Following the assessment of responses to the project brief, two of the proponents were invited to participate in an extended bidding process or SNP. An evaluation plan was developed for this stage of the evaluation process and signed off by the project steering committee and the probity auditor.
The SNP was conducted over a period of eight weeks during which time there was significant interaction between the state and proponents to address design, commercial and technical issues identified during the evaluation of proposals in response to the project brief. Interactive tender process protocols remained in place and were adhered to during this phase.
Key differences between the SNP evaluation process and the project brief evaluation phase included that:
• the state was able to respond directly to the bidders' designs and proposals, as opposed to merely referring back to the project brief
• a key objective of this phase was to reach agreement, as far as possible, on the terms of the project agreement and ancillary contracts.
As part of the SNP the two proponents submitted revised offers on 26 July 2007. These revised offers were assessed by the evaluation panel and relevant sub-evaluation panels in accordance with the evaluation plan. The SNP evaluation report was finalised in late August 2007 and recommended that the offer submitted by CHP be selected as the preferred solution.
The evaluation panel concluded that the SNP was beneficial to the overall outcome for the state with both bidders submitting revised offers that included significant improvements over the proposals submitted in response to the project brief at the RFP phase, in relation to both design and commercial terms.
Both revised offers were considered to represent value for money in comparison to the public sector comparator of $1.016 billion, with the recommended offer having a risk-adjusted net present cost of $953 million.
The government endorsed the evaluation panel's recommendation in early September 2007. The state then entered into a period of exclusive negotiations with CHP. In order to maintain some competitive tension during this period the state also retained the right to revert to negotiations with the other proponent.