madhya pradesh metro rail co limited · madhya pradesh metro rail co limited ... 2nd pre-bid...

of 24

Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited Address -: First floor Palika Bhawan, Shivaji Nagar, Bhopal – 462016 Madhya Pradesh (India)

(Ph:-0755-2552730) Email id: [email protected]

No: /MRTS/2016/ 3872 Dated:20 /12/2016

Minutes of the 2nd

Pre-Bid Meeting/Conference regarding selection of General Consultant for M.P. Metro Rail Projects

RFP No. 01/GC/MPMRCL/2016 Dated 06/05/2016

2nd

Pre-Bid meeting regarding selection of General Consultant for M.P. Metro rail projects was organized at Directorate of Urban

Administration and Development at 11:00 AM on 29th

November 2016 in the presence of Managing Director, MPMRCL, members of

tender committee of MPMRCL and representatives of various consultancy firms. List of participants is enclosed as Annexure-I. After

due deliberations, the reply on clarifications sought towards RFQ cum RFP regarding selection of General Consultant for M.P. Metro

Rail Projects are furnished here under :

S.No Section/Clause/

Page No.

RFP Excerpt/ Title Clarifications Sought MPMRCL’s Reply

1. Section 1 : Letter

of Invitation

Point No. 3

Page No. 7

and

Section2 : Part II

Selection

Procedure-

Datasheet,

Clause 4,

Method of

Selection

Page no.36

Method of selection:

Quality and Cost Based

Selection (QCBS)-70:30

Since this project is based on

Bilateral/Multilateral funding and as per

International funded projects, Quality is of

paramount importance, the method of

selection should be revised to at least

80:20 instead of 70:30 so that the quality of

the project may be maintained. This may

please be accepted.

Provision of RFP shall prevail

of 24


Page No.


2. Section 1 : Letter

of Invitation

Clause No. 7,

Page No. 8

Schedule of important

dates for this selection

process

Extension of Time :

The proposal submission date is mentioned

as 5th

January 2017 online and 6th

January 2017 physical copy.

We have experienced that during Christmas

celebration most of the experts especially

other than India tend to go on a long

vacation and do not respond to the mails or

any communication which hampers in

compiling their CVs and other details which

are integral part of the submission

document.

We therefore request you to extend the date

of submission from six weeks further as for

such a magnitude of CVs and taking consent

will take time. Hence it is requested that the

due date may be revised to 16th

February

2017 online and 17th

February 2017

physical copy.

Addendum is being issued

separately

3. Section-2

(Part –I),Selection

procedure- ITC,

Clause 3.1,

Page No. 13

Introduction to bidder for

e -tendering.

Please confirm whether we have to submit

the financial proposal also physically along

with the technical proposal.

Financial Proposal will be

submitted online only whereas

technical proposal will be

submitted online as well as

physically.

4. Section 2

Part I- ITC,

clause 3.1

Page No. 15,

EMD for INR 40 million

(rupees forty million

only) comprising of INR

10 Million in the form of

We request that the EMD be accepted in the

form of a Bank Guarantee as this is standard

practice. Furthermore request for the

reduction of the EMD from INR 40 million


of 24


Page No.


Section 2 : Part

II- Datasheet

Clause No. 14

Page No. 37

DD and balance in the

form of BG, and all

relevant

enclosures….envelop

stated above.

to INR 20 million

5. Section 2, Part 1.

Clause 8.6

Page No.22 and

Section 7: SCC

Clause No. 10

and

Page No. 203 of

SCC

Clause 4.6 of

GCC, Page No.

194 and

Sr. No. 7

Addendum-III

Replacement of key

experts…….imposed for

each week.

We consider this clause as punitive and

counterproductive to the delivery of the assignment.

This clause seems to be of a regulatory nature rather

than a facilitating nature. Consultants have only a

certain level of control on the choice of staff whether

to continue in a particular job or not. Thus penalizing

the consultant for the leaving of a staff (which legally

is not in the consultant’s control) does not seem to be

in line with international guidelines such as provided

for by the World Bank / ADB. These risks will

ultimately be passed on to the client.

With so many projects in India running concurrently

it is inevitable that staff will move between

companies and projects. The client is contracting the

consultant for the delivery of a service and not for

manpower supply. The consultants are bound to

deliver a particular service even if the staff has left

and this risk is acceptable to consultants.

We request for a total deletion of these penalties.


6. Section 2 , Part-1

selection

procedure-ITC

clause 10.2

Page No.23

Amendment of RFP and

Applicability of the

provisions

Since plenty of new clauses has been added

under addendum-3, it is kindly requested to

please provide the fresh RFP to the

consultants.

Agreed, amended RFP is

being issued. Bidders shall

have to submit bid as per

amended RFP only.

of 24


Page No.


7. Section 2:Part I

Clause 12 (v)

Page No. 26

CV’s of the key experts

signed by the Key

Experts themselves and

by the authorized

representative submitting

the proposal

Please confirm that an electronic/ scanned

signature from the expert will be acceptable.

Partially agreed, Addendum is

being issued separately

8. Section 2:Part I

Selection

Procedure-ITC

Clause No 13 (b)

(13.4)

Page No. 28

Payment under the

contract shall be made in

INR only.

It is an international competitive bidding;

We would like to draw your attention

toward various GC projects currency

conditions. Please see attached pages from

Chennai GC, Ahmedabad GC, Mumbai

Line 3 GC, Nagpur GC, Lucknow GC,

Mumbai line 7 & 2B GC where multiple

currencies was allowed.

We request you to consider price in multiple

currency like USD/EURO/INR.

So we propose “Payments under the

Contract shall be made in the

currency or currencies in which the

Financial Proposal of the selected

Consultant is Expressed


9. Section 2 : (Part-

I): Selection

procedures-ITC

Clause No. 23 of

Page No. 34,

Section 2 : (Part-

II): Data sheet

Bid capacity Please make sure “ all clauses related to Bid

Capacity in the RFQ cum RFP( Data sheet

Clause No. 24 of page No. 42, Clause No.

23 of Page No. 34 and clause No. 5.2 of

Page No. 60) should be deleted.

Agreed all, related clause will

be deleted as applicable.


separately

of 24


Page No.


Clause No. 24 of

Page No. 42

Section 3:

Shortlisting of

Consultant

Clause No. 5 on

Page No. 58

Clause 5.2

Page No. 60

10. Section – 2 Part-II

Clause No. 9,

Page No. 37 and

Clause No. 15,

Page No. 38

Refer – Sr. No.

11 of

Addendum III

&

Annexure 10 of

Addendum -III

Minimum number of man

months for expert:

There seems to be the printing error in the

column 1 of the table which shows 684 man

months for International/Local Key Experts.

684 man months are for international

positions only.

Pl confirm.

Also with reference to the Annexure 10

under the Addendum III the Project

Director/Project Leader/Project Coordinator

has been shown as International/Local type.

As per our understanding the position is

under the international type only.Pl

Confirm.

There is no printing error,

positions mentioned could be

either Foreign or Local.

However Addendum is being

issued separately

11. Section 2 Part-II,

Selection

procedure-data

Apostle Certificate Should Bid be submitted with Apostle

certificates

Yes, Addendum is being issued

separately

of 24


Page No.


sheet

Clause No 11,

Page No. 37

12. Section – 2 Part-II

Clause No. 19 (i)

Page No. 40 ,

Attachment-1 for

Datasheet,

Page No. 43-50

And Annexure-2

of

Addendum III

Total points for the key

experts

Sum of points indicated for the experts is 23

instead of 24

Agreed.


separately

13. Attachment1:Data

Sheet,

Annexure-2

Clause 19 (ii),

Page No. 41

Revised

Annexure 2

Addendum-III

Adequacy of the

proposed methodology

and work plan

Please specify the sub-criteria and point

system for the evaluation of this criterion

Methodology – 10 points

Work plan – 8 points

Organization staffing -2 points


separately

of 24


Page No.


14. Section 2,

Selection

Procedure

Clause 19(iii),

Page No. 41

Revised

Annexure 2

Addendum-III

Familiarity with the

language and country

10%

We request that this criteria be changed to

Familiarity with developing countries.

Also, given the large number of metro

projects being implemented in India and

limited expertise available globally and in

India, it is more and more difficult to find

staff with experience in India without

affecting ongoing projects and clients within

India.

Further, other developing countries are

comparable to India and modification of this

criteria will not affect even in the least the

quality of staff being provided for the

project, or the project implementation. Good

experts generally are able to perform in any

condition and country, even if they have no

prior experience in this region.

