Tender Evaluation of Works Contracts

From To

:

Tel. No. Your

Fax No. dated

Email Fax No.

Date Total 2

[)

11

10 ell'

note in

ETWB TCW No. 8/2004 Page 1 of 3

政府總部

環境運輸及工務局香港花園道美利大廈

Environment, Transport and Works Bureau

Government Secretariat Murray Building, Garden Road,

Hong Kong

Ref : ETWB 546/84/01 Group : 15

29 April 2004

Environment, Transport and Works Bureau Technical Circular (Works) No. 8/2004

Tender Evaluation of Works Contracts

Scope This circular sets out the various methods of tender evaluation in the procurement of works contracts. Effective Date 2. This circular takes effect on all tenders for works contracts invited after 1 May 2004. Effect on Existing Circular 3. This circular replaces WBTC 22/2002 and 23/2002 which are hereby cancelled. This circular should be read in conjunction with ETWB TC(W) No. 7/2004, WBTC Nos. 15/1999, 24/2002 and 36/2002. Application 4. This circular applies to all capital works contracts and term contracts. This circular does not apply to design and build contracts.

香港特別行政區政府 The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region


Method of Tender Evaluation 5. Two methods of tender evaluation are introduced in this circular viz.:-

(a) Formula Approach; and

(b) Marking Scheme. Details of the above methods are given in Appendices B and C respectively. In conjunction with the use of the above methods, departments may adopt a screening process to screen out unqualified tenderers. This is introduced as Stage I Screening and details are given in Appendix A. 6. The Central Tender Board has given approval to the use of the above methods with or without Stage I Screening provided that the choice of method for a particular contract follows the guidelines given in this circular. The choice of Tender Evaluation Method 7. Generally, a contract will be awarded to a tenderer who complies with the conditions of participation and whose tender conforms to the essential requirements of the tender documentation and is the most advantageous in terms of the specific evaluation criteria set out in the tender documentation. 8. There are occasions where the quality of service or product is a major consideration, e.g. works contracts for high value or prestigious projects, works which are sensitive or have a bearing on public safety or convenience, works which are of unusual complexity or require a high level of co-ordination, technical expertise or unusual technology or works which are subject to very tight programme schedules. In the past, departments would conduct a prequalification exercise for the tenderers to tighten the qualification requirement and if there were insufficient time for the prequalification, a marking scheme would be adopted in the tender evaluation. With a view to adopting a more transparent and systematic approach to tender evaluation, putting more emphasize on the quality of tender and eliminating the time-consuming prequalification process, departments should use a marking scheme in tender evaluation given in Appendix C, for all works contracts falling into the aforementioned category and for which the Electrical and Mechanical Services Trading Fund (EMSTF) will not participate as a tenderer.


9. A separate exercise for prequalification of tenderers should no longer be necessary and should only be employed in accordance with the guidelines for prequalification given in ETWB TC(W) No. 36/2002. Prequalification may also be used for mega sized contracts. This will be decided by the departments and justifications would have to be given in seeking approval from CTB. Tendering cost for mega sized contracts would be a consideration in seeking approval for prequalification. ETWB TC (W) No. 36/2002 will be amended to reflect this policy. Para. 11 of WBTC No. 15/99 which requires prequalification to apply to maintenance contracts as a norm is no longer applicable with the promulgation of this circular. Where prequalified tendering is adopted, a separate marking scheme tailored made to suit the specific features of the contract shall be devised and shall be subject to approval from CTB, following policy support from this Bureau. Prequalification exercises already done and marking schemes already approved prior to the promulgation of this circular are not affected by this circular. 10. A simplified method of tender evaluation using a formula approach contained in Appendix B shall apply to all other works contracts not falling into the category referred to above and for which EMSTF will not participate as a tenderer. 11. In conjunction with the use of either the Formula Approach or the Marking Scheme and if considered necessary, departments may adopt Stage I Screening procedures given in Appendix A to ensure that the tenderer complies with the necessary minimum requirements before their tenders are considered further to avoid abortive work. 12. A flow chart illustrating the above procedures is given in Appendix E. 13. If there is doubt as to the choice of an appropriate tender evaluation method for a particular contract, it should be referred to the Head of the Department who should then decide on the most appropriate method to be used.

( C S Wai ) Deputy Secretary for the Environment,

Transport and Works (Works) 2

ETWB TCW No.8/2004 Appendix A Page A1 of 1

Appendix A

Stage I Screening This is introduced to ensure that the tenderer complies with the stipulated minimum requirements before their tenders are considered further to avoid abortive work. The following are examples :-

Minimum experience requirements.

The Tenderer’s status. For example, the tenderer must be on the List of Approved Contractors for Public Works under specified category or categories.

Minimum resource/technical capability requirements.

Minimum past performance standard. For example, tenderers with more than 10% performance reports rated as adverse will be screened.

Departments are suggested to prepare a check list against the listed items specifically designed for the needs for their contracts. Departments are reminded that all these items are mandatory requirements and therefore departments should exercise great care in preparing the check list. If a tenderer fails to comply with any one of the listed items, his tender shall not be considered further. For the avoidance of doubt, if the Marking Scheme method is adopted, the tenderer’s ‘Tender Price Documents’ shall not be processed and the sealed envelope shall remain sealed until the completion of the whole tender evaluation process under the marking scheme if he failed the Stage I Screening. The sealed envelope containing the ‘Tender Price Documents’ of the concerned tender which failed the Stage I Screening (as well as those of the non-conforming tenders, if any) should be opened after completion of the whole tender evaluation process (i.e. after completion of both the technical and price assessments) and the relevant tender price should be recorded in the relevant tender report for reference by the concerned approving authority. In the case of a joint venture tender, if the participants/shareholders of the joint venture collectively satisfy all the qualification requirements, or the laid down experience criteria, as the case may be, this joint venture tender would be considered qualified. If Stage I Screening is adopted, departments should include all the necessary details, including all the mandatory requirements and the consequence of non-compliance, in the Notes to Tenders.

ETWB TCW No. 8/2004 Appendix B Page B1 of 3

Appendix B

The Formula Approach to Tender Evaluation The Formula 1. The formula approach to tender evaluation will only take into account the tender price and the tenderer’s past performance. With respect to each conforming tender, a combined price and performance (overall) score will be determined in accordance with the formula below. Normally, the tender with the highest overall score should be recommended for acceptance, subject to the usual requirement that the department is satisfied that the recommended tenderer is fully capable (including technically, commercially and financially) of undertaking the contract. For tenders with a tender price:-

the lowest tender price among

those conforming tenders the tenderer's performance rating 60*

the tender price of the tenderer+ 40* the highest performance rating

among those conforming tenders For tenders without a tender price (such as term contract):-

100 + the lowest value for tender analysis among those conforming

tenders

the tenderer’s performance rating

60* 100 + the value for tender analysis

of the tenderer

+ 40* the highest performance rating among those conforming

tenderers Note: (i). For the purpose of calculation using the formulae above, a conforming tender

means a tender which (a) conforms to the essential requirements of the tender documentation; (b) is submitted by a tenderer which complies with the conditions of participation;

and (c) has passed the Stage I Screening (where Stage I is applicable).


A conforming tender with abnormally low or high tender price or tender value or is considered unsuitable for recommendation for the award of the contract (such as financially, commercially or technically incompetent) remains to be a conforming tender.

(ii). The performance rating means the performance rating held in the ETWB’s

Contractors’ Performance Index System (CMIS) on the original date set for the return of tenders or, if this has been extended, the extended date. (With effect from 3.5.2004, if a tenderer has been enlisted by way of substitution, the performance rating of this tenderer as recorded in the CMIS would have taken into account the past performance of the old contractor.) If a tenderer does not have a rating on that date, he shall be assigned an average rating based on the ratings of the other tenderers who have submitted a conforming tender as defined in Note (i) above. For joint venture tenderers, the performance rating shall be the weighted average of the performance ratings of the participants or the shareholders in accordance with their shares of work by value. If no performance records are available to a participant/shareholder of a joint venture, the rating of this joint venture shall be taken as the rating of the other participant/shareholder. If there are more than one other participant/shareholder in this joint venture, the performance rating of this joint venture shall be the weighted average of the performance ratings of these other participants/shareholders in accordance with their shares of work by value.

(iii) For tenders with a tender price, if the tendered sums or the overall scores of those

top few tenders are very close (usually the three with the highest overall score), the department should discount future payments to obtain the present value and use the present value to substitute the tender price in determining the overall scores. This exercise should only apply to those top few tenders.

(iv) See Appendix D for sample calculations of the above formula. Tender Recommendation 2. The tender recommendation shall be prepared in accordance with SPR 375. 3. Departments should bear in mind that under no circumstances can a tenderer be advised that his tender is unsuccessful, even though his tender is non-conforming until a decision on tender award is made by the relevant tender board or the Controlling Officer where such authority has been delegated via Financial Circular No. 10/2001.


Notes to Tenderers 4. Tenderers should be advised of the tender evaluation criteria. For tenders adopting the formula approach to tender evaluation, the following note to tenderers in lieu of that given in WBTC No. 2/2001 should be provided in the tender documents:

“Tenders will be evaluated in accordance with the formula approach set out below. Tenderers should note ETWB TC(W) yy/2004 which sets out the use of the formula approach for tender evaluation. Tenderers shall note that the Government is not bound to accept the tender with the highest overall score or any tender and may cancel the tender exercise on public interest ground. In considering the acceptance of a tender, the Government will take account of all relevant circumstances including the following:-

(i) The overall score;

(ii) The effect of incident of payments by discounting future payments to obtain the present values if the tendered prices/overall marks are very close; (only for tenders with a tender price)

(iii) The effect of exceptionally high or low priced items; and

(iv) The tenderer’s capability (financially, commercially and technically) in undertaking the contract. For the avoidance of doubt, matters such as bankruptcy, false declaration, lack of integrity, acts of dishonesty, the latest available information and reports reflecting serious shortfall in performance and the latest available information and reports relating to serious safety or environmental incidents may be taken into account in determining whether a tenderer is fully capable of undertaking the contract.

[Set out the adopted formula approach, viz. paragraph 1 above including the Notes. Incorporate details of the Stage I Screening and all the mandatory requirements where applicable and the consequences of failing Stage I.]”

Electrical and Mechanical Services Trading Fund (EMSTF)

5. To guard against potential bid challenges, procuring departments should not adopt the formula approach in tenders where in their opinion EMSTF may participate as a tenderer. In such case, procuring departments should, instead of using the formula approach, simply recommend the acceptance of the most advantageous conforming tender having regard to the considerations listed in paragraph 4 above with the exception that “The overall score” referred to in (i) should be replaced by “The Tender Price” or “The Tender Value” as the case may be.

ETWB TCW No. 8/2004 Appendix C Page C1 of 28

Appendix C

The Marking Scheme General 1. A “standard” marking scheme is provided hereunder. The use of the standard marking scheme has been agreed by the Permanent Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury (Treasury). Only in very exceptional cases departments are permitted to deviate from the standard marking scheme contained hereunder. If departments wish to make any modifications to the standard marking scheme, they must seek policy support from the Works Policy Section of ETWB before they proceed to obtain approval from the relevant tender board. This procedure must be complied with prior to invitation to tender. 2. In seeking policy support for the use of a non-standard marking scheme, departments should provide a brief description of the works, the special features of the contract, detailed justification for the use of a non-standard marking scheme, respective weights for quality and price, assessment criteria and their relative weights, and passing mark for individual attributes. The departments should also provide detailed explanation on why the standard marking scheme is considered inapplicable. The department will only be allowed to proceed with submission to the relevant tender board for approval of a non-standard marking scheme after they have obtained the said policy support. This procedure also applies to the marking scheme used in prequalified tendering as noted in paragraph 9 of the technical circular. 3. No alteration to an “approved” marking scheme may be made without further approval from the relevant tender board on any alterations made. The tender 4. The procuring department should disclose the full marking scheme for the information of the tenderers, in the form of an Annex to Notes to Tenderers as provided in Appendix C-1 to this circular. 5. A two-envelope approach shall be adopted. The tender shall consist of two parts; the technical submission and the tender price documents. They should be enclosed in two separate envelopes, clearly marked with the words "Technical Submission" and "Tender Price Documents" respectively, together with the tender reference on the outside of the envelope. The two envelopes shall then be placed


inside a sealed envelope and delivered in the manner as required by the tender notice. The standard Clause 3 of the General Conditions of Tender – Alternative Clause 3 for tender using a marking scheme in tender evaluation promulgated in ETWB TC(W) No. 51/2002 Appendix A is applicable. 6. The submission on technical resources and technical proposals shall form part of the contract. The standard notes to tenderers as provided in Appendix C-1 and the standard SCC in Appendix C-2 shall be incorporated in the tender documents as appropriate. Opening of Tenders 7. After tenders have been opened and authenticated, the tender opening team should place the originals of the tender price documents in a sealed envelope. The sealed envelope, together with the technical submissions, should be collected by the procuring department while the duplicates of the tender price documents should be kept by the tender board. 8. The procuring department should appoint an officer of D2 rank or above, who is not involved in the tender exercise, for the safe custody of the sealed envelope on tender prices. To guard against inadvertent placing of any tender price documents among technical submissions by tenderers, he should also check against the technical submissions collected from the tender opening team before passing them to the assessment panel for evaluation. 9. Normally, the technical submissions are to be evaluated first. If during the technical assessment it is revealed that it is necessary to deal with any tender qualifications and/or seek any clarifications on any matters in the technical submissions, they should be dealt with and resolved before the tender price documents are opened such that the technical submissions may be properly assessed. The sealed envelope which contains the tender price documents should only be opened after the assessment panel has completed the evaluation of all technical submissions based on the approved marking scheme. No alteration to the technical assessment should be allowed after the tender price documents are opened except in the case of correction on errors of form or if the technical assessment was based on incorrect factual information. Further, technical submissions inadvertently placed inside the envelope containing tender price documents shall generally not be considered. However, the assessment panel may consider such information contained in the technical submissions which is wholly of a factual nature and which does not require any subjective assessment. Examples include conviction records.


In such cases, the assessment panel may re-visit the technical scores to see if any adjustments are needed in the light of the additional facts. Where subject to a very tight programme schedule and with the personal approval of the Head of Department, the price submissions and technical submissions may be separately evaluated by the project team and an independent assessment panel concurrently, but the project team and the independent assessment panel must not exchange any information received on the tenders until the whole evaluation is completed and they shall not make any alteration to their assessment thereafter except for the corrections as noted above. Heads of Department should only approve the concurrent assessment of the technical and price submissions as an exceptional arrangement and should ensure that there are adequate measures to safeguard the integrity of the tender evaluation process. When the concurrent assessment approach is adopted, departments should record the names of the parties involved in the technical assessment and price assessment and keep the period of assessment to the minimum. Assessment Panel 10. An assessment panel shall be established to evaluate the technical submissions. The assessment panel shall be made up of suitably qualified personnel capable of making an independent assessment of the tenderers’ submissions, technical or otherwise. The assessment panel shall consist a chairman plus at least two other members. Normally the chairman will not mark the tenderer’s submissions in order to ensure that the meeting is considered orderly and impartially. The chairman shall be a directorate officer while the other members shall be public officers of professional rank or above coming from more than one department. Members of the project team and members of the assessment panel including the chairman should familiarize themselves with the basic requirements, implications and obligations contained in the WTO GPA and the associated rules which govern the subject tender exercise. Reference should be made to the guidelines given under WBTC Nos. 22/98 and 22/98A. For contracts administered by consultants, the consultants may be invited to serve as an adviser to the assessment panel but the consultants shall not be appointed as a member of the assessment panel. 11. Members of the assessment panel shall individually mark the tenderers' submissions in accordance with the approved marking scheme. For each submission, the average mark given by the panel members shall then be taken as the technical score of that submission. 12. The assessment panel and the project team, as well as the officer responsible for the safe custody of the sealed envelope on tender prices, should observe the


prevailing civil service guidelines on how to prevent or deal with conflict of interest situations, and the need to declare any conflicts, whether actual or perceived, arising between their official duties and their private interests. Financial Circular No. 9/2003 and the Stores and Procurement Regulations Chapter IA (180 to 195) are relevant. The confidentiality requirements as set out in ETWB TC(W) No. 7/2004 must be strictly observed. The chairman shall ensure that every member of the assessment panel is reminded of the need to maintain confidentiality of the whole tender assessment process. The Marking Scheme 13. A standard marking scheme is given below. A full mark shall be assigned to each attribute which must not lie outside the specified range, if any, and the total of the full marks must be 100 for all 4 sections below. (A) Weighting Distribution

Attributes Permitted Full Mark

Section (1) - Tenderer's experience (a) relevant construction contracts completed in the past 5

years to demonstrate that the tenderer has the relevant management and technical experience.

10 - 20

(b) relevant construction contracts completed in Hong Kong in the past 5 years to demonstrate that the tenderer has the relevant local experience. (Note: This item is to be added on a need basis. It is not intended to discriminate contractors based outside Hong Kong. There must be justifications to support that local experience is essential for the satisfactory delivery of the project before including this item in the marking scheme.)

0 – 10

(Subject to the full mark for

Section (1) not exceeding 20)

Section (2) - Tenderer's past performance

(a) workmanship 5

(b) progress 5

(c) site safety and accident rates 5

Attributes Permitted Full Mark

(d) environmental control 5

(e) general obligations 5

(f) attitude to claims 5

(g) record against convictions under the Immigration Ordinance, Employment Ordinance or other site safety, environment related and road opening offences

5

Section (3) - Tenderer's technical resources

(a) proposed managerial, technical staff. (Where minimum requirements on managerial and technical staff are specified in the Contract, alternatively use “proposed addition to or enhancement of the minimum requirements on managerial and technical staff as specified in the Contract and only such addition or enhancement shall be assessed.”)

5 - 20

(b) proposed essential plant and equipment, if any, for certain operations as specified by departments where the plant and equipment will have a bearing on the quality of service. (Where minimum requirements on essential plant and equipment are specified in the Contract, alternatively use “proposed addition to or enhancement of the minimum requirements on the essential plant and equipment and only such addition or enhancement shall be assessed.”)

0 - 20

Section (4) - Tenderer's technical proposal

(this may include demonstration on site, method statement, quality assurance plan, site safety policy, use of environmentally friendly products and processes etc. For projects involving predominantly underground works, more emphasis should be placed on the tenderer’s risk management approach and contingency plans.)

10 - 40

Total 100

ETWB TCW No. 8/2004 Appendix C Revised Page C5 of 28

(30.10.2009)


(B) Marking Standard

General – As a matter of principle, there shall be no negative marks or marks exceeding the full mark given for any attributes. All assessment criteria must be clearly stated and made known to the tenderers in the tender document. Departments are reminded to re-visit the Marking Scheme, including the Marking Standards and the assessment criteria, on the issue of any tender addendum to assess whether adjustments should be made to correspond with the changes brought about by the tender addendum.

Attribute Marking

(1)(a) Departments should normally state the minimum requirement (e.g., have at least 2 construction contracts of value not less than HK$50M each completed in the past 5 years, counting from the original date set for the close of tender). Experience from contractors for works done in the capacity of a sub-contractor shall not be counted. Departments should spell out in the tender document the types of contract which are considered relevant and the requirements on relevant management and technical experience. For multi-disciplinary contracts, attribute (1)(a) can be divided into further attributes to take into account past experience for different types of contracts. If foreign currencies are involved in assessing the value of the contracts completed, the exchange rate for conversion to HK currency shall be the average between the buy and sell TT rates sourced from the Hong Kong Association of Banks available from its website’s historical data for the original date set for the close of tender or, if this has been extended, the extended date. For contracts using ex-European currencies, such ex-European currencies shall be converted to the Euro Currency using the exchange rate at the first date Euro currency came into the market, before conversion to Hong Kong currency. Departments may vary the requirements on contract value and the 5 year period to suit the nature of their contracts. However, it is suggested that a minimum of 5 years shall be adopted to avoid excessive limitation on the available tenderers. Departments are required to decide on the assessment criteria, such as the marks to be given for each qualified contract, and the criteria must be disclosed at the time of tender. The contract value in the minimum requirement should normally be set between 50% and


Attribute Marking 75% of the estimated value of the works. The following notes are to be observed:-

Where Stage I Screening is applicable, tenderers will be checked against the minimum requirement and the tenderer must comply with the minimum requirement in order to proceed to the Marking Scheme stage.

If minimum requirement is stipulated or if Stage I Screening is used, there is no passing mark for this attribute and marks will be given for anything above the minimum. Again departments are required to set criteria to decide on the marks to be given for anything above the minimum.

In setting out the requirements under this attribute, departments should bear in mind the limited time available to tenderers within the usually tight tender period and should avoid complex calculation of contract values.

For contracts completed within the past 5 years, irrespective of its commencement date, the full value of the works should be taken into account.

The original contract sum at the time of the contract award will be taken as the full value of the works. For term contracts, the estimated expenditure on the contract will be used.

Experience gained in the capability of a sub-contractor will NOT be considered. The experience of a parent, subsidiary or affiliated company will not be considered.

Contracts which are still on-going (except for landscape establishment works), irrespective of the date of commencement of the contract, will NOT be considered.

Sectional completions, not being the last section completed excluding establishment works, if any, will NOT be considered.

Completion here means “certified complete” by the **Engineer/Architect and applies to the contract as a whole (excluding Maintenance Periods). For term contracts, the date of expiry of the contract term is regarded as the completion date.


Attribute Marking If there is a need to extend the tender period, please ensure

that the assessment of the qualification of the tenderers’ 5-year experience requirement would still be based on the original date set for the close of tender and would not be affected by the extension. All tenderers should be notified of this assessment criteria at the time the notification of the extension is given.

For novated contracts, only those contracts novated before the date on which the tender notice is first published will be considered. The full value of the novated contract will be considered to be accountable to the new contractor (the novatee) but not the old contractor (the novator).

(1)(b) Same as (1)(a) above.

(2)(a) - (2)(e)

The marking shall be made based on all reliable information available on the contractors’ local performance in the past 5 years counting from the original date set for the close of tender or, if this has been extended, the extended date. This applies to all categories of on-going contracts as well as completed contracts within this five year period including the relevant contracts in the Housing Authority if available. Departments are required to specify what type of contracts are considered relevant from the Housing Authority for the purpose of assessment under these sections. Where it relies solely on contractor’s past performance appraisals kept by ETWB, the marking shall be as follows:-

Past performance appraisals falling

Below “satisfactory” Above “satisfactory” % of full Mark

>20% Any percentages 0

>10 and <20% Ditto 25

>2 and <10% Ditto 50

<2% Ditto 65

0 <15% 75

0 >15% and <30% 85

0 >30% 100

Attribute Marking

For attribute (2)(c), site safety performance and accident rates shall each carry a maximum of 2.5 marks. The assessment of safety performance shall be as set out in the table above.

The assessment of accident rates shall be as follows: ⎯ Three accident rates for all public works contracts undertaken by the contractor during the same 3 year period as 2(g) below shall be considered. The three accident rates will be measured at a date 2 months, 14 months and 26 months before the original date set for the close of tender or, if this has been extended, the extended date and the accident rate will be calculated for a 12 month period prior to the measuring date and being the total no. of accidents in all public works contracts undertaken by the contractor within the 12 month period over the total no. of 100,000 manhours within these contracts within the 12 months. The target will be the ETWB accident rate target applicable to the measuring date. 2.5 marks if all three accident rates do not exceed the ETWB target. 1.7 marks if 1 accident rate exceeds the ETWB target. 0.9 mark if 2 accident rates exceed the ETWB target and 0 mark if all 3 exceed the ETWB target.

The above provides a yardstick in dealing with other local records, such as the relevant Housing Authority contracts. Reference should also be made to the relevant technical circulars on contractors’ performance appraisal. For contractors without any performance record in the past 5 years, the marking shall be based on the average mark attained by the other tenderers in the corresponding attribute who have satisfied (a), (b) and (c) under paragraph (E) of paragraph 13 of this Appendix.

(2)(f) The marking shall be made based on all reliable information available on local projects in the past 5 years counting from the original date set for the close of tender or, if this has been extended, the extended date. This applies to all categories of on-going contracts as well as completed contracts within this five year period. The marking shall be as follows:


(30.10.2009)

Attribute Marking % reports within past 5 years

with unreasonable claim attitude Marks to be given

< 3% 5 > 3% and < 6% 4 > 6% and < 9% 3 > 9% and < 12% 2 > 12% and < 15% 1 > 15% 0

For contractors without any performance record in the past 5 years, the marking shall be based on the average mark attained by the other tenderers for this attribute who have satisfied (a), (b) and (c) under paragraph (E) of paragraph 13 of this Appendix.

(2)(g) References to the Ordinances below shall be deemed to include references to such Ordinances as the same may be amended from time to time. For conviction records under the Section 17I or 38A of the Immigration Ordinance, the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance, Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance, Shipping and Port Control Ordinance, Air Pollution Control Ordinance, Noise Control Ordinance, Waste Disposal Ordinance, Water Pollution Control Ordinance, Dumping at Sea Ordinance, Ozone Layer Protection Ordinance, S27 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance, Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance or Employment Ordinance, the marks will be allocated according to the formula below.

Factor = number of convictions in the past 3 year period# number of ongoing and completed construction contracts in the same period*

# This 3 year period counts from and includes the date 2 months before the original date set for the close of tender or, if this has been extended, the extended date. Number of convictions includes the total number of convictions under all concerned ordinances. Convictions here relate only to convictions of the tenderer or any participant/shareholder of a joint venture tenderer. Convictions of the tenderer’s sub-contractors or the sub-contractors of any participant/shareholder of a joint venture tenderer should not be counted here. However if the


(30.10.2009)


(30.10.2009)

Attribute Marking

convictions relate to the tenderer or any participant/shareholder of a joint venture tenderer in the capacity of a sub-contractor, this should be counted. The date of the conviction is treated as the date of the judgement in which the conviction was pronounced. The date of the commission of the offence which gave rise to the conviction is irrelevant here.

* The number of ongoing and completed construction contracts is n to be the sum of the following: take

(a) the total number of public and private sector contracts of

all categories within the above 3-year period in Hong Kong where the tenderer is acting in the capacity of a main contractor or is a participant/shareholder of a joint venture acting in the capacity of a main contractor; and

(b) Where convictions of the tenderer or any cipant/shareholder of a joint venture tenderer were recorded e capacity of a sub-contractor, those sub-contracts within the 3 year period in which the convictions were recorded.

partiin thsame

Tenderers shall provide a list of the various contracts together

with the contact telephone, facsimile numbers and where applicable, emails of the Engineer/Architect/ Authorised Person for the contracts.

Marking Criteria

0 mark if the factor is > 5.00

1 mark if the factor is > 4.00 and < 5

2 marks if the factor is > 3.00 and < 4

3 marks if the factor is > 2.00 and < 3

4 marks if the factor is > 1.00 and < 2.

5 marks if the factor is < 1

For contractors ithout any works in Hong Kong in the same 3 year wperiod as defined above, the marking shall be based on the average mark attained by the other tenderers for this attribute who have satisfied (a), (b) and (c) under paragraph (E) of paragraph 13 of this Appendix.


Attribute Marking

(3)(a) - (3)(b)

Technical resources required and submitted from the tenderer shall form part of the contract. Where there are no minimum requirements on technical resources, a passing mark should be set.

Where minimum requirements on technical resources are set in the contract, these minimum requirements are contractual and are required to be complied with. There is no need to set a passing mark for such a case. All tenderers are expected and are required to be able to meet these minimum requirements. This will be Stage I Screening where applicable. Tenderers may be invited to make submission on any resources which are either additional to or enhancement of these minimum requirements and marks may be given for any resources which are either additional to or enhancement of these minimum requirements.

Departments are required to decide on the assessment criteria for this attribute to suit their specific project needs. The criteria must be disclosed at the time of tender.

