THE Office of the Public Auditor is unable to issue a ruling on the appeal by Tang’s Corp. or the appeal by Micronesia Environmental Services LLC or MES regarding the $3.8 million, three-year Marpi landfill contract.
From left. Rep. Joseph Leepan T. Guerrero, Micronesia Environmental Services environmental engineer James Benavente, and then-Rep. Marco Peter inspect the Marpi landfill in Sept. 2020.
Photo by Emmanuel T. Erediano
Accordingly, OPA stated, “the decision of the Director of Procurement and Supply remains in effect and parties may pursue relief before the Commonwealth Superior Court pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act….”
The Department of Public Works awarded the contract to operate the Marpi landfill to MES.
After Tang, the previous landfill operator, and two other contractors that submitted bids filed protests, Procurement and Supply terminated the contract between MES and DPW, saying it violated procurement regulations.
Procurement and Supply said it would issue a “revised solicitation under which all parties will have an opportunity to participate.” MES would be allowed to continue to operate the landfill until a notice to proceed was issued under the new contract, Procurement and Supply stated.
On Sept. 24, 2020, Tang Corp. appealed to OPA the decision of Procurement and Supply.
On Sept. 29, 2020, MES also filed an appeal to OPA.
OPA said prior to “receipt of the appeal, OPA Investigations Division had engaged in a separate review of the disputed contract award but, because of the subject matter, took affirmative steps to screen personnel in case OPA was later called upon to decide any procurement appeals. This included shielding outside counsel, who was assigned the present matter, from the collateral review.”
On Oct. 6, 2020, the Procurement and Supply director distributed his report on Tang’s appeal, “a separate matter that is closely related to the present appeals. Unfortunately, the report distributed confidential requests for information regarding OPA’s collateral inquiry to OPA’s screened personnel and all interested parties. This compromise of the screen between OPA’s separate operations and the disclosure of the confidential inquiry to interested parties rendered OPA unable to issue a decision on the merits of the present procurement appeal without jeopardizing its independence or compromising its other ongoing operations,” OPA stated.
