Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

Post by mealigan on Tue Jun 21, 2011 11:39 pm

Here is a case which I would like to throw to the body for comments (based from an actual procurement project of a govt agency):
1. Project is for a road construction with a concrete volume of 300 cu. m. Class "A" mix as specified.
2. Bidder A is lowest bidder as read based from financial bid and Bill Of Quantities (BOQ).
3. Bidder A's detailed estimate showed quantities for cement, gravel and sand which will not satisfy Class A mix and the required concrete volume. Resulting unit cost which are lower however were used to compute cost in the bill of quantities, hence, bid was lowest as read. i.e. lower unit cost x concrete volume = cost for concrete volume of 330 cu. m.
4. TWG of agency BAC pointed out that the quantities as shown in the Detailed Estimates will not satisfy the required concrete volume hence Bidder A should not be declared as lowest calculated bid. A case of computational errors.
His evaluation involved rectifying computational errors such as adjusting the quantities of cement, sand and gravel to come up with a Class A mixture for Bidder A using Bidder A'S unit prices for the materials. In the process, Bidder A was re-ranked as 3rd lowest bidder.
5. Query of Procuring Entity: Is the TWG correct in his evaluation that the bid of Bidder A be recomputed using Class A mix, hence resulting to an increased bid.
6. How do we define "computational errors" in infra projects.
7. IS it okay to use lesser quantities in the detailed estimates so as to come up with lower unit costs and use it to cost out unit quantities in the BOQ.
8. Bidder A says that he will deliver the specified concrete volume if awarded the contract since his BOQ shows the req'd volume.
Your comments are highly appreciated.

Comments

mealigan
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 19
Company/Agency : Bicol University College of Engineering
Occupation/Designation : Asst. Dean / Procurement Trainor
Registration date : 2008-09-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:04 am

mealigan wrote:Here is a case which I would like to throw to the body for comments (based from an actual procurement project of a govt agency):
1. Project is for a road construction with a concrete volume of 300 cu. m. Class "A" mix as specified.
2. Bidder A is lowest bidder as read based from financial bid and Bill Of Quantities (BOQ).
3. Bidder A's detailed estimate showed quantities for cement, gravel and sand which will not satisfy Class A mix and the required concrete volume. Resulting unit cost which are lower however were used to compute cost in the bill of quantities, hence, bid was lowest as read. i.e. lower unit cost x concrete volume = cost for concrete volume of 330 cu. m.
4. TWG of agency BAC pointed out that the quantities as shown in the Detailed Estimates will not satisfy the required concrete volume hence Bidder A should not be declared as lowest calculated bid. A case of computational errors.
His evaluation involved rectifying computational errors such as adjusting the quantities of cement, sand and gravel to come up with a Class A mixture for Bidder A using Bidder A'S unit prices for the materials. In the process, Bidder A was re-ranked as 3rd lowest bidder.
5. Query of Procuring Entity: Is the TWG correct in his evaluation that the bid of Bidder A be recomputed using Class A mix, hence resulting to an increased bid.
6. How do we define "computational errors" in infra projects.
7. IS it okay to use lesser quantities in the detailed estimates so as to come up with lower unit costs and use it to cost out unit quantities in the BOQ.
8. Bidder A says that he will deliver the specified concrete volume if awarded the contract since his BOQ shows the req'd volume.
Your comments are highly appreciated.

Comments

What I see here is a partly ambiguous requirement that lead to several complications.
1. 300cu.m is okay as a quantity, but how do we define Class "A". Is it included the specifications?;
2. Okay, Bidder A is the lowest in the Abstract as Read;
3. Is it not a ready mix concrete? if not, are the quantities for cement, sand, and gravel not given? because i believe they should be;
4. You are now violating the principle of "evaluating on equal footing"; also, you cannot adjust the quantities, only prices/amounts;
5. Considering no.4, NO. As to the technical aspect, non compliant or patently insufficient bids should be disqualified;
6. Computational errors in goods and infra is the same. it will only refer to arithmetical correction of the unit and total costs, in figures and in words;
7. No. Quantities should not be variable. Adjustments apply to prices only. Otherwise, you may be evaluating on "different footing" like comparing a bagger mix with a ready mix, which should not be;
8. You don't ask anyone if they will deliver because obviously all of them will if awarded the contract (just to win it); if the original bid was insufficient as to the volume, they should not be allowed to modify or improve their bid by "promising to complete the quantity"; there are rules on evaluation, and we are bound to comply objectively;

Hope these help. Smile

avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2480
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

