曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
the bidders. All bidders were offered the same opportunity to ask questions about and provide
comments on the 2004 RFP. All bidders were offered the same opportunity to protest the 2004
RFP specifications and procurement policies. The selection process was conducted in a fair
and open manner. The evaluation criteria established in the RFP were applied equally to all of
the proposals by the members of the Evaluation Committee. All scores assigned by the
Committee were approved and properly documented at the Evaluation Committee meeting.
The Evaluation Committee reached consensus on the final recommendation to the Board.
Allegation 4: Although SBCAG believes that the RFP specifications were clear, SBCAG’s
response to the insurance questions submitted by the bidders, as well as the insurance
language in the draft contract caused some confusion. This confusion may have led to different
cost proposal assumptions, which may have resulted in a different ranking of the proposals.
In addition to the potential confusion regarding insurance requirements, the abbreviated
schedule for the 2004 RFP may not have allowed bidders adequate time to fully understand the
RFP specifications. The 2004 RFP schedule was accelerated to ensure that the new contract
would be awarded before the current term of the existing contract with Santa Barbara Airbus
expired. The 2004 RFP proposal schedule was eleven (11) days shorter than the 2003 RFP.
No pre-proposal meeting was included in the process and the written question and answer
timeline was shortened by 20 days. Based on the accelerated schedule, the bidders only had
one day in which to submit a protest to a specification requirement after receiving SBCAG’s
responses to the bidder’s questions. The accelerated schedule may have constrained the ability
of bidders to adequately respond to SBCAG responses.
Options to Resolve the Protest to the 2004 RFP:
1. Cancel 2004 RFP and Reissue New RFP: In light of the confusion with the 2004 RFP
insurance provisions and the tight proposal schedule imposed on the bidders, canceling
4
the RFP is the recommended action to resolve the pending protest from American Star.
If the 2004 RFP is canceled, staff will then make the necessary improvements to the
RFP specifications, improve the RFP process and bring a new RFP to the Board for
approval. If the board approves this recommendation, the current protest by American
Star is rendered moot and no further action regarding the protest is required by SBCAG.
Cancellation of the RFP by the board is not a protestable action under SBCAG’s protest
procedures.
2. Award contract to American Star: This action would require the Board to uphold the
protest, award the contract to American Star and adopt findings in support of this action.
This action would likely result in a protest by one or more of the other bidders. A second
round of protests would lead to additional delays and would likely result in the
cancellation of the 2004 RFP.
If this option were approved, it could lead to greater operating costs for the Clean Air
Express program, since the cost proposal submitted by American Star was 7% higher
than the cost proposal submitted by Santa Barbara Airbus ($81.50 vs. $76.10 per
revenue vehicle hour).
3. Award contract to Santa Barbara Airbus: This action would require the Board to reject
the protest, award the contract to Santa Barbara Airbus and adopt findings in support of
this action. If SBCAG awards a contract to Santa Barbara Airbus, American Star has
stated that they will continue the protest to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). It is
unclear as to how long the FTA protest process would take, however experience has
shown that this process could take several months to be completed.
4. Hire an Impartial Hearing Officer: The SBCAG Board can elect to defer its decision and
direct staff to hire an impartial hearing officer to conduct a hearing, and prepare a written
recommended decision, including findings of fact. This action would further delay the
RFP process and would require spending additional SBCAG time and money on the
protest. Hiring a hearing officer would not prevent other protests from being filed and
would not prevent American Star from filing a protest to the FTA.
Recommended Improvements to the RFP specifications and RFP Process:
If the Board elects to cancel the 2004 RFP and direct staff to reissue a new RFP as
recommended, several RFP items will need to be considered before releasing a new RFP.
Once changes are made to the RFP, staff will bring the revised RFP to the Board for approval
prior to advertising. The following RFP items will need to be considered prior to reissuing a new
RFP:
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
航空资料32(176)
