Pipeline project a tender issue<\/p>\n
I refer to the article in your paper of Feb. 1 entitled \"House
\nmember finds fault with Natuna pipeline project.\"<\/p>\n
According to Indonesian regulations, no one, including Mr.
\nNasution, should have had access to any price information at the
\ntime. Your average reader might miss the subtle, but critical
\nimplication, regarding the law.<\/p>\n
Your article clearly quotes Mr. Nasution as saying \"and
\nDaewoo, had high skills and had offered very competitive prices\".
\nIn the last sentence of the same article the reader finds out
\nthat the invitation for the commercial submissions have not even
\nbeen released yet.<\/p>\n
But according to the rules set forth in Indonesia's
\nPresidential Decree Keppres 16, and Pertamina BPPKA's Bulletin
\n077 governing the tendering process, it would be impossible for
\nanyone to make price comparisons when your article clearly stated
\nthat the commercial submissions of the contractors in question
\nhad not been made at the time of Mr. Nasution's complaint. Only
\nby going outside the rules of Indonesian regulations for
\ntendering could anyone have had relevant information at the time
\nregarding prices. If Daewoo offered competitive prices, we must
\nask what these prices were, what they are competitive with, when
\nwere these prices offered, and who were the prices offered to?<\/p>\n
Further, it appears the Natuna project managers have selected
\nthe Indonesian \"Two Phase Method\" for tendering, (one of the
\nthree methods available within Keppres 16). This two phase method
\nis common on extremely complex projects such as the one described
\nin your article, and allows much flexibility in negotiating the
\ntechnical requirements of the project. But the key reason for
\nallowing such freedom in negotiating technical requirements,
\nprior to receipt of commercial submissions, is to ensure the
\nproject's technical success, and to identify and eliminate the
\ncontractors that cannot meet the technical requirements. This
\nelimination should be performed without commercial influence.<\/p>\n
Having rules to guide us is good, but having officials who are
\nallowed to operate outside and independently of the rules is bad.
\nThe act of obtaining and using tendering information prior to the
\ncommercial tender submission undermines the intention of the
\nregulations, such as Keppres 16. If your article is accurate in
\nstating that the commercial tenders had not been released at the
\ntime Mr. Nasution was making his claims, then it also begs
\nanother much larger question: How do companies, such as Hyundai,
\nDaewoo, or anyone else, reach and influence House members prior
\nto commercial tender openings?<\/p>\n
BRUCE M. KENNEDY<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/pipeline-project-a-tender-issue-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }