PUC awards Tesla UV treatment contract despite protest alleging scoring rounding changed outcome

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission voted to award a design‑build contract for the Tesla UV treatment facility to PCL Civil Constructors, rejecting a formal protest from the joint venture of CDM and Monterey Mechanical that said a scoring-rounding rule produced an unfair outcome.

Julie Labonte, the PUC’s Water System Improvement Program director, told commissioners the procurement used a prequalification process and a published evaluation formula that combined qualifications and two cost components (a lump-sum bid and a 25‑year net present‑worth operating cost). "PCL came in first with 433.17 points," Labonte said, and staff recommended proceeding to meet an urgent construction schedule tied to a system shutdown window.

CDM and Monterey Mechanical argued the rounding method changed the final standings. John Toyota, CDM/Monterey Mechanical’s proposed project manager, said the team proposed a higher‑cost, lower‑operational‑risk approach and that "the rounding result changed the order of the selected firms." Bill McInerney Jr., counsel for the JV, told the commission that the rounding to the nearest hundredth removed roughly 1.5 points from their evaluated score and that, without that adjustment, their team would have ranked first.

Deputy City Attorney John White responded that the RFP included the formula and rounding instructions and that departments must follow evaluation rules they publish. "When a public entity sets forth a formula such as the one that was used here to allocate the points, those are the rules of the game," White said, urging the commission to apply the RFP as written.

Staff also stressed time constraints: the project is driven by regulatory requirements and requires a system shutdown that is available only in a limited window; Labonte said a notice to proceed on construction must be issued by Oct. 30 to preserve the shutdown opportunity and avoid more costly alternatives.

After public comment and legal discussion, a commissioner moved to adopt staff's recommendation and award the contract to PCL; the motion passed.

The commission recorded and heard the formal protest and staff's written response; commissioners said they gave the protest "great weight" in deliberations but concluded the procurement followed the advertised evaluation method. PUC staff indicated that phase‑2 construction authorizations and further contractual steps remain subject to finalization, and that the protest record will remain as part of the procurement file.

Next steps: staff will proceed with contract award paperwork and (where required) seek Board of Supervisors approval and continue to brief the commission on schedule risks and any post‑award protest activity.