There is no institution in the country where an inspection of any of the supervisory authorities would fail to find tons of violations. The Executive Environment Agency is no exception. The Supreme Audit Office has recently published a report on its financial management for 2011 and 2012. The document makes it clear that the rules and regulations in the office were often broken and its management has not created enough order and organization in disclosing procedures and preparation of tender documentation for the award and implementation of contracts. Because of the lack of effective control, a number of offenses in respect of the deadlines for submission of information to conclude and implement agreements have been carried out.
Although the experts of the Supreme Audit Office audited only randomly selected public procurement tenders, they found enough flaws that deserve attention. The competition announcement for the supply of consumables for chromatography systems, for example, indicated that players may submit bids for one or more of all of the 116 lots. At the same time, deposits and guarantees had a certain pre-set total amount for participation of 2,500 levs without breaking this sum down per positions. Then, during the actual procedure, the Evaluation Committee asked the candidates Hromservice, Soflab, ASM2 and FOT to justify the formation of their pricing proposals that were 30% more favourable than those of the other contenders. However, this was not reflected in the minutes of the committee, not was it announced that for several lots no bids were submitted. Moreover, there was an absurd error when selecting candidates for one of the positions. Instead of ranking first the company offering the lowest price, T. E. A. M., the first place was given to Soflab whose bid was significantly higher in price. Later the ranking was fixed, with the explanation that an error of fact was present. Last but not least, the information on the execution of six of the contracts was sent by the environmental agency for registration in the Register of public contracts only during the audit, after the legal deadline for this had expired.
Seemingly small at first glance but essential discrepancies were conducted in the tender for the supply of consumables for analyzing devices to control air quality. To participate in the procedure the precondition was a turnover from contracts with similar nature of activities in the amount of at least 600,000 levs, although there were 14 lots and for each one candidates could bid separately. So for some of the lots whose value is less than 100,000 levs, the turnover requirement is excessive and poses unreasonable limits to the participation of all the candidates. Moreover, information on the contracts concluded with Sophilco, Labconsult and Marvel was not published in time. There was no decision on the termination of the lots in which no contractor was selected. For lot 11, the assignor has not signed a contract with the only qualifying bidder Labexpert because a report by the Head of the Laboratory for water quality noted that the figure of the bid (73,912 levs) exceeded the financial resources that can be allocated for this position, but no specific reasons were given for this fact. The report was not discussed with the Department of Financial and Economic Activities and Property Management for establishing the real fact of lacking financial resources. With its inaction, the agency in fact failed to implement its own decision on the ranking of candidates and choosing a contractor for the respective lot, which rendered the procedure laid down in that part meaningless, explained representatives of the Audit Office.
Another interesting case is the contract for the renovation of the National Automated System for Continuous Monitoring of the Gamma Background. Violations were revealed also in the procedure for the unified information system for the exchange of data from the monitoring of waters. Similar gaps were allowed in choosing the company to carry out the servicing of automated radiation monitoring system of the water in the Danube Region of NPP Kozloduy. The selected candidate was Proservice NT, which again was the sole candidate.
Administration of the Executive Environment Agency has committed violations also in the carrying out of small contracts. The tip of the iceberg in the agency’s work, however, is the purchase of stationery without having performed any procedures for that. For this purpose in 2011 the body spent 32,765 levs without VAT but for its delivery a public order was not assigned. Sanctions for this an all other violations will not be imposed.
The BANKER
