DPHW: Contractor not qualified to build DM Avenue
October 2, 2002 | 12:00am
Was the construction firm which built 2.3 kilometers of the 5.1-km President Diosdado Macapagal Blvd. (PDMB), the J.D. Legaspi Construction (JDLC), qualified to build the controversial road project?
No, at least according to the records obtained by The STAR at the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).
The documents indicate that JDLC did not have the required experience to undertake the PDMB project when it was awarded the then P500-million worth of road construction at the Manila Bay reclamation area of the Public Estates Authority (PEA).
The project’s cost which ballooned to P800 million is the current subject of investigation following a public accusation by PEA board member Sulficio Tagud Jr. that other board members were involved in the project overpricing.
"Based on its credentials submitted to DPWH, it (JDLC) does not qualify for a project of this magnitude," a government bidding expert told The STAR.
The source said that under Presidential Decree 1594 and Executive Order 40, all bidders for a proposed infrastructure project must have previously completed a similar project worth at least half of the contract they were trying to secure.
When reached for clarification, the highly reclusive Jesusito D. Legaspi, sole proprietor of the JDLC, briefly said that his company’s work experience included road constructions at Camp John Hay in Baguio City and in Global City at Taguig.
Legaspi said he could not elaborate because his records were not with him.
DPWH records however indicated that JDLC did the "upgrading of Pennsylvania (Street)," "Global City Development," and the "asphalting of PHSA Access Rd." The source could not explain what PHSA stands for.
The records also showed that the John Hay project built between Feb. 1, 1999 and Jan. 6, 2000 merely cost P53 million, the Global City project built between June 14, 2000 to June 7, 2001 cost P79 million and the PHSA built between March 11, 1998 to Dec. 11, 1998 cost P93 million.
The STAR source also appeared puzzled by the JDLC qualification on the DPWH file, and assumed that the company may have merely failed to include other vital credentials in their work experience description. The JDLC is under the DPWH category of "AAA" and "Large B" for roads, with the two ratings representing the highest for contractors.
"Or maybe PEA has a different requirement," the source said, but admitted that the qualification provided by law applies to all contractors.
According to the "criteria for prequalification" issued by the PEA on July 23, 1999 for all those vying for the PDMB project, it was stated that the "contractor must have completed relevant project with an aggregate amount of not less than P250 million for the last five years in order to satisfactorily comply with this project."
Records revealed that it was the DPWH that provided the name of Legaspi when PEA wrote to it requesting for a shortlist of 10 bidders who can undertake the project. In a May 19, 1999 response, the DPWH listed 10 contractors and ranked JDLC second.
PEA then went on to indicate in a report that "the five qualified bidders for package 1 (they were divided into two) reveal that they have the necessary technical and financial capabilities to undertake the project and are not included in the list of blacklisted contractors."
On Oct. 21, 1999, it was certified that JDLC submitted the lowest bid for the PDMB project at P584, 365,885 during the opening of bids on Sept. 16, 1999 and on Nov. 26, 1999, a notice of award was given to JDLC.
Meanwhile, another government source told The STAR yesterday that the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) should look into the functions of "board committees" created by the PEA board of directors to help shed light into the alleged anomaly in the PDMB.
"For a top heavy corporation, (the committee) is already questionable. It is susceptible to influence-peddling, " the source said on condition of anonymity. PEA is a government-owned and -controlled corporation.
PEA general manager Benjamin Cariño belied the claims of the source.
"No, I don’t think so. The members of management participate in the deliberation (on projects). It’s a welcome additional layer (in the agency’s organizational structure) because it gives everyone time to review the proposals," Cariño told The STAR in a telephone interview.
The government source explained that each of the board members, with the exception of chairman Ernest Villareal, handles a committee depending on his "area of expertise."
Approved through a board resolution about three months ago, the committee had as main objective the facilitation of effective discussions during board meetings, sources said.
"The chairman of a committee, after working closely with management, would be able to answer all possible inquiries from the board members. But then, a board director could have also presided over operations. It could give the directors perfect opportunity to talk directly to the contractors or vice-versa," the source said.
The source said the PEA board of director should only be a policy-making body.
The source described the board committees "much like that in Congress" where bills were discussed on the committee-level before they were presented to the floor for deliberations. The setting up of board committees was an idea of director Rodolfo Tuazon, the source said.
According to the source, Tuazon was the chairman for construction and infrastructure development committee; Cariño for human resources and development; Jose Marie Gerochi for reclamation; Angelito Villanueva for finance; Martin Sanciego Jr. for audit; and Tagud for property development.
It was reported that Tagud had alleged that Tuazon lobbied for the board’s approval of several variation orders (VOs) and price adjustment in the contract of JDLC.
Tagud claimed he had objected to the JDLC’s request for three VOs and price adjustment in the contract of JDLC.
Villareal told The STAR that the board of directors’ "committee functions only involve review of proposal from management prior to submission to the board."
"We are a working board. I don’t see anything wrong with it," Cariño said.
At Malacañang, officials would rather play the role of an "exterminator" instead of an "arsonist" to solve problems at the PEA.
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye doused cold water yesterday on a proposal from two congressmen to abolish the graft-ridden PEA. He said the abolition proposal was "premature" to consider at this point, when only certain officials alleged to be corrupt were involved in the project.
In a statement, Sen. Ramon Revilla, chairman of the Senate public works committee, said he was ready to lead an inquiry.
The investigation on the PDMB controversy would be conducted jointly with the Senate Blue Ribbon committee chaired by Sen. Joker Arroyo, it said.
