1.8
S
HARING OF
I
NFORMATION
B
ETWEEN
G
OVERNMENT
A
GENCIES
(a)
NSW
Government agencies, Local Government authorities and members of Austroads
Incorporated make available to each other information relating to projects including information
relating to a tenderer's / contractor's performance (for example, substantiated reports of
unsatisfactory performance) or financial information.
(b)
This information may be taken into account by agencies and authorities in considering whether to
offer the Tenderer opportunities for work (including for example the assessment of suitability for
registration, prequalification, selective tender lists or the award of a contract).
1.9
RMS
S
TATEMENT OF
B
USINESS
E
THICS
Parties to the Project Deed must comply with the RMS Statement of Business Ethics. The
statement is
available from the following internet address:
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/doingbusinesswithus/downloads/rta_businessethics_dl1.html
1.10
D
ISPUTE
A
VOIDANCE
B
OARD
(a)
RMS has adopted a dispute avoidance procedure, including a three member Dispute Avoidance
Board (DAB), designed to avoid disputes where possible, and otherwise to
provide an efficient
mechanism for quick and efficient resolution of disputes. Members of the DAB are required to
act impartially, not as an advocate for either party. Members will maintain an ongoing
involvement with the Project through participation in Management Review Group meetings. It is
anticipated that this will assist with early intervention to prevent formal disputes
from arising
under the Project Deed. If a dispute cannot be prevented, the DAB will decide it in accordance
with clause 20 of the Project Deed and the DAB Agreement.
(b)
It is intended that the DAB Agreement will be signed between RMS, the successful Tenderer and
the three DAB members on or before the date of execution of the Project Deed. A copy of the
proposed DAB Agreement appears as Schedule 38 to the Project Deed. Tenderers are referred to
clauses 2.9 to 2.11, clause 3.5 and clause 20 of the Project Deed and Schedules 38 and 39 of the
Project Deed for further details of the role and functioning of the DAB.
(c)
The Tenderer is required to nominate in its Tender two suitable persons as candidates for
appointment as a DAB member, having regard to the criteria in Schedule 39 to the Project Deed.
RMS retains the right to object, on
reasonable grounds, to the successful Tenderer's nominees.
Once a successful Tenderer has been selected, RMS will decide which one of the Tenderer's
nominees will be appointed to the DAB and RMS will nominate a second member. The nominee
of each party will confer to nominate the third member, having regard to the criteria in Schedule
39 to the Project Deed. The nomination of the third member
is subject to the approval by RMS and
the Contractor.
(d)
The Tenderer is to note that:
(i)
the DAB costs are to be shared equally by RMS and the Contractor in accordance with
clause 6 of the
DAB Agreement; and
(ii)
the DAB costs do not form part of the Project Contract Sum.
1.11
T
ENDERER
’
S
O
FFER
RMS intends to capture elements of the Recommended Tenderer’s offer in the executed Project Deed,
including its Schedules. Where elements are captured, this will represent the minimum requirements that
the Contractor will need to meet in relation to the elements captured in
order to comply with the
requirements of the Project Deed. The decision to capture elements of the Recommended Tenderer’s
offer rests solely with RMS and RMS has total discretion over which elements to capture.
IC-DC-C92
D&C Request for Tender
Edition 1, Revision 21, September 2017
Page 4
2.
TENDER EVALUATION PROCESS
2.1
P
ROBITY
A
DVISER
(a)
The selection process will be carried out having regard to the NSW Government Code of Practice
for Procurement dated 18 January 2005.
(b)
A Probity Adviser will monitor the fairness and transparency of the selection process to provide
assurance of a fair and equitable treatment of the Tenderers.
(c)
The Probity Adviser is
[insert Probity Adviser’s name] of
[insert Probity Adviser’s company
name]. In respect of probity issues, Tenderers
may contact [insert Probity Adviser’s name] as
follows:
Phone:
[insert phone No]
Mobile:
[insert mobile phone No]
Email:
[insert email address]
Facsimile:
[insert facsimile No]
2.2
E
VALUATION FOR
R
ECOMMENDED
T
ENDERER
2.2.1
O
VERVIEW OF
E
VALUATION
P
ROCESS
(a)
The Recommended Tenderer will be selected on the basis of the Tender offering the best value
for money, including:
(i)
the greatest level of certainty of delivery of the objectives and requirements detailed in
this Request for Tender;
(ii)
adjusted comparative prices; and
(iii)
any other factor relevant to the determination of the best value for money Tender.
All relevant information in the Tenders will be taken into account by RMS in
making its
evaluation of the Tender which represents the best value for money.
(b)
Tenderers must satisfy the mandatory criteria specified in clause 3.2(c)(ii) of this Request for
Tender, as well as the other requirements in clause 2.3 and clause 4.2 of this Request for Tender
for conforming Tenders.
(c)
RMS favours tenders which demonstrate a greater level of certainty of delivery of RMS’
objectives and its requirements as contained in the Project Deed.
(d)
Evaluation of the Tenders will be the responsibility of an Evaluation Team appointed by RMS.
Team members may include advisers from the government and private sectors.
(e)
The Evaluation Team will:
(iv)
evaluate the Tenders in accordance with the evaluation criteria and satisfaction of the
requirements in this Request for Tender;
(ii)
recommend whether or not to proceed with design and construct delivery; and
(iii)
if appropriate, recommend a Tenderer to RMS.
(f)
The outcome of the non-price evaluation of the nominated Project Verifiers will form part of the
Tender evaluation process, subject to RMS’ rights under clause 2.3(e) of this Request for Tender.
(g)
The outcome of the comparative price evaluation of the nominated Project Verifiers will only be
relevant to the selection of the Project Verifier and will not be considered
in the comparative
price evaluation of the Tenders under clause 2.2.2.
IC-DC-C92
D&C Request for Tender
Edition 1, Revision 21, September 2017
Page 5