member

1. Communication from the Chair.2' Status of procurement: Re-introduction and privatization of

rnotor vehicle inspection services project (continuaiion of previouspresentation): CAPABILITY REPORT

3' Draft Cabinet Paper on the Proposed Maintenance of DistrictRoads using Direct Labour (road equipment and road Gangs.)

1 Paper on the creation of a state construction company5' Brief on the proposed hosting of the 13th ILO regitnal seminar forlabour based practitioners

6. Paper on the policy for redevelopment and strengthening of theNational ConstrucA.O.B

I

ABBREVIATIONS/ACROITYMS FOR THE L2TII TMT MEETING 23RD MAY2008

ACE/DUR

ACE/RM-

ACMatE/QM-

Assistant Commissioner Engineering/ District UrbanRoadsAssistant Commissioner Engineering/ RoadMaintenanceAssistant Commissioner Chief Materials Engineer/ Actrng Commissioner Quality Management

Assistant Commissioner Safety and InspectionActing Commissioner Roads

Any Other BusinessAll to NoteDirector of TransportEngineer in Chief/ Director EngineeringKampala City CouncilMinistry of Finance, Planning arrd Economic DevelopmentMinistry of Works and TransportMinister of Works and TransportMinister of State Works and Transport (Transport)Minister of State Works and Transport (Works)Principal Assistant Secretary/Finance & AdministrationPermanent SecretaryTop Management TeamUnder Secretary (Finance & Administration)

AC/ SIAg. CRAOBATNDoTEIC/ DEKCCMoFPEDMoW&TMoW&TMS/W&T (r) -MS/W&T (w)-PAS/F&APSTMTus/F&A

o

d

,J

o

?

The Chairman then stated that he was concerned about thePublic's perception about road accidents in the countr5r andthat the MoWT was unfai rly biamed. He noted that it was the

5Law Enforcement that

terated the need to finalise thewas weak and in that regard he

ret proposed amendments to theTraffic and Road and Safety Act 1998. He then directed thatthe Directorate of Transport do all that was possible to havethe amendments finalised He further stated that he would goahead and issue a Statu tory Instrument (SI) to put tl:e law 1nforce white the amendments were being finalised. He directedthat the SI be ready before 1 4/t1/08He also emphasized the need to have the proposed inspectionof vehicles operationalised;

1. The Ministry,s Budget:

The Chairman noted the outcry about the inadequate budget. Henoted that one of the ways to manage would be to shift the Ministry,sHeadquarter from Entebbe to Kampala so that the Ministry could

,f tr

MIN. LllLlzOOS: COMMUNTCATTON FROM THE CHATR.

The chairman welcomed members to the meeting and regretted thefact that the retreat that had been proposed so as to clear theP::-u]:* of TMT agenda could not take [t"". due to other urgentlssues..

It would therefore be necessary to try and clear as much possibleduring the proposed time.

Members were then asked to look at the agenda and agree a wayforward. After thorough examination, the afenda stated above wasadopted.

It was further agreed that the meeting would as much as possiblediscuss the crucial papers on today,s "agenda

but would adjourn at2:oo p.m. to allow the Ministers attend to other duties. Thefollowing day a few relevant members would reconvene to discussand finalise the cabinet Memorandum on the proposed takeover ofsome district roads.

Regarding other Items that had been put on the agenda it was statedthat item No. 11 (Revised DUCARUp) was not ready while item no. Z(Payment of outstanding bils) had already been agreeci uponbetween the Ministers and items ,g. g (paper Ln MTRA) and 10 (Use3,1]nermoplastic paint) were considerea .rot to be very critical at theume.

Action by

Ail

DoT

HonMinister

I

save on fuel and time spent traveling to and from Entebbe. It wasthen proposed that :

i) Temporary renovations be made to existing premises inKampala pending the construction of the Ministry'Headquarter in Kampala using government funds.

ii) To temporarily rent premises in Kampala. This would requireapproval from office of the President and MoFPED.

2. The issue of lack/non-functioning internet services in theMinistry was brought up. It was noted that the services left a lotto be desired and needed to be streamlined.

3. The need to replace the air conditioning system in the office of theMS/W&T (W) was aiso noted and agreed.

Min 2l lLlOS: Status of Procurement:- Re-introduction andPrivatization of motor vehicle inspection serrrices project(continuation of previous presentationf CAPABILITY REPORT

I,

aa

The paper was presented by AC/SI on behalf of DoTwere informed that:

and members

TLre company that had subrnitted its bid electronically hadbeen evaluated as advised by PPDA. It had however beenfound non-compliant and therefore had been not pre-qualified;As directed by TMT during the last meeting, the AC/SI hadprepared the capability report of the 8 companiesrecommended by the evaluation team for prequalification. Hestated that the companies that had been recommended were:

1. Fontana Auto Parts Uganda Limited;2. M/S Bison Consult International Ltd. in JV \4rith APPLUS

Technologies Inc.;3. BIM - Auto Engineering works & MGS international Ltd.;4. Green Boat Motor Vehicle Inspection Ltd. in joint venture

with Dae MYUNG Motor Vehicle Industry;5. Coin Limited in association with DALEI Group of companies

Ltd.;6. Multiplex Limited;7. Spear Motors Ltd. in joint venture Victoria Motors Ltd. and8. SGS Societe Generale De Surveillance SA

It was stated that all the recommended companies had fulfilled theconditions/evaluation criteria in the bid document. After thepresentation, the following issues were raised;

- Members wanted to know whether the premises of all theabove companies had been visited to ascertain proof ofphysical infrastructure/ facilities ;

PS&US/ FA

PS&US/ FA

US/ FA

US/ FA

o

)

a

)

o

a

the local companies had no prior experience in the field ofMotor Vehicle lnspection and wondered how they wouldmanage the business They were either garage operators ormotor vehicle importers;Those companies that were in joint venture qrith othercompanies should on their own be capable of running thebusiness in the event the joint venture partner opted out;It was therefore necessary to critically evaluate JVs includingascertaining the JV agreernents. However, some of the JVcompanies were found to be wanting;Those in association were in a worse situation because theassociation was not legalIy binding;It was further pointed out that some companies had namedInsurance companies as their source of credit/Guarantorsthis was not acceptable in procurement, it was only Banksthat could offer Credit guarantees.

while discussing the company profile of BIM - Auto Engineeringworks & MGS International Ltd, the chairperson declared that hehad interest in the company since the owner comes from Kazo hisconstituency,'and therefore excused himself. He requested the Hon.MS/W&T(W) to chair;

- It was discovered that two of the companies had submitted thename of Francis Kavuma as one of their Key Staff contrary toPPDA regulations. It was further noted that the said FrancisKavuma however, had indicated different years of experiencein the two companies. It was decided therefore that this beinvestigated;

- It was also discovered that two of the companies belonged toone person including the Insurance company that was namedas the source of credit;It was noted that out of the

e. However to the urgent of the servlcesbecause the project had delayed, the procurement process

should proceed to the next stage;

-

It was therefore directed that:

1. The exercise had dragged on for long and it was important thatthe procurement continued to avoid more wastage of time giventhe outcry about road accidents;

2. T}rat therefore the bid document should be carefully preparedwith strict evaluation criteria so as to eliminate the companiesthat had no experience. AC/SI was directed to revise the biddocument and present it to TMT before he could proceed.

3. The companies should show capacity to set up, conduct andtrain competent staff to carry out inspections.

4. The companies should also demonstrate proof of existence ofsuitable facilities for the purpose;

t CS SGS seemed

5

5. Strong Financial Capacity and not from insurance companles.6. That since this was a pre-qualihcation exercise meant for short-

listing, the post-prequalification should be carefully andcritically conducted;

7. The companies that had submitted insurance companies as thecredit guarantors be disqualified as this was not acceptable asper PPDA regulations;

8. Mr. Francis Kavuma should be investigated to ascertain:i) which company he worked for or which of the companies

he had given his CV;ii) whether it was the same Kayuma since the years of

experience cited were conflicting; andiii) on the basis of the findings, a decision would be taken

whether to disqualify the two companies or one of them.g. The technologr to be used should be clearly stated including the

ICT component, specifically how it would interface with Police,URA and MoWT;

10. The bid document should include a clause(s) on :

il Performanceguarartteeii) Performance Indicators;iii) Penalties for non-performance; andiv) At the time of signing the contract the joint venture

should be effective.

11. TMT rescinded the earlier decision to award the contract to twocornpanies and instead agreed that one company would be

a*aided the contract for a period of 5 years after which thesittration would be reviewed. This was after realizing that thevolume of business would not be adequate for the twocornpanies to realize return on their investments.

12. The use. department would write to the contracts Committeeabout the TMT's observations regarding :

i) the companies which had indicated insurance companiesas the credit guarantors;

ii) the companies that had submitted Mr. Kavuma Francisas their key staff.

13. The procurement should proceed after the user department andContracts Committee have sorted out the issues above; and

Min 3/ 11/O8: Draft Cabinet Paper on the Proposed Maintenanceof District Roads using Direct Labour (road equipment and roadGangs. )

The paper was presented by ACEIDUR on behalf of the EIC/DE andthe follorxiing was stated:

- That due to the continued deterioration of district roads, ithad been feit necessary to explore alternative methods of

d

d

6

a

district roads maintenance other than the use of small scaleLabour Based contractors to providing Road Equipment toevery district and reviving the use of road Gangs to maintainthe roads.The contracting had been abused by district poricy makersand leaders leading to wastage of the meager resources givento the districts.There was need to determine the most effective way tomaintain the district road network, andThe draft paper was therefore presenting the principles of theinitiative and the proposed implementation strategies forapproval before submitting it to cabinet.

District Equipment- It was noted that currently, 33 districts had a full fledged road

equipment unit, 27 had a Grader each while 32 had, nothing.- The proposed scheme was estimated to cost UShs.235.41bn

over a period of 2 years. UShs.63.46 for Fy 2oog /o9 and,UShs.171.95bn for FY 2OO9 /2OIO.- It was further noted that the district roads had aged and weredifficult to maintain and that the kind of resource given to thedistricts was adequate to carryout not rehabilitation.

- The district road network totals 2T,sookm and the lengthvaries from district to district. currently the maintenancebacklog stands at 10,00okm and at current costs it wouldrequire ushs.4oo - 5o0 m to rehabilitate 2okm of roads whichis the cost of a Grader.

- That in addition, the district road network was small anddifficult to maintain.

That in the past, methods of:i) Direct Labour (force Account); andii) Contracting; methods were used.

- That (i) and (ii) above had been tasted and have been found tohave various disadvantages hence the need to explore otheralternatives.

- In the past, various projects supported by variousdevelopment partners had been implemented in the districtsleaving behind various types of equipment;

- These together with other equipment bought by Government ofUganda constitute some of the stock of equipment in thedistricts. some of the old equipment needed shs.13.27bn forrepairs.

A road equipment unit was said to be comprised of:i) A Motor Graderii) 2. A Wheel Loader/Traxcavatoriii) 2 Tipper Trucksiv) 1 Roller

a

7

v) 1 Water Bowser andvi) 1 Pick up for supervision

The number of districts had however been increasing from 33to 45 and later to 56 and now to 87.That there is currently a shortfall of 32 Graders, 51 WheelLoaders, 8O Tipper Trucks, 49 Rollers, 66 Water Bowsers, 19pickups and 96 Motorcycles. This therefore called forprocuring more equipment, providing more funds for repairingthe existing ones, increasing operational funds, recruitingmore staff and rehabilitating/improving regional mechanicalworkshops and district facilities.

The use of Road Gangs

It was noted that road gangs had been used in the past andthat it was now being proposed to revive them;That this called for a clear and transparent recruitmentmodality, strict supervision and fair renumeration to makethem effective.It had been estimated that 13,750 road workers and 2,292road -'overseers would' be recruited to be accommodated incarnps so as to ensure discipline. That teams "Gangs" of 6would be accommodated in the camps and would work on astretch of 12km each.That therefore a total of 2,292 road camps would be requiredthroughout the country. Road tools and implements woulda-lso be provided.

During discussions, the following were raised;- That the cabinet Memo lacked an introduction and the 2"d

paragraph needed to be rephrased to reflect the commentsmade during the recently concluded JTSR where it was statedthat funds disbursed to districts had never been substantial.

- Some districts were too small (with a road network of only85km) to own equipment;

- There was therefore need to divide the country into technicaldistricts so that they could share the equipment to avoididleness which could lead to their abuse and underutilization;

- There was need to carry out a critical analysis of the currentstock of road equipment and their performance to form thebackground to the initiative as well as agree on the best way tomaintain district roads;

- That the private sector was small and could not cope with thedernand (backlog);

- The need to come up with a workabie proposal includingrnaintenance of the equipment either by the supplier or injoint ventrire with the central government or with the districts.There was also need for a mobile service van to do vehicle

a

Erc/DE &,

TaskforceJ

(l

o

maintenance on site;The d.etail of who would do what in terms of procurement ofthe equipment and recruitment of the Gangs and who wouldown and manage what should be detailed;The need for involvement of the Central Government (MoWT)was recognized. However, the proposal to have the equipmentmanaged by the MoWT was said to have political implicationsin view of the decentralization policy;The idea of a plant hire pool was muted and in this regard theneed to visit other countries to learn from their experiences inthis area was suggested, Zambia and Kenya were proposed;The idea of continuing with the use of Regional workshops washowever criticized and said to have failed to deliver toexpectations; andThe current formula for allocation of funds to districts neededto be revised. The use of the population per district was saidto be wr-ong instead the length of the road network shouldhave been used.

It was therefore directed that;

1. The draft cabinet memo be emended to include theobservations made including the justification for the initiative.In addition a professional research be carried out so as toprovide facts and avoid the proposal being rejected by Cabinet;

2. The certificate of financial implication be ob.gained from theMoFPED before the Memo could be submitted;

3. That in the circumstances, each district should be providedwith a Grader, a Tipper Truck and a Pick-up for supervision;

4. The other major equipments would be allocated on a Regionalbasis and managed by the Central Government as a project ofthe MoWT. The network be examined as a basis to determinetl.e regions and the equipment required per region. Thosedistricts which already have equipment should be ascertainedand indicated;

5. The operational funds would be given to the districts while thefunds for maintenance of equipment and staff salary would bemanaged by the project;

6. The districts would be expected to prepare work plans.7. The grading would be carried out by the districts while the

rehabilitation would be by the Central Government;8. The issue of who accessed the equipment, first wouid be

determined administratively.

As far as Road Gangs ulere concerned, It was agreed that:9. tJ.e issue of renumeration be critically examined. The proposed

payment of a lump sum of Shs. 60,000/ was said to be toolitfle and should be revised to about Sh.SO,OOO per km;

10. include provision of overalls to the gangs;

a

PS

Erc/DE &Taskforce

EIC/DE

EIC/DE

Erc/DE &Taskforce

4

9

1 1. the Gangs to be accommodated for disciplinary andmonitoring purposes and that the construction of the campswould be a one off expenditure.

12.The Cabinet Paper was said to be too long and therefore be

shortened to f,it into the guidelines given by the CabinetSecretariat; and

13.An annex shdwing the detailed district road network shouldbe provided. The above amendments be incorporated beforefurther action could be taken.

There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00p.m. The meeting of T\resday 1 lft November was cancelled.

CHAIRMAN SECRETARY

EIC/DE&Taskforce

o'

d

r0

TELEGRAMS. .'ADMIMSTER"

DIRECT LINES'AT-f ORNEY GENERAL-/MIMSTER'S OFFICE: 04 I 4'343 84 I

MINISTER OF STATE'S OFFICE 04 I4.34 34O I

SOLICITOR CENERAUS OFFICE 04I4.34394I

UNDER SECRETARY'S OFFICE. 0414.342261

GENERAL LINES: 0414-23053819

IVII N ISTRY OF JUSTICE ANDCONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS,P. O. Box 7183Kampala, Uganda

FAX' 0414-2308021254829

E-MAIL' info@justice go'ug

WEBSITE: rrt'rv.iusticc.go.ug

ADM/293/01ln any conespondcnce on

this subjea plcasc quote No. ..-..............

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

February 10,201 I

AllAccounting Officers

suBJECT: cLBan q.Ncr oF coNTRACTs By TIIE arConNpv cENERAL,.CIIAMBERS/VIIMS TRY OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAI AFFAIRS

O This is further to ours of even reference dated I 5h November 2006 concerning the above subject.

We wish to further advise that in order for us to be able to effectively perform our mandate under article119 of the Constitution, we shall require the following documents to accompany all contracts submittedfor clearance:

l) A copy of the minutes of the Contracts Committee meeting at which the award was made;

2) A copy of the Contracts Committee decision (pp Form 209);

3) A copy of the Bid Submission Sheet or, in the case of a contract of selice, a copy of the offer ofappointment and the response thereto (letter ofacceptance); and

4) A copy of the letter of no objection from the financing institution in the case of procurementsunder donor-funded projects.

O Any contact submitted without the above documents shall not be cleared..

Please note that where circumstances warrant, the offrce may request for additional information.

Lastly, we request each of you to designate a specific officer in your respective entities with whorn thisoffice shall be liaising on all matters relating to clearance of contracts.

t

C irab

FOR: SOLICITOR GENERAI

Hon. Attorney GeneralMinister of Justice & constitutional AffairsHon. Deputy Attorney GeneraV Minister of State for Justice & Constitutional Affairs

C.c

o

o

TELEGRAMS ..ADMINISIER,,I)ilit.( I t.t\t,\:\l-t()t{\t.\ (;L\t ri\l . 0lt.l-j.tJult\ll\l\ll..ll OIrSI \l t_: 0JlJ-J-IJJ{}t

S()l.l( I l ()t( (;1..\tlr.\ll: ttJtJ-JJ-i9{r( \t)t:lt:st.ct{t..'1"\t{\: 0JH-Jl216l(;t.\t:t{r\t.t.l\ljs:

o.flJ_2J05JIJ/9l';\\: 0{t.t-lJ(}1t02/2sJ829ti-t I.\ I I-:\\ rrJSr.r'r: -*ffi+tgs,... *,"-Irr nrrt crlrrespondcucc 0nlhi\ suhjccr ptcnse quorc \o. ADM.69/01

26'hOctober 2015

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE ANDCONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRSP.O. BOX 7183KAMPALA - UGANDA

Tr lt RcpuoLtc cr uoar{oa

o

All Permanent SecretariesAll Chief Administrative OfficersAll Accounting Officers

CHECKLIST OF CLEAR,ANCE OF CONTRACTS

The above refers.

whereas we have PigYioutly issued guidance on the required documents when making asubmission to the solicitor denerati 6ni.u, it has come-t-o- o* attention that many entitiessubmit incomplete documents ,.uqrilJ Lo clear contracts,

Thrs is therefore to furdrer crarify that the required documenB incrude:

1. Letter seeking clear,alce/advice/opinion (Instructions)2. Contract/Agreement Form3. General Conditions of Contract4. Special Conditions of Contract

: Bid validity extensions, where applicable6. Signed Evaluation Report7 ;:?Hi,L"f:i:U3,,ff::f

('t anv) and contracrs commirLee minures approvins theB' A signed full set of contracts committee Minutes indicating the award and the amount9' A copy of the bid-incruding Biilr oiauantities for works contracts10' A signed copy of the orilinat coniraa where an addendum is to be cleared evidence ,clearing the ihitiar contraci *nur" un umendment is sought,11' A certificate of incorporation *r,.r" bodies

-..pli-t" are involved with their

::il}?ii"rs (at times individuals are debarrea uv EiJa rrom performing Government

12. Power$ of Attorney (where applicable)13. CVs for consultancy contracts

11 1 No objectidn for donor funded proiects I

r)' A co-operatidn or joint venture Agrelment or partnership deed where appropriate I16' A certificate of Registration witrr ihe rrrco Board especiaily for MoU,s17' statement of reouirements/priie scneautes ro,. rru,ne*oiilcontracts and other contracts"::il:[i,x8l,,p;J[.,"#jl,?}],1,:],"ii[:.ililiir:i?J":f ;['#;:,.nui.or1

C irabake t '

o

(

Ag. SOLICTTOR GENERAL

ii I,- l,; !.

ilLI

t t\

['t

rl

Telcgram: ,MINIWORKSTelephone: 256-4t-J20l0l/9Telex: 6El3 WORKS UGAFrx: 256{l-J20IJ5E-Mril: mowhc.,iiurlonline.co.uq.irn rny corrcspondcncc on this subjcclplease quote Xo. ADIII/F93/01

Ministry of \yorks, Housing anrl

Comm u lrications Headquarters,

P O Box 10,

ENTEBBE,

TtIE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

4'h February 2OOg.

The Executive Director

Dear Sir,

(a)

\\1,\ \ \LIqqEqtq

Public Procuremenr and Disposar of pubric Assets Authority (ppDKAMPALA

Section (l) - Instructions to Bidders(i) Item (2) source of funds:This has been changed to reflect that the bidder shall fury providethe funds to imprement the oroject unJtrr"n charge inspection fees.

l#*:ilrarged sharl be tr rse q;",.d by the bid?.;ilth. bidding

ga J:i [1,(^ i-t, n':t'.':ri.'i'i ;'ii'i t-l I

)4

I

I

P U I LlC,'r'S 1::,r -r'S,q ui':'i'iRl t

l: ; ', : i:r) i{llt 't't

Yr+r .iil ,1r* 1;r -.i [ / ,-;,1i' '(-i\J.Yr .tl-'"t q,-. ri-r' -ri lr J"t 'r '

fnnocuREMENT oF *RIVATE MoToR ,EHICLE INS.ECTI.N .ER,ICES:-Request For Approval of A Modifieotiunou.a Bidding Document_-__.u6 vvL!

IThe Ministry of works and rransport is re-introducing and privatizing Motor Vehicleinspection service in Uganda. This pro..." -in*iJ.,

develop, instalr, commiss-ion and operate motor u.r,i.tt flf;fi:"ffi:,,:il::Jffi,j:i and charge motor vehicle owners an inspecti;" f;;;'*hich should cover the bidder,sinitial investment, operating cost,-profit *i ..onr;r;i"" fee. The concession fee will bei paid to the Ministry/Goverinent'.' ---- wrDur res' rne concess

According to PPDA Regulation 243Q).this is.a project financed under Build, own andoperate (Boo) modarity and the Mioirrry [d-;;;r. another type of conrracr orcontracting alrangement other ** jlr: r,""i*al.**.rn.n, procedure and documedtsfor procuring the normal services. This reffi ;;il;.. from you as to the appricabrer procurement procedures and docuinents fb. ihi;;;:liir]ro.rrement.

t,tl!*l.lr.u::I.loli,J';.il'?ff "isl,trJ:l[!iL,,H:T?,1T'?j"Jf

applicable but the Bid Documents differ fto,n iil;rilis,*a*d Bidding Document fornon-consultancy services using Intemational open ildd;"g in the following areas:-

l ills t.ii l'tlL ilr,itrrii.r [.t,liiliil-1]fri:lriii.D;'ii Ntiiix ED AFFiDAYIT Oi:

S\1,ORN/Di]CI.ARID

cl

a) ir___-_ /

t-1I \\!r \

\t'i ttTI

llIF0ilL \iii'ioo.//..m:. TH IS. YOF

(.-l r''"i

.t

o

o

ta

t"-''t

?

(ii) Item (6) - Contcrtts of Bidding Docutttetts

Tlre list dilfcr'.s ll'onr the s(alrdard docurtt:nts becattse this colltract

clO.-S lt(,1 ltr..'c (jcrrcrcl C,.'tttlitttttts t'l'('()l'ltlilct atttl SPecilrl

C'r-.rtc!iti,.1,t rrt"(",rr1ltit(-t hul lrAs r.'rrrtrlitir)ll\ irt cr)lltl'ilcl ltttil CtrttllaCl

ii,tit;.r.it

n

ii

(b), Section 3 - Evaluntiort N'[cthorlologl' Critcri:r

. The Evaluatiorr Methodology Criteria used tbr this llrocttrentettt is

the Qualitv artd Cost Based selectiort (QCBS). rvhiclr is in

accordance rvith PPDA Regulations 198,200 and 201'

Section 6 - Stntenrent of RcquirententsTerms of Ret'ere6ce (TOR) to be r,rsed by the sr.rccessful bidder to

develop, install. commission and operate technical mofor

vehicle ipspectiop statious throughout the country and charge

inspection fees.

Part 4 - Contract, Sectiotts 7, 8 and 9

This procuretnetlt has only sections 7 (Conditions of Contract) and

8 (Contract fornrs). The contract is quite different flronl standard

contracts in that the service provider will charge inspection fees

from vehicle orvners in order to recover his/her investments,

operating expenses and the concession fees that are paid to

Government instead of the Government paying the service

Provider.

(c)

(d)r.

i

%

(e) Part4 section 9 - AgrccmentThe form of Contract Agreement is different from the standard agreement

because the conditions of codtract differ. This agreement has, therefore, 'been prepared in accordance with these conditions of contract.

The Contracts Committee of Ministry of Works and Transport at its 374th meeting held

on l6h January 200,9, advised the Ministry to first consult PPDA and any other relevant

org* in the pio""tr of preparing the special modified Standard Bidding Document and

Form of Contract.

I accordingly enclose a copy of the modified Bidding Document for-the Procurement of

Mandatorf llotor Vehicle lnspection Services for your consideration and subsequent

approval.

Charles MuganziPERMANENT TARY

,\ \'r.\\\ \ \\\\ \ \

Y

2

\'\t\(r\

t

t ,lt\

tI

t\ t\

I t t t I tlt'\\\-r*lI\tt

ff ,l/

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority1 Pilkington Road, 14th Floor, Workers House, P.O. Box 3925, Kampala, Uganda

Tel: +256 (0414) 311100 Fax: +256 (0414) 344858

PPDA/]VI20/000

SIOur Ref: ........

Your Ref:: .....,

3'd March,

r The Permanent S

rI1l

Transport, ?s?

Page I of3

,):iD Ai:FI[.iAi/lt' 0i.. St'V()Rt'ilL)trCLAh.tD

D,{\'OF

.. .r: .'-.; : :. "-

: ' j i-I Jl ' | '

^'.'t' '' ,(' '

lii

- $ tuiiiil i'iu'J

tl*

r[-,

l"

rrt

Ministry of WorksP.O.Box 10,

ENTEBBE

PROCIJREMENT OF PRTVATE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION SERVICES:.REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MODIFTED' STANDARD BIDDINGDOCUMENT.

Reference is made to your letter of 4th Februar/ 2009 in rgspect of the above mentionedsubject.

The Authority has studied your letter and the draft Bidding Document and noted that:-

l. The Ministry of Works and Transport (MOWT) is re-introducing and privatizingthe Motor Vehicle Inspection service in Uganda which involves granting aconcpssion to a private firms to develop, install commission and operate motorvehicle inspection stations countrywide and charge motor vehicle owners aninspection fee, which would cover the bidder's initiat investment, operating cost,profit and a concession fee payable to the Minisury/Govemment.

2. MOWT is applying to PPDA under PPDA Regulation 243(2) to allow it to useBidding Documents deviating from PPDA's Standard Bidding Document (SBD)since it is a Build Own and Operate venture to be procured through Openlnternational Bidding method and has submitted its draft Bidding Document forPPDA's guidance/approval.

The Authority considered Regulation 243 of the Public Procurement and Disposal ofPublic Assets Regulations, 2003:-

Regulation 243(2) provides that where a project is to be financed or partially financedunder Build Own Operate (BOO), Build Own Transfer (BOT), Build OwnTransfer (B$OD, Public Private Partnership (

u-. I \ | f-'i I,i,\ii(t

I 'mi;il U !t,

i]LFO

, , itT\ I\,\f,

Palcoo]{r

IJ IS.

t

a?\!,t

,|

o

o

lillolr

lilr

t,lr

;oIIiIIIt

arrangement, a procuring and disposing entity shall seek guidance from the Authority onthe applicable procurement procedures and documents.

Under Regulation 243(3), the applicable procurement procedures shall be in accordancewith the basic procurement principles of public procurement in the Act and Regulations.Under Regulation 243(4) The Authority ffiay, issue guidelines for priiate sectorcontracting arrangements.

Subsequent lo-Iolt letter, the Authoiity requested for and held a meeting with your staffon Monday 23'o February 2009 in the PPDA Board Room, at rvhich tne fottowing issueswere clarified:-

l. It was clarified that the bidder with the lowest bid (i.e. the oie with the highestdifference between the bid price and the ceiling) will be the most responsive forthat particular item;

2. The Ministry will consider the possibility of providing land to the successfulbidder instead of the bidder acquiring the land;

3. That the Ministry has opted for a BOO instead of BOT because the Govemrnentdoes not intend to operate the project itself since it has in the past failed tomanage the project and most of the equipment would have depreciated to almostzero value after the five years. The decision to privatize was arrived at after areport from a consultancy carried out by a Canadian firm which has studiedsimilar projects in several countries;

4. The procurement will be two-stage envelope bidding; ancl

5. The main difference in the MOWT document is that instead of the bidder beingpaid, it is the bidder paying the PDE from what it collects from the vehicle ownersthrough collecting the inspection fees. The PDE will take l0% of the gross feesexcluding taxes;

The Authority advises that:-

l. According to the Bidding Document, there will be an initial exclusive contract forfive years with the successfut bidder and for the second five year period, theservice will be_opened to all qualified bidders. The Bidding documeni should befor the initial five years only and the criteria of evaluation ih.t also considers thesecond five year period should not be lrart of this Bidding Document. TheMinistry may also consider extending the period fiom five y.u.i to an appropriateperiod of time to allow the successful bidder recoup its investment, taking intoaccount the amount of investment involved;

K2. The Ministry should consider acquiring land for the bidder to avoid the projectcollapsing in case the bidder fails to acquire the land;

Palcoo Page 2 of3

'ft, t. \\1.t. t, \\ t,t. t. \\ t,\t, \\ tr\ \ 't\ t, t, \ tt\

7

ifrl

Ft

tt

p,

I

Fl

IIF

?

tIIt

D

y T\" Bidders shgtild give a performance guarantee to safeguard Government- rnterest in case of failure to perform on the part of the successful bidder;

y' The Bidders should indicate in the proposal how they inten4 to build localcapacily by emp^loying.local people and involving local companies, and thisshould also be reflected in the evaluation criteria;

5' Since this is a kind of Non Tax Revenue for the Government (10% payable t. -)Govemment), payments for the inspection fees by the motorists should b. ;;;; /to the bank. Further advice on this matter should be obtained from Ministry of ,Finance, Planning and Economic Development;

6' The bidding documents purchase price of 200,000/= is rather excessive. ThePublic Procurement and Disposal oiPrblic Asseis Regulations, 2003, n.gri.tion146(5) provides that "so/icitation documents noy bZ so7 in order to recovercosls but the price shalt be calculatbd to. re-co-vei only costs relatecl to printing,copying and distribution and shail not include rny ilr*"rt of profit.i,'A moreappropriate price should be set;

The Contract Document is not in the PPDA SBD format in that there are noseparate General Conditions of Confract and Special Conditions of Contract, uutthe two have been merged into one. Accordini to Section 62 (3) of the publicProcurement and Disposal of public Assets 1,ct, the General conditibns ofConhact shall not be modified except through Special Conditions inserted into thesolicitation document or contract. The Authirity advises iirt tt r standard GeneralConditions of Contract be maintained and amended uy tt. Sp.cial Conditions ofContract as a deviation is not necessary. The amended contract document shouldbe sent to the Solicitor en93t for apirovar before it i"rign.a as required *J".

*EreofthePu!licProcurementandDispo-salofPublicAssetsRegulations, 2003;

l.ItIIII

i

(.

l\.\\\ t t \ \\ l.'.\t t. t.

Please amend the document as agreed/advised and send us the final document forapproval before the documents are sold to bidders.

Ol-IrLil",Cornelia K. SabiitiFOR: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

cc: Chairman, Contracts Committeecc: Head, Procurement and Disposal Unit

Palcoo Page 3 of3

'3, t, l, t, \\t,t, t. \\t,t* |

.at

Your Ref:

t, fi l:

Ref:Our

o

t',,?ffi ,1, :: : ]f ffi1i; i fl _r_,."

o s a I o f p u b I i c A s s e t s A u t h o r *yre r : +2,5 6 rr.

" j, ii ir;' III;lr";;"; i:i: r:;,;

;;,';;. ;;:,,PPD/irb[20t000..,..

...

86 April, 2009

The Perman0nt S ecretary,

Yidjoy of Works ard Tiansport,P.O.Box 10,ENTEBBE

l'i il:-; I \ r..if r {-iii;ijil'tLi ! ii;t lir 'i

u,cl'(,j\[,h,4 ii 'I]j;r,;.f/..,t;.

;:l L, ..ti,irii:,.ivii

5'r/0liir,.;

tJi'.,

,t j/ t,t.t, i, I rt .

c.i-' -',i"r'ti:..r+i-.1 r-?u,

-t ti i

la

PROCUREMEIVTREQIIEST FORDOCT.IMENT.

OF PRTVATE MOTORAPPROVAL OF A

Reference is made r

no.,,.m".; ilffi l3,n:,T'fffi ,lffilaoove mentioned subJect.

,"H'#hr##Til,iHl,'#

m

CES:-

Publicof the

andon 66

rssues in rel to the Authority's adveven reference,paragraphs

contained inafi 7 of the

I

2.

The Mtnistry shoulcouapsing,;;;;;x,,;tr;*,f:;:i:xrr,,#,*i:#,bidderto

I

1 o

the project

The standard General Conditions of Contract be maintained and anended by theSpecial Conditions of Contract at a dqiafion is necessary.

Entity

Page I of2

The Authority would like ro clarify the following:_

t. I 5. " the discretion bf yourbidder acquire the land i,J"lf,'

acquire the land for the bidder or let tlre2'

;'ffi:"Ir":::Yli' indicated Hyr, t. o.1.1"-1rr. Standard Bidding

fu;*itiffi ,;i ..i:

ff ::##:*ffI:, H [fr ",u,, in,hi s cas e i, i,,r, r

flft:ff s,',f:{,:Hiil$*,"#:n:xf #i:#:ffi ,[il?::[:il,l$

Pa/coo

t lr t. \\,

t)

I

/61

\.

I

o

o

; i- .,. .a

l' '' r,2

1""/'1i.it,t r

' !,,

til

hi

ti

t,

li

1.I

3. The Bidding Document should provide guidance to the potential bidders of thepayment methodology to be adopted by the users of the service which would befurther agreed upon during negotiations vrith the successful Bidder;

4. The amended Bidding Document should be sent to rhe Solicitor General forapproval as required under Regulation 8(!) of the Public procurement andDisposal of Public Assets Regulations, 2003;

Please send us a copy of the final bidding document approved by the Solicitor Generalfor our records.

DIRECTOR

cc: The Sol Generalcc: Chairman, Contracts Committeecc: Head, Procurement and Disposal Unit

l,o

Palcoo Page? of 2

f\\\t*t,\\t,t. t, \\\t, \ \\ S, t \\\\ t* \\\\ |

, WWTclcgrrm: MINI\VORKSTelophonc: 256-41- 32010119Telex: 61313 WORKS UGAFax: 256-41-320135

25641-32t364E-mril: [email protected]

In any correspondencc on thissubjcct please quote

No:ADM/F93l0lTTIE REPTIBLIC OF-UGA NDA

Date : 14th April 2009

The Solicitor,GeneralMinistry of Justice and Constitutional AffairsI(A]VIPALA

Miilstry of Works and TransportHeadquarters,P O Box 10,

ENTEBBE,

Uganda.

C"L & CCr'i,(

(*. ct'*' olv 91)

II

.z' c'

o .\€,.luiii-rti il-*Gi

PROCUREMENT OF PRTVATE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTIONSERVICEES: Request for Approval of Amended stand,ard. Bidd.ingDocumeuts

I l1".Jti1tto of Works and Transport is re-introducing and privatizingI motor vehicle inspection

. servicei in uganda. This "p-".r"

involves' concessioning private firms to develop, in-stalli commission ana operateI Soto.t

vehicle inspection stations cou;trjryide. Motor vehicle owners will| ,i be charged an inspection fee which sirould cover the bidders, initialti rnvestment, operating cost, prolit and concession fee. The concession fee; will be paid to the Ministry/Government.lr

' where as the traditional S_tapdard Bidding Docu*"rr\ are for services

I oxH:.l;i:"r# e?iliti6:Tm*,:ffit",e*i#::",iJ:'H:standard General Conditions of Contract inapplicable in this

I f::::1"^", and alternarive conditions of contract and bidding, documents have to be used.

Under Regulation 8(2) of the Pr,rblic Procurement and Disposal of pubticAssets Regulations 2003: "The Authority, in consultations with theAttorney General, shall determinb the f,rocedure for the review andapproval of the'alternative bidding documents, where requested by aProcuring and Disposar Entity in accordance with regulatio.," izg."The Ministry of Works and Transport, as thebidding procedures and documents for this special

\\ r. \\ \r. t \\ t.r* t, t* \\ r_

d'L'u.,..,,

Ett F'O

i:.D At:Fti-)AVIT,tur

slt/0.DAY')

s (,

It

ia \

ETH

'^r};r 'fri:

0

?I

Ii,1

\-Y4

t'"{

o

o

f *'ro.r:A'r!-il*ifT

th"4g. or['.4s February 2OO9, to the Public Procurement atrd Disposal ofPublic .A,ssets Authority (PPDA) for review and approval (Herewithattache$ is the forwarding letter ref no. ADM/F93/O1 (Annex 1!).

PPDA after exchange of corresPondences and a meeting with theMinistry, gave conculTence subject to some changes being made to thedocuments (see letters PPDA/M?OIOOO dated 3'd March 2OO9 and 8eApril 2AO9 attached annextures II and III respectively). The biddingdocume e accordingly been arnended as advised by PPDA.

to t the amended bidding documents for your

les M

cc The Executive DirectorPublic and Disposal of Public Assets Authority.KAMPALA

r

) fiEttfLlEot^rls: "ADMINISTER"Drircr LNES:

MrMsrER's OrrrcE: Ml-l4340lArroRNEy Gorenel.s Omce: 04 l.l4l ga ISoltctroR GENEI^L.S OFIrcE: 04 l_14i94 IUrorn Secnrrrny's OrrrcE: 04 l-14226 I

CEr.rER^r Ln€s: 04l_210518/9Fr:i: O{ t_210902/2j4829

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE ANDCONSTITUTIONAL AFFAI RS.P.O. Box 7183,Kampala, Uganda

-i

I

I

ln rny corrcspondcncc on THE REPUBLIC OF UO^NDA

Clause 38, sub-ctause 2 4th line, " determined to be should bedeleted , it should read thus , "the D rgpg! tn shallTlii: i5 'r'iji. r \.i,ilfiiI t'lni'lhi:0..,x.t

'{ :i ii) t' XID AFfiD,1t,'IT OF

BFF(,J,:L= .1,iE THS\VURNI DECI.AKEi]

)(rc.1/..^T

clause 36, sub-crause .1, .!h* proviio shourd be rephrased to provide

that post qualification shail be undertaken to detennine that the bestevaluated bidder has the capacity and resource to effectiveiy ;;ryout the contract.

this subjcct please quorc *" ADMr7l2B4tO1

21't May, 2009. i

The Permanent SecretaryMinistry of Works & TransportP.O Box 10Entebbe - Uganda

oAttn: Charles Muganzi

RE: APPROVAL OF STANDARD BIDDING DOCUiI/IENTS FORPROCUREMENT OF PRIVATE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION SERVICE.

Reference is made to your letter ref: ADM/F93/01 dated 14th April 2009, on theabove subject.

The draft Standard Bidding Document for procurement of private motor vehicleinspection service is hereby approved subject to G toilowing:

clause 2 after the description of services, it should be stated theprovision is under a Build Own and Operate venture.

1. Refer to the Bid Notice.

clause 5, 7th line, the word "your" shourd be dereted and reptacedwith'the".

lo - Clause 6, 8 (c) dcies not 6xist in the bid notice, g (c) therefore shouldbe replaced with 7 (c).

2. lnstructions to bidders.

I

t\r\ \ \\\\ r. \\\t- t. \\. t I\ttr tt

I\" t

SIONTI-]

ts...

TA

DAY OF

(_),\

Qr\a L \I' a

o

o

*- - -

':r' -- ---"

E+-i::-lPl

-

i.. .

award a contract to the Bidder whose offer has been determined to

the best evaluated bid, provided that the Bidder is qualified to

ferform the contract .satisfactory

anO subject to satisfactory

negotiations.

i),Xr^tub

n#uo p.pFOR: SOLIGITOR GENERAL

a

L

IriItI

I

q \\\\ r. \\\t. r, \\\,t. r.'\\r.,, (. \*\\r, \ (.\ \t.

loI

I

I

I

I

I

7 ffiAzutla t-' ;:u [ -

Tftg.rnr: 'lllNI\YORKSTclcphonc: 2.56-J-1-320929 or J20l0t/9'fclcr: 613lJ WOIIKS UGAFrr: 256{l-320tJ5E-l\trll: m0ryt(nlryorks.so.uuln rny corrcspondence on thi! subject plcascquotc Not ADilt/f93/01

/)

illinistry of Works, nnd TransportP O Box t0,

ENTEBBE,

Uga nda.

PP Form 209Rs3(3),Rsl(8)

MISSION

jllls lS Titf: i;tli l;ii [iijliir-11,,

t/,

li

it

TIIE NEPUBLIC OF UCANDA

Ministry of Works & TSansportCON,TRACTS COMMITTEE DECISIO} Oi A SUB

dH,Y,yy, Works & Transport

ii

-L

BE

Eng. RwangaS ARY, CONTRACTS COMMITTEEADM4F93t99t0lt5t06t09

xuts;l.Fr-11i1, i,oo.//.ar

,1

l; rt U ,j:i:FiL);',,I f 0F

Il i Tiiis.0rlr/DI.Lt.ARiD

aI

YCF

I,l i;r\-iii

\\\\\\\\\\r r.r.\r, \tti1 l. t r.\\\\r.\'

Procurenrcnt NuEntiry Nanre Dcpartnrcnt Name Budgct

YcarScqucnccNumbcr

Bid nrber

NuContract

MOWTRe lationsTransport 08i09 Svc/07-08/001I IwT/

SUBMISSION INFORMATIONrocurement or DisposalSubject ofP tues rfo AReq fopprova dinBid Do tcumenoE na d Bid

oN tice for the troRe-in ducti no of Motor ehiv cleI ection eryis cesSubmission made (Section Letterand Title of Subm ission Form

Memo from DHP daU 25ted 5/20t0 09FoPP Irm Interna tiona BiddinDate/reference of Contracts

ComrniRee0l/06/09:393 oC Contracts mtm Mttee neeti o

E

coNTRA sCT coMMITTEE DECISION

Please this letter ason this su

authori tn future

informbidding idding

/valAppro *eieetien us tobmissiotrol Controcts CommitteerdlsThis to stthat Ial 3ts 93you onheld JI0 unemeeting 9200 the Contracts Comrnitteethe thedocument internationalopen b and the draft advertisement.

;.rSi[)iri-

\

,!)