In a statement, Villareal said he was "ready anytime" for the Senate probe. — With reports from Marichu Villanueva
No, at least according to the records obtained by The STAR at the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).
The documents indicate that JDLC did not have the required experience to undertake the PDMB project when it was awarded the then P500-million worth of road construction at the Manila Bay reclamation area of the Public Estates Authority (PEA).
The project’s cost which ballooned to P800 million is the current subject of investigation following a public accusation by PEA board member Sulficio Tagud Jr. that other board members were involved in the project overpricing.
"Based on its credentials submitted to DPWH, it (JDLC) does not qualify for a project of this magnitude," a government bidding expert told The STAR.
The source said that under Presidential Decree 1594 and Executive Order 40, all bidders for a proposed infrastructure project must have previously completed a similar project worth at least half of the contract they were trying to secure.
When reached for clarification, the highly reclusive Jesusito D. Legaspi, sole proprietor of the JDLC, briefly said that his company’s work experience included road constructions at Camp John Hay in Baguio City and in Global City at Taguig.
Legaspi said he could not elaborate because his records were not with him.
DPWH records however indicated that JDLC did the "upgrading of Pennsylvania (Street)," "Global City Development," and the "asphalting of PHSA Access Rd." The source could not explain what PHSA stands for.
The records also showed that the John Hay project built between Feb. 1, 1999 and Jan. 6, 2000 merely cost P53 million, the Global City project built between June 14, 2000 to June 7, 2001 cost P79 million and the PHSA built between March 11, 1998 to Dec. 11, 1998 cost P93 million.
The STAR source also appeared puzzled by the JDLC qualification on the DPWH file, and assumed that the company may have merely failed to include other vital credentials in their work experience description. The JDLC is under the DPWH category of "AAA" and "Large B" for roads, with the two ratings representing the highest for contractors.
"Or maybe PEA has a different requirement," the source said, but admitted that the qualification provided by law applies to all contractors.
According to the "criteria for prequalification" issued by the PEA on July 23, 1999 for all those vying for the PDMB project, it was stated that the "contractor must have completed relevant project with an aggregate amount of not less than P250 million for the last five years in order to satisfactorily comply with this project."
Records revealed that it was the DPWH that provided the name of Legaspi when PEA wrote to it requesting for a shortlist of 10 bidders who can undertake the project. In a May 19, 1999 response, the DPWH listed 10 contractors and ranked JDLC second.
PEA then went on to indicate in a report that "the five qualified bidders for package 1 (they were divided into two) reveal that they have the necessary technical and financial capabilities to undertake the project and are not included in the list of blacklisted contractors."
On Oct. 21, 1999, it was certified that JDLC submitted the lowest bid for the PDMB project at P584, 365,885 during the opening of bids on Sept. 16, 1999 and on Nov. 26, 1999, a notice of award was given to JDLC.
Meanwhile, another government source told The STAR yesterday that the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) should look into the functions of "board committees" created by the PEA board of directors to help shed light into the alleged anomaly in the PDMB.
"For a top heavy corporation, (the committee) is already questionable. It is susceptible to influence-peddling, " the source said on condition of anonymity. PEA is a government-owned and -controlled corporation.
PEA general manager Benjamin Cariño belied the claims of the source.
"No, I don’t think so. The members of management participate in the deliberation (on projects). It’s a welcome additional layer (in the agency’s organizational structure) because it gives everyone time to review the proposals," Cariño told The STAR in a telephone interview.
The government source explained that each of the board members, with the exception of chairman Ernest Villareal, handles a committee depending on his "area of expertise."
Approved through a board resolution about three months ago, the committee had as main objective the facilitation of effective discussions during board meetings, sources said.
"The chairman of a committee, after working closely with management, would be able to answer all possible inquiries from the board members. But then, a board director could have also presided over operations. It could give the directors perfect opportunity to talk directly to the contractors or vice-versa," the source said.
The source said the PEA board of director should only be a policy-making body.
The source described the board committees "much like that in Congress" where bills were discussed on the committee-level before they were presented to the floor for deliberations. The setting up of board committees was an idea of director Rodolfo Tuazon, the source said.
According to the source, Tuazon was the chairman for construction and infrastructure development committee; Cariño for human resources and development; Jose Marie Gerochi for reclamation; Angelito Villanueva for finance; Martin Sanciego Jr. for audit; and Tagud for property development.
It was reported that Tagud had alleged that Tuazon lobbied for the board’s approval of several variation orders (VOs) and price adjustment in the contract of JDLC.
Tagud claimed he had objected to the JDLC’s request for three VOs and price adjustment in the contract of JDLC.
Villareal told The STAR that the board of directors’ "committee functions only involve review of proposal from management prior to submission to the board."
"We are a working board. I don’t see anything wrong with it," Cariño said.
At Malacañang, officials would rather play the role of an "exterminator" instead of an "arsonist" to solve problems at the PEA.
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye doused cold water yesterday on a proposal from two congressmen to abolish the graft-ridden PEA. He said the abolition proposal was "premature" to consider at this point, when only certain officials alleged to be corrupt were involved in the project.
In a statement, Sen. Ramon Revilla, chairman of the Senate public works committee, said he was ready to lead an inquiry.
The investigation on the PDMB controversy would be conducted jointly with the Senate Blue Ribbon committee chaired by Sen. Joker Arroyo, it said.
In a statement, Villareal said he was "ready anytime" for the Senate probe. — With reports from Marichu Villanueva
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
By Ian Laqui | 8 hours ago
7 hours ago
By Alexis Romero | 17 hours ago
By Mark Ernest Villeza | 17 hours ago
Recommended