Provision of diesel generator sets for Halifax class frigates and in-service support

Table of contents

• 1. Background and introduction
• 2. Project requirement
• 3. Attestation of assurance
• 4. Objectives of the fairness monitor assignment and methodology
• 5. Fairness Monitor specific activities and findings
• 6. Reference documents

1. Background and introduction

Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. and Hill International Inc. in Joint Venture was engaged as the Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe the competitive procurement process for the Provision of Diesel Generator Sets for Halifax Class Frigates and In-Service Support for Department of National Defence (DND). This competitive process was undertaken by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) through Letter of Interest and Qualification (LOIQ) Solicitation Number 8483-1137106/B, a second LOIQ Solicitation Number W8483-137106/C and a Request for Proposal (RFP) Solicitation Number W8483-137106/D. Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. and Hill International Inc. in Joint Venture is an independent third party with respect to this activity.

We hereby submit the Final Report covering our activities concerning the LOIQ phase and the RFP phase including the selection of the recommended bidder.

This report includes our attestation of assurance, a summary of the scope and objectives of our assignment, the methodologies applied, and specific activities and relevant findings.

2. Project requirement

The Government of Canada identified a requirement for the services of a company to provide replacement Diesel Generator Sets for Halifax Class Frigates and In-Service Support for the Royal Canadian Navy. The In-Service Support is intended to be in place for approximately twenty (20) years, which is expected to be the life of the frigates.

3. Attestation of assurance

The Fairness Monitor (FM) hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the procurement process for the Provision of Diesel Generator Sets for Halifax Class Frigates and In-Service Support for Department of National Defence (DND).

It is our professional opinion that the competitive process we observed was carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.

Note: For all references in this report concerning fairness related comments being provided to project officials, it is confirmed that, as necessary, project officials provided clarification to the Fairness Monitor (FM) or took appropriate action to address the comments, and as a result no fairness deficiencies were recorded.

4. Objectives of the fairness monitor assignment and methodology

The overall objective was as follows: provide PWGSC with independent observation of project procurement activities; provide fairness related comments to project officials as early as possible so that appropriate action could be taken to resolve the concerns before fairness was impacted; bring any potential fairness concerns to the attention of the Operational Integrity Sector if there is no timely resolution with project officials; and attest as to the fairness of the procurement process, including its execution.
 
To accomplish the objective we undertook the following activities:

• became familiar with the project governance structure;
• reviewed the two LOIQ solicitations;
• reviewed the RFP solicitation;
• reviewed all amendments and addenda to the LOIQ and RFP solicitations including questions submitted by respondents and answers provided;
• reviewed the procedures to be used for the evaluation of responses and the guidance provided to the evaluation team;
• observed the evaluation of responses to the two LOIQ solicitations and the RFP solicitation to ensure that the specified evaluation and contractor selection procedures and departmental policy were followed and consistently applied during the evaluation and selection process; and
• observed the debriefings of unsuccessful respondents. (This activity will be reported on in an addendum to this report.)

5. Fairness Monitor specific activities and findings

Fairness Monitor activities and specific findings concerning the letter of interest and qualifications phase

We reviewed draft versions of a LOIQ during the period May 7, 2013 to August 2, 2013. We reviewed the LOIQ as posted on BuyandSell on August 5, 2013 (Document 1). No fairness deficiencies were identified. During the period August 27, 2013 to August 29, 2013, we reviewed Amendments 1 to 4 (Documents 2 to 5). No fairness deficiencies were identified. The LOIQ closed on September 13, 2013.

During the period September 23, 2013 to September 25, 2013, we reviewed clarification questions to the respondents and the answers received, and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials. On September 25, 2013 we observed the consensus evaluation of the responses received. All responses were found to be non-responsive. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

We reviewed draft debriefing letters to respondents on September 26, 2013 and subsequent elaborations by e-mail from the Contracting Authority to a respondent on September 27, 2013 and October 4, 2013, and found no fairness deficiencies.

We reviewed a draft version of a second LOIQ on October 3, 2013 and we reviewed the LOIQ as posted on BuyandSell on October 4, 2013 (Document 6). No fairness deficiencies were identified. During the period October 4, 2013 to October 18, 2013, we reviewed Amendments 1 and 2 (Documents 7 and 8). No fairness deficiencies were identified. We observed an Industry Conference and One-on-One meetings with suppliers on October 15, 2013. No fairness deficiencies were identified. The LOIQ closed on October 25, 2013.

