Everything was ready for today, at noon, the hearing to present the counterproposals for a million-dollar call in the Mining and Energy Planning Unit (UPME) -attached to the Ministry of Mines-, which began to be prepared last January, during the government of Gustavo Petro, when that portfolio was in charge of Edwin Palma.
The Investigative Unit of EL TIEMPO investigated and established for the first time that the UPME has just frozen the hearing until next December 4, after the Attorney General’s Office sent Rafael Fragozo, director of the UPME, a letter with observations in which the entity was even asked to analyze the possibility of revoking the million-dollar call, for 654 billion pesos.
READ ALSO
What does the Attorney General’s Office say?
Director of the Upme, Rafael Fragozo Photo:Upme
This newspaper established that the call seeks to select an investor and an auditor for the design, acquisition of supplies, construction, operation and maintenance of the Nueva Loríca 110 kV Substation, located in Córdoba, which seeks to meet the growth in demand in Lorica, Chinú and Coveñas, to reduce the risk of failures and blackouts.
According to documents from the call to which this newspaper had access, on July 31 (when the Petro government was dying) the UPME determined that only the economic proposal of a consortium called Sigma Energía was valid. Therefore, the hearing to present counterproposals from other interested parties had been scheduled for today, November 12.
The First Deputy Attorney General’s Office for Preventive Surveillance of the Public Service, headed by Marcio Melgosa, assured that the proposal from Enelca SAS ESP –Another of the interested companies, specialized in regional transportation and transmission of electrical energy, was declared non-compliant.
And explains that in the information published on the website of the UPME, it was not observed that the company had been informed about the possibility of filing an appeal against that decision.
“In the event that the resources have not been granted, UPME is recommended to analyze the risks of possible nullity, given the defect that this possible violation may constitute, which would be carried over to subsequent actions – including the award -, which would have as a budget the exclusion of ENELCA. “Such an omission could compromise the legal certainty of the procedure and the stability of the project.”reads the document.
READ ALSO
Experience and resources
These are the observations of the Attorney General’s Office for the Nueva Lorica Substation. Photo:Private file
In addition, the Public Ministry asked the UPME to report the analyzes and decisions regarding a determination not to allow the filing of appeals against the award document to select the investor.
The Attorney General’s Office was emphatic in pointing out that there is a ruling from the State Council that indicates that the assignment of a project is “a motivated administrative act that is susceptible to an appeal for reconsideration.”
And it is ensured that in the experience required in the investor selection documents, The exclusion of ongoing contracts was UPME’s own decision and did not comply with the regulations of the Energy and Gas Regulatory Commission (CREG).
“For this reason, the experience requirement required of investors must be motivated. The above, coupled with the fact that operation and maintenance activities are continuous activities, which means that they could be accredited by contracts that have not been completed but are being executed”reads the document known by EL TIEMPO.
Parallel to the Melgosa alerts, EL TIEMPO learned that the process has also been the subject of previous alerts and complaints from the Colombian Veeduría Network, in the event of possible irregularities that could compromise free competition and objective selection.
READ ALSO
The postponement
The document in which the schedule is modified. Photo:Private file
For this reason, the Attorney General’s Office requested that each of the observations presented be resolved in depth. and that the possibility of revoking the call be analyzed.
As a result of the alerts, the UPME has just issued an addendum that modified the schedule of the call and moved the hearing for the presentation of the counterproposals to next December 4.
To justify the modification, the UPME assured that it had sent requests for consultations – without explaining what – to the CREG. and the Superintendency of Industry and Commerce, which to date have not been responded to.
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT
u.investigativa@eltiempo.com
@UinvestigativaET
Follow us now on Facebook
