Submission of LOI

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

888th post

Post by engrjhez® on Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:54 pm

RDV @ GPPPI wrote:
If the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry (for goods/infra/consulting services), the prospective bidder will have to submit within the date prescribed in the bidding documents its Letter of Intent (LOI) first (if it is already registered) and/or application for eligibility (if it is not yet registered or if it has to update its registration), before it could be allowed to submit its bid.

Supposed the procuring entity established and maintains a registry (at least manually, because electronic registry connotes use of PhilGEPS facility or support for online bid submission which is has to be technically established first) of suppliers/contractors. Registration period is defined in the Bidding Documents. But even if the bidder does not participate in registration (ie before the deadline of submission of bids), they are still allowed to submit bids provided they have secured and paid for the bidding documents fee. The class "A" documents for registration purposes must be submitted completely as required by the IRR. However, for those bidders who have registered/updated their firm and was issued a "Certificate of Registration" or COR to that effect, they may use that issuance in lieu of class "A" eligibility requirements. In the end, registration remains as a tool to facilitate eligibility check, thus not mandatory. My questions are:

  1. Is this practice correct?
  2. Can registration be made mandatory? As it is required for drawing up a (short)list under Section 53.1.2.2?
  3. Registration is NOT tantamount to eligibility - true or false?

This is actually my 888th post. And may I again thank the Lord for giving me the strength, health and wisdom that I reached this far. To many, 888 means eternity. But to me, it is just another number that adds to endless efforts to uphold good governance.

May I also take this opportunity to thank every fellow forum members in helping each one in successfully achieving the very essence of this forum - whether 888 or not.

Mabuhay tayong lahat! cheers
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: Submission of LOI

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:05 am

I can answer the third one registration is not tantamount to eligibility.

Registration with the PhilGEPS is not an accreditation and thus not tantamount to a finding of eligibility, nor is it a guaranty that a manufacturer, supplier, distributor, contractor or consultant may participate in a public bidding without first being determined to be eligible for that particular public bidding.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:02 am

engrjhez® wrote:
RDV @ GPPPI wrote:
If the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry (for goods/infra/consulting services), the prospective bidder will have to submit within the date prescribed in the bidding documents its Letter of Intent (LOI) first (if it is already registered) and/or application for eligibility (if it is not yet registered or if it has to update its registration), before it could be allowed to submit its bid.

Supposed the procuring entity established and maintains a registry (at least manually, because electronic registry connotes use of PhilGEPS facility or support for online bid submission which is has to be technically established first) of suppliers/contractors. Registration period is defined in the Bidding Documents. But even if the bidder does not participate in registration (ie before the deadline of submission of bids), they are still allowed to submit bids provided they have secured and paid for the bidding documents fee. The class "A" documents for registration purposes must be submitted completely as required by the IRR. However, for those bidders who have registered/updated their firm and was issued a "Certificate of Registration" or COR to that effect, they may use that issuance in lieu of class "A" eligibility requirements. In the end, registration remains as a tool to facilitate eligibility check, thus not mandatory. My questions are:

  1. Is this practice correct?
  2. Can registration be made mandatory? As it is required for drawing up a (short)list under Section 53.1.2.2?
  3. Registration is NOT tantamount to eligibility - true or false?

This is actually my 888th post. And may I again thank the Lord for giving me the strength, health and wisdom that I reached this far. To many, 888 means eternity. But to me, it is just another number that adds to endless efforts to uphold good governance.

May I also take this opportunity to thank every fellow forum members in helping each one in successfully achieving the very essence of this forum - whether 888 or not.

Mabuhay tayong lahat! cheers

Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR provides as follows:

"If the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system, a prospective bidder, whether or not duly registered in either system, shall submit a written letter of intent and/or its application for eligibility and latest Class "A" documents, to the BAC on or before the deadline specified in the Bidding Documents. Any application for eligibility or updates submitted after the deadline for the submission of the letter of intent shall not be considered for the bidding at hand."

Based on the foregoing provisions, the following are clear:

1. That provision is applicable only if the procuring entity maintains an electronic registry system, not a manual system. The PhilGEPS registry system does not yet accept submission of Class A documents, hence it would not be applicable. An example of a procuring entity that maintains its own electronic system is DPWH;

2. If a procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry system, a prospective bidder who is already registered will submit a written LOI to the BAC on or before the deadline specified in the bidding documents;

3. If a prospective bidder is not yet registered in that system, he will submit an LOI and application for eligibility, together with his Class "A" documents, to the BAC on or before the deadline specified in the bidding documents;

4. If a prospective bidder submits his application for eligibility or updates after the deadline for submission of the LOI, it shall no longer be accepted; hence, he could no longer participate in the bidding. He cannot submit his Class A documents as part of his Technical Proposal, which is still allowed if the procuring entity has no registry or if it is maintaining only a manual registry, in which case the Certificate of Registration issued by the BAC will take the place of the Class A documents.

With the preceding provision, I think it has pretty much answered the first 2 questions raised by engrjhez.

On question No. 3, the answer is TRUE (for the moment). As I have mentioned in Item 1 above, the PhilGEPS registry system does not yet accept submission of Class A documents and, therefore, registration in the PhilGEPS does not amount to the finding of eligibility. And even if it does, there will still be a system of eligibility check that has to be performed even if a bidder is already registered in the system, particularly to find out if the registered supplier/contractor has updated Class A documents.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Mon Mar 08, 2010 6:06 pm

Actually section 23.4 mentions a manual or an electronic registry for PEs. If A PE maintains a registry and the prospective bidder already has his file in that registry current and updated said bidder submits LOI to use those docs. IF new, the bidder submits an application for eligibility together with the class A docs. this is supported in the BDS for infra (clause 12.1 ITB) hOWEVER, as i have noticed this is not supported in the PBD for Goods although as i have also stated before, i believe the LOI and the application for eligibility should apply for both.
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:00 am

charlie brown wrote:Actually section 23.4 mentions a manual or an electronic registry for PEs. If A PE maintains a registry and the prospective bidder already has his file in that registry current and updated said bidder submits LOI to use those docs. IF new, the bidder submits an application for eligibility together with the class A docs. this is supported in the BDS for infra (clause 12.1 ITB) hOWEVER, as i have noticed this is not supported in the PBD for Goods although as i have also stated before, i believe the LOI and the application for eligibility should apply for both.

Agree that Sec. 23.4 mentions both the manual and the electronic registry. However, Sec. 23.4.3 is specific only for an electronic system and it is only under that sub-section that the requirement of a written LOI is required.

In the case of consulting services, Sec. 24.4.3 likewise mentions both manual and electronic system of registry. However, Sec. 24.4.3.3 under that pertains only to a registry system using PhilGEPS or the procuring entity's own electronic system. Again, there is a requirement for submission of a written LOI in that situation.

I think the intention of the revised IRR is really to remove the requirement for the submission of a written LOI. I believe that an exception was, however, made when the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry system. I am of the impression that at the time the revised IRR was being drafted, the case of DPWH, which has an electronic system, was considered.

From what I know, DPWH has a centralized electronic registry (maintained at its Central Office in Port Area, Manila). A prospective bidder from the Visayas or Mindanao, for example, has to submit his written LOI in the engineering district where he/she wants to participate in the bidding. That LOI will be forwarded to the Central Office (CO) data center which will determine whether that bidder is already registered and has his/her registration current. If not yet registered, he/she will have to submit his Class "A" documents to the CO so that the same will be entered into the data base. The bidder will only get to know if he/she is eligible during the opening of the bid.

In all other caseS, where there is no electronic registry, the submission of a written LOI (even for Infra and Consulting Services, which where required before in IRR-A) is no longer required in the revised IRR.

That is just my take of the revisions made in the new IRR.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Tue Mar 09, 2010 3:33 pm

RDV @ GPPPI wrote:
charlie brown wrote:Actually section 23.4 mentions a manual or an electronic registry for PEs. If A PE maintains a registry and the prospective bidder already has his file in that registry current and updated said bidder submits LOI to use those docs. IF new, the bidder submits an application for eligibility together with the class A docs. this is supported in the BDS for infra (clause 12.1 ITB) hOWEVER, as i have noticed this is not supported in the PBD for Goods although as i have also stated before, i believe the LOI and the application for eligibility should apply for both.

Agree that Sec. 23.4 mentions both the manual and the electronic registry. However, Sec. 23.4.3 is specific only for an electronic system and it is only under that sub-section that the requirement of a written LOI is required.

In the case of consulting services, Sec. 24.4.3 likewise mentions both manual and electronic system of registry. However, Sec. 24.4.3.3 under that pertains only to a registry system using PhilGEPS or the procuring entity's own electronic system. Again, there is a requirement for submission of a written LOI in that situation.

I think the intention of the revised IRR is really to remove the requirement for the submission of a written LOI. I believe that an exception was, however, made when the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry system. I am of the impression that at the time the revised IRR was being drafted, the case of DPWH, which has an electronic system, was considered.

From what I know, DPWH has a centralized electronic registry (maintained at its Central Office in Port Area, Manila). A prospective bidder from the Visayas or Mindanao, for example, has to submit his written LOI in the engineering district where he/she wants to participate in the bidding. That LOI will be forwarded to the Central Office (CO) data center which will determine whether that bidder is already registered and has his/her registration current. If not yet registered, he/she will have to submit his Class "A" documents to the CO so that the same will be entered into the data base. The bidder will only get to know if he/she is eligible during the opening of the bid.

In all other caseS, where there is no electronic registry, the submission of a written LOI (even for Infra and Consulting Services, which where required before in IRR-A) is no longer required in the revised IRR.

That is just my take of the revisions made in the new IRR.

My understanding is that the LOI is used to inform the BAC that the prospective bidder's Class A docs are already with the PE and is current and updated and the bidder intends (thus the LOI) to use those docs instead of submiting new ones. This is done even when the procuring entity does not maintain a registry at all. But more so if there is a registry. this is regardless also of whether the registry system of the PE is electronic or manual. If the prospective Bidder is a first time bidder or needs to update his Class A doc for purposes of participating in a bidding, said bidder writes a letter of intent to participate and at the same time apply for eligibility or updating whichever is applicable.
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:37 pm

charlie brown wrote:
RDV @ GPPPI wrote:
charlie brown wrote:Actually section 23.4 mentions a manual or an electronic registry for PEs. If A PE maintains a registry and the prospective bidder already has his file in that registry current and updated said bidder submits LOI to use those docs. IF new, the bidder submits an application for eligibility together with the class A docs. this is supported in the BDS for infra (clause 12.1 ITB) hOWEVER, as i have noticed this is not supported in the PBD for Goods although as i have also stated before, i believe the LOI and the application for eligibility should apply for both.

Agree that Sec. 23.4 mentions both the manual and the electronic registry. However, Sec. 23.4.3 is specific only for an electronic system and it is only under that sub-section that the requirement of a written LOI is required.

In the case of consulting services, Sec. 24.4.3 likewise mentions both manual and electronic system of registry. However, Sec. 24.4.3.3 under that pertains only to a registry system using PhilGEPS or the procuring entity's own electronic system. Again, there is a requirement for submission of a written LOI in that situation.

I think the intention of the revised IRR is really to remove the requirement for the submission of a written LOI. I believe that an exception was, however, made when the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry system. I am of the impression that at the time the revised IRR was being drafted, the case of DPWH, which has an electronic system, was considered.

From what I know, DPWH has a centralized electronic registry (maintained at its Central Office in Port Area, Manila). A prospective bidder from the Visayas or Mindanao, for example, has to submit his written LOI in the engineering district where he/she wants to participate in the bidding. That LOI will be forwarded to the Central Office (CO) data center which will determine whether that bidder is already registered and has his/her registration current. If not yet registered, he/she will have to submit his Class "A" documents to the CO so that the same will be entered into the data base. The bidder will only get to know if he/she is eligible during the opening of the bid.

In all other caseS, where there is no electronic registry, the submission of a written LOI (even for Infra and Consulting Services, which where required before in IRR-A) is no longer required in the revised IRR.

That is just my take of the revisions made in the new IRR.

My understanding is that the LOI is used to inform the BAC that the prospective bidder's Class A docs are already with the PE and is current and updated and the bidder intends (thus the LOI) to use those docs instead of submiting new ones. This is done even when the procuring entity does not maintain a registry at all. But more so if there is a registry. this is regardless also of whether the registry system of the PE is electronic or manual. If the prospective Bidder is a first time bidder or needs to update his Class A doc for purposes of participating in a bidding, said bidder writes a letter of intent to participate and at the same time apply for eligibility or updating whichever is applicable.

I hope GPPB-TSO could clarify it here in this forum (paging Pritong Kandule and Niwram).

When I asked Dir. Ruby Alvarez, Executive Director of GPPB-TSO during our trainers training, in September 2009, to clarify if the submission of written LOI is only required if the procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry, she answered in the affirmative.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by dlsn on Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:24 pm

Sec. 23.4.2 of the IRR states that when a bidder maintains a current and updated file of his Class "A" Documents with a procuring entity, he shall be issued a certification to that effect, which he shall then submit in lieu of the actual Class "A" Documents. He does not have to submit an LOI to get that certification. He is entitled to that certification whenever he updates his file. And the fact that he submits the certification as part of his bid is sufficient proof that he intends to use the file of his Class "A" Documents maintained with the procuring entity for purposes of compliance with the eligibility requirements.

The intention is to require LOI only when the procuring entity uses an electronic registry system (PhilGEPS or its own); thus the qualifying phrase "if the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system". Also, please note that the submission of LOI only appears in Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR, not in Sec. 23.4.2.
avatar
dlsn
Moderator
Moderator

Male Number of posts : 52
Company/Agency : GPPB-TSO
Occupation/Designation : Deputy Executive Director
Registration date : 2008-07-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Mar 09, 2010 8:56 pm

dlsn wrote:Sec. 23.4.2 of the IRR states that when a bidder maintains a current and updated file of his Class "A" Documents with a procuring entity, he shall be issued a certification to that effect, which he shall then submit in lieu of the actual Class "A" Documents. He does not have to submit an LOI to get that certification. He is entitled to that certification whenever he updates his file. And the fact that he submits the certification as part of his bid is sufficient proof that he intends to use the file of his Class "A" Documents maintained with the procuring entity for purposes of compliance with the eligibility requirements.

The intention is to require LOI only when the procuring entity uses an electronic registry system (PhilGEPS or its own); thus the qualifying phrase "if the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system". Also, please note that the submission of LOI only appears in Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR, not in Sec. 23.4.2.

Thank you, dlsn, for finally clarifying. I hope the issue is now settled with that clarification from GPPB-TSO.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:07 am

dlsn wrote:Sec. 23.4.2 of the IRR states that when a bidder maintains a current and updated file of his Class "A" Documents with a procuring entity, he shall be issued a certification to that effect, which he shall then submit in lieu of the actual Class "A" Documents. He does not have to submit an LOI to get that certification. He is entitled to that certification whenever he updates his file. And the fact that he submits the certification as part of his bid is sufficient proof that he intends to use the file of his Class "A" Documents maintained with the procuring entity for purposes of compliance with the eligibility requirements.

The intention is to require LOI only when the procuring entity uses an electronic registry system (PhilGEPS or its own); thus the qualifying phrase "if the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system". Also, please note that the submission of LOI only appears in Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR, not in Sec. 23.4.2.

It is good that the GPPB has made a stand on the issue and i respect it. However let me just pose a few questions based on circumstances that i can think of or has experienced. first, how can the maintenance of an electronic or a manual sytem be such different from the other that a prospective bidder submits an LOI when he intends to be registered or intends to update his files in an electronic registry maintained by the PE and NOT when it is only manual? Second, section 23.4.2 may not mention the LOI and you might be correct in saying that the certification is automatically given when a bidders registers or updates his file with the PE. However, how about PEs who do not formally maintain a registry but is conducting a lot of bidding activities. suppose a prospective bidder has just been declared eligibile by the PE in a very recent previous bidding (say 2 days before) and would like or intends to use the same eligibility documents (to save on cost) in the next bidding? How can the BAC issue a certification without the prospective bidder informing the BAC of its intentions? Are we saying now that the said eligibility docs cannot be used by the propective bidder even when these are the same docS we are talking about?

Further, in the submission of the eligibility docs to update his/her class A docs in the PEs registry is there no covering letter to signify this intent to register or update. should the prospective bidder just submit the docs without an accompanying letter? If a letter would help clarify the intent of the bidder, (i.e. to bid or update) can this not be called LOI also?
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:33 pm

charlie brown wrote:
dlsn wrote:Sec. 23.4.2 of the IRR states that when a bidder maintains a current and updated file of his Class "A" Documents with a procuring entity, he shall be issued a certification to that effect, which he shall then submit in lieu of the actual Class "A" Documents. He does not have to submit an LOI to get that certification. He is entitled to that certification whenever he updates his file. And the fact that he submits the certification as part of his bid is sufficient proof that he intends to use the file of his Class "A" Documents maintained with the procuring entity for purposes of compliance with the eligibility requirements.

The intention is to require LOI only when the procuring entity uses an electronic registry system (PhilGEPS or its own); thus the qualifying phrase "if the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system". Also, please note that the submission of LOI only appears in Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR, not in Sec. 23.4.2.

It is good that the GPPB has made a stand on the issue and i respect it. However let me just pose a few questions based on circumstances that i can think of or has experienced. first, how can the maintenance of an electronic or a manual sytem be such different from the other that a prospective bidder submits an LOI when he intends to be registered or intends to update his files in an electronic registry maintained by the PE and NOT when it is only manual?

Electronic Registry involves some software that has "audit trail capabilities" just like the PhilGEPS. With such feature, you must submit LOI with the documents in the prescribed date before the deadline for submission. It even reuires to submit manually Section 8 of the Revised IRR expounded the features of procurement thru electronic means, particularly Sec.8.5.1:

8.5.1. To ensure the widest dissemination of the Invitation to Bid/Request for Expression
of Interest, manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, contractors and/or consultants
shall register with the PhilGEPS. All Procuring Entities already maintaining an
electronic registry upon the effectivity of this IRR shall integrate the same with
that of the PhilGEPS.
A manufacturer, supplier, distributor, contractor or
consultant duly registered with the PhilGEPS may participate in a procurement
undertaken by any procuring entity, provided that the said manufacturer, supplier,
distributor, contractor or consultant maintains its registration current and updated
in accordance with the provisions of this IRR, and its registration is proper and
relevant to the particular type of procurement.
And should the PE establishes a Registry under the Revised IRR, the same must be integrated or be the PhilGEPS itself. Procedures outlined in Section 8 shall be explanatory.
charlie brown wrote:
Second, section 23.4.2 may not mention the LOI and you might be correct in saying that the certification is automatically given when a bidders registers or updates his file with the PE. However, how about PEs who do not formally maintain a registry but is conducting a lot of bidding activities. suppose a prospective bidder has just been declared eligibile by the PE in a very recent previous bidding (say 2 days before) and would like or intends to use the same eligibility documents (to save on cost) in the next bidding? How can the BAC issue a certification without the prospective bidder informing the BAC of its intentions? Are we saying now that the said eligibility docs cannot be used by the propective bidder even when these are the same docS we are talking about?