Partially agreed. Addendum is


15. Section 2,

Selection

Procedure

Clause 19 (iii),

Page No. 41

Revised

Annexure 2

Addendum-III

Experience in India 10% We would further request that the 10%

marks allotted for experience in India that

the following conditions are applied:

In case of foreign experts, this requirement

may be removed and the marks

redistributed, as this will help increase the

pool of the number of expatriates available

globally. The number of foreign experts

with Indian experience is severely limited

and with the large number of concurrent

projects, this will be counter-productive as

there is bound to be a shortage of qualified

staff.


separately

of 24


Page No.


16. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(i)

Page No. 43

And Annexure- 2

of Addendum- III

Marking for experience It should be

>10 projects : 30 marks

6-9 projects : 20 marks

< 5 projects : 10 marks


17. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(i)

Page No. 43

And Annexure- 2

of Addendum- III

Experience of

International/Indian

projects of comparable

size, complexity and

technical specialty

Eligible projects are the

relevant eligible

assignment* projects of

Metro/ LRT in which fee

excluding indirect taxes

valued at not less than Rs

900 million (Rs 90 crore)

have been received by the

member(s) of the bidding

consortium in the

previous 10 years i.e.

from year 2006 to 2015

up to Dec 2015

We understand that only completed projects

with fee received of more than Rs 90 crores

will be considered under eligible

assignments.

In order to differentiate the level of bidder’s

capacity in implementing the GC Projects It

is kindly requested to please consider only

the completed projects which are under

revenue operation for a period of min. one

year prior to 31st Mar 2016.

Same practice has been followed by other

GC RFPs in India.Pl confirm.


18. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(i)

Experience of Projects On 19(i) previous clause ( “ The Bidder

having done and claim highest numbers of

eligible projects for carrying out consulting


of 24


Page No.


Page No. 43

Annexure-2

Addendum III

services similar to the ones requested under

this assignments will be awarded full points

) “ seems to more clear to differentiate the

levels of bidders capacity than the revised

19(i) clause in the addendum – III (“if a

bidder has more than 5 eligible projects, it

can be awarded full points)

19. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(i)

Page No. 43

&

Annexure-2

Addendum III

Section 2, Data Sheet,

Clause 19(i)

Weightage for Eligible

Assignments : 30%

Weightage for Approach

& Methodology : 20%

Weightage for

Competency of Key

Experts:50%

Sir, as you would appreciate, the success of

projects of this nature would depend mostly

on the qualification and experience of the

team involved in, rather than the number of

such assignments carried out by a

firm/consortium in the past by deploying a

totally different team of experts in the

projects carried out 10 years back.

Hence we propose weightages for various

items may please be modified as below in

line with other GC-RFP documents of other

metros such as Mumbai (MMRDA) &

Nagpur as detailed below.

Nagpur Mumbai For

Bhopal &

Indore

Weightage

for

Eligible

Assignmen

ts

1200

(15%)

1050

(15%)

15%


of 24


Page No.


Weightage

for

Approach

&

Methodolo

gy

2400

(30%)

2100

(30%)

25%

Weightage

for

Competen

cy of Key

Experts

3600+

800 =

4400

(55%)

3150+

700=

3850

(55%)

60%

Total 8000

(100%)

7000 100%

20. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(iii)(1)

Page No. 43

&

Annexure-2

Addendum III


Attachment 1 : For

Data Sheet, Clause

19(iii).1

General Qualification –

30%

For Post graduate (or

higher) in engineering/

Master of Business

Administration after

engineering graduation,

in respective field for all

engineering positions and

Post-graduation or

acceptable professional

qualification or Master of

Business Administration

Since the GC scope involves lot of planning

also, the Post-Graduation in planning after

Graduation in Engineering may also be

included and the clause may please be

modified as below:

For Post graduate (or higher) in engineering/

planning/ Master of Business

Administration after graduation in

engineering in respective field for all

engineering positions; and Post-graduation

or acceptable professional qualification or

Master of Business Administration after

graduation in respective field for all non-

engineering positions will be assigned full

points.


separately

of 24


Page No.


after graduation in

respective field for all

non-engineering

positions will be assigned

full points

21. Attachment1:For

Data sheet Clause

19(iii)(2)

Page No. 43

Annexure-2

Addendum III


Attachment 1 : For

Data Sheet, Clause

19(iii).2) Adequacy for

the assignment – 50%

Working in the same rank

or equivalent (type of

work) in the task

assigned for minimum 5

years, full points will be

assigned



work) in the task

assigned for minimum 3

years up to 5 years, 50%

of full points will be

assigned

The referred clause stipulates same rank or

equivalent. But in the industry different

designations are being used for a same

nature of job with same seniority level.