1"'-:*,tI

\

t .\

,

\}

o

a

.\\ r. \\\\ t. \\\\ \ \\\\ t. \\\\ t. \\\\ t.\t

t ,-'ri I

ti,1.,Ir

h

IiIrIi

Xo

!rl,lI

'TIi ri. J

fffi

a

Ilepublic of Ugancla

Ministry of Works and Transport

Bidding Document

For theProcurement of Mandatory Motor vehicle

Inspection Services

Subjcct of Procuremcnt: Provision of Mandatory Motor vehicleInspection Services

Procurement RcferenccNum bcr:

MOWT/SVCi07-08/001I I

aProcuremcnt N{cthod: open Intemational Bidding

Datc of Issuc: 3o'l'Jull,

tt t\ \\.\t. r.\\\t. r \\\r \\ \r.\\\t.r"\I

h4UisstoN ,( rl'\i':l

i,t)

E.l l\I 1: lr H

ANI:I t)

rI R0 ll

I oo/.

s\\,i)RN/; L. Il

D UF

i.\il1 AiFtD,ivlT 0i

t L L

Qti\$, l.*.

t

faf

a,

Acronyms-

Public Procuremelrt ancl Disposal of Public Asscts Act

Bid Data Sheet

Bidding Document

Evaluation Methodology and Criteria ',Conditions of Cbntract

lnstructions to Bidders

Procuring and DisPosing EntitY

Procttrement attd DisPosal Unit

PublicProcurementandDisposal(ofPrrblicAssets)Autlroritypublic procurement and Disposal of public Assets Regulations

Statement of Requirements

MinistrY of Works and TransPort

Terms of Reference

Parties to thb Agreement

Uganda Revenue AuthoritY

Uganda Police Force

TransPort Licensing Board

Consumer Price Index

Uganda Bureau of Statistics

lI

ra t

Act

BDS

I]DEMC

CC

ITB

PDE

PDU

PPDA

Regulations

SOR

MOWTTOR

PTA

URA

UPF

TLB

CPI

UBOS

I

o

t{q

t

,i

\\ t. \'\\t. r. \\\\ t. \\\\ t. \\\\t.\\\\

i--1t,

1-j

I

I

1

I

Bidding Document

Tablc of Contcnts

Invita tion

- Bid Notice

Ilidding Procedures

Section I Instructions to Bidders

Section 2 Bid Data Sheet

Section 3 Evaiuation Methodology and Criteria

Section 4 Bidding For:rns

Section 5 Eligible Countries

Statcm en t of Req uirements

Section 6 Statement of Requirements

Contract

Section 7 Conditions of Contract

Section 8 Contract Forms

Appendic,es

App.endix I : l'echnical Specifications

Appendix 2: General Specifications

Appendix 3: Guide to the Preparation of the l'echnical Proposal

rl

lo

l'art l:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4

II

i

I' I

okd,

I

I'l;l, l

IIh[.L t. t.,n.t.( t. \\\t t_t.\\l t. \\ \ t. t, \\\ \ t. \

I

III

'-]

i

I

l

t

o

o,ai

r. \\\\ r. \\\\r. \\\\ t. \\\\ t.\\\t. t. \\\\

l-f=Part 1: IIID NOTICE

no

PART I: INVITATION- Bid Notice

tr \\\tr t- \\\t t. \ \ \\ t. \ \\\ \ \ \'q.t't- \ \\|

+

r,l

r:t

nt

il

I

l,l

U

U

U

iJ

il

Part 1: BID NOTICtr

BIDNOTICEUNDEROPENINTERNATIONALI}IDDING

Itcpublic of Uganda

Ministry of Works and Transport

frorn 9:00 am to 5:00 Pnt'

A comP lcte set of Bidding Documents in Engl ish may bc Purclrased bt interested

i\':\]r;f

Procurcmentltefercnccnumbcr(MoWT/SVC/07-08/00lll)

1. Thc Governmcnt of Uganda through the Ministql ol works and Transport is re-

introduci'g motor -velii.t.

inrp..tion as a statutory reqttirenrent for all motor

vehicles o' the -road.

Motor ".rti.i. inspection -scrviccs

will be provided by a

private moror ,.;i;[ i*p..,or. d; ;;;.tsful bidder lbr which this bidding is

conductcd wiff ie olfered u nr.-y.u'-co"ces'ion to develop' install' commission

and operat. n,o,o, vehicle inrp..tion t*,ionr. The fees p."t1_b^I^:1.^ inspection

sen ice ur.r, *iit' "ou.t the slrvice providers' investment' operating expenses'

profit and concession fees'

2,TheMinistr.yofWorksandTransportinvitessealedbidsfronreligiblebiddersforthe provision of Mandatory perioaic'insp..tig1 Services for all N'lotor vehicles for

Roadworthin.rr.-it. prouision is under a Build own operate venture'

3. Bidding will be conducted in accordance with thc open lnternational Bidding

procedures coniained in thc Co".it*nt of Uganda'i Public Procurenrent and

'Disposal of Public Assets Act' 2003'

4. Interested eligibre bidders may obtain further infomration from Ministry of works

and Transport and inspect the biddi;; iotun,tn" at the address given belorv at 7(a)

5

biddcrs on the subnrission of' a u'rittcn aPPlication t0 the address bclou at 7(b) and

rupon Pe vnrcrtt ol' a non-refund able t'ecj ol' Shs: I 00.000/= (Onc hundred thousand

Uganda Shillings Only). The mcthod of payment wilt be by bankers draft or cash

paynlents in the bank using bank PaYment forms obtairlcd tiont the Ministrl'. Thp

document rvill be handed over to the autho rised represcntativc at thc addiess given

bclorv at 7 (a). No liability witlbe acccPted for your failurc- tcl collect the docuntent'

6. Bids rnust be delivered to thc address belort'at 7(c) at or betbre I1.00 am local timc

ort WedrlesdaY .23'd Septembcr 2009 All bids ruust be accomPanied by gJ}ld-SegsItlt) or thc1

ol' s Dol T'rvo

inU Shillines. Latc bids shall be re.iectcd. Bi

the presence of the representat ives wlto choosc to attend

ds will bc oPened in

at the address belou

at 7(d) at I I.30 anr Iocal tinre oll Wednesda1, 23td Septcnrbcr 2009

t. \ \ \ \ t. \ \ t. t. *-. t,',,\ t, t. \t.\t. t.\\!t\rt.\\

Part 1: BID NOTICE

il'l

7. Address docutnents may be inspected at:

(a) The OIfice of the l-lead Procttrement and Disposal UnitStreet Address: Plot 4/6 Airport Road

Town/City: EntcbbePostal Adclrcss: I']. O Box l0Country: UgandaTelephonc +256 414 32010119

Facsimile numbcr: +256 414 320135

(b)

(c)

i-t

il'lI

Addrcss docut-nents will be issucd front:

l'lie OIfice of the I-leacl Procureurcnt and Disposal UnitStrcet Addrcss: Plot 4/6 Airport Itoad

1'orvn/City: EntebbcPostal Address: P. O Box l0Cor,rntry: Uganda'feleplrorre; +256 414 320101/9

Address Bids must bc delivered to:

The Olfice of the Head. Procurement and Disposal Unit at the address

- given in 7(b) above

(d) Address of Bid OPening:

The Ministry of Works and Transport Headquarters.

Street Address: Plot 4/6 Airport Road

Towrr/City: EntebbePostal Address: P. O Box l0Couutry: UgandaTelephonc :.t'256 4 | ! 3201 0l 19

Iracsimile number: +256 414 320135

Permancnt Sccrctary

o

li

i-

o

ll;

II

I

li t

I

lir

1,

lrA \\\\ \ \\\\ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \\ \ r$rr r, \\ \'

lr .--\

I-l

f']I

l

a

o

.\\\\\\\\ t \\\t \\\t.1. l.t.\t l.t.t.\\\t*l

'!

rr11

11

il11

R

R

rlo

11

r'l

llnrlllo

Ircf[ 2: SeCtion [ [.ii'sti'u__ctit rrs'fd Biddcrs-:-*. '-- '

Section [: [nstructions to l]idders

'l'lble of Clauscs

llrlIIllrltl

.\.t.l.

l._i.

B.

6.

s.

C.r).

10.

ll.t2.r3.I .1.

15.

r6.t7.13.

t9.20.

t)21.

22.?i24.25.

E.

26.

27.

28.

29.30.

3t.32.JJ.

34.

35.36.37.

F.

38.

39.40.4t.

(i cncr:t1...........

Scopc ol Uid.................Sourcc oI Ftrttcls .....,... ......Corrupt l)ractices...............l:ligiblc Lliddcrs

Qrrali tication ol the llidclcr

Ilitldin g f)octlrnctttContcnts ol Ilidding Docttment...........Clari l'ication oi Riddirig DocLrtnent.....

r\rnendrncnt of Biclding Docutttctrt....

Prcparation of Ilitls

Preparation of UidsDocunrents Conrprising the Bidt] id Subnr issiort Sheet

Bid Prices and DiscountsCurrencies of Bid....-.....Documents Establishing the Eligibiliry of the BidderDocuments Establishing the Qualifications of the Bidder.

Period of Validity of Bids.............Bid SecurityFormat and Signing of Bid.......

Submission antl Opening of Bids.... ........ l0Sealing and Marking of Bids..Deadline tbr Submission of BidsLate Bids.....Withdrawal and Replacernent of Bids.Bid Opening .....................

Evaluation of Bids......

Confidentiality ..

Clarit'ication of Bids...................Compliance and Responsiveness of Bids.Nonconformities, Errors, and Omissions.

inistrative Comliliiil : :

Conversion to Single Currcncy.....Margin of Prefercnce ...

l'-inancial Comparison of Bids.........Determination of Best Evaluated Bid(s) ..............Post-qualification of the BidderProcuring and Disposing Entity's Right to Accept or Reject Any or All Bids.......

Arvard ProcedureNotification of Award and l-etter of Bid Acceptance...............Signing of ContractPerformance Security..............

Prelirninary Examination of Bids- Eligibility and AdmDetailed Comnrercial and'fechhical Evaluation............

0

0I

I

I

,2

2

2

3

.l

.t

-t

1

4

5

5

5

:r

5

6

6

6

Section l: Page I of, 16 Docurnent: Instructions to Biddcrs

irt.\ t,\.\ t.\\ \.\\. l. t. \.\\\ \ \\\\ t,. \.\\\ t.'

I

l):rrt 2: Scction I lrlstructions'['o []icldcrs

Section l. Instrtrctions to lliclclcrs

,\. (icncral

Scopc of lJid

'['hc pr.ocuri,g apd Disposing Entity inclicatccl in the l]id Data Sheet (llDS), invites bids

lirr thc proviiion of the Services speciticd in Scction 6. Statcment of ReqtliIClllents. to

conultcrtcc ou thc ctatc indicatcd on the [-]DS'

l-5e l*sr*rcri.ns to Bictclers (ll't]) shoulct be rcacl in coniunction rvith the llDS. ['he

strl-r.icct u6c[ prgcurcr-r-rcnt rct'crcucc nunrber artcl irtptrts to ['le providcd by the Procuring

iutLi Disposing Untity arc proviclccl in the Conditiorls ot'Cotrtract'

['hroughoLrt this Bidding Documeut:

(a) the term .'irt rvriting" means comrnunicated iir rvrittetr tbrrn rvith proof of receipt;

(b) il'the context so requires. singular nleans plural attd vice versa; and

(c) ''day" means calendar daY,

Source of Funds

l.t

l

t.i

l${$htAA(\

{}:

RE\s-i)LeLLJ.,>) \

it-$

2.

2.1-[he procuring and Disposing Entity within its mandate of regulating the transport sector

is re-introdu.ing statutory piriodic inspection of all motor vehicles on the road' Motor

vehicle inspection servicei will be provided by a private motor vehicle inspector

awarded a concession out of this tendering process. The Concessionaire shall develop.

install commission ancl operate motor vehicle inspection stations on a five year contract

with potential for extension for another five years'

T'he funds to implement the project shall be fully provided by the successful bidder. The

successful bidder will then.hury. vehicle owners inspection fees. The fees to be charged

shall be the ones quoted by th- bidder in the bidding document. The fee will include

direct costs, financial costS, overhead costs, profit, corpgrate taxes, cOncession fees and

any other costs associated with the provision of the services..

The fees charged by the Concessionaire for the motor vehicle inspection services, the

concession fees paid to government and any"other applicable taxes shall be--subject in all

respects to the terms anJconditions of'the resulting contract placed by the Procuring and

Disposing EntitY.

2.2

3; eqrruiieffi,fl?qff$ffi

3.1 It is the Government of Uganda's policy to require that Procuring and Disposing Entities,

as wcll as Bidders and Providers, observe the highest standards of ethics during

procurement and the execution o[ contrac.ts. In purstrit of this policy, the Govcrnment o[

itgancla represented by the lrublic Procurenrent ancl Disposal of Public Assets Authority

(hcrein relerrcd to as the Ar'rthority);

(a) clefines, for the purposes of this provision, the ternts set f,orth below as follorvs:

(i) .,corrupt practice" includes the offering, giv.ing, receiving, or soliciting of

anything of value to influcnce the action of a public oflficial in the

proctlrcmcnt process or iu coutract cxcclltion; atrd

\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\' \\ \B

il,f j

I

uLI$p

!.&-

tr- [rart-2;-.See tiorr ['] ---,[n5[ftrctions-:I]o l]idders-'. -

i1

n

t{i

fr

n

f,.fr

frf1

rtlft'fr

fit,rtf

3.2

J.J

1.4

'flratrdule[ti* ludes a nrisrcpresentation of tircts in orcler t<;

process or the exccution ol a corrtract to thcuellce a procurerncntrlctrirncnt of the Procuring iurd Disposing Errtity, nnd includes collusivcpractices among Ilidders prior to or alier bid subrnission clesignecl ttrcstablish bid prices at artitlcial, non compctitive levcls and to clcprivc the

l)rocuring and D,isposing Entity of the benelrts of free ancl opcn cornpctition:

(b) rvill rc.iect a recorrlmcndation tbr arvard if it clctermincs that the llidtlcrrccotnrnetrded lor arvard has errgauccl in cc)rrLrpt ()r liludulcnt ltnrcticcs irr

conrpe ting lbr the Contract;

(c) will suspend a Provicler liorn cnuaging in any public procurernent proceecling tbr rstated period ol tirne, if it at any time determines that the Provicler has cngaged irrcorrupt or fiaudulertt practices in competing tbr, or in execr.rting, a Covcrnmcntcontract.

Furthermore, IJidders shall be aware of the provision statecl in Clause t.2.1 and 1.2.2 otthe Conditions of Contract.

In pursuit o[ the policy defined in Sub-clause 3.1, the Government o1'Uganda requiresrepresentatives of both Procuring and Disposing Entities and of Bidders and Providers toadhere to the relevant codes of ethical conduct. Bidders are required to indicate theiracceptance of the Code of Ethical Conduct for Bidders and Providers by signing the BidSubmission Sheet.

Any communications between a Bidder and the Procuring and Disposing lintity relatedto rnatters of alleged ti'aud or corruption must be made in rvriting and addressed to theAccounting Officer of the Procuring and Disposing Entity.

4"--- Eligibls Bidders'l'il

4.1 A Bidder, and all parties constituting the Bidder, shall meet the following criteria to becligible to participate in public procurement:

(a)",..thebidderhastlie.legal.sapacity,tepntelinto,*.qgnEA€titr+E1i

(b) the bidder is not:

. (i) insolverrt;

(ii) in receivership;

(iii) bankrupt: or

(iv) being rvound up

(c) the bidcler's business activities have not been suspended;

(d) the bidder is not the subject of legal proceedings for any of the circumstanccs in(b); and

(e) the bidder has lulfilled his or her obligations to pay taxes and social securitycontributions.

4.2 A Bidder may be a natural person, private entity, government-owned entity, subject toITB Sub-Clause 4.6. or any combination of them with a formal hte$tlo-eate{*U\to anagreement or under an existing agreement in the fbrm of a joint venture, consortiuni, or

Sectiorr l: Page I of I6 Docurnent: Instructions to Bidders

f,.\\\.r. \ \ \ \r. \ \\\r. r.. \r,\\ t. \\\\ r. \\\

'.-:l !- ,1*1.+r:t9,i- -----: X.lr:

fItrflflfl

Plr.t 2: Sccti0ir [ [nstructi0tis'l'o I]idtlcrs

l.i

association. In the case of a j<lint veutLlre, consortittnr, or association. uttless otherrvise

spccitiecl in the BDS. all parties shall be jointly and sevcrally liable'

,\ Biclclcr. anrl all par.tics constituting the Biclclcr including sub-contractors shall ltave thc

rrationality of a1 eligible ccluntry, in accorclance rvitlt Scction 5. Eligible Cotrntries' '\llicldcr shalI be dcenied to have the nationality of a country if the I]idder is ztcitizen or is

c..stitutcd. incorporated. or registered and opcrates in contbrrnity rvith the provisiorls of

the laws of that coru.ltrv. this critcrion shall also apply to thc cletcrniiuatiott of thc

,ationalitv 'f proposccl subcontractors tbr auy part ol the Corttract inclr-tclirlg relatcd

11,erkS or supplies

,\ tliddcr slrall not lrave a conliict of interest. ;\ll Bicldcrs tilrrnd to be irl contlict oI

i'tcrcst s5all bc disqualifiecl. r\ llicldcr nra,v be considered to ltavc a contlict of interest

rvith t>nc or rtlorc partics in this bidding process' if thcy:

(a) have colltrolling shareholdcrs in cotnmon; or

(b) rcceive or have received any direct or indirect subsidy tiom any of them; or

(c) have the same legal representative lor ptlrposes of this bid; or

(d) have a relationship with each other, directly or tluough common third parties, that

plts tl.rem in a position to have access to information about or influence on the bid

of another Bidder,.q&infi*guf&irthG-{es.$lgD.q"p.lthg.Ptg9wingand=Disposing Enti$

-t.l

"g-ul*i*$/,hts-b-iddilteP#cf, s*tIl

-1.5

(e) Submit more than one bid in this bidding process. I-lowever. this does not linrit the

participation of subcontractors in more than one bid, or as Bidders and

subcontractors simultaneously; or

A firrn that is under a declaration of suspension by the Authority. at the date of the

cleadline for bid submission or thereafter, shall be disqualified.

Government-owned enterprises shall be etigible onty if they can establish that they are

tegally and financially autonomous and operate under commercial law'

Iliclders shall provide such evidence of their continued eligibility satisfactory to the

procuring and bisposilg Entity, as the Procuring and Disposing Entity shall reasonably

request. i1 ,.tut.d ,uppli"r and staff employed under the contract shall have their origin

or nationality in an eligible country.

4.6

4.7

rtsffifl

.,.

TI

LI

f,1.u

Ftrlr)

?b\:

s\f'

I

?rLI

LI

LI

5.-' Qualifrcdtfiiioftfib.Uifierj.l 'Io cstablish its qualifications to perform the Contract, the Bidder shall complete and

subnrit:

(a) the.BiddingFormsprovided in Seetion 4""q$d f(b) the.information and'documents stated- in: Section.3, Evaluation Methodologs an-#

'Ciiterid:' t5.2 The qualifications of the best evaluated Bidder will be assessed as part of a post- I I

clualification in accordance rvith ITB Clause 36. LlIn the event that pre-qualification of potential Bidders has been undertaken, only..bids . gflrom pre-quatitici giiders rvill be consiclered lor arvard of Contract. lhese qualified UBidtters should submit r,vith their bids any information urpdating their original pre- F

5.3

\\\\\r\\JT\ of

\\r, t\ r.\l\rl'[.,q"tlTt,\ r*\ .[

{H

rtrn

nrl11

r1

ILl1

IIllrltl-oU

rltltltI1l

rl(t

Part 2r Section I Instructions To Bidders

qualification applications or. alternatively, contirm in their bids that the originallysubmitted pre-qualitication information remains essentially correct as of the date of biclsr.rbmissiort.'fhe update or confirmation should be provided in the Qualification Form.

B. Ilidding Document

6. Contents of Ilidding Document

6.1 TheBiddingDocttmentconsistsof Parts 1,2,3;and4andappendices l,2and3whichinclude all the Sections indicated below, and should be read in conjunction rvith anyaddenda issued in accordance with lTB Clause 8.

PART l: Bid Notice

PART 2: Bidding Procedures

. Section L Instructions to Bidders

o Section 2. Bid Data Sheet '

o Section 3. Evaluation Methodology and Criteriao Section 4. Bidding Forms

o Section 5. Eligible Countries

PART 3: Statement of Requirements

o Section 6. Statement of Requirements

PART 4: Contract

o Section 7. Conditions of Contract

o Section 8. Contract Forms

Appendices

Appendix l. Technical Specifications

Appendix 2. General Specifications

Appendix 3. Guide to the Preparation of the Technical proposal

6.2

6.3

The Bid Notice or any Pre-qualification Notice is not part of the Bidding Document.

Bidders who did not obtain the Bidding Document directly from the Procuring andDisposing Entity will be rejected during evaluation. Where Bidding Documents areobtained from the Procuring and Disposing Entity on a Bidder's behalf, the Bidder,sname must be registered with the Procuring and Disposing Entity at the time of sale andissue.

6.4 The Bidder is expected to examine all instructions, forms, terms, and requrrements in theBidding Document. Failure to furnish all information or documentation required by theBidding Document may result in the rejection of the bid.

C\

-}

$0

EZ!(FF

7

Arhe Procuring and Dis

requiring any clarification of the Bidding Document shall contactposing Entity in writing at rhe Procuring and Disposing Entity,s

Section l: Page 5 of 16

\.\ \ t. \, \.\ \ t. t.Document: Instructions to Bidders\.\\\ \ \.\\\ \ t[,\\ \ \ \\ r

Part2: Section I Instructions To Bidders

acldress ipdicated in the BDS. The Procuring and Disposing Entity will respond in

rvriting to ally reqLlest for clarilication, provided that such reqtlest is received no later

t'arr trre nunrber oi,toy, prior to the deacilirre for bicl submission i*dicated in the BDS'

'['hc l)rocuring aucl Disposing Entity shall [orrvard copics of its response to all Bidders

rvh. rrave accluired ttre iliaaing I)ocument directly from it, i,crudi.g a description of the

irrquiry but rvitltout iclentiffing its source. Should'the Procuring and Disposing Entity

clccnt it ncccssary to amend tne niading Document as a result of a clarification' it shall

clo so following the procedure under ITB Clause 8'

Amcntlment of Bidding Documcnt

r\t any time prior to the deadline for submission of bids. the Procuring and Disposing

Entity may amend the Bidding Document by issuing addenda'

Any addendum issued shall be part of the Bidding Document and shall be communicated

ir.r writing to all who have obtiined the Bidding Document directly from the Procuring

and Disposing EntitY.

To give prospective Bidders reasonable time in which to take an addendum into account

in preparing their bids, the Procuring and Disposing€ntity may, at its discretion' extend

the deadline for the submission of bids, pursuant to ITB Clause 8'

I8.1

8.2

8.3

I.lIrl

t1

tlfltltlsuutrTf

TTJJJ

C. PreParation of Bids

9. Cost of Bidding

9.1 The Bidder shall bear all costs associated with the preparation and submission of its bid,

including uty-n"g*iations with or visits to the Procuring and Disposing Entity' and the

procuring *a- Sitposing Entity shall not be responsible or liable for those costs'

iegardlei of the conduct or outcome of the bidding process.

10. Language of Bid

l0.l rhe medium of communication shall be in writing unless otherwise specified in the

BDS.

10.2 The bid, as well as all conespondence and documents relating to the bid exchanged by

the Bidder and the procuring and Disposing Entity, shalt be written in English unless

otherwise sPecifred in the BDS'

10.3 Supporting documents and printed literature that are part of the bid may be in another

language provided they are accompanied by an accurate translation of the relevant

passages i" ;il];guaie specifiea in ttg Sub-Clause 10.2, in which case, for purposes

of interpretation of ihe bid, such translation shall govern.

ll. Preparation of Bids

I L I Bidders are required to prepare and submit two separate bids' one bid will be for the

technical proporul and unoth.r for the frnancial proposal' (Trvo stage two envelopes)'

I 1.2 A pre-bid meeting will be held as indicated in the BDS' Attendance at the pre-bid

rneeting is oPtional.

t

Jtta

t-?E P,i{usen t*' Cb m p r i q if S gBABid

l2.l 'the bid shall comprise the follorving:

(a) the Bid Submission Sheet, in aqcordance with ITB Clause l3;

(b) a Bid Secttrity, in accordance rvith ITB Clause l9;

(c) rvritten contirmation authorising the signatory of the bid to cotnmit the Bidder, in

accordance with l'fB Sub-Clause 20'2;

(d) documentary evidence in accordance rvith I'fB Clause 4 establishing the Bidder's

eligibility to bid;

(e) documentary evidence inqualifi cations to Perform

(f).a.,, ttis i+o sia;ialtha gu i ad:'io'iii+' pi.iparatibn o f {

13. Bid Submission Sheet

accordance with ITB Clause 5 establishing the Bidder's

the contract if its bid is accepted; and

fto

flrlfi.Otr

1r

tl

l3.l The Bidder shall submit the Bid Submission Sheet using the form provided in Section 4,9

BiddingpognSt This form must be completed without any alterations to its format, and

;;'ffi#tttffiThall be accepted. eti ulant< spaces shall be filled in with the information

requested, which includes:

(a) the procurement Reference Number of the Bidding Document and the number of

each addenda received;

(b) a brief description of the Services offered;

th"+price$

quote&fees;-The so 0 c.e-ss.Lo&fee*.shall bo 1

tifi "0

d

$Us).+.g

.,1

(d)

(e)

(0

(e)

(h)

(i)

(h)

any discounts offered and the methodology of their application

the period of validity of the bid ;

a commitment to subrtrit any Performance Security required and the amount;

a declaration that the Bidder is eligible to participate in public procurement;

a declaration of nationality of ihe Bidder;

a commitment to adhere to the Code of Ethical Conduct for Bidders and Providers;

a declaration that the Bidder, including all parties comprising the Bidder, is not

participating, as a Bidder, in more than one bid in this bidding processl

confirmation that the Bidder has not been suspended by the Authority;

a declaration on commissions and gratuities; and

an authorised signature.

ln

that' thei.hfinit Prices, costs.

(k)

(l)

(m)tlrtttHtI

1'i

Section l: Page 7 of l6 Document: Instructions to Biddcrs

\.\ \. \ .',, \\ \. \..t, \\ \ \.\,. \ t. \\.\ \\t, \.\\\ \

Part2: Section I tnstructions To Bidders

ov*e_r!9999p.r.gfl Ie4*gql_q.g$,sto,&{e,tl*lt*m*:*}

(c) A ;iaiirfie.r,q the{lh.:lqnc6iiiofi 6e' J ;ii6l:i 07, o i tt,. qu o tedip r i c c ;

(d; irn'auth'oaised siena$fff,;ffI

l{. Ilid Priccs nnd Discounts

l4.l prices quored by the Bidder shall be fixed during the Bidder's perflormance o[ the

Contract anci rrot subject to variation on any account, unless otherwise specified in the

IIDS. A bid submitted with an adjustable price quotation shall be treated as non

responsive and shall be rejected, pttrsttant to ITB Clar.rse 3l.

14.2 The Bi<lcler shalI quote any unconditional and conditional discounts and the methodology

for rheir application in the Bid Submission Sheet, in accordance with ITB Sub-Clause

r 3. I (d).

15. Currencies of Bid

l5.l Upless otherwise specified in the BDS, bid prices shall be qr.roted in Uganda.Shillings.

16. Documents Establishing the Eligibility of the Bidder

l6.l To establish their eligibility in accordance with ITB Clause 4, Bidders shall complete the

eligibility declarations in the Bid Submission Sheet, included in Section 4, Bidding

Foims and submit the documents required in Sdction 3, Evaluation Methodology and

Criteria.

17. Documents Establishing the Qualifications of the Bidder

l7.l To establish its qualifications to perform the Contract, the Bidder shall submit the

evidence indicated for each qualification criteria specified in Section 3, Evaluation

. MethodologY and Criteria.

18. Period of ValiditY of Bids

lg.l Bids shall remain valid for the period specified in the BDS after the date of the bid

submission deadline prescribed by the Procuring and Disposing Entity. A bid valid for a

shorter period shall be rejected by the Procuring and Disposing Entity as norcompliant.

l g.2 The procuring and Disposing Entity 'will make its best effort to complete the

procurement process within this period.

l g.3 In exceptional circumstances, prior to the expiration of the bid validity period. the Procuing

and Disposing Entity may request Bidders to extend the period of validity of their bids. The

request -and

the pipo*.r shall be made in writing. If a Bid Security is requested in

accordance with ITB Clause 19, it shall also be extended for a corresponding period. A

Bidder may refuse the request without forfeiting its. Bid Security. A Bidder granting the

request shall not be required or permitted to modiff its bid'

19. Bid SccuritY

l9.l Unless otherwise speciflred in the BDS, the Bidder shall furnish as part of its bid, a Bid

Security in original form and in the amount and cunency specif,red in the BDS.

19.2 'Ihe Bid Security shall be, at the Bidder's option, in any of the following forms:

t{r{TIuutILIuuuuu

$flIIItllt

\.\\\ 8

\ t\ \\t

.\.\\\ \ \.'\ \\ \ \.\ \\ \ \.\

Section l: Pasc 9 of l6\.\\\r.\.\\.\\

hH- --t&l

T+t{r

h

tl

fl

til.tr

h

h

trLI]lOtlr-llL1lLtilTI1l

fr$r\

" t'rrrFsEEtidiT f -- - fnsffiftfrTflT.To tli&fd-asr

(a) a clcnrand guarantce;

(b) rrn irrcvoclblc lctter of credit: or

(d) anothcr sccurity irrdicated in the tlDS.

li'om a reputable source liom an cligible ct'ltrrrtry. 'l'hc Bid Security shalI bc srrbrlilteclcither using tlre Ilicl Sccurity lrorm irtcludccl in Sectiou 4. tlidding Fornrs. or in anorhersLrbstarrtiall),sintilitr tbrmat. Irt cithcr casc, tlte tbrnr nrust incluclc thc corrrplctc rranre ot'thc llidder. '['lrr: []id Security shall be valid lbr trvcnty-cight days bcyonci thc cncl ot'thcvllidiry pcriocl of the bid. -this

shail also apply if the pcriod tbr bid valiclity is cxtcndcd.

19.3 r\ny bid not acconlpanicd by a substantially responsive Bid Sccuritv. if onc is rctprirc.c[ irr

accorciancc rr'ith I'lB Sub-Clause l9.l shall be rejectcd bv thc Procuring and l.)isposingIintity ls rlon-cornpl iant.

I9..1 .the Bid Sccurity of all Bidders shall be returnecl as promptly as possiblc orrcc thcsuccessfitl Uidder has signed the Contract and provicled any recluirccl PcrtbruranccSecurity.

19.5 The Bid Secr.rrity may be fbrf'eited:

(a) if a Biddcr withdrarvs its bid during the period of bid validity specitied by thetlidder on the Bid Submission Sheet, except as provided in tTB Sub-Clause 18.3:or

if the successful Bidder fails to:

(i) sign the Contract in accordance with lTB Clause 40;

(ii) tirrnish auy Performance Security required in accordance with ITB Clause4l; or

(iii) accept the corrdctiorr of its bid price pursuant to ITB SubClause 29.4.

20. Format and Signing of llid

20.1 The Bidder shall prcpare one original of each of the documents comprising the bid as

described in I'l'B Clauses l l and l2 and clearly marked "ORIGINAL". In addition, theBidder shal! submit copies of the bid, in the number specified in the BDS and clearlymark each of thern "COPY". In the event of any discrepancy between the original andthe copies, the original shall prevail.

20.2 The original and all copies of the bid shall be typed or written in indelible ink and shall be

signed or initialled by the person signing

20.3 Any interlineations, crasures, or overrvriting shall bc valid only il they arc signcd orinitialled by the person signing the bid.

Document: Instructions to Bidders

(b)

[):rrt 2: Scctiort I Ittstrttctiorts'[o Bidclcrs

l) Subrnission lnd Opcning of llids

21. Se aling :rntl )'lrrrl<ing of llids

I l.l 'l'e chnic:rl ltrtlllosirl

t'[c t]iclclcr slrall cnclosc thc origirraI lrid each copy- (-lcopics) ol'tlte tcchrtical bid. irlscpilrare scalcd envclopcs, cluly rnarkinq the cnvelopes as "ORlClNr\L I'ECLINIC.\L

t,[tOIIOSr\[-" and "COPY OF ttlE 'fECllNICr\L t)ROPOST\L" -['hcse cttrclopcs

coptainirrg the original and the copies shall then be cnclosccl in ortc single plain crtvclopeprerrke-cl "'t'trcI'lNlcz\L PI{OPOSi\L". securcly sealecl in sttch a nlatlncr tliat opening and

rcsealing cattttot be achieved ttncletectecl.

'ilte inner attd outer cnvclopes shal[:

(a) bcar the rtame and address of the I-]idder;

(b) bc addrcsscd to the Procr.rring and Disposing Entity in accordancc with t'tB Sub-

Clatrse 22.1 ;

(c) bcar the Procurement Ret'erertce number of this bidding proccss; and

(ct) bear a rvaming not to open before the time and date tor bid opening.

21.2 l'innncial llid'l'hc llidder shall enclose the original and each copy (4 copies) of the financial bid. in

separare sealed envelopes, duly marking the envelopes as "ORIGINAL FINANCIAL

BlD" and "COPY OF THE FINANCIAL BID." These envelopes containing the original

and the copies shall then be enclosed in one single plain envelope or box marked..FINANCIAL BID". securely sealed in such a manner that opening and resealing cannot

be achieved undetected.

The inner and outer envelopes shall:

(a) bear the name and address of the Bidder;

(b) be adclressed to the Procuring and Disposing Entity in accordance with ITB Sub-

Clause 22.1 ;

(c) Sear the Procurement Ileflerence number of this bidding proc&s; and

(d) bear a warning not to open beforc the time and date tor bid opening.

Zl.3 If all envelopes packages are not sealed and marked as required, the Procuring and

Disposing Entity will assume no responsibility for the misplacement or premature

opening of the bid.

22. Deadline for Submission of Bids

22.1 Bids must be received by the Procuring and Disposing Entity at the address and no later

than the date and time indicated in the BDS.

222 The Procuring and Disposing Entity may, at its discretion, extend the deadline for the

submission of bids by amending the Bidding Document in accordance rvith ITB Clause

8, in which case all rights and obligations of the Procuring and Disposing Entity and

Bidders previously subject to the deadline shall thereafter be subject to the deadline as

extendcd.

fFf,IfIfIiI{iirF

U_lJ

{ifffl

*f

t,\\\ \ \\

Prrt 2--scetion-f I'msfructiorisTol]fddtrs*'

flililill_l

23. Late Ilids

23.1 The Procuring and Disposing Entity shall not corrsider any bid that arrivcs alicr the

deadline for submission of bids, in accordance rvith ITB Clause 22. r\ny bid rcccivcd b1,'

the Procr.rring and Disposing Entity alier the deadline for sr.rbmission of bids shall bc

declared late, rejected, and returned'unopened to the Biddcr.

2{. Withdrarval and llcplaccment of l}ids

24.1 .,\ Bidder may 'r,vithdraw or replace its bid atier it has been submittcd at any timc betbrethe deadline tbr submission of bids by sending a rvritten notice, duly signcd by an

authorised representative, which shall include a copy of the authorisation in accordancervith ITB Sub-Clause 20.2. Any corresponding replacement of the bid must accompanythe respective written notice. All notices must be:

(a) submitted in accordance with- ITB Clauses 2l and 22 (except that withdrawalsnotices do not require copies), and in addition, the respective envelopes shall be

clearly marked "WITHDRAWAL" or "R-EPLACEMENT" and

(b) received by the Procuring and Disposing Entity prior to the deadline prescribed forsubmission 0f bids, ih accordance with ITB Clause 22.

24.2 Bids requested to be withdrawn in accordance with ITB Sub'Clause 24.1 shallberetumed unopened to the Bidder.

24.3 No bid may be withdrawn or replaced in the interval between the deadlisubmission of bids and the expiration of the period of bid validity specified

-. Bidder on the Bid Submission Sheet or any extension thereof.

24.4 Bids may only be modified by withdrawal of the originalbid and submission of areplacement bid in accordance with ITB Sub'Clause 24.1. Modifications submitted inany other way shall not be taken into account in the evaluation ofbids.

25. Bid Opening

25.1(a) The Procuring and Disposing Entity shall conduct the bid opening of technical andfinancial bids in t\e presence of Bidders designated representatives who choose toattend, at the address specified in the BDS.

(b) There shall be two separate bid openings; the first one being for the technical proposaland the second for the flnancial bid.

(c)'the technical bid shall be opened on a date and time specilied in the BDS.

(d) Bidders whose technical bids shall fail in the technical evaluation shall not have theirfinancial bids opened. The address, date and time of opening the financial bids shall becommunicated to the bidders at least 7 days in advance.

25.2 First, envelopes marked "WITHDRAWAL" shatl be opened and read out and theenvelope with the corresponding bid shall not be opened, but returned to the Bidder. Nobid rvithdrawal shall be permitted unless the corresponding withdrawal notice contains avalid authorisation to request the withdrawal and is read out at the bid opening.

25.3 All other outer envelopes including those marked "REPLACEMEN'|" shall be opencdand the bids within them opened. Replacement bids shall be recorded as such on thcrecord of the bid opening.

Section l: Page I I of 16 Document: lnstructions to Bidders

ne forby the

_o

II

\\.\ \\. \ \.\ \\\. \.\ \\ \ \.\\ \ \ \.\ r. r. r.- r..l*

.I f,'

fl,nfl

[)art 2: Scction I Iit;tr'ttctions To I]iddei's

15.4 r\ll bicls shall be opened one at a time, rcading out: tlte uante of the Biddcr; the prescnce

ol a Bid Sccurity, if applicable the bid price; and'any othei details as the Procuring and

iiirporing fntity may consider appropriate. No bid shall be rejected at the bid opcning

cxcept for late'bicls. in accordance with ITB Sub-Clause 23.1.

15.5 Only crrvelopes that are opened and read out at the bid openiug shall be corrsidcred

lirLther.

25.6 'the procuring ancl Disposing Entity shall prepare a record of the bid opening that shall

i.clucle, o, u *ininlum: the name of the Bidder, ',vhether there is a rvithdrarval and/or

rcplacement, the bid price and the presence or absence of a Bid Security. rvhere required---

l'he Bidderr' 1..pr.r.,,tatives lvho are present shall be requested to sign the record- The

omission of a Bidder's signature on the record shall not invalidate the contents and effect

- of the record. A copy ofitre record shallbe distributed to Bidders Lrpon paymentof a iee

and clisplaycd on thi Procuring and Disposing Er-rtity's Notice Board within one rvorking

day from the date of the bid Opening'

flftfftffi

:.\

st-lL-D--,

d\-\ q*

*FRo_\\

dt

E-.- Evaluation of Bids''!

26.l Information relating to the examination, evaluation, comparison, and post-qualification

of bids, and recommendation of contract award, shall not be disclosed to Bidders or any

other persons not ofhcially concerned with such process until information detailing the

stage of evaluation is communicated to all Bidders'

26.2 Any' effors,bp. a.-Bidde* to. ,nttUegg$"$S- BfStglt'sland.lis99sing Entity' in tr,

::mrll*:1m"ffi:1T,tffi ie$#i'iationorthebidsorconfr actawad

26.3 NotwithstandinglTB Sub=ClausQn26r2i"'tone.the time of bid op:e{lg to. the-time o}Contract awardl if any Bidder wish.es; to'contact the Procuring and Disposing Entity o+

any matter related to th. bidding pr6ceq$ !t shq$A$tgso inwritingi,l.Sfl

27. Clarification of Bids

27.1 To assist in the examination, evaluation, comparison and post-qualification of the bid's'

the procuring and Disposing Entity may, at its discretion, ask any Bidder for a

clarification Jf itr bid. Any clarification submitted by a Bidder that is not in response to

a request by the procuring and Disposing Entity shall not be considered. The Procuring

and bisposing Entity's r.qu.rt for clarification and the response shall be in writing. The

request'for iarincation shall be copied to all bidders for information purposes. No

change in the price or substance of the bid shall be sought, offered, or permitted, except

to confirm the conection of arithmetic errors discovered by the Procuring and Disposing

Entity in the evaluation of the financial bids, in accordance with ITB Clause 29.4.

28. Compliance and Respor-r.slve4es1 q!.Pif,t i

2g.l'the procuring and Disposing Entity'.s determination of a bid's compliance and

responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself.

Zg2 A substantially compliant.and respensive bid is one that c91for.m9 to all the tenns.n . '

conditionq,. and requirements sf the Bidding Document without maferial deviationr

\.\ \ \t.\r,\ \. \. \ 't'\'rf',t'J\l'\ 1.

I lE.**=:=.-t I:i+.---

:: Parts}:-Sect iorrt;-.

reservation, or omission. A material deviation, reservation, or omission is one that:

(a) affects in any substantial way the scope, quality, or pertbrmance of the Servicesspecified in the Bidding Document; or

(b) .limits.' in.any substantial way, inconsistenf,".With the.. Bidding Document, rhe'Prpcurin&,and*Disp.qpge,Entity's rights or the Bidder's obligations under any;rresul tfurg Contrac t ; or;-l' il

(c)..i-[".rectified.you!.d;"ffirRpetitivo.positionofotherBiddersp-Le.seqtilg:substaritiall}tofi dtidfi t-at"dlelptinsiVdbidS.'?

28.3 If a bid is not substantially compliant and responsive to the Bidding Document, it shallbe rejected by the Procuring and Disposing Entity and may nor slrbsequently be madecompliant and responsive by the Bidder by correction of the material deviation,

-reservation, or omission.

29. Nonconformities, Errors, and Omissions

29.1 Provided that a bid is substantially compliant and responsive, the Procuring andDisposing Entity may waive any non-conformity or omission in the bid that does notconstitute a material deviation.

29.2 Provided that a'bid is substantially compliant and responsive, the Procuring andDisposing Entity may request that the Bidder submit the necessary information ordocumentation, within a reasonable period of time, to rectify nonmaterialnonconformities or omissions in the bid related to documentation requirements. Suchomission shall not be related to any aspect of the price of the bid. Failure of the Bidderto comply with the request may result in the rejection of its bid.

29.3 Provided that a bid is substantially''compliant and responsive, the Procuring andDisposing Entity shall rectiff nonmaterial nonconformities or omissions. To this effect,the bid price shall be adjusted, for comparison purposes only, to reflect the price of themissing or non-conforming item or component

29.4 Provided that the bid is substantially compliant and responsive, the Procuring andDisposing Entity shall correct arithmetic errors on the followlng basis:

(a) if there is a discrepancy between the unit price and the total price that is obtainedby multiplying the unit price and quantity, the unit price shall prevail and the totalprice shall be corrected, unless in the opinion of the Procuring and DisposipgEntity there is an obvious misplacement of the decimal point in the unit price, inwhich case the total price as quoted shall govern and the unit price ihall bccorrected;

(b) if there is an .elror in a total corresponding to the addition or subtraction ofsubtotals, the subtotals shall prevail and the total shall be corrected; and

(c) if there is a discrepancy between words and figures, the amount in rvords shallprevail, unless the amount expressed in words is related to an arithmetic error, inwhich case the amount in figures shall prevail subject to (a) and (b) above.

29.5 lf the Bidder that submitted the best evaluated bid does not accept the conection oferors, its bid shall be rejected and its Bid Security may be forfeited.

Section I: Page I 3 of I 6 Document: Instructions to Biddcrs

I'ri.\\\\. t' *\ \\\ \.\ t. \.\. \.\ t.\ t. \.\ t. \ \. \.\ \. \ |

tIu1I

tITI

tI

'f

r{rilnl{

rIr!

rIrlrlrlt't

It;tI(

LIIJ

$zEG+

FC)eLf

qG?,

.;,-- r'r.i, 1,:,,.)i.rr-: - . ;-.

Part 2: Scction I Ins t^'l:ctic its To Bidders

30.PreliminaryExaminationofBids-EligibilityandAdmiriistrativeCompliance

i0.l The Procuring and Disposing.Entity shall examj.n:.'h" legal documcntation and otl'rer

intbrnration submitted by Biclders ," *riry the eligibility of Bidders in accordance with

I'fll Clause 4'

i0.2 If aticr the examination oIeligibi*ty, the proc.uring and Disposing E,tity detern'rines that

the Bidder is not eligible' it shall reject the bid'

j0.3 The procuring and Disposing Entity sha, examine the bids to confirm that a, documents

and tcchnical documentation ,.qu'.*a in ITB il1use 12 have been provided' and to

cletermine,t" **pttteness of eath documeirt submitted'

30.4 Trre proc.ring and Disposing Entity sha[ conf,rrm rhat the folrorving docr'rments and

iuforrnatio* l",ave been provia.a in the bid. If any of these documents or information is

missing, thc oft'er shall be rejected'

(a) the Bid Submission Sheet' including:

- f U a brief description of the Services offered;

(ii) the period of validity of the bid;

(b) the Price Schedule;

(c)writtenconfirmationofauthorisationtocommittheBidder;and

(d) a Bid SecuritY'

t\\\

31. Detaited Commercial and Technical Evaluation

3l.lTheProcuringandDisposing-Eltityshallexaminethebidto:".i|'j:thatallterms,conditions and requirements of the uiaaing document have been accepted by the Bidder

;t,h";t any material deviation or reservation' e procuring and

31.2 lf,after the examination of the terms, conditions and requiremdnts' th

Disposing Entity determines tt.i ii. Lid is not substantialry responsive in accordance

witfr ttg-Clause 28, it shall reject the bid'

32. Conversion to Single Currency - C

32.1 For evaluation and comparison purposes, the Procuring and Disposing Entity shall

convert a* uiJ p;i;., ;*p;essed in'zuiounts in various currencies into a single currency'

using the se,ing exchange ,u,. "robtished

by the source and on the date specified in the

BDS.

33. Margin of Preference

33.1 unless otherwise specified in the BDS, a margin of preference shall not apply' where a

Margin or pr.r.r.,i* applies,_its uppri"ution-ana aetait shall be specifred in section 3'

Evai-uation Methodology and Criteria'

34. Fin ah-eiai. eoinpariib'# bf Bid'#"i

34.1 The Procuring and Disposing Entity shall.financially evaluate each bid that has been

determined,uptothisstageofth.evaluation'tou'tsubstantiallycompliantandresponslve.

34.2 'to financially evaluate a bid, the Procuring and Disposing Entity shall only use the

criteria and methodologies a.niJ in thls Clause and in Section 3' Evaluation

t

\ I\

I.IiIri.I,luL\\ \ i\'\\\ qq\\\\\.\\

(

*

i):li't 2: Scction I I,tsti'uctions'l-o I]iddcrs

ilt.2 't hc l)rocuring arrd Disposing Entity shall award a Contract to the Bidder whose ot'l'er has

been cletermincd to be the best evaluated bid, provided that the Bidder is qualified to

pertblrr tfie Contract satisfactorily and subject to satisfactory negotiations.

39. Notilication o[ Arvard and Letter of Bid r\cccptance

l9.l l)rior to the expiration of the period of bid validity, the Procr.rring and Disposing l-ntity

strall notily the successtirl Bidder, in r.vritirrg, that their bid has been accepted by issue ofa Letter ol Bid AccePtance.

39.2 1jptil a fbrnral contract is prepared and executed, the Lctter of Bid Acceptance shall

constitute a birrding Contract.

{0. Signing of Contract

40.1 Promptly alter notitjcation of contract award by the issue of a Lettcr of Bid r\cceptance.

the Procuring and Disposing Entity shall send the succcsstirl Bidder the Agreenrent and

the Conditions of Contract.

40.2 Within rwenty-eight (28) days of receipt of the Agreement, the successful Bidder shall

sign, date, and return it to the Procuring and Disposing Entity.

41. Performance SecuritY

4l.l Within twenty-eight (28) days of the receipt of the Letter of Award of Contract from the

Procuring and Disposing Entity, the successful Bidder shall furnish any Performance

Security required in accordance with the Conditions of Contract, using for that purpose

the Performance Security Form included in Section 8, Contract Forms, or another form

acceptable to the Procuring and Disposing Entity.

41.2 Failure of the successful Bidder to submit the above-mentioned Performance Security or

sign the Contract shall constitute sufficient grounds for the annulment of the contract

award and forfeiture of any Bid Security. In that event, the Procuring and Disposing

Entity may award the Contract to the next best gvaluate{ Bidder who is determined by

the Procuring and Disposing Entity to be qualified to perform the Contract satisfactorily.

fl_iI

ufi

l-

uuu

(J$'

fl,riuffd

,qi

\\\\ \',. \. rtt"\ \.\*11 \l$\ qi't.\\\\

i J1t -*, -+-1i:r.:i-g1t-:-i=- =-- -.---..-:::-i:.:-..:-"t=-: -.,--:--.--'== '

Methodology and Criteria. No other criteria or methodology shall be perrnittcd.

i+.1 To tlnancially compare bids, the Procuring and Disposing Entity shall:

(a) cletermine the bid price as detailed in Section 3. Evaluation Methodology and

Criteria;

conect any'aritllmefic enors in accordance with tTB SubClatrse 29'4;

apply any unconditional cliscounts otfered in accordance r.vith l'fB Sub-clause

13. l (d);

make adjustlnents for any nonmaterial noncontbrrnities and omissions in

accordance rvith ITB Sub-Clause 29'3;

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e) convert all bids to a single currency in accordancc rvith ITB Clause 32;

(0applyanymarginofpreferenceinaccordancewithlTBClause33;

(g) determine the total evaluated price of each bid'

35. Dctermination of Bcst Evaluated Bitl(s)

35.1 The procuring and Disposing Entity shall compaie all substantially comoliant and

responsive bid-s to determine the best evaluated bid or bids, in accordance with'section 3, 'IEvaluation Methodology and Criteria'

36. Post-qualification of the Bidder

36.1 post qualification shall be undertaken by the Procuring and Disposal Entity to determine

that the best evaluated bidder has the capacity and resource to effectively carry out the

contract.

36.2 T\e determination shall be based upon an examination of the documentary evidence of

the Bidder's qualifications submitted by the Bidder, pursuant to ITB Clause 5. to

clarifications in accordance with ITB Clause 27 andthe quatification criteria indicated in

Sectiori 3, Evaluation Methodology and Criteria. Factors not included in Section 3 shall

not be used in the evaluation of the Bidder's qualifications.

36.3 An affirmative determination shall be a prerequisite for award of the Contract to the

Bidder. A negative determination shall iesult in disqualification of the bid, in which

event the prociring and Disposing Entity shall proceed to the next best evaluated bid to *tmake a similar determination of that Bidder's capabilities to perform satisfactorily.

36.4 post-qualificatiori witl be conducted and bid information shall be verified'

37. Procuring and Disposing Entity's Right to Accept or Reject Any or All Bids

37.1 The procuring and Disposing Entity reseryes the right to accept or reject any bid, and to

annul the bidiing pro..r, and re.lect all bids at any time prior to contract award, without

thereby incurring any liabiliry to Bidders'

F. Award of Contract

38. Award Procedure

3g.l The procuring Entity shall issue a Notice of best Evaluated Bidder and place such a

Notice on pub-li. display for a prescribed period and copy the Notice to all Bidders prior

to proceeding with contract award'

Section l: Page 15 of 16 Document: lnstructions to Bidders

\ \.\\ \ \ \.\ \ \ \. \\ \\ \-,..\\\\ \.\ \\ \ \.'

Part z:--section.. /.- tri(l. Dat* sheet*=-- --=.= --

Section 2: Bid Data Shect

i The Procuring and Disposing Entity is: Ministry of Works and Transport

Commenccment: The assignment is expectcd to commence befbre January

201 I

Subjcct: The subject of the procurement is: Provision of lvlandatory lvlotorVehicle Inspection Services

, Reference: The Procurement Relerence Number is'MOWT/SV/07 08/00r I I

Joint Ventures and Consortiums: Each of the partners must singularly be

capable of executing the.contract

Data relevant to the I'tB

A. General

ITB 1.2

ITB I.2

tTB 4.2

ITB I.ITTB I.I

Instructions to I

Bittders i

Reference i

ITB IO.I

ITB IO.2

ITB 7.1

ITB II.2

B. Bidding Document

Clarification: For clarification purposes only the Procuring and DisposingEntity's address is:

Attention: He'ad Procurement and Disposal UnitStreet Address: Plot 4/6 Airport RoadTown/City: EntebbePostalAddress: P. O Box 10

Country: UgandaTelephone: +256 414 32010119Facsimile number: +256 414 320135

The Procuring and Disposing Entity will respond to any request forclarification provided that such request is received no later than 14 days prior

i to the deadline for submission of Bids

C. Preparation of Bids

Medium: The medium of communications shall be in writing

Language: The language for the bid is English.

Pre'bid meeting: A pre-bid meeting shall be held.

Date: Thursday,20h August 2009 Time

Address for Pre-bid meeting is:Ministry of Works and Transport Headquarters,Street Address: Plot 4/6 Airport RoadTown/City: EntebbePostalAddress: P. O Box l0

:U

l0:00 a.m

ilr1

rfrtililddd Section 2: Page I of 3 Docurnent: Bid Data Sheet

tX.\-\.\ \.\\ \\\\\\,\ \\ \ \.\(.\\\-\ \ \ \\,

L'art2: Section 2. Bid Data Sheet

ITB l2.l(t) r\clditional bitl information: z\dditional inflormation rcqtrired in the bid

includes:

ryf cchnical Proposal prepared according to the guide given in r\ppendix 3-

Guide to Preparation of the Technical Proposal'

r Prices: '[he prices quoted by the Bidder may be adjusted if the Consumer

Price Index (CPI) has changed by more than 3.0 poipts. The base year shall be

taken to be the year in rvhich bids lvere submitted. 'fhe Consumer Price Index

data sliall be obtained from Uganda Bureau of Statistics and the price increase

shallbe agreed upon in consultation r,vith the Supervising Entity

Data relevant to the ITB

n'B 14.1

bid Ube: shi 1ltheof shall lngs.The gandauC renr curTencycy

valiod: dity calendar20IIshal bebidThe daysPeriv periodlida ty

ITB I5.I

ITB I8.1

Instructions to I

llitlders I

Refcrcnce :

Bid Security: A Bid Security shall be required.

The amount shall be: Two hundred and fiffy thousand United States Dollars

Acceptable Securities: Other types of acceptable securities are:

(a) Bank guarantee;

(b) Bank Draft; or

(c) An irrevocable letter of credit.

ITB 19.1

rTB 19.2(d)

or

Number of Copies: The number of copies required, including the original is

5 (five)ITB 2O.I

Form of Authorisation: The written confirmation of authorisation to sign on

behalf of the Bidder shall consist of written powers of attomey.tTB 20.2

D. Submission'and OPening of Bids

Bid Submission: For bid submission purposes only, the Procuring and

Disposing Entity's address is :

Attention: Head Procurement and Disposal UnitStreet Address: Plot 4/6 Airport Road

Town/City: Entebbe

Postal Address: P. O Box l0Country: UgandaThe deaclline for bid submission is:

Bid Opening: The bid opening for the technical bid shall take place at:

ITB 22.I

ITB 25.I

2009 Time local time : I l:00 amDate:

I Street Address: Plot 4/6 A Road

23'd

\ 1..,,.\ \t.,", t*.\ \t. t,r. t..1.\t*[,ilrfkk\"I-tlt l\{t,t.\.\ E

L|.zrtl:'-Sectirrrt'2..BiGDatrSheeF,'.:..,..',.

Instructions toBidtlers

ReferenceData relevant to the ITI]

Town/City: Entebbe

; Postal Address: P. O Box l0. Country: Uganda' Date: Wednesday, 23'd SeptemThe address, date and timcommunicated to the bidders

ber 2009 'l'ime : (local time) I l:30 anre of the financial bid openi ng shall be

evaluation of the technical bid.by the l)rocuring and Disposing lintity alicr

ITB 32.1 ' All prices quoted shall be in Uganda Shillings

TTB 33.I , Margin of Preference: The Margin of preference shall rrot apply

Section 2: Page 3 of 3 Document: Bid Data Sheet

.\\\ t-. \.\ \t.\r\.\ \\ \. \.\ \ \ \ \.\ (. \ \ \ \ t.t

"1

e

o

\ \.\. \. \ \ \,\ \ \ \. \.\ ( \\1.,t, \\\\,\ \\\\..\\\

PartZz Section 3. Evaluation Methodology and Criterion

Procurement Reference Number: MOWT/SVC/07-08/00 I I I

i\ Evaluation Methodology

l. Mcthodology Uscd

The evaluation methodology to be used for evaluation of the bids shall be the Qrralityand Cost Based Selection (QCBS).

l.l

2. Summary of Methodology

2.1 The Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) is the evaluation methodology that

takes into account both quality and the cost of bids in a process under which technical

bids are evaluated without access to financial bids.

For Joint Ventures, Consortiums or Associations, each party must meet the technical

evaluation criteria separately

2.2

2.3 The evaluation shall be conducted in three sequential stages -

a) A preliminary examination to determine whether a bidder is eligible and todetermine administrative compliance of bids received;

b) A detailed evaluation to assess -(i) Responsiveness to the terms and conditions specified in the bid document;

and

(ii) The technical quality of bids against set criterion on merit point system, to

determine the technical score of each technical bid and to determine which

technical bid has reached the minimum technical score.

c) Financial comparison to determine the financial score of each financial bid, toweight the technical and financial scores and to determine the total score of each

bid.

2.4 Failure of a bid at any stage of the evaluation shall prevent further consideration at the

next stage ofevaluation. Substantial responsiveness shall be considered a pass.

Part 2 Section 3: Evaluation Methodology and Criterion Page 1 oi5

[.\ \.1. 1,. \ \ \".\ \. \ \ \-\ \. t. \ \.\ \ \ \ \,\ \\ \ \

B

3

Part 2: Scction 3. Evaluation MethodologY and Criterion

3.2

Prcliminary Examination Criterion

EligibilitY Critcrion

'l'he eligibility requirements shall be determine<l for eligible bidders in accordance

rvith l'fB Clause 4. l-f B Clause ll and ITB Clause 20'

.[hccJocurncnrationrcquiredtoprovideevideflceofeligibilityshallbe:

a) a copy ot'the [Jiclder's vaticl Trading Licertce or equivalcttt;

b)acopyoftheBicldcr'sCe(ificateofRegistrationorequivalentc) a copy of the Bidders Articles/Memorandum of Association or equivalent;

d) proof that the Bidder has fulfilled his or her obligations to pay taxes and social

' security contributions up to year 2008;

e) a copy of the Bidders VAT registration or equivalent if locally incorporated;

0Astatementinthesubmissionsheetthatbiddermeetstheeligibilitycriteriastatedin ITB 4.1 and ITB 4'2

g) A declaration in the Bid Submission Sheet of the nationality of the Bidder;

h) Statement in the bid submission sheet that the bidder has no conflict of interest;

i)Adeclarationinthebidsubmissionsheetthatthebidderisnotundersuspensionby Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority;

j)Acopyofauditedbookofaccountsforthepasttwofinancialyearsorcalendaryears uP to 2008

k) Evidence of annual turnover of not less than united States Dollars S(five) million

or the equivalent in Uganda Shillings'

l)lSO900l:2000certificationinqualitymanagementsystemsm) Recommendation from the client where services of.mandatory motor vehicle

inspections for roadworthiness have been or are being rendered'

Administrative Compliance Criterion

4.lTheevaluationofAdministrativcComplianceshallbeconductedinaccordancervith tTB Sub{tauses 30.3 and 30'4'

Thepreliminaryevaluationshallbcconductedonapassfailbasisandabidthatfailsat this stage shall not be evaluated for the remaining stages'

Part 2 Section 3: Evaluation Methodology and Criterion Page 2 of 5

3.I

.t.

\(, \ \,.,1,, t. \ \ t,\ \ \ tr\.\ \\ \.\.\t t.\ \.\.\\

IF"'-Part 2z Section 3. Evaluation Methodolo and Criterion

C Detailed Evaluation Criterion

). Commercial Criteria

The commercial responsiveness olbids shall be evaluated in accordance with ITBClause 3 1.2. The criteria shall be:

(a) acceptance of the conditions of the proposed contract;

(b) acceptablemobilisationperiod;

5.1

6. Technical Evaluation CriterionA technical proposal shatl be prepared by the bidder in accordance with guidelines given inAppendix 3. The technical qualiry of the bids shall be conducted on merit point system against

the criterion given below.

p

Criteria PointsI Conception

IUnderstanding of the concession arrangements and comments on

TOR) Proposal for Building Local Capacity

5

3 Experience and Skills of The Bidder in Implementing TechnicalMandatorT Motor Vehicle Inspection for RoadworthinessManagement of Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection forroadworthiness l0Staffmanagement of mandatory motor vehicle inspection services 8

Customer care in mandatory motor vehicle inspection services 9

Operations and Administration of mandatory motor vehicleinspection services l0

4 Business PlanFinancial Capability and Start up costs 8

Premises and Test Equipment 5

In formation Tephno logy. 5

Stafling and Management 4.5

Security and Maintenance services 4Financial management 5.sCustomer Services 4Publicity and Marketing 4Reporting and Performance review 4

Operational arran gements 4Implementation action plan 5

Additional services 4

TOTAL 100

Part 2 Section 3: Evaluation Methodology and Criterion Page 3 ol5

\ \ \,.\. \.\\\.\ \.\\\.\ \ \ \ \ .\ \\ \ \ .\\ \ r_t

IP

Ea\

t_

toTIe$

\\ \,\ \ t. t .\ .\t.t.t r\.\t.t t.,\..\t \t.\.\t_\

*t\ - - .,, \\.!-.- '!t/,-,yr lI

.l.hc toialhunrber of poirrts is 100 and the minimum and qualifying technical rnarks.shallbe 70

points out of 100. A bid that does not score the tninimum qualifying technical marks shall not

Part2z Sectio n 3. Evaluation Methodolo and Criterion

be cvaluated for the next stage'

ThepointsscoredatthisstageshallberveighedoutofT0%ofthefinalscore

D Financial ComParison Criteria

then multiPlied bY 100.

The total score at this stage will be weighed out of 30% of the overall score

8. Calculation of Final Score

Each bidder,s weighted score out of 70% for Stage 2 will be added to the weighted score 307o

for Stage 3, to arrive at the bidder's overall score. The bidder with the highest overall score

will be considered the best evatuated bidder. The bidders will be ranked from highest t'o

lorvest. The best evaluated bidder will be considered for post qualification'

Part 2 Section 3: Evalu ation Methodology and Criterion

7. Evaluation of Pricing

Bidders are required to fi[ a price schedure for the five year concession. For each transaction,

the Ministry has set a ceiling which is indicated in the schedule' The bidder is required to give

a flat fee to be charged over the five year term'

'l-his price schedule willbe evaluated out of 100 points'

Each transaction in the price schedure wilr be evaluated by subtracting the bidder's price from

the given ceiling to determin e the price dffirence. The price dffirences will be added and a

bidder with the highest sum of price dilferences wi\ score the highest points for the price

schedule.

The highest sum of price differences for the price schedule will be used as the common

denominator in determining each other bidders' proportionate score out of 100 points. Each

bidder,s sum of price differences will be dividedbythe highest sum of price differenc8and

t

Part 2: Section 3. Evaluation Metho

u+r^'f

dolo and Criterion

E. Post Qualification Evatuation Criteria

The capability of the best evaruated bidder ro meet the requtrements as specificd in the tcrms of.ref'erence rvill be assessed and verified. This rnay inclu de, but not lirnited to. contacting thebidder's ref'erences and other key individuals to substa ntiate the pro osal's content d thebidder's experience. It rnay also include contacting and visiting rnanuthcturer s of inspectionequipment and areas rvhere sirnilar*concessions have been im plerncnted by rhe bidder. If the bcstevaluated bidder lails to meet post qualification requrrements as specified, thcn the ne.rt bestevaluated bidder rvill be considered flor post qua lification. The first bidder ro satislv tlre postqualification evaluation criteria will be considered for the concession

Part 2 Section 3: Evaluation Methodology and Criterion Page 5 of5

r. \ t.1..\\\t,,\ .\ \\t* \ \\\t..\.\\\ \\.\ \\t*l

:':]I

t

ntlt_

ti]

ll'.ti!li

{

-l

I

d

iliIll

I

t

O'il''i

It-

II

\ \ \.\ \. t r.\ I\ \r.\ .\, \\\\,\ \\\\.\ \\\\J,t,

;tr.1

l'

',I

Fate2r'See tio*'a BiddiiifF0trlS=r*::-'

ith'a_

Section 4 Bidding Forms

Table of Contents

J.l Standard Bitl Forms4.1.I Bid Submission Sheet.

4.1.2 Bid Security.

4.1,3 Price Schedule for the 5 year term4.1.4 QualificationForm

Section 4: Page I of g Document: Bidding Forms

,.-l. lr \\ t .\, 1.\t*\.\.t.,\t.t.\ (.\\...\ \ \\l-t.\t

fr.,#

flrl'tttis llitl Stbnti.s.sion Sheet .sltrtulcl be on the letrerheacl of the Biclcler und shoultl be signed

lt1; tt lterson witlt tlrc Proper uttthority to sign clocttments lhctt qre bindingon the Bidder' It

.r'lutttltl bc inclttlecl by the Bidcler in its biclJ

4.1.1 Bicl Submission She et

Part 2: Section 'l Bldding Fortns

Date: [lr.sc rt clare (as day, tnonlh ctncl year) of bicl submissionl

Procurement Reference No

(g) We undertake to abide bY theCodeofEthicalConductforBiddersandProviders

during the Procurement Process and the execution of any resulting contract;

(h) The following commissions, gratui ties, or fees have been Paid or are to be Paid with

respect to the bidding Process or execution of the Contract: linsert complete name of

each ReciPient, its full address, lhe reasonfor which each commission or gratuitY

was paid and the amount'and currencY of each such commission or gratuitYl;

I

\

To: lvlinistry of Works and'fransport

We, the undersigned, declare that:

(a) we have examined and have no reservations to the Bidding Document' including

Addenda No.,'iirr", t lhe number and issuing date oJ'each Addenda);

(b) we offer to provide the services in conformity with the Bidding Document for the

Provision of Motor Vehicle Inspection Services;

(c) our bid prices are given in the.financial bid' we state that quoted prices include direct

costs, frnancial costs, overheads, ftont and concession fees' The concession fees shall

be l0% of the quoted Price'

(d) Our bid.shall be valid for a period of lspecify the number of calendar daysldays from

the date fixed for rhe bid sutmission deadline in accordance with the Bidding

Document, *Ji, shall remain binding upon us and may be accepted at any time

before the expiration of that period;

(e)lfourbidisaccepted,we-committoobtainaPerformanceSecurityinaccordancewiththe Bidding Document where required in the amo-Yt of [insert amount and currency

inwords ,r;i;;;;;'iitn, prrqoiionce securityJ for the due performance of the

Contract;

(0 we, including any associates or Joint venture partners for any part of the contract'

have nation"f, iro* the following eligible countries; llnsert detailsl

fT

fi11

ffiffifirItl

(i)

If none has been Paid or is to

We are not ParticiPating, as B

be paid, indicate "none"]

idders, in more than one bid in this bidding process;

0) We, including any subcontractors, do not have any conflict of interest as detailed in

ITB Clause 4.4;

\

Currency andAmount

PurposdReas onName and address of

ReciPient

[ \r t .\ \. \\t .\ \ \tl'W\ (.\\l\tt \\ .\ \\\r \

fi a tiorr* Bidding Forrrrs

(k) We, our afhliates or subsidiaries-including any subcontractors or providers tbr a.ypart of the contract-have not been suspended by the Public l)rocurcnrcpt arrdDisposal of Public Assets Authoiity in Uganda fionr participating in publicprocurement;

(l) We, including any subcontractors or providers fbr any part of the contract or contractsresulting fiom this pre-qualification process, are etigibie to participate in publicprocurement in accordance rvith ITB CIause 4.1;

(m) our Bid is binding trpon us, subject to modifications agreed during any contractnegotiations;

(n) We understand that this Bid, together rvith your written acceptance thereof included i.yotrr Letter of Bid Acceptance, shall constitute a binding contract betrveen us, until aformal contract is prepared and executed;

(o) We understand that you are not bound to accept the lowest evaluated bid or any orherbid that you may receive;

Name: [insert complete name of person signing the BidJ

In the capacity of [insert legal capacity of person signing rhe bidJ

Signed: [signature of person whose name and capacity are shown aboveJ

Duly authorized to sign the bid for and on behalf of: [insert complete name of BidderJ

Dated on day of [insert date of signingJ

r.- \, ::a.:_r,'\ -_, +-/!. - r I r#{Tftf,trfifrf,flfrfrflfl

"HT

Part 2z Section 4 Bidding Forms

t.l-his llicl securit., shoultl be on the leilerheatl of the i.sstrirg Financictl

'sltotilcl be sigttecl by ct lterson wit.h.t,h' p'-op" at'trhoriry to sign the Bid

't,'o

i,rrt,),,Atrt'Ly tne Biclcter in its bitll'

Institttlion and

SecuritY. It should

r .\ \ \ \*\ .\ \ \ \ \ .\l*\,t(t' .Br,\\ilE"k"s \ \ \\ .\ \ t

-1. -, -- . Pa -rtj i:$Eg ilo,:n::+ E id d iE s

4.1.2 Bid SecurityDate: [insert date (as day, month and year) of bid submissionl

Procurement Refercncc No.:

To: ,llinistry oflVorks hnd Traisport

Whereas [in.sert cctntplete name of BidderJ (hereinafter ''the Bidder") has submittcd its biddated [insert dute (us tluy, ntonth andyehrJ tbr Procurement Reference number [in.rcrtProctu'entent Reference nunrberJ for tlie supply of [insert hrie.f clescription o.l'the Servic'c.tf ,

hereinaftcr called "the Bid."

KNOW ALL PEOPLE by these presents that WE [in.ret't complete nqme o.[ institutionissuing the Bid SecurityJ,of [insert city of domicile and country of nationallty/ having ourregistered office at [insert full address of the issuing inslitutionJ (hereinafter "theGuarantor"), are bound unto [insert complele name of the Procuring and Disposing EnlilyJ(hereinafter "the Procuring and Disposing Entity") in the sum of [spectfy in wort]s theamount and curuency of the bid securityJ [specfy the amount and currency infiguresJ, forwhich payment well and truly to be made to the aforementioned Procuring and DisposingEntity, the Guarantor binds itself, its. successors or assignees by these presents. Sealedwith the Common Seal of this Guarantor this [tnsert day in numbersJ day of [insert month],

[insert year].

THE CONDITIONS of this obligation are the following:

l. If the Bidder withdraws its bid during the period of bid validity specified by theBidder in the Bid Submission Sheet, except as provided in ITB Sub-Clause 18.3; or

2. If the Bidder, having been notified of the acceptance of its bid by the Procuring andDisposing Entity, during the period of bid validity, fails or refuses to:

(a) sign the Contract in accordance with ITB Clause 40; or

(b) furnish the Performance Security, in accordance with the ITB Clause 4l; or(c) accept the correction of its bid by the Procuring Entity, pursuant to ITB Clse. 29;

we undertake to pay the Procuring and Disposing Entity up to the above amount uponreceipt of its first written demand, without the Procuring and Disposing Entity havingto substantiate its demand, provided that in its demand the Procuring and DisposingEntity states that the amount claimed by it is due to it, owing to the occurrence of oneor more of the above conditions, specifring the occurred conditions.

This security shall remain in force up to and including twenty-eight days after the period ofbid validity, and any demand in respect thereof should be received by the Guarantor no laterthan the above date. This guarantee is subject to the Uniform Rules for DemandGuarantees, ICC Publication No. 458,

Signed: [insert signature of person whose name and capacity are shown' helo,wJ

Name: [insert complete name of person signing the BidJ

In the capacity of [insert legal capacity of person signing the bidJ

Duly authorized to sign the bid for and on behalf of: fin.sert complete name of Bidcler]

Section 4: Page 5 of 8 Document: Bidding Fornrs

\ \\t,.t \u_[.\ .\ \1.t.\ \ \[.t*\ .\ \.t. t"It \\

Irffinffifirt

-i5rGth

n0l-

n\qF

P:rrt 2: Scction'[ rJiclding Forms

I l'lti;; l;rice Schecltie shoultl be signed hy a person with the proper uuthorily to sigtt

tlocttrtcnt,r.fbr the Bidcler. It:;houlclbe incltrcledby the Biclcler in its bid. Tlrc Biclcler may

raprodttce this in lcrndscupe.fbrmut but is responsible.for its crccurale reprocluctionJ.

r\r4.1.3 Price Schedule for the 5 year term

Dale: [insert clctte (us. cluy, tttonth und year) of bid submissionJ

Procurement Relerence No:Date .

Procurement Reference No:

Name of Bidder

We state that these prices include direct costs, financial costs, overheads, and pmft dconcession fees. The concession fees shall be l0% of the quoted price. -

Signed: [signature of person whose name and capacity are shown belowJ

Name: [insert complete name of person signing the bidJ

In the capacity of: [insert legal capacity of p.erson signing the bidJ

Duly authorised to sigrr the bid for and on behalf oft

Iin.sert complete nqme of Bidder]

Dated on day of [insert date of signingJ

I

I

I

I

I

:

i

I

I

I

Group of IVIotor vehicles to be

inspectedMinistry's Unit price

Ceilingrue. Shs)

Bidder's UnitPrice

(Ue. Shs)

I Motor 28,000

2 Car and se vehicle 56,000

3 more than 7

passengers and not exceeding 20 62,000

4 Passenser Vehicle of more than

20 pasing.tSffot exceeding 60 75,000

5 Passenger vehicle of more than

60 passengers

84 000

6 Goods vehicle of less than 3.5

tons

56,000

7 Goods vehicle of 3.5 tons and

less than l0 tons

75,000

8 Goods vehicle of more than 10

tons

84,000

9 Trailer of two axles 30,000

l0 Each extra axle on a trailer 10,000

\ t. \. \ .\ (. l. [, \ .\. \'t:T:t':\.Tt\:'t'':t\\. \\ .\ \\

Part2z Section 4 Bidding Forms

[This QualiJication Form should be submitted for the Biclder. The fornt shoulcl bc on the-tetterhiad of the Biddir and should be signecl hy a pu,sott tvith thi proper cttrthoritlt to sigtt.

It should be includecl b,the Bidcler in ils bicl, if so.rtcrtacl in Scction 3.

The infurntation will be usedfor purposes of ltost-qtnli.fication or/br veri.licutiott o.[1n'a-

qual(ication. T'his inforntatiott u'ill nol be incorporaled in the Contract. Atrqch udditiottulpages QS necessary.

Refe, to Section 3, Evaluqtion lvlethodologt ancl Crileria.for deloils of the criterio to be metand inftrntalion to be completedJ.

4.1.4 Qualification Form

Name of Bidder:

L The work performed providing Services of a similar nature and value over receutyears is: [List also details of Services under way or comntitted, including expecleclcompletion date.J

2. The ma.ior items of equipment proposed for carrying out the Scn'ices arc

Item ofI Equipmcnt

Condition (ne*', good,poor) and number

available

Orvncd, lcasctl, or to hcpurchascd

No Name of Client andContact Person

Type of WorkPcrformed

Duration and Datesof Contract

Value ofcontracl

Description,make and agc

(years)

t.t. \ t.t t_\ [ t.'ti,t].t",1 -tt,lt-t:.,,\,\.t,t-\ \ \t.t,t \

'..j-.,-i-.( - .-.-,;--'.r t tiPartZz Scction 4 Bidding Fornrs

3. The qualificatior.rs apd experience of key personnel proposed for adnrinistrati<ln and

execution ofihe Co.tract are: [Attach biographical data.]

rrtItItItT

rlt

Position Namc Years ofExpericncc(gcneral)

Year of Expcrienccin proposed

position

4. Banks that may provide references cuflng a

are: [State nan'te, address and telephone, rclex and facsimile numbersJ

5. Additional qualification information is attached, as required.

We, the undersigned, declare that

(a) the information contained in and attached to this form is true and accurate as of the date

of bid submission:

or [delete statement which does not apply]

(b) the originally submined pre-qualification information remains essentially correct as of

the date of bid submission.

t

Signed:

Natne:

ln thc capacitl'of

Dull' authoriscd to sigrl

thr.' Qual i fi cation ljornr

lirr and t'xt beltall'o[:

[signatttre of person whose name and capacill' o" shou'rt belovJ

[ittsert complete nante of person signing the Quali/ication Form]

[insert legctl capucitl' o7,'u"ott signittg the Qualification FormJ

linse rt completc name of Bidde.rJ

da1, of linscrt datc of signingJDatcd on

\ t. t.\ .\ \ t. \. \ .\. k\t'l$o ".'\, \Sl{{iln':tt:\ t. t* l.

}. \ t. (. t {

Part2z Section 5: Eligible Countries

Section 5: Eligible Countries

procurement Referencc Number: MOWT/SVC/07-08/001 I I

All countries are eligible except countries subject to the follow'ing provisiotts

A country shall not be eligible if:

(a) as a matter of law or official regulation, the Governtnent of Uganda prohibits

commercial relatiorts with that countly, provided that the Government of Uganda

is satisfied that such exclusion does not preclude eft'ectil'e competition for the

provision of services required; or

(b) by an act of compliance with a decision of the United Nations Security Council

taken under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, the Government ol'

Uganda prohibits any import of Services from that country or any payments to

persons or entities in that country.

\ \t.t. .\ \ \ t.t."\t,1.,t,]. t,.:\:t*t'qt:\ \ [. t.. \ \ \ [ t

-*t r-'"iI

I

TI

.lI

rl

'lI

Ii

,I

o

\ \. [ [. [, \ .\ \t_t.\ ].\\t.\ .\\\t.\ \\\t.\ \ \,tr*.,.r.trLL

I

I

- - r 'Pmr3: S€etioII6; SEtbn{"flriF6treEufremcTts.-,-1-.tt -Iir

lliln

iln

l'1.

ilR

R

11

R

11'

IT

flrfit'1'

rI]

Section 6: Statement of Requirements

Procurement Reference Number: MOWT/SVCi07-08/001 I I

TERMS OF REFERENCE (T.O.R) FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF MANDATORYIVIOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION SERVICES - (APPENDICES l, 2 and 3 AREPART OF THE TOR'S)

I.O BACKGRQUND

Road traffic accidents in Uganda have been increasing over the years and they are caused bya number of factors. Defective vehicles, is one of the causes of these accidentscontributing over l0% of the total accidents in the country. Recent studies show thataccidents caused by defective vehicles lead to annual losses estimated at over 56 billionUganda shillings in terms of vehicle damages, lost output of the dead and injured peopleand medical expenses.

The Government is currently implementing a number of measures to reverse the accidenttrend. The measures so far taken include improvement of the road infrastructure, speedcontrol regulations, computerisation of driving permits and road safety education andsensitisation.

To minimise accidents caused by defective vehicles, the govemment intends to introducemandatory periodic inspection of all motor vehicles for roadworthiness. The introductionof mandatory inspection of vehicles shall also reduce amounts of gas emissions on theenvironment and its consequences on human health as vehicles that do not meet setemission standards shall not be declared roadworthy.

Uganda tsed to implement the mandatory motor vehicle inspection until 1998 when it wassuspended in preparation for the divesture of the inspection services from govemment to the privatesector. The purpose of these terms of reference therefore is to select the most competitive offer byone company or consortium of companies to develop, install, commission and operate technicalmotor vehicle inspection services for vehicles registered or domiciled in the jwisdiction of Uganda.

INTERNATIONAL of Canada between August 2005 and May 2007 found the project viable anrmade recommendations for implernentation.

The successful bidder is expected to commence the provision of the services not later thanl8 (eighteen) months from the date of contract award.

IThe Ministry of Works and Transport carried out a Feasibility Study on the Re-Intoduction anr {-Privatisation of Motor Vehicle Inspection Services. The study that was conducted by LE/_ .ir

Section 6: Page I of 5 Document: Statementof Requirements

dl .\\ t.t .'. .\.\t.f.{. \ \\ t.t \ \\.t.\ \ \\t.\ \ \t.

* -:-

-- --- F- :jj. ,; i-, -' F' ., - --- -- ' \ 3

Lni

III1I

'l'-l

ail

TiI

tr'.III

Part 3 : Section 6. Statement of Requirements

2.0 GENERAL OBJECTIVES:

.[Iregeneralobjectivesofthemandatorymotorvehicleinspectionprogrammeare:

r to reduce traffrc accidents rates and high environmental pollution levels w'hich are

caused uy .ir.ri.,i* of vehicles that lack adequate mechanical conditions'

o reduce the time spent flor transportation'

r reduce excessive fuel consumption and spare parts expeqses

o project u.,i., ,.*ices-offeredby the govemment of uganda to residents and visitors

whatever the means oi transportation and

. create employment opportuni,i., ,iur contributing to poverry reduction'

The successfut firm will enter into a five-year cgnjla:Lwith a potential five-year extenslon

provided p.rfo..*..'i, ,u,irruo".y. ei., iie initiar five years, other concessionaires will

be procured ,o .o'npt" for the provision of the services'

4.0SCoPEoFTHEMoToRvEHIcLEINSPECTIoNPRoGRAMME

3.0 CONCESSION TERM:

is to cover road safetY and emission contro I and will be aPPlied to all the

whether Private or public, and/or domiciled in Uganda. Details of theregistered

of insPections, inspection potential,

Upes, 'vehicle population,

premises and

frequencYtechnical specifications are in the attached

size of station

1 and 2.

sustainable develoPment

and thereafter any other

consultations with the

Economic asPect: The economtc situation in the country shall be taken into account

so that the cost of the Project can be considered bY the users as a needed

' contribution. The concessionaire shall be required to build local caPacitY bY

emploYing local peoPle and involving local comPanies.mandatorY motor vehicle

Social asPect: The Partici pation of citizens in theof technical insPection

T

fl.L

T^tVV$t

It

:

t\\\\.r ^\\\5

\

o

inspection Proj ect shall be Promoted through Publication

IE --Pa rts3 :- Section 6; S ta tem enFoFRequ irem ents

statistics and other regular information bulletins, suggested by the concessionairetiom time to time.Environmental aspect: The current environmental regulations shall be consideredthroughout the term of the contract.

Political Institutional aspects: The supporting institutional, regulatory and legalframework shall be considered.

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION

The Ministry will procure the service provider in accordance with the procurementregulations and laws of Uganda. The successful bidder will be granted a concession to

develop, install, commission and operate technical motor vehicle inspection services lorvehicles registered or domiciled in the jurisdiction of Uganda.

The concessionaire of the vehicle inspection services shall have the technical competence toensure a quality service. In order to achieve quality service the concessionaire must providethe requirements set forth below conceming its infrastructure, the technical inspectionitems, equipment, personnel and customer service.

a

a

5.1 Test Centre Infrastructureo Test centres shall be suffrcient in number and be strategically located in order to

minimize the distance that customers will be required to travel for a test.o Test centres shall be located in easily accessible areas, be provided with good

access for vehicles so that entry and exit will not cause heavy trafficproblemVcongestiori' on existing roads.

o Test centres shall have appropriate areas for vehicles waiting to be inspected.o Test centres shall provide sufficient number of toilet facilities for both test

centre staff and customers.

f 5.2 Technical Items for InspectionThe Ministry shall require that the following items be inspected during the test:

o Alignmento Suspension. Braking system .

o Emissionso Electrical system. Any other items as will be specified in the station Inspection Manual.

5.3 Test Centre EquipmentThe equipment to be used by the test centres shall be approved by the Ministry.

The equipment shall include not less than those equipments listed in Appendix l:

o

UDJ?><

$gtr

t\\t t \t l.\

Section 6: Page 3 of 5 Document: Statement of Requirements

\ \\ r.r \ \\r.\(.t,t.t \ t.l-l.t

t

tcr-., ,.]|:::;:rr',:"i,';'."Xr[t"-^.d p, o rulry quarirred.Lnd experienced proressional who

rvi, have overa* ,.ro""riu-,ity ior ,n" [u t*;; lil -Yll, utto manage a suffrcient number

of suitably quuriniPlJ;il r,^ii,r p.rform tr" '"rvit" utto'aing to the volumes of

".fri.f.t .*p..tta to be inspected'

5.5 Customer Service and Quality Management :a. -^-l l^ ^r,er

The concessionaire and its emproyees sha* have a strong commitment to customer servlce

and the concessionaire wi* be expecteii. pr.rrae a robust quality Tullgt*:nt system and

a code of practice ;;;ri;il aetailed pro..dur., for appropiiu,.iy dearing with customer's

Part J: Se

comPlaints.

mid'term revlew

the Contract'"-- - - Ministry of Works and Transport

- Concessionaire

- To be aPPointed

ction 6. St:rtement oi Requirements

FrequencY of Vehicle InsPections

t5.0

sub

tuetffihffiHitffidr'a

II

I

\lk

II

rI

qI

I

I

I

II

II

II

iL .,, X,l fi ',|;' :? ; lyr:X,': T: JH.Hllffil

"l'T.'.',['J

w. r be c ar cur ate d i n re sp e c t to the

anniversary of .rst registration 1i-*.r.t,"'-ti*ta a situation exist for vehicles to be

inspected out of the registration pattern ,i,. .oi..trionuir, **t set in prace an alternative

'tiul *outa facilitate the inspection'

5.8 Responsibilities for

Responsible EntitY

Executive EntitY

Supervising EntitY

3',?r.*,:;:':?ff :H1:";"*'!"Tt-'u."";1:,1',ffi H*::::i:;3"#:'.']..eMinisuvThere will be . ,"#.i ,,,..iuni* ro, u*uur'performancl "uit*i

and a comprehensive

uTIli

5.10 RePortingThe concessionaire shalt prepare and submit to the Ministry ieports and information about

the performance of v;i.i;i"rp.rtionlint .s that it op.#.s. The reports, frequency and

metirodology or rru*irri;;r .;

rp**.[i" eppt"ai- i .rectrnicat Specifications)'

6.ft,s-qltJB$&9&SUNPS{*t .. .

Funds ro imptemeni ,t. project.shall be-provid:d i." tll,:y the successful bidder and thus

frnancial solidity "i iil uiaa., is one of ttre selecrion .ritJria. T!9- lucc.essful

bidder will

then charge vehicrcowners inspecdon i..r.-iueraesto ue'p'id'sltt.rrua theones quoted$

il:

\\1.\-t 'i:-t"f.\

of

ILt\\ J \t-rP't

\ I 4it.

i" t-*-:--- PartF$-cti0,f tr- St ulrernen[1-- -'rf,

,sn{:'rrT

$nfTo

tT

Hgiig6-eag*&H fees,will.*'-*foHtfte$iddE!ryiniitstine{t;;Jo*gelise-e(psn$s$ptEf -,rj$*q*qcf.ssss-$iomfeTil

Section 6: Page 5 of 5 Document: Statement of Requirements

\\t.' .\ l. \\r .\ .\. \l*(..\ t \t, t.[ ]. \1.t.[ \\t

!I

il

Ft.r

,r-lIi

'l

-1

-l

J,.1

i

I

'I

Ii

Oi

-tl

rI

t:i

\.\ \\1.\,\ \\\t.*.\\\\,\ \ \\\,\ \\\\.1..\ \t.

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

SECTION 7: CONTRACT FOR THE PROVISION OFMANDATORY MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTIONSERVICES

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1. DefinitionsUnless the context otherwise requires, the following words and terms shall have the

meanings assigned to them:.

(a) "Contract" means the Agreement entered into between the Parties and includes theContract Documents

(b) "Contract Documents" means the documents listed below, including allattachments, appendices, and all documents incorporated by reference therein, and

. shall include any amendments thereto.i. Agreement,ii. Any Letter of Bid Acceptance,iii. Provider's Bid as amended by clarifications,iv. These Conditions of

All documents forming the Contract are intended to be correlative, comptementary,and mutually explanatory.

