This is a bid challenge proceeding in which the Petitioners seek relief on the basis of allegations that the Respondent engaged in conduct which was fraudulent, arbitrary, illegal, or dishonest regarding the award of contracts under RFP No. 96C- 010G, Asbestos and Industrial Hygiene Consulting Services. The Petitioners assert that if their proposals were properly evaluated, they would both be entitled to contracts under the subject RFP. Specific issues raised by the Petitioners are as follows. The formal written protest filed by Petitioner Gaudet Associates, Inc. ("Gaudet"), is in the form of a letter dated October 20, 1995. That letter raises numerous issues in twelve numbered paragraphs. At hearing Gaudet announced that it was pursuing only three basic issues. The essence of those three issues is set forth in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7 of Gaudet's formal written protest. Reduced to their simplest terms, the three issues Gaudet pursued at hearing are: Whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to assign a seventy dollar per hour rate to an "office manager" position in its evaluation of Gaudet's proposal. Whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to contact some proposers and allow them to clarify their proposals without also contacting Gaudet and allowing Gaudet to clarify its proposal. Whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to deduct points from Gaudet's proposal because Gaudet did not list an architect in its proposal. The formal written protest filed by EnHealth Environmental, Inc. ("EnHealth"), is in the form of a letter dated October 19, 1995. That letter raises two basic issues, each with two sub- issues. Reduced to their simplest terms, those issues are: Whether it was arbitrary or illegal for the School District to award contracts to proposers who were not, or might not be, in compliance with Section 496.006, Florida Statutes. Whether it was arbitrary or illegal for the School District to award contracts to proposers who were not, or might not be, in compliance with Section 496.007, Florida Statutes. Whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to contact some proposers and allow them to clarify their proposals without also contacting EnHealth and allowing EnHealth to clarify its proposal. Whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to deduct points from EnHealth's score based on the assumption that EnHealth's hourly rates for services did not include supplies, materials, and equipment necessary to provide those services. At the formal hearing, EnHealth for the first time raised two additional issues; namely, (a) whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to assign a sixty dollar per hour rate to an "office manager" position in its evaluation of EnHealth's proposal, and (b) whether it was arbitrary for the evaluation committee to deduct points from EnHealth's score because EnHealth did not have a professional engineer or a licensed architect.Agency engaged in arbitary conduct by contacting some bidders and not contacting others.