CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE (CPC) AGENDA
DATE:
August 30, 2016
DAY: Tuesday
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
LOCATION: Carl T. Langford Board Room, OIA, One Jeff Fuqua Boulevard, Orlando, FL
I.
CALL TO ORDER
II.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - Appeal Process and Lobbying Activities
NOTE: If anyone is aggrieved by any of the proceedings of today’s meeting and wishes to appeal the results of
actions made by this committee, they must file an appeal stating the item they wish to appeal and the basis for which
they wish to appeal, and it must be received in writing by the Executive Director, Mr. Phillip N. Brown, in his office at
One Jeff Fuqua Boulevard, Main Terminal Building by Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 4:00 p.m.
For individuals who conduct lobbying activities with Aviation Authority employees or Board members, registration
with the Aviation Authority is required each year prior to conducting any lobbying activities. A statement of
expenditures incurred in connection with those lobbying instances should also be filed prior to April 1 of each year
for the preceding year. As of January 16, 2013, lobbying any Aviation Authority Staff who are members of any
committee responsible for ranking Proposals, Letters of Interest, Statements of Qualifications or Bids and thereafter
forwarding those recommendations to the Board and/or Board Members is prohibited from the time that a Request
for Proposals, Request for Letters of Interests, Request for Qualifications or Request for Bids is released to the time
that the Board makes an award. As adopted by the Board on September 19, 2012, lobbyists are required to sign-in
at the Aviation Authority offices prior to any meetings with Staff or Board members. In the event a lobbyist meets
with or otherwise communicates with Staff or a Board member at a location other than the Aviation Authority offices,
including the Mayor of the City of Orlando or the Mayor of Orange County, at their offices, the lobbyist shall file a
Notice of Lobbying (Form 4) detailing each instance of lobbying to the Aviation Authority within 7 calendar days of
such lobbying. As of January 16, 2013, lobbyists will also provide a notice to the Aviation Authority when meeting
with the Mayor of the City of Orlando or the Mayor of Orange County at their offices. The policy, forms, and
instructions are available in the Aviation Authority’s offices and the web site. Please contact the Director of Board
Services with questions at (407) 825-2032.
III.
CONSIDERATION OF AUGUST 8, 2016 MINUTES
IV.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
No items to present in the Consent Agenda.
V.
NEW BUSINESS AGENDA ITEMS
A. Purchasing Request for Written Quotation #92279-16, LED Light Fixtures Supply
Procurement – Award Recommendation
B. Purchase of Extended Warranty Service Agreements from Signature Technologies, Inc.
d/b/a Com-Net Software Specialists (Com-Net) – Award Recommendation
Page 1|2
VI.
OLD BUSINESS AGENDA ITEMS
A. Vehicle Services Travel Plaza Facility at Orlando International Airport
VII.
ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: Any person who desires to appeal any decision made at these meetings will need record of the
proceedings and for that purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which
includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
NEXT SCHEDULED CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2016 AT 1:30 P.M. IN THE CARL T. LANGFORD BOARDROOM
Page 2|2
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016
On AUGUST 8, 2016, the CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE of the GREATER
ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY met in the Carl T. Langford Board Room at Orlando
International Airport, One Jeff Fuqua Boulevard, Orlando, Florida, 32827.
Chairperson Daniell called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. The meeting
was posted in accordance with Florida Statutes and a quorum was present.
