Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wastewater Procurement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Wastewater substation bids show wide disparity; committee to refer rebid question to finance

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Bids for the Goose Creek substation upgrade showed a large price gap (BSI $545,600 vs. PKF Mark 3 $1,254,918.67). Committee members and staff said the disparity may reflect equipment ownership and rental assumptions; Chair Bernie Flynn recommended rejecting the award and rebidding and the committee agreed to refer the issue to the finance committee.

Committee members raised procurement concerns on Dec. 9 after wastewater staff presented two bids for the Goose Creek substation upgrade that differed markedly in price.

Wastewater director Sean Mitchell said Bridal Stanton Inc. (BSI) submitted a low bid of $545,600 while PKF Mark 3 submitted $1,254,918.67. Mitchell and staff told the committee the discrepancy appears to stem from line-item differences such as whether a bidder planned to rent large generators and related equipment versus using owned equipment. "In talking with our engineer, we believe that PKF misunderstood and was expecting that they were gonna purchase a large piece of our equipment where BSI knew that they weren't," Mitchell said.

Chair Bernie Flynn said the bidding results left the borough effectively with one viable low bid and recommended rejecting the award and putting the project back out to bid. "I think the borough deserves to have another shot at trying to get the the price lower," Flynn said, adding the borough has time while key equipment is due in February.

Other members and staff noted risks of delaying a multi-year project that includes lead times for transformers and medium-voltage switchgear. Mitchell said some components are scheduled for delivery in January and February and that rebidding could add two to four months to the schedule; the committee discussed balancing risk of delay against the potential for lower cost through renewed competition. The committee did not make a final procurement award at the meeting and agreed to send the matter to the finance committee for decision.