An explanation given by T&T Electricity Commission (T&TEC) chairman Sushilla Ramkissoon-Mark of why an $8 million land-acquisition consultancy services contract was awarded to a nonexistent partnership is not adding up. While Ramkissoon-Mark, wife of Speaker Wade Mark, says under her guidance, proper procedures were put in place and followed, investigations show a discrepancy.
The contract in question is tender 9084, for the provision of land-acquisition services at Brechin Castle to La Brea Union Estate, Debe to Penal and San Rafael to Wallerfield. The scope of works includes relocating over 100 residents for the construction of a high-voltage network to transmit power from the new Trinidad General Unlimited power station in La Brea.
In June 2011, T&TEC put out an ad inviting proposals for the land-consultancy services. This came after the management of T&TEC decided to stop Row Services Ltd from providing services for land acquisition from Brechin Castle to La Brea, on the basis that the relevant documentation had not been put in place.
The land-acquisition contract awarded to the company for San Rafael to Wallerfield by the previous board was also terminated. In response to the ad, three companies submitted bids. They were:
• Geometric Surveying Consultants: $6,145,887.50
• ACQ and Associates: $8,667,636.25
• Consortium Land Acquisition Systems Specialists (Class): $8,421,105
Members of Row Services Ltd, the Sunday Guardian learned, formed a partnership-ACQ and Associates-and were able to meet the criteria for the job. Both Geometric Surveying Consultants and ACQ and Associates gave a 12-month timeframe for the job to be completed. Class, however, promised to complete the job in six months.
T&TEC shock
Despite the speedy timeframe given by Class, ACQ and Associates got the nod from the evaluation committee, as members were not convinced six months was sufficient. In its recommendation, the evaluation committee said, "ACQ and Associates emerged as the most suitable tenderer with a score of 78.79 per cent.
They possess the full range of expertise to provide a 'turnkey' solution to the land-acquisition process. It is therefore recommended that tender 9084...be awarded to ACQ and Associates."
The evaluation team also expressed concern over the bid submitted by Class. "The name of the organisation as defined in the information of the tender is not listed as Consortium of Land Acquisition Systems Specialists but refers to Dharamchand Depoo, Vindra Maharaj and Shobna Persad (DMP)."
As stated in DMP's letter of October 21, 2011, the three attorneys will form a partnership, if successful, the commission will enter into an agreement/ contract," the evaluation team noted.
Criteria not met but contract awarded
How was a nonexistent partnership able to qualify to provide land consultancy services to T&TEC? Something went awry some time between October and December 2011. The Tenders and Contracts Committee, of which Ramkissoon-Mark was a member, rejected the recommendation by the evaluation team and instead awarded the job to DMP, even though at the time the partnership had not yet been formed.
The contract was awarded on May 21, 2012. Before that, T&TEC's acting general manager of transmission Charles Innis crossed swords with general manager Kelvin Ramsook and objected to the move to bypass the process.
In a strongly worded e-mail sent to Ramsook, he wrote, "I am in receipt of your memorandum dated January 3, 2012, on the subject at caption. Given your written instructions as contained in the final paragraph of the memorandum, I have signed the form recommending the award of the caption tender in favour of DMP/Class.
"I wish to reaffirm my position in support of the evaluation committee's recommendation that ACQ/ROW, being the first-ranked tenderer based on all the published criteria, should be awarded the tender. I therefore disagree with the Tenders and Contracts Committee's approval of DMP/Class for the award but have acted as instructed."
Innis gave these reasons for disagreeing:
• DMP/Class was not ranked first by the evaluation committee;
• The Tenders and Contracts Committee, in recommending DMP/Class, only considered two of the five published criteria: cost and time. The other criteria-resources, experience and methodology-were not considered;
• The evaluation committee had taken all published criteria into consideration in the evaluation of the tender;
• He felt the six-month timeframe was unrealistic and would not be met;
• The tenderer approved by the Tenders and Contracts Committee had no track record in compulsory land acquisition;
• The tenderer recommended by the evaluation committee, ACQ/ROW, was the only one with experience and had been in the business for a number of years. The fact that they had worked on the project before made them ideal;
• The difference in price between DMP/ Class and ACQ/Row was only $214,375, or 29 per cent;
• He disagreed that ACQ/Row had an unfair incumbent advantage because they had worked on the project before;
• A summary of the evaluation committee's assessment of ACQ/Row and DMP/Class showed ACQ/Row totalled 78.79 points compared to 57.56 points.
T&TEC breaking rules
When the Sunday Guardian contacted Ramsook last Thursday to ask him to shed some light on who gave a directive to reject the recommendation of the evaluation committee, he refused to comment. "I cannot comment on that. You need to speak to the former chairman, Omar Khan. He was the chairman at the time. I have absolutely nothing to say," he said.
But when Khan was contacted last Saturday, he too distanced himself from the matter, referring the Sunday Guardian to Ramkissoon-Mark. "I am no longer the chairman. I was never an executive chairman. You need to contact the new chairman," Khan said, before hanging up the phone.
Ramkissoon-Mark responds
Contacted last Saturday, Ramkissoon–Mark said the decision to award the contract was based on a legal opinion. Not wanting to disclose a copy of the legal opinion or reveal who it was obtained from, Ramkissoon-Mark said it concurred with a ruling from Justice Carol Gobin which said the Water and Sewerage Authority had erred in a decision to award a consultancy land-acquisition contract to a company.
Gobin deemed the contract illegal because the company name, and not that of an attorney, was stated as accepting the contract. Asked on what basis a decision was taken to reject the recommendation of the evaluation committee, given that DMP had not formed a partnership at the time bids were evaluated, Ramkissoon-Mark said Row Services Ltd used to do all the acquisition of land for T&TEC.
But this was not properly handled, she said. "No tendering process was followed and no systems were put in place. Basically, it was a runaway horse that could not withstand scrutiny. "As a result, the board moved to put systems in place and introduced a fair system of public tendering whereby this particular contract went out for public tendering."
She said another issue was that at the time Row Services Ltd was a limited liability company. Ramkissoon-Mark stressed, "There is a legal opinion, there is a ruling and there is a very binding precedent to show that a limited liability company cannot give legal services."
Senior Counsel Dana Seetahal yesterday told the Sunday Guardian that attorneys providing legal services are guided by the Legal Profession Act, which states a company cannot provide legal services; only lawyers can, either as single individuals or in partnership.
Nevertheless, Ramkissoon-Mark charged, "In excess of $4 million in taxpayers' money was being given to particular companies without following any process." Once the board had a legal opinion, she said, the contract was put out to tender.
Ramkissoon-Mark said Class stood out because of the six-month time estimated to complete the contract.
"Class's delivery time was the shortest. I think they were also amongst the cheapest. In terms of the procurement philosophy of the commission in optimising value for dollar we thought it justified on that basis." Ramkissoon-Mark added that since becoming chairman she no longer served as chairman of the tenders committee.
Innis: I objected from day one Innis had a different story to tell.
Admitting that a contract had not been prepared for one of the jobs awarded to Row Services Ltd, Innis said, "It did not happen under my watch. When I realised no contract was prepared, I instructed for a contract to be drafted up so works from Brechin Castle to La Brea could be completed.
"The documents were prepared for approval for the contract, but a decision was taken to go out for public tender." Told that the Sunday Guardian had obtained an e-mail in which he objected to the decision to reject the evaluation committee's finding, Innis replied, "The evaluation team made a recommendation selecting ACQ and Associates for the job."
Asked why he opted to sign another recommendation, given that DMP had not yet formed a partnership, Innis said, "That was neither my recommendation nor that of the evaluation committee. I was instructed to do so. I complied. "I am no longer at T&TEC," he pointed out.
Managing director of Row Services Ltd Maureen Daniel Braveboy, contacted on Wednesday, also refused to comment, only saying, "I really do not want to get into that matter involving T&TEC. I prefer not to comment." DMP insists contract will
be delivered on time but......
When the Sunday Guardian contacted senior partner of DMP Shobna Persad on Saturday, she confirmed the contract had been awarded to them. "We started doing a series of valuations and we started negotiations with a number of people," she said. "Most people are willing to settle, so it is being done by private treaty. We are just following up with some deeds and are in the process of registering them. We are expected to complete by the end of November."
Asked when the partnership was formed and who the partners were, Persad said, "Dharamchand Depoo, Vindra Maharaj and myself. Could you please tell me how you got my number? "We have formed a partnership."