Section 573490. The Circuit Court of Richland County has exclusive jurisdiction over actions between the department and a private entity for breach of a partnership agreement, whether the action is for monetary damages or declaratory, injunctive, or other equitable relief. A partnership agreement may contain a dispute resolution process, including, but not limited to, an obligation to participate in mandatory, nonbinding alternative dispute resolution. Section 573500. Partnership agreements may not be assigned, transferred, or sold without the prior written consent of the Department of Transportation Commission. The commission may not consent to a transfer, assignment, or sale unless it is in the public interest. Section 573510. The department may employ or contract with consultants and other specialists, as may be necessary, to carry out the duties and functions of this article. Any consultants or specialists, including the independent financial consultant, retained by the department are public employees for the purposes of the conflict of interest provisions contained Chapter 13, Title 8. Section 573520. The financial structure of a transportation facility subject to a partnership agreement authorized pursuant to Section 573200 may be refinanced pursuant to the provisions contained in this article if the refinancing is in the best interest of the public and allows for the continued operation and maintenance of the facility. Section 573530. The department may adopt rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this article as it deems necessary and appropriate.” SECTION 3. Chapter 3, Title 57 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding: “Article 9 Toll Roads, Use of Tolls, and Collection of Revenue Section 573900. As used in this article, the following terms have the following meanings: (1) ‘Department’ means the South Carolina Department of Transportation.
(2) at a minimum, the procurement officer subject to item (3) of this subsection, must indicate to, or discuss with, each offeror being considered for award, deficiencies, significant weaknesses, and adverse past performance information. The procurement officer also is encouraged to discuss other aspects of the offeror’s proposal that, in the opinion of the procurement officer, could be altered or explained to enhance materially the proposal’s potential for award. However, the procurement officer is not required to discuss every area where the proposal could be improved. The scope and extent of discussions are a matter of procurement officer judgment; (3) government personnel involved in the acquisition shall not engage in conduct that: (a) favors one offeror over another; (b) reveals an offeror’s technical solution, including unique technology, innovative and unique uses of commercial items, or any information that would compromise an offeror’s intellectual property to another offeror; (c) reveals an offeror’s price without that offeror’s permission. However, the procurement officer may inform an offeror that its price is considered by the governmental body to be too high, or too low, and reveal the results of the analysis supporting that conclusion. It is also permissible, at the governmental body’s discretion, to indicate to all offerors the cost or price that the governmental body’s price analysis, market research, and other reviews have identified as reasonable; (d) reveals the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance; or (e) knowingly furnishes source selection information, as defined by regulation; (4) the procurement officer may request or allow proposal revisions to clarify and document understandings reached during negotiations. At the conclusion of expanded discussions, each offeror must be given an opportunity to submit a final proposal revision, including any revisions necessary to address any changes made to the solicitation. The procurement officer is required to establish a common cutoff date only for receipt of final proposal revisions. Requests for final proposal revisions shall advise offerors that the final proposal revisions must be in writing and that the government intends to make award without obtaining further revisions.”