HAS Universal Structures Ltd. (USL) failed to complete its $106 million contract for construction of shear walls at Central Block of Port of Spain General Hospital?
And if so, has UDECOTT declined to impose the penalty of $50,000 for every late day?
Did USL secure the contract for the structural works after the official deadline for submission of bids?
What are the implications for a further delay in completion of this long overdue project?
These and other disturbing questions deserve answers since UDECOTT is using public funds for reconstruction of the country’s primary health facility.
USL was granted the contract last June, to be completed in nine months, after Shanghai Construction Group withdrew from the project.
The completed works, therefore, should have been handed over by USL last March.
Chinese-owned SCG had privately complained of unexpected increased operating costs of US $9 million and delays by the Government in making payments.
The scope of workers for USL includes completion and installation of the steel frame, casting of floors and all the shear walls to the roof level.
Construction experts have been asking whether work has so far been completed on only six of the 13 levels.
One expert said the project “is in severe delay” and questioned the new construction cost.
He said: “It cannot be $106 million when the project is less than 50 per cent completed and the time to complete is up.”
USL won the contract ahead of Yorke Structures Ltd., Steel Structures Ltd., and Metal-X Engineering Ltd.
At the time of the awarding of the deal, one of the contractors wrote to UDECOTT complaining about “events which have transpired since the closing date of May 20, 2022, regarding the tendering process…”
The contractor asked that the proposals of all bidders “be evaluated independently to ascertain whether the scoring process was fair and just.”
Several engineers have queried whether UDECOTT had properly evaluated the contractor, and called for the appraisals to be made public.
They raised technical issues, including the “structural system’s deformation capability and ability to absorb and safely dissipate energy from cyclic motion in a seismic event.”
UDECOTT’s contract with USL said if the contract is terminated, the company waives all rights to remedies or action.
There have so far been no responses from UDECOTT after former Urban Development Minister Dr. Roodal Moonilal publicly discussed the issue and called for full disclosure.
Knowledgeable people are saying there is a role in the matter for the procurement regulator under Act 1 of 2015.
They cited several provisions of the legislation on public procurement and the principles of good governance.
Clause 13 (h) authorises the regulator to “audit and review the system of procurement and disposal of public property to ensure compliance with the objectives of the Act.”
Clause 13 (n) gives the regulator the right to investigate any party involved in public procurement for “any alleged or suspected breach” of the Act.
The law stipulates under Clause 29 (e) that a procuring entity should ensure that all suppliers and contractors “have the necessary professional and technical qualifications and competence…”
Clause 34 said that where a procuring entity is of the opinion that a submission is “abnormally low,” it should request relevant details.
The Act gives the right to a failed bidder to challenge the decision of a procuring entity.
