Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 4 Hansard (3 April) . . Page.. 1412 ..
(10) ACT Procurement Solutions and the ACT Government Procurement Board considered the procurement process proposed by ACTION complied with Section 8 (1)(c) of the Government Procurement (Principles) Guideline 2002 (No 2). In reaching this decision ACT Procurement Solutions and the Board, noted that ACTION had:
undertaken detailed market research over nearly 2 years;
decided to limit the evaluation process to buses that were currently under contract to other governments in Australia; to meet ACTION's obligations under the ACT Accessible Transport Plan and the national standards for accessible transport enshrined in the Disability Discrimination Act; and
determined that only two suppliers could adequately meet ACTION's requirements within the specified timeframe; ACTION had determined that, of the types of bus bodies available under existing Government contracts, the steel CB60 body type was the only body that would adequately meet the Territory's requirements and included the requirement for the steel CB60 body type in their tender documentation.
(11) In house evaluation of the available body materials was conducted and based on a number of engineering principles namely, repairability, durability, serviceability and longevity, ACTION determined that bodies manufactured from steel were more suitable than other materials.
(12) Currently 90% of ACTION's fleet is bodied in steel, with the other 10% bodied in aluminium. ACTION has gained considerable experience in the repair and maintenance of both steel and aluminium body types. This experience leads ACTION to the conclusion that welded steel bodies offer a higher level of serviceability than aluminium bodies.
(13) The contract for the supply of MAN buses with Custom Coach bodies to Transport SA and the Contract for the supply of Scania buses with Volgren bodies (with a Custom Coach body option) to Brisbane City Council.
(14) Yes - the ongoing evaluation of these two contracts is the basis of the present RFT.
(15) No
(16) N/A
(17) The responses to the RFT have been subject to Value for Money analysis in accordance with the Procurement Plan endorsed by the ACT Procurement Board. The value of this procurement is its genesis in existing government contracts, which enabled highly competitive bus prices to be offered.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .