"Principle of installing Modified Bitumen Roof Systems"

Sounds pretty easy doesn't it?  Well, today I'd like to introduce a couple of words (and definitions) you often hear from people describing roof systems.

The first word we will focus on is :  "Bitumen"

From Wikipedia:

Asphalt /ˈæsfɔːlt/ ( listen) also known as bitumen is a sticky, black and highly viscous liquid or semi-solid that is present in most crude petroleums and in some natural deposits, it is a substance classed as a pitch. Until the 20th century, the term asphaltum was also used.^[1]
The primary use of asphalt is in road construction, where it is used as the glue or binder mixed with aggregate particles to create asphalt concrete. Its other main uses are for bituminous waterproofing products, including production of roofing felt and for sealing flat roofs.
The terms asphalt and bitumen are often used interchangeably to mean both natural and manufactured forms of the substance. In American English, asphalt (or asphalt cement) is the carefully refined residue from the distillation process of selected crude oils. Outside the United States, the product is often called bitumen. Natural deposits terminology also sometimes uses the word bitumen, such as at the La Brea Tar Pits.
Naturally occurring asphalt is sometimes specified by the term "crude Bitumen"; its viscosity is similar to that of cold molasses.^[2][3] whilst the material obtained from the fractional distillation of crude oil (boiling at 525 °C (977 °F)) is sometimes referred to as "refined bitumen".

Refined Asphalt (Bitumen)

Reports indicate that Asphalt production is generally 80% for road building materials, and 20% for roofing materials.  And folks, that's a lot of oil being either laid on the ground, or placed atop your home, or business.

Many people are confused as to "White" modified bitumen roof systems (I will describe the "Modified" portion in a moment).  It has a VERY LOW solar reflectance, and can reach temperatures of 200 degrees F., adding to energy demands.

Here is a crew installing "Modified Bitumen"

Okay, someone is on the ground feeding 100 lb. cartons of asphalt into a kettle, typically heated with propane burners to a temperature of around 425 degrees F.  I've personally "fired" one of these monstrosities, and would not wish it on my worse enemy.  This job is typically referred to either the "kettle man", or the "fireman".



Wouldn't you like to spend around 10 hours a day in the hot sun wearing full coverage clothing, and a face mask?  The pieces can easily "splash" the molten asphalt onto the workman, and you will keep in mind he is chopping 100 lb. cartons of this all day.  It is much easier in the morning when the asphalt is cool, and when you strike it with an axe, is almost "glasslike" and splits fairly easy.  Onced  it warms up, the asphalt becomes "gooey", and the axe simply sticks.

The hot asphalt is pumped to the roof, and collected into "hot luggers"



Okay, we've heated up the asphalt, pumped it to the roof through a steel pipe, loaded it into our "hot lugger", rolled it across the roof, and emptied it into the "Mop Cart".  You can see the guy using a roofing mop, the other guy is the "setter", and the other is casting ceramic granules into the asphalt "bleed out".  Sometimes referred to as "Feeding the chickens".

Here is a finished Modified Bitumen roof:



You will note the letters "SBS", and "APP".  They stand for:

"Styrene Butyl Styrene" : (Thank you to Johns Manville)

"SBS is a rubberized modifier that increases the overall performance of the sheet by providing excellent elongation and recovery characteristics. SBS modifiers extend the service range of the product, so that it can be handled in cooler temperatures without cracking or shattering, and in warmer temperatures without softening to the point where it begins to flow".

This material is applied with the "hot mop" method as illustrated above.

APP: Atactic Polypropylene

"Johns Manville has developed formulations that enhance the asphalt's overall weatherability by modifying premium-grade asphalts. By combining these modified asphalts with non-woven polyester or glass fiber reinforcements, JM produces waterproofing systems that exhibit tremendous strength, elasticity and weatherability.

APP membranes provide superior tensile strength while maintaining critical flexibility — even in the coldest environments. Additionally, with APP roofing membranes (coated with a proprietary blend of asphalt and atactic polypropylene), contractors now have an efficient mode of application by heat welding, making hot mopping unnecessary".

