HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.q. Pre-Bid Qualifications-SCADA Project, City Project 377CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 5, 2004
AGENDA ITEM: Pre -Bid Qualifications, SCADA Project, City
Project #377
AGENDA SECTION:
Consent
PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer
IWIAJ
VS La
ATTACHMENTS: September 27, 2004 Memorandum from
Kaeding and Associates, Inc., Resolution
APPROVED BY:
f�
RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
QUALIFIED BIDDERS FOR THE SCADA PROJECT, CITY PROJECT #377.'
ACTION:
ISSUE:
Consider pre -bid qualifications of system integrators for the SCADA Project, City
Project #377 and establish qualified system integrators as "basis of bid" system
integrators.
BACKGROUND:
On May 10, 2004, the Utility Commission authorized advertising for bids for the SCADA
Project, City Project #377. The project, when completed will unify the City's SCADA
System which monitors and controls the City's wells, water towers, sanitary sewers, lift
stations and stormwater lift stations.
Due to the magnitude and complexity of the project and the necessary computer
programming to ensure an operational and maintainable system, the qualifications of
potential project bidders to complete the project, coordinate the transition from the
current system to the new system and provide timely support after the implementation
of the new system is paramount. To address these concerns, the City's consultant, in
coordination with the City Attorney and City staff prepared a pre -bid qualification
process to establish potential bidders that meet the qualifications necessary to
complete the SCADA Project, City Project #377,
As outlined in the attached memorandum from Paul Kaeding with Kaeding and
Associates, Inc., five potential project bidders submitted qualifications for the proposed
SCADA Project, City Project #377. Based on the review of the qualifications of these
potential bidders, it is the recommendation of Staff and the consultant that Council
•aneq Aew I!ounoo jeq} suo!}senb ao sluawwoo ssaippe of 6u!laaw
eqj le elgel!ene aq ll!M `bulpeeN Ined `jue}Insuoo s,AI!O aql pue `Aauao11y 40 aql ` -4elS
•sa}ep!pueo paAoidde I!ounoo eqj woaj sp!q
aniaoaa of las aq Il!M joefoid eqj jol aIep p!q a `aa:4ew s!ql uo uo!joe llounoo 6u!puad
•ouI `swa}sAS loaiuoo aail!j S n
'oul `10JIu00 -ul
. oul `swalsAS Ioaluoo }uawnalsul
oul `Auedwoo swalsAS o!jewo}ny
:LLE# loafoJd 40 `10afoad ` GVOS
aql aol sio}ei6alu! walsAs „p!q jo s!seq„ se palsil aq salep!pueo 6uimolloj eqj gs!Igelse
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2004 —
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING QUALIFIED
BIDDERS FOR THE SCADA PROJECT
CITY PROJECT #377
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount has received pre -bid qualifications from the
following potential candidates:
• Automatic Systems Company, Inc.
• Instrument Control Systems, Inc.
• In- Control, Inc.
• U S Filter Control Systems, Inc.
• Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc.
WHEREAS, the pre -bid qualifications of the aforementioned candidates has been reviewed for
conformance with the pre -bid requirements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendations of Staff, the City Attorney and the
consultant.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota:
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. does not have sufficient experience or staff resources to
manage a project of the magnitude and complexity of City Project #377, and the Council
therefore finds that Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. is not a qualified system integrator
for the project.
2. The following candidates meet the required qualifications to submit a bid for the SCADA
Project, City Project #377.
• Automatic Systems Company, Inc.
• Instrument Control Systems, Inc.
• In- Control, Inc.
• U S Filter Control Systems, Inc.
Resolution 2004 —
ADOPTED this 5 th day of October, 2004.
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
Motion by:
Voted in favor:
Second by:
Voted against:
Kaeding and Associates, Inc.
7300 France Avenue South
Suite 330
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 -4545
Phone: (952) 831 -0317 E -Mail: info @kaeding.com Fax: (952) 831 -2179
MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Rose ount
Attn: Mr. Ai dy Brotzler
FROM. Paul Kaedin
DATE: September 27, 2004
RE. Rosemount, Minnesota
SCADA System
The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system proposed for the City will be used to
monitor and control the City's stormwater, wastewater and water infrastructure. It will be used to alarm
abnormal operating conditions at the stormwater and wastewater facilities, and to monitor, control and alarm
abnormal conditions in the City's water system. The controls will monitor the level in the elevated storage
tanks and will start and stop well pumps based on the level in the storage tanks. The system will also control
the pressure reducing station that transfers water between the east pressure zone and the west pressure zone
in the City. As the City expands, the need to provide more sophisticated control of the facilities that produce
and distribute water will increase. This system is intended to provide the flexibility for future controls.
The system will also respond to new and increasingly difficult demands placed on the City's staff. The
system will log operating hours of mechanical equipment, will sense and alarm abnormal conditions such
as low temperature and leaking pipes in the various facilities, and will sense and alarm unexpected entry into
the facilities. As the City expands and more stations are added, the SCADA system can be expanded to
accommodate those stations and the controls that are needed to allow for operation of the water, wastewater
and stormwater systems.
The system uses dedicated, secure radios that will communicate on a licensed frequency. This reduces the
dependency on telephone circuits and allows for faster communication between sites. The new equipment
will also support and use fiber based communication; and that system is being expanded as new pipes are
installed throughout the City. All of the equipment that is being procured allows for a variety of system
integrators to obtain and program the system.
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 2 of 8
System integrators are commercial organizations that have experience with municipal control systems and
have access to the parts that are necessary for the system including the primary sensing elements, the
controllers, and the final control devices. They also have knowledgeable personnel who can modify
commercially available software to meet the specific needs of the City. The software is configured to
generate reports that the City needs to submit to regulatory organizations, as well as use internally to improve
the reliability of the infrastructure and reduce the cost of operating the water and wastewater system. A
specific example involves pumping stations. Without a SCADA system, many stations must be visited daily
so the operating hours of the pumps can be recorded and operation observed. This monitors pump wear, the
potential for partial plugging of the force main, and abnormal conditions such as the failure of heaters and
leaking. When the SCADA system is installed, visits to the stations can be less frequent since the
information is available at the master station at the public works facility. This saves on operating costs for
the trips, and frees the operators to perform other tasks.
The new SCADA system is sophisticated. During the time when it is being installed, the City will experience
disruption of the existing systems because the equipment must be disconnected from existing controls and
connected to the new controls. As the individual equipment is connected, it must be tested to assure that it
works correctly and that the new controls function correctly. The start-up problems that are encountered with
any new system will occur. The staff must maintain the City's water supply throughout this procedure. The
normal concerns regarding the quality and reliability of the equipment are an issue. In addition, the ability
of the system integrator to successfully install and start up the system without disrupting the supply of water
to the community, as well as dispose of wastewater and stormwater are critically important. Failure to
perform cannot only create substantially more work for the City staff, the City can suffer financial claims
if pumps fail to dispose of stormwater or sanitary wastewater, and basements are flooded or if the City water
supply is interrupted.
There are a variety of organizations that claim to have the expertise to build and install a municipal SCADA
system. The qualification process is one where certain minimum criteria have been identified. Potential
candidates were invited to submit written responses to a solicitation. The responses were reviewed. The
intent is for candidates to be identified that meet the minimum requirements set forth by the City. Those
candidates will be listed as organizations that will be considered in the bidding process for the Rosemount
SCADA system.
The following paragraphs summarize the criteria that were used in the solicitation, the reasons that the
criteria were used, and a summary of the responses of the candidate firms to the requirement.
Firms that wish to be considered must have an office within 75 miles of the City of Rosemount. The
reason for this requirement is that during the start-up and initial operation, there will be times when
quick response to resolve mis- operation or to coordinate the project is essential. Along response time
could be unacceptable in a variety of situations.
All respondents meet this requirement.
The proposed project manager shall be a person with technical qualifications and experience in
municipal SCADA systems. The project manager's resume identifying training and experience is to
be provided including a statement that if the candidate is the successful integrator, the proposed project
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 3 of 8
manager will not be changed without the written approval of the City. The proposed project manager
shall have a minimum of five years experience as an employee of the candidate firm. This requirement
is so the project manager is familiar with the procedures of his / her employer and is a significant
member of the firm to rally the firm's resources if necessary.
Similarly, the individual proposed for software development / configuration is to be identified. This
person shall have the technical qualifications and experience in software configuration of municipal
SCADA systems. The candidates are to provide a statement that if the candidate is the successful
integrator, the person responsible for software development will not be changed without the written
approval of the City. The proposed software development person shall have a minimum of four years
experience as an employee of the candidate firm. The reasons are the same as for the project manager.
All the candidates meet this requirement.
The candidate firm was asked to identify at least four (4) successful municipal SCADA systems of
similar or greater complexity for a water or wastewater system in the states of Minnesota, Iowa,
Wisconsin, South Dakota or North Dakota between January 1, 2001 and July 1, 2003. The systems
shall be operational. The intent of the dates was to allow time so a determination could be made of
how the systems are operating once installed and turned over to the owner.
To qualify as a system of similar or greater complexity, the following criteria must be met and the
following information provided:
The project must be for a governmental organization. The intent is to confirm that the system is
a municipal water or wastewater system and that the candidate organization has addressed the
circumstances that are unique to this industry. The cost of the system shall exceed $500,000. The
cost is to identify projects that are as large as, or larger than the one being considered by
Rosemount. As systems become larger, the system integrator's management capabilities, financial
resources, ability to provide direction at multiple sites, in addition to the integrator's obligations
on other projects become a concern for the City. Other requirements in the solicitation require
familiarity with radio and/or fiber optic based telemetry and experience with control systems ...
not just monitoring systems.
Three of the four projects should be configured using AB PLCs with workstations running
Wonderware software. The fourth project may use a different manufacturer's PLC and/or
workstation software. Our experience is that a significant number of municipal projects in this
part of the country use Allen Bradley PLCs and Wonderware software. The intent of the design
is for the successful vendor to use these products or similar, widely based equipment and software
so the City benefits by a large installed base. A large installed base will help assure support of the
system into the future.
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 4 of 8
In alphabetical order:
Automatic Systems Company indicates projects with total values of $1,057,000; $669,500;
$547,700; and $523,600. The projects use the hardware and software specified.
In- Control, Inc. indicates projects with values of $499, 000; $653, 000; $749, 000 and $552, 000.
These projects include Allen Bradley PLCs but generally use RSView software, a product of the
Allen Bradley Company.
Instrument Control Systems, Inc. indicates projects with total values of $2,860,000; $721,600;
$758,000; and $594,000. Two of the projects include the specified hardware and software, and
two use similar systems by other manufacturers. The alternate equipment includes GE PLCs and
iFIX software.
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. indicates projects with values of $207,100; $173,200;
$134, 000 and $71,100. Three of the projects use the specified hardware and software. One is
apparently a monitoring system only.
US Filter Control Systems, Inc. lists projects with values of $929, 000; $759, 000; $650, 000 and
$1,294,000. The projects use the specified products on three projects and software on two of the
projects.
The requirement regarding the size of a project and the time frame was relaxed. In some instances,
large projects extended thru the window allowed; and in other instances, multiple work tasks for the
same overall system were awarded. Where multiple work elements are involved, the total cost was
used when the candidate identified the various elements.
This item will result in 0 to 40 points for the candidate. Evaluation will be based on the size of the
project, responsiveness of the candidate, and system performance determined by interviews with
governmental agency personnel. Thirty points are allocated based on the size of the projects. The
consideration is the candidate's ability to manage large SCADA system construction projects. The
remaining 10 points are for similar hardware and software. This is a secondary issue and if the
equipment and software is similar and the candidate has experience with the specified products, the
candidate should have the necessary skills to construct and program the equipment. Based on the
foregoing, the points awarded include:
Automatic Systems Company
40
Instrument Control Systems Inc.
