Original source · versioned page text
2016-11-14 General Committee Agenda
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (14.4 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 8 NOVEMBER 2016
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 54 of 111
Final Evaluation
Weighted Attribute Evaluation Spreadsheet
16177012
Hans Point Foreshore Renepinaton See °
PRICE
No. |NAME OF TENDERER excl of GS
1 Sama ore | = = ont » vee
2 |Marine Civil Contractors Pty Ltd $298,871 : :
3 |Entracon Civil Pty Ltd ee) The ratings:
4 |Hall Contracting Pty Ltd | ——«$410,582) * 0 (zero) = Unacceptable — a fail for that criteria and extreme risk
5 |Rimlex Pty Ltd t/as Nabis Dredging + 20 (twenty) = Very Poor — the content of the submission for that criteria is of a low standard and high risk
Aas * 40 (forty) = Poor — the content of the submission for that criteria is unimpressive and poses a moderate risk
ja Po * 60 (sixty) = Good — the content of the submission for that criteria is meritable and will need to be monitored if awarded
a | + 80 (eighty) = Very Good — the content of the submission for that criteria is of a high standard and advantageous
| Po * 100 (one-hundred) = Exceptional — the content of the submission for that criteria is flawless / outstanding and most adva
Ls
S| Po Once all the data is entered the resultant scores based on the price and non price elements are automatically calculated fc
NON-CONFORMING TENDERS
1 [BoralQuaresSSSCSCSCSC*dD no evaluate Number of Tenders Evaluated = [5]
|
1 2 3 4 5
Rimlex Pty Ltd
. Marine Civil Entracon Civil Pty | Hall Contracting .
~ : ~ _ ™_
Dredging
Evaluation Criteria wercemna on | srt] “owe | asot| “see [Seng] “een Pong] et [Pong | een
Resultant Resultant Resultant Resultant Resultant
weighting weighting weighting weighting weighting
capabiity @Resourcing | 10% jes | 4 | + Fe > ey:
a ee
* P| Pa
Enironment&Surananiy | Pa
ontributiontoLocal Economy | 15% | 8 | 12 | @ | 12 |e | iz | wo | s | o | s
Total Technical Score 65% Po 8145 T8985 8
Normalised Technical Score (Tn) Po AS
Neointrastructure |oontractors PtyLtd| Ltd | ytd
PART B - Price element Neo Infrastructure Contractors Pty Ltd Ltd Pty Ltd Nabis Dredainc
Total Fees (Pc) 35% $349,437 $298,871 $O $410,582 $263,737
Average Fees (Pav) $...........2.....22.-.- $264,525
Price Score 68 87 0 45 100
Normalised Price Score (Pn) 68 87 0 45 100
Weighted Price Score (Pw
Total Score of price and non price
elements
OTHER DETAILS
Assesment panel member 1 Technial Officer - Coastal and Foreshores, Planning and Infrastructure
Assesment panel member 2 Workplace Health and Safety Advisor, Executive Office The Contract Administrator confirms the above weightings
Assesment panel member 3 Environmental Officer, Planning and Infrastructure Contract Administrator's signature:
Assesment panel member 4 -
Page 54 of 111See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.