FilrpF

(c) "Day" means working day. "Month" means calendar month.

(f) "Personnel" means persons engaged by the Provider or by any Sub-contractor asemployees and assigned to the performance of the Services or any part thereof;

(g) "Procuring and Disposing Entity" means the entity concessioning the Services, asspecified in the Agreement.

(d) "Eligible Countries" means the countries and territories eligible in Section 5

(e) "Part5/" means the Procuring and Disposing Entity or the Provider, as the case maybe, and "Parties" means both of them.

(h) "Provider" means the natural person, private or government entity, or acombination of the above, whose bid to perform the Contract has been

'accepted by

the Procuring and Disposing Entity and is named as such in the Agreement, andincludes the legal successors or permitted assigns of the provider.

Part2, Section 7: Conditions of Contract Page I of 16

\\t.t t \tI t.t \Ll.t t \\t.t tLr t I\'\1,I

I

(j)'.strbcontractor',ITleansanynaturalperson'.privateorgovernmententity'oracombination oI the above, including its tegal successors or permitted assigns' to

,uvhom any part of the Services a"U. ptoiided or execution of any part of, the

Services ii subcontracted by the Provider

(k) The word "Government" shall mean the Government of the Republic of Uganda'

(I)lfthecontextsorequiresit,singularmeanspluralandviceversa.

Nothing contained herein shall be construed as establishing a relation of master and

servant or of principal and agent betwe.n it..pt*uring and Disposing Entity and

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

(i)''services'.lneallstheservicestobepe.rformedbytheProviderasdescribedintheco ntract.

(m)

the Provider.

this

a)

,t@i* lL

It is the Government of Uganda,s policy to require that procuring and Disposing Entities,

aswellasBiddersandProvid.,,,nd.,Publicfinancedcontracts,observethehighest'standardsofethicsduringtheprocurementandexecutionofsuchcontracts.lnpursuitof

;

flrlrriIoI

b) will suspend a fltrm, either indefinitely or for a

awarded a Public funded contract if it at any

engaged in corrupt or fraudulent practices in com

funded Contract.

The Provider shall permit the Government of Uganda to inspect the Provider's

accounts and records relating to the performance of the Services and to have them

ions of Contract

period of time, from being

etermines that the firm has

for, or in executing, a Public

Page 2 of l6

stated

time d

peting

l_l

LI

LI

LI

LI

H

1.2.1

Part2, Section 7: Condit

\ \t.[.\ \\t.t.\ \\1.\.[ \\\\.\ \ \\\.\ \ t.l,l

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

;rr

il]lili{?

;

F_Ll

tilrflFFrHI

audited by auditors appointed by the Covcrnment of Uganda, if so required by thcCovernment.

1.2.2 ln pursuit of the policy defined in Clause 1.2, the Procuring and Disposing Entitymay terminate a Contract for Services if it at any time determines that corrupt orfraudulent practices \vere engaged in by representatives of the Procuring and

Disposing Entity or of a Provider, during the procurement or the execution of that

contract, without the Procuring and Disposing Entity having taken timely and

appropriate action satisfactory to the Covernment of Uganda to remedy the

situation.

L SUB.IECT OF THE CONTRACT

The Parties have concluded this Contract whereby the Supervising Entity shall providethe Concessionaire with an exclusive right to provide Motor Vehicle Inspection Servicesat the Specified Test Centre Locations and the Concessionaire shall have an obligation toprovide the required services for the organization and operation of Mandatory MotorVehicle Inspection Services in the numbers-and to the vehicle types in accordance withthe Conditions of Contract.

2.2 The documents consisting the contract shall be interpreted in the following order:

a) Agreement,b) Letter of Bid Accepthnce,

c) Concessionaires Bid as amended by clarifications,d) Conditions of Contract,e) Statement of requirements,

f) Contract AppendicesAll documents forming the contract are intended to be correlative, complementary andmutually explanatory.

The Concessionaire shall provide the services specified in accordance with the provisionsof this contract, and in accordance with the inspection throughput estimates (suchservices being hereinafter called "the Services").

2.1

2.4

2.3

The Contract is concluded with a particular Concessionaire, who shall not have the rightto subcontract or sublet any benefits of this Contract to third parties without the priorrvritten approval of the Supervising Entity.

Part2, Section 7: Conditions of Contract Page3oFl6

r \tr r \t t t\'. I. L \ \ \ \t.r.\ \ \\r.[ \ \r r.^l \. r

l.*ii

rjrr

I,il

III:II

&IIII.II:I

trT

JI

JJ

J

\

$

,$

3.1

3. r.1

3.1.2

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

J. RlGl{TS r\ND OI}LIGI\TIONS OF THE PARTIES

'ftre concessionaire acting as a tluly authorized techhical services provider is

iNvarded the right to conclutle this contract basecl on the resutts of open tender and

has the right to:

Apply to the Supervising Entity with proposals for modification oflinspection throughput

plans, test station layouts, or other characteristics ofl the test station developed by the

concessionaire to improve the efficiency of the inspection services;

Charge fees lor each type of inspection executed in the amounts established by the

Supervising Entity and specified in the Price Schedule;

Apply to the Supervising Entity with proposals concerning justified amendment of

nspection fees;

Refuse to carry out technical inspections on any vehicle. that is presented at the test

station in a condition that in the informed opinion of the Concessionaire presents a Health

and Safety or other identified hazard to test station personnel or third parties;

Replace if necessary the testing equipment originally proposed by the Concessionaire in

his tender for the award of contract provided that all replacement equipment is of the

same or superior quality as the equipment specified in the original tender bid documents.

Prior written agreement shall be obtained from the Supervising Entity for all such

replacement(s).

The Concessionaire shall have an obligation to:

Carry out the Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspections in accordance with the manu'als'

pro.Ldrr., and guidelines specified by lhe Supervising Entity for the services and as set

out in Appendix I and associated Test Procedure Manuals;

Operate the services and maintain the premises and equipments used for the provision of

the services in all respects in accordance with the requirements of the laws, standard

iegislative acts and other specific regutations applicable to light industrial operations and

to the provision of the ,p..if,. services contracted. It shall be the sole responsibility of

the Concessionaire to ilssure the full awareness by the Concessionaire and the

Concessionaire's authorized employees of all relevant general acts, legislation' and

regulations applicable to the specifred services. It shall be the responsibility of the

Part2,Section 7 : Corrditions of Contract Page 4 of l6

,l

t,t..l .\ \t.t.t \t-\t.t \\\t.t \ (t t.t I \\t.t .\.

I:r

t

Part 4 Section 7:'Conditions of Contract

Supervising Entity to make available to the Concessionaire all acts. legislation, andregulations specitic to this Contract and the Contracted Services;

3.2.3 Collect inspection fees chargeable in accordance rvith the scale of fbes set out.

3.2-4 iVlaintain accurate and up to date records of the Mandatory r\lotor Vehicle Inspectionscarried out. including all Retests after Initial Failure, and to report all test and retestresults to the Supervising Entity including electronic data transfer.

3.2.5 Carry out regular quality assurance contrsl of all inspection activities and maintainrecords of the results of' such quality assurance control activities to provide theSupervising Entity with required data for the purpose of service monitoring and at anytime provide the authorized representatives of the Supervising Entity or other authorizedgovernment agencies with:

Allow access to the concessionaire's premises at all reasonable business times to permitinspections forthe purpose of control of the quality of the services and full access to thetechnical facilities and equipment of the Concessionaire;

3.2.6 Make timely payment to the Supervising Entity of all concession fees payable for theexclusive concession to provide Mandatory Motor Vehicte Inspection Services at the TestCentre Locatiohs assigned to the Concessionaire under this Contract in accordance withthe amounts and procedures specified in the Contract

3.2.7 The Concessionaiie shall bear and pay all taxes, duties, and levies imposed on theConcessionaire, by all municipal, state or national govemment authorities, both withinand outside Uganda, in connection .with the provision of the Motor Vehicle InspectionServices to be supplied under the Contract.

3.3 The Supervising Entity acting at alt times in compliance with and within the limitsof the specific authorities delegated to the Supervising Entity by the Ministry ofWorks and Transport shall have the right to:

3.3- l Define the minimum numbers and technical standards for the Mandatory Motor VehicleInspection Services to be provided;

3.3.2 Define the level and format of the information to be provided by the motor vehicteowners and the Concessionaire when presenting vehicles for inspection including ctearinflormation that the services are provided on behalf of the Supervising Entity and the

Part2, Section 7: Conditions of Contract Page 5 ol l6

-a

I

t-tt.[ I't

r*

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

lppeals procc<lure(s) available to vehicle owners and the Concessiorraire in the event of

disputcd inspection resttlts or decisions;

j.j.3 Specily the levels of,fees chargeable forthe various types and levels of Mandatory Motor

Vchiclc Inspections at the moment oIContract signing;

3.j.4 Modif,y the level of fees chargeable if such a decision has been authorised by the Ministry

of Works and Transport and provided such a decision does not aflect the economic

viability of the project. In each case of such modification to f'ees chargeable the

Supervising Entity shall immediately provide the Concessionaire with official

notification;

--.-\j.3.5 At all reasonable times, normally during the Concessionaire's hours of business, request

the Concessionaire to provide the authorized representatives of the Supervising Entity

and other State Supervising Entities acting within their competences established by

tegislation of the Republic of Uganda (the purpose of the inspection shall be clearly

defined) with the following:

Access to the Concessionaire's premises to permit inspections for the purpose of quality

control of the facilities and equipments used for the provision of services and access to

the technical facilities of the Concessionaire and information concerning technical

maintenance and repair of the facilities and equipments to verify the Concessionaire's

compliance with the requirements specified for the level of services to be provided;

Request the Concessionaire to provide relevant information required by the Supervising

Entity for the purposes of monitoring of Concessionaire's activity regarding collection of

fees, issuance of Test Certificates, ild fulfilment of other obligations of the

Concessionaire specified in this contract and the Appendices;

il5n

I

flfl

3.3.6rtrt?rLI

LI

Ll

Ll

' 3.4 The Supervising Entity shall have an obligation to:

3.4.1 Provide the Concessionaire with all necessary technical documents and manuals to

inform the Concessionaire in detailof the required performance of the services;

3.4.2 lmmediately notify the Concessionaire (except for force-majeure impacts) about

decisions on modification of inspection fees or chargeable tariffs upon receipt of oflicial

authorization from the Ministry of Works and Transport of the modification of such

changes, provided such a decision does not affect the economic viability of the project;

Part2, Section 7: Conditions of Contract Page6ofl6 U

Ut,t

L\ \ \

tr I tt t\t\\ \ L t' l.\\r.t l \\r.t .\,\\t I I.\,1.

it

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

3.4.3 Provide proper and adequate protection of the exclusive rights of t5e Concessionaire lorthe first five years and enlist the assistance of the Traffic Police and the Uganda R6,cnueAtrthority to en[orce Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection regulations to supporlcommercially viable Test Station operations by enforcing the mandatory presentation ofvehicles for inspection;

3.4-4 Inform the vehicle owning population through effective mass media campaigns about thcsafety related and environmental protection objectives of the Mandatory Motor VehiclcInspection Program. In a subsequent or parallel campaign inform the vehicle o,"vningpopulation of the requirements of the Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection Program, the

relevant inspectioh frequericies for all motor vehicle types, the scale of fees chargeable.and the range of penalties applicable for non-compliance with Mandarorl, VetriclcInspection Requirements. At each planned modification of the Mandatory Motor VehicleInspection Program prepare and present further media campaigns to continue to maintainpublic awareness and support for the program.

4 CONCESSION FEES AND PAYMENT PROCEDURE

4.1 In consideration of the Ministry Of Works and Transport granting the Motor VehicleInspection Concession, the Concessionaire shall pay to Ministry of Works and Transport,a monthly fee equivalent to l0% of the Gross Turnover for each month, rvhichever isgreater (the "Concession Fee");

The Concession Fee shall be paid monthly in arrears, with or without demand. within l5(fifteen) days next after the end of the month to which it relatesl

4.3 The Concession Fee shall be computed against the Gross Turnover in Uganda Shillings;

The above payment procedure shall however be subject to further negotiations andmodifications with the successful bidder

4.5 The Concession Fec shall be subject to revision b1, the Ministrl, of Works and fransport;

4.2

4.4

.r.6 l'he Concessionaire shall pay to the Ministry of Works and Transport interest per <lav onan1' part of thc Conccssion l-ee to Ministry of Works arrd 1-ranspor( tlrat is duc bur isoutstanding at unpaid frorn iirne to time. 'fhc pavmcnt shall rclate to tlrc pcriocl lirrrn(and including). the datc ol'delault (bcing the first dat,afrcr t5c duc darc sl'tlrc nro,rSlr

Part2. Section 7: Conditions ol-Contract I)agc 7 ol'l(r

l.t \\t.,..f \\t.t.[ \\t.t.l .\ \t.l.l I \ tr t t5L I

payment) until the date the payment is actually mhde' The rate of interest per annum

shall be the 364-day Bank oi Ugunda Treasury Bill [discounting] rate plus 4olo' Interest

shall accrue rcgardless of whetherthe concession fee or the GrossTurnover is disputed or

Part 4 Section 7 Conditions of Contract

not;

For avoidance of doubt, Gross Turnover shall not include value added tax;

The Concessionaire rhutl hur. the right to provide advance payment for the period of not

more than 6 (six) months

Uganda;

Further negotiations on the payment procedure shall be subject to discussion at contract

negotiations

concessionaire failure;

Apply a financial penalty in the amount of ( )for each violation under repeated (more than

onc) violations by the Concessionaire:

*[, tt-

fItlLl

ntTjt,J

J

J

JJ

?J

I1I

"T

il:l

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

Upon repeated failures of the concessionaire to fulfil the obligations specified by the

Contract the Ministry of Works and Transport shall have the right to initiate Contract

termination procedrres in accordance with the civil Legislation of the Republic of

5 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES

5.1 Failure to provide payment for the exclusive right to provide Motor Vehicle lnspection

Services in compliance with the amount(s) and procedurls specified in clauses 4'l and 4'2

shall constitute grounds for the Superviring entity to impose a late-payment penalty as

specified in clause 4'5;

5.2 Upon repeated failures of the concessionaire to fulfir the obrigations specified by the

contract the Supervising Entity shall have the right to initiate contract termination

proceduresinaccordancewiththeCivilLegislationoftheRepublicofUganda;

5.3 Fairure of the concessionaire to compry *ith the procedures specified for collection of fees'

registrationandreportingofdataconcerningallMandatoryVehiclelnspectionsexecutedand thcir ,.rrltr, siall constitute the ground for the Supervising Entity to:

Provide the Concessionaire with a written warning and a notice of requirement for

immediaterectificationofthesituationunderasingleproveninstanceof5.3.1

5.3.2

\t'J

I)art2. Section 7: Conditions of Contract

I,\\r]L\\r.rI\Page 8 of l6

) \[rr.t I\t*l,l \trt I\\\

t f

Part'4

Section 7: Conditions of Contract11

rt

rI6.1

6 FORCE MA.IUERE

For the purposes of the Contract, "Force Majettre" shall mean an event or events rvhich

are beyond the reasonable control of a Party, and which makes a Party's perforrnance of

its obligations hereunder impossible or so impractical as reasonably to be considered

impossible in the circumstances, and includes, but is not limitcd to' war' riots' civil

disorder, earthquake, fire, explosion, storm, flood or other adverse weather conditions'

strikes, lockouts or other industrial action (except where such strikes' lockouts or other

industrial action are within the power of the Party invoking Force Majeure to prevent),

confiscation or any other action by government agencies'

6.2 Force Majeure shall not include

6.2.1 any event which is caused by the negligence or intentional action of a Party or

such'Party's Sub-contractors or agents or employees; nor

6.2.2 any event which a diligent Party could reasonably have been expected to both:

6.2.2.1 take into account from the effective date of the Contract; and

6.2.2.2 avoid or overcome in the carrying out of its obligations; nor

6.2.3 insufficiency of funds or failure to make any payment required hereunder'

it,, fai'lure of a party to fulfil any of its obligatibns hereundEr-shall not bsconsidered to

be a breach of, 6r default under, the Contract insofar as such inability arises from an

event of Force Majeure, provided that the Party affected by such an event has taken all

-- -reasonable-+recautions, due care.and reasonable alternative measures, all with thc

objective of carrying out the terms and conditions of the Contract'

A Party affected by an event of Force Majeure shall take all reasonable measures to:

6.3

6.4

6.5

a) remove such party's inability to fulfil its obligations hereunder with a

minimum of delaY; and

b)minimisetheconsequencesofanyeventofForceMajcurc.

A Party affected by an event of Force Majeure shall notify the other Party of such event

as soon as possible, and in any event not later than fourteen (14) da-vs follorving the

occurrence ofsuch event. providingevidence ofthe nature and cause o[such event' and

shall sirnilarly glve notice of the restoration of normal conditions as sooll as possiblc'

Part2. Section 7: Conditiotrs of Contract Page 9 of l(r

tt lltl I ttl I tll IIt \ \t.t.l I t \

II

\ : tt t \ \ \ tr \ \

7

6.6

7.t

't)

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

Not later than thirty (30) days after the Provider, as the result of an event of ForceMajeure, has become unable to perfornr a material portion of the Services, the partiesshall corrsult rvith each other rvith a vierv to agreeing appropriate measures to be takcnin tlte circumstances.

TERM OF CONTRACT, TERMINATION AND RESCINDING OF CONTRACT

The successful bidder is expected to commence the provision of the motor vehicleinspection serviccs not later than l8 (eighteen) months from the date of contract award.

The term of this contract agreement shall be five (5) years commencing on the date ofcontract award, unless terminated earlier in-accordange with the provisions of thisagreement.

The effectiveness of this contract agreement is conditional upon the prior and continuingfulfilment by the Concessionaire of the following conditions of effectiveness to thesatisfaction of Ministry of Works and Transport or on before the specified date:

Documentation- The Concessionaire shall have delivered to Ministry of Works andTransport the following documents:

(i) Bid Security as set out in section 4: Bidding Forms;(ii) Price Schedure as set out in Section 4: Bidding Forms;

The Term may be extended or renewed at the option of the Ministry of Works andTrans porl and pend i ng sati sfactory performance.

This contract shall be automaticalty terminated if the concessionaire:

Becomes bankrupt or insotvent or has a receiving order made against him;

commences liquidation proceedings other than for the purposes only of reorganization oflegal entity (reconstruction, amalgamation, etc);

Cives offers or promises of any loan, fee. reward. or advantage of any kind to an,\,employee of the Supervising Entity, provided that there is retiable and evincibteinformation about such offers or promises:

l'hc Contracl can bc terminated or amended based on the mutual agreement of the parties:

rt2. Scction 7: Conditions of Contract Page l0 of l6

F:: '

Il-;lTr-I

I

Tj-l

-lt,

.rl

sllEJul

H

?H

tttrtlTI

\.+{

7.3

7.3.1

7.4

7.5

7.5. t

7.5.2

7.5.3

7.6

Ira

t.\\ tr ttr ttr Itt t T\ !\ \\L\ttL \ I

7.7

7.8

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

The Supervising Entity shall have the right for unilateral annoLrncement of request to

terminate this agreement at any time if the concessionaire fails to observe the terms and

conditions of this agreement or flails to execute with due diligence and speed any action

necessary lor the proper perlormance of the agreement. Under the provisions of this Item,

the concessionaire w'ill be given fourteen days notice of, any intended application to the

court;

Grounds for the rescission of contract under conditions specified in Items 7.4 and 7 .6

shall not deprive the Parties of the right to request termination of contract based on other

conditions specified by the legislation'of the Republic of Uganda or any of the following

conditions:

7.8.1 The Concessionaire's equipment does not meet the requirements concerning the level ofservices specified by the conditions of the Contract regarding the number and quality ofthe equipments required for the proper operation of the services and the Concessionaire

does not provide guaranties for rectification of the situation within a reasoirable period oftime;

7.8.2 The Concessionaire fails to provide the services with a sufficient number of personnel

taking into account requirements concerning the rest and work regime of the personnel

and thus, cannot safely provide the services in the volumes required;

7.8.3 Advanced rescinding of the contract caused by any of the reasons indicated in this

chapter and by decision of a relevant court about rescinding of the contract does not give

the right to the Concessionaire to stop the provision of the contracted services for the

period before the advertised tender and concluding of a new contract for the required

services

8 INSPECTION AND AUDIT

8.t The Ministry of Works and Transport or its Supervising L,ntity shall have thc right. lorpurposes of determining the standards of servicLs or compliance with the terms of this

Agreement or the Concessionaire's'obligations under it, to inspect, audit or conduct a survc)'

of any aspect related to the Services.

The Supen,ising Entity at its discretion shall, for purposes of verifying or determining the

correctness of thc documcnts and statement submined by the Concessionaire pursuarrt to thc

provisions of clause [7.2.1]. have the right to cause an inspection and audit to be madc on

Pa(2. Section 7: Conditions of Contract Page ll of16

8.2

\l I I trtttrltillIttttrtiltItIII L

ITt

Parl 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

8.3

the operational, transactional and financial documents and records of the Concessionaire

including rvithout limitation invoices, receipts, and analogous supporting data and pertinent

irrlormation ar-rd data set out or implied by the provisions of this Agreement. The

Concessionairc shall be obliged to provide tlte relevant documents when demarrded and as

required by the Supervising Entity.

ln the event that the inspection and audit establishes that additional payments are due to

Ministry of Work and Transport then the Concessionaire shall pay such additional amount

to the Ministry of Works and Transport within l5 days of receiving written notice from the

the Ministry of Works and Transport. \n the event that the inspection and audit estab\ishes

that the Concessionaire has overpaid the Ministry of Works and Transport, then such

ovcrpayment shall be credited (by issuance.of a credit note) to the Concessionaire, horvever

in no event shall Ministry of Works and Transport be liable for interest if there has been an

overpayment by the Concessionaire.

9 SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES, APPLICABLE LEGISLATION

9.1 If any question dispute or difference whatsoever shall arise between the parties in relation

to or in connection with this agreement then either party shall as soon as reasonably

practicable give written notice to the other (in writing) of the existence of such question

dispute or difference, specifring its nature and the point at issue;

If the dispute shall be referred to the arbitration of a person mutually agreed or, in the

absence of mutual agreement, to a person or body appointed under the provisions ofexisting legislation of the Republic of Uganda such submission shall be deemed a

submission to arbitration within the meaning of Civil and Procedural Legislation and

other existing legislation of the Republic of Uganda and relevant conditions of the

Contract;

tT

It

dt

9.2

I

o

9.3 The existence of any dispute shall not entitle the Concessionaire to suspend unilateralll'

the operation ofl the services during the whole period required for the settlement ofdispute:

I(} PROCEDURE FOR PROVISION OF INFORMATION AND NOTIFICATIONS

l0.l An.,- notice required or permined under the terms of this Agreement shall (unless

otherwise provided by tlris Agreement) be in writing and shall be sufliciently served ifdelivered by hand or sent by registered mail. telex or facsimile to the respective Parties

as follorvs:

l)art2. Scction 7: Conditions oIContract Page l2 of l6

tl t \ \r.r"l \\r.r J \\t-rJ \\t*r.l I lllt I,u\ \-r r\. a

tril

ilrT

t1

11

rl

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

(in the case of Ministry of Works and Transport) to:

Head of Procurement and Disposal Unit,

Ministry of Works and TransPort,

Plot4i6 AirPort Road,

P.O. Box 10,

Entebbe,

Uganda.

Telephone: +256 414 32010119

Facsimile number: +256 414 320135

(in the case of the concessionaire) to:

or to such other address or telex or facsimile number as may from time to time by notice

be designated bY either ParU.

Any such notice shall be in the English language and shall be deemed (in the absence of

proof to the contrary) to have been received and given, in the. case of delivery by hand'

at the time of delivery, in the case of post, seven (7) days after posting it and' in the

case of telex or facsimile, on the completion of transmission.

10.3 AnY notice or othe r communication that is required to be given to the Parties to the

Agreement (PTA) shall be deemed to be properly given if it is addressed to

[insert name, position and address]

r 0.2

r0.4

r 0.5

or

such other person or address as the PTA may from time to time sPecifY.

person or address that the concessionaire may from time to time sPecifY

Any notice required to be given under this contract shalt be sufficiently given if

fonvarded by registered post, recorded delivery service, printed telecommunication' or

presented b), hand in writing. Every such notice shall be deemed to have been received

and given at the time rvhen. in the ordinary course of transmission. it should have bcen

delivered at the address to which it was sent'

Part2, Section 7: Conditions o f Contract Paec l3 ol' I (r

Any notice or other communication

shall be deemed to be

\

which is required to be given to the concessionaire

property given if it is addressed to

[insert name, position and addre'ssJ or such other

tlttillItiltIlilIrt ttl I t\ \ \ L L \

Il , i

nPart 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract tI

11 PERFORMANCESECURITY

lt.l The Concessionaire shall, within twenty-eight (28) days of the notification of contract

award, provide a Performance Security for the due performance of, the Contract

wlrich shall amount to I 0o/o of the estimated annual turnover of the business (i.e

United States Dollars One Million trvo hundred and fifty thousand (US$ 1.25M) or

the equivalent in Uganda Shillings)

l 1.2'l'l-re proceeds of the Perlormance Security shall be payable to the Procuring and Disposing

Entiiy as compensation for any loss resulting from the Concessionaires failure to complete

its obligations under the Contract.

ttrItI

T

IIa

ttT

T:T

,lu,:JtrT

;

a

I1.3 The Performance Security shall be in one of the forrns below

(a) Bank guarantee;

(b) Bank Draft; or

(c) An inevocable letter of credit

I 1.4 The performance Security shall be discharged by the Procuring and Disposing Entity_

and retumed to the Concissionaire on the date the Concessionaire begins provision of

the Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection services'

12 OTHER PROVISIONS

l1.l Laws governing the agreement: This Agreement, its meaning and interpretation and the

relationship between the Parties shall be govemed by the laws of the Republic of

Uganda.

l2.Z Language of the Contract: the language of the contract shall be English

12.3 Distinct provisions: Each of the provisions of this Agreement is severable and distinct

from the others. tIat any time one or more of these provisions is or becomes invalid.

illegal or unenforceable. the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or

impaired.

ll.4 Modification: Any modification of the terms of this Agreement may only be madc b1'

wrinen agreetnent between the Parties.

Part2. Scction 7: Conditions of Contract Page l4 of l6

;

T

T

,.,*iItL'r

t I\ tltt Itr tt \\\ !\ ! \t.r J .\ \trr J .\ \ \

l-,ff-r--....+=--,-.-.rr- ,

EI:

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

12.5 Waiver: The failure by either Party to exercise or any delay by either Party in exercisirrg

a right or remedy provided by this Agreement or by law does not constitute a rvaiver ofthe right or remedy or a waiver of other rights or rcmedies. No single or partial

exercise of a right or remedy provided by this Agreement or by larv prevents thc firrther

exercise of the right or remedy or the exercise of another right or remedy. 'f hc rights

and remedies provided by this Agreement are cumulative and not exclusive of any

rights or remedies provided by law.

12.6 Costs and expenses: Each Party shall pay its own costs and expenses incurred by it inconnection with the preparation and completion of this Agreement.

12.7 Previous agreements: This Agreement supersedes all previous agreements whether

written or oral between the Parties and relating to any matter contained in this

Agreement and not included by incorporation or reference

12.8 Assignment: The Concessionaire shall not transfer or purport to assign or transfer any ofits rights or obligations under this.Agreement without the prior written consent of the

Ministry of Works and Transport.

12.9 Third ParO Rights: Nothing in this agreement shall confer upon any person, other than

the Parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns, any rights or remedies

of any nature whatsoever under or by reason of this Agreement.

12.10 Insurance to be taken out by the Concessionaire: The Concessionaire shall take out,maintain and shall cause any Sub-contractors to take out and maintain, at their own costinsurance coverage against the risks and on terms and conditions approved by the

Procuring and Disposing Entity as follows:

(i)(ii)( iii)(iv)(v)(vi)

Third Party motor vehicle

Third Party liabilityEmployer's liability and workers' compensation

Professional liabil it1'

Loss or damage to equipment and property

Other

l2.ll . The Concessionaire shall at the Procuring and Disposing Entity's request. providc

evidence to the Procuring and Disposing Entity shorving that suclr insurance has been

taken out and maintained.

Part2, Section 7: Conditions olContract Pagc 15 ol' l6

tr r ttlrt T\tltI tl IrItilrIt t\ \\\ Ltt l.\ L t \ \ L \ \ \

Part 4 Section 7: Conditions of Contract

12.12 Indepcndcnt contractor: the concessionaire is engaged as an Independent contractor

f,or purposes of this Agreement and shall not be considered as an employee, servant,

agentorsubcontractoroftlreMinistryofWorksandTransport'

12.13 Survival: the Concessionaire shall remain obligated to Ministry of Works and Transport

under all clauses of this Agreement that expressly or impliedly by their nature extend

beyorrd the expiration or termination of this Agreement, including but not limited to the

payment and indcrntrity provisions'

,.!

i:t

t:I

It"I

tI

E

itlE

o

Page l6 of l6Part2. Scction 7: Conditions of Contract

Irt\t.r t !\1,.t] !\f,t I t\ttt .t, l.l .lIt.il.1\t.\' I \

tI

,

-U:-*,

L

r.i

'il

Lio

tl'1F

l

i!rl

ri IU

I

,Ll

'i1

tl

ji:r'I,i- I

a

Appendix I

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

APPENDICES

Technical Specifi cation

General Specifications

Guide to the Preparation of the TechnicalProposal

{rJL

L]a

itrlli

,l--l-{--

rlIt

oI

1

II

lr

,}I

J

I

I

r tta\

tt Ittr I tIa\I t. t,l .ltr IIrl t

t\tt

\t\ \

il

:-

r! \ L I \ t I I I

t.

I

l

v

Qr

.Lr

o

;i"

-''1}

tL

t\

t,.\r.r J !lt I t\\\tillIt\\\\t\

t\

,.1 .l t. l.l J ..t t. l.l I

It

APPENDIX 1

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

FoRMOTORVEHICLEINSPECTIONPRoGRAMME

l trl,t l

o

Ii

rl

ii

{{i

Fr

Fi

d,EL

It#,t1r

{t

I

Ir IL

t_l'. l l \l,l.l I \lI tl rl\.\\L

IL

I

Appendix l:Technical Specification

1.1 PART 1: OPERATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

1.1. Notifications to Owners

l.l.l. The Concessionaire shall send notifications to owners of vehicles subject to its

technical inspection service ("o$,ner" or "otvners") to remind them of the

requirement to have their vehicle tested. This must be done in such a way that ifthey fail the initial test they rvill stil.l have sufFrcient time to return for Re-Test

before their test due date.

1.1.2. The Concessionaire shall also accept vehicles that were'not or have not yet been

notif,red for their test.

1.1.3. private vehicles may be presented at the earliest 3 months priorto theirTest Due

Date; all other vehicles may be presented up to one (l) month early.

2.1 Booking of tests

2.1.1. The Concessionaire shall operate a modern booking service.

Z.l.Z. The Concessionaire shall provide dates and times that are convenient for Owners

and remind Owners that tLe relevant registration or-licensing documents must be

brought to the Test Centre along with the vehicle'

3.1 Cancellation of tests

3. l. I . The Concessionaire shall accept cancellation of a test in advance of the confirmed

appointment date up to a limitid period of time as specified by the Ministry.

3.1.2. The Concessionaire shalt use all reasonable endeavours to avoid cancelling tests

unless otherwise compelled by circumstances outside its control'

3.1.3. Proposal should be made on how to deal with cases where a vehicle is not

preiented for its test. at the appointed time and a notice of cancellation has not

been received by the Concessionaire'

4.1 Lead-times

4.1 .l Upon request. the Concessionaire must offer Full Test appointments -within an

u*rug. of trvo u,eeks and a maximum of three weeks. Re-Tests must be offered

on urlrug. within one week of the request and a manimum of two weeks.

Appendix I : Technical Specification Page 2 of l6

\

' --- |

. -d[-I

t-IIIIIIE

o;

Ii

.;

I.l.I

IIIIII

\Irl I

\t\t.l I !. t.l.t It\ilI

\\t t.l.l .l Itt I I\\\\\\ \ \

Appendix 1: Technical S pecification

5.1 Collection of test fees

5.1.1. The Concessionaire may collect all Test Fees in advancc ol the tests or uponpresentation of the vehicle, and shall accept normally used range of paymentmechanisms implemented in the country.

6.1 Opening hours

6.1. l. Test Centres must be open for a minimum of 30 hours per rveek. ThcConcessionaire shall publish the opening hours at least on th; main receptiondoor. The Concessionaire shall not change its opening hours as publicized unlessthree weeks prior notice is given.

6.2. Conduct of tests

6.2.1. The Concessionaire shall undertake all tests in accordance with the requirementsof the Ministry.

6.2.2. AII vehicles being tested shall .only be driven through the test lanes by staffemployed by the Concessionaire.

6.3. Test results

6.3.1. Upon completion of the test, the Concessionaire shall inform each Owner of thedetailed result of the test and provide each Owner with a sequentially numberedstatement of test results. In the case of a failed test the statement oi t.tt resultsshall identiff the main faults to be rectified and detail any dangerous defects. Thetest report shall be generated automatically by the informationiystem provided bythe Concessionaire.

6.3-2. A Certificate of Roadworthiness and a Vehicle Identifier shall be issued by theConcessionaire.

6.4. Re'tests

6.4.1. The Concessionaire shall use all reasonable endeavours to undertake re-testing assoon as it is convenient for Owners.

6.5. Documentation

6.5. r The concessionaire shall design and undertake the printing of all tesrdocumentation to be used in the provision of the Testing Service. The lornrand content of the documentation shall be subject io approral by the

Appcndix I : Technical Specificarion Page 3 of l(r

tq.I, l ,l lllt rlt.l-ilI \l, lIl\lrrll\ \r

i#

Appendix 1: Technical Specification

Ministry. The Concessionaire shall bear the costs associated with the design

and printing of all test documentation.

6.6. Reporting

6.6.1. The Concessionaire shall provide the Ministry rvith accurate and usefulinformation at regular intervals and in a format to be agreed.

PART 2: TEST EQUIPMENT

7.1 Equipment

7 .l .1. The Concessionaire shall provide all Test Equipment, which should include:. roller brake tester;. decelerometer;o under body inspection equipment (lifts or pits) including jacking system;

o headlamp aim tester;o exhaust gas analyzer;o diesel smoke meter;. steering side slip plate; ando suspension and shock absorber tester.

7.1.2. All testing equipment accommodated within each Test Centre shall be accurate,

reliable, and built to good engineering standards and incorporate the most up-to-date safety features. The Concessionaire shall qnsure thqt all the Test Equipment

is available in each test lane at alltimes.

7.1.3. The Concessionaire shall ensure that all Test Equipment has a current calibrationcertificate, if appropriate, and retain such calibration certificates for each item ofTest Equipment on site at each Test Centre. The Concessionaire shall check that

all Test Equipment remains in calibration at specified intervals and will keep

records of all such calibration checks. '

7.1.4. All Test Equipment shall bc recalibrated at specified intervals by persons

accredited by the appropriate competent authority.

7.1.5. The Concessionaire shall maintain the Test Equipment in proper working order.

upgrading and replacing Test Equipment as necessary.

Appendix I : Technical Specification Page 4 of l6

JIIIIJ$IJ

ui)

LT

u'-j

tlB

\ll I l\L\

lt I t\tll I

\r't[. \ \ \ \

ilIll r t tr I IL\\I

l'\ILL \

Appendix l: Technical Specification

8.1 Automation requirements

8.1.1. The following Test Equipment shall be automated so that the test procedure and

the measurement and collection of the results are not under the corttrol of the

Vehicle Tester.

. roller brake tester,r exhaust gas analyzer,o diesel smoke opacity meter, '

o steering side slip gauge,. suspension and shock absorber tester, and

. Headlamp aim tester.

8.1.2. For each piece of Test Equipment set out above the Concessionaire shall provide

o x cofilprehensive user or operator manual. written evidence that the item of equipment has been approved to the required

specification by the competent authority;. a current calibration certificate (if appropriate); and

. a written record of safety inspections and maintenance carried out.

8.1.3. With regard to lifts and jacking beams, the Concessionaire shall provide a written

declaration from the manufacturer as to the standard and specification and shall

maintain a written record of all the safety inspections and maintenance activities

carried out.

9.1 Braking

9.1.1. Each Test Centre shall contain at least one roller brake tester, set in the floor so

that vehicles under test are

tester elsewhere within the test

9.1.2. In addition, each Test Centre shall include equipment to check the calibration ofthe brake force.measuring deviceand at least one decelerometer.

l0.l Exhaust emissions

l0.l.l. Each Test Centre shall contain at the least one exhaust gas analyzer and one diescl

smoke opacity meter.

ll.l Wheel alignment

I l.l.l. Each test lane shall contain a steering side slip plate installed level rvith the floorin a position where all wheels rvill be on the same horizontal plane when the right

hand front and rear wheels pass over the plate.

Appendix I : Technical Specif-rcation Page 5 of l6

ll I lt Iilrll. l I IIillI\\l \ t. \il!I\IL I

ix l: Technical SPecification

! \t.ftt Irr I l t\Lt!.r.LrJ .} \r.rJ !tt I)

Append

t2.1 SusPension

}2.l.l.Eachtestlaneshallcontainasuspensiontesterinstalledsothatvehiclesundertestare substantiallY level'

13.1 Untler Vehicle InsPection

l3.l.l. Each test lane shall contain either a wheel supporting lift or a pit installed so that

there is:

Appendix l: Technical SpecificationPage 6 of l6

oadequateclearanceateachendtocaterfortheoverhangofavehicle;. a clear height above any fully lowered lift platforms; and

. Adequate clearance to enabie the Vehicle Tester to view the sides of the Vehicle

;ilI" ;p"n its doors to gain access to the inside of the vehicle.

13.l.2.Eachtestlaneshallcontainanaxlejackingdevicecapableofliftingsimultaneourf,ioi-t-*h.els of tf,.-front oi rear

-axles of any relevant vehicle'

using the Vef,icte manufactur.ilt t..o'mended suspension test procedures'

equiPment and jacking Points'

l4.l lleadlamP Aim

\{\\.Erq\ \qs\ \unq s\t\ qq$\un u \u{ $\ou\te( hetilunl }i\ t"to $\Stil\e( $\

accordance with the manufacturCs specification'. The rai\s sha\\ be certified by a

competent p;;;;;t parallel to within plus or minus two millimetres of the plane

of the marked area.

14.l.2.Suitable equipment to ena.ble the headlamp aim tester to be checked for aligninent

on a regular basis shall also be provided by the Concessionaire'

l5.l Other equiPment

l5.l.l. Each Test centre shall also contain a range of other-equipment including general

illuminatio"i"r if,r ,"derside of vehicles. a log voltage portable hand lamp' a tyre

tread depth g*r., and equipment foi inflating and checking tyres pressure'

l6.l Informationrequirements

l6.l.l.The Concessionaire shall provide the following information at intervals and in a

format to be agreed:

o maintenance register for each item of Test Equipment:

o record of faults for each item of Test Equipment:

o record of calibration ,.uJingt for 'each

item of rest Equipment' if

aPProPriate;

m

tlnttrtrIqrlritt

i

ilila;

Ol

T

II:T

:il'l

,rf\'\ \ l. \ L \

o

A ix 1: Technical Specification

calibration certificates for each item of Test Equipment, if appropriate

17,l PART 3: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

18.1 Information Technology Services

l8.l.l. The Concessionaire shall provide the computer network and all of the computerequipment necessary to provide an efficient, accurate and reliable Testing Service,using the most appropriate hardware and proven software. The informationsystem provided by the Concessionaire shall be at least capable of supporting thefollowing activities.

. booking and recording of all aspects of the Service;o maintenance of an accurate and reliable record of the test status of all

vehicles; ando the provision of information to the Ministry of Works and Transport (MoWT)

and the Supervising Entity, Transport Licensing Board (TLB), Uganda Policeand Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) in order to facilitate monitoring andsupervisory responsibilities of the Ministry and linkage with otherinstitutions

l8.l.2.The information system provided by the Concessionaire may be linked to, orshould form the basis for the establishment of, a National Vehicle FileiDatabase.

18.1.3. The Concessionaire shall provide an information system that is capable ofreceiving the information from the National Vehicle File/Database. Theinformation system should also be capable of providing information to theVehicle Registration Unit on vehicles tested and their corresponding test results.

19.1 Reporting

19.l.l.The Concessionaire shall install the information system that can compile andretain booking information, registration numbers, vehicle identification numbers,odomriter reading. Own'er details. Vehicle Tester details and test information foreach and every individual test and re-test undertaken. This information shall alsobe held on the system for a period of at least twelve months and archivedthereafter for a period of not less than six years. The information system shallalso be capable of separately identifying the Vehicle Tester and the individualitems of Test Equipment used in any particular test.

19.1.2. The information system shall hold the test information in such a manner that theMinistry can obtain daily. weekly. monthly or annual reports on number of cars

Appendix I : Technical Spccification Page 7 of l(r

I l \1.[.] I \ l. I "l ll. l.l lIr I t\ t \ lt ,tl t\

tl

ecificationAp ix 1: Techn

tested,passandlailratesforinitialandre-tests,reasonsforfailure,cancellation

ical SP

-r1

n

n

1I

1

1

o1

IIII

,,1

.I"l

etc.

20.1 Sccu ritY

20.l.l.TlreConcessionaireshallinstituteappropriatephysicalandaccesssecurityforboththeinformationSystemandthe.datastoreswithinitinordertopreventr'rnautho rizea "t' "a

ifrcati on or i nterrogation'

2l,l lntegritY of data

2l.l.l.TheConcessionaireshalluseitsbestendeavourstoensurethatalldataheldontheinformation system is complete ffi;ffitt' rn" concessionaire shall be aware

that no tt'ira |arry may have access to the information system'

Hardware

.TheConcessionaireshallprovideandmaintainallcomputerhardware,including

thfi 1il1ffi]U#l**;i1flf*.m:'*m:*mruuarvequipmen'['

22.1

22J.1

23,1 Software

23.|.l.TheConcessionaireshallp.rovideandmaintainthesoftwaretofulfilthegeneralrequirementt'l"t '*"

andtinks to the Ministry'

24.1 Network sen'ices

24.|.|.TheConcessionaireshallprovideasinglepointofinterfacewiththeMinistryandshall include the necessary .on"..iioi, ,l tr''.ve{cre Registration Unit' The

Concessionaire shall "lro

pro.uffitiJi-a-"intain alt thJinterface equipment'

The concessionaire shall ensur"id#;;;[;;;tt hunt tontittency of interface'

accesstostoreddatafrom"ny..*"'r.'tationonthenetworkandaccesstoauthorized software'

25.1 Training

25.l.l.TheConcessionaireshallprovideadequat:-d.appropriatepracticaltraininginthe network #;id;y;,J, ro'

'orrnominated by the Ministry.

Page 8 of l6

Appendix l: 1'echnica I Specification

Ir I l \t.r I I \u I l \t.t .l I \l*l .l I \ Ir,ltlL I t \

Appendix 1: Technical SPecification

tE=

il,

#

H

IT

PART 4: PREMISES

26.1 Premisesrequirements

26.1.1. The concessionaire shall propose appropriate fully serviced premises from which

to deliverJhe Service and whiih may include mobile stations. The premises

shall be located in locations that satisfy the requirements of this

SPecification. :

26.l.2.The Test Centres shall be used solely for the purpose of vehicle testing and shall

not form part of any premises used for a conflicting business.

27.1 Location

27.1.1. The Concessionaire shall provide an integrated network of Test Centres

strategicallY located.

27.l.z.Sites chosen shall be able to accommodate any future expansion or contraction in

testing volumes resulting from demographic or socio-economic change.