Hence we request you to consider the total

experience and its relevance to the present

job, rather than the designation/rank in

previous assignments while evaluating the

expert’s eligibility/capability.

Further, we suggest that for non-core expert

positions such as Safety Engineer, Safety

Inspector, Chief Environment Expert,

Environment Engineer, Utility Engineer,

Multimodal Transport Planner, Chief

Geotechnical Expert, Head Strategic /

Financial Expert, Real Estate / PPP Expert,

Transport Economist, etc., the experience

from their relevant filed would be sufficient,

and experience from metro rail sector is not

mandatory.

Please consider.


separately

of 24


Page No.




work) in the task

assigned but less than 3

years, no points will be

assigned

22. Key Experts CVs

Page No. 45

Annexure-2

Addendum-III

CVs for Head Office It may please be clarified that for the head

office, i.e. positions K-44, K-45, K-46, K-

47, K-48, K-49 and K-50 the CVs may be

submitted in the proposal. This may please

be confirmed.

Yes, CVs for all Key

(Including positions K-44, K-

45, K-46, K-47, K-48, K-49

and K-50) Non-key and

supporting staff have to be

submitted along with the

proposal.

23. Section 2: (Part-

II) Selection

Procedure - Data

Sheet

Page No. 49

Data Sheet: Age Limit

Criteria: As such there is no age

limit for proposed Key

Experts. However, 25%

of the Points shall be

reduced for any

proposed Key Expert as

mentioned below;

―Project Director/

Project Leader/Project

Coordinator‖ and Dy.

Project Director/ Project

Leader‖ as listed at Sr.

No. K-1 and K-2 above

respectively, aged more

than 70 Years as on

It is kindly requested to keep the age limit

for all the key staff for the evaluation

purpose as 70 Years as on date of

submission of the proposal.

The projects under multilateral funding

institutions don’t have any age limit criteria

provided the candidate is medically fit to

take the assignment.


of 24


Page No.


date of submission of

proposal. All the other Key

Experts aged more than

65 Years as on date of

submission of proposal.

24. Section 2,

Selection

Procedure

Clause 19 (iii)2 of

Attachment -1 for

data Sheet

Page no. 50

Revised

Annexure 2

Addendum-III

Relevant eligible

assignments for experts

In addition to accepting prior experience of

GC / PMC, it is requested that experts with

experience on metro/MRT and LRT projects

working for contractors may also be

considered. This will enhance the pool of

experts available. Due to the large number

of concurrent projects, insisting on GC /

PMC experience will be counter-productive


25. Section 2,

Selection

Procedure

Clause 19 (iii) 2,

Page No. 50

Revised

Annexure 2

Addendum-III

Adequacy for the

assignment (50%)

- Working in the

same rank or

equivalent (type

of work) …..

We request that the criteria may be relaxed

as under :

1a) working in the same rank or equivalent (type

of work) in the task assignment for more than

three years – 30%

2a)working in the same rank or equivalent (type

of work) in the task assignment for minimum 2

years – 15%

3a) Working in the same rank or equivalent (type

of work) in the task assignment for 9 months – one

year.

This will enhance the pool of engineer and

experts available for this project. Due to the

large number of concurrent projects, insisting on

GC / PMC experience will be counter-

productive


separately

of 24


Page No.


26. Section -3

Clause 4.1

Page No. 56

Non Substantial partners. Is there any restrictions on positions and

numbers of staff to be proposed by the non-

substantial partners?

Pl confirm.

JV/Consortium with partner

having less than 10% share/

participation is not allowed.

In a JV/Consortium if any

partner is having share/

participation less than 10%

then in that case that JV/

Consortium shall be

disqualified.

Addendum in this regard is


27. Section -3

Clause 4.1

Page No. 56

Inclusion of Indian firm

as JV/Consortium partner

Kindly consider to make it mandatory to

include at least one Indian firm having

Requisite Qualifications in each consortium.