Further, in the submission of the eligibility docs to update his/her class A docs in the PEs registry is there no covering letter to signify this intent to register or update. should the prospective bidder just submit the docs without an accompanying letter? If a letter would help clarify the intent of the bidder, (i.e. to bid or update) can this not be called LOI also?
Section 8.3.2. stipulates that "The rules and regulations governing the manual method of procurement shall apply whenever the rules in this Section are silent...x x x". This also applies where manual registration is being used. Regardless of the number and occurrence of public bidding, the primary purpose of registry shall still be to "facilitate eligibility check".

In our practice (manual registry), we included a schedule for Registration long before the deadline for submission of bids. Interested bidders may submit their Class "A" documents with or without cover page or LOI. The BAC will then issue a COR if the required documents was satisfactorily complied. On the other hand, if the bidder does not register during the prescribed period, they may still join the bidding provided that all eligibility documents are submitted with the technical envelope. If the said bidder passed the eligibility check, we automatically include copies of such documents in our manual registry and we issue to that effect, a certificate of registration (COR) to the said bidder (even if they are not declared as the LCRB/HRRB/SCRB/SRRB later).

Very Happy
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: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:05 pm

engrjhez® wrote:
charlie brown wrote:
dlsn wrote:Sec. 23.4.2 of the IRR states that when a bidder maintains a current and updated file of his Class "A" Documents with a procuring entity, he shall be issued a certification to that effect, which he shall then submit in lieu of the actual Class "A" Documents. He does not have to submit an LOI to get that certification. He is entitled to that certification whenever he updates his file. And the fact that he submits the certification as part of his bid is sufficient proof that he intends to use the file of his Class "A" Documents maintained with the procuring entity for purposes of compliance with the eligibility requirements.

The intention is to require LOI only when the procuring entity uses an electronic registry system (PhilGEPS or its own); thus the qualifying phrase "if the procuring entity maintains a registry system using the PhilGEPS or its own electronic system". Also, please note that the submission of LOI only appears in Sec. 23.4.3 of the IRR, not in Sec. 23.4.2.

It is good that the GPPB has made a stand on the issue and i respect it. However let me just pose a few questions based on circumstances that i can think of or has experienced. first, how can the maintenance of an electronic or a manual sytem be such different from the other that a prospective bidder submits an LOI when he intends to be registered or intends to update his files in an electronic registry maintained by the PE and NOT when it is only manual?

Electronic Registry involves some software that has "audit trail capabilities" just like the PhilGEPS. With such feature, you must submit LOI with the documents in the prescribed date before the deadline for submission. It even reuires to submit manually Section 8 of the Revised IRR expounded the features of procurement thru electronic means, particularly Sec.8.5.1:

8.5.1. To ensure the widest dissemination of the Invitation to Bid/Request for Expression
of Interest, manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, contractors and/or consultants
shall register with the PhilGEPS. All Procuring Entities already maintaining an
electronic registry upon the effectivity of this IRR shall integrate the same with
that of the PhilGEPS.
A manufacturer, supplier, distributor, contractor or
consultant duly registered with the PhilGEPS may participate in a procurement
undertaken by any procuring entity, provided that the said manufacturer, supplier,
distributor, contractor or consultant maintains its registration current and updated
in accordance with the provisions of this IRR, and its registration is proper and
relevant to the particular type of procurement.
And should the PE establishes a Registry under the Revised IRR, the same must be integrated or be the PhilGEPS itself. Procedures outlined in Section 8 shall be explanatory.

In our practice (manual registry), we included a schedule for Registration long before the deadline for submission of bids. Interested bidders may submit their Class "A" documents with or without cover page or LOI. The BAC will then issue a COR if the required documents was satisfactorily complied. On the other hand, if the bidder does not register during the prescribed period, they may still join the bidding provided that all eligibility documents are submitted with the technical envelope. If the said bidder passed the eligibility check, we automatically include copies of such documents in our manual registry and we issue to that effect, a certificate of registration (COR) to the said bidder (even if they are not declared as the LCRB/HRRB/SCRB/SRRB later).

Very Happy

The concept of audit trail kasi should be applicable not only to electronic procesess but more so with manual. In fact the concept of an audit trail is long observed in manual transactions even before the mainstreaming of electronic processess. In the absence of a convincing reason i am constrained to believe that the mention of LOI under 23.4.3 is merely to highlight its need particularly for electronic registries. But is does not in any way prohibit the prospective bidder from submitting a letter of intent covering the eleigibility docs submitted to explain whether it is submitted as an update or for new registration. My understanding is that in electronic registries the file could be uploaded separately and thus the need for a written LOI to inform the PE if nothing else. If this is correct then i dont see why it is prohibited to submit the LOI under manual registries.

then of course i also raised the issue of those PEs not maintaining registries but conducts bidding with regularity and thus may possess current and checked eligibility docs of bidders who might want to join in succeeding biddings but intends to use the eligibility docs perviously submitted. i am hoping i can be forgiven for not putting the matter to rest here just yet even tho the gppb has already spoken
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by dlsn on Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:21 am

RDV @ GPPPI wrote:Thank you, dlsn, for finally clarifying. I hope the issue is now settled with that clarification from GPPB-TSO.

charlie brown wrote:It is good that the GPPB has made a stand on the issue and i respect it. However let me just pose a few questions based on circumstances that i can think of or has experienced. first, how can the maintenance of an electronic or a manual sytem be such different from the other that a prospective bidder submits an LOI when he intends to be registered or intends to update his files in an electronic registry maintained by the PE and NOT when it is only manual? Second, section 23.4.2 may not mention the LOI and you might be correct in saying that the certification is automatically given when a bidders registers or updates his file with the PE. However, how about PEs who do not formally maintain a registry but is conducting a lot of bidding activities. suppose a prospective bidder has just been declared eligibile by the PE in a very recent previous bidding (say 2 days before) and would like or intends to use the same eligibility documents (to save on cost) in the next bidding? How can the BAC issue a certification without the prospective bidder informing the BAC of its intentions? Are we saying now that the said eligibility docs cannot be used by the propective bidder even when these are the same docS we are talking about?

Further, in the submission of the eligibility docs to update his/her class A docs in the PEs registry is there no covering letter to signify this intent to register or update. should the prospective bidder just submit the docs without an accompanying letter? If a letter would help clarify the intent of the bidder, (i.e. to bid or update) can this not be called LOI also?