28.1 Buildingrequirements

28.1.1. The Concessionaire shall describe the proposed network of Test Centres

(including any Mobile Test Centres) capable of testing all of the Vehicles that will

iequire teiting in any year together with all necessary ancillary accommodation.

28.1.2.The premises shall as a minimum include:

o test lane(s) capable of accommodating vehicles of up to 22 metres long and

4.8 metres in [eight; (private and/or commercial vehicles);

o a r€cePtion office;o dedicate toilet facilities for customers (one of which is suitable for disabled

persons);o adequate parking, access roads and extemal lighting; and

o other appropriate support aceommodation'

28.1.3. All pcrmanent and Mobile Test Centres shall be fully weatherproof, with concrete

or steel non-slip floors,.and have adequate, tighting and ventilation' Brake and

emission testing may be undertaken in a separate covered area.

29.1 Statutor1requirements

29.l.L The Concessionaire shall comply with the relevant statutory requirements relating

to the premises, having regard to any relevant guidance in relation to the

buildings, equipment and other site facilities'

Appendix l: Technical SPeci fication Page 9 of l6

llltt IillI I \t.t.l I \t. l.l I t\ ! \ t"l .l I

ItI

\ L \ '\

I

E

App

30.1 Planning antl statutory authority approvals and agreements

30.1.1. The Corrcessionaire shall be responsible for obtaining all planning approvals,

complying with building control regulations, copducting all local authority and

utiliiy nefotiations, seeking all approvals and making any appeals associated with

the pioject. The Concessionaire shall be responsible for all related costs, fees and

bonds.

31.1 General dimensions and features

3l.l.l. Each Test Centre shall provide sufficient parking and manoeuvring space to

accommodate and allow ihe unobstructed movement of Vehicles that have been

tested or are awaiting test.

31.1.2. Each Test Centre shall have unobstructed access from the site entrance to the car.parking facilities and Test Centre enrance. Each Test Centre shall include

effective ventilation or exhaust extraction equipment designed to connect to the

exhaust pipe of any vehicle. Adequate levels o.f illumination shall be provided

with even iight airtiiUution to allow inspection work to be carried out with ease.

3t.l.3.Each Test Centre shall have a properly equipped reception office Td.1 waiting

room and adequate seating foi all- customers. Each Test Centre shall provide

toilet facitities for customers. Separate toilet and washing facilities shall be

provided for Test Centre staff.

endix l: Technical SPec ification

32.1 ExternalinsPection

32.l.L Each Test centre shall have an unobstructed area of sufficient size to permit the

full and proper external inspection of vehicles'

33.1 Lighting and headlamp test area

j3.l.l. Each Test Centre shall provide a clearly marked area, at least 3.0 meters wide and

6.0 meters long which, .pu.t from a clearly identified strip of 0.8 meters wide

down the centrl of the aria, .has been certified by a competent person as flat and

level to within plus or minus six mitlimetres in any 3.0 meters. If a lift or pit

forms part of this area. certification shallalso be required.

34.1 Ventilation

34.1.1. The Concessionaire shall make specific provision to prevent a build up of exhaust

fumes or other noxious gases.

Appcndix I : Tcchnical Specification Page l0 of l6

L

IIlltu.rllu.rllu.ll II \\' r \tt

-\ \r \

Appendix 1: Technical Spec ification

35.1 Commissioning

35.1. t. The Concessionaire shall undertake all the technical and operational

commissioning associated With the Test Centres, and shall ensure that this is

properly and fully integrated with the design, construction and equipping ofeach Test Centre.

35.l-Z.The process of technical and operational commissioning shall ensure that the'building,

services and equipment comply with this Specification and that all

systems operate safely and satisfactorily'

PART 5: PERSONNEL

36.1 Personnelreq[irements

36.1.1. The Concessionaire shallernploy.directly all staff who cary out vehicle testing.

3G.l.z.The Concessionaire shall maintain adequate staffing levels (including adequate

cover for holiday and sickness absence), employ appropriately qualified and

experienced staff, train all staff for their particular tasks, ensure that all staff are

well superuised and ensure an appropriate level of staff continuity.

36.1.3.The Concessionaire shall ensure that all staffunderstand and comply with the

legal requirements relevant to their area of work and do not engage in or have a

material-interest in a conflicting business. In addition, the Concessionaire shall

ensure that all relevant staff has a thorough working knowledge of the Testing

Service.

36.1.4. The Concessionaire shall demonstrate to the Ministry as and when requested that

all staff are adequately trained to meet all the legislative requirements associated

with the delivery of the Testing Service.

37.1 Recruitment

32.l.l. The Concessionaire shall fill all staffvacancies including those arising during the

Term of the Concession, using oiren, transparent and fair recruitment policies.

38.1 Qualifications

38.1.1. All Vehicles Testers shall have the appropriate nationally recognized

qualifications. The Concessionaire shall provide evidence of the qualifications ofeach Vehicle Tester as and when required

Appendix I : Technical Specification

\t tJ I \[t.l I \[t.l

Page ll of l(r

tII t t, l.!.ll tl I I

Appendix 1: Technical Specification

39.1 Training

39.l.l. The concessionaire shall implement initial and continuous training for all Vehicle

Testers so as to ensure the effective operation of all Test Equipment and

information systems, the quality o f the test results and compliance with all

service standards.

39.l.Z.The Concessionaire shall assess and review the proFrciency of individual Vehicle

Testers throughout the Term of Concession.

39.1.3. The Ministry reserves the right at any time to require the Concessionaire to

provide rernedial training for any Vehicle Tester found to be deficient or todismiss that Vehicle Tester.

40.1 Information requirements

40.l.l.The Concessionaire shall provide the following information to the Ministry at

specified intervals and in a format to be agreed:

. aoy changes to the list of certified Vehicle Testers;

o the training and certification status of each Vehicle Tester, and

. any changes to the employment terms and conditions of all staff

SECTION 6: FACILITIES

4l.l Building and Services maintenance

4l.l.l. The Concessionaire shall carry out planned preventative maintenance and reactive

maintenance for all aspects of the buildings and services, including mechanical

and electrical plant, equipment and installations, and fixtures and fittings.

4l.l.z.The Concessionaire shall ensure that the work undertaken is consistent with both

Statutory requirements and the manufacturer's recommendations.

4l.l.3.The Concessionaire shall provide a structured approach for dealing with reactive

maintenance using an appropriate works information management system.

4l.l.4.The standard of maintenance shall be commensurate with established Good

lndustry Practice and in accordance with the acceptable maintenance standards.

41.1.5. The Concessionaire shall be responsible for any modifications considered

necessary or desirable to maintain the effectiveness of the services provided or

compliance with any and all relevant legislation.

Appendix I : Technical Specification Page 12 of l6

tl I\I,rlrlJ I [1_lJ \ t' lltrrllI t-\t J [.lr\ aI

Appendix l: Technical SPecification

41.1.6. The Concessionaire shall attend upon Environmental Health Officers, the Safety.

Health and Welfare Authority and any other person or body who requires or is

entitled to, access to any of the individual Test Centres. The Concessionaire shall

make and retain a formal record of any such inspections or visits'

12.1 Cleaning

42.l.L The Concessionaire shall ensure that each Test Centre is consistently maintained

to a standard of cleanliness.

4Z-1.2. The Concessionaiie shall determine the precise nature of cleaning required in

each area dependent upon the design, interior fitment and decoration of the

building.

PART 7: CUSTOMER SERVICE

43.1 General

43.1.1. The Concessionaire shall prepare and maintain a Customer Charter forihe Testing

Service.

43.1.2.The concessionaire's staff shall exhibit at all times the necessary knowledge,

skill, attitude and behaviour to satisff the requirements of the Customer Charter.

U.l Senice deliverY

44.1.1. The Concessionaire shall propose suitable procedures to deal with customers and

to train and develop staff in order to ensure the successful delivery of the Testing

Service at all times.

45.1 Help and information

45.1.1. The Concessionaire shall detail how he plans to deal with queries relating to the

Testing Service.

45.1.2. The Concessionaire shall respond to any reasonable requests for help or

information from car Owners and members of the general public regarding the

Testing Service.

46.1 Complaintsresolution

46.1.1. The Concessionaire shall detail how he plans to deal with queries relating to the

Testing Service.

Appendix I : Teclrnical Specification Page l3 ot' l6

\ uIuIlllll. I .l I \l.t.t I [. t\ \ \ ilt

Appendix l: Technical SPecification

TIrIIdttIIIt#tIlftilFl

46.l.Z.The Concessionaire shall deal with all complaints, whether received directly by it

or referred to it by the Ministry. The Concessionaire shall maintain an accurate

and up-to-date central record of all complaints received'

PART 8: IMPLEMENTATION

47,1 Implementation requirements

47.l.L l'he Concessionaire shall ensure that the Testing Service is introduced, in a fair

and equitable manner.

48.1 ImplementationPlan

4g.l.l.A final implementation plan shall be agreed withthe Ministry within fourweeks

of the u*uid, setting oui the Concessionaire's program for establishing the Test

Centres and the Service.

4g.1.2. The suggested implementation plan shall provide details of any phasing

arrangements and respective milestones (key date) to ensure that the Testing

Service is operational as early as possible'

49.1 Implementation

49.1 .1. The Concessionaire shall establish and operate a project managem€nt structure to

ensure that the Testing project proceeds in accordance with the implementation

plan.

50.1 PublicitY and enforcement

50.1.1. The Concessionaire shall propose a public awareness campaign to be

imptemented in conjunction with the Ministry of Works and Transport prior to the

commencement of the Testing Service'

50.1.2. The same Concessionaire shoutd work with the Ministry of Works and Transport

on ways and methods to improve co4pliance'

PART 9: PUBLICITY AND MARKETING

5l.l CorporateidcntitY

5l.l.l . The concessionaire shall propose a corporate identity.

52.1 Publiciq'

52.1.1. T'he Concessionaire shall publicize any changes to the Testing Service and

providc all inlormation literature

Appendix I : Technical Specification Page l4 of l6

I I [\'J t \\'l I \\tl ll\I \.\ I \. \ t\(|)

\I

-I

tilttt, )

ilr!

t'?

r?

r?

rtilUiltrUtrm$i

mtutu

H

Appendix 1: Technical SPecification

Ill

53.1 Marketing

53.1.1. The Concessionaire shall ensure that car Owners are aware of the Testing Service

and shall market and advertise the Service. The Concessionaire shall propose a

marketing programme to promote a positive image for the Testing Service'

51.1 Site information

54.1.1. The Concessionaire shall provide appropriate standards signage and within each

Test Centre.

PART 10: SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

55.1 StatutorYrequirements

55.1.1. The Testing Service shall be provided in accordance with all relevant legal and

regulaiory requirementi, whether established by statute, bye-laws.

regulations, code of Practice.

5S.l.2.The Concessionaire shdll keep itself fully informed of all proposed changes or

amendments in any legal or regulatory requirements that may impact upon

the Testing Service.

56.1 Storage and retrieval of information and documents

56.l.l.The Concessionaire shall make arangements for the use of any information

n_ecessary for the purpose of providing tre Testing Service.

56.l.Z.The Concessionaire shall at all times observe the confidentiality requirements to

the Agreement.

57,1 Co-ordination and liaison

57.l.l.The Concessionaire shall establish and maintain contact with external bodies as

approPriate.

58.1 Quality and standards

58.l.l.The Concessionaire shall have a general responsibility to provide a higlr qualitl

service to its customers and the Ministry.

Appendix l: l'echnical Specification Page 15 of l6

ttt-I,l ItIHilI tlrill IilIatII

IAppendix I : Technical Specification

59.1 Manual

59.1. I . The Concessionaire shall produce a Manual for the Testing Service rvhich

incorporates the performance standards.

59.1.2. The Concessionaire shall maintain the Manual in accordance rvith prevailinglndustry Practice and the objectives and performEnce standards established

by the Ministry.

SECTION 1I: REPORTING AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW

60.1 Reporting

60. l.l. The Concessionaire shall prepare and submit to the Ministry specified reports and

information about the performance of the Testing Service.

61.1 Monitoring

6l.l.l.The Ministry will monitor the Testing Service to ensure that it is delivering to

agreed performance standards and shall specifically be entitled to carry outplanned and random check testS on samples or Vehicles tested during the

Term of the Concession.

6l.l.2.The Ministry will have full and unrestricted access to the Concessionaire'spremises and all relevant information and documents held by or created by

the Concessionaire in delivering the Testing Service.

6l .l .3. The Ministry will make periodic inspections of the Test Centres to ensure that the

concessionaire is fulfilling its obligations under the Agreement. When

required by the Ministry, the Concessionaire (at its own expense) shall

provide an experienced and responsible employee to accompany the officers

or agents of the Ministry on any such inspections.

6l.l.4.The Ministry will also directly or otherwise undertakes regular customer

satisfaction surveys in order to determine the opinion of customers as to the

quality of the Testing Service.

6t.l.5.The Concessionaire shall comply in full with requirements for providing

information to the Ministry auditors. The Concessionaire shall also provide

unaudited and audited accounts to the Ministry. 'The Concessionaire shall

also provide unaudited management accounts for each reporting period.

62.1 Advicc and SuPPort

62.1.L't'he Concessionaire shall provide advice and support to the Ministry as and when

required on any matters relating to the Testing Service'

Appendix I : Technical Specification Page l6 of l6

I

u$rJ

rJJU

ItI

Illt t \ilt ll IilII I t-[rl t t t\utt\t \ L \

.ILI,

ilI.ilJ

Appendix 2: General Specifications

il

APPENDIX 2

GENERAL SPE CIFICATIONS

SCOPE OF THE MANDATORY MOTOR VEHICLEINSPECTION

LLI J lJtt[-tJlil.Il I tt [.t.tl t t [. t

I

Appendix 2: General S pecifications

APPENDIX 2: GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

SCOPE OF THE MANDATORY MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION

I.O TYPES OF MANDATORY INSPECTIONS AND HOW THEY SHALLAPPLY

Mandatory motor vehicle inspection will be of two categories, road worthiness andpublic service worthiness and the two shall apply as follows:

o All vehicles registered in Uganda regardless of the type or owner shall be subjectto mandatory periodic roadworthiness inspection.

o All vehicles shall be subject to mandatory road worthiness inspection beforeregistration except where exemptions apply.

o All vehicles excluding public service vehicles, private omnibuses, motor cycles,trailers and goods vehicles shall be exempted from mandatory road.worthinessinspection for four years from the date of first registration regardless of thecountry where the first registration took place.

o Goods vehicles above 3.5 tons shall be exempted from mandatory road worthinessinspection for two years from the date of first registration iegardless of thecountry where the first registration took place.

.. ' Motorcycles shall be exempted from mandatory road worthiness inspection forone year from the date of first registration regardless of the country whire the firstregistration took place.

, ft All vehicles whose registration plates have been withdrawn by the police andreturned to the licensing officer after accident or having been diemed notroadworthy shall be subject to mandatory roadworthiness inspection before theregistration plates can be returned.

All vehicles that have been modified will be subject to mandatory roadworthinessinspection before the moditication can be entered in the vehicle registration;legalising the modification and permitting the vehicte to be used in the modifiedstate. Examples of modified vehicles include goods trucks that are modified tobuses or fuel tairkers.

AII public service vehicles i.e. public buses. taxis and rental vehicles will besub.iect to mandatory public passenger service worthiness before getting thepassenger carrying licenses.

\ -t' ^..\\'i y

L\

i^tYa

o

Appendix 2: Ceneral Specifications Page 2 of 7

It.t [.l*ltII

\ \.uJ \.\r J l'.u] llttll\

--Lj'

Appendix 2: General Specifications

Number of Vehicles

Year 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007Vehicle TypeCars 65,472 75,342 85,212

lo aoA 22.74420.71453.203 57.409 6r.615Pickup and 4-wheel drives27.s68 34.151 40.734Minibuses

Buses 868 946 1.024Aeric tractors 2,717 2.989 3,261Motorcycles 108,207 136,123 164,039Others 1,876 2,028 2,1 80

380.809TOTALS 278,595 329,702

?: a All private omnibuses (i.e. private vehicles carrying more than 7 passengers

excluding the driver) will be subject to mandatory public passenger serviceworthiness before getting passenger carrying licenses.

LA VEHICLE POPULATION AI\D FREQUENCY OF INSPECTION

2.1 Vehicle Population

The estimated number of vehicles in Uganda as at 3l't December 2008 in variousclassifications as detailed in Table I below was 437,930. At an arinual growth rate

of about l5%, the vehicle population is expected to double in the next 5 years.

.4

Tablc t: Estimated Number of Vehicles on the Road as at 3l't December 2OO8:

2.2 Frequency of Inspection

A twelve monthly inspection period shall apply to the following classes ofvehicles:

l. Motorcycles2. Private cars and dual purpose vehicles3. Light goods vehicles

A six months inspection period shall apply to the following classes of vehicles:l. Medium and heavy goods vehicles,2. Tractors and heavy tractors,3. All categories of vehicles carrying passengers for hire and licensed as public

service vehicles. private omnibuses. temporary public omnibus. rentalvehicles. town taxicabs, country taxicabs and tourist agent vehiclcs.

Appendix 2: General Specitications Page 3 of7

UJ I (UJ I (t.il | [ Ul I t U,' IrJ I t

A endix 2: General S ecifications

3.0 INSPECTION POTENTIAL

Considering the expected inspection frequency for the difflerent types of vehicles and thevehicle population, the annual inspection potential by the end of the year 2007 wasestimated at 170,000 inspections for motorcycles,265,000 for Iight vehicles and 22,300for heavy vehicles. These figures do not include inspections at first registration,modification and vehicles deregistered by police when in dangerous conditions.

The inspection potential is distributed in the 5 regions given in Mapl as given in Table 2belorv. As the vehicle population increases, the inspection potential is expected to doublein the next 5 years.

Table 2: Estimated Distribution of Inspection Potential as at3l't December 2007

Region Motor Cycles Lieht Vehicles Heaw VehicleRegion I 141,667 235,081 9,557

Region 2 4,048 4,274 3,1 86

Region 3 8,095 8,548 3,1 86

Region 4 12,143 12,823 3,1 86

Region 5 4,048 4,274 3,186

170,000 265,000 22300

Mep l: Motor Vcbiclc Inspcction Regions

JIt,

\,REGION 4

\

REGION 1

5

I

\,,

(r.,\,I

\al

r REGION 3

REGION 2

Appendix 2: General Specifications

\[rl l,\t.rJ I t-t.rJ t

Page 4 of 7

I\t tf Itltltl.. l.

Appendix 2: General Specifications

II

T

llI

I

{.0 LOCATIONS OF INSPECTION STATIONS

The inspection stations shall be distributed with objectives of satislying thc irrspcction

potential and bringing services nearer to'the users. The service providers may have to get

mobile inspection facilities in addition to the fixed inspection stations. The areas ofKampala, Jinja, Mbale, Gulu, Arua, Masindi, Fortportal, Mbarara and Masaka must be

covered by the inspection programme.

A' TYPES OF TEST STATIONS

The vehicles are grouped in three inspection groups for purposes of technical inspectionprocedures. There will be three types of test stations; one type for each group of vehicles.

Each of the inspection centres will be designed and equipped to carry out all the

necessary checks for that group of vehicles. Types of stations are:

l. Motor cycle test stations for motorcycles;

2. Light Vehicle Test Stations for Cars, dual purpose vehicles, light omnibuses, lightgoods vehicles;

3. Heavy vehicle Test Stations for medium and heavy omnibuses, medium and heavygoods vehicles, tractors and heavy tractors.

5I INSPECTION EQUIPMENT

The purpose of divesting the inspection services to the private sector is to improve theservice delivery by modernising the inspection methods. Modernisation of the servicewill entail a shift from manual to semi automated or fully automated inspectionprocedures. The ministry has set up the minimum equiprnents requirements for each typeof test station as detailed below. Where practical, equipment that combines one orequipment into a single unified device is acceptable.

6.1 List of Minimum Equipment for Light and MediumVehiele lnspeetion Stations

. Brake tester (rvith print out) - suitable for both 2 wheel and 4 wheel driveo Weight inspection equipment. Sideslip tester (with print out). Speedometer testero Suspension tester (with print out). Headlight tester aimer/intensity (with print out)o Sound level testero Diesel smoke opacity tester - (rvith print out). 4 gas exhaust gas analyser - (with print out)

Page 5 ol7Appendix 2: General Specifications

tI ItlItI[t tJ l,ltLr.t I [U l I I l. IL?

Appendix 2: General S ifications

tnspection pit / ramp or hoisting equipment

Standby generator

Air compressorHydraulic trolley jack and safety stands

Convex wall mirrorsWheelchocksTyre tread gauge

Office IT equipment

6,2 List of Minimum Equipment for Heavy Vehicle

Inspection Stations

. Brake tester (with print out) - suitable for both 2 wheel and 4 wheel drive

. Weight inspection equiPmento Sideslip tester (with Print out)o Speedometer tester. Headlight tester - aimer/intensity (with print out)o Sound level testero Diesel smoke opacitY tester

o lnspection pito Standby generatoro Air compressoro Air pressure gauges ' for air break testing

. Heavy duty hydraulic trolley jack and heavy duty safety stands

o Wheel chockso Tyre tread gauge

o Office IT equipment

6.3 List of Minimum Equipment for Motor Cycle InspectionStations

. Brake inspection equipmento 4 gas exhaust gas analYser

o Speed inspection equiPment

. Headlight inspection equiPment

. Sound level tester

. Cycle hoist equipmento Tyre tread gauge

o Generator

Appendix 2: General Specifications

ll.t.Ult.l*Ulll.ulIPage 5 of7

t.ul t t.ul t

-. -,a .---:a'- --l

Appendix 2: General Specifications

6.4 List of Minimum Equipment for MobileFacilities

Electronic brake tester

Headlight tester aimer/intensity (with print out)

Sound level tester

Bottle jack

Diesel smoke opacitY tester

4 gas exhaust gas analYser

Tyre tread gauge

Portable. generator

2 sets of hydraulic trolley jdck and safety stands

Wheel chocksLaptop comPuter

PrinterPickup truckWorkshop truck or Enclosed trailer and tractor

Vchicle lnspcction

o

a

o

a

o

a

a

a

a

a

o

a

a

a

a

7 STATION PREMISES

Station premises must comply with.the minimum standards set by the ministry. The

station lround area must be- adequate for the offtces, inspections buildings, vehicle

parking, drive ways, entrances and exits.

The minimum ground areas are as follows:

c 324 M2 for Motor cycle test stations.

c 2,400 U2 1O.Z+ hectares or 0.6 acres) for Light vehicle test stations;

o 3600 Vt2 1O.lO hectares or 0.9 acres) for heavy vehicle test stations;

Appendix 2: General Specifications PageT of7

t ) r ltII tr J I l. [r, t.l Lt l I llI I I l.

t].

II

Il

al

o

ot!I

.tI

I

- -J

jj

it

I t l..Lr IIt-[.t I l.[Il,UIIll. I IIII" [[f J

Appendix 3: Guide to Prepara tion of Technical ProPosal

1

l

IL

APPENDIX 3

GUIDE TO PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

il.ilffil,pntrnrnIhJ

hH

l1

Page I of9Appendix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical Proposal

t ll I III LIf t ll t tIl,l.[t]ItUII

{i-I,

{'r

1|Appendix 3: Guide to PrePara tion of Technical Proposal

I.O TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

As part of the bid submission, the bidder is required to submit a Technical Proposal

comprising oft

Understanding and Comments on the Terms of Reflerence;

Proposal for building local capacity;

Experience and skills in Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspections for Roadworthiness;

Business Plan

lll

II

L

ii.iii.iv.

LlLI.E

tldF

Ts##

dT

il#

#

ilrt\

3.0 PRoPOSAL FOR BUILDING LOCAL CAPACITY (s MARI(S)

The bidders shall indicate in tEir proposal how they intend to build local capacity. The

bidder is specifically required t., ihot" how they will associate with Ugandan

companies/individuals for purposes of:

i.' providing the necessary land for installation of inspection equ-ipment/parking, site

offices and such other real property necessary for completion of the projgct

ii. providing local expertise'ani local manpower for the motor vehicle inspection

services (number oi local expertise and local manpower_ proposed to be engaged in

the motor vehicle inspection shall be required)

iii. Any other services inthe opinion of the bidder that can be handled by Ugandans

2.0 UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONCESSION ARRANGEMENTS (1 MARK)

The bidder must briefly demonstrate their understanding oi the proposed concession

arrangements. This should include but not be limited to purpose of the project, scope,

finanJing and responsibilities of the service provider. The-bidder is expected to comment on

the termi of reference and where necessary, comment on how the terms of reference can be

improved for the benefit of the project.

4.0 EXPERIENCE AND SKILLS OF THE BIDDER

The bidder must fill the eualification Form in Section 4 of the Bidding Forms and

demonstrate their experience and skills by:

i. Outlining thlir experience and skills in mandatory motor vehicle inspection for

ll.roadworthiness;Outtining how their experience will be adapted for the proposed motor vehicle

inspection project in Uganda; and

Ciring .*u*pl.t of m-otor vehicle inspection for roadworthiness projects that have

been implemented.

Appendix 3: Guide to PreParation o fTechnical Proposal Page 2 of9

t.ultt.ult[.rl t ( I Itt.ultl".ult

o

Append ix 3: Guide to Prepara tion of Technical Proposal

The bidder is specifically required to address issues of business ownership, business

management, staff management, operations and administration; and customer service

experience.

4.1. Management of MandatorT Motor Vehicle Inspection for Roadworthiness

4.2. Staff management of mandatorT motor vehicle inspection setryices

t.5

MarksItem Description

5i.o sati used h I I I lonveh c en t me oot rno structureI1.5Knowledge, skills and the employees in motor vehicle

tionlns

duties of

2iii and/o

ehi inspecti

rothe motd rmeti biddethe ownerf managedoThe lengthuldsho eb 0ates:d odincl lnudonclev ot (perprogram

ol ntsI int I 2- 5eabov 0and2Number of test centres and number of vehicle inspections at each test

centre per annum. (minimum 20 test centres), 20 centres (l point),lv.

above 50 centres1.5in the motor vehicle inspection programme

(direct & indirect); 250 - 300 employees (l point), above 300v

em

Number of emploYees

1.5nited States Dollar twelve million,vi Annual sales revenue: (minimum U

10Total

MarksItem Description

2in hiring/recruitment of staff (policyl0- l5 intsbeen in nt

i. Experienceace s- l0

and how long it has

1.5Staff training policy and how long it has been in place; 5 - l0 yearsilr0- r5

5Resolving disputeVacting as a mediator (policy and when it wasilt.lemented

Disciplining and/or term inating employees; (policy and how long it

has been iniv

andI.5-v. Po for motivati lo it has been in lace

8Total

Page 3 of9Appendix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical Proposal

II. l. I Itl.UItIUIl"lLllul tl'-Lll

Appendix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical Proposal

4.3. Operations and Administration of mandatory motor vehicle inspection services

4.4. Customer care in mandatorT motor vehicle inspection services

Meeting the needs of diverse customers (types and numbers of

#r'I-1-l-t-l-I

Id#{

III.I

vtdiverse customers ous

Item description Marks

Developing and/or managing operational policies, standards and

guidelines (the po licies standards and guidelines are required);2.5

lt. Managing administrative functions (experience in banking, filing,bookkeeping, inventory control, etc.) (management and accounting

systems are required);

2.5

lI Performing or managing administrative tasks (such as filing,bookkeeping, inventory management, etc.) (procedures' manual is

required); and,

2.5

iv. Managi ng data entry functions, including the training of employees

to perform this function (a minimum of 40 staff skilled and

experienced in computer keyboarding functions).

2.5

Total l0

Item Description Marks

i. Front-line experience dealing with customers in a technical

mandatory motor vehicle inspection programme (number ofemployees, places and period);

2

ii. Experience in dealing with internalcustomers (such as departments

within an organization) and external customers (such as other

businesses, suppliers, trades peoples) (numbers of intemal customers

and other customers such as suppliers);

il1. Training/education in cugt I

lv Handling customer complaints and conflict resolution (anach

nes in handl customer nts

I

v Providing customer service excellence, including specific examples

number of ficI

I

vii. Monitoring customer service levels or providing an oversight

function (frequenc y and number of customer satisfaction surveys

conducted)

2

Total 9

Appendix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical Proposal Page 4 of9

t l..U I I I t.l I I .l,U I t t.U I I l_\r I I t.u

Append ix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical ProPosal

MarksItem Description

Identifying tlre start-uP costs and operating expenses

the project for the first five Years;

l. associated with

It. nancial

identifiedvehicl inspection

of10ns theand ectschedulesfi proJappropriateProvidingre businessstsco and flectingexpenses;start-up operating

ASbusinessemotorthereal ofties ngoperatidetailed in the t'erms of reference

Ii ii. how the will be funded

5

such as:

o A letter of credit from a financial institution;o A net worth statement; oro Financial statements

lv providing documentationConfirming their financial capability and

8Total

TtE bidder shall give an elaborate business plan. The business plan will be reviewed and

scffid against thJdesired specific requirements outlined in this section. Each business plan

-:.*ill be ialuated on the bid'der's appioach to managing the project for over the term of the

5.t BUSINESS PLAN

oorfract within the agreed regulatory framework.

5-1. Financial Capability & Start-Up Costs

The applicants must demonstrate their capability to fund the initial start-up and ongoing

iwesrnent for the motor vehicle inspection project as follows:

5.2. Premises and Test EquiPment

The bidder shall submit their plan to acquire premises to satiss the motor vehicle inspection

potential as outlined in ,fr" terms of t.i.tlnJe: The premises plan and test equipment plan

must address :

Appendix 3: Gu

UI

of Technical

0.5

ide to Preparation Proposal

t I I .1.. Iil ll- l&

. MarksItem Description

nshedestablbetoonsstatitestofands locations.bernumThe typec e n,statiovehstat O[' ghttorsrefe motorcyclecontext,this type

le stationor mobie stationvehicheav0.5lt

locationsl

oentshmestablforitesSorof premlseslabiavai propriateapityThethetnstationstestthe

ill.test stationof eachand designProposed layout

ll

Page 5 of9

,:.- :lt-,

,1 |

a

IIrIrI-,q

IIr1

;I

JI:l5.3 Information TechnologY

The bidder sha, give a detailed information technorogy proposal meeting the requirements

given in the technic; ;p;;tf*;,to*. tn;:"H;;;tili;f;#it"; technologv proposal must

Ap dix 3 Guide to P tion of Technical Pro osal

management Plan including but not

address

o

5.4 Management and Staffing

The bidder shall give a comprehensive human resources

limited to the following:

of Technical ProposalPage 6 of

Appendix 3: Guide to PreParatton

*lJ t lruJ I.1.\t I t,l,l.,f I tl.l.l I t l.(f I t.l i

9

tv.ith berumnatedlmestthetoonat getherStstteheacfoacca vThe n

Y uananandnthlomadtestedbetolesehfo

2

. The type, make' brand and suppliers of each'item of the

such as:equiPmentposed testDetails o f the pro

fitechni

u pment. sed.eq ntroposed u ropop ptest pmeeachf eqoSloncatsca peclThea hrouda ghput.and vtuithe eq pmenontestonefor ftaken omeo T temeachfoSho torynaratandrd operecomancerfora The pesedent poProtest pmthe equi entutesthefouenclestionbraCaa

5

Total

Marks

Item DescriPtionI

t.betosoftwareandhardwareofand peature tyN

ll.interfaceofand typeatureN

2il1.

andto thewith regardor recoverydisasteranddatatestofthe back-uPdata,testofintegritY

I

!

iv.

andtheforarrangementsor

softwareandhardwareal

Total

Marks

Item 0.5n structure;rganisattoThe planned o

0.25ll.

testtheofeachnbetostaffofand tyPeNumber nnsvariatioandfotakcentres0.5

ul.iv.

)staff (managerskeydesioflesand profrumberN

pendix 3: Guide to PrePara tion of Technical ProPosalAp

5.5 Security and Maintenance Services

Tb bidder shall give a detailed maintenance plan proposal that must address the following:

5l Finencial Management

=,,-,.fh bi<lder shall give a financial management plan (system) addressing the following specific

-a-

IsSIE:

0.5v Detailed stafflwork schedule

0.5vi. Roles & res bi beremmstafffoes eachrns0.5

Yn.sta[f

mernber ofrecruiting eachbidder will seek whenQualifications the

0.5vlll.

vehicle testers

and training of alltment, selectionProcedure to be used for recrui

sta includin0.25

on and benefitsStaffcomx 0.5

customer serylcex-

no interruPtion tothere will beOverall plan to ensure that at all times,

4Total

MarksItem DescriPtion

IL lv{aintenance andforI

Cleaning arrangements to ensureILwith the requiredcompliance

Arrangements to ensure comPELhealth and welfareliance with safetY,

Iat theforIY. 4

?.arl

MarksItcn llescriPtions

Iol lect and handl inl- loncCash

ii- BankinI

iii. Business financialIiY. Bookkee and financial ng;

1.5ofconcession fees.Y

5.5T.trl

Pagc 7 of93: Guide to PreParatiorr of Tec hnical Proposal

rrJ I I rU I I II' tI r|' I I I,I

ffa

IAp dix 3: Guide to Prepdra tion of Technical osal

5.7 Customcr Services

The bidder shall give a custo mer care proposa I addressing the followittg:

5.8 PubticitY and Marketing

The bidder shal give a detaired pubricity and marketing proposal setting out sPecific

approach to

5.9 Reporting and Performance review

The bidder shalr give a reporting and.performance review proposar, speciffing the reports

and informu,ion tr,.'.'o;:r:il".1t;h.d;*il;i, ,ty'19 d;i"i;i' ;d ot-her stakeholders

,u.r, o, p9f i c9,. .u

s;d. " Ii;;;; j:H'",3,#l'"I?:'# rr,:Uf ;:X;;uYfr

ut"'n'

erir,"ii v The bidder may also propose

o

t l.l.lI t.l.ft l.Appendix 3: Guide to PreParation o f Technical Proposal

ul lf,UJ t*l"trt ll.l.tJPage 8 of9

I

Marks

0.5Ifem Des cription

0.5n customernff traiS a)

Providiii heers;customtormattofo1nand

lll.comcustomerofnrocesslP

4iv.

service.

maintaircustomeng goodandningforarraneneral gementsG

Total

MarkstncrlDesltemIidei.cIll

tu.testforteSi 1

4iv

awareness

udingicityofmeasureofmethodstheinclfor publ

Total

ltem

Il.

and TransPortorkswofMinistrYtoof reportsFrequencyandNature

toUofil

oF rcePoliceFandatureN I

lll.AuthoritYRevenueUto gandaof reportsard FrequencYNature

4lv

tof reo portsuencyFreqandatureNEMA

Total

Apperidix 3: Guide to Preparation of Technical Proposal

iilill

5.10 OperationalArrangements

The bidder shall make a. detailed operational arrangements proposal addressing the

following:

5.11 Implementation Action Plan

The bidder shall provide a detailed implementation proposal addressing the following:

5,12 Additional Products and/or Seryices for enhancement of Road Safety in Uganda

In this section, the bidder shall provide a detailed approach on their plans to generareadditional revenue by providing other road safety related services/products. The additionalrevenue plan should includc, but is not limited to:

llerlis

I

1

I

Item Description Marksi. Notifoing vehicle owners when their vehicle are due for test 0.5

ii. Booking anangements 0.5

iii. Test fee payment arrangements

iv. Re-test arrangements for vehlcles that fail the first test 0.5

v. Arrangements for notification of test results 0.5

vi. Operating hours 0.5

vii. Reporting-arrangements for the daily transactions 0.5

Total 4

I

I

Item Description MarksImplementation plan specifuing the project milestones and how these

milestones are to be phased for the earliest proiect completion.I I

u. All anticipated times that accompany each task (including theanticipated completion date.

I

iii. Proiectmanagementarrangements I

lv Identiffing any barriers that may affect the project implementationschedule and how they will be resolved

I

v Arrangements for publicity and marketing campaign prior to thecommencement of the testing services

I

Total 5

li Itemof ucts and/or

ll. ted volumes:revenues (including any

and.revenrrc

Miiii. Anticipated

lv Added value/benefits the MinitoTotal

hec 9s IAppendix 3: Guide to Preparation o[Technical proposal

t Itl. I !l UIIIIt ltIIlJ ll.t

I:' - ilF -r

a

:?Y

.J

i1

-'i.

tlt

tr,

I

}

t t \

.}.t.ti1

t

I

I

I

ilIII It!.ult!.t\I t f .I I I t.t.lr I I t.

rI

lf{rlTchrrra:'MIrt-fl\'ORXSf'ctcoroic: ?561l'32U979 or l20l 0l/9Trlcr: 61313 WORI(S UGA

Fu: 255{lJ20ll5E-Fhih mowldrvorks'Po'uPt ;t.orr-pood.ot' oo lhit subjccl plcrst

qtorc No: ADI't/T'!r3 lI

Minislry of \l'orks, rnd Trrnsport

P O Bor l0'ENTEBBE

Ugrnde.

TBE RETUBLIC OF I'GANDA

PP Form 209Rs3(3),Rsl(8)

Ministry of Works & Transport

CONTRACTS COMMITTEE DECISION ON A SUBMTSSION

tXcieOeaof Submissbn to Contracts Committee

is to inform You that at its 440th meeting hetd on 09u July 2010, the Contracts Committec

the recommendalion of the majority of Evaluation Cornmiuee membcni who had

in accordance with the criteria set in the bidding document' and awarded the tender

h,ovision of MandatorY Motor Vehicle Inspection Senices to M/s SOCIETEat evaluated Unit Prices for each motor

catcgory as detailed below:

Group of Motor Vehicles to be inspected Bidder's UnitPricc

-Ptu

I lttt l. l@1 J t l.l, l

Procurcrncnl

CmtrrtBrrdgdYclr

ScquorccNumba ,

Dcprrtmcnt Nr'nc- Brriy Nrrnc

09-10TransportRegulation

MOWT

DA\' OF .BEFORE ilIE TI]IS

zoo.l.{..nr...Minisrry of Works & TransPortHPDU

EI{TEBBERMATION l-i s

SUBMISSION

Vchicle

I andforthe Ten

tory Motorl.t

ined TecRe-evaluation RePortFinanciel BidsProvision of M

Services

$rbject of Procurement or Disposal

0E/07/2()10tionel Biddi

Memo from HPDU da

PP Form ISection I-cner

Title of Submission FSubmission made (

mdCommittec M09107ll0z

in.5l7l07llDae/referencc of Contracts

C.omminee

ONCONTRACTS COMMITTEE

28.0@Motor56,000VehicleCar and Dual62,000lassenscLl4ehicle of rnoie than 7 Passengers and not

\ct

tst

fit

}is+'rf .:*[-

)}

J'IJIiT

JIT

T

rL

jrIT

I

T

It

lI.[:I

Mn. J.

SECRETARY, CONTRA CTS COMMITTEEADWF93l99l0rt5t07nuo

) \

IIl.UII!.UIIl.l-l It,l .\lIt,l .[.] ItI

exceeding 20 Passenger

30,000Passenger Vehicle of more than 20 Passe4gers no.t

exceedtng 60 Passengers4

Passenger Vehiclc of more than 60 Passengers 5005

56,0006 Goods Vehiclc of less than 3.5 Tons

Ccods Vehicle of 3.5 Tons and less than lO Tons 75,0001

Goods Vehicle of more than l0 Tons 30,0008

Trailer of Two Axles 10,0009Each Extra Axlc on a Trailer 500IO

ln)luote this letter as on this suPlease authori ln future

II

.I fu'a-

1

lII

i

: lnkrt Narne of Procuring and Disposing Entity

o

Best Evaluated Bidder Notice{For Procurement and Di.sposal Notice Board)

The bidder narned below has been evaluared as tlre best evaluated bidder for rheprocurement requirernent detailed below. It is the intenti.,on of tne pr**i11g andDisposing En;itr io piace a contract with the bidder oun*u after Ten (10) working daysfrom the date for display given below.

R224(t)

or theaccordance

Nanre: Ayo

Date

2. yF9ANAUEGAL cRouP) lrol-DrNcS.A.LP.O. BOX I t3,6i(I0HAMRA, BEIRUTTEL: +9615 463363FAX: + 961 547004E-MAIL: inf@mecan io ue.com. ib

il

Pirptay of this Notice does not constitute an acceptarrce of the bid,i f".Tation of a contract. Bid accepance and contract placenrent

with the Regulations.

i Authorise.{.for display on procurement and Disposal Notice Boa

I signature:

Position: {2n9m 0I

To be copied to all bid&rs who submined bids, including the best ewluatd bidder.TIIE FOLLOWING FIRMS WERE T'NSUCCESSFTJL:

PPO/HPDU

E}WIRONMENTAL SYSTEMSPR,ODIJCTS HOLDINGS INC.7, I(RPES ROAD,EA{?CRANDBY, USAcT 06026-9720TEL: E60 3922100Fil(: E60 3922105

v'.:

I

Noticc Fonmt tsacd May 2NJ- I -ofpSc 2

I

r.Ll I l,f.U I tffir t t,) [t I r I I Ll

Procurement Reference number: MOWT/SVC n7_U8/@1t 1

Subject of Procurement: Re-eva-lu-atron Rgport for Cornbined TechnicalFinancial Bids Ior the Tender for provisionMandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection Services.

and

of

Method of Procurement: PPFORM I (Open Intemational Bidding

Name of Best Evaluated Bidder:

AVTEL:

\it)FAX

DA\

rws SOCIETE GENER,ALE DE SUR(sGS)

DEM *iirIBiTxHi TETI DrrtA,t. t)+4 (22) ,IT ()

ECLARERi.ric

4( -22)

Date for Display: 0u09nu$

Date for Removal: t5/09nu0

.tq@

flilmtril

-at

I

_ .t,:TL

.iJ\.-. - ,i1

|:lii

o

o

_t

UI I tlt l.l.lI,It tII l,l .

I ll"Lt I t,l .l.t I t 'l\

Insert Name of Procuring and Disposing Entity

3. APPLUS TECHNOLOGIESTEL : 312 661 1100

FAX: 312 661 0070

5. DALEI GROUI6ff, CHUANGXINKEJI BUILDING WEST

TIAN'AN CYBER PARKFUTIAN DISTRICTSHENZHEN, GUANGDONG PROVINCE,

5 I 8040rEL: +86 (0)755 88352233P6;53 +86 (0)755 8835 3270E-MAIL: http://www.daleigroup.com/

R224(1)

4. SYSTECH INTERNATIONALTEL: 954 913 7740FAX: 954 3412056

nrp

Ftt+&

.64twtvr- tNoticc Fonat isscd MOt 2003

- 2 -olpgc 2

I I Ul I I U II I [r II I 1.,II II U' I I t

'-t- -

,l_

-tI

,l

'l

'5rt

'io

ol

!tl.[.] I t I ttI tl l.t 1tl.ul ll.[tltl.l*'

-iI #--A-ppe-nc\\ ^- 2-

&M?L/tt*u'l E)

t)

i

- t.t'.'z:. t:lIj i-;:l ar3r,5, C: 05AZ''.'9i'Jit'1 ?i!t j't1 i r:r,: l-jJ -,12-i'?', -r.^..' J:p-:!.'..i'i c:.

