@ bevclopwre$t acaberaq of the philippinesBrDs & AwARDs CoMrirrrrEE (SO No.2018-035)

BAC Resolution No. 1 17, series of 2018

BAC ReSoIUTION DECLARING FIIIune OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BIOContodl ONE Lor CoNsrRUcrroN oF A FoURTEEN-SToREr RETNFoRoED Concazre

BUILDING CoIIPRISING FoUR-SToREY MULTI-USE PODIU,'|, TEN FLOORSAccoI,,MoDATIoN TowER WITH RooF DECK AND BASEMENT PARKING &UTILITIES IN DAP CoxTeaence CEN7ER ,N TAGAYTAY CITY FoR T,IEPURPIOSES OF ,,STRENGTHENING

THE CAPACITY oF THE DEVELoPMENT ACADEMY OFTHE PHILIPPINES To PRowDE BoTH GENERAL & HIGHLY SPECIALIZED TRAINING

CqURSES Fon GoWRNMENT OFFICIALy,,ABC: P829,575,OOO.0o Btddtno No' rB17-381683-01

WHEREAS, the Academy advertised on November 3,2017 (Friday) the lnvitation to Bid

of the contract cited above in one of the newspaper in nationwide general circulation(The Philippine Star) and posted the same in the Ph|IGEPS Website, DAP Website, andconspicuous places at the DAP Pasig premises continuously for seven (7) calendardays;

WHEREAS, on the scheduled Submission and Opening of Bids last 29 November 2017(Wednesday), only three (3) bidders tendered their Bids, namely:

1. Floridablanca Construction and Development Corporation, submitted at 08:53AM;

2. Embrocal Builders, lnc., submitted at 09:25 AM; and3. E.M. Cuerpo, lnc., submitted at09:47AM

WHEREAS, in response to the said advertisement, eleven (11) Prospective Biddersbought the Official Bid Documents at P75,000.@ each;

1. A.M. Oreta & Co. lnc.;2. E.M. Cuerpo, lnc.;

3. lConstruction and Developers, lnc.;4. J.D. Legaspi Construction;5. Ron Daniell Construction Corp.;6. Embrocal Builders, lnc.;

7. Floridablanca Construction and Development Corporation;8. 21th Construction and Development Corporation;9. S.C. Megaworld Construction and Development Corporation;10. C.B. Garay Construction Builders; and11. C.E. Padilla Conskuction, lnc.

BAI Resolution

ils. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID June 22,2018

p.2l4L

WHEREAS, the eight (8) Prospective Bidders who did not attend nor submit their bidfurnished their Letter of Regret, respectively;

WHEREAS, during the said scheduled Submission and Opening of Bids, the Bidssubmitted by E.M. Cuerpo, lnc. (EMCI) and Embrocal Builders, lnc. (EBl) were declared"ELIGIBLE" on the Checking of their Eligibility, Technical, and Financiat Documents.However, the declaration as to the eligibility of the Bid of Floridablanca Construction andDevelopment Corporation (FCDC) was suspended due to a clarification that had to bemade on the discounts offered as stated in their Financial Bid Form;

WHEREAS, on'13 December2017,the BAC scheduled the Resumption of the Openingof Bids of FCDC and declared the same as "ELIGIBLE"'

WHEREAS, on 21 December 2017, upon evaluation and confirmation, the Bids andAwards Committee (BAC) declared the Bid of FCDC as the LOWEST CALCULATEDBrDl (LCB);

WHEREAS, on 08 January 2018, the BAC Secretariat furnished all eligible bidders anemail as regards the declaration of the Lowest calculated Bid and the commencementof the Post-Qualification process;

WHEREAS, on 12 January 2018, the BAC Secretariat informed the Bidders, thru email,that the Bidding Process was postponed upon the directives from the DApManagement;

WHEREAS, on 25 April 2018, the BAC secretariat received a copy of the NotarizedSecretary certificate2 corresponding to the Lifting of the suspension of the BiddingProcess for the above-said contract and the BAC called upon the Technical workingGroup (BAC-TWG) to assist in the resumption of the post-eualiflcation;

WHEREAS, on 30 April 2018 to 02 May 2018, the BAC-TWG has resumed with thePost-Qualification for the Lowest Calculated Bidder;

WHEREAS, on 07 May 2018, the BAC-TWG presented their findings andrecommendations to the BAC, BAc deliberated as to FCDC's bid responsiveness andupon BAC's deliberation, the bid submitted by FCDC was declared ,,non-responsive,,;

1 Annex -A" - BAC Resolution No. 044. s. 2017' Annex B" - Notarized Secretary Certificate

BAC Resolutiun

t{o.ll7 s.ZEl8DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

June 22,2018p.3l4L

WHEREAS, on the same date, the BAC Chairperson instructed the BAC Secretariat tofurnish FCDC a copy of the Notice of Post-Disqualification and instructed the BAC-TWGto proceed with the post-qualification of the 2nd rank bidder upon Notice being sent toFCDC;

WHEREAS, on May 08, 2018, BAC Secretariat sent the Notice of PoslDisqualification3to FCDC thru email and thru registered mail on May 09, 2018;

WHEREAS, on 09 May 2018, the BAC-TWG proceeded with the post-qualification ofthe bid submitted by Embrocal Builders, lnc. (EBl), the 2nd rank bidder;

WHEREAS, on May 10,2018, a Request for Reconsiderationa was sent by FCDC thruemail and the same was foruvarded to the BAC Chairperson on that same day;

WHEREAS, on 15 May 2018, the BAC and BAC-TWG members convened to deliberatethe merit of such request and thereafter decided to DENY the FCDC's Request forReconsideration;

WHEREAS, BAC-TWG presented their findings and recommendations to the BAC onthe bid submitted by EBI and upon BAC's deliberation, the bid submitted by EBI wasthen declared as "non-responsive" ;

WHEREAS, on the same date the BAC Chairperson instructed the BAC Secretariat tofurnish EBI the copy of the Notice of Post-Disqualification and instructed the BAC-TWGto proceed with the post-q ualification of the 3'd rank bidder upon Notice being sent toEBI;

WHEREAS, on 17 May 2018, the BAC Secretariat furnished the Reply to the Requestfor Reconsiderations filed by FCDC, thru email, and also furnished the Notice for post-

Disqualification' to EBl, thru email;

WHEREAS, a Request for ReconsiderationT was filed by EBI on 18 May 2018 and wasforwarded immediately to the BAC members. The BAC has convened on 22 May 2018to deliberate the merit of such request and thereafter decided to DENY the EBI'sRequest for Reconsideration;

WHEREAS, on 25 May 2018, the BAC Secretariat has furnished EBI the Reply to the

3 Annex "C" - Notice of Post-Disqualification of FCDC'Annex "D" - Request for Reconsideration of FCDC" Annex E" - Reply to the Request for Reconsideration of FCDC' Annex F - Notice of Post-Oisqualiflcation of EBI' Annex "G" - Request for Reconsideration of EBI

BAC Resolution

t{0. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID June 22, 2018

p.4l4L

Request for Reconsiderations, thru email, and sent thru registered mail on 28 May 2018;

WHEREAS, upon the post-disqualification of the 2nd rank bidder, the BAC Chairpersoninstructed the BAC-TWG to proceed with the poslqualification of the 3'd rank bidder,EMCI upon proper communication was sent to EBI;

WHEREAS, on May 28 - 30, 2018, the BAC-TWG proceeded with the poslqualificationof the 3'd rank bidder;

WHEREAS, on 31 May 2018, the BAC-TWG presented to the BAC the findings andrecommendations on the bid submitted by EMCI, for the BAC deliberation as to theresponsiveness of the bid, and upon thorough deliberation, the BAC declared the bidsubmitted by EBI as "non-responsive" and the BAC Chairperson instructed the BACSecretariat to furnish EMCI the copy of the Notice of Post-Disqualification;

WHEREAS, on 04 June 20"18, the BAC Secretariat furnished EMCI a copy of Notice ofPost-Disqualifications, thru email and registered mail;

WHEREAS, on 07 June 2018, a Request for Reconsiderationlo was received by theBAC Secretariat, thru email, filed by EMCI and was then forwarded to the BACmembers for their consideration. The BAC convened on 13 June 2018 for thedeliberation on the merit of EMCI's Request for Reconsideration and thereafter decidedto DENY their request;

WHEREAS, on 14 June 2018, the BAC Secretariat furnished EMCI the Reply to theRequest for Reconsiderationll, thru email and registered mail; and

WHEREAS, on the consideration of the procedure set forth by 2016lmplementing Rules and Regulations of RA9184, the exhaustion of theMechanism has already lapsed resulting to a failure of bidding.

RevisedProtest

I Annex "H' - Reply to the Request for Reconsideration of EBI'^Annex "1" - Notice of Post-Disqualification of EMCI'' Annex J - Request for Reconsideration of EMCI" Annex "K'- Reply to the Request for Reconsideration of EMCI

NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Members of the Bids and Awards Committee (SO-2018-035), hereby RESOLVED as it is hereby RESOLVED:

1. To declare the FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-B|D the aforesaidtransaction; and

2. To recommend to the Head of the Procuring Entity the approval of the foregoingBAC-concluded findings to declare a FAILURE OF B|DDING AND TO RE-BID

EAC Resolution

t{0. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID June 22,2018

P.sl4L

RESOLVED on this 22nd day of June 2018

Concurred by the BIDS & AWARDS COIVM IITEE 50#2018-035 dated 26 April 2018

0- MuJarN MMANUEL A. IT

BAC Member 1 BAC MeIFer 2

'y\w(LATTY. VIENNd OLGA G. PARCE

BAC l\,4ember 3

MON AR. DE ARMASBAC Member 4

E

E ntative

/1vt?rt/ '''-.

TRYG\E A. BOLANTE

BAC Vice-Chairperson

Revlewed as Legellyl Complient:

Tq*tneATTY. VIENNA OLGA G. PARCE

DAP Leqal officer

Budget ln clusion Cedif i6d :

anarrtt.,0a. ot',1-SD. BARAWIDAN

Acting Managing 0irector, Finance Dept

Reyiewed es Process Conplient:

ATW. REMUSDkector,

A. REYESSecretariat

ENDORSED FOR FINAI DEC'S'O ;

BAC Chairpersfn (SO-2018-035)BERNARDO A. DIZON

()-

FAILURE OF BIDDING

RE-BID TRANSACTION

Head ol the Procuring Entity

APPROVED 8Y:

dd

.c: COS-ATRS, O-OIC /// SVP-Ml.M, OIC DAP /// Dir NLC, BAC-TWG Chairman

A.

BAC Rasolution

il0. ll7 s.2018

June 22,2018p,6l4L

e.112

! *vclo1-tchl AcAbo4lr'l of tlrc ph;lippirlcr

BAC REsoLUrloN oN THE

DECLARAT|oN oF LowEST CALCULATEO BID (LCB)

e@!s! ,,ONE I"oT CO STRUCTION Of A FOURTEEN.STOREY REII.I'ORCEO CONCRETE EUIIOING

coMpRrsrNc FouR-SroREY MUtTI'USE PODIUM, TEN t|OORS ACCOMMOOATION

TowER wtrH Roor DEc( ANo BaS€MENT PARKING & UrllrlEs lNc[uolNc S|TE

DEVELoPMENT AND vARlous slTE lMPnovEMENTs AT E DAP CoNFERENCE

CENTTR rN IAGAYTaY CtrY FoR THE PuRPosEs oF "SIREN6THENING THE CAPACITY

oF THE DEVEIoPMENT ACADEMY oF THE PHlLlPPlNEs ro PRovlDE sorH GENERAL

& HrcHLY SPEclAuzEo TRAII{It'lc couRsEs FoR GoVERIMENT OrFlclal.s"

pE29,575,ooo.s .l44!&&'i 1817-381643'0143c,

WHEREAS, the Bids and Atvards Committee (BAC) has scheduled the Submission

and Opening o, Bids last 29 November 2017;

WHEREAS, during fhe scheduled Submission and Opening of Bids out of eleven

ii i;;;;t';;t-. ;ho uought the ofilciar Bid Documents (oBD), onlv three (3)

contraclors submitled their Blds on'time:

Florldeblanca Con3tructlon and D'vsloPmenl Corporation' submitted

their bid at 08:53 AM;imbrocal Bulldelr, lnc., submitted their bid at 09:25 AM: and

E.M. Cusrpo, lnc., submitted their bid at 09r47 AM'

flHEREAS, the chronological order of the opening ol bids was based on the date of

purchase of the OBD. the sequence is as follows:

E.M. Cuerpo, Inc.,, Embrocal Buildsrs, lnc.; and

iloridablanca Conslruction and Developmenl Corporation'

WHEREAS,on the scheduled Opening of Brds last 29 November 2-01 7 '.the BAC has

a."iOJio "onor"t

. Resumption of O-pening of Bids on the merit that Floridablaoca

C"""]trr,iti* ""0 bevetoprient Corporat6n has submitted their Request for

iJiiiJiili"ti"" ,t'ot t "i

to be resolved pnor to the declaration of the Lowest

Calculated Bid;

WHEREAS, the aummary of the scheduled Opening of Bids and-Resumption of the

d;;;i;fi'Bil; ;;iJ ta.t'zg tlor"mu"' 2017 and 1i December 2017 are as follows:

E.[. CUERPO, lNC. - ELIGIBLE for funher delibcration with Financial Bid of P

788,333,333 r;

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

Annex "A"Page 1 of2

BAC Resolution No. 044, SorieB of 2017

June 2DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BI

Annex "A"P.ge2 ol2

E BROCAL BUILDERS, lNc. - ELIGIELE for further deliberation wdh Financral

o'f P 77? ,777 ,777 .at andFLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPT'ENT CORPORATION _

ELIGIBLE for tunher deliberation with Financial Bid of P 825'446 082's (the

discounts offered and the methodology for their application ars 11olo)

NOw, THEREFORE, we. the Members of the BAC, hereby assessed

Floriiabhnca Con3truction .nd DeveloPment Corpor'tion with the Financial Bid

of P 825,r146,082.e (the discounts offered and the methodology for their application

ate 11o/o\ ot a calculated amount of Soven Hundred Thirty Four l'illion Six

xrnar"i flrtv Seven Thouaand ttrirteen peros end 57/'l od (P 734,647,013'a)'

as the Lowest Calculated 8id (LCB) and eligible for post-qualification: and

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Technical Working Group (TWG) is directed to

proceeO with the post{ualification within thirty (30) calendar days lrom date of this

Resolution.

RESoLVED on this 21't day of December 2017

APa'*'--A}IATMA SD. BARAI,VIOAN

8AC Member

EERNAROO A. OIZON

€nd Uaer resentative per5on

MAGDALENA t. MENDOZA

BAC Chairperson

.,'1\D^p tc\o€ffi!\arc !r 7\l5 tn t l!89\!^c r.!o 'Cadoq

8AC Resolution

llo.llT s.2018

2

Trrrr/._TRYGVE ( EOUI{IE

BAC Member

V

June 22 20188AC Resolution

t{o.ll7 s.2018 p

Annex "8"Page 1 of2$ ucrcloprcttt .caDo,*1 of tkc philippirts

SECRETARY'S CERTIFICATE

I, Vladimir F. Sedural, of legal age, beang the duly appointed and incumbentCorporate Secretary of the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), a

government-owned ahd -controlled corporation duly organized and existing by virtLle ofFresidential Decree No. 205, as amended, with principal office at DAP Building sanMaguel Ave. Ortigas Center, Pasig City, after havinq been sworn according to law, herebydepose and state:

1. On March 7, 2018, the Board of Trustees of OAP approved and passed thefollowing resolution:

soaRD RESOLUTION NO, 2014-O05BY Referendum

LIFTING 'HE

SUSPE'{SION OF THE PUOLlC EIDDINGPROCESS FOR THE PROCURE].IENT OF "ONE LOT

CONSTRUCIION OF A FOURTEEI{.STOREYRETFOR.CED COI{CRETE BUILDTNG CO]TIPRISING

FOUR SToRCY tauLTl-usE PoDIUltlrTEt{ FLOORS ACCOr.ll,lODATlON TOWER WITH ROOF

DECK AI{D BASEiiENI PARIC G AI{D UTILITIESTNCUDI'{G SITE DEVELOPIT.ENT AND VARIOUS SITEIri{PROVE}IENTS At THE DAP COt{PEREIICE CENTER

I1{ TAGAYTAY FOR THE PURPOSE OF-STRCI{GTHETItI{G TH€ CAPACTTY OF THE

DEVELOPT4ENT ACADE}IY OF THE PIIILIPPtNES TORPOVTDE BOTH GENERAL AND HIGHLY SPECIAIZEDTRAtt{lr{G COURSES FOR GOVER i'lEI{T OFFICIALS"

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has approved throughBoard Resolution No. 20]7-21 the multi-yearimplementation of the physical expansion plan of the DAP

conference Center (DAPCC) in Tagaytay City for thepurposes therein stated;

WH€REAS, the first and the second tranches ofappropriations for the implementation of theaforementioned plan have been earmarked in R.A. No,

10924 and R.A. No. 10964, othervvise known as theGeneral Appropriataon Act of 2017 and 2018, respectively;

WHEREAS, the biddinq for the construction of the newtraininq buildinq in DAPCC, Tagaytay City started onNovember 3, 2017 but vras suspended by the Board ofTrustees durang its emergency meeting on January 4,2018 while organizational concerns were being attendedto;

WHEREAS. the Department of Budget and Management(DBM), the Government ProcLlrement Policy BoardTechnical Service Office (GPP8'TSO), and the Departmentof Public Works and Hlghways (DPWH) have advised theDAP to resume the bidding and commence theimplernentation of the expansion proiect in 2018;

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

June 22 2018BAE Resolution

l{0. ll7 s.2018 p.9l4L

Annex "B"Page2 ol2

Now tharefore be it rcsolved, as it is HEREBYRESOLVED, that the pubic competitive bidding for theabove-described project be resumed as soon as possible;

RESOLVED FURTHER, thAI thE BIdS ANd AWATdSCommittee (BAC) be immediately reconstrtuted;

RESOLVED FINALLY, that the BAC and the DAPManagement proceed with dispatch in the implementationof the project, and comply strictly with the relevantrmplementing rules of RA No. 9184.

2. To the best of my knowledge, the foregoing resolutaons have not been revoked,amended, or in any manner modified.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand on this

Corporate Secretary

Before me, a notary publac in and for personally appearedvladimir F. Bedural, exhibiting to me his Driver's License No. N25-15-009362 expiring on12/23/2022, who is personally known to me to be the same person $rho presented theforegoing instrument and signed the instrument in my presence, and who took an oathbefore me as to such instrument.

APR 2 5 2018,witness my hand and seal this

ooc. no. !j1Page No. --,/CCBook No. lr-;serrec of 2O18-

All l. fAt Rt sNntury blic

Appointftr.n !-o 2 (20t8-2019)Roll No. 6*sa TfN No.245-743.{rt2[,ICL!: Compliarue No. V0010458r'F DA? Bid8., Sai Mi

i. P{rigcriv

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

8AE Resolutinn

Nu.ll7 s.20lBDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID June 22, 2018

p,LOl47

Page I ol1

[ray 8, 2018

MR. ALOWN E. ALMERIAVice President for Special ProjectsFloridablanca Construction and Oevelopmont CorporationBrgy. Apalit, Floridablanca, Pampanga

NOTICE OF POST.DISQUALIFICATION

Dear Mr, Almeia:

This is to inform you that as the Bidder who submitled the Lowest CalculatedBid for the bidding of One (l) Lot Conltruction of a Fourts€n-Storey ReinforcedConcrete Building comprising Four-Storey Multi-use Podium, Tsn FloorsAccommodation Totyer with Roof Oeck and Basement Parking & Utilitiosincluding Sit6 Oovalopment and variou3 Sit lmprovement3 at the DAPConferencs Cantor in Tagaytay City for the purposes ol "SrrL'ngrhaning tht'(dpudi (t thc [)ttelopnent -ltultnl afthe l'hilippinL,! b Pruridc both Ottlttul & HilrhlrSpeciuli:el Truinitg (bffst.t li)t'Co|ennent ()llicitlt" as per lnvitation to Bid No.lBlT-38i683-01. the Bids & Awards Committee (BAC) and ils Technical Working Group(TWG) conducted an evaluation of your submitted bid.

However. upon careful examination, verification, validation, and ascertainmentof all statements and representations made, we regret to inform you that BAC foundyour bid not responsive relative to the requirements and conditions specified in theOfrlcial Bidding Documents (OBD). BAC wishes to inform you on the llndingswherein your submitted bid failed; enumerated as follows:

FINDlN6SELIGIBILITY OOCUMENTS

"E02" Submitted copy of Certificate of Filing of Amended oI Articles oflncorporation i5sued by SEC on June 29, 2015 instead ofthe requiredactual SEC Registration Certificate

.l "FAII-ED' non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBD.

05" i Presented one (1)ongoing private contract with above 2% slippage as ofNovember 29, 2017

Did not include tovernment contracts based on "undisclosed" data foundby TWG in the internet. Seelinksbelow:

E

\& rtre rq*r9\d\p6' G(di..b\rcoc ,.d 06ou^rfi_reol6_,

e," s a1;^iDJco""iiiiJ so n. z,j, i cir

t.

6I

8AE Resolution

No. ll7 s.2018

June 22,2018p.tLl4L

Annex "C"Page2 ol l

p 2/4

F/NDiNGS

"FAll-€D" non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBD

http://w,*w.dpwh.aov.phldpwh/sites/default/fiteslwebf orm/civil works/contra.t of aereemenr16Af0103%2ocontra.t.odf

huo://npd..sov.oh/uoloads/def ault/f il€s/g64rbaf 241853977649efob5f11abba-odf; and

htto://f loridablanca.qov.oh/downloadable/PHILGEPS/Rechannelinq%200B620Caulaman%20River/AWARD.odf ?boxtvoe=edf&q=false&s2=f als

e&r=wide

Presented three (3) completed private contracts

Due to non-inclusion of the SLCC as well as completed projects listed inthe Company Profile under Technical Documehts (marked a5'T03") onthe statement of all COMPLEfED government and/or private contracts as

required.

.l rFAtLED" non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBD

TECHNICAL DOCUMENTSSubmitted duly signed copy of Certificate of Site lnepection issued onNovember 20, 2017 however, document {e-file) is absent in submitted CD

':. -FAILED" non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBO

a

+

8EO

"102"

'T08" to"T18"

Bidder complled wlth requlred attachments and personnel requiredqualifications. The personnelsigned his CV in black ink.

'l "fAlLEo" due to personnel's signature in black ink.

Submitted Cv of Mr. Job C. Capis. with attached copy of c€rtificate ofCompletion for Basic Occupational Safety and Health Training Course

{4Ohrs) for Supervisors issued on Mar. 28, 2008 in lieu of DOLE CertificateofAccreditation ar required in 8DS Clause 12.1 (b) (ii.2) item 4.8. pE. 38.

