Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1 of 42
Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited Address -: First floor Palika Bhawan, Shivaji Nagar, Bhopal – 462016 Madhya Pradesh (India)
(Ph:-0755-2552730) Email id: [email protected]
No: /MRTS/2016/ 3275 Dated: 31/05/2016
Minutes of the Pre-Bid Meeting regarding selection of General Consultant for M.P. Metro Rail Projects
RFP No. 01/GC/MPMRCL/2016 Dated 06/05/2016
Pre-Bid meeting regarding selection of general consultant for M.P. Metro rail project was organized in Room No. 107 of Directorate
of Urban Administration and Development at 11:00 AM on 23rd
May 2016 in the presence of members of tender committee members
and representatives of various consultancy firms. List of participants is enclosed in Annexure-I. After due deliberations the reply on
clarifications sought towards RFQ cum RFP regarding selection of General consultant for M.P. Metro Rail Projects are furnished here
under :
S.
No
Section Page
No.
RFP Excerpt Clarifications Sought MPMRCL’s Reply
1. Letter of
Invitation.
serial no. 1
7 The Government of India (hereinafter
called Borrower) has applied financing
from Japan International Corporation
Agency (JICA) towards the cost of Madhya
Pradesh Metro Rail Projects for Bhopal and
Indore (hereinafter called-the Project).
It is requested to kindly confirm whether the RFP has been
approved by the JICA or what is the status of the approval.
RFP is under process
of JICA approval
however MPMRCL
will proceed at its
own and existing
clause shall prevail
2. Letter of
Invitation,
point No. 3
page No. 7 and section 2
data sheet
clause No. 4
page No. 36
7 &
36
– A consultant will be selected under
QCBS (Quality and cost based selection
process with 80% & 20% weights for
Technical & Financial Proposal respectively) and procedures described in
RFP
We request you to please change the QCBS weights from
80:20 to 90:10 for Technical & Financial respectively.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 2 of 42
3. Letter of
Invitation ,
Point No. 7
7 Document it is stated that the last date of
issuing addendum by the client is
28.05.2016.
Hence we propose that at least 8 weeks time should be
provided for submission of bid. The Bid due date may
please be extended up to 15.07.2016.
In this connection we wish to submit that the bid requires
collaboration with International consultants. Also many
International Experts are to be deployed on the projects.
The process of collaboration and selection of expert shall
need much more time. At least minimum 8 weeks time
shall be required for preparation and submission of bid after issue of addendum/amendment.
Bid submission date
and time is extended
up to 7-7-2016 till
15:30 hrs.
4. Section 2 Part 1 (C)
Replacement
of Key
Expert
Clause 8.6
and Clause
10 of SCC,
Page 203
22 Replacement of Key Expert
It is stated that, for the reasons other than
death, prolonged illness requiring change
of physical location which shall be duly
certified by a medical practitioner
registered with Government Authority, remuneration to the key personnel will be
reduced by 10% for each replacement.
However in case replacement of the key
personnel’s happens more than 10% every
year, there will be penalty of 0.25% of
overall man months payable to the GC
In this regard, it is submitted that all the Consultants try their level best to keep the
proposed key personnel but due to unavoidable
circumstances beyond their control, substitutions
are needed. Also as per normal practice followed
by all renowned agencies like World Bank, ADB,
AfDB etc. in all other ongoing projects in respect
of Replacement of Key personal the Client accept
replacement with equivalent or better qualification
and experience and at a same rate of
remuneration.
Hence, the Client is requested to kindly accept
replacement of key personnel with equivalent
or better qualification and experience and at a
same rate of remuneration without any
penalty.
We consider this clause as punitive and
counterproductive to the delivery of the
assignment. This clause seems to be of a
regulatory nature rather than a facilitator nature.
Consultants have only a certain level of control on
the choice of staff whether to continue in a particular job or not. Thus penalizing the
consultant for the leaving of a staff (which legally
is not in the consultant’s control) does not seem to
be in line with international guidelines such as
provided for by the World Bank / ADB. These
risks will ultimately be passed on to the client.
With so many projects in India running concurrently
it is inevitable that staff will move between
We Partly agreed, Addendum is being
issued separately
Page 3 of 42
companies and projects. The client is contracting the
consultant for the delivery of a service and not for
manpower supply. The consultants are bound to
deliver a particular service even if the staff has left
and this risk is acceptable to consultants.
We request for a total deletion of these penalties.
Replacement penalty @10% is on higher side. We
request you to please reduce the replacement penalty
from 10% to 5% and if replacement of key person
happens more than 10% every year, there will be additional penalty of 0.25% of replaced staff man-
months only.
We also request that if replacement takes more
than 15(Fifteen) days than additional penalty of
1% should be applicable on replaced man-months
only.
We feel current replacement penalty is very high,
request you to provide some limit for replacement as
done in other GC’s in India like MEGA, Lucknow,
Nagpur.
We request you to replace the existing clause as: Overall replacement of key experts (whose CV is to
be evaluated at proposal stage) shall not exceed 10%
during first 02 years and 20% in subsequent years
(similar to other JICA RFP). If replacement exceeds
these limits, a penalty of 5% of the replacement man-
months shall be levied.
Replacement of Key Staff, is very challenging for
Consultants, since, Key Staff doesn’t turn up to join,
due to various reasons beyond the control of
Consultants.
We would request to remove the penalty clauses
for the same and accept a replacement with equal
or better credentials, at the same billing rate.
5. Clause
12.1.(ii)
B-
Consultant’s
Experience
24
96
About forty (40) pages of relevant
completed projects illustrating the
Consultant‘s relevant experience (TECH
2B, 2C & 2D).
….. Each member of JV/ Consortium shall
provide separate details. Use about 60
pages
Please Clarify, the Total Page Limit for TECH 2B, 2C and
2D
Cumulatively total
page limit for TECH-
2B, 2C, and 2D will
be about sixty (60)
pages, Addendum is
being issued
separately.
Page 4 of 42
6. Technical
Proposal
Format and
Content,
Clause 12 (v)
26 CVs of the Key Experts signed by the Key
Experts themselves and by the authorized
representative submitting the proposal
Since, the Key Staff are spread across the world, it is very
difficult to arrange for the original signature on the CVs.
We would request you to allow scanned signatures at the
bidding stage. Original Signatures may be asked for, during
Contract Signing
Agreed. Addendum is
being issued
separately.
7. Financial Proposals
Format and
Content,
Clause
13.1.ii and
Section 5
Financial
Proposal
Fin-2 :
Summary of
Cost Page
No.117
27
Financial Proposals Format and Content
The Financial Proposal requires completion
of three forms, FIN-1 to FIN-3 shown in
Section 5.
The Financial Proposal format doesn’t have any FIN for
filling the reimbursable items which includes Duty Travel
to site, Office Rent, Furniture’s, Equipment’s, and Office
Supplies. It is requested to kindly add the FIN 5 to fill the
reimbursable items.
There is no separate provision for
Reimbursable items,
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads
which Includes
provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses etc.
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D, in which
details of overhead expenses shall be
submitted.
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is
being issued
separately.
8. Section 2,
part I of ITC,
Clause 13.3
28 Currency of Proposal & Payment
Consultants shall express the price of
their services in INR.
Consultants shall state the portion of their
price representing local cost in INR
Being the international competitive bidding which includes
the International Persons to whom we have to pay in the
foreign currency, it is kindly requested to add the Euros,
Dollar & Yen under foreign currency.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
9. Section 2,
part I of ITC,
Negotiations,
Clause 17.5
33 The unit rate of Expert remuneration could
also be subject to negotiations
Since, this is a Quality and Cost Based selection, where we
need to deploy the best of the resources, spacely available –
we would request you to kindly restrict the negotiation to
the Man-Months only.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
10. Section 2,
part I of ITC,
Bid Capacity
for Shortlisting
of the
consultant,
Clause 23
34 Bid Capacity Should it be calculated for 48 months or 60 months, Please
Clarify
Bid Capacity should
be calculated for 60
months. Addendum is
being issued separately.
Page 5 of 42
11. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet ,
Clause 9,
37 A single Technical Proposal but with core
team at PMU & separate teams in PIU‘s for
each city (Bhopal & Indore) needs to be
submitted. Core team shall be deployed at
PMU (HO) only, as mentioned in Section
6, Annexure –III A(E-1 and E-2) &
Annexure -III B(E-1 and E-2)
Abbreviations of PMU and PIU need to be provided, where
it is used first time in RFP.
PMU stands for
Project Management
unit.
PIU stands for Project
Implementation Unit.
PMU and PIUs have
been used for the first
time in Clause 9 in
Page No. 37 other
than this PMU and PIUs have also been
used in Clause 19 (3)
in Page No. 44 and
TECH – 3 in Page
No. 102
12. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet ,
Clause 9,
and
Clause 15, page 38
37,
38
A Single Technical proposal but with core
team at PMU & Separate teams in PIU’s
for each city (Bhopal and Indore ) need to
be submitted . Core team shall be deployed
at PMU(HO) only, as mentioned in
section6, Annexure –III A(E-1 and E-2) & Annexure- III B (E-1 and E-2)
Minimum Man month for experts are –
8734
As separate team are required for both Bhopal and Indore,
the minimum total, Man months of 8374 provided under
this clause accounts for only one package. Please confirm
the minimum total man months for both Bhopal and
Indore.
Minimum total man
months for Bhopal
and Indore shall be
16448 including man
months required for
PMU (Head office), in this regard,
Addendum is being
issued separately.
13. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet ,
Clause 10,
37 Section 2, Data Sheet, Clause 10
Offer from a consultant shall be considered
ineligible if the consultants or any of its
constituents have been barred/ blacklisted
for suspension of business by central
government/state government/public sector
undertaking in India as on date of
submission of proposal.
Sir, We wish to suggest that either the Individual Bidder
and or any Member of a Consortium should not have been
blacklisted during the last 5 years prior to the date of this
bid submission. May please consider and modify the clause
accordingly.
Provision of RPF
shall prevail.
14. Section 2,
Part II, of Data Sheet ,
Clause 11,
37 All accurate translations must be notarized
by a notary of respective country and ….