7th September 2010

The Accounting Officer.i.l;nistry of Works & TransporlPlot4/6, Airport Road,P.O.Box 10,

Entebbe, Uganda

Dear Sir,

RE: P=QUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN RESPECT OF THE PROCUREMENT oF MANDAToRYVEHICt.E INSPECTION SERVICE (REF NO: MOWT/SV/07-08/C01 1 1)

Environment Systems Products Holdings lnc, U.S.A (ESP) participated in the above procurement process and hasreceived the notice of Best Evaluated Bidder indicating that the lender has been awarded to M/s Soci6t6 G6n6rale deo Sr.'rveillance SA (SGS). However, Environment Systems Products Holdings lnc, U.S.A (ESP) is ernent with

II

--1

the evaluation orocess'.reascns:

plus the award and stron gly believes that the process should be for the

1. Section 46 of the PPDA Act provides that in all Public Procurements and Disposal, theand

ng the rroneous conclu

Yours,

However, in this caseto ITB 34.3 of the solicitation document iss

was the most responsive

\1.11

\

() i :.;,) :!11 't

of such SS

ers was disregardedS

a

2. ln accordance with PPDA Regulation 190 (3) (a) and (h), the total evaluated price of each bid is key in deternniningtne most responsive bid. However, during the evaluation, this was not complied with as Unit Costs iormed thebasis for comparison.

3. Under Appendix 2, General Specification and specifically Section 2.1 Vehicle population, the statistics wereadvised to be the basis for the bidders'costing. Therefore, it was pertinent that in the evaluation criteria this has tobe considered in accordance with PPDA Regulation 131 (1) (c). ln addition to PPDA Regulation 86 (2) requires thatin all procurements, the end result shoutd be best value for money irrespective of the method of procurement used.This seems not to agree with the evaluation methodology that was used.

ln view of the above therefore and in light of Section 46 of the PPDA Act, the aEiO to Soci6t6 G6n6rale deSurvelllance SA (SGS) does riot maximize competition and achieve vatue for mdney as required under the basic publicprocurement and disposal prlnciples justifying the need for adrninistrative review to addresi the issue raised irr detailand come out with the most appropriate decision in the circumstances.,

We have attached bank draft of USh 500,000/- for administrative review fee.

Than ii,lil"'.i;T'l Oi?

V/Oir.KS {. Te.;iilSPORTII

Ii

Signed:

Name: NITIN MANAln the capacity of: DIRECTOR

e? j'Hts t: ilirl i'.\lirlj:i i,i.ii,Duly authorised to sign the bid for and on behalf of:ENVIRONMENT SYSTEMS PROOUCTS HOLD]NGSDated on 7h day of September 2O1O

Cc: Executlve Director, PPDA, Kampala, Uganda

';*4*,

'i i'J

;lI'

UItltIIu

it i.t! JD 7',.f iir i""r'*;':,

.t \i,,rii\,li\1,-' ..i ;,-:

l.Il U' II [rl I'

IIIF{iFil .,!i:

2A0

U tll

and

i r l.t Lr,\'i l-i S

I

.__-__1 r i, ,

iI

I

).-=\,

o

,iI

I

itIlt Iu.uIu,ult,.[r ltlttltl. (L\

,-\t'l\l

+F-lr\

E

Telegranr: ,MINIWORKSTelephorre: 256-42-3ZO1O1lg

::].:*, 61313 woRKs uGA:..r, .. 25642-320135

;-,:,:.,],- [email protected],In any corrqspondence onGETubiectplease quote No: FIN g3/g9/01- --e,,vvr

30'r' Septenrber 2010

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

Ministry of Works andTransport Headquarters,P O Box 10,

Entebbs.

UGANDA

Mr. Nitin ManawatDirector

-_J

Environment Systems products Holdir7 Kripes noao-,'ia".i';;"';n"fl:t" r-rordrngs lnc UsA (EsP)usA cro6o26_sz!1

Grandbv

RE; PROCUREt

e T;B?^#sliFI$iJ#,,_,; #il ":ils

pE c r o N s ERV c E

ln your. unreferenced letter of 7rh Seoevaluarion pro.".J.-"v,L:':::] j,_,-:eptember 201 o, you r

l,,,",-,tf #j_*l_H:J',eT$slki"#I;l'?H'"#i,mBff #li{trSince the Bank Orrl,.*3: dated 9rh September 2010 and o;-!:it'ffij:'rtf?foT,n,'t,rtir!-n"ur[ili"..*lnmence, ,hJ?'9nt

or the ree is a resarpre-

compraint'noin"''x1?'#:"3il:Xi;n^#[#H?:#li"J,:#5#"'V;f i":;:i'";

}iJrf.THffi H:fli:r.:::'l?,:".,,#il1,f ffi 13i:f #:Jr"r"hasbeencarriedout1. Comptaint,Tllltheinterpretatior

;i;!iiiz:;::"xf #ff",,i}il jfr,:ffi"#:,,,"?,:r:::r:,,

F n d i n s s' fll,: :!i ;l [:,,

-;,Jfl

":ff# -{: lilldi q; j,:Tff ,T jffiHl, il:correcfly applied and

+:.f,:,f#::,r,g[m":,. ;3!;,"J,"fi .ffi :t';#*:,f;the Emprov"' *6 JJ,r". tp ",.tiro"ri'ffiqj#.Hff#Th\irhe unit costs ro derive-totar .";i;';;;i,:,tn" torar costs-rJr price orcost comparison' Tne empioy-ei'i,j'n]oiinoicate

in the Bid bocumenrII3' * f; u s,i: JT: I*ffi :.ii*":m;.: : r,?",,T'

r n a n v c a s e, i f

E

rtIIU,II lr I I tfilt

, l!ll lt' i l!l i'r,trr,i..- i,:,ri.r. r:i,.

I r-l',iri, t,1il l:il;at.f(..st....

,i T, D AFFllliiVlT 0Fiti.r::lt_'l'il

S\f 0RNi DtCLr'iiiED

u.{ i

11

I

I

I

,

.H

l

e

o

,l\Iu,ulil.lltI\lllr l I l l.lJ t f r.l l t I t \

t-iE

- tt a.

t3

3 Complaint; The Vehicle populatio2 snould be the t,asil

Statistics advised .

used n rh; ;;;L;ilTlir.:,#';,H,1g,ffi filifi,+T:Jt:Findings : The Bid Solicitation Di

dar

,,:Lillirnriri*i"r#i;ill"#iiHqFi:,lffi ;,;:,;,,:#the pricing. uru uoculrlent state how it ** ,o'i" used in: Aft,o!,,t"t3:#ili Y"'nl'?n in the PricquantitLst_o_[",ii,lo;::J,];it#:.;, j.:...[T;,;J,H,,1:.,JI,,L1:

: you,u"".,*j?l: ;i,"il i[1f.r^l5 as conrirmed

,nicre numb;;;';'# fi,l,Xirtfft. rhat you did not-ffi;fiHil##fl'Hff:fiffi

PPDthe E

bid Iconsithe E

lntended : This rA;;;;-":i.{#Jil*f*L'ffi ;:ixx*i#:f 'ff;j?,a:J';[?,",Comptaintr

ftrilf^end resutt shoutd be the best vatue_fcis not;lTo'

ot Procureme:ompriant,viththis;J.:ffi ;;;'d:':iii,l#,l"JJ["'ff :U',".t",

Findings r ,Y:H"-t"::money

is a function of many factors:

tr,iil1-*-is*-*fffioffi il".ffi ,ffi: ppDA Act 2003 Section .; ""-:.",_::'"""rs

of varue-for-rpsney.

amons oth"r:,;;ffi;46 clearty impties [:l_*,g::for-money is,was achje_v* n.Ib-r, ;"r'":' ,T,$,#;jifff!!:l rr,i, t"rr'pii,",

,trH?:?H,:l3,tll::l"ils#Itr;il,"["]ffi ]l],#1#money.

' Jh?i]over' after a rigoro-u;.rr*y. set the ceirings for unit prices forp r c e s, "i,n

?' [ 3 l f T'H, I jr: r: ;f i;'J 11r ffi ',]r'

#i lfi[:l;:

tiF1r'l,i

I

II

I

I

p

4.

r

Lrl I I, tlI f f I Il t. III f .t I I I I I IIIr

-i

II

I

II

I

o

?

illl\I u.(r l u.\t l ut I .l. l| (r Itl.l.t I

I

f

i 1- *

Il

)

.noney The Bestherefore rneets

;f llalu3te'o Bidder'ts

m e r h o d "

r ; ;;,.j,1,: # ; ;;, ;

" r1:,1'::n-['J;#"

?',: j[ j,iJli

x; il:: The EvaluationceirinssJn?il?"il:Ji"r1",,Kr.lff ,J;;:[, jffi :#:#;:trp..i.u: This complaint is a nullity and merits no action.

' [:h:?,:Y::" :""TrtJd Docum e n t ( prop

os a r) rwo in adm is s ib re

*1- The lSo certifiearo rra,. _r. rr *,**#*ffiifl*##,,**i

IntendedAction

lnadmissibleCertificates inyour proposal

slo+2

On.. the above ti,v

r:,#::l',',f ;,'ffi:,1iH?;,,#,T,3,':,"1'#f,f H,x;;

oThgrg of€ renaao ^r,^_.

ml,fr:|,f*H*T**rufimother Findings : This Bicj Documenr

e informed orir',u iioingrl-- ''

*nrt#,mu#**##ffi-tr: The Bid Document araPnroved by PpDA r]1t}.:*luation me

Silnrlerr,, ,^,^'r.^ s^ ds a nationa, aD€X hnrrr,::-l"yy wer€ r€Vi

-:lr5*-'i:;U,i;,ra}{-#T##:i:'r'nr",ritroria re ;;i -.rr; il# ff,rrl]l1',r.1it,f jlii;i

jt

II I LLrI tI I,II I f t.f I I f I t , t_tI I l,fl

_.,l'

,:Ij

ilil.t

i'l:l

,icl

I

o

Iu.l.t ltl.l.l ltl.Ll lt(".(l ltl.llt.t I I I \

\

F+

20!0 :t:1, 11lH.0F H0il!:stTPnNS, 1i,56 tt 4320135 I'. (r5

Compltancr wilh tl,e lsun rnd practl*l ol the stet-o le one cf tho prc'rcqulsttos cf valuc-for-monsy ln tho BtC Soltcltotlort Docrrrnent. Thsmethodo.logy lcud: trc aood vahio{or'money aN b ln keeping with Lfro

PPOA Act 2003 crrd Regulathoe whi:h govern P(ocurement irr UgerrCa.

Your suggettlon tM{ statlrUcal data ln O'c Appendlx 2 ol h€ BId

Docurnent be uecd is enoneous end in that tt b sketchy, incomplate

and urould bo an illegalrhy to krsort ii h a msultsnt mntrast agroomont

IPPDA Regulal.ion 131 (1) ol

,Yfir are dearly belatedty complaining about the Bid Doct'ntenL TNs k unfalr, inegular anddfE v.'ror6 timc.ftr E:€ l:,rders.

You should have done sc before 23d Septernber 2009, the closing iato

Yoe'r,E: r:ilnhtmtivo RaMe w foc ls. tholollcio, notmfunda.L:!-'

Irinou'y thanh you for todgin;' a f<;rmat complein! sp,r:j{ying your concelflS .1'rC putting,c-le'fl and tfre Govcn,::,cnt tystams. This ll i: :ce<:as tt should be ir;: heallhy

:;,arent budr(es ,r in Uganda and olsetvit'.:e

Yr;'r^mU (r..**o^'.,'E iiHANEN

a

c.c.c.c.c.c.

":ic Ixecutiw Direcl<,r. i'u5li:: Pro<rtrernsntar;:'l i'tpctalgf Pubncfueets rruthorily', iiu Cirairman, Minislq' c l Vrrc: i.s and Tranrpcri C: r:trads Cornrnlttee. t,a l;ead o{ Procrrrern!,:: ;:ns Obpoed Unil llini. lry of Worlo and Transp:rt

,

tll l, ill ll I tl Ll trf I I ttfftl.f _l

1t

a

'irIijl{l

tl

li

it

nIi

-l

I

I

I

il,l

e-_!JI,1,

t

L'

,l

lt"ri,iB,

i.II)

Oi

I

itI

4.IF.rl,b

rr

H

t-rl:#,],t.ii:I*'

,]iir_i.

tl.(l lt#.1. 1 ltl.l.l ltl.(l ttl.UlrIl\I

*."r'l .l'.!.:.-.i .:..i ,

Ir-:'-'..}}-; .' ?:..

\,*'rl''ts ta

c1|.9,. rJrl I 1 ttBd, [.u Grhbr. Cl q4: "

(''20 n 8({t ]'?'2 100 f lr0 122'2101 v *u

7h Oclolx r 2010Our Ref: l; lll'/l- I )/PPDA/MoWT/O 1

I he [j.xecrrlivc l)ircclorPublic l,ru(urrlrnent and Disposalr.rf t,ublic Assels Aulltority

KAMPN LA.

{i

9

Dear Srt.

RE: /rPFt./rL AGAINST TH E ADMINISTRATIVE REVIIV/ FINDINGS lN RESI)ECT oF THE

PROCIJRt h'lE!r'T OF MAI{DAi ORY

MOWI'/S v/0i -0u/001 1 1 )

VEHICLE lN:iPECTION SERVICt:! (t?EF' NO'

M/s tn'r.tr-,or.:.t Systems prorftr.;is l.loldings lnc, Uniiec -ll:,k?:., of America (ES'f:l 1.,:'ttir:ipated 3s

a bi<jrlr:r *. lhc fr,finistr, of Works and 1'ran-sportiendr.:r t(, llrr,:ure Mandatory Vt.'i:c:c i,spection

Seruicc.s i,,u'e llre Captioned tetrcjt:r rcferenCe.

Follorvirrr; il':e retease Of the Bcsi f:valuated Bidder Nolic't'' l:ljl'' chose to apply 1c;'ainrinistrative

revi(,rv r..r lh,:' frocwing Enlity, lr:,ving not been satislit:tj rvil!r lhe process' Co;'r' ol the lctter

datctt 7;s,'2010 hereto attachecf f or rcady reference'

On lr1:,.'..1()1(1, ESP receiverJ lrY {ax a letler cl;"tr': 3C/9/2010 (Ref' lllj"33/g$/01) that

conrriui:illr,rl rhe Administraiivt: ;(.view findings. Copy ttl thc letter hereto ettiche(l lor ready

referc trr c .

upon digestrrrg the findings, t.lit,is not satisned and ?rgr(:eabte to the finciirrgs orving to the

follorvir',gixrn siderations that we re not addressed :

?). '[]rc t)rocuring Entity alleged lhat ITB 3/r (3] (g) wa:; construed ou-t.of contexl by ESP ln the

I requesl krr fh€ review. This isserrion is contdfabie givert that, 5'62 (2) (a) of the PPDA Act

provrdes that alt solicitation cocuments aie supposed to ctelail the terms and co:rditions that apply

to a resrriling conrracl. The loregoing provision. whcrr rea(l in landem wilh s'60 ol the PPDA Act'

Reg190(3)(h)andReguJation2S5(2)(d),it-beconresvcryclearthatESfrrightlyconstruedtheprovisiort in view o[ the procutement;

b). tn the tindings by the f)rocuring Entity, ir was indicerted under compliarrt 3 that the Bid

Soticitation Document did nor any rvhere iat" mot thc statistical data provided in Appendix 2

Sectiorr 2.1 was to be the basis for pricing. This assertron by the Procuring.Entity @ntravenes

Regutation 28S (i) and (2) and 134 tZt wn'ictr was intendcrt to prornote tair and open competition;

.ri

,iiii i\ iiii i;': i:i:ti i' li r,;,ni-') """I Aii I,D ifr-li.\'; i't 0i

0Ri{, I]ECi AR.ED

r) AY

iirirri'i-ii)

'r'uto;'i1t;i'

C

t,llssl

II I II I; rll lrf lItI l t;I t

'; ti FGlr

t-J ll

i I is.,

ri.- ,a

1f,rl,

Ir-T

1f

:-)I

i

B

ot

Ii_

I

I

l

t

I

ti,

-.1

I

IL

01

rL,i

u ltil.

b

r

)

F

I

iI

I

i

;i,t,-J

I

tltf,(! ltfu(l lttt IItI ll

to"

tI

{I

(\

I

& ia'i.-')j.'i't'il.Ei1.

r{3..[ni;

,,-1.1: riiii. tirili r lloi.d. f.i &r.tbr. CI tlioi'o 9i2C t' 8rn l92.rlm t t@f,9?.?105 s'r c'rt (tl l,rj,l7n

c). The recluired degree ol lransparcncy i;nd lairness as e:reclerl of public procuterlrctlls I'l)pear

lo have b<:r:n funrlarnenlalty wantino in tlre case of this public ptcrcuICrTlefll. Tlre rci:son trrr vrtrit:lt

being thal, ESP, discovered froln lhe ['locurement File sht- was i:vailed when shc ruqrrr slcd lor

the detailecJ Evaluation Reprcrl lollovring lhe Besl Evalualed llidder Nolice, lltal, rlrtr: ol llteBidders, SGS had in fact requested for an Administrativc fleview as eatly as 2(i/01/21)iU tvell

bcfore the Bcst Evaluated Eliddcr"Noticr: could be releascd.

..Mosl surpri:;ing, is thal in llre l:inrJirrgs ol lhe Procuretneril Hrrlily. ttre issues raisuiJ l,y SGS irtJanuary 20iO ippeared promincnlly alrd lhe Procuremunt [:rttrty seem to have dtawtt cr,rttclttsiotts

fronr tlrc J;;nuary leview proces!: t'lo nraltr:r the illcgality thrr process was laitrle<l wiilr: sitrr:e lhero

was no rvay SGS could havo r.rbtairied tlre detailed irrforntaii<ln about the EPS birl r'.'itlroui intctnal

collusicrrr rvitlrirt tlte Proculirtg [jtititr':

d). On lir+ issue of lhe ISO (icr:riic;rle expiry (or [-.Sl' rUS/r), .lhe observatiorts rnade by lhe

Ptocuringr [:nlrlv in the findings a (. vcty conlradiclo,y lc :l'ose of the Technical !:r';:lit;liion lhal

rightly pa...sc<l ISP at the prr,lirr:' ::!] r:v2lr"1ion stage. 'l!,e rt ason for lhis is lli';:. i: v.'as ESP

llndia) llTherefor

ri I acirrally had the r.[ /'.ltorney in resPecl o'l,te b rd who had a velid .Ii0 t trlificale.(USA) ISC cefii',tcate could nevci l,;ri,.] l>een ther:, ilre validity or invalrdriv re

basis <lf llre trid cvaluation proces:".

e). Thr.: f:rocurement Entity allcS:r s. rri lhe Findings ltta: tiSF' availed an expiret: cr:'di]rc:lte from!the Sta:,. of Ohio with the vir:v; lt; ftoving experience. in this Iegard, whercas' i'.SP did avail

experiel:r:e certificales to suppo:i lrer bid. none was lron, llte State of Ohio. All r"'clc'vulitj and il

shoulcj l:'. v.'hy ESP's bid should lu,r'e been found respons'ri'e.

The purl'r,se of this @mmunic;rii :;' ilrerefore, is lo seek -vr:itl indulgence ilt revic:r" 'r i: I ,Q proc€ss

as e,irpo."cred by pDDA Act niil. ilre view.to enabling lhc prevatence of conlpctiti(;r. lr:.C value for

rnoney as required by S. 46 of ilrr: I)POA Act.

Thankirrg you.

Sincerely Yours,-)

Signerl

llame: NITIN MANffi" \\r lo(\

ln the capacity of: DIRECTOR

Duly aultrorised to sign the trid for and on behalf of:

ENVIIIONMENT SYSTEMS I'IIODUCTS HOLDINGS INC.U.S.A

Dated on 7h day ol October 2010

I I I I.t r ; I |,t.r I t f,(.t I t Lf ltt t ll# t

a

I

t:t'

rit

at

a

-t

il'i,

rIh

\rtt.

-l:

lrI

I

l

o

irl:I

i'-ti

I,I

I

I

il*ltitr

tl t f ,t.l $ t f ,l"l I t t,l..f I t (,f,.1 I t I,l..l, {It

i

.,t-

fifr

fr

flfir5firIif,Ii[!lilitl

ti

Ir

I,; ?1,;"tj.:,:T:I I: t'a n d D i s p o s al of p u b I i c A s s e rs A u t h o r i r y

'",' . l', Ii f ii :'iJ,",fif :l f,: fA, L";.,,'*,J

a m p a, a . U s a n o a

Our Ref:,,.

Your Ref:,.

....PPDA/M.t7.t}oo

4'h November 2010

i. M/s Dalei Group;

ii. ' M/s Applus Technologies Inc;

MAC/en

Tlre Accounting Offi cer,Ministry of Works & TransportP. O. Box I0,ENTEBBE

RE: REQUEST FOR O'N,,Ni.,*OUVE REVPY IN RESPECT TO THEiIfl i"11'ffi3#"ds$ ;is**3i*I, uixi,aiffi , M oroRReference is made to lvus Environment sy-stems products H:lg,lq, Inc,s Appricarion forfnd;:ri'istrative

Revie* ,"lil erni"*;;;J';t'il; er z,t.in ,..p..i,ro rh. above'in

accordance wi1,+",*vrilaTi1'i:liJ!lr{!it:i:*.fjrt:*ffi.,,;ifiti,,".[;,#:I*f.:Til:i"l,Tffit'r:.ffi H:ild:'t't#aarilH;;lo",i,.Review

In consideration of the grounds raised i1 lhe Appricatioa an-d in right of the facts

estabrished in the course of the rerriew _of

the .ui", ,r"a'r, th, goaia reJected IWsxlHffi:i i#:T:r:?*;;,'."*'i:ilfi [::'*;n::,,L rr, ",".,oi! io,,r,. d ec i s i o n

Ho*r"' due ro the unethicar conduct 1r:11.o.,Lthis procurement process by the Entity

and the bidders' the.Entityr. ai...iJ 1o

c11ce! ,r,"prl.urrm.ent pioc"., *d re-tender;,::: rhe restrictea internltil";i;ddrng with ,n. [riffig six (6) firms thar submitted

Tilt:; I.! Ii;i. ij\liiii.j ii l i-:;r i. i)FHiiir_ ti 't'i ;

BEIr)RE i\i .q TliiS

ii.: i i'1 AFFIii,t,'.,:T ()i.!ii 0R:rlLr;:a, ,\:::

OFzoo.ff..;t

)R o,1'r iis

Ltl t l,trl ).t. llI

ii\iti.)

Tl', lJ t

go.ug

Page I of2, U,4.

,)

t--rli! t

r i\

\f ' .

iii. ftfl, Sh.te &nerale de Surveillance, S'A (SGS);

iv. M/s SYstech Internationai;

v. M/s Mecanique - Fal Group Holdings; and

vi. M/s Environmental System Products Holdings Inc (ESP)

A IE

cc

D CTOR

chairman, contracts committee, Ministry of works and Transport

Head, Procurement and Disposal unit, Ministry of works and Transport

.II

Oi

1llr

MAC/en Page2 of2

I I f,t r l l l,l.t I l l,l l f il,(l l l {,lf l l I

I'iiI

I

-li

I

::

REPORT ON THE APPT,ICATION FOR ADMITVISTRATIVEREYIEW IN RESPECT TO TITE TENDER F'OR THE PROVISIONi-V OF'MANDATORY MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION BY

MINISTRY OF WORI.S AND TRANSPORT

REF: MOWT/S y Ct07 _08/001 I I

ENTITY: MIIVSTRY OF WORKS AI\ID TRANSPORT

LICANT: M/S ENVIRONMBNTAL SYSTEMS PRODUCTSHOLDINGS INC

NOVEMBER 2OIO

Pagc I of29

I l,ttI t Lt.I| | f,t.tI I l.t.tI I '.tt,

I l,t I

I

I'#-.

rrlI APP

i--J: ; #ti:'

tttiI

Pubric procurement and Disposar of pubric Assets AuthorityPlol 37 Nakasero Roa!,_!a!as"ro To*"r, S*LiooL!!..Box 3925, Xrrprr", Ugandarer: +256 (0414) 3ttoo Fix: +zso (o4i;i.3dig.

llI

rl

,Ii-l

r)tlii

t

Our Ref:,

Your Ref:

" "P?D;di./Mt7.ttoo

4'h November 2010

RE:.

E UTIVE DIRECTOR

T

'rIT

T

T

IIIIIIr

cc:cccc:

MACien

The Director,M/s Environment Systems products Holdings Inc,]_{ripes Road, Easi GrandbyusA cT06026-9720 o'

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATTVE REVIEW IN RESPECT TO THEPROCUREMENT FOR PNOUSTOX OF N,TAXOAIORY DIOTORVEHICLE INSPECTION SERVIiES.

Reference is made^to^Y.our lws Application for Administrative Review to the Authoritydated 7th October 2010 in *qp;i;il, above tender.

[t!Tf T:i#Lig:i,,;;i.],.,:"$#hfr.u.3;ill;j,BT''[f ,;i jl:Application for Adnrinistrative Review and madc thc dirowing decision;

In consideration of the gr:yd, raiscd -T th: Apprication and in right of the factsestablished in the course of the review of the .uorliriJ.r, the Authority reJected yourApplication' The reasons for the decision,r".ont"io.a-in ttre report it.tl, aftached o

Accounting Officer, Ministry of Works and Transportchairman. contracts commlttcc, Ministry of wo*s and TransportHead, Procuremcnr urd Disposaiunir, Ministry oiwoit, ina r*,rpon

lUebsite

r+ [,[rl t [,l.rTT I t (,r..r ilI

Pagc I of I

\ \

I

Cnoruyrus

U

A

N

- Application for Administrative Rcview- Accounting Officer- Adlninistrative Review TeamNotice of Best Evatuated gidi., Notice- Contracts Comrnittee- Chief Mechanical Engineer.- Evaluation Committel- Environmental Systems products Holdings Inc- Head procurement and Disposal Unit- Inspector of Vehicles r ---

- yinistry of Works and Transport- lrgcuring and Disposi"g Entiiu- principal InternalAuditlr

----r

: il1[,H::::fffflffiTosarorpubricAssersAuthoritv- Societe GeneralJde Surveillance

E

I

'for 'ldninistrotit'e Reviat' h.r'Mr's Environmenrat sysrems products H"lgirr: rnc in respect to the Tenderforthc provision of Mandwo4,Llotor ri;i;;;;;;;;;-#;; wiks antt rt:;;;;;;;

Page 2 of29

tl t f ,,l ll (,{_tll l,t*tll f ,t-tll [,tt,l,I

r1rt i

liE OF CONTENTS

Prge

ONYMS 2

O BACKGROUN'D 5

LEGAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE l3

METHODOLOGY .... l3

GROLINDS RAISED BY THE APPLICANT. t4

4.I GROLINDS RAISED BY THE COMPLATNANT AT ACCOUNTING OFFICER LEVEL.... 14

4.2 GROLTNDS RAISED BY THE COMPLAINANT AT PPDA LEVEL.... ..........,...... I5

RESPONSE BY THE ACCOUNTING OFFICER ON THE GROUNDS RAISED.................. I5

4.4 DECISION OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICER t7

FIhIDINGS BY PPDA ON THE CROI.'NDS RAISED BY THE APPLICANT........................... I8

t DECTSTON OF rHE AUrHoRrrY........... ............. 28

fTITIEXES:

-l

ij

,t_1.

I

)jIrlt

t'

\I

I

t.

I

I

I

F

Or-')

I_)

T

fo" Application for Administrative Review by N,I/s SGS to the Accounting Oflicer, MOWTdated 26th January 2010.

Best Evaluated Bidder Notice dated 2nd September 2010.

Application for Adrninistrative Review by M/s.Environmental Systems Products HoldingsInc to the Accounting Officer, MOWT dated 7tn September 2010.

Decision of the Accounting Oflicer, MOWT dated 306 September 2010.

Application for Administrative Review by M/s Environmental Sptems Products HoldingsInc to the Authority dated 7th October 2OlO.

aaer 3:

ISO 9001:2000 Certificates issued by lvl/s DET NORSKE VERITAS to ESP and letter ofrecommendation from IWs TCL Certifications India.

Email from lWs ABS Quality Evaluations conlirming the ISO 9001:2000 Certificate ofscs.

lor Administrative Rcvieu,D.y Mis Environmental Sptcms Producls Holdings lnc in rcspect to thc Tenderfor

the provision of l,landototl, Motor l'ehicle lnspeclion by Ministq, of llorts and Tronsporl

Page 3 of29

rl

lll [.r llI l,t llt,l.l ll [,(llt I illt

I

\

.1'€.q

8: ESP's Rcference Letters from the State of Ohio

TrIII

'for ltlminislrativc Refiew h.t'M/s Environment8t systcms Producrs Hotdings lnc in respecr to ,he Tenderlorlhe proviion of Mondatory Motor l/ahicla lnspection b1., Mini.rt4, ol Hro*s and Tro'nsport

Page 4 of29

t_f_llt [,(rlt [,l.tll t,(tll [,\f l I t,t.

=

l.l

I.O BACKGROUND:

i. Cooper Motors Corporation (U) Ltd

ii. Fontana Auto parts (U) Ltd

iii. Agricommodities and Financ eFZE

ir,. Motor Center EIA Ltd

!n 7'h.February 2008, Minisrry of works and Transport (Mowr) Ieq!,qsted for .'lExpressions of Interest (Eol) for:Pre-qualificdrion of M;bavJi.L irJr..,io,, scn,ice iProviders in the Nerv Visiort and Monltor tt.*rfrp-.rr.-ir," deadlinc for submission of ..------.t

on l8'h March 2008, Mowr issued an addendum to all bidders in thc Monitor Newspaperantl the deadline for submission of bids was extended ,o i;j nprir 200g.

on 4'h April 2008, bid opening was held lor the above tender and the lollowing l7 firmssubmitted their bids:

I

.1

-tl

lI

I

,l

"l

o

1.2

1.3

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

ix.

x.

xi.

xii.

xiii.

xiv.

xv.

xvi.

Bisons consult lntemationar Ltd & Apptus Technicar Inc. & MGS Int. LimitedBIM Auto Engineering Works

Serefaco Consultants Ltd

Farm Engineering Industries Ltd

Green Boat Motor Vehicle Inspection Ltd

Coin Limited & Dalei Group

Tata (U) Limited

Multiplex Limited

Spcar Motors limited & Victoria Motors Ltd

Mamba BYGG Technical services (u) Ltd & Scandinavian Test Lines

Walusimbi's Garage Ltd

City Oil (U) Ltd

Pagc 5 of29

i,i.

,1

,l

o

lor Administra'it'c rtt't'it'tt'6.t'M/s Environmental systems Products Hotdings lnc in resytect rc rhe Tender/orthe provision of Mantlatoq' Molor Yehictc lnspection b1, lvlinistn, o! wirks apd Transporl I

r

It l,t.,rlI t,il It l_,I I l*t ltl.,\t ltl_

-,1a

(rt \r

1.4

1.5

t.6

' xvii. Societe Cenerale de Surveillance, S.A

on l8'h April 2008, M/s Great Pools E.A-Linrited.on behalf of Mis workshopElectronics, SA communicatcd to PPDA requesting for its intervention since tSey hadsubmitted an electronic mail as per thc Staniara niiaing Docunrenr but it had not bcenreceived by II{OWT.

on I2trtJune 2008, the Contracts Committee approved the evaluation rcport.

on 25'r' June 20081yoyT displayed the Best Evaluated Bidcler Norice with a ren.tt)valdate of 9'h July 2008. The foliowing firrns naa u..,i-pre-qualificd an6 were to submitbids:

lv

Fontana Auto Parts (U) Ltd

Bisons consult lnrernational Ltd & Applus Technical Inc. & MGS Int. LimitedBIIvI Auto Engineering Works

Green Boat Motor Vehicle Inspection Ltd

Coin Limited & Dalei Group

Multiplex Limited

Spear Motors limited & Victoria Motors Ltd

Societe Generale de Surveillance, S.A

Page 6 of 29

v

t.7

1,8

1.9

l. t0

tllt

vl.

vii.

viii.

9n l9'n september 2008, PPDA commuricated to Mowr advising the Entity to evaluatethe electronic bid since this mode of submission was indicated in- the it"na.ra BiddingDocument. Mowr responded to ppDA's letter on +,h pecemuer 2010.

The bid for M/s Workshop Electronics, SA was evaluated on 30rh October 200g and foundto be non-responsive. The Contracts Committee considered the evaluation irporl;i!,;November 2008.

on l0th November 2008, a capability statement on the eight firms was submitted to theContracts Committee where it was risolvcd that two firms, Coin Limited & Dalei Groupand Bisons Consult Intemational Ltd & Applus Technical Inc. & MGS Int. Limited beremoved from the pre-qualification tist since they had submitted bid securities fromlnsurance companies and not frnancial institutions.

on.l6th January 2009, the Contracts Committee in its 374th meeting approved cancellationof the above procurement proccss duc to the following reasons:

.for Adminisn'afive Ret'ieltr'tt'M/s Environmentat systems Products Hotdings lnc in respect to the Tenderlorthc provisiou of llonduton' Motor ltehicle lrcpection ht, Minisnl,o[ llorks and Transport

l- I , I l.l* I , I II I | ,t I ' I I trt Itt

.:-, F-.-:----rl E -'

(i) Use of thc wrong procuremenl. nrethod namely p?c-qualification/short listing ofproviders i.stcad of open/restricted intemation.iuiaa in g; on.t(ii) Lack of proof of access to credit by some o[trre prequarified firms.

PPDA and the Solicitor Gcneral approved the drafi standard Bidding Documenr on g,hApril 2009 and 2l't May 2009 respe'ciiu.f y.

on 24'h luly 2009, a new procurement process for the tender t-or provision of nrotorvehicle inspection services *.t udu.rtlr.a in tr,. pr"rlto,l'N*rpop. r, il,h .uly 2oo9in rheNew vision Newsoaper and East African Busin.r, W..t , 27rn July_ 2.d August 2009, Thebid security required wrs -ui$-

jid^ooo .rd ; ;.rrbil.n., security of r0% of rheestimated annual tumover of US$ 1.25 million.

Solicitatiorr documents wcre issued to the forowing 34 firms:

;j

Irl,.1

l. t r

t.t2

Lt3

t

t1

-l

I)

Procurement African Supplies Sysrem Limited (PASS)

for 'ldminisn'olit'e Ru'ittvDv M/s Environmental systems products Holdings lnc in respect o the Tenderforthe provision o! firuwlatort rvrotor ychicre rnspection b), Mir;r;;,r-;i worr,s antr Transport

Bisons Consult Ltd

Techno Brain (U) Lrd

Societe Generate de Surveillance, S.A

Multiplex Limited

Green Boat Motor Vehicle Inspection Limited

Global Testing Solution Limited

Vehicle Inspection Services (U) Limited

Fontana Autoparts (U) Ltd

Worldwide Environmental product (\[Ep)

Automobile Association of Uganda

Lindab Sverigi AB

Mecanique - Fal Group Holdings

Coin Limited

Achelis (U) Ltd

Bureau Vertas Limited

PageT of29

I.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

ix.

x.

xi.

xii.'

xiii.

xiv.

xv.

xvi.

Tot:

l,-

t..

I

t

:

.J

i

ilrl t l_,\r II I t t. (t l t l. u I I l,ltl I t l-,t \

3

T

xvlt.

xviii.

xix.

xx.

xxi.

xx ii.

xxiii.

xxiv.

xxv.

xxvi.

xxvii.

xxviii.

xxix.

xxx.

xxxi.

xxxii.

xxxiii.

xxxiv.

Japan Export Vehicle Inspection Center Co. Lintited

Bureau Veritas Bivac BV

CAN International

Thc Cooper Motor Corporation (U) Ltd

Spear Motors Ltd

Dott Services Ltd

Sinshty Consulting Ltd

Auto Securite

IT

Health and Safety Agency

Tasjeel

Applus Technologies lnc

STA Inspection PT Ltd

Systech International

Victoria Motors

Parkinson Clarke Middle East

Environmental System products Holdings Inc (ESp)

Dalei Group

L14

t.t5

l. t6

on 2g.t August 2oog,a pre-bid meeting was hetd and pre-bid minutes issued to all bidderson 25th August 2OOg.

on l8ft September 2oog, PPDA communicated to MOWT advising the Entity ofcomplaints from local

^u]$agrs against the above procurement process and invited the

Entity for a meeting on 23d september 2009 to discuss the matter.

pn 23d September 2OOg, PPDA hetd a meeting with MOWT and in a tetter, advised theEntity to proceed with the bid reccipt and opening which was scheduted for thc same day,23d September 2009.

for Adninistrolive Review 6.t'M/s Environmentatsystcms Products Hotdings lnc in respecr o the Tenderforthe pro$sion qf Mandnton' Motor Vehicle lnspection by Ministry of lllorks anil Tranrport

Page 8 of 29

f ,[ rtt l ttIII (III l,(tIt |,LtIt filil

l.JI

iI

1,tl'17 Bid opening was held on 23'd Septenrber 2009 at ll:20 a.m and the foltorving firmssubmitted thcir bids:

i. Dalei Group

ii. Applus Technotogies Inc

iii. Societe Gencrale de Surveillance, S.A (SGS)

iv. Systech Intemational

v. Mecanique - Fal Group Hotdings

vi. Environmentar System products Hordings Inc (ESp)

l'18 on l4'h october 2009 in its 407'h Contracts committee meeting, the following EvaluationCommittee members were approved:

I

CMErovPI,ASIS

TSO

9n ?6tn January 2010, SGS submitted an Application for Administrativc Review (AAR) to

the Accounting officer,-Sowr alleging biiach of the ppDA Act Sections 45, 49,52 and72 udRegulation s Bl, ll2, 177 and l g5-. (Annex l) .

on a.s February 20-19: MglvT requested bidders to extend rheir bid validity and bidsecurity periods for 100 working days which was done by all bidders.

I l9t February 2010, PPDA advised MOWT to disregard the Application forAdministrative Review by'SGS sincc it was legally flawed bJause tt e

"o'mft.inant hadillegally accessed information during the evaluartion process contrary to Section 47 of the

PPDA Act. PPDA advised the Entityto proceed wittrihe procurcment process.

On l2th March 2olo, in its 423'd Contracts Committee mceting, thc Technical Evaluationreport was approved and it was resolved that the financial bids for the following twobidders who passed the technicar cvaluation stagc should bc opened:

dl.

ll.iii.iv.v.

Eng. Okurut G.WMr. Ronald AmanyireMr. Ambrose AsiimweMr. Isaac OkokMr. Edward Kizito

LI

a,

l. t9

r.20

1. l.2l

t.22

I

)

i. ESP -92.67%ii. scs - 86.290/o

for Administrotive Review D.r'M/s Environmental Sptems Products Holdings lnc in respcct n rhe Tcnd*/orthe provision o.f Mandaton' Motor l/ehicle lnspcrtion b1, Minisrq, of lltorks and Transport

Page 9 of29

I

)

[,(tllt lr tLI t [,

I

l

i

l

tlt[,(tltf,t.fttt,

,:J I

L(

ht.23 on 29th March 20l0' the financial bid opening forthe two firms was held. The followingunit prices inclusi,e of dir'ect costs, irnancial iosts, overheads. profit and conccssion fecswcre quoted by the rwo bidders:l_

fI

(.

I

I

J'

t.26

t.27

t'24 ,?:r::11?nlzoto,financial

evaluation was conctuded and sGs scored go.4o%and ESp

l'25 on 26th April20l0, the Head, Procurement and Disposar unit (HPDU) subrnitted a reportto the contracts committee disagreeing with thr'rrrormendations of the Evaluationcommittee citing tack cif value for money uy ttre recommended Best Evaluated Bidder.on 5th May 2010' the contracts committee rejected the HDpu,s disagreement report.on 5th May 2010' HPDU communicated to PPDA'and requested for guidance oh theinterpretation of the evatuation methodorogy ana criteria.- '

lor ltluinistrati'e Revietv kt'Mls Environmentat Systems products Hotdings rnc in respe* o the Tenderlorthe provision of Mandaro4, Motor l/ehiclc lnspection h), Ministn, o/ llrorks anr! Transporr

Pagc l0 of29

ttl I f,ttl I l,tl, I l,[tl I l,ft, I I Irl

NO.

L

VehicleMotorType

MOWTCeiling

25 200=

ESP'sPrice

29,000=

SGS'sPrice iff

2 800

ESP'sPrice D

SGS'sPricc Diff

2 Car and dualvehicle

56,000= 50,400= 56,000= 5,6000

0J ssenger of more

than 7 passengersand not excecding20

Pa 62,000= 55,90Q= 62,000= 6,200 0

4. ssenger vehicleof more than 20passengers notexcecding 60

Pa 75,000= 67,5Q0= 30,000= 7,500 45,000

5 Passenger vehicleof more than 60

84,000= 75,600= 500= 8,400 83,500

6. Goods vehicle ofless than 3 5 tons

56,000= 50,400= 56,000= 5,600 07 Good vehicle of 3.5

tons and less thanl0 tons

75,000= 67,500= 75,000= 7,500

8.

0

9.

more than I 0 tonsTrai Ier 2of axles I

8,400 54,000

1,000 9,5009,000= 500=

Each extra axle on

stM OF PRICE

10. 10,00Q=a trailer

56,000 212,000

I

'i::l,

1.28 On lgth May 2010, PPDA revicwed the bidding document, noted the evaluarionmethodology and criteria and advised MOWT that since the Entity's Contracts Committcchad thc mandatc to award contracts, they should therelore take the final dccision on thenrattcr.

l-29 On 26'h May 2010, MOWT requested bidders to extend theirbid validityand bid securitypcriods for 90 u,orking days, which was donc by all biddcrS.

1.30 In its 433'd Contracts Committee meeting held on 28'h May 2010, a re-evaluation of thebids was recommended using the same Evaluation Committee. The second evaluationreport also recommended SGS as the best evaluated bidder in the above procurement.

l.3l On 2nd June 2010, M/s Applus Technotogies Inc communicated to MOWT rvithdrawingtheir participation in the above procurement process.

L.32 On I'r July 2010, the second re-evaluation report was concluded recommending M/s SGShowever, two members of the Evaluation Committee dissented with the majority andrecommended ESP citing issues of value for money.

1.33 On Sth July 2010, the HPDU again submitted a report to the Contracts Committeedisagreeing with the recommendation of the majority of the Evaluation Committee.

1.34 On 96 July 2010, the Contracts Committee approved the recommendation of the majorityto award the tender for the provision of thc motor vehicle inspection services to tWs SGS.

1.35 On 20th July 2010, the HPDU submitted a memo to the Ag. Permanent Secretary, MOWTdisagreeing with the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee.

1.36 On 30th July 2010, the Ag. Permanent Secretary, MOWT communicated to thc HDPUadvisipg the Contracts Comminee to proceed as per PPDA's advice in a letter date.d t9ftMay 2010.

1.37 On 3d August 2OlO, HPDU communicated to PPDA about the disagrcernent with theContracts Committee and Ag. Permanent Secretary on thc r@orlmendation of theEvaluation Committee.

1.38 On 25th August 2010, PPDA communicated to MOWT advising the Entity that it stillstood by its earlier decision for the Contracls Committee to make thc final decision on thematter.

1.39 On 2nd September2010, a Best Evaluated BidderNotice (BEBN) was issuedwith [,I/sSGS as the Best Evaluated Bidder with a rcmoval date of l5th Scptcmbcr 2010. (Anncx 2)

for Admfuistrotivc 8o'ierr Dl ltUs EnvironmentalSystcms Products Holdings lnc in respect to the Tenderlorlhc provision ol Mondaton Motor l'chicle lnspection h, Minisny of Works and Tronsporl

Pagc ll of29

,t4i''-c

;,ltl'rL*!

.-l/lIJ

Iri,i ,

t

ri

I

i;

Ilo

o

f ttIrll (tl I f.,\ll t 1.,\ll It.tll II L.

l'53 on 2"d No'ember 2010, thc HPDU submitted a report to the Accou,ting officer, Mow.rdisagrecing with the conient of the .Administiative Review refort with regard tostatements attributed to him received by ppDA on 3'd November 2010.

1.54 On 2nd November ZOIO, the Accounting Oflicer; MOWT submitted a responsc (o theappeal by ESP to the Authority dated 7'h October 2010 received by ppDA on 3,dNovember 2010.