Committee members present: Dolly Daniell, Senior Director of
Staff/Others present:
Administration and Technology, Chair
Kathleen Sharman, Chief Financial Officer
Tom Draper, Director of Operations
Brad Friel, Director of Planning
Brian Engle, Director of Customer Service
Jo Thacker, Legal, Broad and Cassel
Shannon Wiggins, Legal, Marchena and Graham
Ray Anderson, Senior Director, Properties &
Concessions
Denise Schneider, Purchasing
Bruce Lampman, Purchasing
Tracy Harris, Concessions
Frank Brown, Concessions
Sharmaine Smith, Concessions
Denise Ward, Business Applications Development
Orlando Santiago, Small Business Development
Kathy Walker, Southeastern Paper Group
Salim Premje, Gateway Vending Florida
Joe Iovino, Blimpster Refreshments
Maria Irizarry, Executive Administration,
Recording Secretary
Chairperson Daniell announced to all present that if anyone is aggrieved by any of
the proceedings of today’s meeting and wishes to appeal the results of actions
made by this committee, they must file an appeal stating the item they wish to
appeal and the basis for which they wish to appeal, and it must be received in
writing by the Executive Director, Mr. Phillip N. Brown, in his office at One
Jeff Fuqua Boulevard, Main Terminal Building, by Monday, August 15, 2016 at 4:00
p.m.
For individuals who conduct lobbying activities with Aviation Authority employees
or Board members, registration with the Aviation Authority is required each year
prior to conducting any lobbying activities. A statement of expenditures incurred
in connection with those lobbying instances should also be filed prior to April 1
of each year for the preceding year. As of January 16, 2013, lobbying any Aviation
Authority Staff who are members of any committee responsible for ranking Proposals,
Letters of Interest, Statements of Qualifications or Bids and thereafter forwarding
those recommendations to the Board and/or Board Members is prohibited from the
time that a Request for Proposals, Request for Letters of Interests, Request for
Qualifications or Request for Bids is released to the time that the Board makes an
award. As adopted by the Board on September 19, 2012, lobbyists are required to
sign-in at the Aviation Authority offices prior to any meetings with Staff or Board
members. In the event a lobbyist meets with or otherwise communicates with Staff
or a Board member at a location other than the Aviation Authority offices, including
the Mayor of the City of Orlando or the Mayor of Orange County, at their offices,
the lobbyist shall file a Notice of Lobbying (Form 4) detailing each instance of
lobbying to the Aviation Authority within 7 calendar days of such lobbying. As of
January 16, 2013, lobbyists will also provide a notice to the Aviation Authority
Page 1|6
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016
when meeting with the Mayor of the City of Orlando or the Mayor of Orange County
at their offices. The policy, forms, and instructions are available in the Aviation
Authority’s offices and the web site. Please contact the Director of Board Services
with questions at (407) 825-2032.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon motion by Mr. Friel, second by Mr. Draper, vote carried to approve the
minutes of July 25, 2016 as presented.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Provision of Workforce Management System Services – Cooperative
Purchase Agreement through US Communities Governmental Purchasing
Alliance(US Communities)
B. Purchasing Request for Written Quotation #92128-16, Foam Handsoap
Supply Procurement – Award Recommendation
C. Purchasing Request for Written Quotation #92302-16, Roll Paper
Towel Supply Procurement – Award Recommendation
Chairperson Daniell asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak to
any item on the Consent Agenda or if the Committee had any questions or
wished to have an item pulled for discussion. There was no response to
either inquiry.
Upon motion by Mr. Engle, second by Mr. Draper, vote carried to approve the
Consent Agenda as presented.
NEW BUSINESS
A. REVIEW OF PROPOSALS – LANDSIDE, LEVEL 1-A AND NORTH CELL LOT VENDING
CONCESSION AND LANDSIDE, LEVEL 1-B AND SOUTH CELL LOT VENDING CONCESSIONS
Ms. Harris stated this is request for proposals (RFP) for vending machine
services at the Airport.
On May 20, 2016, in accordance with the Aviation Authority’s concession
policy, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Landside, Level
1-A and North Cell Lot Vending Concession and a separate RFP for the
Landside, Level 1-B and South Cell Lot Vending Concession at the Orlando
International Airport (the airport).
The term is three (3) years subject to early termination by the Aviation
Authority without cause upon 90 days written notice.
The successful proposer(s) for each opportunity were to be granted the nonexclusive right, privilege, and obligation, to rent, occupy, equip, furnish
and maintain the vending units for the operation of their respective
concession at the locations indicated below:
Page 2|6
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016
Each location identified for each concession was to consist of at least two
(2), and not more than three (3), vending units which must include at least
one (1) vending unit for the dispensing and sale of refrigerated nonperishable, non-alcoholic beverage items and one (1) vending unit for the
dispensing and sale of non-perishable snack items.
Both RFPs required the successful proposer of each to pay, to the Aviation
Authority, during the term of each agreement period, a concession fee in an
amount equal to a percentage of gross receipts derived from the sale of all
products sold at the premises.
For both RFPs, proposals containing a
proposed concession fee of less than fifteen percent (15%) of gross receipts
were not considered.
The Aviation Authority’s
and responsive proposer
Aviation Authority. Both
evaluation, which are as
intent is to recommend award to the responsible
with the proposal deemed most favorable to the
RFPs contained identical criteria to be used for
follows:
Criteria Rated as Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory


Financial Capability - Proposer’s financial information must show the
financial ability to meet its existing obligations and those to be
undertaken if successful in being awarded the [Landside, Level 1-A and
North Cell Lot Vending Concession or the Landside, Level 1-B or South
Cell Lot Vending Concession at the Airport]. In the event the information
provided is deemed insufficient, then the successful proposer may be
required to post a contract bond or letter of credit in an amount up to
$10,000.00, as determined by the Aviation Authority.
Reputation - Reputation will be considered based upon the information
provided by proposers’ references. A poor reference or multiple nonresponsive references may result in an unsatisfactory rating.
Criteria Rated According to Strength Demonstrated In Proposal



Demonstrated Experience and Qualifications - Ranking for this criterion
will be based upon the information submitted for the experience and
qualifications of the proposer in operating vending units. Material
litigation will be considered in this criterion.
Customer Service and Marketing - Ranking for this criterion will be based
on the extent to which the customer service approach will further the
Aviation Authority’s goal of improved overall customer service and the
likely success of the marketing program. The successful proposer must
provide consistent inventory management to maintain inventory in ninety
percent (90%) or more of the selections in all vending units at all
times. Must provide and post on vending machines a designated local or
toll-free number for repair service requests or technical support.
Automated refunding capability preferred. Must be on-site to provide
repairs within four (4) hours of notification by the Aviation Authority.
Products and Quality, Variety and Price Range of Items - Products, whether
national, regional, or local should have a recognized public appeal and
meet the criterial specified herein. Proposed vending unit beverage and
snack items are expected to be of high quality and a variety of items.
Page 3|6
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016

Prices should be reasonable when considering the proposed products and
brands.
Vending Units - Proposed premises use and vending units should present a
visually appealing concession space intended to maximize appeal to the
traveler, while remaining true to The Orlando Experience®. The proposed
vending units will be considered for evaluation purposes only, and will
be subject to further review and approval by the Aviation Authority after
award.
On June 24, 2016, the Aviation Authority received the following proposals,
listed alphabetically as follows:



Blindster Refreshments (Blindster Refreshments) of Orlando, Florida
Gateway Vending FL, LLC (Gateway Vending) of Orlando, Florida
The Vending Station, Inc. (The Vending Station) of Saint Cloud, Florida
Ms. Wiggins summarized the CPC memo that was included in the packets and is
set forth below in order to capture all of the information contained within
the memo.
Ms. Wiggins then stated this is a pilot program. Therefore, the proposal
indicated that two (2) years of experience were required. Further,
Ms. Wiggins presented the following irregularities:
Blindster Refreshments - Blindster Refreshments submitted two boxes, one
box was labeled “Proposal
for Level 1-A and North Cell Lot Vending
Concession” and the second box labeled “Proposal for Level 1-B and South
Cell Lot Vending Concession.” However, the contents of both boxes were
identical. Blindster did not separately propose on each concession
opportunity as required and instead combined both concession opportunities
as if it were a single opportunity.
Additionally, while the proposals identify the proposer as “Blindster
Refreshments,” the Florida Secretary of State certificate submitted by
Blindster Refreshments was for an entity named “BLINDSTER, INC.” The Florida
Department of State’s website does not list “Blindster Refreshments” in its
database as a business entity or fictitious name.
