Dar es Salaam — The Public Procurement Appeals Authority (PPAA) has dismissed an appeal by a Chinese elevator supplier Ms S.E.C (East Africa), which challenged disqualification from a Sh134 million tender for supply of a passenger lift at the Bank of Tanzania (BoT).
PPAA sided with BoT that the appellant failed to comply with technical specifications provided in the tender document.
Last November BoT floated a tender for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of a passenger lift at its Mtwara branch, Shangani Residential Block "B" of which four firms registered their bids.
Following evaluation, three tenders - including that of the appellant - were found to have not complied with some technical specifications provided in the tender document. The tender was finally awarded to M/s Derm Elevators Limited at Sh134 million.
The Chinese company was disqualified over failure to indicate that an Automatic Rescue System in the lift was battery-operated. It also offered to supply the lift with back side round hand rail instead of a rail on two sides as mentioned in the technical specifications.
However, the company challenged the disqualification, arguing that it specified the system in the tender documents but the same was termed Emergency Landing Device (ELD).
The firm says ELD performs the same function of landing the lift to the nearest floor and opening the doors for the people to come out in case of an abrupt power cut or other emergencies.
At the hearing of the appeal, the company conceded it did not state in the specification that ELD is battery-operated but instead attached a brochure which had information that the device was operated in such a manner.
In its recent decision, PPAA sitting in Dar es Salaam concluded that the appellant's tender was fairly and properly disqualified in accordance with regulation 205 of the Government Notice No 446, 2013.
Under the regulation, all tenders are required to be checked for substantial responsiveness to the technical requirement of the tendering documents.
"Having reviewed the appeal record and given the admission by the appellant on specifications, it is crystal clear that the appellant failed to comply with technical specifications," said the authority.