Exh 2A~"'
AGENDA ITEM #2A
.,,, - AUGUST 12, 2002
10871 75th St. North • Largo,. Florida .33777
ToLI Free: 800-335-5219 •Office: 727-547-1622 • Fax: 727-547-1722
,~. DIGITAL CONTROL CORPORATION E-mail dccQgte.net • Website: www.digitalcc.com
~" July 25, 2002
City of Atlantic Beach
'~' 800 Seminole Road
Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233-5445
Attention: Mr. James R. Hanson, City Manager
CC: Mayor John Meserve
~,
'~ '- Commissioner Dezmond Waters III
,_
" ~ Commissioner Paul Parsons
~ Commissioner Rick Beaver
Commissioner Louis Borno, Jr.
Mr. Alan Jensen, City Attorney
Dear Mr. Hanson,
,:.
~,.., This is a formal protest over the awarding of the SCADA project to Control Design and a formal
request for reconsideration by the City of Atlantic Beach for the following reasons.
,~, 1. Digital Control Corporation is the low bidder by a substantial margin, 18% lower thane
w Control Design on the base bid and 21 % lower than Control Design on the entire project.
~-~. 2. Digital Control Corporation was not rated correctly by the review committee in comparison to
k the other- bidders. Digital Control Corporation bid the project as specified but was penalized
excessively for. not .submitting confidential financial information and not participating in an
optional site visit prior to submitting. its technical bide. Three representatives of Digital Control
i- Corporation including the Vice President of Engineering did visit the site prior to submitting the
pricing portion of the bid, however.
3. Digital Control. Corporation has the requisite experience and capability to execute this
contract.
There is a major discrepancy -over the requested financials. City officials indicated that the
financials if submitted would be considered confidential and therefore not for public distribution.
~"" Our Counsel disagrees with. this and states that this information would be part of the public
record under the Florida Sunshine-Laws and subject to widespread distribution. Your city
attorney did not dispute this opinion in his letter dated July 22, 2002. If the financials were to be
r"" reviewed only by a competent person in confidence, Digital Control Corporation would have
readily complied with submitting financials to the City. The review committee did not include
someone with -the requisite financial' qualifications to review financial statements. Further, the
""" bid documents did not indicate that these statements would be held in co~dence. The bid
documents .did indicate that. the City would be protected by the bonding requirements of the
Manufactacrer of High Performance Instrumentation and Control Systems
~ AGENDA ITE11~I #2A
AUGUST 12, 2002
C"'
~"' contract. Digital. Control Corporation complied with the bonding requirements. The bonding
a , ` process requires Digital Control Corporation to submit extensive financial information both
about the company and its officers to the bonding company. The bonding company is bound by a
~"^ confidentiality agreement. The bonding company also has trained staff to expertly determine
what risk,. if any, exists. -The bonding company is in essence acting as the City's proxy in this
regard. A .submission to the bonding company is in essence a submission to the .City. The
~"' bonding. company issued the bid bond after determining that the City is not at risk. This should
`` ' comply with the submission of financial documents requirement of the bid documents.
'""' Digital Control :Corporation. requested and received from the City the proposal from Control
Design. The financials were included. So in fact the City does not hold them in confidence..
These financials are incomplete. The balance .sheets were .submitted but not: the corresponding
~. income statements. They are not certified by anyone. They are not even a compilation by an
t' outside accounting firm, so their accuracy cannot be .confirmed.
"~ Regarding the review, it is untenable for a company with 25 yearn of control experience founded
by Honeywell employees to berated 21: percentage points less qualified then Control Design.
;`~ Control Design has a much smaller staff, has narrower experience and has not executed. a single
telemetry project of this magnitude using radios. They have executed only one large system
which uses fiber optics. There is a large difference in the skill necessary to use radios versus one
which is hard wired. The other references include only one other 5CADA system in a municipal
` water/wastewater environment and even this one does not include any wastewater lift stations.
~.,., Digital Control Corporation has successfully installed many radio based SCADA systems for
water and wastewater applications much larger in scope than the one envisioned for Atlantic-
" ` ' Beach. These are indicated in our reference list. Digital Control Corporation also has a huge
,,,, installed base of instrumentation and controls in water and .waste water applications. Control
f Design does not enjoy such similar experience. Control Design has indicated it will assign only
` one college educated staffto this project. Digital Control Corporation indicated it would assign. a
,..., minimum of four college graduates to this. project. Digital Control Corporation has indicated it
is only 4 hours from the City and response time would be 24 hours or less. Despite its close
proximity, Control Design has stated that its response time is still 24 hours. Presumably this is
~ due to its small size. Digital Control Corporation would install PC Anywhere, commercially
` available software package, in its base computer allowing for remote access and troubleshooting
from its main engineering office. Control Design has no such option. Digital Control
.~ Corporation proposed the use of Wonderware as its HMI software package. Wonderware is a
well-known HMI software. package with thousands of users worldwide. .Digital Control
Corporation is a factory certified Wonderware Systems Integrator. Control. Design has
r- recommended .the use of VT SCADA from a small Nova Scotia .company known as Trihedral
Engineering. .Digital Control Corporation proposed the equipment that was specified and is the
same equipment that was proposed by Control'Design but Control Design rated much higher in
*~^ that category. Digital Control Corporation made the recommended site visit but this was still not
recognized by some of the members of the review committee.
,..,
AGENDA ITEM #2A
AUGUST 12, 2002
k
For the foregoing and other reasons, this is a formal protest to award this contract to Control
Design, Inc. Given the fiduciary responsibility of the City Officials, T request to discuss the
matter at the next City Council meeting on August 12, 2002.
k Very Best Regards,
~...
Digital Control Corporation
J D Cattel
~`": President
r-+
~.,
v _.
~""
~„-> _
~GEND ~ ITEM I ~? A
AUGUST 12, 200?
CITY OFATLANTIC BEACH
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
_.
ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5445
_ TELEPHONE: (904) 247-5800
FAX: (904) 247-5805
SUNCOMi 852-5800
http a/ci. atlantic-beach.fl.us
F"
August 5, 2002
~,
J. D. Cattel
President, Digital Control Corporation
f.
10871 75`~ Street North
Largo, FL 33777
:Dear Mr. Cattel;
This is to respond to your letter of July 25, 2002 concerning your proposal for SCADA equipment.. You
z 'raised several concerns about the award of this contract. This letter willrespond to each of those as follows:
Digital Control Corporation was the low bidder and should receive the contract; Price was not the
only criteria for award. The criteria also included an evaluation of the equipment to be provided,
location of thevendor, financial stability and other items. These criteria were.clearly spelled out in
r, the City's request for proposal The intent is to get the best "bang for the buck" and not just spend
the least amount of money.
DCC was penalized for not submitting confidential financial in, formation/the bond should have been.
sufficient; The City's purpose in requesting to see the financial information is to get some assurance
that the company providing goods and services will be in business. for some time. If a vendor were
to go ouf of business during installation of a system, the bid bond would provide a mechanism to get
"~" the installation complete, although that situation inevitably brings with it a lot of headaches.
However, our long-term service needs from a vendor extend well beyond the initial installation of
any system. The City will undoubtedly need additional .service and/or repairs on this system for
years to-come. Relying on a bid bond for, an indication of long-term viability is not sufficient. As for
', ,your concern over the confidentiality of financial information, there are some provisions in Florida
...Law allowing for the withholding of some documents. Had you raised this concern prior to
,~ submittal of technical data and prices, City staff would have discussed with you the ways that the
information can be protected. Specifically, any proprietary information separately submitted in an
..;
envelope marked "Confidential", can be withheld from public disclosure. The information you
„^ requested on your competitor's bids was provided to you under the Open Records Act because they
did not mark the information as confidential `
DCC was penalized unfairly for not visiting the site/DCC did visit the site; Two site visits were noted
.,~
in the City's RFP. One was mandatory and the other was recommended. A site visit prior to the
~~ submission of the technical part of your proposal was recommended. The RFP stated, "contact with
key department staff prior to submitting a [technicaTj proposal is encouraged...." DCC did not make
'""" his site visit.. After the technical criteria was evaluated by City staff, the scores were put in a sealed
envelope and not made public untilafter the opening of the pricing.two weeks later. The second
visit, which the City required, was before the pricing proposal was submitted, and DCC did send a
m.,
r-
:~GEND ~ TT E_lI #2~1
~.tiGtiST 12, 2002
,.~ delegation to Atlantic Beach in connection with that second visit. The technical rankings made by
City staff did not directly grade DCC for making a site visit prior to submission of the technical
proposal. However, your proposal undoubtedly reflected a lack of knowledge about Atlantic
Beach's needs. Donna Kaluzniak told me that you explained your company's choice not to make
this site visit because "there is nothing special about Atlantic Beach's system...you didn't know why
'you needed to visit."
DCC has the experience to do our installation; The City takes no issue with this statement. It is the
City's belief that all the vendors submitting proposals have adequate experience to install the
necessary system for Atlantic Beach.
~ The software proposed by DCC was superior to that from others; The "Wonderware" software
proposed by DCC was not the highest rated by City staff.: The company with the highest rated
software had one of the highest prices, and was not chosen as the City's vendor. Again, it is the
' City's intent to get the best for our dollar.
,~, The response time, from DCC of 24 hours. is as good as anyone else's; The City's request for
k proposals lists 24 hours as the maximum allowable response time. Each of the vendors was required
to agree fo this maximum response, or their bid would not be considered. Proximity to Atlantic
~,,,, Beach was also one of the criteria scored because it is a fair assumption that a company located
closer to Atlantic Beach will be able to respond to our emergency needs quicker. Your company did
not score well in this criteria because you are the farthest away.
`""" DCC has a strong reputation as a provider of SCADA systems in Florida. In this case, it appears to me that
your representatives took us for granted.- Had someone visited Atlantic Beach prior to submission of the
technical proposal and learned more about our needs, the scoring would probably been higher for DCC. We
~""> could have worked with you over the confidentiality concern had you raised it prior to the bid opening. As
:: you are probably already aware, governmental entities can only consider items that are submitted prior to the
due date. To take anything after the prices have been. announced would be unfair to the other vendors.
_.
The City Commission awarded a contract for SCADA equipment at the last Commission meeting on July
~. ;
22nd, Your previous letter of protest had been provided to the Commissioners. prior to the meeting and the
~,,, . basis of the protest was publicly discussed prior to the decision.
f _ -. .
~ Your letter of July 25~' will be provided to the City Commission, and it is the Commission's policy to allow
..anyone to bring a City matter to their attention at any Commission meeting. Please plan to limit your
~. -
W '. comments to five minutes.
If you need any additional information please let me know. I am,
Very truly your