According to legal counsel’s analysis, when evaluating competitively
solicited proposals, the decision of a government entity may not afford one
proposer an unfair advantage by acting arbitrarily and capriciously, the
test of which is “generally controlled by a determination of whether [the
government entity] complied with its own proposal criteria as outlined in
the RFP.” Emerald Corr. Mgmt. v. Bay County Bd. of County Comm'rs, 955 So.
2d 647, 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). While the Aviation Authority has the right
to waive minor irregularities, combining two separate proposals constitutes
a material irregularity that cannot be waived. Further, it would be
impossible to award only one of the two concession opportunities to
Blindster Refreshments because the proposals it submitted linked the two
opportunities. This is considered a material irregularity that the Aviation
Authority cannot correct and prevents the Aviation Authority from awarding
any one of the concession opportunities to Blindster Refreshments.
Page 4|6
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016
Gateway Vending FL, LLC - Gateway Vending submitted separate proposals. One
for Level 1-A and North Cell Lot Vending Concession and one for Level 1-B
and South Cell Lot Vending Concession. However, Gateway Vending did not
submit evidence of experience sufficient to meet the requirements for either
opportunity. The vending machine experience described in its proposals are
vending machines located within coin laundry locations that are owned and
operated by an affiliate of Gateway Vending. Gateway Vending also did not
provide details regarding whether the vending machines are supplied,
maintained, stocked or operated by its own employees, an affiliate or a
third-party. Considering the Aviation Authority required experience in the
direct management and operation of a vending machine concession or similar
business in its Eligibility and Proposal Form, this is considered a material
irregularity that the Aviation Authority cannot waive and prevents the
Aviation Authority from awarding any one of the concession opportunities to
Gateway Vending.
The Vending Station, Inc. - The Vending Station submitted only one container
with one set of identical proposals labeled “Proposal for Landside, Level
1-A and North Cell Lot Vending Concession Proposal for Landside, Level 1-B
and South Cell Lot Vending Concession.”
Pursuant to the Aviation Authority’s instructions, if a proposer desired to
propose on both concession opportunities, it would need to propose on each
opportunity separately by submitting two separate containers, one containing
12 sets of proposals for the Level 1-A and North Cell Lot Vending Concession
and a second containing 12 sets of proposals for the Level 1-B and South
Cell Lot Vending Concession. Instead, The Vending Station submitted one
container containing a total of 12 sets that responded to both concession
opportunities combined. As a result, combining the two concession
opportunities is a material irregularity that cannot be waived and prevents
the Aviation Authority from awarding any one of the concession opportunities
to The Vending Station.
Ms. Harris then explained that in the proposal documents, the Aviation
Authority reserved the right to reject any or all proposals for any reason
and to re-advertise or not to re-advertise for proposals.
Based on the
irregularities of each proposal received, Staff recommends that the
Concessions/Procurement Committee deem all proposals non-responsive, reject
all proposals and make a recommendation to the Aviation Authority Board to
solicit a new RFP for vending machine services at the airport.
Chairperson Daniell asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak to
this matter. She then asked if any Committee members had questions.
Mr. Draper inquired as to whether it was staff’s intent to resolicit a
vending opportunity.
In response to Mr. Draper’s question, Ms. Harris
stated that staff intended to re-solicit a vending opportunity with possible
changes, not fully known at this time. Moreover, the current proposers will
be able to propose on any future re-solicitation of a vending concession.
Mr. Joe Iovino, from Blindster Refreshments, then inquired on the reasons
their proposals were deemed non-responsive as he indicated Blindster
Page 5|6
DRAFT - CONCESSIONS/PROCUREMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 8, 2016
Refreshments is interested in submitting a proposal for rebid. Ms. Wiggins
explained the reasons already stated. Mr. Friel inquired about modifying
the RFP for resubmittal.
Ms. Conner responded it would most-likely be
modified.
Mr. Engle inquired when the second RFP would go out to the public. Ms.
Conner responded it would take a few months since there is a time-frame
that needs to be met.
Mr. Engle presented a motion based on staff’s recommendation to place the
RFP back out for bid. Ms. Sharman seconded the motion. Mr. Friel asked, for
clarity, if the
Committee was
approving staff’s recommendation.
Chairperson Daniell clarified that based on staff’s recommendation the
request was to deem all proposals non-responsive, reject the proposals, and
make a recommendation the Aviation Authority Board to solicit a new RFP.
Mr. Engle’s motion was amended to deem all proposals non-responsive, reject
all proposals and make a recommendation to the Aviation Authority Board to
solicit a new RFP for vending machine services at the airport. The motion,
as amended, was seconded by Ms. Sharman, and vote carried to approve staff’s
recommendation.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Daniell asked if there was further Committee business to
discuss.
The next scheduled CPC meeting will be held Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at
3:00 p.m. in the Carl T. Langford Board Room.
With no further business before
adjourned the meeting at 1:46 p.m.
________________________________
Dolly Daniell, Chairperson
this
Committee,
Chairperson
Daniell
_______________________
Date
Page 6|6
GREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY
Orlando International Airport
One Jeff Fuqua Boulevard
Orlando, Florida 32827-4399
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Concessions/Procurement Committee
FROM:
Bruce E. Lampman, C.P.M., CPPB, Purchasing Manager
DATE:
August 30, 2016
SUBJECT: Purchasing Request for Written Quotation #92279-16, LED Light Fixtures
Supply Procurement – Award Recommendation
Type of Procurement:
Request for Written Quotations (RFQ) will result in a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA).
Term of Agreement:
The term of the BPA shall end on June 30, 2017.
Specifications:
On August 5, 2016, the Authority received quotations for the procurement of 6 listed LED
light fixtures to be provided on an “as needed” basis. A specified manufacturer, a specified
product and estimated quantity was listed for each item. It was stated in the RFQ, that “no
alternate products will be considered”. It was required that a specification sheet be submitted
for each light fixture priced in a respondent’s quotation to confirm the respondent was
quoting the specified item. It was required that unit prices include all costs associated with
the delivery of the goods to the Authority’s location. This quotation is for an indefinite
quantity over a fixed time period. The actual amount spent will be based upon the quantities
ordered at the agreed upon unit prices.
Award Criteria:
It is the Authority’s intent that an Award, if made, will be to the responsible and responsive
Respondent submitting the low Total Quotation and has provided unit pricing for acceptable
products for all LED Light Fixtures listed. The Authority reserved the right to make a split
award to no more than two Respondents based on a line-by-line review of the acceptable
products quoted.
NEW BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM A
Concessions/Procurement Committee
August 30, 2016
Page 2
Fee Structure and Calculation:
Total Quotation is based upon the sum of the products of the unit prices times the estimated
quantity of each item listed in the RFQ.
Respondents:
Firm
Graybar
Facility Solutions Group
Gexpro
World Electric Supply
Rexel
Regency Lighting
RetroLED
E&C Electrical Service
Lamp Sales Unlimited, Inc.
ESCO Supplies, Inc.
Total Quotation
$32.262.70
$159,275.60
$163,450.00
$164,369.60
$164,972.80
$192,576.90
*$225,360.00
**$262,160.90
$279,155.00
***$325,164.10
*The Quotation submitted by RetroLED contained mathematical errors resulting in an
understatement of its Quotation by $500.00. The corrections are reflected in the above
tabulation. The errors did not affect its ranking.
**The Quotation submitted by E&C Electrical Service contained mathematical errors
resulting in an overstatement of its Quotation by $330.40. The corrections are reflected in the
above tabulation. The errors did not affect its ranking.
***The Quotation submitted by ESCO Supplies, Inc. contained mathematical errors resulting
in an overstatement of its Quotation by $0.12. The corrections are reflected in the above
tabulation. The errors did not affect its ranking.
References and/or How Firms Meet the Experience Criteria:
N/A
Evaluation of Respondents Relative to Award Criteria:
Section 1.5.1 of the RFQ specifications it was required that a specification sheet be submitted for
each light fixture priced in a respondent’s quotation to confirm the respondent was quoting the
specified item.
Concessions/Procurement Committee
August 30, 2016
Page 3
The Quotation submitted by Graybar provided unit pricing for 3 of the 6 listed items.
The Quotation submitted by Facility Solutions Group provided unit pricing for 5 of the 6 listed
items.
The Quotation submitted by RetroLED provided unit pricing for alternate products for all 6 of
the listed items. Staff is recommending that this quotation be deemed non-responsive.
The Quotations submitted by Gexpro, World Electric Supply, Rexel, Regency Lighting, E&C
Electrical Services, Lamp Sales Unlimited, Inc., and ESCO Supplies, Inc. provided unit pricing
for all 6 of the listed items
Staff is recommending that Graybar be found responsive and responsible on 3 of the 6 listed
items in the not-to-exceed (NTE) amount of $32,262.70.
Staff is recommending that Facility Solutions Group be found responsive and responsible on 5 of
the 6 listed items in the NTE amount of $159,275.60.
Staff is recommending that Gexpro be found responsive and responsible on all 6 listed items in
the NTE amount of $163,450.00.
Staff is recommending that World Electric Supply be found responsive and responsible on all 6
listed items in the NTE amount of $164,369.60.
Staff is recommending that Rexel be found responsive and responsible on all 6 listed items in the
NTE amount of $164,972.80.
Staff is recommending that Regency Lighting be found responsive and responsible on all 6 listed
items in the NTE amount of $192,576.90.
Staff is recommending that E&C Electrical Service be found responsive and responsible on all 6
listed items in the NTE amount of $262,160.90.
Staff is recommending that Lamp Sales Unlimited be found responsive and responsible on all 6
listed items in the NTE amount of $279,155.00.
Staff is recommending that ESCO Supplies, Inc. be found responsive and responsible on all 6
listed items in the NTE amount of $325,164.10.
Clarifications Required During the Process:
Staff did not consider a split award as seven of the nine Respondents were responsive and
responsible on all 6 of the listed items.
Irregularities or Issues that Impact Recommended Ranking:
None.
Concessions/Procurement Committee
August 30, 2016
Page 4
Fiscal Impact:
The amount quoted by the low Respondent providing unit pricing for all of the listed fixtures
(Gexpro) is within budget for funds expected to be spent under the resulting BPA in the current
fiscal year from Operation and Maintenance Funds 301.687.210.5460002.000.100166,
301.687.611.5460002.000.100166, and 301.687.631.5460002.000.100166. The department
intends to submit budget requests for funds expected to be spent under the resulting BPA in FY
’17 and such requests, when considered with known or anticipated obligations of the department
for FY ’17, do not exceed expected or reasonable funding approvals.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the following be recommended to the Executive Director: 1) deem the
quotation submitted by RetroLED non-responsive for the reason stated; 2) award Purchasing
Request for Written Quotations #92279-16 to Gexpro as the low, responsive and responsible
Respondent providing unit pricing for all of the listed fixtures in the not-to-exceed amount of
$163,450.00; 3) authorize funding from the approved Operation and Maintenance Funds and 4)
authorize the Purchasing Office to issue the necessary blanket purchase agreement.
GREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY
Orlando International Airport
One Jeff Fuqua Boulevard
Orlando, Florida 32827-4399
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Members of the Concessions/Procurement Committee
FROM:
Bruce E. Lampman, C.P.M., CPPB, Purchasing Manager
DATE:
August 30, 2016
SUBJECT:
Purchase of Extended Warranty Service Agreements from Signature Technologies,
Inc. d/b/a Com-Net Software Specialists (Com-Net) – Award Recommendation
Type of Procurement:
Approval of award will result in a Purchase Order (PO) based on a Single Source Procurement
Justification.