This is what "Torching" looks like:

MANY people hear the term "Rubberized Asphalt", and think they are geting a "Rubber" roof.  This is obviously not the case.  The "Rubber" is a "Modified Polymer".

The roof repels water, but given what we know is a very archaic, and dangerous method.  Also consumes huge quantities of materials that will never break down in landfills, and contaminates water supplies through leaching of nitrogen and phosphorous.

This is obviously not my choice of roofing methods, but it does in fact "keep water out".  It CREATES great demand  in HVAC cooling (approximately 20%).  So if you live in a warmer climate (most people do), this would not be your best option.  Modified Bitumen roof systems typically have a Solar Reflectance Index of .25 (similar to asphalt shingles.  For the record, (according to LEED V2.2, Page 95), the minimum Solar Reflectance Index for a cool roof to mitigate "Heat Island Effect" is .78.  So you can see this is clearly anything but a "Cool Roof".

Today is a very good day, I am happy you are sharing it with me, and always remember to keep looking "UP".

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon

Manager, Roof consultant's Alliance

CCC1325620

"Oklahoma Schools Under Investigation"

Dear Friends:

I was asked to help a colleague in Oklahoma who'd grown tired of watching exclusionary behavior in schools, as it pertains to competitive roofing bids.

Today, I will limit my comments, because the story speaks for itself.  If I have any message, it would be an analogy of "David and Goliath", and to illustrate you can make a difference.  I will always encourage you to speak only from science and public record.  You must arm yourself with knowledge, or you may write to me for help.

Please see the video, click on the blue topics below for additional documentation: 
PLEASE VIEW!

http://www.news9.com/story/15953631/school-districts-accused-of-wasting-tax-dollars

Amy Lester, Oklahoma Impact Team

OKLAHOMA CITY -- "Every building has to have one, but some school districts may not follow the law when they put on a new roof. That's the accusation at the center of a special audit state auditor Gary Jones is conducting right now.

"We are the watchdog. We want to do everything that we can to ensure that the proper procedures have been followed," said State Auditor Gary Jones.

Attorney General Scott Pruitt called for the audit, instructing Jones to audit the books and records of school districts in Mid Del, Edmond, Enid, Newcastle, Piedmont, Stillwater, Yukon and Guthrie. That information will help Pruitt determine if the districts are "unfairly restricting the specifications in bid notices" so only certain manufacturers can qualify. At issue: possible collusion or kickbacks, all at taxpayer expense.

Read Letter From Attorney General

We talked with several contractors and roofing experts who say unfair bidding processes happen in some school districts, far too often.

"It's very frustrating for me because I see these school districts are having to lay off teachers, they're having to cut programs, they're trying to tighten their budgets and they're wasting literally millions of dollars of Oklahoma taxpayer money," said Denver Green, president of operations for Saratoga Roofing and Construction.

Green is currently putting roofs on schools in Oklahoma and other states. He and others in the industry say Tulsa public schools has specific manufacturer requirements in its bidding information for roofing projects. He claims that limits competition and leads to higher prices. We looked through years of documents and found, when it's not a metal roof, Tulsa only uses the manufacturer Tremco. Green says this is because contractors like him, who are qualified and certified by other well known manufacturers, cannot meet the district's strict requirements. Even though the bid requirements say "or approved equal", Green believes other manufacturers won't or can't qualify. Other roofing experts agree that the bid information limits who can bid. They say this is costing all of us.

Tulsa Schools Spreadsheet

We showed the bid information from four projects to Green and an architect who works on school projects. Depending on the project, Denver's estimates, by using a different manufacturer, he could do the jobs for between about 40%-65% lower than what Tulsa actually paid. The architect's estimates were 30%-40% lower. And if you apply their same math to district projects since 2008, Tulsa may have been able to save between 2.8 and 5.6 million dollars.

"I was actually shocked. I found that we could do the projects for half of the cost and still make a significant profit," said Green.

Green's not the only one questioning Tulsa and other Oklahoma school districts. Ron Solomon, a roofing expert from Florida, is concerned as well. He is a state certified roofing contractor who worked in the commercial discipline for 37 years. He now dedicates his life to stopping the use of proprietary specifications in public roofing projects. He recently wrote several emails to members of the Tulsa school board and architect to point out problems he sees in their bid information.

