RE: FINALITY NOTICE OF THE DECISION TO THE PROTESTS - MULTI MUNICIPAL UTILITY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO AGUAS DE SANTIAGO

RFP Ref: WAS-B05/CF

Claim Further toFinancial Proposal Opening Session

Challenger: SEURECA/CESO CI INTERNATIONAL SA

This reference is made to the competitive process “RFP/ QCBS / Ref: WAS-B05/CF MUNICIPAL UTILITY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO AGUAS DE SANTIAGO” initiated on September 11, 2013. The reference is further made to RFP Section I: ITC, Clause 9. Bid Challenge System, which sets the rules that govern to review any complaint submitted by a bidder.

This notice is to provide information on the final Decision taken by MCA CV II Review Panel regarding the Protest filed by the Challenger, SEURECA/CESO CI INTERNATIONAL SA, to all bidders that participated in the referenced tender launched by Millennium Challenge Account – Cabo Verde II, as well to the Millennium Challenge Corporation, MCC. 

Pursuant to Section I: ITC, Clause 9. Bid Challenge System of the RFP, the MCA CV II Review Panel has reviewed the protest filed on June 25, 2014.

And on July 4, 2014 MCA CV II Review Panel issued a notice in relation to the Protest filed by the referenced Challenger referenced above which was sent electronically to the affected bidder, explaining and detailing the circumstances under which this procurement was conducted.

It was concluded that there was neither ‘conflict of interest’ as described in the Request For Proposals (RFP) Section 1 (pages 4, 5 and 6) nor ‘unfair advantage’ as described in clause 1.8.8 Section 1, as being referred by the referenced Challenger; taken into consideration the forgoing, the bid challenge submitted by the Firm SEURECA/CESO CI INTERNATIONAL SA is not upheld.

Pursuant to Section 9. Bid Challenge System, paragraph 9.1 of the Request for Proposal (RFP) of this procurement, Seureca appealed this decision, seeking review by MCC of the rejection of its bid challenge by the MCA CV. And on July 14, 2014, the Challenger submitted an Appeal to MCC.

Upon review of all relevant emails, and other files provided by Seureca Consortium and MCA CV II, based on the circumstances of the referenced procurement and the terms set forth in the RFP, MCC concludes and determines that a procurement violation occurred due to the fact that TFP Planege, a member of the Cowater Consortium, had a possible conflict of interest and an unmitigated unfair advantage.  Consequently, it was determined that the Consortium COWATER INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED /TPF PLANEGE – CONSULTORES DE ENGENHARIA E GESTÃO, S.A/ R.J. BURNSIDE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED should not be selected as a bidder and be disqualified from the referenced procurement process. Thus, the referenced Procurement process shall resume and proceed accordingly by entering into negotiations with the next ranked bidder.

However, this does not limit TFP Planege´s ability, or any member of the consortium with TFP Planege, to bid on any future procurement to be launched by MCA CV II.

MCA-CV II Review Panel,

_________________

/ Hélder Santos /

Managing Director

_________________

/ Claudio Santos/

WASH Project Director

_______________________

/ Maria de Lourdes Silva /

Procurement Manager