We would request you to kindly allow all such translations
to get notarized from the Consultant’s Home Country – this will save lot of time and logistical issues
Provision of RPF
shall prevail
Page 6 of 42
15. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet ,
Clause 14,
37 Not with standing anything contrary
contained in ITC 12, 13 and 14;
a. the Consultant shall submit with its
Proposal a Bid Guarantee for the sum INR
40 Million (INR Forty Million) in the
form of a bank guarantee issued from an
Indian Scheduled commercial Bank
(excluding Cooperative Banks) as defined
in Section 2(e) of RBI Act, 1934 read with
Attachment 2 to Data Sheet. The Bid Guarantee shall remain valid for a period of
60 (sixty) days beyond the validity of the
Proposal, as specified in section-1 Letter of
Invitation in point No. 7.
We find the bid guarantee to be quite considerable. Please
consider lowering the amount to [insert new amount]
We Request to reduce EMD to INR 20 million
Provision of RPF
shall prevail.
16. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 14 (g)
38 g. The Bid Guarantee shall be forfeited:
1. if the Consultant withdraws its Proposal
during the period of Proposal validity; or
2. if the Consultant does not accept the
correction of its price pursuant to Clause
16.7 (i) of ITC; or
3. if the successful Consultant refuses or
neglects to initiate contract negotiations, to execute the Contract or fails to furnish the
required Performance Guarantee within the
time specified by the Client; or
We think that by practice, it is the client who initiates the
negotiations. We also think that failure to sign contract
after negotiation should not be considered failure. Please
clarify that clause g(3) should read as:
“If the successful Consultant refuses or neglects to engage
in initiate contract negotiations to execute the Contract
after successful negotiations or fails to furnish the required
Performance Guarantee within the time specified by the Client; or
Addendum is being
issued separately.
17. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 16
39 All direct taxes applicable in State of
Madhya Pradesh and in India to be
included, except local Service Tax which is
payable as per SCC Clause 13.
We request you to amend the clause as;
All direct taxes applicable in State of Madhya Pradesh and
in India to be included, except local Service Tax which is
payable (as per prevailing rates on date) as per SCC
Clause 13.
Addendum is being
issued separately.
18. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
40 Criteria, sub-criteria, and point system for
the evaluation are;
Experience of the Consultants relevant
eligible assignment.
a) Experience of international projects of
comparable size, complexity and
technical specialty; 15 points
b) Experience in India; 10 points
c) Experience in JICA funded projects: 5 points
The criteria seems to be different from the earlier GC
projects implemented by the JICA in India (Refer
Mumbai Metro Line 3 & recently awarded Ahmadabad
Metro) also the criteria doesn’t suffice or fulfil the
requirement of the ODA Guidelines of the JICAs
Standard Request for Proposals.
As per the guidelines of the JICAs Standard Request for
Proposals (SRFP) under Japanese ODA Loans for the
QCBS selection process the criteria towards the
Experience of the Consultants relevant to the assignment
is as under. a) Experience of international projects of comparable size,
complexity and technical specialty
b) Experience in developing countries under comparable
Addendum is being
issued separately
Page 7 of 42
conditions
c) Experience in Japanese ODA projects
(Refer Guidelines for the Employment of Consultants
under Japanese ODA Loans, April 2012 Clause 14.2 Page
No DS‐4).
Also the experience in Developing Countries doesn’t
limits to the experience in metro rail projects only, It can be any experience in infrastructural project as sole
consultant or member of joint venture/consortium carried
out in developing countries during last 7years.
Also the experience in Japanese ODA projects doesn’t
limit to the experience in metro rail projects only, it can
be experience as sole consultant or member of joint
venture/consortium in any of the infrastructural projects
under Japanese ODA loans carried out during last 7 years.
So it is kindly requested to amend the criteria as per the
JICAs Standard Request for Proposals (SRFP) under
Japanese ODA Loans for the QCBS selection process the
criteria.
19. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
40 Section 2, Data Sheet, Clause 19(i)
Points
(i) Experience of the Consultants
relevant eligible assignment:
a. Experience of
international projects of
comparable size,
complexity and technical specialty
15
b. Experience in India 10
c. Experience in JICA
funded projects 05
Total points for
criterion (i):
30
Sir, as would appreciate, the success of projects of this
nature would depend mostly on the qualification and
experience of the team involved in, rather than the place in
which such project are carried out. Hence we proposed
experience from eligible projects irrespective of their
location, may please be considered in total. Further, weight
age for this item may be revised to 20 marks and weight
age for CVs may be increased accordingly, and the clause
may please be modified as below:
Points
(i) Experience of the Consultants relevant
eligible assignment:
a. Experience of comparable
size, complexity and
technical specialty carried
out Overseas/India/ JICA
funded anywhere in the
world.
20
Total points for criterion (i): 20
Addendum is being issued separately
Page 8 of 42
Points
(iii
)
Key Expert’s qualification and
competence for the assignment:
Maximum number
of points for each
Key Experts for the
positions or
disciplines are
mentioned in
Attachment-1 to
Data Sheet, for
which each Key
Expert will be
evaluated.
50
Total points for
criterion (iii):
50
Weight age for Key Expert’s qualification and competence
for the assignment may please be modified as below:
Points
(iii
)
Key Expert’s qualification and competence
for the assignment:
Maximum number of points for
each Key Experts for the positions
or disciplines are mentioned in
Attachment-1 to Data Sheet, for
which each Key Expert will be
evaluated.
60
Total points for criterion
(iii):
60
20. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
40 Section 2, Data Sheet, Clause 19 (i)
Weightage for Eligible Assignments - 30%
Weightage for Approach & Methodology - 20%
Weightage for Competency of Key Experts - 50%
Sir, as you would appreciate, the success of projects of
this nature would depend mostly on the qualification
and experience of the team involved in, rather than the
number of such assignments carried out by a
firm/consortium in the past by deploying a totally
different team of experts in the projects carried out 10
years back.
Hence we propose weight ages for various items may
please be modified as below in line with other GC-RFP
documents of other metros such as Mumbai (MMRDA) &
Nagpur as detailed below.
Nagpur Mumbai Sugge
sted
For
Bhopa
l &
Indore
Weightage for Eligible
Assignments
1200
(15%)
1050
(15%)
15%
Weightage for
Approach &
2400
(30%)
2100
(30%)
25%
Addendum is being issued separately
Page 9 of 42
Methodology
Weightage for
Competency of Key
Experts
3600+8
00=440
0 (55%)
3150+70
0=3850
(55%)
60%
Total 8000
(100%)
7000 100%
Relevant Pages of GC-RFP document are also attached herewith for your ready reference please. Kindly consider.
21. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
40 Points
(i) Experience of the
Consultants relevant
eligible assignment:
d. Experience of
international
projects of
comparable size, complexity and
technical specialty
15
e. Experience in India 10
f. Experience in JICA funded
projects
05
Total points for
criterion (i):
30
Further, experience from eligible projects irrespective of
their location, may please be considered in total in line with
other GC-RFP documents of other metros such as Nagpur
& Mumbai, without specific weight ages to JICA projects.
We understand, MPMRCL has not tied up with any
funding agency till now, hence in our opinion experience
from JICA funded projects may not be needed, rather this
condition would limit the competition of GC and funding
agencies in future. Further, as explained in the above para,
weightage for this item may be revised to 15 marks in line
with other GC-RFP documents of other metros such as Mumbai (MMRDA) & Nagpur.
May pl. consider.
Points
(i) Experience of the Consultants relevant
eligible assignment:
b. Experience of comparable size, complexity and technical
specialty carried out
Overseas/India/ JICA funded
anywhere in the world.
15
Total points for criterion (i): 15
Addendum is being
issued separately
22. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(i)
40 Data Sheet on Page 40 of RFP Document
Criteria ,Sub Criteria and Point System for
the evaluation have been indicated as
below:-
Experience of the Consultants relevant
eligible assignment.
a) Experience of International projects of
comparable size, complexity and
technical specialty - 15 points
It is clarified under clause 19.1 Attachment 1: For data
Sheet on Page 43 of RFP Document that Relevant eligible
assignments shall be projects of General Consultancy
/General Engineering Consultancy/Project Management
Consultancy for Metro/ LRT. Projects of Detail
Design/Feasibility/Detailed Project Report shall not be
considered as eligible projects.
The criteria fixed as above for these projects appears to be
different from the earlier GC Projects implemented through
JICA financing in India like Mumbai Metro Line 3 and
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 10 of 42
b) Experience in India - 10 points
c) Experience in JICA funded projects : 5
points
recently awarded Ahmadabad Metro Projects. Also these
criteria do not suffice or fulfill the requirement of ODA
Guidelines of JICA standard RFP. As per standard RFP
under Japanese ODA Loans for QCBS selection Process
and Clause 14.2 Page No. DS-4 guidelines for the
employment of consultants under Japanese ODA Loans,
April 2012, the criteria of the Experience of the
Consultants relevant to assignments is as under:
a) Experience of International projects of
comparable size, complexity and technical specialty.
b) Experience in Developing Countries
under comparable conditions.
c) Experience in Japanese ODA Projects
Also the experience in developing countries and Japanese
ODA Projects should not be limited to the experience in
metro / LRT projects only. The experience of any
infrastructural projects as sole consultant or member of
joint venture / consortium in developing countries during
last 7 years should also be considered.
23. Section 2, Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)
41 Evaluation of CVs No marks have been allotted for International Experience of Expatriate Staff – Please Clarify
As per Provision of RFP.
24.
Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(b)
43
Experience in India
The number of points for projects to be
assigned shall be determined considering as
mentioned below
Eligible Projects in India as a sole
consultant/ lead member/ member of joint
venture/consortium, in which fee excluding
indirect taxes valued at not less than INR
800 million (INR 80 crore) have been
received by the member of the
The invitation is for International bidding with experience
in Similar assignment worldwide and not limited to India.
The concept of GC has come from JICA and only 3‐4 GC
projects are there in India namely – Delhi Metro Phase I &
II, Chennai Metro, Bengaluru Metro, Kolkata East West
Corridor & Ahmedabad Metro. All of them are ongoing
and only 1 or 2 are complete.
It is a known fact that presently 2‐3 firms have experience
in India and this competition shouldn’t be restricted only
for them by this clause.
We are presently working in Design as well as GC
projects of Metro in India for 7 projects for last 7 years.
We feel this should be accounted and not restricted to GC
projects.
The JICAs ODA guidelines for SRFP doesn’t relates to
the Experience in India it is Experience in Developing
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 11 of 42
Countries.(Refer Guidelines for the Employment of
Consultants under Japanese ODA Loans, April 2012
Clause 14.2 Page No DS-4)
As per the JICAs guidelines for ODA projects the
evaluation criteria under the Experience in Developing
countries doesn’t relates to the fee received under Metro
GC Projects.
As per the JICA guidelines the weightage is based on the
number of the projects carried out in developing
countries or the years of the experience of the sole consultant or member of joint venture/consortium in
developing countries.
So it is kindly requested to amend the criteria of
experience in India as experience in developing countries
as per the JICAs Standard Request for Proposals (SRFP)
under Japanese ODA Loans for the QCBS selection
process with the criteria or Experience of Metro Projects
in India for Design & Project Management.
25. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19 (i)
43 Experience of the Consultants to the
relevant eligible assignments
“Relevant eligible assignments shall be
projects of General Consultancy/ General Engineering Consultancy/Project
Management Consultancy for
Metro/ LRT”.
As per our understanding the experience of LRT shouldn’t
be accepted as most of the LRTS are at-grade only which
doesn’t suffice the current scope which is completely
elevated section.
So it kindly requested to consider the experience of Metro
GC projects only under eligible assignments category.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
26. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(i)
43 Section 2, Data Sheet, Attachment 1 :
For Data Sheet, Clause 19(i)
*Relevant eligible assignments shall be
projects of General Consultancy / General
Engineering Consultancy/Project
Management Consultancy for Metro/ LRT.
Projects of Detail
Design/Feasibility/Detailed Project Report
shall not be considered as eligible projects.
Sir, as you appreciate, the conceptual, planning, design,
development and execution genesis of any rail based Mass
Transportation System is from railways only, and for that
very reason, today the majority of the metro experts in
India and Abroad are primarily Railway Engineers. Hence
we request you to consider the experience of GC/PMC
from Railway and High Speed Railway projects also to be
included in to the category of eligible assignments. Further
the General Engineering Consultancy involves lot of Design review, Planning, Suggest Alternate Solutions
during execution, apart from procurement and construction
supervision. As such the GC team should have very good
knowledge of Detailed Design Review, Detection of
faults/mistakes, Suggest most cost effective and innovative
designs, which otherwise will lead to major failures, cost
overruns and ultimately long delays. Therefore, we suggest
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 12 of 42
you to consider experience of Detailed Design of Metro /
LRT / HSR / Railways also to be included in to the
category of eligible assignments, has been considered in
the recent GC projects of Lucknow Metro, Nagpur Metro
and Mumbai Metro.
27. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet, clause 19(i)
43 Experience in India for relevant eligible
assignment
As per clause: Person should have worked on
LRT/METRO projects in India where a fee received is
more than 90 Cr (definition of eligible projects).
We feel that it is impossible to find a person with this
criterion because even if a person has experience of
Metrorail in India, he will not be able to indicate total fees
received till date.
We request you to consider: Experience in India for
Metrorail/MRTS projects.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
28. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19 (i) (a)
43 Eligible projects are the relevant eligible
assignment* projects of Metro/LRT in
which fee excluding indirect taxes valued
at not less than Rs 900 million (Rs 90 Crores) have been received by the
member(s) of the bidding consortium in the
previous 10 years i.e from year 2006 to
2015 up to Dec- 2015.
It is requested that apart from Metro/LRT the eligible
projects should also include the projects done in
transportation sector which includes Railways/Road/ Port/
Inland Water Transport/Airport
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
29. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(a)
43 Section 2, Data Sheet, Attachment 1: For
Data Sheet, Clause 19(i)a.
Experience of international projects
of comparable size, complexity and
technical specialty
1
5
Sir, as already reasoned in the above point (2), the success
of projects of this nature would depend mostly on the
qualification and experience of the team involved in, rather
than the number of such assignments carried out by a
firm/consortium in the past by deploying a totally different
team of experts. We would agree to your proposed
condition provided, the same firm/consortium deploys the
same team, which they had engaged in all their earlier
projects during in the past 10 years. Hence we feel awarding full points to a bidder offering / claiming the
experience from highest number of eligible projects would
not be good in the interest of the project. Rather we suggest
that the maximum number of eligible projects to ascertain a
firm’s experience from eligible assignment may be limited
to 5 (Five) projects as has been done in the recent GC
projects of Nagpur Metro and Mumbai Metro.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 13 of 42
The number of points to be assigned
shall be determined considering the
following:
The Bidder having done and claimed
highest numbers of eligible projects
Eligible projects are the relevant
eligible assignment* projects of
Metro/ LRT in which fee excluding
indirect taxes valued at not less than
Rs 900 million (Rs 90 crore) have
been received by the member(s) of
the bidding consortium in the
previous 10 years i.e. from year 2006
to 2015 up to Dec 2015.
30. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(a)
43 Section 2, Data Sheet, Attachment 1:
For Data Sheet, Clause 19(i)a.
The Bidder having done and claimed
highest numbers of eligible projects for
carrying out consulting services similar to
the ones requested under this assignment
will be awarded full points( i.e. 15
points). Points for other Bidder will be
awarded proportionately with respect to the
highest number of eligible projects.
Sir, as already reasoned in the above paras, the success of
projects of this nature would depend mostly on the
qualification and experience of the team involved in,
rather than the number of such assignments carried out
by a firm/consortium in the past by deploying a totally
different team of experts. We would agree to your
proposed condition provided, if the same firm/consortium
deploys the same team, which they had engaged in all their
earlier projects carried out about 10 years back. Hence we
feel awarding full points to a bidder offering / claiming
the experience from highest number of eligible projects
would not be good in the interest of the project. Rather
we suggest that the maximum number of eligible
projects to ascertain a firm’s experience from eligible
assignment may be limited to 5 (Five) projects as has
been done in the recent GC projects of Nagpur Metro
and Mumbai Metro.
Relevant Pages of GC-RFP document are also attached
herewith for your ready reference please. Kindly consider.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 14 of 42
31. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(a)
43 Experience of International projects of
comparable size, complexity and technical
specialty –
We request that a threshold of 5 similar projects should be
used as a benchmark for full marks. All of the companies
that will bid for this project are large and fully capable
companies with proven track records.
We believe that having proportionate marking for number
of projects performed will lead to a disproportionate
advantage for firms that manage to submit more projects
and certificates, with no additional benefit to the client or
to the project and will take the emphasis away from the proposed projects to past projects.
The benchmark set is already very high and will ensure
only the most qualified firms can bid and no further
splitting of marks is needed (precedent has been set in the
latest projects of Nagpur and Mumbai Line 3 / Line 7)
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
32. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(a)
43 Eligible projects are the relevant…….have
been received by the member(s) of the
bidding consortium……….Dec 2015
Please confirm if the fee received of INR 900 million for
the eligible assignment during the previous 10 years must
have been received by an individual member that is
claiming that experience for this bid.
It is Fee received by
the member (s) of the
bidding
consortium/JV or fee
received by a sole
participant.
33. Section 2, Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(b)
43 Data Sheet on Page 43 of RFP document under heading experience in India it is
stated that the number of points for projects
to be assigned shall be determined
considering eligible projects in India as a
sole consultant/ lead member/ member of
joint venture/consortium, in which fee
excluding indirect taxes valued at not less
than INR 800 million (INR 80 crore) have
been received by the member of the
bidding consortium in the previous 07
years i.e from year Jan 2009 to Dec 2015
In this connections we wish to draw your kind attention towards Guidelines for the Employment of Consultants
under Japanese ODA Loans, April 2012 Clause 14.2 Page
No DS-4
The JICAs ODA guideline for SRFP doesn’t relate to the
Experience in India it is Experience in Developing
Countries. As per the JICAs guidelines for ODA projects
the evaluation criteria under the Experience in Developing
countries doesn’t relate to the fee received under Metro GC
Projects. Also the weight age is based on the number of the
projects carried out in developing countries or the years of
the experience of the sole consultant or member of joint
venture/consortium in developing countries.
Hence we propose that Under Clause 19 sub clause 19
(i) b Section 2: (Part- II) Selection Procedure - Data
Sheet on Page 43 the criteria of experience in India may
please amended as experience in developing countries
as per the JICAs Standard Request for Proposals
(SRFP) under Japanese ODA Loans for the QCBS
selection process.
Provision of RFP shall prevail.
Page 15 of 42
34. Section 2:
(Part -II)
Selection
Procedure -
Data Sheet
(Attachment
1: For Data
sheet)
General
44 The tender requires a Strategic/Financial Consultancy team
at Headquarters mentioned in the Annexure III (A) which
is a first of its kind in GC. It is requested that a separate
scoring should be kept for bidders having experience as
strategic/Financial consultancy or as Owner Support Office
in similar eligible projects with minimum fee of INR 100
million i.e. INR 10 Crore.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
35. Section 2:
(Part -II) Selection
Procedure -
Data Sheet
(Attachment
1: For Data
sheet)
General
44 Implementation of 5D BIM is a specialized activity and
past experience of the bidder will help in successful implementation of the digital platform envisaged by
MPMRCL. It is requested that separate marks for
experience in implementing 5D BIM in international
projects should be allotted and included in scoring
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
36. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(i)(c)
44 Adequacy of the proposed methodology
and work plan
Please specify the sub-criteria and point system for the
evaluation of this criterion
Methodology – 10 points
Work plan – 8 points
Organization staffing -2 points
It is sub-criteria and
point system of
criteria 19 (ii).
37. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)
49 Age Limit Criteria:
As such there is no age limit for proposed
Key Experts. However 25% of the Points
shall be reduced for any proposed Key
Expert as mentioned below;
―Project Director/ Project Leader/Project
Coordinator‖ and Dy. Project Director/
Project Leader‖ as listed at Sr. No. K-1 and
K-2 above respectively, aged more than
70 Years as on date of submission of
proposal.