"I wanted to make sure that I notified the school district of the potential problem with them in terms of lawsuits and overpayment of services," said Solomon. "No public entity should give the perception that they are favoring one manufacturer over another. This is absolutely the case in Oklahoma, in Tulsa."

Solomon says that he has not heard back from his emails. His fight against this issue is far from over.

Read bid specifications for a Tulsa school

Read bid specifications for a Tulsa school

So, how does Tulsa defend this? We talked with the schools' Director of Bond Projects, Bob LaBass.

"The Tremco roofing system has been one of the most successful programs that we've implemented," said LaBass. "Part of their program is they do full inspections during the installation process. Then, they inspect for 10 years afterwards so, it prolongs the life of the roof."

LaBass says they essentially pay extra to outsource maintenance and save on personnel costs. They spend tens of thousands of dollars, per roof, for a 10 year maintenance program offered by Tremco. It includes regular inspections, repairs and preventative maintenance. The district also purchases a 10 year warranty, in addition to the maintenance agreement.

"If it's a problem with a Tremco product, they repair it. If it's a leak, we get instantaneous response, nearly. They'll be out within two hours," said LaBass. "We're getting more than just a roof, we realize that, and we're paying more and we're also getting a lot more service and we're getting a lot better, a lot longer roof."

Read Tremco maintenance agreement

Read Tremco warranty

In a statement, Tremco says, "In each of the projects on which Tremco roofing systems have been installed on Tulsa Schools, we have supplied our products to local Oklahoma roofing contractors that have competed successfully in public bid environments for the opportunity to deliver cost-effective, long-term roofing solutions."  It goes on to say, "Roofing costs on particular projects reflect the unique conditions which each building presents. But in each instance these costs should also cover the delivery of products and services that achieve long-term roof performance, regular maintenance and durability. If a low-cost roof system fails early, is improperly installed, is inadequately maintained, or requires costly repairs throughout its life cycle, the seemingly low cost option can quickly become the most expensive in the long-term."

Read Tremco's full statement

Other manufacturers provide less expensive 20 year warranties, instead of maintenance agreements. Other districts tell us the warranties satisfy their needs and their roofs last for decades. While LaBass says this allowed the district to cut maintenance workers, Tulsa still has 53 more maintenance people than Oklahoma City schools.

Read sample warranty from another manufacturer

We took what we found about Tulsa Public Schools to the state auditor. Based on what we provided it's possible his special audit could be expanded to include other schools.

"All the time, we should never waste tax dollars. It's a greater emphasis right now when school teachers are being laid off and we don't have enough money to perform the basic functions in government," said State Auditor Gary Jones.

Jones' audit will take several months to finish. We'll be watching and will let you know what happens."

Much appreciation and respect to Amy Lester of News 9.  She worked very hard on her report, and it shows.

The point here is that you are not powerless to fight against things that may seem impossible, or missions that may seem insurmountable.  I did it, and you can do it.

I will continue to fight hard for YOUR RIGHT to fairly compete, and to nourish your families.

I am humbled you care enough to visit with me here, and am thankful on the most personal level.  I pray for your success, and will remind you to reject negativity in all forms, and always keep looking "UP".

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
"Independent Sustainability Research"

"Manager Roof Consultant's Alliance"

CCC1325620

You may contact me directly:  RobertRSolomon@aol.com



"Public" Vs. "Private", or "Insanity Vs. Sanity"

As a "Conservative Environmentalist", and appointed a judgeship by the Governor of Florida 5 times for "Sustainable Florida", and "Sustainable Schools", I would like to share my take on things, as it pertains to roofing.

Do not get confused with the "Private" market, and the "Public" market. In the "Private" market, the owners are actually having to PAY their OWN money, where in "Public" structures, the taxpayer foots the bill, which to our government is "Free" money and therefore does not have to be spent in the consumer's best interest, and isn't.

Here is a comment from a private client, who pays the bills:

Ron:

Brandon has almost twice as much conditioned space as Tampa (64,229 sq. ft. vs 33,005 sq. ft., respectively) yet from the period of April through July of this year Brandon used 40% less electricity than Tampa; for a savings of $30,367 for the period. I realize your TPO roof should get most of the credit but we should also consider the "cool-wall" paint on the exterior and the newer/more efficient equipment. Thanks again for pushing the TPO roof.

Sincerely,

Cleve

"Brandon" has a synthetic white (TPO) reflective roof (inherently LEED compliant), where "Tampa" has a white granular surfaced modified bitumen (petroleum) roof. A conservative approach that was environmentally friendly in every way.

If you remove a black asphalt shingle roof, and replace it with a white asphalt shingle roof, you will not qualify for any "Rebates". Why Ron? Because the sun "sees" all petroleum products as "black", and factually, the white granules do very little to reflect the sun's radiant energy.

Your home can easily have a roof surface temperature of 200 degrees F., that stays hot well into the night, also known as "Heat Island Effect" (Page 95 LEED V2.2). If you don't believe me, place your forearm on a nice hot day, on your white shingles, and get back to me.

PV technology has been obsolete for years, yet we continue to subsidize this nonsense. The "theoretical" limit of silicon's elemental properties is 33.5% . Period.

"Graphene" and carbon nanotube advancements (commercially available in 5 years) has 10X the elemental properties of silicon, and you will also see it in computer chips as well. "Graphene" is ridiculously inexpensive, and will eventually turn the entire roof surface into a solar collector.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea7_crd_TwQ

Government only knows TWO terms: "LEED", and "PV". Both of them useless.

Please view this 2 minute video by Secretary Chu:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0GKcdgxHsk

This is what I do as a "Conservative Environmentalist". It's "Low Hanging Fruit", yet while ALL my private clients do it for obvious reasons, the government still installs roofs made of oil on the vast majority of their buildings. I GUARANTEE your school district is installing petroleum based roofs, spending more money to install them, paying 20% MORE in energy costs.

I might also mention the copious amounts of nitrogen and phosphorous leaching from these roof systems into our water supplies. Of course, this starves the water of oxygen, and inhibits microbial growth.

Illiterate people, making illiterate decisions, on things they know absolutely nothing about. They haven't the slightest credential that allows them to address a topic.

In Tampa, our City Council thought it would be a great idea to install a $960,000.00 PV system over a petroleum based roof. The roof CREATES A 20% DEMAND FOR ENERGY. The PV (at maximum) is only 20% EFFICIENT. So, for a 1 million dollar investment, we get a NET ZERO.

I'd also like to point out that "Rebates" are not "Free Money". You and I pay for those rebates.

So, that is what a "Conservative Environmentalist" actually thinks, rare as it is.

Thank you for visiting with me here, as I consider it a great privilege to speak with you.  Please reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP".

Respectfully,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Manger, Roof Consultant's Alliance
CCC1325620
http://wikiroof.blogspot.com/

"Satellite Roof Estimating Services"

At first, I was skeptical that accurate measurements could be taken by satellite imaging, but Boy was I wrong!

First I was amazed how effective it is, and then was shocked to see how little it costs.

I've easily done over a thousand takeoffs driving to the project, throwing a ladder, and physically measuring the structure.  I was actually at one apartment complex that took three days to measure.

It takes a lot of money for a contractor to send an estimator, do the takeoff, draw a roof plan (most of them rather crude), pay for a vehicle, fuel, insurance, etc.  That was then, and this is now.

Of course I have no interest in any satellite estimating services, but will show you an example, and a couple of links of people who offer these services.  Check this out: (click for larger view)

Aerial examples graciously provided by Prattco, Inc, Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors (listed under "Trusted Professionals" 813-973-4771).  Also, the service was provided by Aerialogics : http://aerialogics.com/

I think I remember this all costing the grand sum of $70.00.

So, needfless to say, I am a huge fan of aerial/satellite imaging, especially when done to this degree.  If you enlarge the photos, you can even see they've provided multiple "waste" factors, and all measurements of Hip & Ridge, Valley, etc., are clearly drawn, and also enumerated.

In an effort to insure accuracy, provide a much cleaner presentation, and to save a great deal of money on estimating, I think this is the ONLY WAY TO GO.

Now, if it's a commercial structure, you may want to visit, and take a core sample, but the rest can easily be done with this method of imaging.

I hope this helps those of you who have many estimates to do, may have a project 200 miles away, while this keeps your estimator actually "estimating", and not sitting in a vehicle riding for 8 hours.

It is my prayer you are well, encourage you to reject negativity in all forms, and to always keep looking "UP"

Respectfully,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
CCC1325620
Manager, Roof Consultant's Alliance
RobertRSolomon@aol.com

"School Roofing Scam Videos on YouTube"

Dear Friends:

After consulting with several legal specialists, I've decided to not post the actual videos, but am assured it's perfectly legal to provide a link to those videos.

So, today is a real treat if you want to see a number of readily available reports on YouTube.  It's actually very easy if you go to YouTube, and simply type in "School Roofing Scams".  You will also notice it's the same ones each time.

You know I do not offer "Opinions", and provide information for you to review and decide what's real, and what's not. 

So, if you want to see where your taxpayer dollars go, take a few minutes, and I think you will be outraged.  I didn't think you'd want to spend hours on this, so I've only posted a few.

Happy Viewing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGPNJxK1ZRQ

http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/131019373.html#IDCThread

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SPGTLMKT60

I'm trying to do something about it through proper channels, and bringing this to your attention, may help advance a solution.

And yes, I am eerily similar to Frankenstein in appearance with the square, and slightly oversized head.  But, that's the hand I'm dealt.  Next week, I'll post the television news interview I'm doing in a major market (by request).  Hopefully, it will be both fun, and informative.  At last, Frankenstein speaks!

As always, I am very thankful, and appreciative, you take time to visit with me here. 

Hoping everyone is having a happy, and productive day.  Reject negativity in all forms, anmd always remember to keep looking "UP".

"Roof Consultant's Alliance"

I'm sorry for interrupting this series (it will resume) to announce my dear friend Mr. Jason Fenstermaker has named me "Manager" of Linkedin's :

"Roof Consultant's Alliance"

I will be adding a link to the site, and will encourage you to join us in many conversations pertaining to roofing across the globe.  Please request access at Linkedin, and I will receive your simple request for approval there.  I review and approve them each day, so you may not be inconvenienced.

Of course this is both an honor, and responsibility that I must be objective about, regardless of my own philosophy.  I welcome  words of opposition, or contributions to the discussions with equal enthusiasm.  So please feel free to say what's on your mind, or start your own discussion there.

We cover many topics including new products, energy, clean water, and roofing practice.  So, if you want to advance your knowledge base regarding any of these (and more) topics, I will personally welcome you.

I'm mobilizing a rather large group of roofing contractors, and roofing organizations, that have  grown tired of taxpayer deception, and in many cases, outright fraud.  An honest manufacturer will be given a forum to declare (Publicly) that they do not participate in, nor encourage "Proprietary Specifications", or "Sole Source" arrangements.  I will contact each of them, and how they respond.  It's either "YES", or "NO".  The name and title of each manufacturer's representative will be given.

Friends, I started this advocacy long ago, with the idea that all manufacturers would encourage the promotion of such positive philosophy for their approved contractors, and the taxpayers.  BUT, I AM WRONG.  I've been told the only way to secure support, and respect (?) is to specify projects, and  reduce revenue streams of those I don't like.  Or gain favor with the ones I do.  I reject this philosophy, as I find it very unflattering, and inconsistent with my mission.

Remember, I'm here to discuss roofing topics, create a level playing field for my colleagues, and save huge sums of taxpayer dollars in the process.  I'm convinced these are honorable goals, and will not compromise my position regarding them. 

The climb will be almost vertical, I understand that, am prepared for it, and with your help, will see it to conclusion.  There is a groundswell among contractors across North America, and I am determined to give them an opportunity to express dissatisfaction in numbers. 

In the meantime, a true test of any manufacturer may be displayed in this way:  Ask them to sign a document saying they do not participate in, nor encourage, "Propietary Specifications", or Sole Source" agreements.  If they refuse, spend your money with an honest manufacturer that will.  This is our first step.