On October 29, 2013 we reviewed clarification questions to the respondents and the answers received, and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials. On October 30, 2013 we observed the consensus evaluation of the responses received and the selection of the pre-qualified respondents. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

We reviewed draft debriefing letters to the pre-qualified respondents and an unsuccessful respondent on October 30, 2013. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

Fairness Monitor activities and findings concerning the request for proposal phase

We reviewed draft and final versions of communications with bidders during the period November 18, 2013 to January 21, 2015, and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials.

We reviewed draft and final versions of the RFP that was released to Qualified Bidders on September 19, 2014 (Document 9), and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. We reviewed draft and final versions of RFP Amendments 1 to 8 (Documents 10 to 17) and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project authorities with respect to our comments on the RFP and amendments. We observed a Bidders Conference, Site Visit and One-on-One meetings with the Qualified Bidders on October 15 and 16, 2014. No fairness deficiencies were identified. The RFP closed on January 27, 2015.

Fairness Monitor activities and findings concerning the evaluation phase

On February 23, 2015 we observed the consensus evaluation of bids received and no fairness deficiencies were identified.

On April 2, 2015 we reviewed the results of the evaluation of proposals and the selection of the recommended bidder as specified in the RFP. We were advised that the calculations and results had been double checked through an independent peer review. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

6. Reference documents

The following documents are referenced by number in this report.  Unless otherwise indicated, these documents are available through the Project Contracting Authority.

Table summary

The following table includes a list of documents referred to in the report such as the Request for Proposal (RFP), amendments, clarification letters, debriefing letters, etc. Each row is numbered, followed by the document title, then a document identifier such as a date or document number.

No.	Document	Additional information
1	Letter of Interest and Qualification  (LOIQ)	Posted on BuyandSell August 5, 2013
2	Amendment 1 to LOIQ	Posted on BuyandSell August 27, 2013
3	Amendment 2 to LOIQ	Posted on BuyandSell August 29, 2013
4	Amendment 3 to LOIQ	Posted on BuyandSell September 6 , 2013
5	Amendment 4 to LOIQ	Posted on BuyandSell September 6, 2013
6	LOIQ 2	Posted on BuyandSell October 4, 2013
7	Amendment 1 to LOIQ 2	Posted on BuyandSell October 4, 2013
8	Amendment 2 to LOIQ 2	Posted on BuyandSell October 18, 2013
9	Request for Proposal (RFP)	Released to Qualified Bidders September 19, 2014
10	Amendment 1 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders December 3, 2014
11	Amendment 2 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders December 15, 2014
12	Amendment 3 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders December 18, 2014
13	Amendment 4 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders December 30, 2014
14	Amendment 5 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders January 9, 2015
15	Amendment 6 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders January 16, 2015
16	Amendment 7 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders January 20, 2015
17	Amendment 8 to RFP	Released to Qualified Bidders January 21, 2015

Addendum to the final report
August 19, 2015

Addendum to fairness monitor final report dated April 6, 2015, concerning the provision of diesel generator sets for Halifax class frigates and in-serve support

This Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Final Report covers the period following the conclusion of the evaluation phase and includes contract award and debriefings to unsuccessful bidders.

The winning bidder was advised on February 27, 2015 that a contract would be awarded to it subject to Treasury Board approval. On the same day, letters were forwarded to the unsuccessful bidders informing them of the results of the procurement process. Each letter offered a detailed debriefing. Face-to-face verbal debriefings were provided to unsuccessful bidders on March 10 and 11, 2015 and to the successful bidder on March 13, 2015, concerning the evaluation process and their individual results. It is noted that project officials did not provide the Fairness Monitor with the opportunity to review the letters prior to being sent to the bidders, and did not provide advance notice of the face-to-face debriefings on the technical aspects of their bids so that the Fairness Monitor could observe the debriefings. The Fairness Monitor reviewed the letters that had been sent to the bidders and a summary of the face-to-face verbal debriefings that had been provided. On May 6 and July 14, 2015 we observed face-to-face debriefings that were provided to unsuccessful bidders by Industry Canada on the Industrial Benefits and Value Proposition aspects of their bids.

Fairness Monitor attestation of assurance

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the written debriefings and the face-to-face debriefings by Industry Canada were carried out in a fair manner. Since the Fairness Monitor did not observe the face-to-face technical debriefings and no written record was kept of these debriefings, we are unable to provide an opinion as to the fairness of the face-to-face technical debriefings of the unsuccessful bidders. However based on the information provided by project officials, it appears that the debriefings were detailed and fair.