Let me first clarify that my opinions on topics in this forum should not be taken as the stand of the GPPB nor the GPPB-TSO. I am merely relaying what I know and remember from the discussions. Everyone is welcome to question them or pose a contrary view thereon.

Personally, I don't think there is not much of a difference between electronic and manual registry systems that a different rule should be applied to another in terms of notification for its use. However, the intention and decision to have different rules for the two systems is very clear.

In line with the objective to streamline the process and remove unnecessary steps and requirements, the original intention of the GPPB was to remove LOI entirely because the submission of bids is a clearer indication of a bidder's intention to participate in the bidding. However, in view of concerns regarding the effect of removing LOI on the implementation of some existing electronic registry systems, the GPPB decided to include that for electronic registry.

For PEs that do not yet have a manual registry system in place, bidders will have to submit their eligibility documents for every project they intend to join. The BAC cannot issue a certification if it does not formally have a registry system in place. To allow otherwise may only render the integrity of the certification questionable.

There is no need for the bidder to signify that the eligibility documents being submitted as part of his bid is intended to update his documents because that should be a presumption with the registry system. Nevertheless, if you feel the need for the bidder to clarify his intention, you may include that in your forms and call it any name you deem fit. However, in no case shall failure to submit that document be a ground for the bidder's disqualification.
avatar
dlsn
Moderator
Moderator

Male Number of posts : 52
Company/Agency : GPPB-TSO
Occupation/Designation : Deputy Executive Director
Registration date : 2008-07-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:50 pm

dlsn wrote:
RDV @ GPPPI wrote:Thank you, dlsn, for finally clarifying. I hope the issue is now settled with that clarification from GPPB-TSO.

charlie brown wrote:It is good that the GPPB has made a stand on the issue and i respect it. However let me just pose a few questions based on circumstances that i can think of or has experienced. first, how can the maintenance of an electronic or a manual sytem be such different from the other that a prospective bidder submits an LOI when he intends to be registered or intends to update his files in an electronic registry maintained by the PE and NOT when it is only manual? Second, section 23.4.2 may not mention the LOI and you might be correct in saying that the certification is automatically given when a bidders registers or updates his file with the PE. However, how about PEs who do not formally maintain a registry but is conducting a lot of bidding activities. suppose a prospective bidder has just been declared eligibile by the PE in a very recent previous bidding (say 2 days before) and would like or intends to use the same eligibility documents (to save on cost) in the next bidding? How can the BAC issue a certification without the prospective bidder informing the BAC of its intentions? Are we saying now that the said eligibility docs cannot be used by the propective bidder even when these are the same docS we are talking about?

Further, in the submission of the eligibility docs to update his/her class A docs in the PEs registry is there no covering letter to signify this intent to register or update. should the prospective bidder just submit the docs without an accompanying letter? If a letter would help clarify the intent of the bidder, (i.e. to bid or update) can this not be called LOI also?



Let me first clarify that my opinions on topics in this forum should not be taken as the stand of the GPPB nor the GPPB-TSO. I am merely relaying what I know and remember from the discussions. Everyone is welcome to question them or pose a contrary view thereon.

I know your opinion or position in issues taken up in this forum is not considered official stand of the gppb nor the gppb tso - which was why i was a bit surprised when RDV said that the issue is now settled since you have already spoken. But nevertheless i did not mind it because you were correct in pointing out the exact provisions as stated in the law. However, since i also feel that i need to illucidate further on the matter i decided to press on.

Personally, I don't think there is not much of a difference between electronic and manual registry systems that a different rule should be applied to another in terms of notification for its use. However, the intention and decision to have different rules for the two systems is very clear.

the decision is very clear as it is provided in 23.4.3. what is not answered is how are the two systems different that the law should provide different rules on the submission of the LOI

In line with the objective to streamline the process and remove unnecessary steps and requirements, the original intention of the GPPB was to remove LOI entirely because the submission of bids is a clearer indication of a bidder's intention to participate in the bidding. However, in view of concerns regarding the effect of removing LOI on the implementation of some existing electronic registry systems, the GPPB decided to include that for electronic registry.

the same thing could apply to manual registries... and for those not maintaining a manual nor electronic registry but has in file updated/checked class A docs, how can the objective of streamlining and removing unnecessary steps be served if we will not allow the BAC to issue the certification when we are talking about the exact same documents that were checked say a fews days before in another bidding by the PE?

For PEs that do not yet have a manual registry system in place, bidders will have to submit their eligibility documents for every project they intend to join. The BAC cannot issue a certification if it does not formally have a registry system in place. To allow otherwise may only render the integrity of the certification questionable.

How can the integrity be the issue here when the elegibility checking was done during an open competitive public bidding - as opposed to perhaps an eligibility checking without the presence of other parties/observers? in the case of the submission of the LOI and elig docs in advance?

There is no need for the bidder to signify that the eligibility documents being submitted as part of his bid is intended to update his documents because that should be a presumption with the registry system. Nevertheless, if you feel the need for the bidder to clarify his intention, you may include that in your forms and call it any name you deem fit. However, in no case shall failure to submit that document be a ground for the bidder's disqualification.

If that is the presumption in a registry system (and i note that you did not distinguish between manual and electronic) then why ask for LOI in one and not the other?

Lastly, how can we say that a PE is officially operating a registry. is there a need to inform or seek approval from gppb or some agency on the operation of the same?
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by dlsn on Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:46 pm

charlie brown wrote:you were correct in pointing out the exact provisions as stated in the law. However, since i also feel that i need to illucidate further on the matter i decided to press on.

Thank you sir. I appreciate your interest on the rationale behind the policy. I may not be the best person to address your concerns, but I'll try to explain the rationale and keep this discussion as fruitful as it is enlightening.

charlie brown wrote:how can the objective of streamlining and removing unnecessary steps be served if we will not allow the BAC to issue the certification when we are talking about the exact same documents that were checked say a fews days before in another bidding by the PE?

charlie brown wrote:How can the integrity be the issue here when the elegibility checking was done during an open competitive public bidding - as opposed to perhaps an eligibility checking without the presence of other parties/observers? in the case of the submission of the LOI and elig docs in advance?

It's not that the IRR prohibits the BAC from issuing a certification, I think the BAC just can't issue a certificate if it does not have a manual registry system in place. I agree that a certificate may be issued after the BAC has examined the eligibility documents of a bidder during a public bidding, but that should be clear in the PE's manual registry system. Bidders should have sufficient guidance on how eligibility documents will be updated, the manner by which its availability is checked, and the corresponding certificate issued. There must be a procedure properly laid down before actions are made. This is why I said that the integrity of the certificate may be questioned if there is no system in place.

charlie brown wrote:If that is the presumption in a registry system (and i note that you did not distinguish between manual and electronic) then why ask for LOI in one and not the other?