35
In- Control, Inc.
35
US Filter Control Systems, Inc.
40
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc.
8
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 5 of 8
Instrument Control Systems' points were reduced because although they met the original project
schedule, their response after the completion of the projects has been irregular. The firm recently had
several people leave to start a competing firm, and the response time is considered an anomaly. In-
Control had points reduced due to the absence of Wonderware on their referenced projects. Other
listed experience does include significant experience with Wonderware software products. Telemetry
and Process Controls lost points because none of their referenced projects were near the size
requirement. The largest project listed had a value of $207, 000, less than half of the target value of
$500, 000. Telemetry and Process Controls has three projects with multiple elements, but the value
of the elements is not identified.
The candidate firm shall provide the following information regarding personnel:
The names and titles of employees of the candidate in the local office that will be used for this project.
The number of years that each employee in the local office has been an employee of the candidate.
Local office is the office closest to the City of Rosemount. Firms with fewer than three service
technicians will not be considered. The criteria is based on the depth of the staff and the ability of the
staff to respond to the potentially intense site activities when the system is being placed into service.
Further, it is recognized that the candidates have other obligations, and the depth of the service staff
can help to respond to unforseen events that occur during start-up and initial operation of the system.
This issue will result in 0 to 25 points for the candidate. Evaluation will be based on the number of
employees and the time of service to the candidate. A homogeneous, long time staff can assist in better
service to the City.
In evaluating the responses of the candidates, we attempted to not include the service managers and
other officers of the companies. Although they may be capable of service work, it is unlikely that they
will do so except under unusual circumstances.
Automatic Systems Company listed four service employees in the Saint Paul office with total
experience with the firm of 41 years.
In- Control, Inc. listed eight service employees with a total experience at the firm of 29.5 years.
Instrument Control Systems, Inc. listed eight employees with 30 years total experience.
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. listed seven service employees with 22 years total experience.
US Filter Control Systems, Inc. listed eight employees with 31 years experience.
If one point per total years of service is assigned:
Automatic Systems Company, Inc.
40 points
In- Control, Inc.
30 points
Instrument Control Systems, Inc.
30 points
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc.
22 points
US Filter Control Systems, Inc.
31 points
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 6of8
In some instances, most employees were listed as "service personnel ".
The candidate shall state in writing that the candidate, with its own employees, will procure the
components, design, assemble, and test the system. Failure to meet this requirement will result in
disqualification. The candidate shall state in writing that the candidate has a full time professional
electrical engineer on his/her staff. The name of the individual, registration number, and the years of
service with the candidate shall be identified. Failure to meet this requirement will result in
disqualification.
All candidates meet this requirement.
The candidate shall provide certificates of product liability insurance and general liability for not less
than $1,000,000 each. Failure to meet this requirement will result in disqualification.
All candidates meet this requirement.
Each candidate shall provide a list of on -going work. Indicate what projects are bonded and the
remaining bonding capacity of the candidate's firm. This issue will result in 0 to 5 points for the
candidate. Evaluation will be based on the remaining bonding capacity of the candidate.
All candidates have bonding capacity suitable for this project. All candidates will receive 5 points for
this category.
The candidate shall provide a list of all water and wastewater system projects completed since January
1, 2002 in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Iowa. Provide the name of the
project, the name of the Owner, and the name and telephone number of the Owner's representative.
Identify the name of the candidate's project manager for the project. This issue will result in 0 to 20
points for the candidate. Evaluation will be based on the candidate's relevant project experience.
Automatic Systems Company
In- Control, Inc.
Instrument Control Systems, Inc.
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc.
US Filter Control Systems, Inc.