LEGAI, PROVISIONS APPLICABLE I

The Public Procurement and Disposal of public Assets Act No. I of 2003.The Public Procurement and Disposat of Public Assers Regulations No. 70 of 2003.The Public Procurem_ent and Disposal of Public Assets p.o-.ur.111"nt Cuidelines.Bidding Document for the provision of Mandatory Motor vehicle Inspection by Ministry ofWorks and Transport.

METHODOLOGYIn investi o-l &r-4! m rnrqlm tivE xevierry, lhe-Autho ri ry ad o p t ed t h e fo I I ow i n g

fui analysis of the following documents:

(i) Adverts;- (ii) Bidding.document issued to bidders;(iii) Pre-bid minutes;(iv) Bids submitted by bidders;(v) Technical and Financial Evaluation reports;(ri) 44R to Accounting Officer (AO) by SCS;(vii) AAR to AO by ESp;(viii) Administrative Review Report by the AO to SGS;(ix) Administrative Review Report Uy ttre AO to ESp;(x) Disagreement reports from the HPDU to cc, Ao and ppDA on the two evaluation reports

and administrative review report;(xi) contracts committee decisions on the above procurement process; and(xii) PPDA's correspondences to the Entity regarding the above p.o.ur"rrnt process.

fut Administrative Review hearing was held on I't Novembir 2010 of the two parties namely; theQplicant M/s Environmental Syitems Produffiidings Inc and MOyT ;il;;.th;A;;;made representations to PPDA.

SN MOWT TITLEI Alex Kakooza Ag. Permanent

'ldministrotiye Reviex' t51'M/s Environmentat S)rstems Products Hotdings lnc in respect to the Tenderlorthe provision of Mandaton, Motor fehicle lnspection b|, Minisrrl, of Works and Transport

Page 13 of29

I l,l. U. I [,t t r t t,t. t l t l,t l l l l,l. t l l t

_ i:;'l'--=..=-J jT -l

a

--i1t'1J.1

*

b:i

1.40 9! 3'u Seplcnrber 2010, the HPDU comnrunicatcd to all the bidders to disrcgard theBEBN issued on 2n'l September 2010 until after post qualification was conducted. Thesecond Best Evaluatcd Bidder Notice is yet to be issued by the Entity.

l-41 On 4'h Septentber 2010, the Chairman. Contracts Committee communicated to the HPDUinquiring as to whether post qualification had been conducted olt the BEB and informinghinr to request all biddcrs to extend their bid validity period and bid security.

l-42 On 6th September 2010, ESP extended its bid validity for 90 working days and bid securityup to 6'h December 2010. SGS's bid validity was up ro 3l't Octobe.igtO.

I.43 On 7th September 2010, ESP submitted an Apptication for Administrative Review to theAccounting Officer, MOWT raising three grounds. The bidder paid an administrati'ereview fee of Ugs. 500,000/=. (Annex 3)

l-M On l3'h September 2010, SGS subrnitted an application forAdministrative Review to theAccounting Officer and made reference to its letter dated 26'h January 2010 on the samematter.

1.45 On 30'h September 2010, the Accounting Officer, MOWT submitted the AdministrativeReview report to ESP. (Annex 4)

1.46 On 5'h October 2010, the Accounting Officer, MOWT submitted the AdministrativeReview report to SGS.

l-47 On 7th October 2010, ESP submitted an Application for Administrative Review to theAuthority having been dissatisfied with the decision of the Accounting Officer. (Annex 5)

1.48 On llth October 2010, PPDA communicated to the Accounting Officer, MOW'I urdinformed him of the application for Administrative Review, r"qu"itrd him io zuspend theprocurement process and submit thc procurement actiorl file to PPDA by l5th-October2010.

1-4* -On tgoOetoUer20tc-, MOlYfsubmitre-dthe procurement action file to ppDA.

1.50 On23d October 2OlO, ESP communicated to PPDA requesting for the rescheduling of thehearing which was scheduled for 26th October 2010 to Z-9th Ociober 2010.

l.5l On 25rh October 2010, PPDA communicatcd to ESP permitting the rescheduling of thehearing to l$ November 2010

1.52 On 29th October 2010, ltl/s Kiwanuka and Kanrgire Advocates submitted a represcntationon the matter on behalf of thcir client, SGS.

lor Administrolive Reviar DI M/s Environrnental Systcms Products Hotdings lnc in respect o rhc Tenclerforlhe provision of Llandato\,Motor lehiclc lnspection b, Ministry of lforks and Transport

Page 12 of29

iI1t

o'f-)

it.t,

rid

f.t

t'l

I

I

-l

ij

II

I t f.'\rltL,l-r llf_,\t ltf-,\t

)

t

l'i

,l

.-L'

I

t

T.

tI,l

-1 .

tIIt:i

rhl.'t. I

2. Karuma Kagyina Ch ainnan, Contracts Committee "l. Denis Sabiiti AC/R&PTR4. Asiinrwe Ambrosc PIA5 Ojok Isaac SIS6. Janephcr Lutimba Secret Contracts Committec7 Catherine Mugunga SfuMOJCA8. Yenrsa Nyangoma PPO/PDU9 Ceorse William Okunrt

Henry LubegaA CMES

IO Senior Structural E eerI t. Ayo Denis PPO/HPDU

M/S ,ENVIRONMENTAL

SYSTEMS PRODUCTSHOLDINGS INC

TITLE

Jamcs Mukasa Advocate, SebaluAdvocates

& Lule Co

2 N{oses Segawa Advocdte, SebaluAdvocates

& Lule Co.

GROUNDS RAISED BY THE APPLICAI\T

GROUNDS RAISED BY THE COMPLAINANT AT ACCOUNTING OFFICER LEVELGround 1:

Section 46 of the PPDA Act provides that in all pubtic procurements and disposal, the conduct ofstch process must maximize competition and achieve uglyefor money. How€ver, in this case thZinterpretatton of the evaluation methodolog and criterta reference to ITB 34.3(9) of thesolicitation document issued to bidders was disregarded resulttig into erroneous conclusion that,SGS was the most responsive.

Ground 2:

In accordancewith PPDA Regulation 190(3)(a) and (t), the total evaluated price of each bid iskcy in delermining the most responsive bid. However, during the evaluation, ihis was notcomplied with us unit costs formed the basis of the comparison.

Ground 3:

Under Appendix 2. General Speci/ications and specificotty section 2.t vehicle popularions, thestatistics were aclvisgd t9 be the basis for the bidders costing, Therefore, it was pirtinenr fiat inauluotion criteria this had to be considered in accordance with the-PPDA Regulation l3l (t)(c).In addition to PPDA Regulatiott 86(2) requires that in all procurements, the eid resulr shouid 6c

for Administraltt'a Rt't'iett'01'MA Environmental Systems Products Hotdings lnc in respect to tlte Tcnderforthe provision of Manilatory Motor l'ehicle lnspection by Ministrl,of lforks and Transporl

Page 14 of29

t.IItI l.tJII t.tIII l_lIII l-1,II tll

"!-l i

F-;):::-:{

:-tltltrj

it-l11

rlt_t

Ie

i'

I

I

I

I

a

I

II:. 1

i

;t

I(-j

i

;i

I'

,iTJ

I

i

'.. _i

l,\tl t [.r.tl I [,\tl I l.tlll.r I I 1..I \\

bat talue for monev irrespeclive of the method of procurement used. This seents not to agree

with the evaluation methotlologg that'u'cts used.

Ground 4:

In ,-iew of the abo,t'c and in light of Section 46 of the PPDA Act, lhe award to Societe Generale de

Suneillance SA (SGS) clocs not ntaxinrize competilion and achieve value lor money as reEtiredunder the basic puhlic procurentent and disposal principles justifving the needfor administrativereyiew to address thc issues raised in dctail and contc out with the ntosl appropriate decision in

the circumslances.

RESPONSE BY THE ACCOUNTING OFFICER ON THE GROUNDS RAISED

Ground l:

Citation of ITB 3a.3(g) was out of context in'this particular procurement. The evaluation

methodology in the bid solicitation document was correctly applied and was not disregarded. The

price information you and SGS filled in the price schedule.and submitted as your offers is what

was directly used. The bid dobument did not state anyrvh'ere that'the employer would use the

statistical estimates and multiply them by the unit costs to derive total costs and use the total'costs

for price or cost comparison. The employer did not indicate in the bid document that he would do

thismathematical function for bidders. In any case, if the employer did so it would not be bidder's

offers.

Ground 2:

The concept of "total price" is being used out of context by the complainant. The individual unitprices quoted by the bidders, including ESP, was an amalgamation (sum total) of direct costs,

hnanciit costs, overheads, profrt and concession fees. Each price in the price schedule was a total

price in its own right. The statistics in the appendix arc mere estimates for indicative purposes.

They ue not exhaustive and did not give figures for all categories of vehicles. The total quantity

for att inspections was not known. Therefore using such incomplete quantities to derive a total

cost would be faulty and misleading. Total costs derived in this manner would not be used incosUprice comparison and award of tender since they cannot subsequently be entered in the

contract agreement to be eventually signed. This would contravene PPDA Regulations l3l(l) (e).

The complaint is a nullity and cannot be actcd upon.

Ground 3:

The bid solicitation document did not aayvhere state that the statistical data provided in

Appendix 2 section 2.1 was to be the basis for pricing. Neither did the bidding documcnt state

how it was to bc used in the pricing. A format of pricing was given in the price schedulc included

in the bidding document. The price schedulc did not provide for vehicle quantities to be filled in

or to bc used. You werc fully aware of this as conftrmed by thc fact that you did not attempt to

lor Adminisnnll,e Reyderr'6.t' M/s Environmentet Systems Products Holdings lnc in respecl to the Tenderfor

the provisiott of Monduton, fulotor l/ehicle lwpection by Minist1' oJ |lorl<s and Transport

Pagc 15 of29

l.tlllt.t,lll. llllI t | ,t_ I I I l. l, | , I I

rfi:E'-

fill in these vehicle numbers and multiply out. Paragraph 7 of the evaluation methodology andcriteria did not provide for use of the statistical data in the calculation of the biddcrs unit prices.PPDA Regulation l3l(l)(c) requires inclusion of an evaluation criteria in the bid solicitationdocument to ensure that all appropriate factors are considered rvhen planning and preparingbidding documents by both the employer and the bidders. This complaint is not tenable because itis a misinterpretation of the PPDA Regulation l3l(t) (c) and a departure from what was intendcdand stated in the bid document.

Grouud 4:

Value-for-money is a function of many factors; price/cost is only one of them. Economy as a

rigorous study and analysis to choose the best option efficiency of price, and other inputs andoutputs, the effectiveness through the impact from the outputs, compliance with the law,obseryance of ethical standards are all factors of value for money. PPDA Act 2003 Section 46clearly implies that value for money is, arnong others, a product of maximum competition. Thiscompetition was achieved through open international competitive bidding and an unambiguousbid evaluation method with an open pre-bid conference, the best evaluated bidder thereforesatisfies the principle of value-for-money. The employer, after a rigorous study, set the ceilingsfor unit prices for each category of vehiclcs in the price schedule. Any bid that offers priceslower than the ceilings offers one of the factors of value for money. The best evaluated bidder'sprices were within the ceilings and therefore meet the principle of value-for-money inespective ofthe method of procurement. The evaluation methodology considered prices vis-a-vis the priceceilings and therefore addressed the principle of value for money. This complaint is a nullity andmerits no action.

jl

I

."

i]

i1t)

iI;l

)-

;ld

While reviewing the bid docum.ent (proposal) of ESP, two.inadmissible documents were seen bythe Entity:

l. The ISO certificate submitted is dated 24ft Mdrch 2005 with an expiry date of 22hd March2008. The expiry date is well before the bid closing date of 23d September 2009. This means

that the ESP ISO certificate is null and void urd not admissible in this procurement.

!

I

I

'-J

I

2. As evidence of relevurt practical expericnce in the similar business, ESP submitted a

ccrtifrcate issued by thc State of Ohio, Deparfinent of Administrative Services with effectivedates cited thereon as "10/01/09 to 06/30/1l", that is October lst,2OO9 to June 30th 2011. Thismeans that as of 23'd September 2OOg, thc closing datc for receipt of bids, the certificatc was anullity. This means that you did not havc thc relevant certificate at the time of admission oftendcrs.

On the above two grounds, ESP bid did not pass the prcliminary (pass or fail) cxarnination stage.

The bid should have been disqualified.

lor Administratiya Revien' D1,M/s Environmcntal Systems Products Holdings lnc in respect to thc Tenderlor

the provision of L'landatoq, Motor l/ehicle lnspection by Ministry of lfork and Transport

Pagc 16 of29

oil1,-)

ii

I

II l. t.t 1 I rltfrlll. l.tlt l.,ult;t,\ \ t. \,

T

T

IIIIT

T

tt

There are rcports alleging that a valid ISO certificate was presente<l to the bid evaluationcommittee and on that basis ESP bid passed thc current lso cirtincate-pre-requite ancl that rhccertificate was soon thereafler withdrawn and probably destroyed after suspicions were raised.This alleged fraud is being investigated and you will be Informei of the findings.

DECISION OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICER

TIrc complaints are a nuttity and merit no action.

The Procuring Entity allegecl that ITB 3a?)G)was constntecl out of context by ESp in the requestfor the review' This assertion is contestable {irrn that, s.62 @ (a) of the ppDA Act provides thatall solicitation documents are supposed i detatt ih, trr^, and condirions tltat apply to aresulting contract. lle foregoing provision, when read in tandem with 5.60 of the ppDA Act,Reg' 190(3) (h) and-Regularion 2s5(2) (d), it becomes very clear that ESi rightty construed theprovision in view of the procuremenl.

Ground 2:

In -the findings by the Procuring Entity, it was indicated under complaint 3 that the bidsolicitation document did not anywhere sate that the srafistical data provided in Appendix 2section 2' l was to be the basis for prictng. This assertion by the iriciring Entity contravenesRegulation 2s5(l) and (2) and t 3aQ) whichwas tntended to promotefair and open competition.

Ground 3:

lle re.Tuired degree of transparency ayd fairnesl ls qpe:ted of pubtic procurements appear tohave been fundamentally wanting in the Zase of rhts pibtt" pri"rr"r,"r{t. Th, ,roron for whichbeing that ESP, discoveredfrom the prorurr^ritfiteihe was availed when she requestedfor rhedetailed evaluation report fortowing the best eviruated bidder notice, thai one of the bidders,SGS had in fact req-uested for an admtnistrative reuia+t as early as 26/01i20t0 wey before thebest evaluated bidder notice could be released. Most surprisiig, is ir; ; the Jindings of theProcurement Entity, lhe issues raised by SGS in January 2010 appeared prominently and rhePlocyremgnt Entity seems to have drawyt.conclwionsfroi *e toniiry ,rir'r, process no matterthe illegality the process was tainted with; since theri was no way SGS could have oblained fhedetailed ittformation about the ESP bid wirhout internal collusion irthin ne i-caring Entity.

Ground 4:

lor Administtnldt't' Rc't'tetr'6.r'M/s Environmentrt systems Producrs Hotdings lnc in respe4 to ilte Tenderlorthe provision o.f Muulutoq, Motor (chicte lnspection h), MinistD, of Works and Tra'nsport

GROUNDS RAISED BY THE COMPLAINANT AT PPDA LEVEL

Ground l:

Page 17 of29

l.t.l I I l. t.t I I l. t.t I I Il.r, l fIt IL. \

*-;,rt

On the issue of the ISO certificute ixpirl,for ESP (USA), tltc ohserttations nade by the ProadngEntity in the finttings ure vet), contratlictory to those of the lechnical evahntion that rightlypassed ESP ur the prelimiildr): sltsluatiott stage. The reason for this i.r that, il v'as ESP (lndia)

tlnt acttnlll,had Povt,er of Attorne.y,in respgqt.gl the.bid tvho had u valid ISO certi/icate.

Tlrerefore, the valiclit.t, or in't,alidity of ESP (USA) ISO certiJicitti'could never havc been the ba.sis

of the evaluatiort process.

Ground 5:

The procut'ement entity alleges in the findings that ESP availed a.n expired cerlificatc fron the.

Stati of Ohio with the t,iew to proving experience. In this regard, whereas ESP dicl avail

erperiince cerlificates to support her bid, none was from the State of Ohio. All were valid and itshould be why EtPb bid should have beenfound responsive.

IIINDINGS BY PPDA ON THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE APPLICANT

ffB 34.3G) of the bidding document states that, to financially compare bids, the Procuring and

Disposinitntiry shall detirminc the total a,aluated price of each bid. This is also in linc wittr

Regulation l9Oi3) (h) which states that financial comparison shall determine the total evaluated

price of each bid.

part2Section 3, Evaluation Methodology and Criteria, Part 7: Evaluation of Pricing:

i. Bidders were required to fill a price schedute for the five year conccssion. Each

transaction in the price schedute was to bc cvaluated by subtracting the bidder's price

from the given ceiling to determine the price difference.

ii. The price differences would be added and a bidder with thc highest sum,of Price

differences would be scored the highcst points for the price schedule.

lor Adninistraliye feueu.D.r. M/s Environmcntrl Systcms Products Holdings lnc in respect to the Tender lorthe protision of Llunduton, llotor ltchiclc lnspcction hS' Minist4' of Works and Transport

Pagc 18 of29

1

L

I

ii'i J

ilit

)o)-

t,

i'

il,]li

iirf

Ground 1; The Procuring Entity alleged that ITB 3a!)k)was construed out of context by ESP l

in the request for the review. This assertton is contestable given that, 5.62 (2) (a) of the PPDA

Act provides that atl solicilarion docaments are supposed to detail the terms and conditions that i

appiy to a resulting contract. The foregoing proiision, when reacl in tandem with 5.60 oI !h! I

pi,Oe Act, Reg. tiO(S) (h) and Regulation 255(2) (d), it becomes very clear that ESP rightly

construed the provision in view of the proanremeht. li

Findings:

lII

l

i'i. -)

irl_i

Ori.t

t-,*

I

Il

i)

I rltl.t.tt I t l. t.t I t l_ l.t I \rl t l_ I,t-l \ \

Iu. The highcst sum of price differences for the price sclrcdule was to be used as the commondcnotninator in detcrmining.each other bidders' proportionate score of 100 points.

Each biddcr's sttn'l of price differences would be divided by thc highcst sunr of pricediffcrence and then multiplied by 100.

v. The total score at this stage would be weighted out of 30% of thc overall score.

As can be noted from the above, the main criterion was the "price differences" and the ,.highestsum of price differences" which were to include direct costs, financial costs, overheadJ andprofit and concession fees.

Under Parl2, Section 4: Bidding Forms, Itern 4.1.3, the price schedule for the 5 year term rvas tobe statcd as follows:

The above prices were to include direct costs, frnancial costs, overheads, profit and concessi)nfees.

The following unit prices inclusive of direct costs, financial costs, overheads, profit and concessionfees were quoted by the two bidders:

NO. MotorType

Vehlclc MOWTCelline

ESP'sPrlce

SGS'sPrlce

ESP'sPrlcc DlfI

SGS'sPrlce Dlft

I Motor Cyclc 28,000= 25,200= 28,000= 2,900 02 Car and dual

purDose vehiclc56,000= 50,400= 56,000= 5,600 0

for,ldministrotiw Rcview th'M/s Environmental Systcms Producb Hotdings lnc in respect rc rhe Tenderforthe provision o.f l'lanilatoq' hlotor Vehicle lnspcction by Minist4,ol lt'ort<s ond Transport

Page 19of29

l.tl llt.tllt, I I l. I I I f..1. I I I I l_ I J I I

No Group of l\Iotor Vehicles to be Inspected Ministry'sPrice CeilingShs.)

Unit(ug.

Bidder's UnitPrice(Ue. Shs.)

I Motor Cycle 28,000=2 Car and dual e vehicle 56,000=3 Passenger of more than 7 passengers and not

20ex62,000=

4. Passenger vehicle of mgre than 20 passengersnot 60 passengers

75,000:

5. Passenger vehicle of more than 60 passengers 84,000=6. Goods vehicle of less than 3.5 tons 56,000=7 Good vehicle of 3.5 tons and less than l0 tons 75,000=8 Goods vehicle of more than l0 tons 84,000=9 Trailer of 2 axles 30,000=t0. Each extra axle on a trailer 10,000=

NO. MotorTYpe

Vchicle MOWTCdilins

E.SP'sPrlce Dlff

SGS'sPrlce Diff

3 Passengcr of morcthan 7 passengers

and not excecding20 passengers

62,000= 55,800= 62,000= 6,200 0

1 Passcngerof morepassengers

exceedingpassengers

veh ic le20

not60

than75,000= 67,500= 30 ,000= 7,500 45,000

5 Passenger vehicleof more than 60passengers

84,000= 75,600=

I',uo=

8 400 93,500

6 Goods vchiclc ofless than 3.5 tons

56,000= 50,400= 56,000= 5,600 0

7 Good vehicle of 3.5tons and less thanl0 tons

75,000= 67,500= 75,000= 7,500 0

8 Goods vehiclc ofmore than l0 tons

84,000= 75,600= 30,000= 8,400 54,000

9 Trailer of 2 axles 30.000= 27.000= 10,000= 3.000 20,000

l0 Each cxtra axlc ona trailer

10,000= 9,000= 500-- 1,000 9,500

SUM OF PRICE DIFFERENCES 56.000 212,000

ESP'sPrlcc

SGS'sPrice

'l)

I

i

-)I1

1I

-t

{

(

I

II

I

.i

o

From the above table lWs SGS had a price difference of 212,000 .N compared to that of lvl/s ESP

which was 56,000.

Under Appendix 2: General Specifications, 2.1, Table l, the estimated number of vehiclcs on the

road as at 3ltt December 2007 was indicated as follows:

lor ldnrinistr.arir,e flevrc,u,D.t.lvl,'s Environmcntat Systemr Products Holdings lnc in respect to the Tenderlor

thc provision o! Mandotol Motor Yehiclc lnspcction hy Ministq' of lfor*s and Tt'ansport

Pagc 20 of 29

I

o,

2

I

t l. t.I I t l.t.| I t l.t.tI t l.l*lI t l. l.lI t l,

No Vehicle Type Number of VehiclesYear 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007

I Cars 65.472 75,342 85,212

2. Trucks 18.684 20,714 22,744

3 Pickup and 4-wheel drives 53.203 57,409 6l,615

4. Minibuses 27.568 34.151 40.734

5. Buses 868 946 t.024

6. Aeric Tractors 2.717 2.989 3,261

7 Motorcycles 108,207 136.123 164,039

E Others 1,876 2,028 2.180

TOTALS 329,702 380,809

@ +t+---,

-:#-

,

As can be noted fronr thc above, not all categories of vehicles indicated in table 5,1.3 were givenestimates in the tablc in 5.1.4 for example; trailer of 2 axles and each extra axle on a trailcr andtherefore the estimates would not have been used for cvaluation. In addition, the wording of theclassification of the vehicles in 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 was also not similar.

Both bidders, ESP and SGS did not makc reference to the estimated nunrber of vchicles whilesubmitting their financial bids but used the criterion contained in the price schedute indicated in5.1.3 upon which the evaluation was conducted.

The Authority does not find merit in Ground I since the Entity rightly applied the evaluationcriteria as stated in the bidding document and the total evaluated prices o[ each bid was obtainedby adding up the price differences of each bidder.

Ground 2z In the findings by the Proaring Enriry. it rvas indicated under complaint 3 rhat thebid solicttation docurnent did not anywhere sate that lhe statistical data provided in Appendtx 2Section 2.1 was to be the basisfor prictng. This assertion by the Procuring EntitycontravenesRegulation 285(l) and (2) and 134(2) which was tntended to promotefatr and open competition.

Findings:

Under Appendix 2: General Specifrcations,2.l, Table l, the estimated number of vehicles on theroad as at 3l't December 2007 was indicated for 8 classilicatiohs as 437,930 and at an annualgrowth rate of about lsyo, it was expected to double in the next 5 years. However, the vehicleestimates were not linked to any other part of the bidding docurnent and therefore were redundant.

No reference was made in the bidding document to the effect that the statistical data in AppendixSection 2.1 was to be used as a basis for pricing. The statistical data could not havc been used

during financial evaluation since it was not in accordance with the format of the price scheduleprovided in Section 4, bidding forms.

None of the two bidders who qualified for financial bid opening inctuded the estimated vehiclequantities as a basis for their pricing and this rnearu that they clearly understood the requirementin the bidding forms and rightly used the format that was provided.

At the hearing, MOWT clarified that the cstimated number of vehicles could not be used as abasis for pricing since it was difficult to predict for example, the number of vehicles to bcinvolvcd in motor accidents or to be modified.

Thc Authority does not find merit ln Ground 2 sincc the bidding document issued to biddersdid not make reference to the statistical data in Appendix 2 as a basis for pricing of bids.

Ground 3:

lor Administt'ative Reviet'6.v M/s Environmental Systems Products Holdings lnc in respect to the Tenderlorthc provision qf Morulaton, Motor Yehicle lnspcction hy Miuistrl,of llorks and Tronsport

Page 2l of29

l- l.t t t f. l.t I t l. l.t I t I l"t I I f. I.t I I f- t.t

l'-'5{-- '

"t

ilThe requirerl degrce of trunsperrcilc.t, unclfainrcss as expected of pubtic procurcntet,ts opl)ear rohave been funclantenlally 6'n,,,',rg in the ut.re of this public prirurrn

"ir. Tlrc reason foi whicttbeing that ESP, discovered from the proutrement file she wos ctvailed when she reqtrcsierl for thcdetailed evaluuliott reportfollowing the hest evaluuted hidder notice, that one of thc biddcis,,SGShad in fuct requcsted for an adntinistratit,e review us early as 26/0t/20t0 v,Ztt bclore tlte bestevaluated bidder notice coulcl be released. Most xtrprising, is that in the trtidings ol theProatrement EntitS,, the issucs raisetl b.l,SGS in Januury, 2010 appearecl proniinentiy uid th,Procurement Entity seem lo have drau,n conclusions from thc Januiry reviiw proccss no nrurterthe illegulit.l' tlte process was tainted with; since there v,a.r no w,ay SGS coulcl have obtained thedetailed inlormation ahout the ESP bid v,ithout internal collusion within the procuring Entity.

Finding:

In its AAR to the AO, MOWT, SGS indicated that they had received a copy of the letter writtenby John Sekitoleko stating that ESP's ISO 9001 certificate had expired on2}nd March 200g andwas substituted with a valid one by the evaluation committee and the documcnt from the Statc ofOhio index No. EPAO17 was introduced into ESP's bid after closure of bid submission. It shouldbe noted that the Contracts Committee approved the technical evaluation report on l2th March2010. SGS further attached both the ISO certifrcate and document from the State of Ohio to theAAR. A copy of the said letter from John Sekitoleko was not available for review.

PPDA advised MOWT in its letter dated l9'h February 2010 to disregard the Application forAdministrative Review by SGS since it was legalty flawed because the complainani-had illegallyaccesSed information during thc evaluation process contrary to Section 41 of the PpDA Aci.PPDA advised the Entity to proceed with the procurement process.

The Authority finds merit in Ground 3 since SGS obtained confidential information leaked bythc evaluation comrnittec during the evaluation process.

Ground 4: On the issue of the ISO certificate expiryfor ESP (USA), the obsertations made by theProanring Entity in the findings are very contradictory to those of the technical evaluotion thatrightly passed ESP at the preliminary evaluation stqge. flte reason for this is that, it was ESPQndia) that actually had Power of Attorney in respect of the bid who had a valid ISO certi/icate.Therefore, the validity or invalidity of ESP (USA) ISO certificate could never have been thi bastsof the evaluation process.

Findings:

Under Part 2 Section 3, Evaluation Methodology and Criterion (3.2, l) of thc bidding document,one of the documentation required to providc cvidence of eligibility was an ISO 9001:2000certification in quality managemcnt systems.

ESP submitted an ISO certificate, from DET NORSKE VERITAS, Houston USA with CcrtificateNo. CERT-08073-2005-AQ-HOU-ANAB dated 24th March 2005 which was valid until 22nd

for Administrottrr r?evferv D1' M/s Environmental Systcms Products Hotdings lnc in respect to the Tender lorlhe provision of Llondoto4' Moktr l'chiclc lnspection by Ministry of lltorks and Transport

Pagc 22 of 29

nll1)

-tI

L

I

r

o

K

ol

.)

I

I

_l

t.tl tl. l.tl tl-t.tlt l*I.tlt l-l.t"l tI

i

:

I l,l\l

-* yrg;[tjJflt;;.u,'rhc ISo certificate had thererore expired at the rime of bid submission orr

ESP also submitted a certificate of recommendation.from TCL certifications India indicating thntESP had bccn recommended for ISo 9001:2008 c.rtin..iio;il;;;; s."o.i;b_er 2009 howcver,the certificate had no date of expiry.

ESP submitted in ils bida Power'of Attorney from the senior vice president and Secretary ofESP (usA) appoi.ting Mr' Nitin Manawat, Director, esnllnaia) to represent the company in theabove tender dated l8th September 2009.

The argument by ESp in the AAR to the Aurhori that the ISO certificate to be considercd in thety

above procuremcnt should be thc one from India stnce ESP (India) had the power of Attorney inthe above tender is not valid since the document from India is a letter of recommen dation and notan ISO certi ficate. As can be noted from the above, ESP did not ful the ent for I9001: should have been eliminated atc

ce ationtrary to the requirement of

ncethe

At the hearing, Mowr produced another ISo certificate purportedly submitted by ESp on z3rdseptember 2010, the time of bid closing, no,n oii Nonsrn VERITAS, Houston uSA withcertificate No' GERT-08073-2005-AQ-AoU-ANAB orlso 9001:2000 dated 24th March 2005which was valid until 22nd March 201b. Some members of the Evaluation co*ittee had duringevaluation, noted the ISo certificate valid until iz;? rtrrr.i 2010 which was zubmitted to them bythe HPDU while others had only noted the one for India.

3^t, ty'hgrity confirmed. that the original ESP bid did not contain the ISo certificare valid until22n0 March 2010 bu-t had the expireione which ** ,uiia up to Z2ndMarch 200g and the Indiaone which was ISO 9001:200g.

g document of ISO 9001:2000.

The Authority sought confirmation from the Key Accounts Manger, ABS Quality Evaluations,USA as to whether the ISO 9001:2000 certilication submitted by SGS was issued by them. It was

upgradewals issued ABS It was also clarified thatrequres all certified companies to to the 2008 verston 9001 by November 15,2010 and that all ISO 9001:2000 certi frcates would be invalid after date. SGS had upgraded

"" r',,

thattheir certification frorn thc 2000 version to the 2008 version (on certi ficate 34648) in February of2010 but had maintained their ISO 900 l:2000 certlficarion from January 28, 1999 to February 2,2010 when they upgraded to the 200g verslon. (Annex.7)

The Authority failed to obtain conlirmation from M/s DET NoRSKE VERITAS about the ISocErtification issued by ESp.

The Authority does not fiud merlt ln Ground 4 since the ISo g00l:200g certlficrte ofnacommendation submitted by ESP (India) is just a recommendation for ISo 9001:200g

for itlministrottt'c Revie,'6r'M/s Environmentat systcms Products Holdings lnc in respe, o the Tcnrlerlorthe provision o-f Manilatory llotor I'ehicle lnspection b1, Ministtl, of worts and Transport

Page 23 of 29

tlll,l.tllll.tlll t. l,lt l.tltf l.tlt

]'

iI

i

certil-rcation and is not an ISO ce(ificate contrary to the requiremcnt of thc bidding documcnt tosubmit air ISO 9001 :2000 ccrtification in quality.management systcms.

Ground 5: The Procurenrcnl Entity ulleges in thefindings that ESP availctl an expirecl certificutefrom the Stute of Oltio t+,ith the view to proving experienee. In this regard, u'hereas ESP did atailerperience. cet'tificotes to supporl hcr bid, none wus from the State of Ohio. All were talid and itshoulrl be wh), ESP's bid shoukl huve beenfound respott.site.

Findings:

Under Pafl2 Section 3, Evaluation Methodology and Criterion (3.2, m) of the bidding document,one of the documentation required to provide evidence of eligibility was recommendation fromthe client where seryices of mandatory motor vehicle inspections for roadworthiness have been orare being rendered.

ESP submitted in its bid, letters from various offices as proof of evidence of experience in theabove tender. Among which were the following: .

Letter frorn State of Connecticut dated August 10, 1999 in favourof lWs Envirotest SystcmsCorporation.Letter from State of Florida dated April 16, 1999 in favour of IWs Envirotest SptemsCorporation.Letter from TLC, New York dated August 27,1997 in favour of lWs Envirotest TechnologiedSystems Corporation.Letter frorn PINCHIN, Taiwan dated December 6, 1996 in favour of lvl/s EnvirotestTechnolo gieJ Systems Corporation.Letter from Indiana Departrnent of Environmental Management, dated January 15, 2002 infavour of lv{/s Envirotest Systems Corporation.Lettcr frorn Ohio EPA, dated January 16, 2002 in favour of M/s Envirotest SptemsCorporation.Letter from State of Colorado, dated January 15,2002 in favour of lvl/s Envirotest SptemsCorporation.Letter from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, in favour of lWs Envirotest. SlatemsCorporation.Letter from Metropolitan Govemment of Nashvillc and Davidson County, dated January 14,2002 in favour of lvl/s Envirotest Systems Corporation.Letter from Pacific Testing Technologies, dated January 14,20fl2 in favour of IWs EnvirotestCanada.

Letter from Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, dated April27,1999 in favour of lWsEnvirotest Systems Corporation.

for Adninistrative Reviev D1'M/s EnvironmentrlSystcms Products Holdings lnc in respect to the Tenderforlhe provision qf Mandttot'r Motor l'ehicle lnspection by Mittistry ol llbr*s and Transport

Pagc 24 of29

t

i-lll

l

ii

t-

aII

(D'

I

-J

_i

t.t I t l.l.t I t l_t.t I t l.l.t I t l.l.tl t I

I

I

-)

_)

II \

_-__:__-*_,.--,",_ r ji.-*E+=j_=,=l}.\,#

Nfr Letter fronr ohio Dns, ilt favour of M/s Envirotest.systems corporatiorr dated 5/2/0g n,itheffective darcs of 07 /Ol/2OOg ro 06/30/09.e Lettcr lrom ohio DAS' irt favour "LYh Envirotest sy'stems corporation dated l0/01/09 rvitheffectivc datcs of lo/01/0t) to 06/30/l l. . - J

o Award recommendation notificatiort from Motor vehicle Administration (MVA) datedDecernber 30,2008for vehicle Emissions trtpi"tio,, iluuogrn,rttt and operarions.o client relerence emairs in favour of Mis Envirotest syrt.m, corporationr Letter front Motor vehicle Administration (MVA; jated octobcr 20, ?oo6in tavour of M/sEnvironmcntal Systerns Products (EsP) ior uitri"iu regisrratton rencv,al services andopera t i tt g a n d nta i n t ct i tt i rt g Mu ry I a n cl's eni iss ion.s tes: ti tt g n e t work.

As can be noted from the above, ESP did submit three letters of experience fronr the Slale_grebjoone was dated January 16,2002, the other was dated -5lz/zoog

rna ir.,"-trrird one was dated10/01109 (Annex 8) all in favour of M/s rnriroi.sisyri.r, corporation. All the other lerterson file were for Envirotest Systems corp except one from Motor vetricle Administration (MVA).It should be noted that Envirotest Systems corporation is a subsidiary of ESp.

h its AAR to the Aurhority, ESP indicated that the ISO certificate to be considered in the aboveIr(rcurement should be the o1q_..gom !a{[a and not USAs ince ESP (Ind ia) had the Power ofin the not ight of the above principle, t Le .l.e_t! ef-s- -o f -e2c p ssign c eshould have been from ESp ( not ESP

valid. In I

The Authority does not find merit on Ground 5 since there is evidence of two letters from thestate of ohio as proof of evidence of experience in the bid of ESp.

$THER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE COMPLAINANT AT THE HEARING:Rcport of the Administrative Review comm ltteez The Adminisrrafive Review committee andnot the Accounting oficer issued the adminbtrative ,iii* report contrary to sections 26 (h), g0(3) (a) and (b) and Rigutations 63, 64 (d)and 346.

. -

Flndings:

The Accounting officer in instituting an investigation appointed an Administrative Review Teamin accordance with Regulation 346 (i). -rrvr'*vu st ^urrrlr,slr !- ----

'The Accounting officer issued his decision within the stipulated timeframe to the complainant inccordance with Regulation 346 (4).

The Accounting officer submitted a copy of his decision to the Authority in accordance withRcgulation 346 (5).

The complainant, ESP submitted an appeal to the Authoriry against the decision of thedministrative revierv findings in accordance with Section qo tt; (b) anr! Regulation 347.

lor 'lduini'tratit'e Ru'ie,, D.r'M/s Environmentat systems products Hotdings lnc in respc* ro the Tender lorthe provision o.[ Llondann, Motor l/ehicle lnspection b, Ministt-t, o! ll/orks and Transport

Page 25 of29

t II l. I I I I t.l.tlll t.llll l.lltlt.I\

-^'---r:-1-F---. j

.iltAt the hearing, the Accounting Officer indicated that in discharging lris duties, he is assistcd b.vtre Entity staff. He therefore appointed the Administrative Review Team which conductett theadministrative review hou'ever; he adopted their findings ancl therefore issue<l his dccisionrccordingly

The Authority noted tlrat the Accounting Officer attached a letter to the Administrative Revievrrcport that communicated his decision to the bidder ancl therefore took responsibility of thedecision. The Authority further noted that the letter contained the reasons why he had rejected theApplication for Adrninistrative Review by ESP. This fulfilled the requiremenis of Reguiation 346(a). The administrative review team although listed on the report, did not comrnirnicate anydecision ott tlte Administrative Review application and thereiore it cannot bc said tSat thcAccounting Officer delegated his role of handling the complaint by ESp to them.

The Authority does not find merit in this Ground since the Accounting Officer institutecl aninvestigation and issued his decision in accordance wjth lhE p_pD_A taw._ -

The Authority does not find merlt in this Ground since the Accounting Oflicer confirmed thatMs. Yerusa Nyangoma was a member of staffof thc Entity and was on thJEntity's payroll.

General Observations:

Breach of thc Ethical Code of Conduct:

l. Access to conlidential information

By M/s SGS

Mr John Sekitoleko in a tetter dated l6'h January 2010, addressed to the Accounting Officer.r91g.,oJ!.rs statcd that the ISO Certilicate of one of the bidding firms was found to have cxpiredon 22n'r March 2008 and substitution of the cxpired certificate was carried out by the EvatuationCommittec.

for Adninisttntiw Rc'viex' D1' Mts Environmental Systems Products Hotdings lnc in respect to thc Tenclerlorlhe provision ol Mundoton' lrtotor l/ehiclc lnspeclion hy Minisl4,of Works and Transport

Page 26 of 29

il

Il

iI

Il

-l

Composition of the Administrative Review Committee: The Chairperson of the Administrative .1Rqiew Committee (ART), h{s. Yerusa Nyangomta was not a ntember i1stallojthe Entity since her atransfer to the Entity had been rescinded.

Findings: i ]At the hearing, the Accounting Officer confirmed that Ms. Yerusa Nyangoma was a member of ; Isaff of the Entity and was on the Entity's payroll. The substantive Aciourrting Oflicer had within , ihis powers, rejected her transfer back to her former Entity.

Ms. Yerusa Nyangoma had been transferred to the Entity however, it was agreed that the Isubstantive HPDU was to remain and handlc old procuremenimatters for a period of six months. ' )

I

o1

II

.)

)t't

)I

I

I

l_l.ll tl-l.ll tl..l.tl tl.l.tl t l.l.ll t

I

.11

7,lr I

LL

Mr Sekitoleko furthcr statcd that a documcnt from the Statc of Ohio IndexNo.EPA0lT wasintroduced into the above tendcr aftcr bid subntission.

Thc above information was in respect to M/s ESP's bid.

The above lcttcr was copicrl to M/s SGS who later on 26'h January 2010 applied forAdnrinistrative Review to tlte Accounting Officer and attached the documents that were availed torhem by Mr Sekitoleko

lv{r John Sekitoleko is not a menrber of staff of Ministry of Works and Transport and is not- known in the Entity.

From the above, it is clear that members of the Evaluation Committee leaked the saidinformation to Mr John Sekitoleko during the evaluatio.n process.

By M/s ESP

At the hearing, the HPDU confirmed having availed ESP, the procurement file for prior penrsalwhen the firm officially requested for it. This was done prior to contract award.

The Contracis Committee indicated at the hearing that they were not aware that the HPDU hadavailed the procurement Iile to ESP.

2. Change in bid details

At the hearing, MOWT produced another ISO certificate purportedly submitted by ESP on23'0 September 2010, the time of bid closing, from DET NORSKE VER[[AS, Houston USAwith Cirtificate No. CERT-08073-2005-AQ-HOU-ANAB for ISO 9001:2000 dated 24th

March 2005 which was valid until 22od March 2010. Some members of thc EvaluationCommittee had during evaluation, noted ttre ISO certificate valid until 22"d Mxch20l0 whichwas submitted to them by the HPDU while others had only noted the one for lndia.

The Authority confirmed that the original ESP bid did not contain the ISO certificate validuntil 22nd March 2010 but had the expircd onc which was valid up to 22nd March 2008 and theIndia one which was ISO 9001:2008

Influence Peddling by IWs SGS

On page I of the Daily Monitor Newspaper datgq-llyovember 2OlO, it was atleged that Mr.Ferdinand Bitanihin*,e, a former Country Manager at SGS at the time was in collusion withEng. Dennis Sabiti of MOWT and that he had sent him an email proposing that for anycompanies to qualify, they should have operated in at least three continents and must have at

least capital investments y-g&LlmilliqEuros (Shs. 38.3 billion) and operation for vehiclcinspection service in three continents.

lor Administrotila Scrror'&.r,M/s Environmental Systcms Products'Holdings Inc in respect to the Tenderfor

the profision of ltlundotor.r, Motor l'chiclc lnspection h), Ministn of llorks and Tronsport

Page27 of29

tl ll l.t.l ll l. lJ ll l.til f l.tlll I I I

d2cC

0*It is indicated in thc Nervspaper that Eng. Dennis Sabiti confirmed reeeipt of ttre email but saithat thc informalion frotn Mr. Ferdinand Bitanihirwe was unsolicited and was not uscd in tlrcbid docunrent. The Authority noted tha!$g $aQiiti ai{ pgldisclose !o_r[he Accounting Officerthat he had becn contacted by thq b!dderMs,S6$.duringttie pripiihttrrf jittiiEis.

The Authority noted that there was a similar requirement in the bidding document containedunder Appendix 3, 4.1 (vi), Management of Mandatory Motor Vehicle Inspection forRoadworthiness where the requirement for Annual sales revenue is:.(minimunr United StatesDollar trvelve million (US$ 12,000.000). This amounts to unethical conduct and intcrfercnce inthe bidding process by SGS thereby giving the firm undue advantage over other bidders

Post Qualification: The Entity issued the Best Evaluated Bidder Notice on 2nd Septenrber2010 with M/s SGS as the Best Evatuated Bidder with a removal date of 15th September2010. This however, was done without conducting post qualification on the bidder. TheEntity therefore had to rescind the BEB on 3'd September 2010 until post qualification hadbeen completed contrary to Regulation 218.

Bid Validity: The Entity indicated at the hearing that the bid validity of the bid for SGSwhich had expired on 31" October 2010 had been extended however; there was noevidence to this effect.

Disagreement by the HPDU of the Adminlstrative Revlew Report: The HPDUsubmitted a report to the Accounting Oflicer dated 2nd November 20lb disagreeing withthe content of the Administrative Review report with regard io statements attributed tohim.

