Wellington selection committee to negotiate with Badger for cellular AMI; schedules interviews for installation bidders

The Wellington selection committee voted May 22 to open contract negotiations with Badger for the village’s planned cellular advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) system and set interviews for three installation contractors to complete the meter replacement project.

Project goals and why it matters: The village is seeking to replace more than 20,000 water meters—more than 95% of which are more than 15 years old—with a networked AMI system intended to restore meter accuracy, reduce “non-revenue” water and give staff more frequent meter reads for leak detection and customer service. Brad Wallach, Wellington’s project manager, said bench testing of about 400 meters showed readings “anywhere from 80% right up to fully compliant,” and that the village “is losing somewhere around $600,000 a year from under registering water passing through the meter.”

What the committee reviewed: Consultants from eSource summarized five AMI proposals and three bids for installation services. The AMI technology bids were from Badger, Empire (proposing Master Meter technology), and National Metering Services (proposing Neptune/R900). Installation bids came from HST Utility, National Metering Services, and RTS (Envocore). The eSource presentation explained the two-part procurement approach: (1) the technology package (meters, cellular endpoints, network/MDMS and customer portal) and (2) the field installation contract to swap meters in the ground and perform associated site work.

Technical choices discussed: Wellington staff and consultants reviewed the tradeoffs among meter technologies, network architectures and data cadence: - Meter type: the team recommended mechanical disc meters for the small residential sizes included in this procurement (3/4 inch to 1 inch standard in the bid). Consultants noted Badger and Neptune proposals use disc technology that, in independent testing cited by eSource, tends to retain accuracy at low flows longer than multi‑jet/velocity meters proposed by Empire. - Network: the RFP specified an LTE‑M (cellular) AMI network rather than a private RF mesh. eSource described propagation studies supplied by the vendors; Badger’s submittal included a claim of 100% coverage for the village, while Empire and National Metering did not provide an explicit 100% coverage confirmation in the bid materials provided to the committee. - Data frequency and backfill: Badger proposed 15‑minute interval collection with data delivered up to four times per weekday and on fewer occasions on weekend days; National Metering (Neptune) showed 15‑minute intervals with three or four daily deliveries stated inconsistently in its materials; Empire/Master Meter proposed one‑hour intervals delivered once per day. Committee members and staff stressed that read cadence affects leak‑detection responsiveness and analytics: “Four times a day versus once a day, that is a big difference,” a consultant said during the meeting.

Pilot and warranties: Wellington staff reported a 2023 pilot with cellular endpoints installed in the system; those endpoints had a reported 100% success rate in the municipality’s limited pilot. Endpoint battery warranties submitted by vendors were typically 10 years (full coverage then prorated thereafter); meter accuracy warranty language varied by meter size and vendor and generally followed industry practice (five years for small meters, shorter or prorated coverage on some larger sizes). Committee members asked for greater detail on flow ranges and on how vendors size meters (the village asked that 5/8‑inch services be replaced with 3/4‑inch model 35 meters in many cases to handle higher irrigation flows up to the quoted 35 gallons per minute where appropriate).

Scoring and committee decisions: After reviewing the proposals and the eSource requirement‑workbook tallies, the committee completed separate scoring for the AMI technology (component 1) and for installation services (component 2): - Component 1 (AMI technology) ranking: 1) Badger (rank 1) 2) National Metering Services (Neptune) (rank 2) 3) Empire / Master Meter (rank 3). The committee voted unanimously to open negotiations with Badger for the technology package. - Component 2 (installation services) ranking: 1) HST Utility (rank 1) 2) National Metering Services (rank 2) 3) RTS (Envocore) (rank 3). The committee voted to hold interviews and presentations with all three installation proposers and set a format of a 60‑minute presentation plus 30 minutes for questions and break; the committee named an order of presentations (HST first, National Metering second, RTS third) and directed staff to schedule those sessions for late June (the committee discussed June 23 as a tentative date and noted availability constraints).

Formal actions and next steps: The committee recorded two formal outcomes. First, it unanimously authorized staff to negotiate a contract with Badger for the AMI technology package; the committee’s vote did not adopt a final contract or appropriation but authorized the city to begin negotiations with the top‑ranked AMI proposer. Second, the committee unanimously authorized interviews/presentations with the three shortlisted installation vendors and established the interview format (one‑hour presentation, 30-minute Q&A) and order of appearances. Staff and the consultant team (eSource) will prepare a short list of focused questions and a demonstration agenda for the interviews and will confirm the schedule with proposers.

What remained unresolved at the meeting: Committee members pressed vendors and staff for more detail on several implementation items that will be part of contract negotiations and interview questions, including: the detailed flow‑range specifications for each meter size (to avoid under‑sizing meters on irrigation services), the exact warranty and repair labor responsibilities for on‑site failures, the availability and structure of separate test/training environments for the MDMS and AMI head end, and the precise MDMS --> Munis/CIS integration steps for mass exchange uploads and work‑order reconciliation. Staff said vendors provided meter cut sheets and that eSource would verify flow ranges and follow up with the committee on the outstanding technical clarifications.

Why the procurement matters locally: Wellington staff estimated the village’s aging meters are creating significant underregistration of delivered water and material annual revenue loss; the AMI program is intended to restore measurement accuracy, reduce vehicle and personnel meter‑reading costs, improve customer notification of leaks and give the village the analytics for faster operational response. Committee members emphasized the need to translate demonstrated vendor capabilities into contract language that protects the village on warranties, integration and installation quality assurance.

Next public steps: Staff will open negotiations with Badger, prepare follow‑up technical clarifications (including meter flow‑range verification and MDMS integration details), and schedule the installation‑vendor interviews and demonstrations per the committee’s direction. Any negotiated contract will return to the committee and council for review and formal award as required by Wellington procurement rules.