COA to Guimaras execs: ‘Explain or refund’
The Commission On Audit (COA) wants top officials of the Guimaras Provincial Government to make a really good explanation on over P9.4 million “white rocks” dealings here.
And should the explanation fall short, full refund of discrepancies noted is to be expected.
One of the major findings in the latest audit made by COA, discrepancies amounting to P735,910 was established by government auditors. As such, COA ruled that the transaction was “disadvantageous to the government,” contrary to law.
The finding stemmed from the province’s improvement and rehabilitation of ten road sections using a total of 15,580 cubic meters of white rocks.
As per disbursement vouchers validated, COA likened the corresponding payments made to “excessive expenditures.”
Excessive expenditures, the Commission noted, comprise overpricing of purchases. These are further characterized by grossly exaggerated or inflated quotations in excess of the current and prevailing market price by a 10% variance from the purchased item.
The two Guimaras contractors involved here were H.F. Enterprises awarded with over P3.8 million worth of the project and V.N. Grande Builders and Supply awarded with some P5.6 of the deal.
COA in January and February issued Notices of Suspensions for the supposed payment to the contractors. Meantime, justifications were made by the province’s Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), the topmost aide of Governor Felipe Nava and the Provincial Legal Officer 1.
While no names were mentioned in the COA report, taken into consideration was the explanation of the BAC chair who said that pricing of the white rocks differ from one town to another. The Governor’s Executive Assistant IV on the other hand said there was just an error in computation and that a new one will be presented. The Legal Officer meantime told COA that price difference was brought by varying bulk of the white rocks purchased and distance of the project site.
Said explanations notwithstanding, COA still wants Guimaras Provincial Government to straighten up the deal.
“In this particular case, the end-user of the LGU was inaccurate estimating the Approved Budget Ceiling (ABC) for each project based on the volume of the goods sought to be procured and the distance of the project sites from the quarry,” the COA said. “We, recommend therefore, that management explain or refund if warranted, the discrepancies in the unit costs charged by V.N. Grande Builders and Supplies and the HF Enterprises on their deliveries of white rocks to the respective barangay road projects as computed…”