The Authority also noted that thc HPDU disagrced with the Evaluation Committee and theContracts Cornmittee five times. While this is provided for under the law, the Authorityruled on it as being unprofessional conduct since his agreements caused delays in theprocwement process and the bidder lWs ESP used the same issucs to raise theAdministrative Review Application

Valuc for Money: ESP in their application for administrative review to the AccountingOfficer, MOWT indicated that award.ing the above tender to SGS would not achicvc valuefor money since the Entity had made an eroneous conclusion that SGS was the mostresponsive. The Authority noted that since SGS had complied with the provisions of thebidding document in terms of the Entity's price ceiling, their bid achieves value formoney.

DECISION OF THE AUTHORITYThe Authority under Section 9l of the PPDA Act and Regulation 347 of thc PPDARegulations 2003 is empowered to makc decisions. on Applications for Administrativc

for Adninistrotive Revic,u'D1'M/s Environmental Systems Products Holdings lnc in rcspect to thc Tendcrforthc provision ol'Mundoto4, Motor Yehiclc lnspection by Minisnl. ol llorks and Transport

Page 2E of29

i

I

J0

-1

,^

rJ-l'

i

'l

o

o

I

I

f l l_l.tl tl-t.ll t l_l.tl t l-l.ll tl_1.. llt

,F

H::XrftT#tr##'*Tirf ising out or anv procuremenr or dispos*r transacrion by ^

The decision of the Atrthority is that the Application lor Administrati'e Re'iew hy lvilsE,vironmcntar Systems products Hordings ;; i, il;.ted. Howcver, in lighr of theuncthical conduct by both thc bidders and tie Entit, *Hl was cvidenced by interferencein the procurement process by the bidders ,,ra ,ffnrrni iruuaul.nt practices noted in theahove procurement process contrary to Sections ii ^^i;;of the ppDA Act and GuitJelineNo' 4/2003' the Entity should cancel and re-te'dcr the'above procurement process. Thedecision of thc Authority is based on the findings orttre autnority in 5.0 abovc.

Page 29 of29

tt t.rf I t l.tl I t l_rl tt t.rl t t t_t, t t I

E::I

I

I

1

1

I

{

IiI

lII;

I

I

a

#

.*E.

ii

t.t I t l. I,t I t l.tl. l.l tt. t I tI I t l_ I. I I I I I,

lhv :i111 : t

, ilo*ottt 1,2010 15 !^6 . lJSIiSl.2OOl KsISO 2.fi)0 Bcttr lnlsrrrtlon.' 8..t sutlC

HE

Muscvcni-ef thc NRM willhuclr hL reclcction mani-fcrto rrd camPei;n tsl forcttoday at thc KrrnP& SctcnrHotcL

Biddln3 for rD unprcc'.dent d fouttbchctivC tcrEh ofEcr, Mr Murcrrcni flrgpimprowd rcrvicl dcltvcrY ud

ILYONIT

Candidates hit

a

j.,

WorksMinistryin tenderaward row

r"-thEq*, ia*traAodt ''l9Sh4tuf*t- ' -6s{ hisrAsart'hrey ftr9nb-qr*ha-613 1 sa16i1 rind ,d'rgr:4P"i'nd RfrJdKrsln

l(zry.hcampaipftail

more iobr rr thc ccntrcPicccof thc-NRM politicd Plrtformfor thc ncxi ftve Yeur ThePresidcnt'r muifesto it 6'tlcd 'Poircd for TrkcoE, cn'bracin3 scwicc dclh.rY radjob crtrtionf

@

Thc Min'rtrY of Works mdTrmsport has awarded a con'tmct to a Swiss firm to curYout mudltorY Periodic me'tor vehiclc insPcction underoucstionablc circmstacer' DoiD Monr'tor udcsundsthrt a formcr top msager atScietc Gcncrdc Dc Surveil-lance (SGO war in rcPortedcollusiou with u ofhcidhomthc MinistrY.

ltc mrnagcr r€Port.dlYotrcrcd ths lo\rcrn-Ecnt rd'vie on whrt-to includc in biddocuments ir ordcr to LicLout compcting 6rmr

SGS wrr cvdurtcd aa thabe$ bidder out of sk 6ros ro,coopthc contnct

Thb Dc*rPrPGr har soen

cmeil corrcrPoodcncr ftonSGSr forocr countrY - -oet'cr Ferdiund Bluaihirwr tothc Arsistrnt Comaisrioncrfor Srfctv ud truPectioa.t U. W;rt MiBirilry, Enghhni. Srbiti. tcUia! thc offi'ddshrt to hcltrdr in theblddoctl.ttrcEt3

EradlcrchulcrIn bir email, Mr BitenihirwcDroDo.€d tbrt for rnY of thrioriprnict to qudifY, ticyshorild havc opcntcd in et

lcast threc coDtiD€nts and

Eurt hryc .t lc.st caPitd in'Estmentr vorth 12 DillionEruor (Sbs3&3billion).

To crcludc snrll Pleycr+va should ProPosc thc fol-lowirt to bG Put is thc teDdcBoocretion for Ychiclc lrsPcc'don Scrvict h thre. cogti'nentr.'wrote Mr Bitdrihin sin urAoril 6- 2ooo- cmril- ED1 Srbiiti confirocd lFeipt ol tlc crDril in rn lDtct'

EEED

n5ABOUTTUiIEOU.H^MS60Tollfu

'4o,i cllotulttsxn 1' crfllrl6NnilL \

frtp.L

Th: battlc lincr haw bccndnm rs candidrtes biddinjto bc thc ncrt Prc.id.nt ofUraldr hit tbc roed on en dI'orit oEcruiw to aPPcal to thcclcctorrta

Bcginnins todeY, tbo cijltnominatcd Prc:idcntiel cen'didatcs htw eractly lO9 drytto conb a,aD, coracr of t}ccourtry lD quc.t fot thrt Pra'ciour Y!tc.

In thet pcrio4 thc cradi'datcr arc ciPGGt"d to vitit dlof Ufaadrl tul dirtrictr lvlr

'{til! is Tiltl E\ii itii'l' :"',t t"'

t'tRli[g i 1 t.iili .-.r .; i) \i I'llJ \ii'i Ui

t',t diii';'Li

ItIt l. I I I t l. r I t I 1iT\1i: irili

t ll

\*/

;.

a q-'i'- ;

:v

I

t

AT'

(

,,AY OF

bLLi'i.l:

t--t

1I

tE

dra, i

l.

1.{Ia

,1

r-,

II ..

tt {

t

"':]*rlt

il1

I

o

o

tIItl. It.l I tItllL

rllIrltl_IT l_ l. l. t

l

tl

Aaa?'

It{a

6oC

$,L'.dC!.LT(tta

J

I

4

If,

lti.

.,i it,.Y)isl

,i;ifl..#'-:

I

1 1 Irildr

.,b--

!

J

rD

3EFoa===a;f?:r -ise

=-gE

=.=^-^==a<:n -.=c.4 **5f*La6 r:t

;; B-a.o4r ?.:^'::ao

-(

'Ji;" ',

d+3)'.? ;," ,,I

rl-r'ea'

,8ffi''i.ia:iilr.. |I,-*.r '-

, ,. r'il.j:/'"

'-ia-

Jul-af.lo

t,Flr!UInqr

?FmF

(D

-=

tii;r

*,-

11

RO

i

l

I'l 'Et

6oI\J

ZOJt''o

-ri

otoo

anIo

{D'

CI!tr-a

tto*tooGI

oo**q-q

>u

66l

*q..

ri

ar,F

oo

ora(x]J.r

6tl6

C'qoq

UEo

oatJts*tE{ro!

tscCo

6

otlnaod'

t{lo"

GtEH

qoB

or5cdo

,J,t6

Fl ,:fFoe8?qf.coftF

6

5otq

o.a

0q

(!o

D

sE"(to.D!

oFdF0

U

o

o,(o

1

i

I

I.1rl

{{$IJ

,i,.t!

f;:lr,,1\'?:\-}

a

ar_

_i,o!'l- lt-

aiT::!a:'-

i

*r.,*i.

t

to;e t

*-.;:--!,.'? i

.:

I

ii.*_+

ii

.Ei

4

tT

I," t'

llt t.rllt Il_tIIIt | |III I rIlt I rIIt

.' i

ffidffi"-.ii -t,:? a--t"

1)

I

\

\I

e

o{

ttrl.tl.t ll I t.ll t t t.tl lt l.tl tt l.tl t l_

r-F'r tl ffm,

I

l,nrl INTERNAL MEMO

To

From

f i [] ili.:lCc: US/F&A

PPO

Products Holdings lnc (ESP). PPDA invited the Mby M/s ESP before it (PPDA) concluded its inve

I,J

itt-_|

The Chairman, MoWT Contracts CommitteeThe Commissioner for Transport Regulations "vrhe Asst. commissioner, Transport Regulations (Eng. D. sabiiti)The Ag. Commissioner, Ir/echanical Services/Chair, bid Evaluation ComThe Head of Procurement and Disposal Unit (Attn. Mr. D. Ayo)The Secretary, MoWT Contracts Cbmmitteb

PS-L.'lOs il:, ts'iiii. il\iiiili i' \tr,i'iri il

t.t(i,il ,,1,iiiI,\vl

I

II TCT

r', l'. L U

oIrIr'0il[ \1i: Tli ,.i)AY ()F

Date: 1711112010

Subject: TENDER FOR PROCUREME

zoa.{f ,.x....

MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION IN UG

You will recall that in October 2010 ppDA com d investigations abovetender process following a complaint from one of t idders M/s Enviro t Systems

),4

to a meeting thations.

..,, S\'; nli,'u:l'*r'aCl

of dattendedings and

directives was issued under cover of its letter pp 171000 d ovember 2010

ln a nutshell, PPDA has reached/issued the foilowing findings/d

1. That, ESP's complaints were frivolous and therefore, rejected

, 2. That within the MoWT there was unethical (corrupt) conduct along thel^ procurement process and as a result the procurement process be cancelled andO the process should be restarted using the six (6) firms, which bidded and use itI as a pre-qualified list.t

3' That both M/s ESP and M/s SGS peddled influence and obtained confidentialinformation irregularly from the officials of the Ministry or influenced the process.

:

It has to be noted that some of the officials who engaged in unethical acts and whoi fiave sabotaged a GovernTgnt project have.been-nimed. Others can easily be\. identified. These individual officials haye to face disciplinary actions.

I You should, therefore, review the PPDA report to arrange to restart the tendering' proce-ss. The present process has to be cancelled and the bidders duly informed. The. i l,t-"-$ff

is not bound to use the six (6) firms as a shortlist but could reitrrt the process,, ,f* (@. scratch.

All the officials who are adversely mentioned in the PPDA report should immediatelyi respond in writing explaining wny iney should not be punished.

I'

t t l.tl t t t.ll t t t*tl t t t.r, I t t.tl t t f.tl

.--+-t ::lt--- -. .:- :i 1..- i'' i'- i

Itrr .lll-,ti

I

iji:

-',/illl\i

lI

}(;

o

o

t l- t.t l t l_ l.t l t l- l. t ll- I, I IL[I.tlttl.tl

l,, rt frIL(

Telegram: "MlNlWORKS,,

relephone I 256-414-320L0 I / gTelex 61313 WORKS UGA

rax:256-474-3ZOL35

Email: [email protected] an),corrcspondcncc on rhis sub.lcct plcascqrrote No ADM/282/|

Ministry of Works and TransportHeadquartersProcurement and Disposal UnitP. O. Box 10ENTEBBE

UGANDA

o

THE REPUBLIC OF

UGANDA

L4th November ZO1.O

The Permanent SecretaryMinistry of Works and TransportP.O. Box 10ENTEBBE.

RE: REpoRT oN THE ApprcATroN FoR ADMrNrsrRATrvE REVTEW rNRESPECT TO THE PROCUREMENT FOR PROVISION OF MANDATORYMOTOR VEHICTE INSPECTION SERVICES

I refer to ppDA's administrative review dated Novembe r 2o1,oon pages 27 0f29 and 28 of 29 under subheading "rnfruence peddring by M/s sGS,,. citing anemail published by the Daily Monitor Newspaper, it is alteged that t colludedwith Mr' Ferdenard Bitanihirwe a former country Manager at sGS during thepreparation of the bidding documents. The report concrudes that this amountsto unethical conduct and interference in the bidding process by sGS therebygiving the firm undue advantage over other bidders.

lnterestingly all the issues mentioned under the subheading ,,rnfruencePeddling by sGS" were never presented for clarification or confirmation at theAdministrative Review hearing of r.'t rvor.ri.,r'roro and yet r attended thehearing' I think natural justice would have required that the issues are put tome to respond to before using them to make conctusions andrecommendation.

The following are my clarifications on the issues raised in the report under thesubheading ,,lnfluence peddling by SGS".

qr

o

1

ISSUE 1

On page 1 of the Doily Monitor Newspoper dated l't November 2070, it wasolleged thot Ferdinord Bitanihirwe a former Country Manoger at 9GS ot thetime was in collusion with Eng. Denis Sabiiti of MoWT and that he hod sent himon emoil, proposing that for ony companies to quolify they should haveoperated in at least three continents ond must have at leost copitalinvestments worth 72 million Euro's (5hs.38,3 billion) ond operation for vehicleinspection service in three continents.

RESPONSE

I have never had any E-mail communication or any other communication withthe said Ferdinard Bitanihirwe. I was-qot awgre of the quoted email until theAdministrativeReviewprocesso1W2orcwasbeingcarriedout.U

Et

lssuE 2

It is indicated in the Newspoper that Eng. Denis Sobiiti confirmed the receipt ofthe emoil but soid thot the informotion from Mr. Ferdinard Bitahihirwe wosunsolicited and wos not used in the bid document,

RESPONSE

I have never confirmed to Daily Monitor that the email originated from Mr.Ferdinard Bitanihirwe. As stated in response to lssue 1, I beca m AW theexistence of this email during the Administrative Review of2010.1 then cross-checked all my inbox rnessages and found that this particularemail was sent to my inbox messages on 5th April 2OOg, opened, and printed byunknown person. I think the same person who opened and printed the emailmust be the same person who passed the email over, to Daily MonitorNewspaper. Therefore Daily Monitor should reveal the details of this person.

Since the emait is dated 5th April 2009 and the preparation of the biddingdocument was completed at the end of January 2009 and then forwarded toPPDA on 4th February 2009 for approval in accordance with Regulatio n 2 3Q)then the email information could not have been used by anybody in MoWT as

the bidding document was in custody of the Authority. (Annex 1, which isattached is the forwarding letter to PPDA and Annex 2 is a letter from PPDAdated 8th Aprit 2OO9 approving the bidding document provided the SolicitorGeneral also approves the Contract).

2

ISSUE 3

The Authority noted that Eng. Sabiiti did not disclose to the Accounting Officer

thot he hod been contacted by the bidder M/s SGS during the preparotoryprocess.

RESPONSE

As already stated in response to lssue 1 I came to knrylWrile mentioned

emailduringtheAdministrativeReviewproceSsofM2010andnot during the preparatory process and therefore, I could not have disclosed toyou what I did not know.

)

qD

GO

tssuE 4The Authority noted that there was o similar requirement in the biddingdocument contained under Appendix 3, 4.7(vi), Management of MandatoryMotor Vehicle lnspection for Road worthiness where the requirement forAnnuol Sales Revenue is: (Minimum llnited Stotes Dollar twelve millionUS$72,000,000). This amounts to unethical conduct and interference in the

bidding process by SGS thereby giving the firm undue advantage over the

bidders.

RESPONSE

This analysis and deduction is not correct as USS 12 million is not similar to L2

million Euro's.

The Ministry's (MoWT) estimates of the annual turnover of the motor vehicle

inspection services business was between U.S.S L2 million to U.S.S 13 millionand this was used to arrive at the following figures:-

(a) Bid security of U.S.S 250,000= (Part 2, Section 2, page 2 of 3 of theBid Data Sheet) which is 2% of U.5.S 12.5 million (ie. Mean value ofthe estimates);

(b) Performance Security of U.S.S1.25 million (Part 4, Section 7, page L4

of 16 of the Conditions of contract) which is 10% of U.S.S 12.5

millions (mean value of the estimates);(c) A requirement of a minimum of annual sales revenue of U.S.S 12

million (Appendix 3, 4.1) which is the minimum estimated annual

turnover of the business.

These figures were discussed in a meeting with PPDA held on 6th April 2OO9

and again in another meeting of 23'd September 2009 held with PPDA, Uganda

Motor lndustry Association Members and MoWT. (Annex 3 which is a letter

3

I

from Motor lndustry Association listing issues for discussion at the meeting isattached). lt was after the 23'd September 2009 meeting that PPDA advisedthe Entity to proceed with the bid receipt and opening which was scheduledfor the same day. (PPDA letter is attached as ANNEX 4).

I therefore wonder how PPDA concluded that U.S.S 12 million is simila r to !2million Euro's when they fully participated in the discussions and approval ofthe figures and the bidding document.

This is therefore to submit to you my responses to the issues raised in theAdministrative Review report of November 2010 by PPDA, in areas where myname is quoted.

ng. Denis SabiitiASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ROAD & PIPELINE REGULATION

c.c. The Chairman, Board of Directors,Public Procurement and Disposal of public Assets,KAMPAIA.

c.c The Executive Director,Public Procurement and Disposal of public Assets,KAMPALA.

8

4

\, - ra' ..1

$ry

aa

I r'lr'1 r .,( lr I'lr,,tlr

Ir r

.\r \l\\(,llh\:i(,,{l Jlrrlul',(,t.ttJ r\1)lllis I

:i,. r|.i:ill.lr

\lirrirtr r rrl \\ rrr l.<. llotrsirr.l llrrl( r,llllllr.rlrr,rrr Ilt:trlrltr,tI l(t \.

I

. \'t Ll,l

I,1;ut rl;r

(. \

\t,,rt 'r',.-,\.t', ,' i,tl,.!,i:: _-:,-,,_.

'r .rrlr rrrl 11rlrrrrltlr llr ' .,lr lllr\.rrr'ju

Jrlc:tre r;ttult irr,. r\l)[1/li9J/0 I

r ll, i., i : :ii.;( (,r'! r, \\l) \

le

%

4'l'February 2009.

'l-he Executive Director'Purblic Procurement arld Dis;tosr,i ol'l)rrblie i\sscts Arrthorit-r' (I'jI'}D.,\)

I(AMPALA

Dcar Sir,

i ,LOCiiilEiviEliTOF PRI\/ATII I'iOTOIl- VflllCLtr INSPECTICI'J SEP.\,/JCnS:-Request For Appro\':rl Ol'A l\{otlified Stnndard l}idding Docurncnt

The Ministry of Works and 1'rarrsl)on is re-introducing and privatizing lvlotor Vehic{einspection service in Uganda. T'his process involves concessioning private finns todevelop, install, comnrission and operate nrotor.vchicle inspec{ion stations countrywideand charge rnotor vehicle o\\'ncls arl inspection fee, rvhich should cover tlre bidder'sinitial irrraestment, operating cost. Proflt :ln(l a corlcession fee. Tlic concession fbe rvill lie

According to PPDA Regulation 243(2) this is a project financed Lrnder Build, Own andOperate (BOO) modality and lhc N4inistry has to use arlotl'rer type of contract olcontracting alTangement othcr than tlre stantlard procurenrent procedure and documentsfor procuring the norrnal services. This requires guidance fronr )'ou as to tlie applicableprocurement procedures and docunrents for tliis speciat ptocurelnent.

The Ministry has preparcd bic! llroccdurcs ancl docuriients for liris speclal prcject. 'i-he

procurement procedures in the PPDA Act, 2003 and Regulalions w'ill be generallyapplicable but the Bid Docurrrcnts differ fi'om the usual Standard Bidding Document fornon-consultancy services using hiternational Open Bidding in the following areas:-

(a) Section (I) - Instructions to Bidders{i) Item (2) source of funds:

Tlris has l.,ccn changed to rcflcct that the bidder shall fully providethe lirnds lo irtrplcrncnt the project arrd thcn charge inspection fees.'fhc fccs chargccl sl:lll tle those quoted b1' tlrc bi<lJer in the biddingdocunrcnt.

t+

a

(lt)

(c)

(ii) Ilclll (0) - ('rrnlclrls ol'llirlrlirrg l)octttttctlsl'ltc lisl tlrlir'r . lirrrn llrt' sl.rnrllrr.l tl)cullt 'rtls [,r'citrtsc tlri.s conlrilclrlrrr'r g1r rl il.: , I ,r't!('t,tl ( 1 r11111111r11. r,l ( ','llll,lr'l ;rttrl S;r,.'t'utl( 1'rr11,1r..t,. ,.t r ,.r11t,, I l.rll lt,ls,,'tt,lrli,rtt.. rrl \r,ltll.lr.';lllrl C1tg1l1;11,1

Scction 3 - lir':rluatrrrrt l\'lclltotlolog) (lritcri:rThc Uvulrrltirrrr \'lclhotloloS).' C'r'ilcril usctl lbr tltis Procurcrrrent is

tlrc C]tr,rlilr,nrtl ('ost llirsctl sclccliorr (Q('llS;. rrlriclr is in

accordnrrcc rvilh l)l'l)A ll.cuulations 198. 200 arrrl 201.

Scction 6 - St:rtcnrcrrt ol' Ilcquit'ctrtctttsTerrrrs ol'llcli'r'u'ncc (1-OR) ttl bc used b1' tlre succcsslul biddcr {odevelo;:. irrstilll. corrrrrrission and operate tcclrrrical nrotorvehicle ilrspcction sla(iorls throughoul tlre countrl'and chargeinspectiorr lbcs.

s (d) ?art 4 - Contt'ec(, .Scctiolts 7, 8 nnd 9

This procurcnrent has only s€ctiorls 7 (Conditiorrs of Contract) and8 (Contracl [orrls). Tlrc contract is quite differerrt fionr standardcorltracts in that the service prcvider will charge inspection feesfronr vehiclc o\\,ners in order to recover his/hcr investments,operating expenses and lhe concession lees that are paid toGovernnrent instead of tlrc Covernment payiug the serviceprovider.

(c) Pnrt 4 scction 9 - z\grccnrcrttThe fornr of Cor:trrct y'.grcenrent is different fronr tlre standard agreementbecause the conditiorrs of contract dilfer. This agreenrent has, therefore,been prepared in accordance with these conditions of contract.

The Contracts Committee of Ministry of Works and Transport at its 374t1' nreeting held

- , of, I6th J'anuary 2009, advised ttre Ministry to firsl consult PPDA and any otherrehvant&-' organ in the pio".r. of preparing the special modified Standard BiciciingDocurnent and

UO Form of Conrracr.

I accordingly enclose a copy of thc r:rodilied Bidding Document for the Procurement ofMandatory Motor Vehicle Insllcction Scrviccs for your consideration and subsequentapproval.

Your Iy,

Muganzi

I

I

2

PtrRI\IANENT RtrT.AIi)'

'r'\Y -t'- ' *-

Our Ref: ..

r-".-h\T,J!fr]

r ioJffi

"1,:: :]ff T;1*l *j_is p o s a I o f p u b I ic A s s e r s A u t h ori ty

,, rer: +2s6 (0414).r,,if Xllil;lr";r,"ilil;H,r,,,, ,r,I..PPDA&[2Ail0.0.......

.

Your Ref:

86 April, 2009

The Permanent Secretary,

Yinrjoy of Works and Transport,P.O.Box 10,

EN]EEBE

PROCUREMEIYT OF PRIVATE Y9TOR \{EHICLE_INSPECTION

SERWCES:.ffi3m*:'. appnbvarl oF ;-Mo;ffi*o srAr,rDAib BTDDTNGReference is made to the meetine be

:;r:mixl,?lrt*'"ii"i',1fi ,:"ff :lXifr '"Tn;:I".T,1i';ffi ;fl :.#.11;',1:

In the meeting-your Entity raised issues in relation to the Authority,s ad'ice contained inffil'ffi;i#yffi,,n"Tj;;"-n 'r""n";;;;.i,""rv paragraphs 2 and 7 or the

t I;##;'y,:X::f,",;:;1,,,1:;::;,Ji,,i:0,{:;",1;,u,00", ,o avotd ,he project

.t*"i--'.{

*

di Special Conditiotts ofContract as a deviation isThe Authority would like ro clarify the following

2. T-ne standard General Condifions of Contract be nru nh+,"anecessary,

and amended by the

I. It is at the discretion of yourbidder acquire the land itsJi

Entity acquire the land for rhe bidder or let fre

, BTr"r.#I":::11,.::,;i*"il."r,,rhat unrike the tradirionar standard Biddingpro vide. o p. y r n e en t i ty, ;]ffi ;##?:#J:,H ti:i,:: S.*,:,ii:*L*;inappricabre jn the pr.r"ui ;;il;;;r.nr process. your Enrity may go ahead rvitrrsffiif;8;', ::; ::,?;;::T F "

i a.i,r,,i J, " ;;;, con d i r ions i n ou, ret rer of

Pa-ec I of 2

ll't,ltstlc ww^, n.d1 a^ ,,^ =_

Palcoo

':{,

rD':;p

3' The Bidding Docuntcnt should providc guidance to dre porenrial bidders of thepa5rment methodology to be adopted bv [e users of the iervice *l,l.f, would bcfurther agreed upon du'ing negotiations with ,r," ,r...rrfur Bidder;

1' l-"--t-,"'ded Bidding Document should be su:t t,s the solicitor General for, approvar as required undcr Reguration qi;J;, the pubric pro"rr"rent andDisposal of public Assers Regulailons, ZOOi;.=

i.j:ffi;::"#. a copv of the finar bidding docurnent approved by thc soricitor Gerrcrar

.ai'.--

s DIRECTOR

cc:'lhe Generalcc: Chairman, Contracts Committee ,

cc: Hcad, Procurement and Disposal Unit

II95

PalcooPage2 of 2

! O*t

7216, ffrnpdo,

trLtr-. IUgondo Moto tr 6,io1,'i

dustry AssociotionlOOd tud Bet ftodd . pO. fb( .Id: +256 plat A3/rO5l6\4UtJgodo

02 September 2009

Executive DirectorPublic Procurement and Disposar (of pubric Assets) AuthoritlWorl<ers HouseP.O. Box 3925Kamp?la, Uganda

Dear Sir,

tl

l02l . Fq.+256

tr_ _ri

{o)414345637

b

6,o

RE: TENDIIR FOR PROCUI}.EMENT oF MANDATORY MoToR VEHICLE=iir:SFEC fiort SER ViCES

I--am rvriting to you on- trehalf of ,Uganda Motor Indusrry Association members todispute the manner the above terrdering process is being tranatea.

we read through rhe bidding document and established that the bidding documenr istailored to foreign bidders as incicated in the points not a b.to*,

I' ELIGIBILITY CRITERION (parr2 se*ion 3 pg 2 of 5)

,+il eligibte bidders are requirecr tc provide evitlence ..ri" the follo* ing:(i) Recommetrdations frorn client where services ol'mandatory motor 'ehicleinspection for road worthiness have been or are ueing rendered:. As you are awar€. no rocar compan), in uganda has ever rendered such aservice since such service was onry ever

-rendered by government underMinistry of Works.

(ii) Evidence of annuar rurnover of nor ress than usD s (ri'e) miilion orequivalent in Uganda shillings:There is no reason whr' conrpinies must hare such a high turnover in orde r torender such a service.

(iii) ISo 9001: 2000 ce^iricatio, in quatitl, maragemenr sysrems:Most molor vehicre dearer corprnie, in tjeanda represent foreignmanttfacturers r'r'hose products confoinr to inrernatiinal standards and dealersmust conlbrm to sttch staildards without necessaril-r having lSo certificarion.

2' BID SECLIRIT)' oF tiSD 250,000 (Part 2 Section 2 pg2of 3 Bicl f)ara .Streer)

This antount is high for an.r' nlotor vehicle dealer companv in Llgancla lrur *.e think itrvas lnade hig.h to discourage companies lrorn participaing.

lr

I 2

%

3. TECHNICAL EVALUATION CR lrrRlON: (Part 2: Seclion 3 pg 3 of i)

Point No. 3: Experience and skllls of the bidder in implementing technical mandatory

motor rrehiclc inspcctiurr for toacl worthiness is s<xlred 3i9'oof the total sco,-e and yel

all local cornpanies do nol have this experience.

4. PERFORMANCE SECURITY (Part 4 Section 7, pg 14 of 16)

A performance security which shall amount to l0% of the estimated annual tumover

of the business (i.e. USD 1.2-5nr) orequivalent in Uganda shillings is required.

This is unfair to the bidders l,ecause it's very costly to obtain such a performance

security from financial institutions

5. INSPECTION EQUIPMENT (Appendix 2 Section 6 pg 5 - 7)

The equipmenr listed is more than what is necessary to render the service of vehicle

inspection.

In our view, the local motol vehicle dealers are in bener position to provide the

rnandatory motor vehicle rrrspection services since they repr€sent manufacturers ofvarious vehicle brands that cclrform to international startdards and also have already

established premises. For example, if you look at countries such as the UK, any

worfcshop/garuEe can be cenified by rheir governmenl to carry out motor vehicle

inspection, the benefit being to enable the motor vehicle owners to have their vehicle

certified at a place of their convenience.

We rherefore requesl that the hidding documenl be revised in order to give the local

companies (especially manuliic:urers' representatives) a chance to participate in this

tender. This will benefit the vehicle owners b5, paying less fees and also offeremployment opportunities to tire local people.

We wait for your quick and prompl action.

Yours faithfulll,,UCAMDA MOTOR INDI: ST.:1.\' ASSOCIATION

----CHAIRI\IAN

Cc The Permanenl Secrelarl . N4inisirl ot'\\'orks and 1-ransport. 1/

Cc The Prime Ir4inister's Olllce P. O. Bor 341 - Kampala

-[4lnrex +t-r':i / rll _rrtt I 1 1,,: .,:,i, .l IJ :_i I I '1 1;:l

itublic Procurornent and Dlsposal of public Assets Authority1 F,ilkingion Road, 14th Floor, Workers ltouse, p.O. Box 3$2S, Kampala, Ugartda

Tet: +256 (0414) A111OO Fax: +256 (0414) 344{t58PP

OurRef.

Yaur Ref::

DA/M.20t000 )o Il\c(s)

\

%23"r September, 2009

C--l*ir*-,lrpDLl,'

'fhe Psrnranent Secretary,Vlinistry of Works and Transport,P.O.Box 10,

ENTEBBE

PROCLIIIEMEI\T OF PRTVATE MOTOR VEHJCLE II,ISPECTI0N SERVICES:-PRGCUREMENT REF. NO. I[{OWT/SVC/07-O8/OOil tReferettce is made to the meeting held today Wednesday 23.d september 2009 at 9:00 anr

Xl.fi:l#,,1,ffiT"1?T.l:**i the Authlrit;;d ,# J'rr"iy,ii, r,,ir,r,""y'in ,e,p*.i

- This is to c;onf-lrrn that you shoutd go ahead withEntiry's schedule. fhe UiA submissiin date snould

the bid recoipt and opening as per yourtherefore not be exlendod.*

@o

F 7

<'. -

f's

t

o"

cc: Chainn;rn, Contracts Commineecc:Ilead, Procrrremenl and Disposal Unit

F,P tI 3,l.it:: f'rtrr'l,.rr

Cks/cooPagr: I of I

tj

t I

T"

I

Telegram: 'MINIWORKSTelephone: 25642-32010119Telex: 61313 WORKS UGAFax: 256-42-3201 35E-Mail: MOWHC@|mul.com,ln any correspondenco on this subjectplease quote No: FIN 93/99/01

22nd November 2010

The Executive Director:Public Procurement and Disposalof Public Assets AuthorityP.O. Box 3925KAMPALA

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

Ministry of Works and

Transport Headq uarters,

P O Box 10,

Entebbe,

UGANDA

r.iil cF

nr'l-'t)ili'f i't rlir!'"'

i.t

rCIJ

Ur

I.aPPDA FINDINGS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFT OCUREMENT R

I i pRovtstoN oF MANDATORY MOTOR VEHTCLE tNSpI' N SERVICES

I draw reference to letter ADMl2Bzll of 14th November zolo dressed to me and ed toyou inter alia by one Eng. Denis Sabiiti, Assistant Cffim ioner, Roads andTransport Regulations, Ministry of Works-and Transport.person in the forrnulation of the project and preparation ofcopy of the letter is attached for ease of reference.

Eng. D. Sabiiti is aggrieved and has registered his comptaint "Uort

the adverse commentsof unethical conduct and being irregularly influenced_ by SGS in the course oi preparing theBidding Document. The officer:-

a) Denies..any exchange of conespondence with SGS, denies having confirmed so withthe Daily Monitor Newspaper and contends that the date of the ehait was well after^!_, the Bid Document had been submitted to ppDA for approval;

b) Argues that PPDA acted unfairly and unjustty when it dodged seekins the officer,sexplariation when he with olheis appeaied'-before ppDA; i"i-r.roi"rber 2010,which is a departure from the basics of naturatjustice.

c) Argues that the stiputations in the Bid Document are not the same as those in the e-'mail in point.

Eng. Denis Sabiiti contends that. these allegations on pp 27 and 28 of your report arefactually wrong, unfair and shourd be expunged from the report.

, I wish to underline that all those officiats and p-roviders mentioned in the report as havingperpetrated unethical (corrupt) acts and acts of sabotage shoutd face sanctions. tt woutdsend a wrong signal of condoning comrption and sabotige if the perpetrators are teft to go

. Denis Sabiiti was leadStandard Bid A

a

It t rJ I t t rJ t t t rJ tf t rJ t t t | ll r t ll

i'i " '

tr.r\

a

o

ttt rJ ttt rl ttL rJ ttt tl tl.t tl ttt tl

'rTr'ir

t

"scot-free" while the.procurement process is being restarted after losing fourteen (14)

months since the tenders were opened on 23ro September 2009!!

,, \.}

lhe dipliplinary acJio4s on Eng. Denis Sabiiti are now being stayed until you respond.

t .,'",i li ,./ ,i..' '.! ',: . .' jii n fr i'i:"':... .;'

'"",t'''l't'-""i I .''\..C.. Muganzi v..,r

PENMENEN} SECRETARY

o

9 ,

It r rt It rJ lt t rJ lt t rJ tt t tl I r r (,J

llI

..'--t

. 4..

t

i

I

I

o

o

t rtttt rJttt rJttt rJ ttt rl tu. rJtl

e

I

:u l I 12.12 256 119 311 113

aur ........IPDJNI20/000

i?h January, ?-01 I

The Permanent Secretary,Ivllnisuy of Works and Transport,P.O.Bcv. 10,

EMEBBB

PP

Public Procurernent and Disposat ofPtot 37 Nakasoro Road. Nakasero Towers Sth floor,

Iel: .256 (0414) 311100 Fax: +25

PuP.O. tsox 3925, Kcmpale, Uganda6 (0414) 344858

T202? P. 00 I /005

F,ef: A\our

i)

k'

cfts let'%t

o

tI

i

RE: PPDA FINDINGS OF THE ADMIMST REYIEW THEPROCUREMENT FOR PROVISION OFINSPECTION SERYICES

TORY. M

Referenc0 is made m your letter under ref: FIN I dated 22"d N l0 onthe above subjcct matrcr. Wc apologisc for thc delay in ing to your I

Ip your letter you refened to the letter dsted 146 fromEirg, Dcnis Sabilti Asst Commlssloner, Roads and f thcMinistry of r,Vorks and Trursport that was a,fiached to your lertcr.

o fire Authority has cuefully sildied both your lottcr and that of Eng. Sabiiri and has norcdttio following: .

' ti) That Eng. Sabiiti is aggricvcd by the adversc comments in the PPDA reportrelating to unethioal conduot and bclng inogularly irrfluerrccd by SGS in thc

, i' course of preparation oftho bidding doqlmcnt.

b) That Eng.'Sabiiti allegee that tho said man* of comspondenco by email withSoS was dodgod by PPDA duiing tho administrativc rcview hearing and wasnwqr brougtrt to tho oflicct's attcntion'in order to seek his reply thereto and soto.make findings on such lssucs which'was in contavcntion of thc basicprinciples of narural jusrice,

d) That Eng, Ssbiiti seeks that tlro said frndings aro unfair, factrully incorrecr and"should bo cxpungcd from tho'PPDA Admirfistrative Review roporr.

..d) 'That'you ,gr.. that ail those dffrcials and'providers stated in rhe PPDA reporr. as perpetrators of unethical condust slrould faco sanorions.

MAC/en

)l

tilIttI

+'

T

EFORE i,{E

oo//..ar,.

iifi l$ t ti t,

fl Ei llq. RrtrtB TI

B

2

oRO

I t++ rJ I t t-tr{+ [*TI'L1 t rJ I

I :--.

i--jr

\

t t t rt t t t rt t t t rJ t t t rJ t t t

iit,','

tii

I

o

a

rl trt llt,L

t

t"t.

2011 12:13 258,114 311 113 PPOT

ffrf ,

l$1

hl

il

,12022 P.001/005

ry're,u/'

a+^

;{a) Thar ir tv to lace a'contract uatedcider after l0 da s from the date the notice rvas glYen.

e) You seek to know whether-(i) rhe alle ations of i behaviour w'ere indeed made a inst SCS

8ga rnst whom

(ii) information contained in tho newspaper arrisle was derived fronr-IpDA.

You t'urther requested for a copy of thc PPDA Admini strative Revierv Report.

The Authority responds as follols:

l. ThE PPDA Administrative

l9

o,J

+

Revierv report issued by the Aurhority observed thatthere was unothical conduct and interference/infl uencc pcddling by SGS in rtrcbidding process. This tinding was arrlved at after getting an'admission by Eng.Denis Sablltl the Asslstut Comrnlssloncr,Regulations of thc Ministry of Works and Tranqport

Hc ho FcrdB of SGS sritcria to tO

4. Undcr PPDA Rcgularion 34?(4) (c) tho Authority ir rcquiredto immcdiately notifi

upon rocoipt of anapplication for Adminisuativo Rcvlew, ell biddcrs of hoapplication and invito thcm to submit any relevant information prior to a givendeadline. Indeed this was dono the m all thc bidders who

2, Thc content of the omail from Mr. Bitanihinre of SGS proposed that for anycompanies to qualiff for tho tender, they should have opcretcd in at least thrcocontinents and must havo u least capital hvcstmcnts wortir 12 million Euros.

3. The Authority would like to point out that under Seetion gj tf l (c) of the ppDAAcq it ls an offenco for a pcnson !o exert unduo in{luencs on Bn omployeo of aprocuringanddisposingentityinth@hcrfunctionsundcrthc Act. Under Scction 35 (a) ono of ilrs'responsibiliries of thc Uscr Depargnent islo recommend Statemcntr^of RquircmenB ro thc hoourcmenr and Disposal Unit.Thc rcprosontadvs of SGS who sent an'email to Eng Sabiitl who was frorn thcUsor Deparfinont undcr the Minlsry of Works anl Trrnrport was thereforooommiming an offenceunderthc PPDA Aot.

a

x+ against SGS were

thc in as far as the allegations

I rJ"r["[ tJ I I t rj,+,t,[ tJ tt t rJ lt t tJ I

ve revtew

-j----;:=--;*-.---

,t

I'r:Iil

a

o

t rJ t t t rt tt t rJ t t t rttt t lJ t t t rJ t t

t*i'; __=

011 12'12 258 {1{ 311 '113

Sabiiti that he rvas in collusiorr with the bidder who rva.s trfing to exen unduiin{'luence on an officer of a procuring and disposing entity in rhe performance6hiFfunctiorts in the procurement process.

5. fhe Authority would like to further point out that under Section 95 (l) (c) of thePPDA Act, it is an offence tbr a person to excrt undue influence on an employee of aprocuring and disposing entiry in the performancc of hls or her funcrions under theAct. Under Section 35 (a) ono of the responsibilities of the User Department is rorecommend Statements of Requirements to the Procurement and Disposal Unit. Therepresentativc of SGS who sent an email to Eng Sabiiti who was from the UserDeparrment under thc Minisuy of Works and Transport in this procurement, was

therefore commining an offenco under the PPDA Act. Eng. Sabiiti aided and abetted

rhis offenco by his failuro Io disoloso tho email m his superlors or even fic Confracts

Commincc who arb rcsponsiblo for recommending suspension against bidders whobreach ths Ethical Codo of Biddcrs- --

6. The PPDA report noted that tho email ftom Mr. Bitsnihirwe proposed that for anycompanies to qualifr, ttrcy strould havc operetcd in qt least tluec continents and musthave at least capiml invesrments wonh 12 milllon Eunrs. The of rhe

lrnal bidding document thas shc to

rcquircment for Annual sales revonue is:minhnum US Dollar 12 million.

7. Tho allcgation by Eng. Sabiitl that tho Autlrority participatcd ln tho discussion and

approval of tlro final Bidding Document is misplaccd slnce 0tc technlcal rcqulremartswcr0 tha and from PPDA Rogulation 243 (2\ mandarcs

for public private conractingt0 apProvc documcnts ando\-

in ordor to onsure that they aro in acoordanco with tho principtos of the AcL Thouthority stands by thc obsonntlon in tho

PPOA

Roviow of

t2022 P.002/005

tho

ov

Asl bctwccn tlrc l{

t t tltt t tltt t It I rJ ttJlu

We hopA that tlrat above responso of tho Auttrority, that you requested for, will guide youas you decide on whether to implcmenr tho rccommendEtlons of PPDA wlth regard to thcdisciplinary actions to takc against Eng. Sabiitl.

Plcaso do not hesitate to seck any futher clarification with rcspect to this matter.

o4"MSCornelia K. SabiitiFOR: H(ECUTIVE DIRECToR

t "'i,.f"[

t ---If

i

o

o

I ttt rl ttt rl ttt tJ tt t rlttl rltt t t

,';-* - Kaehwe;Kafmlzi;-BwmH &t . emiep * law, btituq,-Advua4, hflnfubnas fr

a

@ths, TraMa&l.1r

Public.Ass efs Authority (PPD A)Plot 37 Nokosero RoodNokosero fowers5n FloorP. O. 8ox 3925Kompolo,

Deor Sir,

RE: NOT,CE OF ,MENDED APPUCALON JUDICIALOF.YOUR RECOMMENDAI'ONS

'N IHE UREMENr R

PROY'S'ON OF MANDAIORY MOIORSERVICES.

I.E 'NSPECIION

We oct for ond on beholf of Engineer Denis Sobiili theAssistont Commhsioner, Tronsport Regulotion, Ministry ofWorks ond Tronsport, hereinofter colled !'our Clienf" ondwe hove instructions to write to you os foilows;

ln your letter doted 4th November, 2010 where youottoched your findings ond recommendotions on theobove subject of poge 27 ond 28, yov sioted thus;

'Tnflueace Peddling bylvils SGS:

On page 1 of the Daily Monitor Newspaper dated 7't Noveabe42010, it was alleged that Mr. Ferdinand Bitanihirwe a formerCountry Managw at SGS at the time was ia collusion withEagineer Denis Sabiiti of MOW aad he had sent him il, e-aailprupuing that for any coapaniee to qualify,' they should haveoperated in at least three contiaeats and must have at leastcapital investmeats worth 12 millioa Eums $hs. AS.S billioa) andoperatioa for vehicle inspution seruice ia three contineata.'

It is indicated in .the Newspaper that Eryineer Denis Sabiitionfirmed rceipt of the e'mail but said that'the iafon4ation fiomMr. Ferdnaad Bitanihirwe was unsolicited and wae not used iathe bid docuaeat Lhe Authoity noted that Eng. Sabiiti did notdisclose to the Accounting Ofrcer that he had been contacted bythe bidder IWs SGS during the prcparatorlr pt ess.

5:,

o

Ktrenprt - lQfttuziGellasctlg (M)tO DIP.LP.(LE)0392-965775