1. (1) Once the negotiation process is completed for any given set of contracts, any applicants not receiving a contract will be notified via letter that the negotiation process for that set of contracts is completed. Applicants not receiving a contract due to the relative ranking (i.e., there were more qualified applicants than available tax compliance contract audits) may file, within 30 calendar days of the date the letter was issued as reflected by the postmark date on the applicant’s envelope, a written request for reconsideration with the Contract Manager. The request will include, at a minimum, the grounds for the request.

   1. (a) Acceptable grounds are restricted to:

      1. The Committee’s failure to comply with section 213.28, F.S., or applicable rules in force at the date of the subject ranking process; or

      2. The Committee’s failure to consider documented relevant facts that were provided in the applicant’s response to the Request for Information or in response to the questions described in rule 12-25.0056, F.A.C. For example, if the applicant clearly indicated 14 years of experience performing tax audits for the I.R.S. and the Committee inadvertently only gave the applicant credit for 4 years experience. The burden of proof lies with the applicant.

   2. (b) Disagreements with professional judgments exercised by the Committee in evaluating any subjective criteria are not grounds for re-evaluation. Also, the Department reserves the sole right to determine what statistical sampling techniques, if any, will be used, and how the selected techniques will be applied. These determinations will not constitute acceptable grounds for initiating the dispute resolution process provided in this rule.
   3. (c) If the Contract Manager determines that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to support the request, the committee members will be provided with the relevant new information. The committee members will use the new information in completing a revised qualification ranking form for the applicant. The applicant’s new ranking will be used in the order of negotiation for any other tax compliance audits or special projects contracts in the subject fiscal year.
2. (2) (a) As provided in subsection 12-25.0056(7), F.A.C., the Contract Manager or his/her designee will be performing evaluations on each contract C.P.A. firm after each completed tax compliance audit.
3. (b) A contract C.P.A. firm may file, within 30 calendar days of the date the performance evaluation was signed by the Contract Manager, a written request for reconsideration of the performance evaluation with the Process Manager, Compliance Support process.

4. (c) This written request must include, at a minimum, what steps have been taken to resolve the dispute with the Contract Manager, and the grounds for the request. Acceptable grounds are restricted to:

   1. The Contract Manager’s failure to comply with section 213.28, F.S., or applicable rules in force at the date the performance audit was conducted;

   2. The Contract Manager’s failure to consider documented relevant facts which were provided by the contract C.P.A. firm. The burden of proof lies with the contract C.P.A. firm.

5. (d) Disagreements with professional judgments exercised by the Contract Manager in evaluating a firm’s performance are not grounds for reconsideration.
6. (e) The Process Manager, Compliance Support Process, will provide a written response within 45 calendar days of receipt of the request for reconsideration.
7. (f) The Process Manager, Compliance Support process, is authorized to revise the disputed evaluation if sufficient documented facts are provided to support the request for reconsideration. The Process Manager will sign any revised evaluation.

Rulemaking Authority 213.06(1), 213.28(4) FS. Law Implemented 213.28 FS. History–New 3-20-94, Amended 10-30-96, 7-31-00.