Latest:
Bid losers may contest InterRoute's EMAC win
16:47 05 Jan 2005
|
Losing bidders are set to appeal against the award to InterRoute
(Raynesway/Mott MacDonald/Serco) of the Highways Agency's (HA)
£250m to £400m Enhanced Managing Agent Contractor (EMAC)
agreement for Area 2.
InterRoute was named the preferred bidder for the Devon, Wiltshire and Gloucester scheme nearly two months ago (CJ 27 October). The other bidders on the scheme's shortlist expressed their anger, alleging that InterRoute was "squeezed" on to the shortlist, even though it had a low-ranking Capability Assessment Toolkit (CAT) score.
Changes to the awards procedure (in line with EU procurement laws), allow any of the scheme's losing bidders to contest the award.
The losing bidders were: Amey/Mouchel; Optima (Accord/
Jarvis/Atkins); Integrated High-ways Services (Edmund Nuttall/Lafarge/WSP/FaberMaunsell); Carillion/Parsons Brinckerhoff; and Networx (AWG/Capita).
The new changes mean the HA has to notify the losing bidders two weeks before the award of a contract to allow a full debrief and a chance for the companies to contest an award if they don't agree with the scheme's procurement process.
"We are definitely considering some sort of appeal," one losing bidder said. "We don't blame the procurement team for the problem. It was a regional change at the last minute to allow InterRoute into the bidding.
"How did InterRoute manage to get on to the shortlist, which should have only contained five bidders? How was InterRoute allowed to even enter the bidding as its CAT score was so low?"
The HA has maintained that InterRoute was only allowed into the bidding due to the "closeness" of the bid submissions.
Dave Parker, the HA supply chain manager who helped
co-ordinate the award of contract, said he was "unaware" of any intention to contest the award.
Any appeal would be the first of its kind, and, as such, Parker was unclear what the next step would be or how much it would hold up the scheme's progress.
"A lot would depend on what the objections are," he said.
InterRoute was named the preferred bidder for the Devon, Wiltshire and Gloucester scheme nearly two months ago (CJ 27 October). The other bidders on the scheme's shortlist expressed their anger, alleging that InterRoute was "squeezed" on to the shortlist, even though it had a low-ranking Capability Assessment Toolkit (CAT) score.
Changes to the awards procedure (in line with EU procurement laws), allow any of the scheme's losing bidders to contest the award.
The losing bidders were: Amey/Mouchel; Optima (Accord/
ADVERTISEMENT
Jarvis/Atkins); Integrated High-ways Services (Edmund Nuttall/Lafarge/WSP/FaberMaunsell); Carillion/Parsons Brinckerhoff; and Networx (AWG/Capita).
The new changes mean the HA has to notify the losing bidders two weeks before the award of a contract to allow a full debrief and a chance for the companies to contest an award if they don't agree with the scheme's procurement process.
"We are definitely considering some sort of appeal," one losing bidder said. "We don't blame the procurement team for the problem. It was a regional change at the last minute to allow InterRoute into the bidding.
"How did InterRoute manage to get on to the shortlist, which should have only contained five bidders? How was InterRoute allowed to even enter the bidding as its CAT score was so low?"
The HA has maintained that InterRoute was only allowed into the bidding due to the "closeness" of the bid submissions.
Dave Parker, the HA supply chain manager who helped
co-ordinate the award of contract, said he was "unaware" of any intention to contest the award.
Any appeal would be the first of its kind, and, as such, Parker was unclear what the next step would be or how much it would hold up the scheme's progress.
"A lot would depend on what the objections are," he said.
ADVERTISEMENT
Most Viewed Articles
ADVERTISEMENT