(4) Technical proposals required and submitted from the tenderer shall form part of the contract. A passing mark shall be set for a satisfactory proposal. Extra credits will be given for any achievement that well exceeds the contract requirements offering extra merits to the project or the public, e.g. Contractor’s proposed method of construction could reduce the construction noise or construction waste well below the normally expected level.

Again, departments are required to decide on the assessment criteria for this attribute to suit their specific project needs. The criteria must be disclosed at the time of tender.

(C) Passing Mark (i) Except for those attributes in Section (2) and subject to (ii) below, there

is a passing mark for each attribute which is equal to 50% of the respective full mark. There is only one passing mark for the whole Section (2) which is also equal to 50% of the full mark. Tenderers failing in Section (2) or in any one attribute in other Sections with a

ETWB TCW No.8/2004 Appendix C Revised Page C13 of 28

(15.2.2008)

passing mark shall be considered as having failed the technical assessment and shall not be given any further consideration.

(ii) Where there are minimum requirements on any or all of the attributes of Sections (1)

and (3) specified in the Contract, there will be no passing mark for such attribute(s). Further, where Sections (3) and/or (4) are divided into several attributes, departments may dispense with passing marks for any or all attributes of these Sections and set a passing mark for the whole Section (3) and/or the whole Section (4). The same applies to Section (1)(a) if it is divided into further attributes and if a passing mark is applicable.

(D) Joint Ventures

(a) Attributes under Section (1) All participants or shareholders of a joint venture tenderer shall be collectively assessed as one entity. It is not necessary that every participant or shareholder must be individually qualified to tender or on the List of Approved Contractors for Public Works or the List of Approved Suppliers of Materials and Specialist Contractors for Public Works. For the Section (1) attributes, qualifications and experience of a joint venture tenderer shall be the weighted average of each participant or shareholder in this present joint venture based on their respective shares of the work by value. For example, if contractor A has 2 relevant contracts and contractor B has 3 relevant contracts, then if A and B form a joint venture and their share is 50/50, the joint venture would have (2 x 0.5) + (3 x 0.5) = 2.5 relevant contracts.

In considering a relevant contract, the full contract value will be taken into account. However, the calculation of the number of relevant contracts a tenderer or a participant/shareholder of the present joint venture would have shall be adjusted based on their respective shares of the work in the past joint venture by value. For example, if tenderer A has completed a relevant contract in a past joint venture of which he has a 50% participation by value of the works, he would be considered to have completed 0.5 relevant contract. If this tenderer A teams up with tenderer B in the present joint venture to submit a tender and their share is 50/50, tenderer A would be considered to have (0.5 x 0.5) = 0.25 relevant contracts. Other combinations follow a similar approach. (b) Attributes under Section (2)(a) to (g) For the purpose of assessing past performance in attributes under Section (2)(a) to (g), each participant/shareholder of a joint venture tenderer shall be separately assessed. The mark of the joint venture tenderer shall be the weighted average of the marks attained by its participants/shareholders for the respective attributes based on their respective shares of the

ETWB TCW No.8/2004 Appendix C Revised Page C14 of 28

(15.2.2008)

work by value similar to the first paragraph under sub-heading “(a) Attributes under Section (1)” above subject to the following rules.

For assessing past performance of each participant/shareholder of a past joint venture contract, the past performance records of the whole joint venture contract shall be attributed to the participant/shareholder irrespective of the value of his share of works in the past joint venture contract. If none of the participants/shareholders of the present joint venture has any performance records for those contracts referred to in the attributes under Section (2)(a) to (g) for the period under assessment, the marking shall be based on the average mark attained by the other tenderers in the corresponding attribute under Section 2 who have submitted a conforming tender as defined under paragraph (E) of this Appendix. Where there are two participants/shareholders in the present joint venture and there are no performance records aforesaid for a participant/shareholder of the present joint venture for the period under assessment, the total mark for this joint venture shall then be the mark attained by the other participant/shareholder of this joint venture with performance records aforesaid for the corresponding attributes. If there are more than one other participant/shareholder in this joint venture, the total mark for this joint venture shall be the weighted average of the marks attained by these other participants/shareholders with performance records aforesaid only in accordance with their shares of work by value for the corresponding attributes. For example, if tenderer A is composed of 3 participants X, Y and Z with 30%, 30% and 40% shares respectively. If participant X has scored 4 marks, participant Y has scored 3 marks and participant Z has no performance record for the attribute in question, the total mark for tenderer A shall be (4 x 0.3 + 3 x 0.3) / (0.3 + 0.3) = 3.5 marks.

(E) Overall Score

The respective weights for price and technical score are 60/40. The overall score for each conforming tender is determined according to the formula below. Normally, the tender with the highest overall score would be recommended for acceptance subject to the usual requirement that the Government is satisfied that the recommended tenderer is fully (including technically, commercially and financially) capable of undertaking the contract. (Note: For tenders without a tender price, departments should replace the term “tender price” in the formula with the appropriate term which is equivalent to tender price in the context of tender comparison for that tender exercise similar to the formula used for term contracts in Appendix B.)

the lowest tender price among

those conforming tenders the technical score 60 *

the tender price + 40 *

the highest technical score among those conforming tenders


For the purpose of calculation using the formula above, a conforming tender means a tender which

(a) conforms to the essential requirements of the tender documentation; (b) is submitted by a tenderer which complies with the conditions of

participation; (c) has passed the Stage I Screening (where Stage I is applicable); and (d) in respect of its technical submissions, has satisfied the passing marks

requirements. A conforming tender with abnormally low or high tender price or is

considered unsuitable for recommendation for the award of the contract (such as financially, commercially or technically incompetent) remains to be a conforming tender. However, any tenderer failing to reach any set passing mark as explained in Part (C) above will be disregarded in the formula calculations.

For tenders with a tender price, if the tendered sums or the overall scores of

those top few tenders are very close (usually the three with the highest overall score), the department should discount future payments to obtain the present value and use the present value to substitute the tender price in determining the overall scores. This exercise should only apply to those top few tenders.

The 60/40 ratio has been chosen following consultation with the construction

industry which has given support to its adoption. If departments consider a different ratio is more appropriate to meet the specific features of their contract, separate approval will be necessary and the procedures under paragraphs 1 and 2 in this Appendix apply.

Tender Report 14. After the technical submissions have been evaluated and the tender price documents have been examined and corrected in the normal manner, an overall score for each conforming tender shall be computed in accordance with the marking scheme. Sample calculations are provided in Appendix D.


15. The tender report shall then be prepared in accordance with SPR 375. The tender with the highest overall score should normally be recommended for acceptance having regard to the considerations listed under Appendix C-1. The procuring department should highlight the approved marking scheme and the result of the evaluation in the tender report. 16. Departments should bear in mind that under no circumstances can a tenderer be advised that his tender is unsuccessful, even though his tender is non-conforming, including those whose technical submissions are found not acceptable, until a decision on tender award is made by the relevant tender board or the Controlling Officer where such authority has been delegated via Financial Circular No. 10/2001. 17. Departments should also bear in mind that a longer tendering period and a longer tender validity period may be required if a marking scheme is adopted. Electrical and Mechanical Services Trading Fund (EMSTF) 18. To guard against potential bid challenges, procuring departments should not normally adopt marking schemes for tender evaluation where in their opinion EMSTF may have an interest to bid. In such case, for works covered by this circular where the quality of service is a major concern, procuring departments should, instead of using a marking scheme, adopt prequalified tendering procedures and recommend the acceptance of the most advantageous conforming tender subject to the usual requirement that the departments are satisfied that the recommended tenderer is fully (including technically, commercially and financially) capable of undertaking the contract. Alternatively, subject to policy support from the Works Policy Section, legal advice from the Legal Advisory Division (Works) and approval from the relevant tender board, departments may consider the use of a non-standard marking scheme by making the necessary modifications to the standard marking scheme above such as by taking out the attributes relating to performance assessments.


Appendix C-1

MARKING SCHEME IN TENDER EVALUATION

NOTES TO TENDERERS Tenderers should note that tenders will be evaluated in accordance with the marking scheme at Annex [ ]. Tenderers should note ETWB TC(W) yy/2004 which sets out the use of marking scheme for tender evaluation. Tenderers should note that the Government is not bound to accept the tender with the highest overall mark or any tender and may cancel the tender exercise on public interest ground. In considering the acceptance of a tender, the Government will take account of all relevant circumstances including the following:-

(i) The overall mark;

(ii) The effect of incident of payments by discounting future payments to obtain the present values if the tendered prices/overall marks are very close; (only for tenders with a tender price)

(iii) The effect of exceptionally high or low priced items; and

(iv) The tenderer’s capability (financially, commercially and technically) in undertaking the contract. For the avoidance of doubt, matters such as bankruptcy, false declaration, lack of integrity, acts of dishonesty, the latest available information and reports reflecting serious shortfall in performance and the latest available information and reports relating to serious safety or environmental incident may be taken into account in determining whether a tenderer is fully capable of undertaking the contract.

Tenderers are required to make a technical submission in accordance with Clause 3 of the General Conditions of Tender, which will be taken into account in the tender evaluation. The submissions on technical resources and technical proposals shall form part of the Contract. The tender price submitted in the Tender is deemed to be inclusive of the execution of the Works in accordance with the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals. Tenderers shall ensure that it is legally and physically possible to execute the Works in accordance with the submitted technical proposals. Should the Contractor for any reason be unable to adhere to the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals, any cost savings to the Contractor arising therefrom shall be determined by the **Engineer/Architect and


deducted from the Contract Sum. For the avoidance of doubt, the Contractor shall not be entitled to any additional payment or extension of time for completion for the execution of the Works in a manner which differs from the technical submission on technical resources and technical proposals. Tenderers’ attention is drawn to Special Conditions of Contract Clause [ ].

Annex [ ] MARKING SCHEME IN TENDER EVALUATION Disclose the full marking scheme including Stage I Screening where applicable. Disclose the weighting of each attribute in the technical evaluation, the marking standard, the assessment criteria and the formula in determining the overall mark. The information provided should be similar to those shown in paragraph 13 of Appendix C, as well as any additional qualification requirements on tenderers as part of the Stage I Screening and/or any criteria of assessment specific to the needs of the contract. The consequences of failing Stage I Screening should be clearly stated.


Appendix C-2

MARKING SCHEME IN TENDER EVALUATION SPECIAL CONDITION OF CONTRACT

(For Capital Works Contracts)

(1) The submissions on technical resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender shall form part of the Contract. The Contractor shall, subject to General Conditions of Contract Clauses 5 and 5A and sub-clauses (4), (5)*, (6), (7), (8), (12) and (13) of this Clause, execute the Works in accordance with the said submissions.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the General Conditions of Contract

Clause 17, the Contractor shall provide a management team including on and off site suitably experienced staff as submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom.

(3)* Without prejudice to the generality of the General Conditions of Contract

Clause 10, the Contractor shall provide all plant and equipment including but not limited to those as submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom which are necessary or desirable for the satisfactory execution and timely completion of the Works or any Section thereof.

(4) In the event the Contractor is unlikely to provide or maintain any staff of the

management team submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom, he shall report to the **Engineer/Architect as soon as practicable and propose for the **Engineer/Architect's approval a substitute staff having experience and qualification comparable with the staff who is leaving the management team. The **Engineer/Architect shall determine any savings of cost to the Contractor, if any, due to the aforesaid changes. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Architect shall be deducted from the Contract Sum.

(5)* In the event the Contractor is unlikely to provide or maintain any plant or

equipment submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom, he shall report to the **Engineer/Architect as soon as practicable and propose for the


**Engineer/Architect's approval modifications or amendments to the Tender submissions on technical resources. The **Engineer/Architect shall determine any savings of cost to the Contractor, if any, due to the aforesaid changes. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Architect shall be deducted from the Contract Sum.

(6) If it is legally or physically impossible for the Contractor to execute the Works

in accordance with the technical proposals of his Tender Submissions, the Contractor shall make necessary modifications or amendments to the technical proposals for the execution of the Works and shall inform the **Engineer/Architect in writing. Any such modifications or amendments to the technical proposals shall conform to the Drawings and Specification.

(7) If the Contractor shall decide not to execute the Works in accordance with the

technical proposals for any other reasons, the Contractor shall make necessary modifications or amendments to the technical proposals of his Tender submissions for the execution of the Works and shall inform the **Engineer/Architect in writing. Any such modifications or amendments to the technical proposals shall conform to the Drawings and Specification.

(8) In the execution of the Works in accordance with the technical proposals or

the technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause, the Contractor shall strictly comply with the Contract to the satisfaction of the **Engineer/Architect and shall strictly comply with and adhere to the **Engineer/Architect’s instructions on any matter relating to the technical proposals or the modified or amended technical proposals as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause.

(9) The Contractor shall within 21 days when so requested by the

**Engineer/Architect give detailed information on the estimated cost of execution in accordance with the technical proposals and the cost of execution in accordance with the technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause. The **Engineer/Architect shall determine the savings of cost to the Contractor arising from the modified or amended technical proposals referred to in sub-clauses (6) or (7) based on the information so provided by the Contractor. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Architect shall be deducted from the Contract Sum.


(10) The Contractor shall not be entitled to, except and to the extent that the Contractor is in compliance with a variation ordered by the **Engineer/Architect under Clause 60 of the General Conditions of Contract, any additional payment or extension of time for completion for the execution of the Works in a manner which differs from the Tender submissions on technical resources or technical proposals (including the technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause) or both.

(11) General Conditions of Contract Clause 15 is amended by adding “(except

where the legal or physical impossibility arises from the Contractor’s technical proposals in the Tender)” after “physically impossible” in line 1.

(12) Any provision in the Tender submissions on technical resources and technical

proposals purporting to impose any obligation on the Employer or the **Engineer/Architect which is not an obligation of the Employer or, as the case may be, the **Engineer/Architect under the other documents forming part of the Contract shall have no effect and shall not be binding on the Employer or, as the case may be, the **Engineer/Architect.


proposals purporting to confer any right or option on the Contractor which is not a right or option of the Contractor under the other documents forming part of the Contract shall have no effect.

(14) General Conditions of Contract Clause 1(1) is amended by replacing the

definition of “Tender” with the following : “Tender” means the Contractor’s tender for the Contract, including for the

avoidance of doubt the technical resources and technical proposals submitted in accordance with Clause 3(1)(d) of the General Conditions of Tender.

(15) General Conditions of Contract Clause 5 is deleted and replaced by the

following: “5. (1) The several documents forming the Contract shall, subject to

sub-clause (2) of this Clause, be construed according to the following order of precedence:

(a) The Special Conditions of Contract (if any);


(b) These General Conditions of Contract;

(c) Other documents forming part of the Contract. (2) In the event of conflict between the submissions on technical

resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender and any other document forming part of the Contract, the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals shall prevail only in the case where such submissions impose higher requirements in terms of quality or quantity than those specified under or pursuant to the other document forming part of the Contract or impose requirements on the part of the Contractor more onerous than those specified under or pursuant to the other document forming part of the Contract and in all other cases the other document forming part of the Contract shall prevail.

5A. (1) Subject to Clause 5, the several documents forming the Contract are

to be taken as mutually explanatory of one another but in case of ambiguities or discrepancies (other than ambiguities or discrepancies within the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender which shall be dealt with in accordance with sub-clause (2) of this Clause) the same shall be explained by the **Engineer/Architect who shall issue to the Contractor instructions clarifying such ambiguities or discrepancies. Where the Contractor makes a request in writing to the **Engineer/Architect for instructions under this Clause the **Engineer/Architect shall respond within 14 days of receipt of such request.

Provided that: (a) [errors in firm quantities or]# work shown on the Drawings or

described in the Specification but not measured in the Bills of Quantities shall be dealt with in accordance with Clause 59;

(b) if in the opinion of the **Engineer/Surveyor compliance with

such instructions shall involve the Contractor in any expense which by reason of any ambiguity or discrepancy the Contractor did not and had no reason to anticipate, the **Engineer/ Surveyor shall value such expense in accordance with Clause 61, and shall certify in accordance with Clause 79;


(c) if in the opinion of the **Engineer/ Surveyor compliance with such instructions shall involve the Contractor in any saving then the **Engineer/Surveyor shall value such saving and deduct the same from the Contract Sum accordingly.

(2) Where there is an ambiguity or discrepancy within the submissions

on technical resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender, the Contractor shall inform the **Engineer/Architect in writing of his proposed amendment to remove the ambiguity or discrepancy; and (subject always to compliance with statutory requirements) the **Engineer/Architect may either issue instructions on such ambiguity or discrepancy or accept the Contractor’s proposed amendment and the Contractor shall be obliged to comply with the instructions or acceptance by the **Engineer/Architect without cost to the Employer. If in the opinion of the **Engineer/Surveyor compliance with such instructions or acceptance of the Contractor’s proposed amendment shall involve the Contractor in any saving then the **Engineer/Surveyor shall value such saving and deduct the same from the Contract Sum accordingly.”

*Note: Sub-clauses (3) and (5) should only be included where tenderers are required to submit a proposal on plant and equipment which is to be assessed and marked.

# Words in brackets needed for building works contracts only.

** Delete as appropriate


MARKING SCHEME IN TENDER EVALUATION SPECIAL CONDITION OF CONTRACT

(For Term Contracts) (1) The submissions on technical resources and technical proposals made by the

Contractor in the Tender shall form part of the Contract. The Contractor shall, subject to General Conditions of Contract Clauses 5 and 5A and sub-clauses (4), (5)*, (6), (7), (8), (12) and (13) of this Clause, execute the Works in accordance with the said submissions.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the General Conditions of Contract

Clause 18, the Contractor shall provide a management team including on and off site suitably experienced staff as submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom.

(3)* Without prejudice to the generality of the General Conditions of Contract

Clause 10, the Contractor shall provide all plant and equipment including but not limited to those as submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom which are necessary or desirable for the satisfactory execution and timely completion of the Works or any Section thereof.

(4) In the event the Contractor is unlikely to provide or maintain any staff of the

management team submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom, he shall report to the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor as soon as practicable and propose for the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor 's approval a substitute staff having experience and qualification comparable with the staff who is leaving the management team. The **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall determine any savings of cost to the Contractor, if any, due to the aforesaid changes. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall be deducted from any payment due to the Contractor.

(5)* In the event the Contractor is unlikely to provide or maintain any plant or

equipment submitted by the Contractor in his Tender submissions on technical resources or necessarily inferred therefrom, he shall report to the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor as soon as practicable and propose for the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor 's approval modifications or amendments to the Tender submissions on technical resources. The **Engineer/Maintenance


Surveyor shall determine any savings of cost to the Contractor, if any, due to the aforesaid changes. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall be deducted from any payment due to the Contractor.

(6) If it is legally or physically impossible for the Contractor to execute the Works

in accordance with the technical proposals, the Contractor shall make necessary modifications or amendments to the technical proposals of his Tender submissions for the execution of the Works and shall inform the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor in writing. Any such modifications or amendments to the technical proposals shall conform to the Drawings and Specification.

(7) If the Contractor shall decide not to execute the Works in accordance with the

technical proposals for any other reasons, the Contractor shall make necessary modifications or amendments to the technical proposals of his Tender submissions for the execution of the Works and shall inform the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor in writing. Any such modifications or amendments to the technical proposals shall conform to the Drawings and Specification.

(8) In the execution of the Works in accordance with the technical proposals or the

technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause, the Contractor shall strictly comply with the Contract to the satisfaction of the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor and shall strictly comply with and adhere to the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor’s instructions on any matter relating to the technical proposals or the modified or amended technical proposals as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause.

(9) The Contractor shall within 21 days when so requested by the

**Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor give detailed information on the estimated cost of execution in accordance with the technical proposals and the cost of execution in accordance with the technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause. The **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall determine the savings of cost to the Contractor arising from the modified or amended technical proposals referred to in sub-clause (6) or (7) based on the information so provided by the Contractor. The savings of cost to the Contractor as determined by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall be deducted from any payment due to the Contractor.


(10) The Contractor shall not be entitled to, except and to the extent that the Contractor is in compliance with a variation ordered by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor under Clause **62/63 of the General Conditions of Contract, any additional payment or extension of time for completion for the execution of the Works in a manner which differs from the Tender submissions on technical resources or technical proposals (including the technical proposals modified or amended as provided in sub-clauses (6) or (7) of this Clause) or both.

(11) General Conditions of Contract Clause 15 is amended by adding “(except where

the legal or physical impossibility arises from the Contractor’s technical proposals in the Tender)” after “physically impossible” in line 1.


proposals purporting to impose any obligation on the Employer or the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor which is not an obligation of the Employer or, as the case may be, the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor under the other documents forming part of the Contract shall have no effect and shall not be binding on the Employer or, as the case may be, the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor.


proposals purporting to confer any right or option on the Contractor which is not a right or option of the Contractor under the other documents forming part of the Contract shall have no effect.

(14) General Conditions of Contract Clause 1(1) is amended by replacing the

definition of “Tender” with the following : “Tender” means the Contractor’s tender for the Contract, including for the

avoidance of doubt the technical resources and technical proposals submitted in accordance with Clause 3(1)(d) of the General Conditions of Tender.

(15) General Conditions of Contract Clause 5 is deleted and replaced by the following: “5. (1) The several documents forming the Contract shall, subject to

sub-clause (2) of this Clause, be construed according to the following order of precedence:

(a) The Special Conditions of Contract (if any);


(b) These General Conditions of Contract;

(c) Other documents forming part of the Contract. (2) In the event of conflict between the submissions on technical resources

and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender and any other document forming part of the Contract, the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals shall prevail only in the case where such submissions impose higher requirements in terms of quality or quantity than those specified under or pursuant to the other document forming part of the Contract or impose requirements on the part of the Contractor more onerous than those specified under or pursuant to the other document forming part of the Contract and in all other cases the other document forming part of the Contract shall prevail.

5A. (1) Subject to Clause 5, the several documents forming the Contract are to be

taken as mutually explanatory of one another but in case of ambiguities or discrepancies (other than ambiguities or discrepancies within the submissions on technical resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender which shall be dealt with in accordance with sub-clause (2) of this Clause) the same shall be explained by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor who shall issue to the Contractor instructions clarifying such ambiguities or discrepancies. Where the Contractor makes a request in writing to the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor for instructions under this Clause the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall respond within 14 days of receipt of such request.

Provided that:

(a) work shown on the Drawings or described in the Specification but not referred to in the Schedule of Rates shall be dealt with in accordance with Clause **63/64;

(b) if in the opinion of the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor

compliance with such instructions shall involve the Contractor in any expense which by reason of any ambiguity or discrepancy the Contractor did not and had no reason to anticipate, the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall value such expense in accordance with Clause **63/64 , and shall certify for payment accordingly;


(c) if in the opinion of the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor

compliance with such instructions shall involve the Contractor in any saving then the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall value such saving and deduct the same from any payment due to the Contractor accordingly.

(2) Where there is an ambiguity or discrepancy within the submissions on

technical resources and technical proposals made by the Contractor in the Tender, the Contractor shall inform the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor in writing of his proposed amendment to remove the ambiguity or discrepancy; and (subject always to compliance with statutory requirements) the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor may either issue instructions on such ambiguity or discrepancy or accept the Contractor’s proposed amendment and the Contractor shall be obliged to comply with the instructions or acceptance by the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor without cost to the Employer. If in the opinion of the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor compliance with such instructions or acceptance of the Contractor’s proposed amendment shall involve the Contractor in any saving then the **Engineer/Maintenance Surveyor shall value such saving and deduct the same from any payment due to the Contractor accordingly.”

*Note: Sub-clauses (3) and (5) should only be included where tenderers are

required to submit a proposal on plant and equipment which is to be assessed and marked.

** Delete as appropriate for civil/building/E&M GCCs

ETWB TCW No. 8/2003 Appendix D Page D1 of 3

Appendix D

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS OF THE OVERALL SCORE Method 1. Only those conforming tenders will be taken into the calculation. See Appendices B and C for the meaning of conforming tender applicable to each formula. 2. Whereas the respective weights for price/value and technical score/performance index are 60/40, the overall marks for the tenders for each of the methods set out below are:- Marking Scheme

the lowest tender price among those conforming tenders the technical score

60 * the tender price

+ 40 *the highest technical score among

those conforming tenders Sample Calculation Tender Tender Price

($M) Technical Score The Overall Score

A 120 (lowest tender price)

65 60 x 120120 + 40 x 65

80 = 92.50

B 125

75 60 x 120125 + 40 x 75

80 = 95.10

C 130

80 (highest technical score) 60 x 120

130 + 40 x 80 80 = 95.38


Formula Approach (For term contracts with a “value” for tender analysis. See page D3 for an example of the “value” used in this calculation.)

100 + the lowest value for tender analysis among those conforming

tenders the tenderer’s performance rating

60 * 100 + the value for tender analysis

of the tender

+ 40 *the highest performance rating among

those conforming tenderers Sample Calculation

Tender Tender Value (%)

PerformanceRating

The Overall Score

A -15.4374 52 60 x 100 – 15.4374100 – 15.4374 + 40 x 52

65 = 92

B -6.2381 59 60 x 100 – 15.4374100 – 6.2381 + 40 x 59

65 = 90.42

C +1.2670 65 60 x 100 – 15.4374100 + 1.2670 + 40 x 65

65 = 90.10


For use in the sample calculation

Appendix To Form of Tender SCHEDULE OF PERCENTAGES

Description

(1)

Section

Percentage (%)

(2)

Limits on Section

Percentage (%)

(3)

Adjustment Percentage

(%)

(4)

Contract

Percentage (%)

(5)

Weighting

Factor

(6)

Value for Tender

Analysis(%)

(7)

Min Max

Section 1 20 -20 +20 8 0.0868 0.6944

Sections 2, 3 and 4 -20 -20 +20 -28 0.0231 -0.6468

Section 5 (a) Item nos. : 057201 to 058104 &

058601 to 058702

-20

-20

+20

-28

0.1197

-3.3516

(b) Item nos. : 056001 to 056502 &

058201 to 058408

-20

-20

+20

-28

0.1110

-3.1080

(c) Items other than those listed in (a) and (b) above

20

-20

+20

8

0.0234

0.1872

Section 6 (a) Item nos. : 060401 to 060406 & 060601 to 060618

5

-20

+20

*PLUS/ MINUS

10%

-6

0.3369

-2.0214

(b) Item nos. : 060407 to 060504 &

060701 to 061104

-20

-20

+20

-28

0.1136

-3.1808

(c) Items other than those listed in (a) and (b) above

20

-20

+20

8

0.0011

0.0088

Sections 9, 10, 11 and 12 20 -20 +20 8 0.0036 0.0288

Sections 7, 14, 15 and 16 20 -20 +20 8 0.0131 0.1048

Sections 18, 21, 25, 38 20 -20 +20 8 0.0024 0.192

Sections 39, 40 and 98 -20 -20 +20 -28 0.1490 -4.1720

Section 41 0 0 0 0 0 0.0163 0

TOTAL --- -- -- --- --- 1.000 -15.4374

* Delete whichever is inapplicable

ETWB TCW No. 8/2003 Appendix E Page E1 of 1

Appendix E The Choice of Tender Evaluation Method

Note : If there is doubt on any of the choices indicated above, the Head of the Department

should then decide on the appropriate method to be adopted.

Is the contract of unusual complexity as described in paragraph 8 of this TC(W)?

Are minimum qualifications

required?

Is prequalification of tenderers required? Para 9 of this TC(W) Such as mega sized contracts

Stage I Screening

(Appendix A) Formula

Approach (Appendix B)

Are minimum qualifications

required?

Prequalification ETWB TC(W) No. 36/2002

Yes

No Yes

No

No

Yes

Stage I Screening

(Appendix A)

Marking Scheme (Appendix C)

Yes No

Submission of Tender Report

Is EMSTF likely to tender?

Special considerations needed

Para. 5 Appendix B

NoYes

Is EMSTF likely to tender?

Special considerations needed

Para. 18 Appendix C

Yes

No