I will begin exposing every exclusionary project, and jurisdiction, along with the decision maker's name, phone number, and address.

You will be furnished public documentation of the activity in question, and will soon learn how easy it is to spot the fraudulent behavior.

I will eliminate the "Trusted Professionals" aspect of this site, and will replace it with a "Pledge" feature where you will be listed with others who place value on honesty, and integrity.

Reject negativity in all forms, and remember to always keep looking "UP".

Respectfully,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
CCC1325620

"Proprietary & Exclusionary Roofing Practices in Public Works"

This is a widespread practice in many public sectors, and our schools suffer for it.  I am proud to say that my district happens to be run by honorable people, whom I respect.  A rarity I'm afraid.

Many people tell me to walk softly around this issue, but I would rather be ground to dust, than be perceived as a coward.  So, I will share this data to with only after I've confirmed it to satisfaction.

The standard operating procedure of these scams are invented by, and perpetrated on, the public by a select group of roofing material manufacturers who would rather adopt a very aggressive sales model, than to compete fairly on the open market.

By "sales model", I mean "Proprietary Specifications".  They work to eliminate any competition, and create great hardship for my colleagues in the roofing discipline.  They also cause great harm to YOU, as taxpayers, as you end up paying exorbitant sums of money for absolutely no additional benefit.

I have NEVER seen this one time within the private sector, as that's a hard sell to someone who actually has to write the check.  For government, that "Real Money", is actually only numbers in boxes, because it's not coming out of their pockets.  In this way, the few are enriched, while the many suffer.   Frankly, I've grown tired of it, and am emboldened by my colleagues across the United States, who ask me to help.

I've made a very difficult, very dangerous, and very time consuming commitment to stand up for them.

You must understand the only real purpose of any contractor is to educate their staff, keep them safe, and provide a good working environment.  As a result, projects are secured, and workmen are able to earn a living, to nourish their families.

In the face of this monumental effort stands corruption, greed, and of course the money ALWAYS associated with it.  Apparently, souls may be purchased, and sold rather easily.

Below, you will find a very informative article written by my friend, Mr. Trent Cotney, Esq.  The first installment in this series so you can understand the premise of proper bidding procedure.  The article is being presented in it's entirety, and as it appeared in the West Coast Roofing Contractors Association's most recent issue:

PUBLIC PROJECTS AND BID PROTESTS

Part I of II

A significant amount of roofing work in Florida involves work with state or

local government entities. These public entities use (or are supposed to use)

competitive bid procedures to procure the lowest bid for projects. If the bid

letting is not conducted in a competitive manner, then the bid letting may be

protested in accordance with published procedures. Generally, these procedures are governed by Florida Statutes and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

Chapter 120, Florida Statutes. This month’s article will focus on who may

commence a bid protest and under what circumstances. Next month’s article

will discuss the procedures involved with filing a bid protest.

Section 255.20, Florida Statutes, and Florida common law provide that

public contracts must be awarded under the rules of competitive bidding.

Section 255.20 generally applies to most public entities; however, there are

certain entities which are exempt from §255.20 and not every public entity is

subject to the bid protest procedures set forth in the APA.

By definition, in order for the bidding to be competitive, all bids must be

based on the same requirements and must be evaluated on the basis of the same

criteria. In other words, the bids must be capable of an “apples to apples”

comparison, and all of the criteria by which the bids will be judged must be

known to the bidders in advance.

Public competitive bidding must be done in a manner that is not arbitrary

or capricious, which can only be accomplished if the bids are compared

according to the same criteria set forth in the instructions to the bidders.

Moreover, because public monies are being spent, public competitive bidding

must be conducted in a manner to avoid even the appearance of collusion or

favoritism.

If a bid fails to comply with the instructions to bidders in some material

aspect, then the bid must be rejected as being non-responsive, because a nonresponsive bid cannot be compared “apples to apples” with bids that have

strictly followed the instructions to bidders.

