British firms claim they were short-changed by National Irrigation Board (NIB).
While cancelling the tender, NIB General Manager Gitonga Mugambi said the firms did not show proof of ownership of machinery required for the works.
The consortium, through its lawyer Wilfred Nyamu, claims that it won the tender competitively and that NIB is in breach of Section 80 of the Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2015.
A fresh tendering dispute is threatening to delay the multi-billion High Grand Falls dam project along Tana River after the National Irrigation Board (NIB) declined to award the contract to the winning consortium.
A consortium of British companies GBM and ERG Engineering, which won the tender to construct the Sh200 billion dam by virtue of two earlier rulings by the Public Procurement Review Board (PPRB), has appealed against NIB’s decision to reject its bid.
The dispute over tender number NIB/T/018/2016-2017 comes up for the third round of hearing at the Procurement Review Board tomorrow following an appeal by the London based contractor.
The bone of contention is that GBM and ERG Engineering Consortium was denied the contract after failing to show proof of ownership or capacity to hire equipment, yet the firms are globally renowned manufacturers of heavy equipment and that they had included details of their machinery at their disposal in the tender documents.
The consortium was among seven pre-qualified international construction firms — five of them Chinese — which participated in the bidding under the fund, design, build, own, operate and transfer model of the multi-billion project but the NIB has twice declined to accept its win.
Six companies were eliminated at the preliminary stages after they failed to proof their technical and financial capacities but the matter has remained unresolved.
Proof of ownership
While cancelling the tender, NIB General Manager Gitonga Mugambi said the firms did not show proof of ownership of machinery required for the works.
"Your firm attained a technical score of 68.5 per cent which was below the minimum technical score of 70 per cent due to failure to show proof of ownership or capacity to hire equipment, in form of logbooks or signed agreements," read Mr Mugambi's letter dated October 8.
According to suit papers seen by the Business Daily, the British consortium accuses the NIB general manager of being "illogical, irrational and unfair to them" by cancelling the tender despite being declared bid winners by PPRB.
The consortium wants PPRB to set aside NIB’s decision to cancel the tender, review the tendering process and compel NIB, the procuring entity, to declare them winners.
It also wants NIB held to account for failure to comply with the orders of the procurement review board and for contravening various tendering laws.
The consortium, through its lawyer Wilfred Nyamu, claims that it won the tender competitively and that NIB is in breach of Section 80 of the Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2015.
Mr Nyamu said NIB used an illogical basis to disqualify the firm, adding that claims that his client did not provide proof of technical capacity were untrue because the tender documents had proof that they manufacture their own equipment.
PAYE Tax Calculator
Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.
