Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Utilities Department

TO:	Mike Wildgen; Debbie Van Saun; Dave Corliss; Ed Mullins
FROM:	Jim Stuit
CC:	Roger Coffey; Dave Wagner; Philip Ciesielski; Alan Landis
Date:	June 27, 2005
RE:	Response to Bid Protest – 2005 Cured-in-Place-Pipe Program (Project #II05-01)

On June 7, 2005 bids were opened for the 2005 CIPP program.  The vendors also bid on costs for 2^nd and 3^rd year contract renewal.  Two vendors bid on the project and the results are shown below.

Vendor	Cost for 2005 Project	Cost increase for 2006	Cost increase for 2007
Utility Maintenance Contractors, LLC	$372,503.84	+5%	+5% (of 2006 price)
Insituform Technologies USA, Inc	$399,538	0%	0%

The City Commission was to consider awarding the contract to the low bidder (UMC) as part of the consent agenda on June 21, 2005, but that item was pulled from the agenda when the other bidder (ITI) filed a protest.

ITI Protest:

The substance of the ITI protest is that “UMC’s bid failed to contain the required criteria in that UMC failed to provide:

A: Independent third party verification of the long-term physical properties and the enhancement factor for its CIPP pipe design; and

B: An ISO 9000 quality control and assurance program for its 1) engineering applications; 2) manufacturing; and 3) installation.”

UMC Response:

UMC has responded that the independent third party testing (ASTM) was not required in the bid submittal, but will be submitted prior to liner installation.  UMC also contends that their resin and liner manufacturers follow ISO 9000 standards, but the company itself “does not have an independently certified ISO program”.

Utilities Department Analysis:

The Utilities Department has analyzed both the ITI protest and the UMC response.  It was the intent of the Utilities Department to provide bid specifications that ensured the quality of both materials and installation for this project.  The Utilities Department has checked material specification sheets and work references from the low bidder and is confident that the low bidder can provide the desired quality.

Finance Department Analysis:

ITI’s protest consists of two complaints.  The first that an independent third party verification of the long-term physical properties and the enhancement factor for its CIPP pipe design was not submitted with the bid and second that Utility Maintenance Contractors are not ISO certified.

Upon reviewing the bid specifications the items being protested are bulleted items under the section “The contractor must meet the following performance criteria.”  No where does it state that the information is required at bid opening.  The bulleted item concerning the ISO 9000 standards does not state that the winning bidder be ISO certified.  It states that it has to meet ISO 9000 specifications/requirements.  UMC says that the products they will use do meet ISO standards; therefore if Utility Maintenance Contractors provides the City with the required information stated above their bid should be accepted as a valid bid.

Recommended Action:

Staff recommends that we acknowledge the protest and offer a response via the analysis provided in this memo.  Further, staff recommends that the City Commission award the project to the low bidder, Utility Maintenance Contractors, LLC, for the 2005 CIPP project in the amount of $372,503.84.