If the contract is awarded to a bidder whose bid fails to comply with the instructions to bidders, then the award is made based on criteria other than the published criteria. In such a case, the award, by definition, is arbitrary or capricious because the letting authority has arbitrarily awarded the contract based on criteria that was not published and made known to all bidders. Awarding a public contract on the basis of criteria that was not made known to all bidders opens the door to favoritism and

collusion.

Case law holds that a minor deviation from the instructions to bidders can

be ignored, but only if the deviation is not material, i.e., the deviation did not

result in an unfair economic advantage. See C.H. Barco Contracting Co. v. State

of Florida, Department of Transportation, 483 So2.d 796 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

The test for measuring whether a deviation is sufficiently material to destroy the

competitive nature of the bid process is “whether the variation affects the

amount of the bid by giving the bidder an advantage or benefit not enjoyed by

the other bidders.” See Harry Pepper & Associates, Inc. v. City of Cape Coral,

352 So.2d 1190, 1193 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1977).

In Harry Pepper, the apparent low bidder, Gulf Contracting (“Gulf”), sought to modify its bid after the other bids had been opened in order to bring its bid into conformity with the instructions to bidders. Gulf had based its bid on less expensive pumps rather than the pumps specified in the instructions to bidders.

The court held that Gulf’s bid deviation was deemed material and non-waiveable because Gulf had the ability to examine the other opened bids and decide whether or not it wanted to modify its bid and incur the additional expense of supplying conforming pumps to obtain the contract, or stand on its less expensive non-conforming pumps and not receive the award.

Gulf had the opportunity to decide whether it wanted the contract after all of the other bids had been disclosed. Gulf’s actions gave it an unfair advantage in the bidding process, which was not enjoyed by the other bidders in the process.

Similarly, in E.M. Watkins & Co. v. Board of Regents, 414 So.2d 583

(Fla. 1st DCA 1982), the apparent low bidder on a project submitted a

required list of subcontractors a few hours after the deadline for bid

submittals.

The court deemed the bidder’s failure to timely submit the list to

be material and non-waiveable because the late submission facilitated

undesirable subcontractor bid shopping. The court came to this conclusion

even though there was no evidence that the bidder actually had received an

unfair advantage or benefit by submitting the subcontractor list after the bid

submittal deadline.

Generally, only bidders who could receive the award if their protest is

successful are allowed, i.e. have standing, to protest a bid. As such, courts

have held that potential bidders who fail to submit bids do not have standing

to contest the bid results. See Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Jacksonville

Transp. Auth., 491 So.2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

A protestor must also demonstrate that it has a substantial interest in the outcome of the bid process, by showing that if the defects in the bid are remedied, then there is

a reasonable likelihood of the bidder winning the contract. See Preston

Carroll Co., Inc. v. Florida Keys Aqueduct Auth., 400 So.2d 524 (Fla. 3rd DCA

1981).

Author’s note: The information contained in this article is for general

educational information only. This information does not constitute legal advice, is

not intended to constitute legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as legal advice

for your specific factual pattern or situation.

Trenton Cotney, a shareholder attorney at Glenn Rasmussen Fogarty & Hooker, P.A., in

Tampa, Florida prepared this article. Trent is Florida Bar Certified in Construction Law, a

Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Mediator, Qualified Florida Court-Appointed

Arbitrator, General Counsel and a director of the Florida Roofing Sheet Metal and Air-

Conditioning Contractors Association (FRSA), a director of the West Coast Roofing

Contractors Association (WCRCA) and a member of Associated Builders and Contractors

(ABC). For more information, contact the author at 813-229-3333 or

tcotney@glennrasmussen.com.

I am deeply appreciative of Trent's unselfish work, and will highly recommend him to any roofing contractor as the very best within our discipline.  If you are unsure of something, or need help, Trent is the guy.  Period.

I thank each of you from the bottom of my heart for caring about what I have to say, and for taking time from your day to visit with me here.  YOU are the only reason I am here, and I am deeply grateful to my many visitors from around God's beautiful earth.

We will return to less complex issues soon, but I must do my best to protect the public interest.

Never despair, reject negativity in all forms, and for goodness' sakes, keep looking "UP".

Respectfully,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon

CCC1325620