28. Section 3: Short

listing of

Consultant Clause

4.1 Page No. 56

And

Sr. No. 17 of

Addendum III

Number of partners Number of partners be allowed as four if not

five



listing of

Consultant

Clause No. 4.1

Page No. 56 and

Addendum III

Non Substantial Member Whether “a non substantial member can

submit CVs for evaluation “ or not








Consortium shall be

disqualified.

of 24


Page No.



separately


listing of

Consultant

Clause No. 4.1

Page No. 56

Clause 4.1: The

Applicants may be a single

entity or a JV/consortium,

joining together to assist

MPMRCL in

implementing the project.

In case of group of entities

the number of substantial

JV / consortium partners

shall not be more than

total 3 (partners having

less than 10% participation

will be termed as non-

substantial member and

will not be considered for

evaluation which means

that their financial

soundness and work

experience shall not be

considered for evaluation

of JV/ Consortium). The

JV/ consortium as a whole

must satisfy both

Technical and Financial

eligibility criteria but the

substantial partners will be

jointly and severally

responsible. The eligibility

Sir, the modified clause is not clear on the

number of non-substantial partners in

JV/Consortium, kindly clarify.

In view of the volume of work involved and

to carry out the work in a most cost effective

manner, lot of inputs/resources from a

capable non-substantial partner, preferably

an Indian firm engaged in and having

experience of metro design, PMC/GEC

would be best suitable. Hence participation

percentage of such Non-Substantial partner

in a consortium may be enhanced up to

20%. Further, in order to ensure capable

firms as non-substantial partners on board,

we suggest you to prescribe qualification

criteria (both technical & financial) for non-

substantial partners also. May please

consider.








Consortium shall be

disqualified.


separately

of 24


Page No.


criteria are as under:


listing of

Consultant

Clause 4.3

Page No. 57

Work Experience In case, the consortium is comprised of 2-3

JV firms and if one (1) of the JV partner

shows only one (1) assignment in its Home

Country and the other two (2) partners have

assignments in the Home & Foreign

countries , will be acceptable, Kindly Clarify

No, it is further clarified that

the same JV partner should

have required experience of

foreign country also if he has

required experience of home

country.


separately

32. Section-4 :

Technical

Proposal TECH-5

: Team

Composition Page

No. 104

And Annexure -5

(Tech-5) of

Addendum III

TECH-5 Team

Composition

Task Assignments and

Summary of CV

Information

Under the revised format of Team

Composition (Task Assignments and

Summary of CV Information), 2 new

columns have been added;

1. Name of the Project (country)

2. Project Duration

Since both these details are already provided

in the CV format It doesn’t have any

relevancy adding the same information

again under the Tech-5 Team Composition

format.

Pl Confirm.


33. Section 4:

Technical

Proposal Standard

Forms

Page No. 105

Refer Annexure-4

Format of Curriculum

Vitae (Sl. No 5B)

Experience of working in

India in relevant eligible

assignment

We understand that the experience of

working in India will be applicable for

international positions only.

Pl Confirm.

No, it will be considered as

Local Experience.

Addendum for amended

Tech – 6 is being issued

separately.

of 24


Page No.


Tech-6 of

Addendum III

34. Section 4,

Technical

Proposal standard

forms,

Section 5:

Financial forms,

Tech-7 Expert

schedule. Note 3,

Appendix to FIN-

1 to FIN-3,

Clause 5 (i)

Page No.121

One (1) month equals

twenty four (24) working

days ……

The purpose of the Form

FIN-3 …..(one day being

equivalent to 1/30th

of a

month)

We understand that working days will be 24

day/month and 5.5 day/week. Please

confirm the rest day (Sunday) and public

holiday of MPMRCL are applicable to GC

and are paid holidays.


35. Section 6, Terms

of Reference

Clause 1.8,

Page No.126,

Clause 4.14,

Page No. 142

Arranging training of

O&M staff of MPMRCL

Please confirm that training costs for

training of MPMRCL personnel are not to

be included in the financial offer and that

these will be paid separately. If training cost

are to be included in the financial offer

maximum man days for training should be

conveyed.


separately


of Reference

Clause 4.1, 4.3 to

4.6, 4.9,4.10

Page No. 127-

137

Effective Date (ED) + 01

months ….

As the mobilization of the team and setting

up of GC operation requires 2 to 3 months,

the time lines for delivery of this activities

are optimistic. Time line of minimum 9 – 12

months is required for inception to tender

design and award. Request to revise the time

line for delivery of these activities.

Days indicated towards

deliverables are indicative and

will be decided / finalized by

the client as per presentation

on approach and methodology

with specific reference to time

line suggested by the bidder,

during negotiation and in

unavoidable cases during on

of 24


Page No.


board interaction, if required.

37. Section 6-Terms

of Reference,

Clause 4.10,

Page No. 137

and

Clause 4.16.1,

Page No. 147

(last two bullet

points)

Preparation of various

plans.

And

Obligation of GC

These activities are normally to be carried

out by the contractors. Kindly confirm that

GC will only oversee contractors carrying

out of the above mentioned tasks.


separately.


of Reference

Clause 16.2,

Page No.153

Consultant will

implement the 5D BIM

for the project as per

direction of the client

BIM is a highly specialized field of project

management, data storage and asset

management. For example it is critical that

contractors are BIM compliant from the

planning and designing stage itself. Please

confirm that additional expert and support

position man months will be provided and

paid for separately, based on mutual

discussion and additional scope definition.

Therefore clause of 5D BIM to be removed.

Agreed, Addendum is being

issued separately

39. Attachment III(B)

Qualification and

Experience

Required for Key

and Non-Key

Page No. 169

Qualification and

Experience Requirements

It is requested for the Key and Non-Key

Experts, where the post graduate experience

is marked as +15 years may please be

amended to +12 years and the assignment

relevant experience may be relaxed from 5+

years to 2 Metro/LRT/MRT and rail


of 24


Page No.


& Annexure-11

of

Addendum-III

projects.

Request that requirements for Post-

Graduation in Engineering/MBA be

removed as this will severely limit the

number of qualified personnel available for

this assignment.

We would request changes as per attachment

1 to these queries.

This may please be considered and

amended.

40. Attachment III(B)

Qualification and

Experience

Required for Key

and Non-Key

Page No. 169

& Annexure-11

of

Addendum-III

Assignment relevant

experience

Most of the positions under the category E-1

, E2 & F are support positions and we

request relaxation on Assignment relevant

experience as it will be difficult to find

candidates with Metro / LRT /MRT

experience. For this hence only experience

relevant to the duties may please be

considered.



41. SECTION 7

(Part-II): Contract

Conditions- GCC

Clause No. 1.1.20.

Page No. 183

High Speed Rail (HSR) Please consider that eligible projects are the

relevant eligible assignment projects

including not only Metro/LRT but also HSR


of 24


Page No.


42. Section 7(Part II)

Clause 2.3.2,

Page No. 185

Availability of Key

experts

We request to consider 60 days for effective

date for substantial mobilization of key

experts.




Clause 2.9.1 (g),

Page No. 188

If the Client, in its sole

discretion and for any

reason whatsoever,

decides to terminate this

contract.

We believe this is an unreasonable condition

and is against the principle of good faith.

Request you to please delete this.



Clause 2.9.2,

Page No. 188

By the Consultant Please include the following

“If employer fails to pay any money due to

the consultant pursuant to this contract and

not subject to dispute pursuant of clause

2.9.6 here of within forty five days(45) after

receiving the written notice from consultant

that such payments are overdue”



Clause 6.5 (C),

Page No. 197

The Client will pay the

Consultant’s invoices

within Forty Five (45) days

after receipt by the client of

such itemized invoices

Request to consider release of payment to

consultant within 30 days of receipt of

invoice.


46. Section 7 (Part II)

: Contract

Conditions –

GCC, Clause No.

6.6

Page No. 198

And

Variation clause +/- 15%. The variation allowed is +/- 15 %. How

variation beyond +/- 15 % would be

handled within contract period

In general, variation beyond

+/- 15 % will not be allowed,

but in case of unavoidable

situation appropriate action

after due approval of

MD/Board as the case may be,

of 24


Page No.


Sr. No. 41 of

Addendum III

will be taken.


Clause 9.2,

Page No. 199

Liquidated Damages for

Delay

We find this clause unreasonable and

unusual for a contract of this type and this is

not found in other similar Indian or

International contracts. This is a man-month

based contract and all deliverables depend

on more than one external stakeholder,

which are not directly under the control of

the GC.


separately

48. Section 7(Part III)

Clause 3.5 (d),

Page No. 203

Project specific

Professional Liability

Insurance

Please confirm that PII’s can be

provided by each company separately to

the extent of their share in the

consortium fee.

Request to reduce the validity to one

year beyond the date of completion.

No, Addendum is being issued

separately

49. Section 7(Part III)

Clause 6.2,

Page No. 204

Adjustment of

Remuneration

Please provide the formula for foreign

currency


50. Section -7, Part-

III, SCC Clause-

16, 6.5 (a) of GCC

, Advance Payment

Page No. 205

The amount of the

advance payment is: Not

more than the amount

equivalent to 5 % of the

contract amount in INR.

Request to increase advance payment

amount from 5 % to 10 % of contract value.


51. General Query Payments to the

consultants/JV/

Consortium

Please confirm that all members of the JV

will be paid separately into their bank

accounts as specified in the contract. We

confirm that the lead member will be

responsible for collating, checking and

submitting the overall invoice.


of 24


Page No.


52. General Query International positions Pl define the term “International Positions”.

Whether the international position means the

person with developed country origin.

Also the evaluation criteria for international

and local experts are same then what is the

difference between the International/Local

Key Experts. Pl elaborate.

It is kindly requested to please provide us

the threshold limit for the international

position in terms of international experience

if required.

Experience of foreign projects

outside India will be treated as

Foreign Experience,

irrespective of their origin.

It is further clarified that

Foreign Expert does not mean

the person with Foreign origin

any person of Indian Origin

with experiences of other

country will also be consider as

Foreign Expert and any person

of origin other than India and

having experience of India will

be considered as Local Expert.

53. General Query Funding of GC Funding of GC? State Will Fund the GC

S.S Rajpoot) (Manju Sharma) (Jitendra Dubey)

(Arun Paliwal)

Director (Technical),

MPUDC

Additional Commissioner,

UAD

E-in-C and Director (Technical),

MPMRCL

Joint Director (F),

UAD

(Vijendra Nanavati) (Manish Gangarekar)

(Kamal Nagar)

Technical Advisor,

MPMRCL

GM,

MPMRCL

OSD (Transport),

UAD

of 24

Annexure -I

Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited

List of Participants

Representatives: Consulting Firms/Organizations

S. No. Name Organization

1 Mr. Umesh Kumbhalkaa L.N Malviya Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.

2 Mr. Milind Nirmal DB Engg. & Consulting

3 Mr. B.B. Sankaram Aarvee Associates Pvt. Ltd.

4 Mr. Parvendra Chauhan EGIS

5 Mr. Pankaj Sharma RAMBOLL

6 Mr. Heo Jung KRNA ( Korea Rail Network Authority)

7 Mr. Varun Sharma PWC

8 Mr. Vibhu Kapila GEODATA

9 Mr. Hardeep Singh HOWE Engg. Projects India Pvt. Ltd.

10 Mr. Kazi Amid Bari SMEG India

11 Mr. H.K Sharma REPL

12 Mr. Ashish Dasgupta AYESA

of 24

13 Mr. Samit Saproo AYESA

14 Mr. Devesh Goyal AECOM

15 Mr. Nerajan Sen Gupta SYSTRA

Representative: Urban Administration and Development & Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited.

1 Mr. S.S. Rajpoot Director Technical, MPUDC

2 Dr. Manju Sharma Additional Commissioner, UAD

3 Mr. J. K. Dubey E-in-C/Director Technical, MPMRCL

4 Mr. Manish Gangarekar GM, MPMRCL

5 Mr. Kamal Nagar OSD (Transport), UAD

6 Mr. Arun Paliwal Joint Director (Finance), UAD

7 Mr. Anoop Vijay Chartered Accountant, MPMRCL

8 Mr. Sandeep Jain Company Secretary, MPMRCL

9 Mr. Shafeeq Ahmed Jr. Manager, CMAMP

Advisors: Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Co Limited.

1 Mr. Chetan Bakshi Technical Advisor, MPMRCL

2 Mr. Vijendra Nanavati Technical Advisor, MPMRCL

madhya pradesh metro rail co limited · madhya pradesh metro rail co limited ... 2nd pre-bid...

Documents