From what I remember, the LOI is supposed to trigger the operation or processing by the electronic registry of the availability of the eligibility documents with the PE, as in the case of the DPWH electronic registry. In the case of manual registry, where the issuance of certificate is applied, the process seems to be reversed in that there is a prior determination of the availability of the eligibility documents with the PE.


charlie brown wrote:Lastly, how can we say that a PE is officially operating a registry. is there a need to inform or seek approval from gppb or some agency on the operation of the same?

There is no need for GPPB approval. It is sufficient that the PE has an established rules/procedure/guidelines on the operation of a registry.
avatar
dlsn
Moderator
Moderator

Male Number of posts : 52
Company/Agency : GPPB-TSO
Occupation/Designation : Deputy Executive Director
Registration date : 2008-07-01

Back to top Go down

Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:36 pm

At the risk of confounding all of us, or confusing those who already have a clearer understanding of the LOI i would like to post the following observations:

1. if the intention of the GPPB was to eliminate the LOI because a clearer manifistation of intent is the submission of the docs in a bidding, and if such intent was not entirely realized as it has to consider the existing electronic registry of the dpwh i believe we need to look closely at what is the previous and current role of the LOI.

1.a The role of the LOI before was to signify a bidder's intent to join a particular bidding for infra and thus submits its eligibility docs together wiith the written LOI. since DPWH maintained a central electronic registry before, the Implementing Units (engineering districts and regional offices) forwards this LOI and the submitted elig docs to manila for cross checking with the database then a list of eligible bidders is generated based on the result. This list is forwarded to the IUs which will become the basis for those who will be allowed to purchase the bid docs.

1.b The current context of the LOI is different in several ways: 1) the intent would be to inform the PE that the bidder intends to use his current file in the PEs registry and include only those docs that are required to update to fit the Class A docs to the particular bidding at hand. an example is the submission of a CLC in case the existing NFCC on file. 2) in the PBD, if the PE maintains an electronic registry, the LOI submitted may substitute for the class A docs themselves (BDS 12.1) In this regard i think an issue can be raised as to whether the provision in the PBD for infra does not contradict with section 23.4.3 considering that in the latter the LOI and/or application for eligibility is submitted BEFORE the deadline stated in the bid docs.

1.c It is clear then that the purpose for the retention of the LOI as stated above at least for those maintaining electronic registries is not served here since the context of the LOI in the revised IRR is different from before.

2) If there was indeed a need to retain the LOI for the purpose of facilitating eligibility checking using an electronic registry, then the same concept could as well apply for manual registries. the only difference between the two is that in electronic registries, the cross checking is done by comparing the documents submitted together with the LOI with the information contained in the database. In the manual registry, the cross checking is done with hard copies of the docs on file as against those hard copies submitted together with the LOI. It could even be proposed that if there is already an electronic or manual database, the mere submission of the LOI plus necessary update docs ( as mentioned above) would suffice since it would only be a matter of checking the database or the folders in the filling cabinet to see if such documents are indeed present. this is perhaps the reason why the BDS 12.1 for infra was so worded. and again, the same can be said for manual registries
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by engrjhez® on Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:04 pm

With due respect, baka pwedeng maki-singit sa 'nosebleed' discussion. Ang katanungan po ni charlie brown ay ganito (sana tama ako):

"may pagkakaiba ba ang manual sa electronic registry at kailangang magsubmit ng LOI sa huli?"

Sana ok lang mag-Taglish kasi feel ko 'nosebleed' na rin ibang readers, ehehe (jok lang). Ganito po yun. Sa manual registry, madali malaman kung merong bidder na may intention sumali. Magsa-submit lang sila ng Class "A" documents during the scheduled registration period. Sa electronic registry, hindi ppwede mai-record ang submission kung walang intention sa sasalihan. Ito ay dahil computer at hindi tao ang nagme-maintain ng registry (although tao ang nag-ooperate). May mga part ng program na mangangailangan ng reference number (na minsa'y mandatory field) ng procurement na sasalihan. Hindi ito magagawa kung basta na lang natin isubmit ang papel. Isa pa, sa electronic system, pwedeng magpasa ng dokumento (maging ang update) electronically. Again, magagawa lang ito kung may LOI na pinanghahawakan ang encoder sa pagbabago (alterations) ng registry files ng sasali . Hindi kasi pwedeng basta na lang magpalit o mag-update ang encoder ng isang electronic registry ng wala syang pinanghahawakan para baguhin yun. Sa side ng bidder, ang receive copy ng LOI ay magsisilbing katunayan na nag-update na sya sa electronic registry (audit trail). Baka pagdating kasi ng bidding, at records ni bidder ay hindi updated - wala syang habol. Doon pumapasok ang integrity at accountability. Sa manual registry, hindi na mahalaga kung saan sasali ang bidder (although mas maganda pa rin ang meron syang cover letter). Wala kasi itong sinusunod na protocol sa pag-store ng files and record. Sa manual kasi, pwdeng simpleng record lang sa logbook, talo-talo na. Or kung merong computer, spreadsheet lang, pwede na - kasi paglilista lang naman ang gagawin. Saka, i-issue-han ng BAC ng certification kung ok records ng bidder. Sa electronic registry, pwede nang hindi mag-issue ng certification kasi ma-che-check naman status nya sa registry. (lalo bang gumulo? haha!)

In short, kailangan ng LOI sa electronic registry para maging "passes" sa mga pagbabagong gagawin sa status ng bidder sa nasabing registry. Ganon ko po sya naintindihan. Very Happy
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: Submission of LOI

Post by amang'65 on Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:12 am

if you dont mind, may i signify my intention?

can we not just simple treat the LOI as parang transmital letter na lang? wherein a bidder/supplier/manufactorer/contractor (o whatever) - signify his/her intention for whatever purpose it should serve whether for purposes of registration or for purposes of compliance in a bidding activity? whether manual o electronic pa yan? whether for goods/infra o consultancy pa yan? parang for formality's sake a bidder simply writes a letter signifying his/her intention kung ano man yung purpose nya (gaya ng na sabi ko - for registration or in compliance to a certain bidding activity) - talo ba ang gobyerno kung ang isang bidder ay nagbigay ng isang sulat na ngasasabing ito ang purpose ko sa sulat na ito? may violation ba? may kaso ba? Very Happy
avatar
amang'65
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Female Number of posts : 282
Company/Agency : City of Baguio
Occupation/Designation : sekretarya
Registration date : 2009-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by engrjhez® on Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:04 pm

amang1965 wrote:if you dont mind, may i signify my intention?

can we not just simple treat the LOI as parang transmital letter na lang? wherein a bidder/supplier/manufactorer/contractor (o whatever) - signify his/her intention for whatever purpose it should serve whether for purposes of registration or for purposes of compliance in a bidding activity? whether manual o electronic pa yan? whether for goods/infra o consultancy pa yan? parang for formality's sake a bidder simply writes a letter signifying his/her intention kung ano man yung purpose nya (gaya ng na sabi ko - for registration or in compliance to a certain bidding activity) - talo ba ang gobyerno kung ang isang bidder ay nagbigay ng isang sulat na ngasasabing ito ang purpose ko sa sulat na ito? may violation ba? may kaso ba? Very Happy

In shorter (kasi short na yung una ko), me problema ba sa pag-submit ng LOI? Kung required man ito sa electronic registry at not required sa manual registry. Tama ba amang? Very Happy
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: Submission of LOI

Post by amang'65 on Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:12 pm

engrjhez® wrote:
amang1965 wrote:if you dont mind, may i signify my intention?

can we not just simple treat the LOI as parang transmital letter na lang? wherein a bidder/supplier/manufactorer/contractor (o whatever) - signify his/her intention for whatever purpose it should serve whether for purposes of registration or for purposes of compliance in a bidding activity? whether manual o electronic pa yan? whether for goods/infra o consultancy pa yan? parang for formality's sake a bidder simply writes a letter signifying his/her intention kung ano man yung purpose nya (gaya ng na sabi ko - for registration or in compliance to a certain bidding activity) - talo ba ang gobyerno kung ang isang bidder ay nagbigay ng isang sulat na ngasasabing ito ang purpose ko sa sulat na ito? may violation ba? may kaso ba? Very Happy

In shorter (kasi short na yung una ko), me problema ba sa pag-submit ng LOI? Kung required man ito sa electronic registry at not required sa manual registry. Tama ba amang? Very Happy


tama ka engr.
avatar
amang'65
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Female Number of posts : 282
Company/Agency : City of Baguio
Occupation/Designation : sekretarya
Registration date : 2009-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:47 pm

engrjhez® wrote:
With due respect, baka pwedeng maki-singit sa 'nosebleed' discussion. Ang katanungan po ni charlie brown ay ganito (sana tama ako):

"may pagkakaiba ba ang manual sa electronic registry at kailangang magsubmit ng LOI sa huli?"

Sana ok lang mag-Taglish kasi feel ko 'nosebleed' na rin ibang readers, ehehe (jok lang). Ganito po yun. Sa manual registry, madali malaman kung merong bidder na may intention sumali. Magsa-submit lang sila ng Class "A" documents during the scheduled registration period. Sa electronic registry, hindi ppwede mai-record ang submission kung walang intention sa sasalihan. Ito ay dahil computer at hindi tao ang nagme-maintain ng registry (although tao ang nag-ooperate). May mga part ng program na mangangailangan ng reference number (na minsa'y mandatory field) ng procurement na sasalihan. Hindi ito magagawa kung basta na lang natin isubmit ang papel. Isa pa, sa electronic system, pwedeng magpasa ng dokumento (maging ang update) electronically. Again, magagawa lang ito kung may LOI na pinanghahawakan ang encoder sa pagbabago (alterations) ng registry files ng sasali . Hindi kasi pwedeng basta na lang magpalit o mag-update ang encoder ng isang electronic registry ng wala syang pinanghahawakan para baguhin yun. Sa side ng bidder, ang receive copy ng LOI ay magsisilbing katunayan na nag-update na sya sa electronic registry (audit trail). Baka pagdating kasi ng bidding, at records ni bidder ay hindi updated - wala syang habol. Doon pumapasok ang integrity at accountability. Sa manual registry, hindi na mahalaga kung saan sasali ang bidder (although mas maganda pa rin ang meron syang cover letter). Wala kasi itong sinusunod na protocol sa pag-store ng files and record. Sa manual kasi, pwdeng simpleng record lang sa logbook, talo-talo na. Or kung merong computer, spreadsheet lang, pwede na - kasi paglilista lang naman ang gagawin. Saka, i-issue-han ng BAC ng certification kung ok records ng bidder. Sa electronic registry, pwede nang hindi mag-issue ng certification kasi ma-che-check naman status nya sa registry. (lalo bang gumulo? haha!)

In short, kailangan ng LOI sa electronic registry para maging "passes" sa mga pagbabagong gagawin sa status ng bidder sa nasabing registry. Ganon ko po sya naintindihan. Very Happy

magandang tanghali engr jhez. maganda ang mga insight mo. halata na marami kang alam tungkol sa electronic registry. hayaan mong ikwento ko rin ang konti kong nalalaman partikular na sa electronic registry ng dpwh ayon na rin sa aking pananaliksik (whew, hirap Embarassed ) hanggang doon lang talaga kaya kong tagalog. Dagdagan ko mixture ng ingles ha?

From what i know of the previous LOI, constructors who are maintaining eligibility docs with the dpwh registry from time to time sends updates without necessarily showing intent to join a particular bidding as yet. there is a cover letter of course but the LOI as contemplated in the old IRR is submitted to signify intent to join a particular bidding. Sabi pa ng nakausap ko, the submission of the updates is made directly to dpwh central office. what is sumitted to the region or district is the LOI and the attached documents for a particular bidding. Ipinapadala din ito sa CO for cross checking with the database. kaya nga daw minsan meron nakalagay na part of the track record as submitted together with the LOI pero di makita sa database kasi nakalimutan magpadala ng bidder ng update sa dpwh CO.

In the previous procedure, the DPWH does not give the certification of eligibility until after the submission of the LOI and the elig docs. for every bidding daw, the bidders submits the track record and in certain instances the financial eligibility docs (CLC if the nfcc ON FILE IS NOT ADEQUATE). this is because every bidding is unique daw that bidders wod need to submit additional documents kahit current na file nila. That was before.

I have no actual exposure to an established manual registry except our own which i cannot define really as a manual registry as yet. However, by the looks of it, the process of encoding the data in an electronic registry based on submitted elig docs is tantamount to the filing of the hardcopies in a folder for each bidder and placed ina filing cabinet. In electronic updating, the encoder does not need the LOI but the docs for updating as is the practice at dpwh. Say nagpadala ang isang constructor ng copies of completed comtracts to update his track record. this will be encoded in the database after verification i suppose. per se, di kailangan ang LOI dito and lalong walang intention na ganoon in the previous IRR. Now in a manual registry ganon din. somebody will file the updates in the filing cabinet and leaves a record of the transaction just like in an electronic registry.

Sa ngayon you will note na iba na purpose ng LOI kahit na sabihin pang it was retained only for purposes of accomodating the system in place of the dpwh. as it is now, the LOI may substitute the class A docs if the PE is maintaining an electronic registry (BDS 12.1). what was a simple letter of intent to join a particular bidding before has now become a document by itself used in substitute of the class A docs already on file in the electronic registry.

it would appear now that insofar as the manual registry is concerned, the appropriate provision would be 23.4.2 in which a bidder shall be issued a certification by the BAC in lieu of the class A.

From my experience, the issuance of the certification is relevant when there is a rebidding with the same eligibility requirements and those already declared eligible would like to join again. this is not clearly covered in the IRR but it makes a lot of sense if only for simplicity, economy, convenience, etc. A certificate issued everytime the bidder updates his file may not always make sense as i have explained, when the NFCC requirement in a particular bidding is higher than what is already on file. Insuch cases, the prospective bidder may now find the need to update his class A docs particularly for that bidding and may thus need a letter to show or inform of such intent hence this can be called LOI. Its not automatic that the PE will understand what the intent of the bidder is particularly if the PE is doing a lot of bidding activities. Its not automatic as i see it even in an electonic registry hence, in instances when the NFCC/CLC requirement is higher than what is on file the prospective bidder has to submit the needed update (e.g. a CLC) JUST SO HE CAN BE ELIGIBLE IN A PARTICULAR BIDDING. for that an LOI is needed and in such instances it could not submitute the class A Docs as stated in the PBD for infra.

Im hoping i am making sense here. pasensya na sa nosebleed.
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by charlie brown on Fri Mar 12, 2010 3:23 pm

amang1965 wrote:if you dont mind, may i signify my intention?

can we not just simple treat the LOI as parang transmital letter na lang? wherein a bidder/supplier/manufactorer/contractor (o whatever) - signify his/her intention for whatever purpose it should serve whether for purposes of registration or for purposes of compliance in a bidding activity? whether manual o electronic pa yan? whether for goods/infra o consultancy pa yan? parang for formality's sake a bidder simply writes a letter signifying his/her intention kung ano man yung purpose nya (gaya ng na sabi ko - for registration or in compliance to a certain bidding activity) - talo ba ang gobyerno kung ang isang bidder ay nagbigay ng isang sulat na ngasasabing ito ang purpose ko sa sulat na ito? may violation ba? may kaso ba? Very Happy

your LOI is acknowledged sir amang1965 Smile

Yon na nga eh. As i see it the LOI has evolved from a document to trigger the process of eligibility checking for infra/consultancy to a document that could substitute the class a docs. the revision to remove the separate eligibility checking was smart and commendable given the notoriety of dpwh infra biddings (daw ha). However, if that is the case why not include those maintaining manual registries because as i see it other that the method of keeping and consolidating the data, parehas lang ang electronic and manual
avatar
charlie brown
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 218
Company/Agency : national government
Occupation/Designation : BAC Chair
Registration date : 2010-01-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:04 am

charlie brown wrote:
amang1965 wrote:if you dont mind, may i signify my intention?

can we not just simple treat the LOI as parang transmital letter na lang? wherein a bidder/supplier/manufactorer/contractor (o whatever) - signify his/her intention for whatever purpose it should serve whether for purposes of registration or for purposes of compliance in a bidding activity? whether manual o electronic pa yan? whether for goods/infra o consultancy pa yan? parang for formality's sake a bidder simply writes a letter signifying his/her intention kung ano man yung purpose nya (gaya ng na sabi ko - for registration or in compliance to a certain bidding activity) - talo ba ang gobyerno kung ang isang bidder ay nagbigay ng isang sulat na ngasasabing ito ang purpose ko sa sulat na ito? may violation ba? may kaso ba? Very Happy

your LOI is acknowledged sir amang1965 Smile

Yon na nga eh. As i see it the LOI has evolved from a document to trigger the process of eligibility checking for infra/consultancy to a document that could substitute the class a docs. the revision to remove the separate eligibility checking was smart and commendable given the notoriety of dpwh infra biddings (daw ha). However, if that is the case why not include those maintaining manual registries because as i see it other that the method of keeping and consolidating the data, parehas lang ang electronic and manual

I think the reason for removing the requirement for submission of LOI (except if procuring entity is maintaining an electronic registry) is because some procuring entities would only give a short period of time (less than a week) from advertisement/posting for the submission of LOI. Of course, failure to submit LOI would disqualify the bidder from buying bid docs. We cannot help but suspect that a favored bidder would be able to comply with the LOI submission requirement, to the detriment of the others. The revised IRR has made it clear that the bidding documents should be available from date of posting (for goods and infra) until bid submission, but that would be possible if submission of LOI before the stated deadline becomes the basis for allowing a bidder to purchase bid docs.

There would be no problem if the bidder still wishes to submit an LOI or any intention to participate or apply for eligibility even if it is not required, but there would be a problem if it will be required by the procuring entity even though it is not necessary. In short, the evolution in the requirement for the submission of LOI is to prevent its abuse by procuring entities by putting another hurdle in the participation of other qualified and interested bidders.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

make it more clear

Post by firstlady_5167 on Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:16 pm

hello GPPPI people! ang hirap talagang intindihin yung explanation regarding sa LOI. In our case we are requiring interested bidders to submit their LOI and Class "A" documents pero wala po kaming electronic registry system (papano ba gawin yon?) We only have the manual registry system. Can you pls explain it again? Baka kasi mali na ang ginagawa namin. Thank you po. . .happy weekend!!!
avatar
firstlady_5167
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 60
Company/Agency : City Government of Tacloban
Occupation/Designation : Asst. Statistician/BAC Sec
Registration date : 2009-07-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by firstlady_5167 on Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:25 pm

sir. . .can you show me a sample of the context of the LOI in the Revised IRR? Thank you po uli
avatar
firstlady_5167
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 60
Company/Agency : City Government of Tacloban
Occupation/Designation : Asst. Statistician/BAC Sec
Registration date : 2009-07-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Submission of LOI

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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