Bldder DID Of COMPLY wlth personn€l r€qulred qualifications. Thepersonnelsigned his CV in black ink.

.l "FAILED" due to non-compliance with personnel's requiredqualifications and signinB of CV in black ank.

Bidder complled wlth requlred attachments and personnel requlredquallflcatlonr. The personnelsigned his CV in black ink.

.i 4FAiiED'due to personnel's signature in black ink.

FINANCIAL OOCUMENTS

"T't9"

"F02"

"T20" to"T24"

Discrepancies on computed unit prjces between 8OQ and DUPA entries.

Discrepancies on some items in the BOQ:

Different unit s used on similar items, specifically on Djvisions 5 &

x

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

*-

June 22 2018r2l4L

BAC Rasolution

1{o.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

Annex "C"Page 3 of4

p.

F04

7.

ir Unreasonable application of cost used for materials with lower andhigher specifications. Some materials of lower specs are priced higherthan materiafs of hiBhet specs lexomples on Oivisions 4, 5, & l.

Use of 10% Profit in gOQ items 3.3.1, 4.3.1 to 4.3.2, 10.1.8.2 up to10.1.8.6, 10.1.13.2, 13.1, 23.5.1 up to 23.5.9, 33.8.1 up to 33.8.6; and, us€

o, 10% VAT in BOQ items 4.5.18 to 4.5.19 are not compliant in theprovisions of DPWH'5 DO no- 197 s. of 2016.

.:' "FAltED'due to discrepancies and non-compliance with the DPWH

D.O. No.197, series of 2016 as required.

.:.'FAILED" non-complaint to the specified requirement perOBD

Discrepancies in .omputed unit prices between BOq and DUPA entries.

Discrepancies on some items in the DUPA:

, Different unit prices used on similar items, specifically on Divisions 5 &7.

ir Unreasonable application ot cost used for materialt with lower andhigher specifications. Some materiali of lower specs are priced higherthan materials of higher specs (examples on Divisions 4, 5, and 7).

.] "FAltED" non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBD

Ure of 10% OCM and PROFIT under DUPA Division No. 8 is not compliantwith the provisions of DPwH's DO no. 197 s. of 2016. Whatis reflectedhowever in the 8OQ is 8% for OCM & Profit.

DUPA did not contain "Table of Contents" as required.

,:' "talLED" non-complaint to the specified requirement per OBD

.:. "FAll-ED" due to discrepancies and non-compliance with the OPWH

D.o. No. 197, series of 2016 as required.

,,F05"

3l/

!6,e8 ]erc\rd\Pd' ce!..ob\lcoc pd om!&rr-llo54d

The total accumulated amount as reflected in "t05 - Cash Ilow/Prop6ed Schedule ot Payment" is equal to P908,667,494.46 whichexceeds the ABC (P829,575,000.00).

Annual accumulated amount in "t05 - Cash FlovPropo!€d Schedule ofPayment" did not match the proiected % accomplishment reflected in

T05's Sch€dule of gillints (example: Year 1 ac.omplishment in "T05" is

valued at 98M while in "F05" total amount is equal to 801M).

^l "FAILEU' due to proposed cash flow exceeding the ABC, thereforegrossly disadvantateous to DAP

.i 'FAILED" due to non-complaince to the specified requirement perOBD

IJ

BA[ Resolution

t{0. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.L3l4L

Annex "C"Page 4 of I

'F06" Discrepancies in computed unit prices between gOQ and DUPA entries.

Discrepancies on some items in the BOQand DUPA:

r Oiffereht unit prices used on similar items, specifically on Divisions 5 &7.

r Unreasgnable application of cost used for materials with lower and

higher specjfications. Some materials of lower specs are priced hiSher

than materials of highet spect lexomples on Divisions 4, 5, ond n., Use of 10% OCM and PROFIT under DUPA Division No.8 is not

compliant in the provisions of DPWH's DO No.197 s.2015. However

what is reflected in the BOQ is 8% for OCM & Profit.

.i "fAlLfD'due to non-complaince to the specified requirement per

OBD

+ 'FAltED" since 8OQ and DUPA ir not compliant with the pertinent and

relevant provisions of DPWH'S D.o. No.197 5.2016 as required.

Based on the foregoing, we regret to inform you that the Bid submitted byFLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPiTENT CORPORATION wasthereby declared POST-DISQUALIFIED.

Should you wish to request for reconsideration, you may do so within three (3)

calendar days trom receipt of this Notice.

We look forward to your participation in our fulure procurement activities

Very truly yours,

rr h\e Bids

"<Le;o

& Awards Committee

oBERNAROO A. DIZONChairperson, BAC

, Senior Vice President, Services

.t : \u6 \)^P ra.D€ff3\r^c lor^'ek E tlbo\e,\.d ord*.orid'\rcDc p.!i o6olr^ufY-tm5c.-6 ^hy

vcr @id4D

BAC Resolutisn

ilo.ll? s.20lBDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

June 22,2018P.L4l4t

tFLORIDABTANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVETOPMENT CORPORATION Eiso 9oo12or5 CERITFTED

May 09, 2018

Sir

For reasons that will be discussed hereinafter, we respectfully request for reconsideration ofthe decision of your Bids and Awards committee (BAc) declaring Floridablanca Construction

and Development Corporation (FCDC for brevity) Post-disqualified in the bidding conducted

by your BAC for procurement of the contract for the One (1) Lot Construction of a Fourteen

Storey Reinforced Concrete EuildinB comprising Four Storey Multi-Use Podium, Ten Floors

Accommodation Tower with Roof Deck and Basement Parking & Utilities including Site

Development and Various Site lmprovements at the DAP Conference Center in Tagaytay cityfor reason stated in your Ietter dated May 8, 2018 entitled Notice of Post-Disqualification.

As we received your letter only on May 8, we have up to Friday, May 11,2018 within which

to flle this administrative remedy of Motion/Request for Reconsideration prescribed under

Sub-section 55.1 of Rule xvll of the 2015 Revised lmplementing Rules and Regulations (

hereinafter IRR) of Republic Act 9184which we can avail within three (3) days from our

receipt of your letter pursuant to the last paraEraph of Art. 13 of the civil Code whichprovides that in computing the period, the first day shall be excluded and the last day shall

be included.

Section 30.1, Rule lX of the IRR provides that the BAC shall open the first bid enveloPe in

public to determine each bidde/s compliance with the documents required to be submitted

for eligibility and for the technical requirements, as prescribed in thi5 lRR. tor this purpose,

the BAC shall check the submitted documents of each bidder against a checklist ofrequirements to ascertain if they are all present, using a non-discretionary "pass/fail"

criterion, as stated in the lnstructions to Bidders (lTB). lf a bidder submits the required

document, it shall be rated "passed" for that particular requirement. ln this regard, bids that

fail to include to include any requirement or are incomplete or patently insufficient shall be

con.

Section 30.2 of the IRR provides that immediately after determining compliance with the

requirements in the tirst envelope, the BAC shall forthwith open the second envelope of

each remaining eligible bidder whose first bid envelope was rated "passed". The second

envelope of each complying bidder shall be opened within the same day, except as provided

under Section 33 of this lRR. ln case any of the requirements in the second envelope of a

particular bid is missint, incomplete or patently insufficient, and/or the submitted total bid

price exceeds the ABc, the BAc shall rate the bid concerned as "failed". only bids that are

Annex "D"Page 1 ot 9MR. BERNAROO A, DIZON

ChalrpersonBids & Awards CommitteeDevelopment Academy of the PhilippinesDAB BuildinB, San MiguelAvenuePasig City

(

June 22,2018.Lsl4L

EAC Resolution

tlo.llT s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

FED@ uo noo,*,,

determined to contain all the bid requirements for both components shall be rated "passed"

and shall immediately be considered for evaluation and comparison

Unarguably your BAC in the openint on November 29, 2077 ot tcDc's first envelope

containing its technical information/documents prescribed in Section 23.1 and the technical

components of its bld prescribed under section 25.2 {b) of the IRR found FcDc's bid

complete, sufficient and complying because your BAC in the said occasion rated FCDCs bid

"PASSED" as evid€nced bv the fact that your 8AC proceeded to open thereafter FCDC'5

second envelope containing the financial components of its bid.

Again, your BAC indubitably also found the financial components of FCDC'5 bid in the

second envelope complete, sufficient and complying because your BAC rated "PA55ED" all

the information/requirements therein and proceeded immediately thereafter to read bid

FCDC'5 price indicated in its Bid Form.

After your BAC had completed the openinB and reading of all the bids on November 29.

2Ol7, yout BAC is mandated under Section 32.2 1 of the IRR to conduct immediately the

detailed evaluation of the financial components of all the submitted bids to determine the

LOWEST CALCUTATED BID using a non-discretionary criterion in considering the

completeness of the bids and possible arithmetical corrections due to computational errors

and omissions. Section 32.2.4 oI the IRR provides, among others, that in case of discrepancy

between the unit costs in the detailed estimates and the unit cost in the bill of quantities,

the latter, meaning the unit cost if the bill of quantities shall prevail.

On January 8,2018, FCDC received a email from the BAC informing that it submitted the

LOWEST CALCUTATED BID (LCO). Having been informed that FCDC submitted the LCD, FCDC

will then be subjected to post-qualification evaluation as mandated in Rule X-POST

QUALIFICATION, of the IRR to determine its bid compliance to the legal, technical and

financial requirements of the contract within a period not exceeding a maximum of fortyfive (45) calendar days after your 8Ac had completed the bid evaluation within seven (7)

calendar days from bid opening as provided in Annex "C"-RECoMMENDED EARLIEST

POSSIBLE TIME AND MAXIMUM PERIOD ALLOWED FOR PROCUREMENT OF

TNFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS of the 2016 IRR of Republic Act No, 9184 lN tlNE FCDC WAS

POST-DISOUALIFIED NOT BECAUSE tT FAILED IN THE POST-QUALIFICATION EVATUATION OF

ITS BIO TO COMPLY TO THE LEGAL, TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE

CONTRACT.

FCDC was therefore very much surprised, nay shocked. when it received your Notice of Post-

Disqualification dated May 8, 2018. FCDC is therefore compelled as a matter of absolute

necessity. not merely as a matter of option, to write this letter to seek/request forreconsideration of th€ decision of your BAC declaring FCDC'S bid POST-oISQUALIFIED forreasons stated in your Notice of Post-Disqualification not only to protect its interest .s a

legitimate and bona fide bidder which submitted the LowEsT cALcULATED RESPONSIVE BID

but more importantly the interest of the Government and the Filipino people since theproject's implementation is to be done using public funds in the form of taxes, fees, charges

and other revenue generating measures of the government.

Annex "D"Page 2 ofg

FTORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVILOPMENT CORPORATIONa (

Bror ADort. Fk idoblorxn Penporrls

June 22,2018p.L6l4tDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BIDBAC Resolution

t{0. ll7 s.2018

Annex "D"Pago 3 of 9E

aFLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

tso 9oo1:2o15

Please consider very, very carefully the following reasons why yoLlr BAC committed Srievousmistake amounting to Eross inexcusable negliSence, evident bad faith, manifest partiality

and/or grave abuse of disc.etion in its decision to post-disqualify FCDC and why your BAC

must re-evaluate and reconsider its decision POST-DISQUALIFYING FCDC and consequently

CONSIDER FCDC'S BID AS THE LOWEST CALCUTATED RESPONSIVE 8ID WHICH MUST BE

AWARDED THE CONTRACT FOR THE PROJECT IN ORDER THAT YOUR BAC AND DAP SHALL

NOT SQUANDER BUT ON THE CONTRARY PRESERVE THE FINANCIAL GAINS IT WILL EARN IN

FCDC'S BID,

EI-IGIBII.ITY DOCUMENTS

1. SUBMITTED COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF FILING OF AMENDED ARTICTES OF

INCORPORATION ISSUED 8Y SEC ON IUNE 29, 2015, INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED

ACTUAL SEC REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE.FAILED" non-complaint (sic) to the specified

requirement per OBD (tag EO2)

DISCUSSION

Section 25, Rule Vlll ofthe IRR requires FCDC to submit its bid in two (2) separate

sealed envelopes, the 1'f envelope containing the technical components of the bid, including

the eli8ibility requirements unde. Section 23.1 of the lRR, and the 2nd envelope containing

the financialcomponents of the bid.

Under Section 25.2 (b) of the lRR, FCDC is required to submit, among others, its PhiIGEPS

Certificate of Regastration and membership in accordance with Section 8.5.2 of the lRR. ln

the bidding conducted by your BAC on November 29, 2017 FCDC submitted in its 1'3t

envelope as one of essential component of its eliSibility documents CERTIFICATE oF

PHIIGEPS REGISTRATION (Platinum Membership) issued by Procurement Service of theDepartment of Budget and Management (DgM) on 16 May 2017 valid up to 16 May 2018.

The 2nd para8raph of FCDC Certificate of PhiIGEPS Registration certifies that FCDC has

submitted the required eligibility documents in the PhiIGEPS Suppliers Registry.

The eligibility documents which FCDC submitted to the Procurement Service of DBM and as

consequence ot said submissaon the Procurement Service issued to FCDC its Certificate ofPhiIGEPS Registration, include among others, FCDC'5 sEC Registration Certificate, Articles oflncorporation, By-Laws and PCAB License.

Having been duly registered with PhilGEPS, FCDC, may, as a matter of right participate in

procurement undertaken by any Procuring Entity, and this includes DAP since FCDC'5

PhiIGEPS Registration Certificate is valid from May 16, 2017 to May 16, 2018 even withoutthe SEC ReSistration Certlficate because this was already submitted to PhilGEPS. ln finetherefore, FCDC's Certificate of PhiIGEPS Registration €stablished conclusively and

unarguably FCDC'5 eligibility to participate in the Procurement of contracts forinfrastructure projects, including the above-mentioned project, by OAP and this principle

equally applies to all other a8encies, oIfices and instrumentalities of the Sovernment,nationaland local.

1

June 22 2018t7l4t

BAE Resolution

l{o.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

ilil,'0"Pags { ol9

T]F]EI

a

Machine copy of FCDC'5 PhiIGEPS ReBistration Certificate is attached as Annex "A"

Nonetheless, FCDC submitted in its l't envelope its certifed true copy of Certificate of Filing

of Amended Articles of lncorporation which it submitted to the SEC. The Certificate of Filing

of Amended Articles of lncorporation contains a certification certifying that the amendedarticles of incorporation of FCDC (Amending Article Vll thereof) was approved by theCommission on this date (29 June 2015) pursuant to the provision of Section 16 of thecorporation code ofthe Philippines, Eatas Pambansa Blg. 68, approved on May 1, 1980andcopres thereof are filed with the Commission.

Machine copy oI the Certificate of Filing of Amended Articles of lncorporation of FCDC

bearing COMPANY REG. NO. CS20O515548, the certified true copy of which i5 in FCDC'5 1'5r

envelope is attached as Annex "8".

Clearly then, your BAC'S decision post-disqualifying FCDC on the ground that it submitted a

copy of the Certificate of Filing of Amended Articles of lncorporation issued by 5EC on June29, 201S instead of the required actual SEC Registration Certificate i5 totally wronB for lack

of factual and/or legal ba5is,

2. PRESENTED ONE (1) ONGOTNG PRTVATE CONTRACT WrrH 2% SLTPPAGE AS OF

NOVEMBER 29, 2017 (02) AND DID NOT INCI-UDE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS BASED

ON "UNDISCLOSED DATA" FOUND 8Y TWG IN THE INTERNET.

DrscussroN

FCDC has no ongoing government contract on or before November 29, 2017, the deadlinefor submission of bids which it is obliged to disclose in its bid. Moreover, as your letter didnot specify the alleged tovernment contracts which were allegedly found by your TWG inthe internet, this fact prevents FOCD in making an intelligent and responsive answer as tothe truthfulness of the alleted ongoing government contracts of FCDC.

II. TECHNICAL OOCUMENTS

3. ,,FAILED,, (02) PRESENTED ONE (1) ONGOING PRIVATE CONTRACT WITH ABOVE 27O

SLIPPAGE AS OF NOVEMBER 29, 2077; l03l DID NOT INCLUDE GOVERNMENTCONTRACTS EASED ON "UNDISCLOSED" DATA FOUND BY TWG IN THE INTERNET.(TAG E05)

DISCUSSION

4, (4) DISCREPANCIES INCOMPUTED UNIT PRICES SETWEEN BOQAND DUPA ENTRIES

Discrepancies in the unit cost in the unit bid prices (DUPA) and the unit cost in the Bill ofQuantities (BOQ) does not make FCDC's bid non-complying because then. the unit costs in

(FLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION r.GA

r5o 9oo12o15

:OilPl';lENI vAnO ADOiE S

-ll

June 22 2018t8l4L

BAE Resolution

No.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

Annex "D"Pago 5 of 9

ia

TLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVETOPMENT CORPORATION

r5o 9oor2o15

the 8OQ shall prevail. (Section 32.2.2, IRR). The reason for this is that the 8OQ is used tocalculate the contract price and FCDC shall be paid for the quantity of work done at the ratein the 8oQ for each item (clause 33.2, SECTION lV-GENERAt CONDITIoNS oF coNTRACT.

5, PRESENTED THREE (3) COMPLETED PRIVATE CONTRACTS (04) DUE TO NON

INCLUSION OF THE SLCC AS WETL A5 COMPLETEO PROIECTS LISTED IN THE

COMPANY PROFILE UNDER TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS (marked as TO3) ON THE

STATEMENT OF ALL COMPLETED GOVERNMENT AND/OR PRIVATE CONTRACTS AS

REQUIRED.

" FAItED,,NON-COMPLAINT (SIC) 10 THE SPECIFIED REQUIREMENT PER OBD

DISCUSSIONT

Section 23.4.2.1 of the IRR provides that for an entity to be allowed to participate in thebidding of infrastrudure projects, said bidder must have completed an SLCC (slNGLE

TARGEST COMPLETED CONTRACT) that is similar to the contract to be bid and whose valueadjusted to curent prices using the PSA consumer price indices must be equal to at leastfifty percent of the ABC to be bid. Corollary hereto, Sedion 25.2 {b) ofthelRR provides thatfor procurement of ihfrastructure projects, the bidder shall submit in its 1'r envelopestatement of its SICC.

ln compliance to this requirement, FCDC listed or indicated in its FORM 2: Statement ofEiddEr,S SINGLE LARGEST COMPLETED CONTRACT, thE sO-STOREY BIRCH TOWER Of

Mairobeni Property HoldinSs, lnc. in #1795 A. Mabini Street, Manila, which it completed onApril 30, 2013 with a contract cost of ONE BILLION SIX HUNDRED THIRTY TWO MILLION

SIXTY EIGHT THoUSAND SlxTY EIGHT AND 43100( PhP1,532,068,068.43) PEsos, supportedby copy of the contract, summary of scope of work, bill of quantities, and certificate ofcompletion, all of which are attached to FCDCs submitted eligibility documents which wereprobably missed or overlooked by the BAc and its Technical Working Group (TwG). The

alleged failure of FCDC to include in its company profile this completed project does notmake FcDc's bid not responsive or non-complying, much less a "FAILED" bid becauseinclusion of said information in Fcoc company profile is not required, much less mademandatory.

6. SUBMITTED DULY SIGNEO CERTIFICATE OF SITE INSPECTIONISSUED ON NOVEMBER

20, 2017 HOWEVER, DOCUMENT lS ABSENT tN SUBM|TTED CD. (06)

DISCUSSION

Section 25.2 (b) of the IRR does not include in its enumeration the CERTIFICATE oF SITE

INSPECTION. What is not included is, according to our lawyer, deemed excluded. Hence, itsabsence in in our CD which we submitted in our bid does not in any manner make our bid

not responsive or non-complying, much less "FAlLED",

However, for the information of the BAC, FCDC through Mr. Alfonso Almeria inspected theDAPCC and was issued the corresponding Certificate oI Site lnspection, machine copy

(

June 22 2018.L9l4L

BAE Resolution

l{o.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

t-nex "o"Page 6of9

IFIED

aFLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

l5o goo12o15

attached as Annex "C", issued by Engr. Alberto Angelo M. Jimenez.The Certificate of Sitelnspection is attached to FCDC Technical Proposal.

7. BIODER COMPLIED WITH REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS AND PERSONNET REQUIRED

QUAL!FtCATIONS. THE PERSONNEL STGNED HtS CV lN ELACK tNK (07)

"FAILED" DUE TO PERSONNET,S SIGNATURE IN BLACK INK

SUBMITTED CV OF MR.]OB C. CAPIS, WITH ATTACHED COPY OF CERTIFICATE

OF COMPLETION OF BASIC OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH TRAINING

couRsE (40) HouRs FoR supERVrsoR rssuED oN MARcH 28, 2008 rN LrEU

OF DOLE CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION A5 REQUIREDIN BDS CLAUSE

12.1.(b) (ii.2) ITEM 4.8 PC 38 {08)

"FAILED" DUE TO NON.COMPLIANCE WITH PERSONNEL REQUIRED

QUATIFICATIONS AND SIGNING OF CV IN EIACK INK.

BIDDER COMPLIED WITH REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS ANO PERSONNEL

REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS. THE PERSONNEL SIGNED HIS CV IN BLACK INK.(10)

"FAILED" DUE TO PERSONNEL'S SIGNATURE IN SLACK INK.

III FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS:

8. DISCREPACNIES ON COMPUTED UNIT PRICES BETWEEN BOQ AND DUPA ENTRIES(11)

(

BIODER DIO NOT COMPLY WiTH PERSONNEL REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS.THE PERSONNEL SIGNED HIS CV IN BLACK INK. (09)

FCDC finds your reason to declare its bid "FAILED" SIMPLY BECAUSE THE CV of itsnominated personnel were signed in SLACK lN( AS TOTALIY ABSURD, FRIVOIOUS AND

PATHETIC. The IRR does not provide in a clear, express and unequivocal manner that alldocuments submitted by FCDC or any bidder, to be signed only using a specified color ofthe ink which must be black and that a bid which i5 signed in black ink should be declared"FAlLED". This rule i5 not practiced or observed in any bidding, whether in the governmentor private sector, because it simply MAKES NO SENSE lN PROVIDING THAT ALL BID

DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SIGNED USING A PARTICULAR COLOR OF INK OTHER THAN BI.ACK

AND A BID SIGNED IN BLACK INK SHALL BE RATED "FAILED".

DISCREPANCIES ON SOME ITEMS IN TH BOQ (12)

A. DIFFERENT UNIT PRICES ON SIMILAR ITEMS, SPECIFICALLY ON DIVISIONS AND 7.

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

iso 9oor2o15 iE

June 22 2018p.2ol4t

Annex "D"Page 7 of9

FLORIDABTANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVILOPMENT CORPORATION l"t n*

B. UNREASONABLE APPLICATION OF COST USEO FOR MATERIALS WITH LOWER AND

HIGHER SPECIFICATIONS. SOME MATERIALS OF LOWER SPECS ARE PRICED

HIGHER THA] MATERIALS OF HIGHER 5PEC5 (EXAMPLEs ON DIVISION 4, S, & 7]

C. USE OF 10% PROFIT IN SOQ ITEMS3.3.1 X X X AND USE OF 10% VAT IN 8OQITEMS 4.5. 18 TO 4,5.19 ARE NOT COMPLIANT IN THE PROVISIONS OF DPWH DO

197, S.2016 (13)

DTSCUSStON

The alleged discrepancies in the computed unit prices between the BOQ and DUPA entriesdo not make FCDC'5 bid "FAltED" simply because there is no provision either in Republic Act9184, its IRR or even the lnstructions to Bidders {lTB) which provides either expressly or bynecessary implication that said conditions justify the declaration of the bid "FAlLED". The

effect of such discrepancies as provided in Section 32.2.3 of the IRR is that the unit cost in

the BOQ shall prevail. The reason for this rule which mandate that the unit prices in the BoQshall prevaii as against the unit prices in the DUPA, NOT DECTARATION OF THE SID FAILED, is

because under Clause 33.2 of Section lv-General Conditions of Contract, the BOQ is used tocalculate the contract price and the contractor is paid for works done based on the unitrates in the BOQ.

On the other hand, the alleged discrepancies or different unit prices used on some items in

Divisions 5 and 7, application of cost used for materials with lower and hiSher specificataons

as well as use of 10% profit do not legally justify your BAc's decision to declare FcDc's bidbecause FCDC and any bidder for government and private contracts are given absolutefreedom and wide latitude to quote his/its bid price in a manner it deems fit and

appropriate using applicable criteria in the construction industry, the only limitation beingthat the total bid price must not exceed the Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC). Fact

i5, a bidde., and this applies equally to FCDC can state in its bid that it is offering to executea panicular scope of work for free by writing in the space containing the item of work zero

or even a dash (-). Lest your BAC have forgotten or is totally unaware of unbalanced bid

which was prohibited under the old law, Presidential Decree 1594 and its IRR is notprohibited under Republic Act 9184 and its lRR.

Lastly, the DPWH Department Order 197, Series of 2016 is not a law and violation thereof bya bidder cannot be used to legitimately sanction a bidder such as FcDcand even thoseparticipating in the bidding of DPWH projects.

BAC Resolution

No. ll7 s.20lB

"FAILED" DUE TO DISCREPANCIES AND NON.COMPTIANCE WITH THE

DPWH D,O. 197, SERIES OF 2015 AS REQUIRED.

.FAILED" NON-COMPTAINT (SIC) TO THE SPECIFIED REQUIREMENT PER

OBD.

I (

June 22 2018p.ztl4L

BAE Resolution

t{o.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

Annex "D"Pago 8 of ITIFI FLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION

& DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONl5O 9OO1:2O1

9. DUPA DID NOT CONTAIN TABLE OT CONTENTS AS REOUIRED

Section 30.1 of the IRR provides that the gAC shall open the first bid envelope in public todetermine each bidder's compliance with the bid documents required to be submitted foreligibility and for the technical requirements, as prescribed in the lRR. For this purpose, theBAC shall check the submitted documents of such bidder against a checklist of required

documents to ascertain if they are all present, using a non-discretionary pass/fail criterion,as stated in the ITB .

The eligibility and technical documents adverted to in Section 30.1 are those enumerated in

section 25.2 (b) of the IRR and you will please note that the Table of Contents ol the DUPA is

not required to be submitted either in the 1't envelope or 2'd envelope as essential

component of the bid. Applyin8 again the principle that what is not included is deemed

excluded, your BAc decision to declare FCDC'S bid "FAILED" because it did not submit theTable of Contents has cenainly no legal and/or factual basis to stand on.

Finally, your reason to rate FCDC'5 "FAILED" due to FCDC5 Cash FlovProposed Schedule ofPayment which equal PhP908,667, 494,46 which exceeds the ABC of PhP829,575,000.0O and

the annual accumulated amount in FOs did not match the projected % of accomplishmentreflected in TOS Schedule of gilling is therefore disadvanta8eous and non-compliance to thespecified requirement per OBD are undoubtedly misplaced and totally wron8.

The Cash Flow and Payment Schedule are only estlmates of what the bidder, FCDC in thiscase, expects or intends to spend during the entire contract duration for the execution ofthe contracted works. This means then that even if FCDC were to spend or even have

actually spent more than its bid price, FCDC pursuant to clause 33.2 and 33.3 of SECTION lV-

GENERAL CONOITIONS OF CONTRACT the amount based on its unit rates for the items ofwork in the BOQ. FCDC cannot demand for more in the same manner that DAP cannot

diminish, except for valid or lawful reason/s the amount to be paid to FCDC provided in theBOQ and not in the DUPA.

FCDC wishes to emphasize that it5 bid price in the amount of SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY FOUR

MITLION SIX HUNDRED IORTY SEVEN IHOUSAND AND THIRTEEN 57I7OO 1PhP734,641,013.57) PESOS only as against the ABC of PhP829,575,000.00 is the lowest compared to thebid of E, M. Cuerpo Construction, Inc. and E. M. Brocal.

To disqualify FcDc for award of contract on what clearly appears as insubstantial and

frivolous grounds will squander the financial gains that DAP and the Filipino people will Sain

from our bid which is by all means the most beneficial and advantag€ous to theGovernment, Should your BAC not relent in its decision to post-disqualify FCDC in view ofthe foregoing considerations/explanations, your action will no doubt cause injury not onlyto FCDC but to the Government and the Filipino people aswell.

(

DrscusstoN:

ln view of the fore8oing considerations, FCDC trusts that this request for reconsideration ofthe decision of your BAc declaring FcDC's bid "FAILED" WILL BE GIVEN DUE COURSE.

June 22 2018BAE Resolution

l{o.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

Annex "D"Page 9 otg

-CERTffi FLORIDABLANCA CONSTRUCTION& DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

r50

Thank you very much for giving this request your objective and impartial assessment tainto consideration the governing principles of COMPETITIVENESS provided in Section 3 ofRepublic Act No, 9184.

. ALMERIAVice President for Special Projects

"FAILEO" NON.COMPTAINT {SIC)TO TH€ SPECIFIED REQUIREMENT PER OBD.

HN]VNOAT & EqJ]B{ENi VARD AD'EESS.&9r. Ap$L FkrridlorE.. Porpar'go

BAC Resolution

ilo.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.2tl4L

Annex "E"Pago 1 of 2

trcvclopr+,rc fit AcAbcTr'rv of the ohtlioo:taes* Broi & AwARo! Co.rrrrEE (SOr{o20r3,035)

May 16,2018

i,T. ALDWN E. ALITERIAVice President for Special ProjectsFloridablanca Con3truction rnd Development CorporaoonBrgy. Apalit, Flondablanca, Pampanga

REPLYTO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Upon deliberation of the poinls Ei6ed in your requost for reconsideration, the Bids &Aw-ads Comhittee (BAC) of the Academy decided lo deny your said requesl forreconsideralion-

Pl€ase b€ guided that eligibility, compliance and responsiveness are differenlconcepts as a mattsr of course. Eligibilrty is the entitement to be chosenCompliance B the act of observance or conformity to sp€cifications or r€quircmenls.Responsiveness is series of verification€forts and validation-actions which willestrablish the overall compliance of the submittals (e g., bid docum€nts) lhat passeslhe tests and scrutny lhat will be convincing enough 1o establish overall

Basically, the BAC deems il proper lhat a submrtted offer or bid (in its entirety)should be complianl with the p€rtinent provisions of RA9184. lhe Orficral BidDocuments (OBD), and oltEr rehvani issuaaces of the Govemment. such as theDPWH'S Department Order No.197 in order for the said bid to be considered to be

A160 kindly be reminded thal FCoC have stated under oath in its Omnibus SwornStatomenl that "E ct of the documents subtlllted in sattslaction ol tha biddingrcquircmen,s L3 ,n aulhentic of the oiginel, completa and all slrterfienb andinlormatio., ptovided lheti.n are tru. and cozsct" and the Bidder haveCerclully exemined all bidding docunenb

The BAC not€d that the reasons mainly stated in FCDC'S request for reconsideralionquestions the very discr€tion of the Academy, as the Procudng Entity, to choose thespecificstions. 8AC cannot accept that FCDC'S submrtted bid is responsive to whatthe Academy speciried. ln several points, BAC has established that what wererequired by RA9184 as w€ll as olher pertrnent and rel€vant laws and issuancescannol guaranleed by bid submitted by FCDC Queslions on specFcalions andolher conditions of the contract should have been raised during the P.e-BidConference. Full comptiance of FCDC'S submitted bii as required by the OBD, Bid

1

Dear ,lL Almeda:

BA[ Resolution

tlo.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.24/41

Annex "E"Page2of2

Fur$Ernorc. ttEre are discrepencies in the subrnitted implementation schedulewh€n objeclively evalualed in relslion to payment schedule as requircd by "F05 ofthe checklist. FCDC'5 submitted bid shows violatons of the basic principles ofPO1445, which stales that: 'Crrr'ns agei,rst Govdituant funds she boaupporlld vlth cofipleTE documa lation': and "No money shell be paid out olany public l,e36ury of &posilory axcept in pu,suaace ol an approprietion lewor othet .pacifrc af,tulo.ry .ulhoiv.

Specdic to FCDC'S submitlal, and in accodance wilh Section 23 1, for purposes ofdetermining eligibility of bidders, Cla8s "A" documgnts, Regislration Cerlilicate fromthe SEC was not submitted lnstead, a Certificate of Filing of Amendment of Aniclesof lncorporation was submilted, which ls technically non-compliant to iherequirements of the IRR of RA9184- Section 16and Secljon 19 oflhe ComoratjonCode provldes fie distinction from the allowence of the changes in the originalArticles of lnco.poration and the date of the actual 'binh'ot lhe iuridical body. Assuch, they are two distinct docurnenls which are not equivalent.

Bullelin No.1, and relevant requiremonts ol RA9184 cannot be estab|shed. FCDCand lhe BUde6 vrho irave indicated their interest to participate were remindedbetore the biis were opened. FCDC did not raise any darificetion.

Again. we reiterate thal FCDC'S rEquelt for r.consideration i3 OENIEO. FCDCmay opl to tile a formal protrest upon payment of a no.-rcfundable fee only w)thinseven (7) calendar deys upon receipt oflhis noiice. in compllance and as presc.ibedby RAg184, olheMise known as the Govemment Procurem€nt Relorm Act.

Please be lnfomed lhat mistakes and inconsistenoes in FCDC s submitted bid asreflected in its computations of the BOO and DUPA are not attributable to iheAcedemy but were discovered upon careful verfications and validations. Moreover,it is misleading to cite that FCDC inlend to spend a significant amount of money thatis above the approved budgel ceiling when FCDC indic€led in is Schedule ofPayment lhel FCDC would be collecting more than S0omillion pe6os in the thirdquarter of lhe firsl year of implementation Such slalements are grossly inept,incompelenl and non-responsive to the requirements set tor the Project Note thatsuch is very disadvantageous to OAP aB a governmerit-€ntity, as well as in refereoceto other Govemment rules and regulatiofls; which have the force and effecl of law.

ry....*-L

lhe Bids & Awards Connitt4e

[-otso

CBERNARDO A.Chairperson, BACSenroa Vice President. Setuices

2 je|i)Eb}@JG[@-si@

BAt Resolution

No. ll7 s.2018

June 22,2018p.z5l4L

#$ Dcvclopao,rt acatcr+rq of thc nlrltifirtlrcs$ 6ii--iiiii'--c o-iE6iiifr aorrr

May 16,2018

NOTICE OF POST.OISQUALIFICATION

Dear ,ls. Reyes:

This is lo in orm you that as the Bidder who submrtted lhe bid with Rank #2lrom th6 Lowest Calculaled Bid (LCB) for th€ bidding of One ('l) LotConltuclion of a Fourteenstorey R€in{orc€d Concreto Buildingcompriaing Fourstorsy lrulti-us€ Podium, T.n Floors AccomrDodalionTower with Rool Deck and B.s6ment Parking & Lnlliti€s lncluding SiteDevolopment aad various Site lmprovemenb at the DAP ConfurenceCeote. in Tagrytay City for lhe purpos* of "rtnatheni,ry th! ( dputit\ olthc lrrelapnent .a.ulenr ot the Philip?inls r) Proride hnth t;e)tet.il & Highl)Spec)ali:ed TluinngCo Bes lit Ooftft cnt Olllal!" as per lnvitatro. to BidNo.lB17-3E1683-01 , rhe Eids & Awads Commiltee (BAC) and its TechnicalWorking Group (TWG)conducted an evaluation of your submitted bid.

Pleas€ nole that aft6r careful examinations, verifications, validations, andascertainmenl of all stgtements and representations cull€d from the bidsubmitted by EMBROCAL Builders lnc (EBl), u/e regret to iflfo.m you lhalBAC have evaluated the EBI'S bij as 'rot r€sponsive" relative lo therequirements and conditions specmed in th€ Offrcial Bidding Documenls(OBD). Thero weiE more than 30 nems lound not responsive or complhnt.The failed items based on the submitled bid of EBI as follol/ys:

FINDINGS

:. TECHNICAL OOCU ENTS

fI

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

Annex "F"Page 'l of 3

ms HERCEDES S. REYESCompliance HeadEMBROCAL BUILDERS IIIC.1435 Casanas StreetSampaloc, Manila

I "m5" ' 0r' varioB doorments: Conslruclion Sfuule, GANTT Chan,

I ; S-Curve, Sd|edule of Billings.

i- ' t "FAILEo" no duplicaE copy of r05 doqherts

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BIDJune 22,2018

p.25l4L

Annex "F"Page2of3

T FINOINGS

"T07" ,r ldanpower Schedule-

* "FAILED" incomplete lisl key personnel: Resident Engineernot included

"T08"to

"T18"

D Need to attach Curriculum Wae (CV) and employment recordsfor all proposed personnel.

s "FAILED" no Cerlficate of Employment

"T19" &) CV of Mr Folipe H S€villeia ,lr. ,rittr attactroa copy ot Certlf,ceteol Complotion for Basic Occupational Safety and HealthTraining Course (40hrs) for Supervisors issued oo April20.2012|n lieu of DOLE Certificale of Accredhation as raquired inBDS Clause 12.1 (b) (ii.2) item 4.8. p.38.

& "FA|LED" not compliant with personnel's requiredqualifications and no Cerlificate of Employment

"f20"to

"f21"

o5r Ne€d to attach CV and emplofnent .ecords for al, p.oposedpersonnel

+ 'FAILEO" no CertificaiB of Employrnenl

"f22" !i) signature on the CV of proposed perconnel Dyne Pajarilo

6 "FAILED" no signature on the CV, no Certificate ofEmployment.

0rr Need to attach CV anct employment .6cords tor all propos€dto

"724"personnel

{ "FAILEO" no Certificale of Employment

q Form'11_LIST-of-EOUIPMENT

o "FAIIEO" e-copy ol lhe duly filled-ori Form 11 nol found inthe submitted cD

09 Form 12_Equipment Lltilization Schedule

+ "FAILEO" incomplete infomalion and missing page in th€d(iplicate copy of Form 12

"T30" D) Certifcate of Biddels Commilrnent

f "FAILED" statemeot in lhe certifcation roads:'Complle',ce wiah all rcqu,,rmen's set lotth t chnicalspecmc.tbrsl instead of 'Compli.nce vith exlrtinglabor laws and slanaletds"

"T32"l Form 14_OMNIBUS-STATE[rENT

t "FAILED" statement rs not a vald as a

$

2

"126"

"7n"

8AE Resolution

No. ll7 s.2018

BA[ Resolution

t{0.ll7 s.2fl8DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.zT lat

Annex "F"Pago 3 ol3

F]NDINGSie.. submited do@m€nt is not duly notarized

FINANCIAL DOCUI*ENTS

12 oetailed Unit Price Anaiysis (DUPA)

+ "FAILEO" due to incornplete informalion/data: i e., noTable oI Contants; and, lt€ms #2'1 .3.'l 5 to ,121 .3.32 underDivision2l (Fire Suppession syst€m) are not supporledwith OUPA.

t, Notarized Staternent of Compliance

+ "FAILED" due to non confoinance with the inlenlSubmitted document certiies: "Compliance to the BOQ andTechnical Specifications" inslead of "Complience with thePertinent Provisions or oPWH'S Departtnent Order No.197,s 2016 dated 07oct2016".

Bas6d on lhe foregoing, BAC regrets to inform you thal the Bid submitted byEI,IBROCAL BUILDERS, INC was thereby declared "POS'-DISQUALIFIED",

Should you wish lo request fo. reconsideratron, you may do so wilhin three(3) €lendar days from receipl ol this Notic€.

We l@k forwad to your participation in our f{rture paocuremenl activities

for the Bi<ts & Awe/ds Commllee

cBERNARDO A,Chairperson, BACSenior Mce Plesk enl SeNlres

3

"F04"

"F06"

EAE Resolution

tlo. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

June 22,2018p.28l4L

l8 Nla\ l0l8

BEIL\iARDO .{. DIZOIit ltLttrperson, BAL'Senlor Vice Presrdem, Sen icesDevelopmcnt.{cademt of the Philipprnes

Dear ( hNrimrn Dizon

-lhrs pcnains ro the Nol,cc fbr Posl-Disqualrtication dated i\1af 16. 2018 u'hich uas receircdb! EMBRO('AL BIjILDERS. NC on lv1a\ 17. 2018 fbr the bidding ol'One (l) LolCorsructron of a Fourteen-Slore\ Reinlbrced Concrctc Burldlng compnsing Four-Storcllrlr-rkj-use Podiun. Ten Floors Accommodation To\\er $lrh RoofDeck and Basenrent Parking& Urilrles including Site Derclopment and rarious Srte lmprorcmenls at the DAPConference Canter in Taga)1a\ CrD for the purposes of '-r?rrngrhentng rhe capactt) 9t thel)crclopment .,Lodemtc ol thc I'htlqpne: trt prowde htth gcnerLtl arui hryhl1 speLtulrtdtrutntng cour\et .fu)r gotcntmenr rlficrult as per Inr itation to Bid No l8l7-381683-01.

lr,[a] $,e compassionatel! request for. reconsideralion lor lhe lbllo*ing t-lndings. to $rt.

I All FINDINCS ruSTIFICATION105 No duplcate copy ofT05 documents As per Section f oflhe lnstruclion to

Brdders ltem l9.l that in the c\ent ofantdlscrepanc) ben\een the onginal and lhecopies, thc ori.sinal shall pre!ail.

T07

Tl9r 08-T18

IncompleE list of ke1 personnelResident Engincer not included

- Safgl qllcer nor-complian a1d no CO!No Ceniticate of Emplolmenr

rl0-Ilt

No Ce.trlicale ol Employmenl

T23- No Certificate ofEmplovment2.1

No srgnature on the CV- no CO!

On the non-inclusion of a residcntcnernecr rn schedule oi manpo$er. ir is

alread] understood rhat as residenlengrnccr. he rs and \\rll al\va)s be prelentlor rhe ennre duation.

2I

.A cenifisare \!as atBched ceniljing thatEng] Se\rlleJa is a cenitied Sa'eqC)[ficer

On rhc absence of CoE. rhis requirementis not specitled in the instruction tobidders. bio data sheer or on other pansof the brdding documcnts e\cept in thechccklist. The purpose of the poslqualiricauon as specrr'ied rn BDS ITB rs

. 19 9he.c\ 99r1p!qac,19 t1lgqqrrgqenr!.

Annex "G"Page 1 of 3

I}Bt tLrrERs, ING-

\ t, l- l, kEngrneer

t\ilr\rDes19n

.r !: .r'.:.: .:i:'9:rso 9001 : 20't5cERrFrEo cen. No.66,{82

:,.' i:: ut .':.:. 11:'r::::-':.

18June 22BAt Resolution

tlo.llT s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

Annex "G"Page 2 of 3

specitied an the BDS. l.lB ! ufl.he

not clear wherher the CoE requir, ll rs

red is

CoE ttom Embr@al or liom therr

prerious emplol'ers. BY signing the

ceflification belo\\ the CVs, u'e have

cenitled thal concemed personnel are

emplo! ed connecrcd \\ith EmbrocalBuildex'. lnc.

On the absence of signature in one of the

CV. this is an honest mistake Due to the\oiume of documents. we ha\'e honestl)mrssed this one documenl lt does nor

atTect thc o\erall responsilenass of lhe

bids as all other CVs sere dull sil'ned

l-isr of Equipmenl not found in thesubmitted CD

On rhe abscnce of this documenl in lhesubmrned CD. please note lhal a hardcopl ot rrhrch ls dul) submrned and

_ t;rmiJ pafl ofthc ungtnal document. .

(Jn rhe absence one documenl on thcduplicale, rhis document is presenl in the

unrrnxl anJ lhe CD. Thus, there is

cnough basrs tor DAP to ascenain its

\alldln lt does not affecr the

responsiteness of the bid.

i16

1-17 lncomplele intbrmatron and mtsstnc page

in the duplicate cop] ofForm ll

On the lncomplete document in theduplicale copy, again, the documenr is

presenr in the origioal. For \thich in thls

. casc. the original copy should alwayspre\arl ln the event of an]), discrepancl-

-T3l---or".ib"s State-e"t itol a ruf,a-aocum.r,t--bn rtrc uUserrce ofitrc oat. on ttre notar,land double place indicated in rhe norarial

stamp. this is an honest mista|e due tothe notary we funhcr ccni& that as lbras s'e are conccmed. the nota4 is a \alld :

-ffir-ffi-roo-\oran-aoi;ifi em;i;;pr,an.l---;"trliT:"1i.:f '*",",";,:TTr:,,1';I

:fil};H:,'];.fi ['''; il:' ":HX:specificstions and the OBD thus it covcrs '

' all requirements including compliance lolabor law! ard DPITI order no 197 s '

2016 We t'unher ceniry that we indeed ,

comply tith the labor code and DP'*'H '

- _----- ---i,iilr.s,*';x,# olBlrtil'"'"'

BAC Resolution

llo.ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.tol4L

Annex "G"Page 3 of 3

FU.+ No rable of conten$ Fire Suppresston

S) slcm are not supponed \\rth DUP.Aon the absence of details in cenarnsecuons ol the DL'PA. this is an honeslr}.pogaphical mtsuke due to the volume

oi thesc documcnts but fie details of thesame can be !alidated in the Bill of

Irtles

Ovcrall, the deticiencies lbund are ven minor thus having no substantial impacl on soundness

and responsi\eness ofthe bld.

Posr-qualrtlcarron connotes looling rnlo the subsEnce not $e lbrm or compleleness becausc

the complcteness should have been done befbre posl riualification. Nelenheless, we assen

thal our bid esscniallt and subsranrialll complied $ilh all the requtrements excepl for mlnordeficiencies in form but not in subslance The \el minor issues used as basis fbrdisqualification can be anributed Io volumrnous documents and date prepsred. natual humanerror which are nol delib€rare, and the shon span of lime given to prepare all the documenEWe believe that very minor unsubstantial deficiencies did not conslitute unresponsiveness ofthe bid to the tcchnical requirements ofthe ptoJecr.

we are very much sure and confident that our bid is lechnicall) compliant and is rherctbreresponsive

Thank ;ou

Sincerel! )"ours,

R(]CAt_10

BAt Resolution

tlo. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.}Ll4L

Annex "H"Pags 1 of2bsvcloprflcnt acaDor.q of thc plrilippircs

May 24, 2018

Ms. MERCEDES S, REYESCompliance HeadEMBrocal BuildeE lnc.1435 Casanas StreetSampaloc, Manila

REPLY TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Dear Ms. Reyes:

Upon deliberation of the points you raised in your request for reconsideration, the

Bids & Awards Committee (BAC) of the Academy decided to deny your request for

reconsideration.

Please be guided that eligibility, compliance and responsiveness are different

concepts as a matter of course. Eligibility is the entitlement to be chosen.

Compliance is lhe act of observance or conformity to specifications or requirements.

Responsiveness is series of verification-eforts and validation-actions which will

establish the overall compliance of the submittals (e.9 , bid documents) that passes

the tests and scrutiny that will be convincing enough to establish overallreasonableness to the needs of the Academy.

Basically, a Bidde/s offe( in its entirety, should be complete, compliant, and

consoninl with the pertinent provisions of RA9184. the Official Bid Documents(OBD), and other relevant issuances of the Government such as the DPWH'S

Department Order No.197. Also kindly be reminded that EMBrocal Builders lnc'(EBl) have stated under oath in its Omnibus Sworn Statement that "Each of thedocuments submitted in satbfaction of tho bidding requiremenb is anauthenaic of the originat, comPlete end all statemants end informa,ionproyided lharein ere true and corocC" and the Biddet have " Carcfutly examinadall bidding documencs".

The BAC noted that tha reason mainly stated in EBI'S request for reconsiderationwas that the deficiencies are very minor thus having no substantial impact on

soundness and responsiveness of the bid. EBI'S bid offer, however, should be

responsive to what was determined by the Procuring Entity, by RA9184, as well as

other pertinent and relevant laws and issuances.

Questions on specifications and other special conditions of the contract should have

J

- P.t12

t

BAE Resolution

il0. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

June 22,2018p.t2l4L

Annex "H"Page 2 ol2

-P.

been raised during the Pre-Bid Conference to which EBI has attended and is boundto comply as required by the Official Bid Documents, Bid Bulletin No.'1, and RA9184EBl, and the bidders who have indicated their interest to participate were remindedcontinuously betore the submission and prior to the opening of the bids. Observanceand compliance to these specifications is, therefore, not considered minor and has

substantial impact on the responsiveness of the bid.

Again, we reiterate thal EBI's rsquest for reconsidsration i3 DENIED. EBI may optto file a formal protest upon payment ol a non-refundable fee of two million Iivehundred thousand pesos (P2,5OO,OOo.@) only within seven (7) calendar days uponreceipt of this notice.

Specific to EBI'S submittal, ifl accordance with Section 25 2.b.viii.2' and as reflectedwith Form I of lhe OBD, the non-inclusion of the Resident Engineer is non-compliantand non-responsive. Such compliance cannot be presumed together with olher"honest mistakes" found in the different parts of submittal specially the FireSuppression System that was not supported with DUPA.

Furthermore, the absence of a signature in the CV of Mr. Pajarito renders the CV asa "mere scrap of paper'thereby the document is deemed not submitted and thusnon-responsave.

On the certification on the authority and validity of the notarization of the OmnibusSworn Statemeflt among other notarized documents, such statement is deficient andnon-responsive to the requirements ofthe Revised Notarial Rules. The validity ofthenotarized documents and the authority of the notary public cannot simply be certifiedby your private corporation.

The Supreme Cou.t has explained that "nolarization is not an empty, meaninglessand routine act.' Fu(her, that the "act of nolarization by a notary public converts aprivate document to a public document making the document admissible in evidenc€without further proof of authenticity." Thus, the defective notarization strips your

document of such efect, clearly not compliant with what was required.

Very truly yours,for the Bids & Awards Committee'L"."BERNARDO A.Chairman. BAC

.' Senior Vic€ Presidenl. Services

fr*i*

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BIDJune 22,2018

p.33l4L

Annex "l"Pagel of 2

June 01,2018

ARCH. CELERINO S, CUERPOPresidentE.M, CUERPO, INC.EMCI Bldg., No. 3 Metropoli DriveMetropoli Residenza, BagumbayanOuezon City

NOTICE OF POST.DISQUALIFICATION

ELIGIBILITY OOCUIIENTS-E06" Presented 82 ongoing government contracts. No ongoing

contracts with private entities

" due to following:

Absence ot Certificate of Accomplishments (CoA) on 57 outof 82 presented government ongoing contracts as requiredattachment stated in Fo.m 1:

No attached NOA and/or Contract. NTP, and CoA on 1 outof 57 ongoi'Maintenance

ng government contracts (ie, project:and Construction Services of Other

1

BAt Resolution

llo.llT s.2018

BrDs 6 A!raFos coruiiiii sol. zc,a crr

Deat Mr. Cuerpo:

This is to inform you that as the Bidder who submitted the 3d LowestCalculated Bid for the bidding of One (.1) Lot Con3truction of a Foudaon€torsyReioforcod Concret3 Building comprising Four-Storey Multi-use podium, TenFloors Accommodatlon Tower with Root Deck and Basemenl parking &Utiliti$ including Site Developmont and various Sits lmprovements at the DApConference Cantar in Tageytay City tor tho purpo3es oi ,.Stftngthening the( updcit.t t)/ .he Dcv,krynent -{t*lem.\ Dl the Phililt inct to pto|iLle both <iucral & Highl).Sp.(idli.ed Training (\rurx}.li)r (joternmefit OlliLidts', aS per lnvitation to Bid No.l617-381683-01, the Bids & Awards Committee (BAC) and its Technical Working Group(TWG) conducted an evaluation of your submitted bid.

However, upon careful examination, veriUcation, validation, and ascertainmentof all slatements and representations made, we regret to inform you that BAC toundyour bid nol responsive relative to the requjrements and conditions specified in theOfficial Bidding Documents (OBD). BAC wishes to inform you on the findingswherein your submitted bid failed: enumerated as followsl

l.

I

June 22,2018EAC Resolution

t{a. ll7 s.2018 9.t4147

Annex "l"Page2 ot 2

/ND/NGSlnfrastruclures Construction/lmprovement of Access RoadsLeading to Airports, Seaports and Declared TourismDestinations to Oeclared Tourism Destinations. Lobo-Malabrigo-Laiya San Juan Road Batangas province',); and,

., 8 out of 57 ongoing projects have no attached NTps asrequired attachment stated in Form 1.

"E08" 02r Presented thirty (30) compleled government contracts and two (2)completed private contracts. Both goyernment and privatecontracts have compli6d with all pertinent attachments required.

Twenty (20) government contracts with l1}okaccomplishment found in the Statement of All OngoingContracts under bid Form no. 1 were not declared in Formno.3 as required: lherefore, E08 submission is paten yincomplete; and,

The said 20 contracts have no aflached CpES-Ratiand/or Certificate of Completion and/or CertificateAcceptanc€.

'):, Submitted CV of Mr. L&owith License No. 0097873

nz Benedik J. Silvestre, a Civit Engineer,validated in the PRC website.

" due to non-compliance wjth personnel's requiredqualifications because of absence of proof of DOLE_OSHaccreditation as per DO No. 16, s. 2001.

ngof

"T19"

Based on theE.M. CUERPO. tNC.

Very truly yours.for the Bids & Awards Commiftee

{*,.^-a.C

foregoing, we regret to inform you that the Bid submitted bywas thereby declared pOST-DtSeUALtFtEO.

. .Should you wish to request for reconsideration, you may do so within lhree (3)

calendar days from receipl of this Notice.

We look forward to your participation in our fulure procurement activities.

BERNARDO A.Chatpe6on. BACSen,ot Vrca

,5.---._._-

otlorO

2

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID

h

BAE Resolution

l{u. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID

June 22, 2018p.l5l4L

E"mfl" GUtrRP@, [NG"ARCHrrECTS :) ENGINEERS C BUILDERS

06 June 2018

THE BIDS AND AWARDS COMMIT'EEDevelopmenl Acodemy of lhe Philippines {DAP)3rd Floor, DAP Bldg., Son Miguel Avenue,Posig CityTel. No. {02) 631-2120

Allenlioni MR. BERNAROO A. DIZON

ChoirpersonSenior Vice Presioenr, Se.vtces

Subject

Project:

REQUEST TOR RECONSIDEiATION

One Loi Conslruclion of o Fourleen-Sforey Reinforced ConcreleBuilding Comprising Four-Slorey Mulli-Use podium, Ten FloorsAccommodotion Tower with Roof Deck ond Bqsemenl porking &Utilities including Sile Development ond Vorious Slle lmprovemenlsol the Dqp Conference Cenier in Togoyloy Cily for the purposes of"Slrengthening the Copociiy of ihe Deveiopmenl Acodemy ol thePhilippines lo Provide bolh Generol & Highty Speciolized TroiningCourses for Governmenl Officiqls" PER l8l7-38t 683-01

Deor Ms. Mendozo:

This is q Requesl for Reconsiderolion on the Post-Disquolificotion of ihe bid of ihe E.M.Cuerpo, lnc. for the subject P.olecl hetd on 29 November 2Ot 7. I O:00 A.M., ot DApBld9., Son Miguel Ave.. Posig Cily SpMC BAC Office, 2nd Fk. Moin Bld9., os per Noticaof Post-Disquolificoiion doted OI June 20tB received by ihe undersigned viqelectronic moil on 04 June 20i8.4;58 p.M. The grounds sloled os bosis for lhe post-disquolillcolion ore due to the olleged foilure of lhe Consorlium lo submit cerloinrequiremgnts/condilions os follows:

"EtIGISIIITY DOCUMENIS

I . "E06": Folled due lo lhe lollowlng;

Annex "J"Page I of 5

q. Absence of Certificote of Accomplishmenls lCoA) on 57 out of82 presented government ongoing conirocts os requiredoltochmenl sloted in Form l;

EAC Resolution

llo. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID June 22,2018

p.36147

Annex "J"Pags 2 of 5

57 ongoing govemmenl conlrocis (i,e.. project: ,,Mqin.tenonce

ond Construction Services ot Olher lnfrostructureConstruction/lmprovemenl of Access Rood Leoding to Airporl5,Seoports and Declored Tourism Deslinolions lo Declored TourismDeslinqlions, Lobo-Molobrigo-Loiyo Son .luon Rood BotongosProvince"

c.8 oul of 57 proiecls hove no olloched NTps os requiredotlochmeni stoled in Form t.

2. "Tqg E08"i Foiled due io the following:

o, Twenty (20) governmenl conlrocts with 100% occompljshmentfound in the Slqtement of All Ongoing Conlrocis under Form no.I were not declqred in Form no. 3 os required; lherefore, EO8submission us potently incompleig; ond

b. The soid 20 conlrocts hove no otloched CpEs-Rating ond/orCertificote ot Completion ond/or Certificote of Acceptonce.

