Row erupts over energy contract
May 07, 2008
A CHINESE company, CCC-XPTTEC-CCC (Nig), has protested against the award of the Bujagali Electricity interconnection project to Jyoti Structures Limited, an Indian company, which it claims did not meet the tender requirements and has never handled a 220kv project in Africa.
A CHINESE company, CCC-XPTTEC-CCC (Nig), has protested against the award of the Bujagali Electricity interconnection project to Jyoti Structures Limited, an Indian company, which it claims did not meet the tender requirements and has never handled a 220kv project in Africa, writes James Odomel.
The project is run by Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Ltd (UETCL).
It involves building a 220kv power station in Bujagali, drawing a transmission line to Kawanda and putting up a132kv in Kawanda. It is funded by the African Development Bank.
Yu Yang, the CCC-XPTTEC-CCC (Nig) country representative, claimed his firm emerged the best out of the three bidders.
He said the won on technical and financing abilities. The other bidder was Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd, also an Indian company.
In an April 11 letter to Eriasi Kiyemba, the UETCL managing director, Yang said: “In view of these and other unstated aspects, we feel that the award was un-procedurally done and was not done in a transparent, fair and accountable manner.
Hence, we wish to protest the evaluation results in the strongest terms possible, the award and the subsequential signing of the said contract with this contractor, which we believe we had rightfully and legally won.â€
“We are also aware that the contractor awarded the tender has no sufficient experience in undertaking such a project in Africa, which has a mandatory requirement in the tender document,†the letter added.
A source said on the very bidding day, the envelops of the two Indian companies were not sealed in accordance with the tender document rule.
“The injustice was observed on the very day of sealing the bids. The two Indian companies did not seal the three envelops in one according to the tender document rules. “This prompted the Chinese company to complain but it was ignored,†the source said.
Yang also wrote to UETCL requesting to be provided with the tender evaluation report, which he said they were entitled for perusal and ease of reference.
However, Kiyemba in response said: “As for the tender evaluation report, this is an internal document, solely for the employer’s usage in bid adjudication. You may however, ask specific questions related to your submission, or choose to arrange a meeting with us for a debriefing.â€
Frank Katusiime, the UETCL board chairman, in a status report on the procurement of a contractor to the finance and energy ministers, said during the board meeting of April 1, some of the members were of the view that there had been errors in the evaluation and would only approve the board paper if the bid evaluation team report was corrected.
He, however, added that at a board meeting on April 8, the two board members (Kiyemba) and David Ssebabi were of the view that the board was acting beyond their mandate.
They argued that the board had no power to review the board paper since it had received a no objection from the bank. But three of the board members in an opinion said the bid evaluation report was “inaccurate and gives misleading information to the bank.â€
The board therefore resolved by majority that approval of the board paper be deferred until such a time as the bid evaluation team answered some questions raised.
Sources said it was at this time of the meeting that Kiyemba declared that he would execute the contract with or without board approval. Kiyemba, however, denied any foul play involved in the tender process.
“The tendering process was very transparent and of course those who lost had to complain. However, they should go to the relevant authorities and present their case instead of running to the media,†he said when asked for a comment.
The Inspectorate General of Government, Justice Faith Mwondha, has also been petitioned over the matter.
The project is run by Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Ltd (UETCL).
It involves building a 220kv power station in Bujagali, drawing a transmission line to Kawanda and putting up a132kv in Kawanda. It is funded by the African Development Bank.
Yu Yang, the CCC-XPTTEC-CCC (Nig) country representative, claimed his firm emerged the best out of the three bidders.
He said the won on technical and financing abilities. The other bidder was Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd, also an Indian company.
In an April 11 letter to Eriasi Kiyemba, the UETCL managing director, Yang said: “In view of these and other unstated aspects, we feel that the award was un-procedurally done and was not done in a transparent, fair and accountable manner.
Hence, we wish to protest the evaluation results in the strongest terms possible, the award and the subsequential signing of the said contract with this contractor, which we believe we had rightfully and legally won.â€
“We are also aware that the contractor awarded the tender has no sufficient experience in undertaking such a project in Africa, which has a mandatory requirement in the tender document,†the letter added.
A source said on the very bidding day, the envelops of the two Indian companies were not sealed in accordance with the tender document rule.
“The injustice was observed on the very day of sealing the bids. The two Indian companies did not seal the three envelops in one according to the tender document rules. “This prompted the Chinese company to complain but it was ignored,†the source said.
Yang also wrote to UETCL requesting to be provided with the tender evaluation report, which he said they were entitled for perusal and ease of reference.
However, Kiyemba in response said: “As for the tender evaluation report, this is an internal document, solely for the employer’s usage in bid adjudication. You may however, ask specific questions related to your submission, or choose to arrange a meeting with us for a debriefing.â€
Frank Katusiime, the UETCL board chairman, in a status report on the procurement of a contractor to the finance and energy ministers, said during the board meeting of April 1, some of the members were of the view that there had been errors in the evaluation and would only approve the board paper if the bid evaluation team report was corrected.
He, however, added that at a board meeting on April 8, the two board members (Kiyemba) and David Ssebabi were of the view that the board was acting beyond their mandate.
They argued that the board had no power to review the board paper since it had received a no objection from the bank. But three of the board members in an opinion said the bid evaluation report was “inaccurate and gives misleading information to the bank.â€
The board therefore resolved by majority that approval of the board paper be deferred until such a time as the bid evaluation team answered some questions raised.
Sources said it was at this time of the meeting that Kiyemba declared that he would execute the contract with or without board approval. Kiyemba, however, denied any foul play involved in the tender process.
“The tendering process was very transparent and of course those who lost had to complain. However, they should go to the relevant authorities and present their case instead of running to the media,†he said when asked for a comment.
The Inspectorate General of Government, Justice Faith Mwondha, has also been petitioned over the matter.