This document provides comments on the draft evaluation report for the Mohmand Dam Project bids. It notes several issues: 1) References in appendices seem incorrect. 2) The evaluation incorrectly marked one bid as failing to provide financial statements, when it only asked one JV member and not the other. Clarification should be sought from both. Another bid is marked contradictory ways. 3) One bid was deemed to not prove experience as a prime contractor based on incomplete information, though it provided documents showing it met the criteria. The evaluation misapplied the experience criteria. 4) Another bid was deemed to not prove its JV member's experience, but the supporting documents actually showed the parent company's experience

1. MOHMAND DAM PROJECT
COMMENTS ON DRAFT EVALUATION REPORT
S.N. Reference Comments
1 General References of Appendix F and Appendix G seems to be incorrect.
2 Financial
Situation
1. In the Executive Summary Bid-02 has been marked “Fail**” with foot note
stating “Bidder has not provided financial statement for JV Members itself,
thereforeit is notpossibleto establish financialsoundnessof theJV Members,
Power China and Power China Chengdu.”
2. Scrutiny of relevant section on page-12 reveled that clarification for the
provisionof Financial Statements wasonly askedfromPowerChinaChengdu
while no clarification was sought from the JV Member Power China.
3. In our opinion, clarification from JV Member Power China should also be
soughtwith the remindertoPowerChinaChengduinaccordance withBidding
Documents.
4. Moreover, Section 3.4.4 Table shows FWO-Power china JV has beenmarked
as “P”(Pass) withthe Remarks“ExplanatoryNote2(a,b) and3 (a)”(whichare
nottraceable inthe report). Thisiscontradictory withthe resultgivenintable
on Executive Summary. Moreover, review findings on Page-12 are also not
conclusive.
3 FWO
Experience –
4.2 (a)
1. Asregardsexperience undercriteria4.2(a), assessmenthasbeenmade inthe
Executive Summary provided under relevant i.e. Section 3.6.2 as:
“As such, capability of FWO is not determined for specific construction and
contract management experience pursuant to Sub-Clause 29.2 of Instruction
to Bidders.”
2. The above assessment has been made on the following basis:
a. Non-submission of authenticated documentary evidence as per
Criteria 4.2 (a).
b. Non-provisionofinformationforclarificationregardingdistributionof
worksof Gomal Zam projectamong the main contractor and its sub-
contractors.
c. On the basis of information available with the Employer “WAPDA”.
d. On the contrary the bidder has attached Letter of Acceptance,
Balance Works Certificates in the Bid and submitted Handing/Taking
over between the Govt. Department including punch list etc. in
response to the clarification asked.
3. From the perusal of above, itislearned thatFWOclaimedGomal Zamproject
against the Criteria 4.2 (a) as “Prime Contractor” and fulfill the minimum
requirement of 10% value of the contract.

2. 4. Notwithstanding criteria 4.2(a), it may be inferred that the bidder could not
submitted the requireddocuments as per 4.2(a) i.e. TOC, DLP, Performance,
as the Project has achieved 73% completion (referred from Balance Works
Certificate). However,substantiationregardingexecutionof the projectcould
be easily corroborated from the submitted “LOA and other documents” and
as also widely available information.
5. We are of the view that, the Sub-Clause 29.2 deals with the professional,
technical, financial, legal or managerial competence of the Contractor and
does not relate to the previous executed works.
4 Power China
Corporation
Experience
1. Asregards experienceundercriteria4.1& 4.2 (a) & (b) forJV Member,Power
ConstructionCorporationof China(abbreviatedasPower China), assessment
has been made in the Executive Summary provided under relevant Sections
on the basis
a. Supporting documents submitted by the Bidder does not depict
experience of JV Member but revealsexperience of parentcompany
(Sinohydro Corporation).
2. We are of the view that contents of first para on page 14 appears to be
contradictory, which needs to be revisited.