All the other Key Experts aged more
than 65 Years as on date of submission of
proposal.
We understand that the Age Limit for the Project Director/
Project Leader/Project Coordinator and Dy. Project
Director should not exceed more than 70 years and the
age limit for the other Key Experts should not be more
than 65 years. Beyond the above age limit there will be the
deduction of 25% of the point. Pl confirm.
It is kindly requested to keep the age limit for all the key
staff for the evaluation purpose as 70 Years as on date of
submission of the proposal.
The projects under multilateral funding institutions
don’t have any age limit criteria provided the candidate is
medically fit to take the assignment.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 16 of 42
38. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)
49 Age limit criteria:
As such there is no age limit for proposed
Key Experts. However 25% of the Points
shall be reduced for any proposed Key
Expert as mentioned below;
- “Project Director / Project Leader /
Project Coordinator” and “Dy. Project
Director / Project Leader” as listed at
Sr. No. K-1 and K-2 above
respectively, aged more than 70 Years
as on date of submission of proposal
- All the other Key Experts aged more
than 65 Years as on date of
submission of proposal.
It is requested that for certain functions like OHE and
signaling for which suitable staff are scarce the age limit
may be please relaxed to 70 years.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
39. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet, clause 19
(iii) (1)
49 General qualifications for Key Experts The general qualification given in Attachment III (B) does
not seem relevant to the qualification given in evaluation
criteria in Data Sheet. We request you to amend it.
General qualification
is relevant to
qualification given in the evaluation
criteria, yet to further
clarify addendum is
being issued
separately.
40. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(iii)(1)
49 General Qualifications (30%) We request the threshold to be a degree in engineering,
with 85% marks for a diploma holder. This will enable the
client to have access to a larger number of qualified
professionals with real project execution experience.
Alternatively client may choose to request a Master’s
degree for a limited number of top positions.
Provision of RFP shall prevail.
41. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
(iii) (1)
49 General qualification – 30%
*Engineering graduate in respective field
for all engineers
*Diploma…….
Experience in India
- 10%
We request Engineering graduates in respective field shall
be assigned 90% of full points instead of 85% of full points
&
Diploma of three years duration shall be assigned 75%
instead of 50%
Experience in India may be granted 15% weightage instead
of 10%
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 17 of 42
42. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19
(iii) (1)
49 Section 2, Data Sheet, Attachment 1 :
For Data Sheet, Clause 19(iii).1
General Qualification – 30%
For Post graduate (or higher) in
engineering/ Master of Business
Administration after engineering
graduation, in respective field for all
engineering positions and Post-graduation
or acceptable professional qualification or
Master of Business Administration after graduation in respective field for all non-
engineering positions will be assigned full
points
Since the GC scope involves lot of planning also, the Post-
Graduation in planning after Graduation Engineering may
also be included and the clause may please be modified as
below:
For Post graduate (or higher) in engineering/ planning/
Master of Business Administration after engineering
graduation, in respective field for all engineering positions
and Post-graduation or acceptable professional
qualification or Master of Business Administration after
graduation in respective field for all non-engineering positions will be assigned full points.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
43. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)
(2)
50
Section 2, Data Sheet, Attachment 1 :
For Data Sheet, Clause 19(iii).2)
Adequacy for the assignment – 50%
Working in the same rank or equivalent
(type of work) in the task assigned for
minimum 5 years, full points will be
assigned
Working in the same rank or equivalent
(type of work) in the task assigned for
minimum 3 years up to 5 years, 50% of full
points will be assigned
Working in the same rank or equivalent
(type of work) in the task assigned but less
than 3 years, no points will be assigned
We request for removal of this criteria. Most
professionals after having worked in a certain rank
for 5 years would justifiably expect some level of
promotion or higher rank and not prefer to move
to a similar rank. If such a condition is required
we request minimum 5 years in one rank below
The referred clause stipulates same rank or
equivalent. But in the industry different designations are being used for a same nature of
job with same seniority level. Hence we request
you to consider the total experience and its
relevance to the present job, rather than the
designation/rank in previous assignments while
evaluating the expert eligibility/capability.
Further, we suggest that for non-core expert
positions such as Safety Engineer, Safety
Inspector, Chief Environment Expert,
Environment Engineer, Utility Engineer,
Multimodal Transport Planner, Chief Geotechnical Expert, Head Strategic / Financial Expert, Real
Estate / PPP Expert, Transport Economist, etc.,
the experience from their relevant filed would be
sufficient, and experience from metro rail sector is
not mandatory.
Please consider.
Provision of RFP shall prevail.
44. Section 2,
Part II, of Data Sheet,
50 Adequacy for the assignment – 50%
Working – full copy from tender (i)………
We request the MPMRCL may please consider to modify
the clause as referred under: a) Working in one rank below in the task assigned for
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 18 of 42
clause 19(iii)
(2) sub point
(ii)
(ii)…..
(iii)……..
minimum 5 years, full points will be assigned.
b) Working in one rank below (type of work) in the task
assigned for minimum 3 years upto 5 years, 50% of full
points will be assigned..
c) Working in one rank below (type of work)_ in the task
assigned but less than 3 years, no points will be assigned.
45. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)(2)
50 Adequacy for the assignment;
“Type of Work”
We assume that “type of work” means Metro/LRT
projects for all positions except for civil positions like
Chief Contract, Chief Quality, Chief Track, Chief
Environmental Expert and Chief Structure Expert-
Elevated, where Railway/infrastructure projects can be
considered. Kindly confirm.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
46. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause 19(iii)
page no 49
49 Familiarity with the language and condition
of country 10%
We request that this criteria be removed. The language of
the project implementation will be in English and India is a
country with many regional languages and cultures.
Also, given the large number of metro projects being
implemented in India and limited expertise available
globally and in India, it is more and more difficult to find
staff with experience in India without affecting ongoing
projects and clients within India.
We believe removal of this criterion will not affect even in
the least the quality of staff being provided for the project, or the project implementation. Good experts generally are
able to perform in any condition and country, even if they
have no prior experience in this region.
Addendum is being
issued separately.
47. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(iii)(3)
50 Familiarity with language Since the language is English, we request for this to be
removed and the points redistributed to general experience
Addendum is being
issued separately.
48. Section 2,
Part II, of
Data Sheet,
clause
19(iii)(4)
50 Experience in India Experience in India may be waived off for any staff who is
an expatriate. This will allow fresh experienced engineers
to be proposed to add to the pool of engineers currently in
India.
Addendum is being
issued separately.
Page 19 of 42
49. Section 3,
Short listing
of
Consultant,
clause 4.1
56 The Applicants may be a single entity or a
JV/consortium, joining together to assist
MPMRCL in implementing the project. In
case of group of entities the number of
substantial JV/consortium partners shall not
be more than total 5 (partners having less
than 10% participation will be termed as
non-substantial member and will not be
considered for evaluation which means that
their financial soundness and work experience shall not be considered for
evaluation of JV/Consortium).
It is requested to clarify that whether a non-substantive
partner provides Key Staff for evaluation purpose.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
50. Section 3,
Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
clause 4.1
56 Clause 4.1: The Applicants may be a
single entity or a JV/consortium, joining
together to assist MPMRCL in
implementing the project. In case of group
of entities the number of substantial
JV/consortium partners shall not be more
than total 5 (partners having less than 10%
participation will be termed as non-
substantial member and will not be
considered for evaluation which means that their financial soundness and work
experience shall not be considered for
evaluation of JV/Consortium). The
JV/consortium as a whole must satisfy both
Technical and Financial eligibility criteria
but the substantial partners will be jointly
and severally responsible. The eligibility
criteria are as under:
In view of the volume of work involved and to carry out
the work in a most cost effective manner, lot of
inputs/resources from a non-substantial partner, preferably
an Indian firm engaged in business of similar nature would
be required. Hence participation percentage of such Non-
Substantial partner in a consortium shall be up to 20%.
May please be considered.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
51. Section 3,
Short listing
of
Consultant,
clause 4.2.2
56 -
57
Share of Lead Member in a consortium/JV. As per clause 4.1 total no. of members are 5, accordingly
we request you to limiting the share of Lead Member to –
“Not less than 26%” in view of others share.
Addendum is being issued separately.
52. Section 3, Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
clause 4.3
57 Work experience : The applicants
Similar consultancy work means a
General/Project consultancy work
pertaining to Metro/LRT System.
The applicant must be
National…../LRT System.
We request that LRT system shall be deleted, wherever the same is stated in the RFP.
Provision of RFP shall prevail.
Page 20 of 42
53. Section 3,
Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
clause 4.3
57 Work experience Please confirm that in case of a consortium, if one member
has an similar consultancy work of INR 1900 million in
their home country and another member of the consortium
has done similar consultancy work of INR 900 million
outside their home country, then this will meet the
eligibility criteria under 4.3 Work experience, given that
the bidders are jointly and severally liable.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
54. Section 3,
Shortlisting
of Consultant,
clause
5.1.(iii)
59 T3- Annual turnover: The average annual
turnover from consultancy works of last ten
financial years should be more than INR 470 millions
The turnover requirement very low vis a vis the work
experience required in the clause 4.3 of Section 3:
Shortlisting of Consultant. It is requested that the average annual turnover from consultancy works should be
increased to atleast INR 1500 million
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
55. Section 3,
Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
Pro-Forma-
1, clause 5
67 Bullet 5th: Please provide details of pending
litigation….
We feel there is some formatting error. As answer to this
question can’t be Y or N. Please see Annexure-
5: Pending Litigation
on page no.81 and
kindly submit the
same as per
applicability.
56. Section 3,
Short listing
of
Consultant,
Pro-Forma-
2, clause 3
68 Extent of participation (including
deployment of major plant items and key
personal) by each member
As the scope under current tender is for General
Consultancy and it does not warrant any deployment of
major plant items, kindly delete the sentence Major plant
items.
Agreed, Addendum is
being issued
separately.
57. Section 3, Short listing
of
Consultant,
Annexure-1,
clause 1
72 For applicants by Joint ventures/consortium ….. Each member of group shall sign the
letter
Please clarify, this letter of application to be signed by all the consortium partners or by the authorized lead partner
Letter of application will be signed by the
authorized
representative
appoint by lead
member of
consortium /JV.
58. Section 3,
Short listing
of
Consultant,
Annexure-7,
87 Financial Data for last 10 years We would request you to kindly consider data for last 5
years, maximum – since it will be make the Bid
unnecessarily very loaded with 10 years of Annual Report
for multiple Consultancies in JV
Moreover, Audited Balance Sheet for the Financial Year, 2015-16 may not be available, so in that case, we would
If Balance Sheet for
the F.Y. 2015-2016 is
not audited then
provisional Balance Sheet duly signed by
the Statutory Auditor
Page 21 of 42
request you to consider last 5 years, from the Financial
Year 2014-15
/authorized
representative of
management shall be
submitted.
59. Section 3, Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
Annexure-8,
Note No. 8
89 We understand that Bank certificate is required only if Enough liquidity as per the RFP is not available in Balance
sheet. Please clarify.
Agreed.
60. Section 3,
Shortlisting
of
Consultant,
Annexure-
8A,
90 Bank Certificate We understand that each JV Partner need to provide
separate Bank Certificate. Banker of JV Partners may not
be the same and in that case, the “text for JV Members”,
may not be relevant.
Agreed. In that case
each JV member has
to submit separate
Bank Certificate/
Banking reference to
fulfill the requirement as per provision of
the RFP.
61. Section 4,
Technical
proposal,
Tech-2(B),
Note
98 Notes: In terms of ITC 15 (read with 19.
(i).a. of Attachment 1 to Data Sheet,
Eligible projects are the similar projects of
Metro/ LRT System in which fee
excluding indirect taxes valued at not less
than Rs. 900 million
We understand that the Client Certificate generally
includes the Complete Fees – it will be impossible to have
a Certificate Issued by Client, by removing Indirect Taxes
from the Fees. We would request you to kindly accept the
total fees.
Total fee excluding
indirect tax can be
certified by the
Statutory
Auditor/authorized
representative of the
management.
62. Section 4,
Technical
proposal,
Tech-2(B), Note No.
4(b),
99 In case the year wise break-up of received
consultancy fees not mentioned in client
certificate than the average received
consultancy fees per year may be considered. However, the total received
consultancy fees of the Firm and claiming
member (or percentage of claiming
member) must be mentioned in client
certificate, same can also be certified by
statutory auditor and produced as proof.
Please note that Statutory Auditor will not sign such
Averaged out Payment Details. We would request you to
kindly allow the “Head of Accounts” for International
Consultants to sign for such information.
Documents related to
average received
consultancy fees/year
wise breakup of received consultancy
fees can be certified
by statutory
auditor/Internal
auditor/certified
chartered accountant.
63. Section 4,
Technical
proposal,
Tech-4, (b)
103 Work Plan In order to draw the appropriate work plan for the
consultancy services is it possible to know the
procurement schedule of the contractors
Work plan could be
drawn as per time line
provided in section-6:
Term of reference
and Attachment –I
and Attachment-II of the same.
Page 22 of 42
64. Section 4,
Technical
proposal,
Tech-7, Note
No. 3
109 One (1) month equals twenty four (24)
working days ……
The purpose of the Form FIN-3 …..(one
day being equivalent to 1/30th of a month)
We understand that working days will be 24 day/month and
5.5 day/week. Please confirm the rest day (Sunday) and
public holiday of MPMRCL are applicable to GC and are
paid holidays.
As per provision of
RFP Sunday’s,
Second and Third
Saturday will be
holidays. Public
holidays of
MPMRCL are not
applicable to GC thus
will be working days
for GC and if these days being declared
holidays by
MPMRCL for GC
then it will not be
paid holidays.
65. Section 4,
Technicl
proposal,
Tech-9,
111 TECH-9: Deployment Schedule As there is already a prescribed format as “Tech-7 Expert
Schedule”, which will show the complete deployment of
GC Staff. So we feel that Tech-9 should be deleted. Further
the denotation mentioned for On-site and Back Office
Deployment shall be used in “Tech-7 Expert Schedule”.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
66. Section 4,
Technicl proposal,
Tech-10,
112 TECH-10: Acknowledgement of
Compliance
We feel these are some formatting error. There should be
“OR” between clause B and C. Kindly clarify.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail. However letter “B”
mentioned
immediate before/
above to point No. C
will be replaced by
letter “C”.
67. Section 4,
Financial
proposal,
FIN-2
117 FIN-2
Summary of costs
(1) We request to include reimbursable components of
works like duty travel to site, Rent of GC offices, office
supplies, utilities &Misc, Office equipment. Reports
&documents printing, drawings, Mobilization &
demobilization of International experts.
Office space of approximately 1500 sq.m floor area. We understand the following will have to be considered for
overheads telephone/mobile charges, security,
housekeeping. Cost of furnishing, air-conditioning as
required, maintenance, cleaning repairs, water charges
electricity charges, security, insurances& other services for
office accommodation.
(2) Estimated Remuneration of foreign Personnel &
There is no separate
provision for
Reimbursable items,
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads
which Includes provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses etc.
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D, in which
details of overhead
expenses shall be
submitted.
Page 23 of 42
Mobilization & demobilization charges shall be included in
the financial proposal
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is
being issued
separately.
68. Section 4,
Financial
proposal,
FIN-2
117 Financial Form As per prescribed financial Forms given in
RFP, there is no form which can be used for showing
reimbursable part. Further if we overload the reimbursable
part on remuneration, it will also attract replacement
penalty. All GCs have such formats for financial proposal.
So we request you to provide the form for reimbursable
part also, as it is very necessary
There is no separate
provision for
Reimbursable items,
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads
which Includes provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses etc.
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D, in which
details of overhead
expenses shall be
submitted.
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is
being issued separately.
69. Section 4,
Financial
proposal,
FIN-2
117 Summary of cost No provision for out of pocket expenses
duty travel to site, office equipment’s and maintenance,
mobilization and demobilization cost for experts, office
supplies etc.) made. Kindly provide the formats for the
same. Also how are these expense paid
(reimbursable/fixed).
There is no separate
provision for Re
reimbursable items,
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads
which Includes
provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses etc.
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D, in which details of overhead
expenses shall be
submitted.
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is
being issued
separately.
Page 24 of 42
70. Section 6,
TOR, clause
1.8
126 Arranging training of O&M staff of
MPMRCL
Please confirm that training costs for training of MPMRCL
personnel are not to be included in the financial offer and
that these will be paid separately.
All cost towards
scope of work has to
be mentioned in the
financial offer
formats (FIN1- FIN
3D) provided in the
RFP.
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads which Includes
provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses also.
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D, in which
details of overhead
expenses shall be
submitted.
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is being issued
separately.
71. Section 6,
TOR, clause
1.3
and
Section 6,
TOR, clause
4.1.3
124
and
128
offices, residential and commercial
complexes
Outline of buildings for head and branch
offices, and control centers
Please provide the details of Offices, Residential and
Commercial Complexes which are there in the scope of
work of GC
Offices, Residential
and Commercial
Complexes will be
developed as part of
property development
towards non fare box
revenue measures.
72. Section 6,
TOR, clause
4.1
127 4.1 Review and supplement the details
given in DPR of Bhopal & Indore
Metro Rail Project as available with MPMRCL - Effective Date (ED) + 01
month.
4.2 Inception Report ( ED + 1 months)
4.3 Design Basis Report ( ED + 1.5
months)
4.4 Project Planning, Progress and
Schedule Management ( ED + 1.5
months)
Any work can’t be started before 01 month, as mobilization
period (minimum). We request you to update the target
dates as; 4.1 Review and supplement the details given in DPR of
Bhopal & Indore Metro Rail Project as available with
MPMRCL - Effective Date (ED) + 02 month.
4.2 Inception Report (ED + 3 months)
4.3 Design Basis Report (ED + 3 months)
4.4 Project Planning, Progress and Schedule Management
(ED + 3 months) – needs many meeting
4.5 Business Plan and Financial Strategy (ED + 04
Provision of RFP
shall prevail and it is
further clarified that time line proposed
are indicative in
nature and it will be
finalized by the client
before signing of the
contract.
Page 25 of 42
4.5 Business Plan and Financial Strategy(
ED + 03 months)
4.6 Identification of non-fare box revenue
models and undertake their
Technocomic feasibility studies,
financial analysis, business modeling
and optimizing fare-box revenue.( ED
+ 03 months)
4.7 Legal and IEC/PR Services
4.8 Organization, Governance and set up of Control Room (ED + 02 months)
4.9 Design and Tender document
preparation & assistance in selection
of contractors/suppliers: (ED + 02
months)
4.9.2 Preparation of Tender design and
Tender documents for procurement
of Systems, Rolling Stock, Track
and Depots for Bhopal & Indore
Metro Project will include but not
limited to:- ( ED + 02 months) 4.9.3 Selection of contractors/suppliers.
4.9.4 Negotiations with Tenderers (ED
+ 05 months).
4.10 Preparation of Various Plan ( ED +
04 months)
16 Digital Platform for Project
management ( ED + 04 months)
months)
4.6 Identification of non-fare box revenue models and
undertake their Techno comic feasibility studies,
financial analysis, business modeling and optimizing
fare-box revenue.( ED + 04 months)
4.7 Legal and IEC/PR Services
4.8 Organization, Governance and set up of Control Room
(ED + 03 months)
4.9 Design and Tender document preparation & assistance
in selection of contractors/suppliers: (ED + 04 months) – when approval is not more than 2 weeks
4.9.2 Preparation of Tender design and Tender
documents for procurement of Systems, Rolling
Stock, Track and Depots for Bhopal & Indore
Metro Project will include but not limited to:- ( ED
+ 06 months) – when approval is not more than 2
weeks
4.9.3 Selection of contractors/suppliers.
4.9.4 Negotiations with Tenderers (ED + 08 months).
4.10 Preparation of Various Plan ( ED + 06 months)
16 Digital Platform for Project management ( ED + 06 months)
73. Section 6,
TOR, clause
4.1
127 Effective Date (ED) + 01 months …. As the mobilization of the team and setting up of GC
operation requires to 2 to 3 months, the time lines for
delivery of this activities is not realistic. Time line of
minimum 9 – 12 months is required for inception to tender
design and award. Request to revise the time line for
delivery of these activities.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail and it is
further clarified that
time line proposed
are indicative in
nature and it will be finalized by the client
before signing of the
contract.
74. Clause 4.2
Section 6
129 As far as personnel not present on sight and
working from Back office their man
months shall be finalized in the
consultation with the consultant.
Deployment Schedule will be flexible &
will be monitored on monthly basis& can
be amended as per need & requirement of
We understand that this Consultation and Finalization shall
happen at the stage of the Contract signing. Please confirm
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 26 of 42
the project.
75. Clause
4.12.1.1
Section 6
138 Site Visit: It should be noted that though
the responsibility for correctness,
completeness and adequacy of the works
constructed by the contractors and for
compliance with statutory obligations
remain with the contractors, GC will be
responsible for any deficiency in the
performance of the contractors
We understand that GC should be held responsible for their
own mistakes. GC should not be made accountable for
Contractor’s mistakes. Please clarify
Provision of RFP
shall prevail and it is
further clarified that
if work, reports etc.
have been verified
/checked /vetted/
supervised/monitored
/ evaluated etc. by the
GC, in that case GC
shall also be responsible.
76. Section 6,
T&R /
Clause 4.14
142 Training of Personnel of MPMRCL
We request MPMRCL to kindly confirm that for such
training that GC participation is not required. In case GC
participation is required, how will MPMRCL reimburse
travel/lodging other costs. Will there be any provisional
sum if yes, kindly indicate the amount.
FIN-2 provisions for
Remuneration and
other overheads
which Includes
provisional sums,
allowances and any
other expenses also .
FIN-2 also provisions
for FIN-3D in which
details of overhead expenses shall be
submitted.
Addendum regarding
format for FIN-3D is
issued separately.
77. Clause 4.14,
Section 6
142 Training of Personnel of MPMRCL We assume, Training will be given in Project/Head Office
(Bhopal) class room and no out station training is expected.
Kindly clarify.
As per requirement
along with office
training, out-station
training shall also be
imparted by the GC.
78. Clause 4.14
of TOR,
Section 6
142 Training of Personnel of MPMRCL
GC will plan and design the training
modules for personnel of MMRDA in
operation, maintenance and repairs of
various equipment and plants supplied by
various suppliers, at OEM’s premises. GC
will also plan and design training modules
for these personnel and their trainers in
operation, maintenance and repairs of the system as a whole and will provide training
It may please be clarified whether it will comprise of
training of MPMRCL staff through on-the-job training or
through structured training program.
In case, the Consultants are to provide structured training
for the MPMRCL Staff, a provisional sum may please be
provided to meet this expenditure and for similarity in bids.
Training will
comprise both
structured and on the
job training and any
other training
required for
comprehensive
discharge of duties by
MPMRCL officials and employees.
Page 27 of 42
to them in these areas. The training will
have to be arranged before commencement
of the trials and will continue upto
commissioning of the system.
All the cost towards
training etc has to be
quoted in the FIN-2
on the basic of FIN-
3D.
79. Pg. 143,
Clause
4.15.2.4
And Pg. 145
Clause 4.15.2.19
Page No.
144 Clause
4.15.2.11.
Pg. 207 ,
Part IV
Appendices -
Appendix B
or Serial 3
143,
144,
145,
207
Reports and Documents
Please clarify, if we need to submit the following reports:
Procurement Report
Completion Report
We understand that Bid Evaluation Report and Tender
Evaluation Report are one and the same. Please Clarify
Yes, procurement
report and completion
reports are to be
submitted along with
other reports mentioned in the
RFP.
Yes
80. Section 6,
Terms of
Reference Clause
4.16.1 (last
two bullet
points)
147 The consultant GC will prepare road traffic
diversion plans in consultation with traffic
police authorities to ensure that traffic flow is not hampered during construction.
The consultant GC will prepare workable,
proper, ‘muck disposable plans’ in
consultation with relevant authorities,
These activities are normally to be carried out by the
contractors. Kindly confirm that GC will only oversee
contractors carrying out of the above mentioned tasks.
GC will assist/Guide
contractors in
preparing traffic diversion and muck/
debris deposable plan
and also oversee
contractors carrying
out above mentioned
tasks.
81. Clause 6.2,
Section 6,
Terms of
Reference
150 Depending on the pace of the progress on
the project, MPMRCL may require GC to
adjust and regulate the deployment of their
personnel. A notice period of 1 month for
local personnel and 2 months for expatriate
personnel shall be given for their
demobilization and remobilization
We understand that this demobilization and mobilization is
related to the personnel with intermittent input and not for
long term experts. Please Confirm.
It will be very difficult to retain Personnel, to be deployed
for longer term, with frequently demobilization and
mobilization
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 28 of 42
82. Clause 16
Section 6:
Terms of
Reference
153 Digital Platform for Project Management
(ED+ 04 months)
The timelines mentioned for the implementation of the
digital platform for project management are very stringent.
Based on our experience it should be changed. It is
requested that the timelines for implementation of Digital
Platform for Project Management should be ED + 06
months instead of ED + 04 months
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
83. Clause 18.1,
Section 6:
Terms of Reference
153 Services and Facilities to be provided by
MPMRCL to GC;
Client will provide reasonably furnished office space for key resources as described
in TECH3.
We request you to specify the area of office to be provided
by MPMRCL in each city.
We understand that MPMRCL will provide reasonable space of GC staff with all necessary requirements (i.e.
Furniture, Electricity, Telephone etc) and whatever
required for completion of work. If additional space will be
required by GC, the expenses will be reimbursed by
MPMRCL. Kindly clarify?
We partly agree,
MPMRCL will
provide reasonably furnished office space
for GC staff at head
office and in city
offices. Rest of the
arrangement has to be
done by GC.
84. Section 6,
Terms of
Reference
Clause 18.1,
153 Client will provide reasonably finished
office space for key resources as described
in TECH3.
Please provide the details of office space area and the
facility to be provided by MPMRCL
MPMRCL will
provide reasonably
furnished office space
for GC staff at head
office and in city
offices. Rest of the arrangement has to
done by GC.
85. Attachment
III(A), Page
162 – 168
Section 6,
Terms of
Reference
162-
168
Positions and Number of Man-Months for
Staff.
As per the positions given in RFP for Support staff, We
assume that the Security and Housekeeping staff will be
provided by MPMRCL for both city level/ state level team
of GC. Kindly clarify.
Also there is no Support staff considered for Head Office
Team. Please clarify, whether this team will be supported
by MPMRCL in term of support staff like IT, Admin.
Security and
Housekeeping staff at
the offices will be
provided by the
MPMRCL and GC
will arrange for
support staff for head
office /GC will
arrange for Security,
support staff for Head
office and Housekeeping staff,
In this regard
Addendum is being
issued separately.
Page 29 of 42
86. Pg. 162 , 166
-
Attachment
III(A),
Section 6,
Terms of
Reference
162,
166
Referring to Attachment III (A)
# NK-10 – Sr. Property Development
Planner
# K-44 – Head Strategic/ Financial Expert
# K-47 – Transport Economist
We would request the following should be international
positions
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
87. Section 6,
Terms of
Reference Attachment
III (A)
162 Chief Testing Commissioning Expert -
Local
We understand that we need to have International Expert in
this position, since that will add lot of value to the project
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
88. Section 6:
Terms of
Reference
Attachment
III (A):
162 ----- It is requested that the positions for 5D BIM should be
included in the strategic/financial consultancy team which
are as under:-
1.5D BIM expert
2. 5D BIM manager
Agreed , Addendum
is being issued
separately.
89. Section 6:
Terms of Reference
Attachment
III (A):
162 Chief Safety Expert - Local We understand that we need to have International Expert in
this position, since that will add lot of value to the project
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
90. Section 6:
Terms of
Reference
Attachment
III (A):
166
K-47 – Transport Economist We believe that the man-months for position is excess at 48
man-months. We request to curtail the man-months to an
appropriate duration
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
91. Section 6:
Terms of
Reference Attachment
III (B):
173 -- It is requested that the post qualification experience for
non-key staff in Strategic/Financial consultancy team
should be reduced from 10+ years to 6-8 years of experience with 2-3 years of Assignment relevant
experience
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 30 of 42
92. Section-6,
TOR
176 Diploma candidate shall have 5 years more
experience to the Performance shown
against each position in attachment III(B)
We request Diploma candidate shall have 3 years more
experience instead of 5 years mentioned in the clause.
Please modify.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
93. Clause 4.1,
Page 128, Pg 182 Clause
1.1.9 Pg 185
Clause 2.1,
Clause 2.3.1
, 2.3.2 Pg
189 Clause
2.9.5 Pg 127
Clause 4.1
182,
185, 189,
127
Effective Date (ED) Kindly clarify what is mean by “Effective Date(ED) –
Signing of contract”.
It has been clearly
defined in Clause -2.1 page 185 of GCC.
94. Section 7(
Part II)
Clause 2.3.2,
185 Availability of Key experts We request to consider 60 days for effective date for
substantial mobilization of key experts
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
95. GCC
General
Provisions
Clause 2.8
187 Suspension
The Client may, by written notice of
suspension to the Consultant, suspend all
payments to the Consultants hereunder if
the Consultants fail to perform any of their
obligations under this Contract, including
the carrying out of the Services, provided
that such notice of suspension (i) shall
specify the nature of the failure, and (ii) shall request the Consultants to remedy
such failure within a period not exceeding
thirty (30) days after receipt by the
Consultants of such notice of suspension.
Such suspension may be revoked on proof
of remedial action by the consultant to the
satisfaction of the Client.
Client has right to suspend but contract does not accord the
same rights to consultant.
Please confirm if this point can be subject to discussion at
negotiation.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 31 of 42
96. GCC
General
Provisions
Clause 2.8,
187 The Client may, by written notice of
suspension to the Consultant, suspend all
payments to the Consultants hereunder if
the Consultants fail to perform any of their
obligations under this Contract, including
the carrying out of the Services, provided
that such notice of suspension (i) shall
specify the nature of the failure, and (ii)
shall request the Consultants to remedy
such failure within a period not exceeding thirty (30) days after receipt by the
Consultants of such notice of suspension.
Such suspension may be revoked on proof
of remedial action by the consultant to the
satisfaction of the Client.
We request to modify as;
The Client may, by written notice of suspension to the
Consultant, suspend corresponding/disputed payments to
the Consultants hereunder if the Consultants fail to perform
any of their obligations under this Contract, including the
carrying out of the Services, provided that such notice of
suspension (i) shall specify the nature of the failure, and (ii)
shall request the Consultants to remedy such failure within
a period not exceeding thirty (30) days after receipt by the
Consultants of such notice of suspension. Such suspension may be revoked on proof of remedial action by the
consultant to the satisfaction of the Client.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
97. Clause 2.9.1.
(g), Section
7 GCC
188 If the Client, in its sole discretion and for
any reason whatsoever, decides to
terminate this Contract.
We request you to delete the clause. Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
98. GCC 2.9.2
(a), (b)
Section 7 (
Part II)
GCC
188 By the Consultant
The Consultant may terminate this
Contract, by not less than twenty-eight (28)
days written notice to the Client, in case of
the occurrence of any of the events
specified in paragraphs (a) & (b) of this
Clause GCC 2.9.2.
(a) If, as the result of Force Majeure, the
Consultant is unable to perform a material
portion of the Services for a period of not
less than fifty-six (56) days.
(b) If the Client fails to comply with any final decision reached as a result of
arbitration pursuant to Clause GCC 8.
The causes available to consultant for terminating the
contract are very restrictive. Consultant should have the
right to terminate for prolonged suspension, breach of
obligation and non-payment of undisputed invoices.
Please confirm that these points could be considered during
negotiation phase.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
99. Section 7(
Part II)
Clause 2.9.2,
page 188
188 1.1.1. By the Consultant
The Consultant may terminate
this Contract, by not less than
twenty-eight (28) days written
notice to the Client, in case of
the occurrence of any of the
Please include the following
“If employer fails to pay any money due to the consultant
pursuant to this contract and not subject to dispute pursuant
of clause 2.9.6 here of within forty five days(45) after
receiving the written notice from consultant that such
payments are overdue”
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
Page 32 of 42
events specified in paragraphs
(a) & (b) of this Clause GCC
2.9.2.
(a) If, as the result of Force
Majeure, the Consultant is
unable to perform a material
portion of the Services for a
period of not less than fifty-
six (56) days.
(b) If the Client fails to comply
with any final decision
reached as a result of
arbitration pursuant to Clause
GCC 8.
100. GCC, 2.9.5
Section 7
(Part – II)
189 Upon termination of this Contract pursuant
to Clauses GCC 2.9.1 or GCC 2.9.2, the
Client shall make Remuneration pursuant
to Clause GCC 6.2 for Services
satisfactorily performed prior to the
effective date of termination, and
In case of termination, and I case this is not due to
consultant’s fault, the consultant should be paid for
reasonable costs incurred due to the termination and
liquidating contract.
Please confirm if this point can be subject to discussion at
negotiation.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
101. Pg. 191,
Clause 3.4
(e) (ii)
Section 7 (
Part III) SCC
Sr.No. 6 Page No.202
191
&
202
that the ceiling on Consultant‘s liability
shall be limited to the amount indicated in
the SCC, except that such ceiling shall not
apply to actions, claims, losses or damages
caused by Consultant‘s gross negligence or
reckless conduct
No Amount is indicated in the SCC – Please Clarify.
Kindly define gross negligence
As per provision of
SCC the ceiling on
consultant’s liability
shall be limited to the
amount of the
Contract in type and
proportion of the currency.
Gross negligence
refers to serious
carelessness, it
could be defined as:
(i) “Gross negligence is
a conscious and
voluntary disregard
Page 33 of 42
of the need to use
reasonable care,
which is likely to
cause foreseeable
grave injury or
harm to persons,
property, or both. It
is conduct that is
extreme when
compared with ordinary negligence
, which is a mere
failure to exercise
reasonable care.
102. Clause 3.4
(f), Section
7 (Part – II)
192 Upon request of the Client, the Consultant
shall, at its own cost and expense, re-
perform the Services in the event of
Consultant‘s failure to exercise the skill
and care required under Clause GCC 3.1.1.
We request you to modify the clause as;
Upon request of the Client, the Consultant shall, at its own
cost and expense, re-perform the corresponding part of
Services in the event of Consultant‘s failure to exercise the
skill and care required under Clause GCC 3.1.1
Agreed.
103. Pg 192 , GCC, Cl 3.6
(ii), Section
7 ( Part II)
192 shall periodically permit the Client or its designated representative, and up to five
years from the expiration or termination
of this Contract, to inspect the same and
make copies there of as well as to have
them audited by auditors appointed by the
Client, if so required by the Client as the
case may be
We request to remove this clause - permitting client to audit records of the consultant up to five years from the
expiration or termination of contract, since it is very
difficult to maintain such documents for such a long
duration
Provision of RFP shall prevail
104. Section – 7,
Part 2 Clause
5.3 Page 196
and
Section -7,
Part IV,
Appendices
– Appendix
F
196
&
208
Appendix-F- Format may please be furnished. Appendix-F client
will provide
reasonably furnished
office with security
and housekeeping
facilities both at head office and in cities
and data as per
availability.
Addendum is being
issued separately.
Page 34 of 42
105. Clause 6.4,
Page 197
Section 7
(Part – II)
197 Any payment under this Contract shall be
made in Indian National Rupees as
specified in the SCC.
As per NIT, it is an international competitive bidding. We
request you to consider price in multiple currency like
USD/EURO/JAPANESE YEN/INR.
We request you consider that payment to consultant shall
be made in the same currency in which they will submit
their offer.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
106. Clause
6.5(c), Page
197 Section 7( Part II)
197 The Client will pay the Consultant‘s
invoices within Forty Five (45) days after
the receipt by the Client of such itemized invoices with supporting documents.
We request you to kindly consider that;
The Client will pay the Consultant‘s invoices within
Thirty (30) days after the receipt by the Client of such itemized invoices with supporting documents.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
107. Clause 9.1,
Page 199
Section 7
( Part II)
199 Liquidated Damages for error
/variation:-
In case any error or variation is detected in
the reports submitted by the Consultant and
such error or variation is the result of
negligence or lack of due diligence on the
part of the consultant, the consequential
damages thereof shall be quantified by the
client in a reasonable manner and recovered from the Consultant by way of
deemed liquidated damages.
As there is no such clause in previous RFPs floated for
similar type ongoing GC works, so we request you to
please delete this clause.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
108. Clause 9.2,
Page 199
Section 7
( Part II)
199 In case of delay in submission of each
deliverables beyond two weeks from the
due date of
submission of deliverable, liquidated
damages not exceeding an amount to 0.5 %
(Zero point five percent) of the agreement
value will be imposed and for further delay
of every week additional penalty of 0.25 %
the agreement value shall be imposed and
recovered by the appropriation from the Performance Security or otherwise.
However, in case of delay due to reason
beyond the control of Consultant, suitable
extension of time will be granted, subject to
a maximum of 5% (five per cent) of the
Agreement Value
Please confirm whether or not this 5% cap is on the
extension of time rather than on the penalty.
Please also confirm that you will allow a cap of 5% on the
penalty itself.
Addendum is being
issued separately.
Page 35 of 42
109. Section 7
Part III
SCC, Clause
7
202 (d) In the event of any defect coming to the
notice of the Client/Consultant during the
liability period in terms of Clause 3.4 of
GCC, and in the eventuality of the
Consultant failing to get it rectified, the
Client will forfeit the amount of the
performance security, provided that the
defect that is the cause of the forfeiture of
the performance bond/security bid effect
that is due to the actions or omissions of the Consultant in accordance with the
Consultant's scope of works and as finally
and conclusively decided by the Client.
Please confirm that the conclusion of the client is
provisional, and can be challenged by dispute settlement
mechanism under Clause 8
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
110. Section 7 of
Part III
,Contract
conditions
SCC/ Clause
7
Clause 2.9.7
/ 3.4g
202 a) The performance security will be 5%
……..but in any case not later than 10
(ten) days from the date of issuance of
letter of acceptance
We request that Performance Guarantee in the form of
Bank Guarantee shall be submitted within any case not
later than 20 (twenty) days from the issuance of letter of
acceptance.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
111. Section 7 of Part III
,Contract
conditions
SCC Clause
6, Page 202
202 The ceiling on Consultant’s liability shall be limited to the amount of the Contract in
type and proportion of the currency.
We request you to please update the clause as; The ceiling on Consultant’s liability (including liability
under clause 9 of GCC) shall be limited to the amount of
the Contract in type and proportion of the currency.
Provision of RFP Shall Prevail
112. Section 7 of
Part III
Clause 7 (a),
Page 202
202 The performance security will be 5% of the
Contract amount from an Indian Scheduled
Bank in form set forth in Appendix J (in
the Indian National Rupees) shall be paid
by the consultant. Immediately, but in any
case not later than 10(ten) days from the date of issuance of Letter of Acceptance.
We request you to please update the clause as;
The performance security will be 5% of the Contract
amount from an Indian Scheduled Bank in form set forth in
Appendix J (in the Indian National Rupees) shall be paid
by the consultant. Immediately, but in any case not later
than 30 (thirty) days from the date of signing of contract.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
113. Section 7 of
Part III SSC
Clause 7 (C),
Page202
202 The Client reserves the right to forfeit the
performance security amount, in breach of
any liability of the Consultant, or in the
event of termination of the Contract in
accordance with Clause 2.9 of GCC
including all its sub-clauses but excluding
Clause 2.9.1(e).
We request you to delete the clause. Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 36 of 42
114. S.no 10 of
SCC (GCC
clause 4.6),
203 Replacement of Key Personnel
It is stated that, for the reasons other than
death, prolonged illness requiring change
of physical location which shall be duly
certified by a medical practitioner
registered with Government Authority,
remuneration to the key personnel will be
reduced by 10% for each replacement.
However in case replacement of the key
personnel’s happens more than 10% every year, there will be penalty of 0.25% of
overall man months payable to the GC
In this regard, it is submitted that all the Consultants try
their level best to keep the proposed key personnel but due
to unavoidable circumstances beyond their control,
substitutions are needed. Also as per normal practice followed by all renowned agencies like World Bank, ADB,
AfDB etc. in all other ongoing projects in respect of
Replacement of Key personal the Client accept
replacement with equivalent or better qualification and
experience and at a same rate of remuneration.
Hence, the Client is requested to kindly accept replacement of key personnel with equivalent or better qualification and
experience and at a same rate of remuneration without any
penalty.
We Partly agree ,
Addendum is being
issued separately
115. Section 7,
Part III
Contract
conditions SCC, Clause
7 Point (d)
203 The risks & the coverage………………..
Validity of PII shall be upto 3 years beyond
date of completion
We request that validity of PII shall be up to one year
beyond the date of completion i.e. (48 months + 1 year
defect liability )
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
116. Part III
Clause 8, (d),
Page 203.
SCC, Section
7 (Part – III)
203 Project specific professional liability
insurance policy with a minimum coverage
equal to remuneration estimated. Global
cover with specific mention of coverage of
GC contract for MPMRCL will be
acceptable. Validity of P.I.I shall be up to 3
years beyond date of completion.
We request you modify the existing clause as ;
Professional liability insurance policy with a minimum
coverage equal to remuneration estimated. In case of
JV/Consortium, Umbrella cover of individual Firms
will be acceptable. Validity of P.I.I shall be up to 1 year
beyond date of completion.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
117. Part III
Clause 8, (d),
Page 203 . SCC, Section
7 (Part – III)
203 Project specific professional liability
insurance policy with a minimum coverage
equal to remuneration estimated. Global cover with specific mention of coverage of
GC contract for MPMRCL will be
acceptable. Validity of P.I.I shall be up to 3
years beyond date of completion.
Please confirm whether consultant could submit a policy
that is renewed annually.
Please confirm whether in case of Joint Venture, the members can choose to each be covered separately for the
project by their separate insurer.
As per provision of
the RFP.
118. Part III
Clause 9, (d),
Page 203 .
SCC, Section
7 (Part – III)
203 The Client is entitled to use the documents
prepared by the Consultant under this
Contract for other projects, without prior
written permission of the Consultant.
We find that this clause is not standard practice. The
consultant will prepare the documents for a specific project
with the specific data from that project. Other projects will
not have the same characteristics. Please delete this clause
or confirm that the client will indemnify and hold harmless
the Consultant for any use outside the project
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
119. Clause 10,
Page 203 ,
203 Replacement of key experts (whose CV is
to be evaluated at proposal stage) will
Please confirm that the 10% penalty on the replacement is
imposed only on the fee for the first month of the
Penalty will be
imposed on each
Page 37 of 42
Section 7
Part III of
SCC
generally not be entertained. Team leader
& Deputy Project leader could only be
replaced in case of death or medical
incapacity. If the key personnel are
required to be replaced on the instruction of
the Clients (due to reasons of performance)
or own its own by the consultant at the time
of initial deployment or subsequently the
key personnel are replaced by the
consultant, for the reasons other than death, remuneration of key personnel will be
reduced by the 10 % for each replacement.
However in case of replacement of key
person happens more than 10% every year,
there will be additional penalty of 0.25% of
overall man months payable to GC. In any
case replacement should not take more than
15 (Fifteen) days otherwise additional
penalty of 1% of overall man months will
be imposed for each week.
replacement.
Please confirm that the consultant is allowed to make at
least a certain number of replacements per year before the
10% penalty will be imposed.
Please confirm that the 1% penalty imposed for delay in
deploying replacement shall be imposed on overall man
months of the personnel replaced only.
man months.
Up to 10%
replacement will also
be subjected to
imposition penalty.
Yes
120. Part III
Clause 8, (d), Page 203 .
SCC, Section
7 (Part – III)
203 Project specific Professional Liability
Insurance Please confirm that PII’s can be provided by each
company separately to the extent of their share in the consortium fee.
Request to reduce the validity to one year beyond the
date of completion.
Agreed.
It shall be as per
provision of RFP
121. Clause 13
6.2 of SCC,
Page 204
Section 7
(Part – III)
204 Adjustment of remuneration We request you to provide escalation for foreign currency
also.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
122. Clause 13 of
SCC, Page
204, Section
7 (Part – III)
SCC
204 Escalation
As per SCC Clause No.13, it is mentioned
that the reimbursable amounts will not be
liable for escalation and the escalation for
remuneration shall be provided as per
formula mentioned therein. The adjustment
will be made in 12 months intervals only.
As per recent guidelines issued by Ministry of Road
Transport & Highways, Government of India vide their
letter no. RW-NH-35071/2/2013-S&R(B) dated 25th
February 2014, it has now been communicated that
escalation @ 5% per year (after every 12 months starting
from 13th month) will, henceforth, be extended to cover all items of the Contract i.e. remuneration, all miscellaneous
items and expenses etc. and NOT only remuneration.
This should be made applicable in this RFP.
Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
Page 38 of 42
123. Clause 13 of
SCC, Page
204, Section
7 (Part – III) SCC
204 Adjustment of Remuneration Please provide the formula for foreign currency Provision of RFP
shall prevail.
124. Section-7
(Part
iii)Contract
conditions –
SCC S.No.14 /
clause of
GCC 6.3
205 The client warrants that…... is necessary. We request the service tax shall be paid to the Consultant
for all payments as applicable as per Govt. norms on
production of documentary proof for having remitted the
same.
Agreed.
125. Clause 16
6.5 (a) , Page
205 Section
7 (Part III)
SCC
205 Advance Payment. As there is no provision for adjustment of advance stated in
SCC, So we propose to amend it as;
Such advance shall be interest free and shall be recovered
in 24 installment starting 6 months after first invoice.
Advance payment
shall be interest free
and will be recovered
in 12 installments.
126. Clause 16 6.5 of SCC,
Page 205
Section 7
(Part III)
205 Advance Payment
As per Clause no. 16 of Special Conditions of Contract, an interest free advance
payment @ of 5% of contract value shall
be paid to the Consultant on submission of
advance payment guarantee.
In this regard, the amount of 5% of contract value is very low and the consultant needs more fund to mobilize their
staff on the project site. Hence, the Client is requested to
kindly increase this amount to 10% of the contract value
(including reimbursable costs).
Provision of RFP
shall prevail
127. General Whether a firm, who has purchased the tender document in
their name, can submit the tender in joint
venture/consortium (where it is not lead). Or is it necessary
to purchase the document form Lead member and submit it
from Lead member of consortium only?
Kindly clarify
Any members of the
Consortium/JV can
purchased the tender
document but has to
be submitted by the
lead member only in
case of
consortium/JV
128. General -------------- We request that the copy of the approved DPR shall be
given
It is clarified that
executive summery of
the DPRs is already
provided in the RFP.
Page 39 of 42
129. General Non-Substantial Partners Are there any restrictions on positions and number of staff
to be deployed by non-substantial partners?
Non-Substantial
Partners can deploy
the staff subject to
provision of the RFP
130. General JV/consortium of partners Since the biding is in JV/consortium. We request you to
clarify that whether the client will treat the JV as an AOP
for all the purposes (e.g. invoicing, payment etc.).
It is clarified that all
invoices etc shall be
submitted by the lead member and all
payment shall made
to lead member only.
131. General Payments to the consultants/JV/Consortium Since the biding is in JV/consortium. We request you to
clarify that whether the payments to JV members
separately or all payment to lead member.
All payment will be
made to lead member.
132. General General Qualifications Please specify which principle should be considered when
evaluating the academic qualifications of foreign
professionals, with particular reference to European and
USA nationals. In particular please confirm that the
European Master’s Degree in Engineering is considered a
Post graduate title.
European master
degree in Engineering
will be considered
Post Graduate title.
133. General Which RFP to be used for submission of Bid RFP with provision of 3 Envelops as per
ITC section 2 part (i)
and provision of
FIN- 3D under FIN –
2 : summary of cost
Page 40 of 42
shall be used for
submission of Bid.
134. General Kindly covey last date for request of clarification
submission on proposal document by the consultants
Till 23rd May 2016
(15:30 Hrs) request
for clarification(s)
can be submitted to
the client.
(Jitendra Dubey) (Vijendra Nanavati)
(Kamal Nagar)
(Sanjay Shrivastava)
E-in-C and Director
Technical
MPMRCL
Technical Advisor
MPMRCL
OSD (Transport)
UAD
CFO,
MPMRCL
Page 41 of 42
Annexure -1
Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited
List of Participants
Representatives: Consulting Firms/Organizations
S. No. Name Organization
1 Mr Sandip Ray Systra
2 Mr. Devesh Goyal AECOM
3 Mr. Abhinav Shrivatava Egis
4 Mr. Parvendra K Chouhan Egis
5 Mr. Sumit Kathare Khatib & Alami
6 Mr. M Murthy AARVEE
7 Mr. B B Sankaram AARVEE
8 Mr. Jai Bundila Geodata Engg. S.P.A
9 Mr. Ashish Dasgupta AYESA
10 Mr. Varun Sharma PwC
11 Mr. Nishanth Pai DB Engineering & Consulting GmBH
12 Mr. Krishna k Singh Ramboll India Private limited
13 Mr. R.C Rohtas TUV SUD South Asia
Page 42 of 42
14 Mr. Mukul Pandey Infra tech Pune
15 Mr Vishal Shrivastava ICT
Representative: Urban Administration and Development & Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited.
1 Mr. S.S. Rajpoot Director Technical, MPUDC
2 Mr. J. K. Dubey E-in-C/Director Technical, MPMRCL
3 Mr. Vikas Mishra Additional Commissioner, UAD
4 Mr. Vijendra Nanavati Technical Advisor, MPMRCL
5 Mr. Kamal Nagar OSD (Transport), UAD
6 Mr. Sanjay Shrivastava CFO, MPMRCL & Financial Advisor, UAD
7 Mr. Anoop Vijay Chartered Accountant, MPMRCL
8 Mr. Sandeep Jain Company Secretary, MPMRCL