118 projects listed
130 projects listed
50 projects listed
32 projects listed
28 projects listed
The relevant project experience relates to the number and size of the projects. The candidates have
multiple projects and, with the exception of Telemetry and Process Controls, the projects are similar
or larger than the cost anticipated for the Rosemount project.
f
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 7 of 8
The points allocated are.
Automatic Systems Company
40 points
In- Control, Inc.
40 points
Instrument Control Systems, Inc.
40 points
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc.
20 points
US Filter Control Systems, Inc.
40 points
* Because the projects are small projects.
US Filter Control Systems, Inc. has listed the fewest projects, but based on the size of the projects
listed and the size of the company, the list is obviously a partial list.
Provide one copy of an operation and maintenance manual for a similar project completed in the last
two years and listed as one of the representative projects. The intent is to determine the thoroughness
that the operation and maintenance manuals have been prepared. This may indicate how the candidates
view support services as being a critical part of a successful project. This topic will result in 0 to 30
points for the candidate. Evaluation will be based on the thoroughness of the manual, its relevance to
the project, and similarity to the requirements of the Rosemount project.
All of the candidates provided operation and maintenance manuals. In- Control provided the manual
in the form of a CD. The operation and maintenance manuals included copies of the instruction
manuals for the components and hardware that was purchased for the project. It would be beneficial
if non - relevant parts of the manual were crossed out, but that is rarely the case and did not occur in
this situation. The operation and maintenance manuals also include the schematic diagrams for the
control system, and the candidates did include this information. Some used an 11 X 17 format, while
others used an 8% X 11 format. Telemetry and Process Control's manual included the ladder logic
for the PLC. This is required by the specification and can be difficult to obtain.
Twenty points were awarded to each candidate. Automatic Systems Company, In- Control, Instrument
Control Systems, and USFilter Control Systems provided manuals that are generally the "standard "
for this type of project. The project presented by Telemetry and Process Controls was a smaller
project, but the PLC ladder logic was included.
Provide a statement indicating that the candidate takes "no exceptions" to the plans and specifications
for the Rosemount project. If exceptions are taken, they must be identified in the statement. This
category can result in 0 to 20 points for the candidate. Evaluation will be based on the number and
nature of any exceptions.
No candidate took any exceptions to the plans and specifications.
A
City of Rosemount
Attn: Mr. Andy Brotzler
September 27, 2004
Page 8 of 8
The candidate shall indicate ifthe firmhas any judgements, claims, arbitration proceedings, or lawsuits
pending, outstanding, or threatened to which the candidate — or an office or partner of the candidate
— has been a party. Provide information on any lawsuit in the past three years or legal action taken by
any governmental authority the candidate has been involved with. State the outcome of the action.
No significant actions were noted for any candidate.
The total points for the five candidates are:
Automatic Systems Company, Inc. 165
Instrument Control Systems, Inc. 150
In- Control, Inc.
150
US Filter Control Systems, Inc. 156
Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. 95
The original documents included Automatic Systems Company, In- Control, Inc., and Instrument Control
Systems, Inc. as the "basis of bid" system integrators with provisions for other candidates to be considered
as an "alternate" to the "basis of bid" integrators. The pre - qualification process received inquiries from five
potential bidders who were evaluated as described in this memo. It is recommended that four candidates be
listed as "basis of bid" system integrators. The original bidding documents identified three system
integrators as acceptable vendors. This process has identified four of the five candidates as recommended
candidates. These include Automatic Systems Company, Instrument Control Systems, Inc., In- Control, Inc.,
and US Filter Control Systems, Inc. Telemetry and Process Controls, Inc. submitted qualifications, but their
"typical" projects and the largest projects identified in their pre - qualification submittal are smaller than the
anticipated size of the Rosemount project. As a result, we are concerned with the capability of Telemetry
and Process Controls, Inc. to manage and develop the project; and therefore recommend that Telemetry and
Process Controls, Inc. not be listed as an acceptable vendor for the Rosemount project.
After you've had a chance to review this memo, please call with questions.
Thank you.
PFK:mj
cc: Mr. Charles LeFevere