Post by mealigan on Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:31 am

engrjhez® wrote:
mealigan wrote:Here is a case which I would like to throw to the body for comments (based from an actual procurement project of a govt agency):
1. Project is for a road construction with a concrete volume of 300 cu. m. Class "A" mix as specified.
2. Bidder A is lowest bidder as read based from financial bid and Bill Of Quantities (BOQ).
3. Bidder A's detailed estimate showed quantities for cement, gravel and sand which will not satisfy Class A mix and the required concrete volume. Resulting unit cost which are lower however were used to compute cost in the bill of quantities, hence, bid was lowest as read. i.e. lower unit cost x concrete volume = cost for concrete volume of 330 cu. m.
4. TWG of agency BAC pointed out that the quantities as shown in the Detailed Estimates will not satisfy the required concrete volume hence Bidder A should not be declared as lowest calculated bid. A case of computational errors.
His evaluation involved rectifying computational errors such as adjusting the quantities of cement, sand and gravel to come up with a Class A mixture for Bidder A using Bidder A'S unit prices for the materials. In the process, Bidder A was re-ranked as 3rd lowest bidder.
5. Query of Procuring Entity: Is the TWG correct in his evaluation that the bid of Bidder A be recomputed using Class A mix, hence resulting to an increased bid.
6. How do we define "computational errors" in infra projects.
7. IS it okay to use lesser quantities in the detailed estimates so as to come up with lower unit costs and use it to cost out unit quantities in the BOQ.
8. Bidder A says that he will deliver the specified concrete volume if awarded the contract since his BOQ shows the req'd volume.
Your comments are highly appreciated.

Comments

Thanks for the reply:

What I see here is a partly ambiguous requirement that lead to several complications.
1. 300cu.m is okay as a quantity, but how do we define Class "A". Is it included the specifications?;

Class A was specified in the bid documents.

2. Okay, Bidder A is the lowest in the Abstract as Read;
3. Is it not a ready mix concrete? if not, are the quantities for cement, sand, and gravel not given? because i believe they should be;

Bid docs did not mention as ready mix concrete; BOQ was given in terms of unit quantity of 300 cu m. not in terms of qtty of cement, gravel and sand.

4. You are now violating the principle of "evaluating on equal footing"; also, you cannot adjust the quantities, only prices/amounts;

it's only during the bid evaluation conducted by TWG that qttys were adjusted

5. Considering no.4, NO. As to the technical aspect, non compliant or patently insufficient bids should be disqualified;

Submitted BOQ reflected the required volume of 300 cu m.

6. Computational errors in goods and infra is the same. it will only refer to arithmetical correction of the unit and total costs, in figures and in words;

how about in coming up with a Class A mix in terms of cement, gravel, sand?

7. No. Quantities should not be variable. Adjustments apply to prices only. Otherwise, you may be evaluating on "different footing" like comparing a bagger mix with a ready mix, which should not be;

should't they both use the same quantities of cement, gravel and sand no matter what the method of mixing is to attain Class A mix and properties?

8. You don't ask anyone if they will deliver because obviously all of them will if awarded the contract (just to win it); if the original bid was insufficient as to the volume, they should not be allowed to modify or improve their bid by "promising to complete the quantity"; there are rules on evaluation, and we are bound to comply objectively;

the agency BAC only mentioned this in passing. there was no modification or amendment made to the original bid. the bidders were informed of the result of the evaluation using the method done by the TWG to normalize the bids. all bids were treated in the same manner of evaluation and recalculation.
All other bidders did not vary much in coming up with Class A mix except for this Bidder A which showed 25% less quantities of cement, gravel and sand to achieve a Class A mix.

Hope these help. Smile

Thanks again engrjhez

mealigan
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 19
Company/Agency : Bicol University College of Engineering
Occupation/Designation : Asst. Dean / Procurement Trainor
Registration date : 2008-09-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:31 am

mealigan wrote:
engrjhez® wrote:
mealigan wrote:Here is a case which I would like to throw to the body for comments (based from an actual procurement project of a govt agency):
1. Project is for a road construction with a concrete volume of 300 cu. m. Class "A" mix as specified.
2. Bidder A is lowest bidder as read based from financial bid and Bill Of Quantities (BOQ).
3. Bidder A's detailed estimate showed quantities for cement, gravel and sand which will not satisfy Class A mix and the required concrete volume. Resulting unit cost which are lower however were used to compute cost in the bill of quantities, hence, bid was lowest as read. i.e. lower unit cost x concrete volume = cost for concrete volume of 330 cu. m.
4. TWG of agency BAC pointed out that the quantities as shown in the Detailed Estimates will not satisfy the required concrete volume hence Bidder A should not be declared as lowest calculated bid. A case of computational errors.
His evaluation involved rectifying computational errors such as adjusting the quantities of cement, sand and gravel to come up with a Class A mixture for Bidder A using Bidder A'S unit prices for the materials. In the process, Bidder A was re-ranked as 3rd lowest bidder.
5. Query of Procuring Entity: Is the TWG correct in his evaluation that the bid of Bidder A be recomputed using Class A mix, hence resulting to an increased bid.
6. How do we define "computational errors" in infra projects.
7. IS it okay to use lesser quantities in the detailed estimates so as to come up with lower unit costs and use it to cost out unit quantities in the BOQ.
8. Bidder A says that he will deliver the specified concrete volume if awarded the contract since his BOQ shows the req'd volume.
Your comments are highly appreciated.

Comments

Thanks for the reply:

What I see here is a partly ambiguous requirement that lead to several complications.
1. 300cu.m is okay as a quantity, but how do we define Class "A". Is it included the specifications?;

Class A was specified in the bid documents.

2. Okay, Bidder A is the lowest in the Abstract as Read;
3. Is it not a ready mix concrete? if not, are the quantities for cement, sand, and gravel not given? because i believe they should be;

Bid docs did not mention as ready mix concrete; BOQ was given in terms of unit quantity of 300 cu m. not in terms of qtty of cement, gravel and sand.

4. You are now violating the principle of "evaluating on equal footing"; also, you cannot adjust the quantities, only prices/amounts;

it's only during the bid evaluation conducted by TWG that qttys were adjusted

5. Considering no.4, NO. As to the technical aspect, non compliant or patently insufficient bids should be disqualified;

Submitted BOQ reflected the required volume of 300 cu m.

6. Computational errors in goods and infra is the same. it will only refer to arithmetical correction of the unit and total costs, in figures and in words;

how about in coming up with a Class A mix in terms of cement, gravel, sand?

7. No. Quantities should not be variable. Adjustments apply to prices only. Otherwise, you may be evaluating on "different footing" like comparing a bagger mix with a ready mix, which should not be;

should't they both use the same quantities of cement, gravel and sand no matter what the method of mixing is to attain Class A mix and properties?

8. You don't ask anyone if they will deliver because obviously all of them will if awarded the contract (just to win it); if the original bid was insufficient as to the volume, they should not be allowed to modify or improve their bid by "promising to complete the quantity"; there are rules on evaluation, and we are bound to comply objectively;

the agency BAC only mentioned this in passing. there was no modification or amendment made to the original bid. the bidders were informed of the result of the evaluation using the method done by the TWG to normalize the bids. all bids were treated in the same manner of evaluation and recalculation.
All other bidders did not vary much in coming up with Class A mix except for this Bidder A which showed 25% less quantities of cement, gravel and sand to achieve a Class A mix.

Hope these help. Smile

Thanks again engrjhez

I see that you have several arguments on the quantity 300 cu.m and Class A mix. I believe we should focus on that.

First, my question is: If we say Class A mix, is it a universally accepted standalone specification? I believe it's not.

Class A refers to a mix proportion for cement, aggregates, and water so as to attain a range of strength required. I bet you will see different meanings and proportions vary from one textbook to another. To be more specific, you should have identified the required strength (after n-days) and whether the concrete mix is thru conventional (bagger mix) or by batch mix (ready-mix). Having said that, it would be out of the question if the following are defined outright:

For bagger mix:
__a__ bags Cement (kg/bag? and indicate if portland/pozzolan)
__b__ cu.m sand (indicate specs)
__c__ cu.m gravel (indicate gravel size)
(where a, b and c are the specific quantities)

For ready mix:
300 cu.m Ready mix Concrete 2,500 psi at 28-days

In fact there should be more details if you specify Class A. Here is an example of a company specification for Class A:



I hope you see the point. You cannot just say that you use 1❌y proportioning. There are a lot of factors. This can be eliminated by specifying completely the details or you may conveniently get away by specifying ready mix. Further, you do not test materials (ASTM standards) and determine the class of mix, as it will not apply to batch mix as well.

Again, you are NOT allowed to change the quantities during evaluation. Only PRICE is adjusted. You do not make a bidder compliant by adjusting their quantities, but rather, you adjust the prices reasonably by applying the IRR. Smile
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2480
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Bill of Quantities vs Detailed Estimates: Civil Works

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum