Para 3.5.7.2 — WORKS_MANUAL

3.5.7.2 Guidelines for resorting to GTE a) Market assessment should be done by the concerned institution, as certified by the Head of the Institution. Only after no Indian manufacturer is found, a GTE should be issued. b) In case no Indian manufacturer/ suppliers are found, procurement may be done, through GTE, subject to compliance of provisions of GFR and requirement of procurement through GeM. c) DEAN (R&D) or an appropriate authority within the institute will issue certificates as per para 3.5.7.3 below, before inviting GTE. As a reporting matter in the Board of Governors, such certificates should be tabled, and also shared with Office of the PSA, DPIIT and concerned Administrative Ministry. d) The information about the procurement of equipment should be shared across various Educational and Research Institutes, through the I-STEM portal, already established for this purpose by the PSA’s office. This will allow the equipment to be used by other institutions too, for research purposes. e) Analyze the equipment being procured time and again from abroad, and help developing them in India by identifying potential manufacturers and providing them technical assistance and expertise for developing the equipment. Half yearly reports on this action to be shared by the Institutes with the Office of the PSA, DPIIT and concerned Administrative Ministry/ A national level scheme will also be initiated by the Office of PSA for indigenous development of scientific equipment. f) Preference to local suppliers over foreign supplier as per the existing Government of India guidelines, should be observed as applicable.

3.5.7.3 Certificates to be issued a) Confirmation of non-availability in India of particular equipment/ consumables of foreign origin through GeM and other sources. b) Certification that locally available alternatives with equivalent specifications are not suitable for research purposes. c) The non-availability of such equipment for research purposes with nearby research institutes or within the institute. d) Certification of the requirement of proprietary items of foreign origin for research purposes (where applicable).

3.5.8 GTE - Risks and Mitigations Risks Mitigations Risks are same as in OTE Same mitigation as in case of OTE also applies here. Moreover, publicity may not reach targeted foreign bidders NIT should also be sent to commercial attachés in foreign embassies in India and to Indian embassies in relevant foreign countries for inviting the attention of likely foreign bidders. The selection of the embassies will depend on the possibility of availability of the required goods in such countries. Escalation of costs due to forex rate variation during implementation. Wherever required technical expertise is available, the possibility of floating open tender than GTE may be explored. Involvement of agents of foreign bidders in GTE procurements is also a major risk area Procurements should preferably be made directly from the manufacturers. Either the agent on behalf of the foreign principal or the foreign principal directly could bid in a tender, but not both. Further, in cases where agents participate in a tender on behalf of one manufacturer, they should not be allowed to quote on behalf of another manufacturer along with the first manufacturer. Commissions and scope of services to/ by the agents should be explicit and transparent in the bids/ contracts

3.5.10 LTE - Risks and Mitigations Risk Mitigation Major risk in this mode is that the demand may be artificially split to avoid OTE or higher level approvals The e-procurement portal may be programmed to raise an alert if the same item is attempted to be procured through LTE repeatedly. Audit should take up a larger percentage of cases in LTE for review. There is a risk that LTE may not attract sufficient number of bids and sometimes there may be a single acceptable offer. This may be because of an insufficient database of enlisted/ known vendors. It could also be due to bid documents not reaching the targeted bidders – intentionally or otherwise. It could also be due to bidders not getting adequate time for submission of bids. On the other hand, unsolicited bidders may also Maintenance of list of enlisted suppliers is a sine-qua-non for LTE. The List of enlisted vendors needs to be reviewed periodically to ensure adequate number of qualified suppliers To ensure sufficient response, in addition to mails/ emails to selected vendors, web-based publicity should be given for limited tenders, with suitable clarifications that unsolicited bids shall not be considered. Further a limited or open tender which results in only one effective offer shall be

1) Inadequate Competition 2) Non-availability of suitable quotations from enlisted bidders 3) Urgent demand and capacity/ capability of the firm offering the unsolicited being known, etc.

b) A simplified Bid Document should be used, instead of a detailed Bid Document. The minimum number of bidders to whom LTE should be sent is more than three. In case less than three approved bidders/ contractors are available, LTE may be sent to the available approved bidders/ contractors with approval of the CA, duly recording the reasons. The requirement should then be marked for development of more sources by the Bidder Enlistment section.

3.5.9 32Limited Tender Enquiry (LTE) i) LTE is a restricted competition procurement, where a preselected list of bidders (enlisted with the Procuring Entity along with those enlisted with other Public Works Organisations/ Works PSUs) is directly approached for bidding; bids from uninvited bidders are treated as unsolicited and are normally not entertained, except in special circumstances. This mode provides a short and simple procedure, but may not provide as good a VfM as in case of open tendering – still a good balance for procurements below a threshold. LTE procedures should be default mode of procurement when the estimated value of procurement is less than Rs. five lakh or when limited numbers of tenderers are known to possess requisite skills, technology and resources, by reason of their high complex or specialized nature, or for works of a secret nature ii) Terms and Conditions a) Copies of the bidding documents should be sent free of cost (except in case of priced specifications/ drawings) directly by speed post/ courier/ e-mail to firms which are enlisted bidders/ contractors. Further, Procuring Entity should also mandatorily publish its limited tender enquiries on Central Public Procurement Portal (CPPP). Apart from CPPP, the organisations should publish the tender enquiries on the Department’s or Ministry’s web site. The unsolicited bids, if any should not be accepted; however Ministries/ Departments should evolve a system by which interested firms can enlist and bid in next round of tendering. However, under the following exceptional circumstances, these may be considered for acceptance at the next higher level of competency:

quote – causing a transparency dilemma about consideration of such offers. treated as a single tender enquiry situation, with relevant powers of approval etc. Adequate time should be given for submission of quotes, which should not be less than three weeks. A longer period (six weeks) could be given in case of import of the materials and, in complex cases, if justifications are given and allowed. There is also a risk that the selection of vendors may not be transparent. At the evaluation stage, some invited bidders may be passed over on grounds of being ineligible/ unreliable. All major procuring departments must keep a list of enlisted bidders for use in restricted bidding. Suppliers or contractors should be selected in a non-discriminatory manner. All past successful vendors/ bidders should invariably be invited. In case it is proposed to exclude any enlisted/ approved vendor/ contractor from being shortlisted for inviting LTE, detailed reasons, such as failure in supply, should be duly recorded and approval of the CA be taken before exclusion. The selection of bidders should be with due diligence, to ensure that bidders who do not meet eligibility criteria do not get shortlisted. At the evaluation stage, in LTE, passing over of a duly shortlisted bidder on grounds of poor past performance or eligibility may raise questions about transparency.

a) There is an urgent need for the work and engaging in competitive tendering process would, therefore, be impractical, provided that the circumstances giving rise to the urgency were neither foreseeable by procuring entity nor the result of dilatory conduct on its part. b) Works that represent a natural continuation of previous work carried out by the firm when considering the limited size of the additional work in relation to the original procurement and the reasonableness of the price it will be cost effective to resort to single source procurement. However, the incremental work should not be more than 25 (twenty-five) percent of the original contract value;

3.5.11 33Single Tender Enquiry (STE) or Selection by Nomination i) The selection by direct negotiation/ nomination is called a single tender. This mode may be shortest but since it may provide lesser VfM as compared to LTE/ OTE and may also strain the transparency principle, it should be resorted to only under following conditions:

3.5.12 STE - Risks and Mitigations Risk Mitigation Risks as applicable in both LTE and OTE are also applicable here. In addition there is a risk that this mode may be used unjustifiably to avoid open tendering (OTE). All mitigation strategies of LTE and OTE would apply here also. In addition the systems of checks and balances should be tighter by way of enhanced and severely restricted delegation of powers in this regard for certification of urgency and approval of this mode of procurement. A system of reports from the authority signing the

c) In case of an emergency situation, situations arising after natural disasters, situations where timely completion of the work is of utmost importance subject to the reason for such decision being recorded and approval of the competent authority obtained. d) Situations where execution of the work may involve use of proprietary techniques or only one contractor has requisite expertise. e) The procurement entity engages in procurement involving national defence or national security and determines that single source procurement is the most appropriate method of procurement. f) Under some special circumstances, it may become necessary to select a particular Agency where adequate justification is available for such single-source selection in the context of the overall interest of the Ministry or Department.

The report relating to such awards on nomination basis shall be submitted to the Secretary/Board/Chief Executive /equivalent managing body, every quarter. The audit committee or similar unit in the organisation may be required to check at least 10% of such cases.]

ii) Terms and Conditions a) The reasons for a STE and selection of a particular firm must be recorded and approved by the CA as per the delegation of powers laid down at in DFPR/ SoPP, prior to single tendering. Powers of procurement of STE are more restricted. b) The Procuring Entity shall ensure fairness and equity, and shall have a procedure in place to ensure that: the prices are reasonable and consistent with market rates for work of a similar nature; and the required work is not split into smaller sized procurements. c) All works/purchase/ consultancy contracts awarded on nomination basis should be brought to the notice of following authorities for information1. The Secretary, in case of ministries/departments. 2. The Board of directors or equivalent managing body, in case of Public Sector Undertakings, Public Sector Banks, Insurance companies, etc; 3. The Chief Executive of the organisation where such a managing body is not in existence.

urgency certificate and post facto review of utilisation of received goods/ works/ services to tackle the expressed urgency may be laid down. Audit should take up the bulk of such cases for review to judge the genuineness of urgency certification.