Foied due to non-complionce wlthquolificotions becouse of obsence ofoccrediiqiion os per DO No. l6 s. 2001 ."

personnel's requiredproof of DOLE-OSH

ln suppod of lhe request for reconsiderotion of E.M. Cuerpo, tnc., the following foctsond legol boses undeniobly deserve lo be given merit:

1. The BAC cited 57 unspecified projecls wilhoui Cerlificqtes ofAccomplishment which is o supporting document sto.ted in .fhe formqlof lhe lisl of qll ongolng projecls issued by the DAp BAC, ond one projectwithoul otlqchments such os Notice to proceed, Controct, Notice ofAword, Certiticote of Accomplishmeni, ond eighl {g) unspecifiedProjects without Notica lo proceed.

An invesligolion conduc'ied by lhe undersigned on lhe molterreveoledihot q I supporling dacuments lho.l ore requked by the DAp BAC oreincluded in our copy of the eligibilily and lechnicql documentssubmitied during the opening of bids. ln lhis regord however, we humblyreques, thot lhe 57 unspecified projects be tisied by the BAC forcompoison so we con reply occordingly.

b. No oltoched NOA qnd/or Conlrocft, NTp, ond CoA on l of

3. "Tqg Tl9":

EAC Resslution

l{0. ll7 s.20lBDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID June 22,2018

p.37l4L

Annex "J"Page 3 of 5

In lhe meonfime, we Wsh to inform the honoroble BAC lhot durjnq ihaopening of bids, EMCI'5 eligibility ond technicol documents wereopened ond roted "possed" by the DAp BAC pursuonl to Section 30 ofthe Revised IRR of RA 9184 which sloles thot:

"The BAC sholl check ihe submilted documenls of eqch bidderagoinsl q checklist of requirod documents to oscerloin if lhey ore o{lpresent, using o non-discretionory "pqss/foil" criierion xx x lf o blddersubmils the required document, il sholl be roled .,possed" for lholpo lculqr requlremenl."

Hoving submilled the required eligibltity ond lechnicol documen.ls, wehumbly mointoin thot we hove complied with the requirement sloled inthe formot of ihe list of oll ongoing projects issued by the DAp BAC.

The BAC hos lhe prerogoiive to seek clorificqtion of o bidder with lhelowest colculqled bid os expressly provided under Sec. 32.1 of RA 9184ond its lRR. Thus, moy we respecttully requesl ,ho.l the findings on lheoforementioned locking documonts be noted by the BAC oscloriflcotion ond not os o ground for posldisquolifico.tion.

2. On the findings of the 8AC thot ihe twenty (20) unspecified ongoinggovernment Projects of EMCI with 100% occomptishmenis thql weredeclored in its submilted Slotemenl of oll ongoing government ondprivoie conlrocls including controcts qy/orded bul nol yet stortedshould be included in in Form 3 fstolemeni of Completed projects) osone of the grounds of the Post-Disquolif icotion of EMCI, pleose beinformed thqt while indeed the projects hove reoched IOO%complelion, the soid projecls ore still subject lo further evoluo.tion of theowner. Hence, lhe Certificote of Completion which the BAC requires forprojects occomplished by 100% remoins pending unlil such lime .lhoi

the evaluolion of lhe owner hos been completed.

Considering thqt Cerlificoles of Compleiion ore yet lo be issued by therespeclive owners of lhe twenty 120) projecls noled by .the BAC, soidprojecls olihough 100% occomplished moy remoin under the lisf ofOngoing Projects.

ln oddition, moy we respectfully point oui thol lhe provision in Sec. 23.1{o) {iii) of 'the 2009 Revised tRR of R.A. 9 t84 which requires o prospectivebidder to submil "oll its ongoing ond qompleled government ondprivole controch, including controcts qwqrded but nol yef storted, ifony, whelhersimilor or noi similor in noture ond complexity x xx,, hos longbeen omended by Governmenl procuremenl policy Boord icppB)Resolulion No.29-2012 (do'ted 23 November 20t 2) which requires only

June 22 2018BAC Resolution

tlo.llT s.20lBDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID p.38/41

Annex "J"Page 4 of5

ftom o bidder 'oll its ongoing government ond privote conkoc

3. The BAC cited lhe reoson in decloring EMCI os foiled on ihe SafetyEngineer/Officar requirement is'the obsence of proof of DOIE-OSHAccredildrion os per DO No. l6 s. 201 1 .

4.8 SAfETY ENGINEER,/Of FICER - Duly occrediled by theDeportmenl of Lobor ond Employment qnd with ql leosl lhree(3) yeqrs' experience in ihe construclion industry. The SofetyEngineer/Officer sholl render iull-lime services for the proiecluntil ils complelion ond lurn-over.

Xxx

Bosed on the obove-quoted requirement. lhe mode/option token byEMCI is to pledge q DoLE-Accredited Sofety Engineer/Officer in theperson of Engr. Lorenz Benedik J. Silveslre. The qt.lqchmenls togelherwilh the Cuniculum Viloe of sqid engr. Silvesire ore: (l ) pRC License; ond(2) Certifico'te of Comptetion for the Conslruclion Sofely Troining withAccraditotion No. CST-lGl l-464, signed ond issued by ihe OccupoiionSofet ond Heollh Center {OSHC) Execulive Dtec.lor, Mo. Teresito S.Cucueco, on 26 November 2010. The soid OSHC is on ottoched ogencyof the Deporlmeni of Lobor ond Emptoyment.

A cursory glonce on the certificole or on ordlnory review of the copy ofOSI-IC Certiticote of Completion tor the Construclion Sqfety Troiningshows thot the sqme is being issued lo ihe soid Engr. Silveslre wi.lhAccredilotion No. CST-IGll-464. Since the Key personnel required forthe subjecl Project is o Sofely Engineer/Office( EMC| ptedged Engr.Siveslre who hove compleled the required Construction Sqfety ondHeqlth iroining os certiffed by OSHC. Hence, our complionce lo thqtporticulor requirement os proof of DOLE Accreditoiion is o Certificole ofComplelion of Construction Sofety ond Heollh Troining issued by onottoched ond duly occredited qgency of the DOLE.

including controcts oworded but not yet stqrted, if qny, whe.ther similoror not similor in noture ond complexiiy x )o(" os omplified by GppBResolulion No. I &2014 {dqted 20 June 20l4) which reflecled likewise oson amendmenl lo Clquse l2.l (o) (iii) of the phitippine BiddingDocuments.

IIB Clouse I2.1 (b)lli.2) 4.8.of the Bid Doto stotes thot:

"rIB Clouse l2.l (b) (ii.2.)

Xxx

8A[ Resolution

l{0. ll7 s.2018DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BID June 22,2018

p.39l4t

Page 5of5

Al lhis juncture, we would like 10 express our qppreciolion for lhe opppresenl this requesl for reconsiderotion ond c orify our lrue posilion on lhe molterdespile the lopse of 197 cotendor doys from bidding. Considering lhe lenglh of timesince lhe stort of this procurement process, we ore confideht thq, the Honoroble BACwould consider the urgent need to resolve lhe oword of the very vilol infrostruclureProject.

Premises considered, we hereby proy of lhis Honorobte BAC io reconsider ond setoside ils decision lo posl,disquolify our bid ond for the EMCI to be considered foroword of conkoct subject lo oiher procedurol requkements of lhe procuremenl Low.

Ihonk you

Very truly y

ETERINO S. CU ERPO

Presidenl

ES:iE

HH6 @ P ti

DECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE.BIDJune 22, 2018

p.4Ol4l

Annex "K"Page I of2

June 13. 2018

ARCH. CELERINO S. CUERPOPresidentE.f,t. Cuerpo, lnc.EMCI 8ldg., No. 3 Metropoli DriveMetropoli Residenza, BagumbayanQuezon City

REPLY TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Deat Architect Cuarpo:

1 frrl. -\'. ).t.t- )tl6 lRRoJR,tgtda2 R\1. tTl.2) 6. )Ot6 tRRolR.t9t8l3 lt/rt*: drtio@n..dhhrutge.u8 us .ti.tiom.!, cl(l]l5h espo$i..

Upon deliberation of the points you have raised in your Request for Reconsideration(RR), it was decided that your request be DENIED for lack of merit.

Post-qualification is that part of the procurement process where the BAC, assisted bythe TWG, convenes in order to determine whether the bid submitted complies withall the requirements and conditions as specified in the Bidding Oocuments,. pleasenote that notwithstanding lhe eligibility of the Bidder, the Academy reserves its rightto review the qualifications of the Bidder at any stage of the procurement process tovalidate, verifv and ascertain whether there has been any misrepresentation made orif lhere has been a change an the in the Bidder's capabrtity to undertake the projectfrom the time I submitted ils ehgibrlity requirements2.

Responsiveness is defined as to act quickly especially to meet the needs of anolheror someone3. We regret to inform you ttrit ttre fWe and the BAC have found thebid you submitted as "unre3ponsive".

The statement in your RR provides information of your own admission to incompleteand unresponsive submissions_

. Out of the 102 submissions of All Ongoing projects, 20 were stated as 1OO%completedi leavjng 82 as either awarded and started or awarded but not yetstarted:

. One (1) out of the 82 does not contain lhe required NOA or NTp or Certificateof Accomplishments (CoA) making the submission as palenlly absent;

1 ao6 \r^c\s^c ..,rd o.ir.{ rr.a^€r :ra. r]d

BAI Resolution

tlo. ll7 s.2018

#Jl\ ocvclonr,rcrr acaDo+t{ of thc nLilinpirrcs* Bror I awArDa Coltrrr€E iso No 2018-035)

r

BAC Resolution

t{0.ll7 s.20lBDECLARING FAILURE OF BIDDING AND TO RE-BID June 22,2018

P.4Ll4t

Annex "K"Page 2 ot 2

*$:3

Eight (8) out ol 82 were without NTP and CoA:

. Fifty seven (57) out of 82 were without CoA making the submission asincomplete; and,

. Only twenty five (25) out of E2 have comptete NOA, NTp. and CoA.

We also took note that some of these projects were supposedly completed in2015 and 2016.

On the matter of the accreditation of the Safety Officer, the Comoletion of Trcnina isnot eaual to the citeion to include a dulv accredited Safetv Officer as required byRule 1033: ltem No.1&2 Department Orde#16 s.2001 by the DOLE. Furtherly,upon validation, your Mr Silvestre does not appear in the list dated December 12,2017 of the DOLE Occupational Safety and Heatth Practitionersa Please note thatyou have only certified M. Silvestre (pel your submission) as having completed thetraining hours; and, not as a Duly Certitied Safety Oflicer, as required in the OBDand by DO#16 s.2001.

As BAC, we conducted the post-qualilication based on the documents as submitted.We hope you would understand that we are constrained to allow supplying additionaldocuments, which would be tantamount to "Bto MoDtFtcaTor{", a prccess disallowedin public competitive bidding.

ln view of the forogoing, we reiterate ths decision of the BAC and your requestfor reconsideration is DENIED for lack of merit

It you wish to further your cause, you may file a protest to the HopE by filing averified position paper and the payment of a non-refundabte protest fee of TwoMrLLroN FrvE HUNDRED THousANo pEsos (P2,SOO,00O.@) wdhin a non-extendibleperiod of seven (7) calendar days upon receipt of this communication.

We thank you for your interest and participation as we look foMard to yourpa(icipation in our public competitive bidding for infraworks.

Very truly yours,for the Bids & Awards Committee

--1.-\^44'_\BERNARDO A-

x-_odox

Chairperson, BACSenior Vice President, Services

a htErAModrcdob.goy r.r4.tfaCA@ldGiarACCnEO[EDt2OpRlCiTtONERSga2Ora2OdiaAO@ et [2@r6a2017!d

2

a: .os ^1l.,

co'. /// sv, M!s_ oic-itA, /// D nsc a6.rhn. /// Mlrrai . fiMD o.Di

I