The Author
Government Procurement Reform Advocate (GPRA), Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PhilGEPS) Certified National Trainer, Earthquake Quick Response Program (EQRP) Volunteer, Civil/Structural Engineer, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Enthusiast, Musician, Poet/Writer, Journalist, Adviser/Counsel, Family Man and Friend.
Legem Advocatus 
Charlene
August 11, 2014 at 1:42 pm
I find you case digest very helpful and easy to understand! Thank you! 😀
Charlene
August 11, 2014 at 1:42 pm
*I find your
engrjhez
August 11, 2014 at 9:35 pm
Thanks! 🙂
lsdumlaojr.
December 2, 2014 at 3:46 pm
engr. jhez,
i am likewise a civil engineer by profession and working with government. i finished law in 2005. i am greatly consoled having browsed your site and learning that you are a civil engineer too. our specie is quite rare as most engineers are inherently not inclined to take up law 🙂
engrjhez
December 3, 2014 at 6:20 pm
Thanks!
Indeed, a rare specie. Most of our kind “hate” essays. Engineers rather spend time computing than speaking before the public or writing essays; the complete opposite of a lawyer.
Cheers to us who appreciate both numbers and letters!
erbhen bueser
December 15, 2015 at 8:13 pm
engrjhez pede nyo po ba kong bigyan ng conclusion tungkol dun sa case po ni “cabaron vs people of the philippines and sandigan bayan” kelangan lang po sa proj namin. thanks po.
engrjhez
February 8, 2016 at 11:28 am
mair de lara
February 25, 2015 at 7:51 am
good am..i am most enlighten by your topic “BAC Technical Working Group (BAC-TWG)”. Where can we seek final interpretation with regards to the..CASUAL Employee can be member of TWG? the COA do not see it that way with their memorandum…
engrjhez
March 25, 2015 at 7:24 pm
You don’t need to seek any “final interpretation”. That is left for the Supreme Court. There are a lot of GPPB opinions issued to support that matter. The COA cannot intervene with the procurement organization. What they can initially do is to give audit observation memoranda. 🙂
Sammy Sarmiento
March 6, 2016 at 12:50 pm
Sir may I ask up if a Procuring Entity may require specialty license for an ordinary building? like aside from being a Triple A contractor, the procuring entity requires aside from the PCAB AAA Classifications such as PCAB license classification particulars in General engineering, Electrical Work (medium B), Plumbing and Sanitary Work, Fire Protection Work, Elevator and Escalator Work and Mechanical Work. It is in my opinion that this is to much to ask for a simple building.
engrjhez
March 6, 2016 at 9:46 pm
No. That excessive requirement may be questioned anytime. The minimum requirement is to have a valid PCAB license. For ordinary buildings, General Engineering/Building may already be sufficient, as long as the allowable ranges of contract cost is satisfied, unless there are extraordinary requirements.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 8, 2016 at 1:36 am
We have questioned it already sir, it is a hospital. and sadly when we researched there will be only one contractor who would qualify with such requirement out of the 6405 licensed contractors in the country.
Furthermore these were also included in their ITB:
Eligible Bidders shall submit a letter of intent with valid PCAB License (original must be presented) with principal classification of General Building and category “AAA” Large B and proof of similar largest contract with certificate of completion signed by the head of procuring entity ( original must be presented).
Worst yet we already paid the bid documents worth 50,000.00 and they would not issue to us the Technical Plans and Specification of the project, they just gave us the PBD. For the reason that we are not eligible without the Other classifications. We are an ‘AAA’ contractor sir.
Sorry for taking so much of your time.
engrjhez
March 8, 2016 at 10:24 pm
The GPPB already clarified in their opinion that LOI is no longer required. In GPPB NPM No. 101-2013:
“The submission of LOI is no longer required for procurement activities the Invitation to Bid or Request for Expression of Interest for which were advertised or posted after 10 September 2013, the effectivity date of the Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) Resolution No. 27-2012, which deleted Sections 23.4.3 and 24.4.3.3 of the revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. (RA) 9184.”
Plans and Specifications must come together with the bidding documents as provided in Section 17.5 in relation to Section 17.1 of the IRR of RA 9184.
Eligibility Check is conducted during opening of bids, not before it.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 8, 2016 at 1:39 am
It is in my opinion that LOI is no longer required as well as Prequalification, and presenting the original is I think premature at this stage, maybe in the post qualification it is necessary to present the original.
engrjhez
March 8, 2016 at 10:29 pm
You are correct. LOI is no longer required. There is no more Pre-qualification since the effectivity of RA 9184.
Submission of photocopy is already sufficient as there is an “Omnibus Sworn Statement” that states under oath that the documents submitted are faithful reproduction of the originals. The BAC can simply check with the agency that issued the Certificate of Completion, if only to prove its authenticity.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 8, 2016 at 9:30 pm
sir i really need your help and your wisdom on this matter
engrjhez
March 8, 2016 at 10:30 pm
I already answered your previous queries.
Hope it helps.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 9, 2016 at 8:45 am
thank you very much sir it really helped us a lot
Sammy Sarmiento
March 9, 2016 at 8:51 am
Just one more thing po, despite having paid the bid documents, the bac continuously refuses as to give the technical plans, what do you think is our remedy and action, since the bidding is set on March 16
engrjhez
March 10, 2016 at 11:23 pm
You might want to send a demand for the plans/specs through a lawyer/law firm and cite the provisions I mentioned earlier and the consequences under RA 9485 (Anti Red Tape Act) and RA 3019 (Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), as your lawyer may deem fit.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 9, 2016 at 9:23 pm
By the way sir what do you mean sir with extraordinary requirements? sorry for being makulit, just wanted to learn po
engrjhez
March 10, 2016 at 11:23 pm
Where was it mentioned?
Sammy Sarmiento
March 11, 2016 at 9:39 am
in your post po last March 6, 2016 at 9:46 pm
engrjhez
March 11, 2016 at 8:02 pm
I was referring to your question:
To my mind, the “ordinary building” has characteristics less than the license and range required for the project. But correct me if I am wrong, because you did not mention any details about it.
Sammy Sarmiento
March 12, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Actually you are very correct sir, the hospital building is to us an ordinary building, but for the procuring entity, they say that there will be a power house and elevator, which are of course component of an ordinary building. is the power house extra ordinary or the elevator for that matter. They are even requiring us to present the original pcab license, original contract of Single Largest Contract, and original of the Certificate of Acceptance, which we categorically opposed because the law stopped the practice of prequalification. As a matter of fact competitive bidding as defined in R.A. 9184 is Refers to a method of procurement which is open to participation by any interested party……Note that the clause is any interested party.
Jeric M. Cuenca
March 10, 2017 at 12:02 am
Engr. Jhez, ngayon ko lang nakita web mo… very helpful!
na-download ko na yung sa Crim 1.
engrjhez
March 19, 2017 at 7:43 pm
Thanks. Don’t forget to study the basics – law, jurisdpridence, and commentaries in reference books.
Jeric M. Cuenca
March 10, 2017 at 12:03 am
Thank you!
Meye Oreste
March 16, 2017 at 2:47 pm
Hi Sir! First of all, I find this page very helpful. Thank you for generously sharing your knowledge with us. Secondly, I would like to inquire about the procedure on the delegation of authority to the end-user of the conduct shopping and negotiated procurement under emergency cases. I understand that there need be a BAC Resolution to validate this. I am concerned with the RFQ. Does this mean that the end-user will be the signatory in the RFQ as well as in the recommendation?
Another concern is regarding the so-called “canvasser”. Upon reading the Revised IRR of RA 9184, I have not encountered the functions of such canvasser. I believe that he is not a regular member of the BAC. What is he then? And who may be appointed as such? Anticipating your response. Thank you very much.
engrjhez
March 19, 2017 at 8:08 pm
As a general rule, it is the BAC who shall conduct the alterative methods. However, the conduct of alternative methods may be delegated. The delegation is limited to the “conduct” of preparing RFQ and in inviting suppliers, and (in my opinion) does not include the conduct of “canvassing”. The recommendation to the HoPE is still through the BAC. A close reading of Annex H on Specific Guidelines for Shopping, Emeregency Cases and Small Value Procurement, shows:
nico bernardo
November 24, 2017 at 1:13 pm
sir good day..
pasensya na po if dito namin na post yun ganitong case. pls help us, we are members of bac sec. recently we conducted a competitive bidding with the following schedules
posting – october 12 – nov 6
deadline of bid submission – nov 6, 9:30AM
opening of bids – nov 6, 10:00AM
we had 2 participating bidders, the first one “Bidder A” bought the bid docs on nov 3, the second “Bidder B” paid the bid docs at 9:00AM of nov 6
bids was stamped received by the secretariat at 8:38AM and 9:04AM respectively. opening of bids proceeded and no issue was raised by both bidders and observers during that time. both bidders passed the preliminary evaluation. the bac subjected both bids to bid evaluation
however, a day after the opening, “Bidder A” filed a letter complaint against us , according to them there was an irregularity in the bidding procedure and that we did not told them that there’s another bidder, they are harassing us and fabricated a lie that we told/confirmed them on nov 3 (date purchased the bid docs) that they are the only bidder.
“Bidder A” even violated the no-contact rule by always calling our Chairman via phone to tell him to just re-bid the project due to alleged irregularity.
Question:
1. In case there are many bidders, are we required to tell them the name of their competitors?.
2. Did we violate the procurement law by not telling “Bidder A” who and how many bidders bought bid docs?
3. Is the transparency in bidding covers the divulging of such kind of information to other bidders?
4. Did “Bidder A” action violated the procurement law? if yes can you provide us specific section.
5. What sanctions the BAC may exercise in case there was a violation on the part of “bidder A”?
6. Can we file a case against “Bidder A” for possible blacklisting? Can you help us what other case even outside the procurement law that can possibly be filed against “Bidder A”?
many thanks sir for your help and will appreciate whatever advice you can impart on us
engrjhez
January 3, 2018 at 3:50 pm
I believe I already answered this in the other forum.
Odette Leh
June 8, 2021 at 10:20 am
Hi, thank you so much for sharing your cases. It is very helpful.