BidEngineer Technical proposal outline Technical Proposal Outline · USD 49
Wastewater pumping station upgrade: 34 requirements, 9 you cannot yet meet
Every clause of the technical specification mapped to a response, an owner and the evidence behind it. Four of the nine are mandatory.
The specification has 34 numbered technical requirements. You can fully comply with 25. Of the nine you cannot, four are marked mandatory by the client, and three of those four are solvable this week with a subcontractor letter or a clarification question. The fourth is not, and it needs a decision from your directors.
Requirement M-12 asks for ATEX zone 1 certified installation experience on three comparable schemes in the last five years. Calder has two. Partnering covers it; claiming three does not, and this is a client who checks. That is a director level decision and everything else in the bid depends on it.
Position
Compliance at a glance
| Section | Reqs | Full | Gaps |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Mechanical, pumps and pipework | 9 | 9 | None |
| 2. Electrical and control | 8 | 5 | M-12, E-04, E-07 |
| 3. Civil and structural | 5 | 4 | C-03 |
| 4. Commissioning and testing | 4 | 3 | T-02 |
| 5. Health, safety and environment | 5 | 4 | H-05 |
| 6. Programme and resourcing | 3 | 0 | All three, see clause 4 |
Section 6 shows zero not because you cannot comply but because programme and resourcing cannot be answered until the M-12 partnering decision is made. They are blocked, not failed.
Matrix
The nine gaps, in the client's own numbering
| Ref | Requirement | Status | Route to compliance |
|---|---|---|---|
| M-12 | ATEX zone 1 installation, 3 comparable schemes in 5 years | Partial. We have 2 | Partner, or do not bid |
| E-04 | SCADA integration with client's existing Telemetry platform | None | Subcontract. Two firms identified |
| E-07 | Functional safety assessment to SIL 2 | Partial | Requires a qualified assessor |
| H-05 | Confined space rescue capability on site | Partial | Specialist standby provider |
| C-03 | Piling within 3 m of a live main | Partial | Done before, evidence is thin |
| T-02 | Witnessed 72 hour performance test | Partial | Clarification: witnessed by whom? |
| P-01 | Named site manager at tender | Blocked | Depends on M-12 |
| P-02 | Resource loaded programme | Blocked | Depends on M-12 |
| P-03 | Commitment to a 26 week programme | Blocked | Depends on M-12 and on C-03 |
Mandatory requirements are shown in bold. The client's instructions say a non compliance against any mandatory requirement may render the tender non compliant, which is the wording that makes M-12 a decision rather than a drafting problem.
Scope
Scope and exclusions, drafted
Drafted from the specification and from what you have said you will and will not do. Every exclusion below is here because leaving it unstated would mean you had priced something you did not intend to.
| In scope | Excluded | |
|---|---|---|
| Pump supply and installation, 3 duty 1 standby | Yes | |
| Pipework, valves and penetrations | Yes | |
| Wet well modification | Yes | |
| Electrical installation and MCC | Yes | |
| SCADA integration | Subcontracted, named | |
| Site survey and ground investigation | By client, per spec 1.4 | |
| Diversion of the incoming main | By others | |
| Temporary overpumping during works | Excluded, see assumption 4 | |
| Decommissioning of the existing plant | Yes | |
| Disposal of contaminated arisings | Provisional sum |
Assumptions
What the proposal assumes
| # | Assumption | If wrong |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Site available 07:00 to 18:00, six days | Programme extends. 26 weeks becomes 32 |
| 2 | Existing wet well structure is sound | Structural works, unpriced |
| 3 | Ground investigation data supplied by client is accurate | C-03 piling approach changes |
| 4 | Client provides temporary overpumping | Significant cost, unpriced |
| 5 | Power supply capacity is adequate | Supply upgrade, long lead |
| 6 | No asbestos in the existing building | Survey and removal |
| 7 | Client witness available within 5 days for T-02 | Commissioning float consumed |
| 8 | Permits issued within 10 working days | Start on site slips |
Eight assumptions is not excessive for a scheme of this type. What matters is that every one of them appears in the submitted proposal in these words. An assumption held in the estimator's head is not an assumption, it is a risk you have accepted silently.
Clarify
Five questions, and the deadline to ask them
Clarification deadline is 17 October, submission 7 November. All five are answerable by the client and all five change either the price or the compliance position.
- Who provides temporary overpumping during the works? Assumption 4 and the largest single unpriced item.
- M-12 asks for three comparable ATEX zone 1 schemes. Does experience held by a named subcontractor or partner count towards this requirement?
- T-02: who witnesses the 72 hour performance test, and what notice is required?
- Is the ground investigation report at appendix C the full set, or is there additional borehole data?
- E-07 requires a SIL 2 functional safety assessment. Is the assessor appointed by the client or by the contractor?
- Ask all five by 17 October. After that the ambiguity is yours
- Do not state compliance with M-12 until question 2 is answered in writing
- Every assumption in clause 4 goes into the submitted document, verbatim
- Every technical claim traces to a named project or a certificate before submission
- Directors decide on M-12 before the bid team spends another week