Term of Agreement:
One time purchase of these Agreements will be completed within ten (10) days after receipt of an
Authority PO.
Specifications:
On August 23, 2016, the Authority received a quotation from Com-Net for the provision of one
thousand, one hundred, twenty-six (1,126), twenty-four (24) month term Extended Warranty Service
Agreements. These Agreements shall provide warranty services beyond the manufacturer’s three (3)
year term warranty provided with the purchase of the Model #LG55VH7B-B monitors being
purchased and installed under BP-447.
Award Criteria:
This purchase of the Agreements shall be made from Com-Net based on a Single Source
Procurement Justification in accordance with Authority Operational Procedure 450.03. Staff has
reviewed the quotation for the Agreements and has determined that the purchase does not lend itself
to a competitive award because this pricing is a result of a competitive process conducted by the
Construction Department. (See “Clarifications”.)
Fee Structure and/or Compensation:
Total Quotation for the Agreements is the sum of the product of the unit price times the stated
quantity of 1,126.
NEW BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM B
Concession/Procurement Committee
August 30, 2016
Page 2
Respondent:
Firm
Total Quotation
Signature Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Com-Net
Software Specialists.
$180,160.00
References and/or How Firms Meet the Experience Criteria:
References were not required.
Evaluation of Respondents Relative to Award Criteria:
Not required.
Clarifications Required During the Process:
The Authority’s policy (Section 450.03, Non-Competitive Procurements) permits the single
source procurement of goods when the procurement is made from one firm among others in a
competitive market place which, for justifiable reasons, is found to be most advantageous for the
purpose of fulfilling the given purchasing need provided that the requesting department
completes a Single Source Procurement Justification form (Form 450.03.2). Single Source
Procurement Justifications with a value in excess of $100,000 must be approved by the Aviation
Authority Board. (Please see the attached Single Source Procurement Justification form.)
On April 18, 2016, the Authority received quotations for the purchase of one thousand, one
hundred, twenty-six (1,126) 55” Display Monitors for the BP-447, Ticket Lobby Renovation
Project in response to RFQ #BP-447-01. All respondents were required to submit warranty terms
and options. Also on this date, the Construction Committee met to observe presentations by the
vendors, open the price portion of the quotations, and interviewed and ranked the quotations. At
the conclusion of this meeting, the Construction Committee recommended to the Aviation
Authority Board to approve an award to Com-Net for the purchase of display monitors
manufactured by LG. The Construction Committee considered the warranty terms and options
but did not include the cost of these Extended Warranty Service Agreement in its not-to exceed
amount of $3,152,800.00. At its meeting of May 18, 2016 the Aviation Authority Board
approved the Construction Committee’s recommendation (Consent Agenda Item “P”). On June
10, 2016, the Purchasing Department issued PO 1004723 for the purchase of the LG Display
Monitors.
Subsequent to these actions, the Operations Department has determined a need to purchase the
Extended Warranty Service Agreements that were previously considered. Com-Net has provided
a separate quotation priced at the unit cost it provided in April, 2016.
Irregularities or Issues that Impact Recommended Ranking:
None.
Concessions Procurement Committee
May 11, 2015
Page 3
Fiscal Impact:
The amount quoted by Com-Net for the provision of the Extended Warranty Service Agreements
is
within
budget
as
funded
by
Operations
and
Maintenance
Fund
301.413.210.5460001.000.100482.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the following be recommended to the Aviation Authority Board: 1)
approve the purchase of one thousand, one hundred, twenty-six (1,126), twenty-four (24) month
term Extended Warranty Service Agreements from Com-Net based on a Single Source
Procurement in the not-to-exceed amount of $180,160.00; 2) authorize the Executive Director to
execute a Single Source Procurement Justification form in accordance with Authority Policy; 3)
authorize funding from the approved Operation and Maintenance Fund; and 4) authorize the
Purchasing Office to issue the necessary purchase order.
Vehicle Services
Travel Plaza Facility
OIA
To be presented at
meeting
OLD BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM A