Reference to KAUST letter # --- regarding security systems arrangementS SAPMT would like to summarize thE issues as follows:
•  During 30% PP review , SAPMT  informed KAUST that  comment No. 178  regarding   security systems arrangement  contradicts  with PSP and thus cannot be implemented.
•  During 90 % PP review , SAPMT informed KAUST that comment No.  195 which was similar    to  178 mentioned earlier  may only be  considered  during detailed design if found appropriate  during  the research  and analysis done by the designer. 
•  Additionally, pervious  comments and counter-comments need not be mentioned now, after the fact, that the Project Proposal was approved by KAUST with only 3 comments, none of which required to change the arrangement of the security system components.
•  The approved project proposal leaves the onus on the designer to develop the option 1 and if necessary consider the second option. The designer has chosen the first option.
•  Based on the above, instead of trying to prove, who commented what or approved what on what stage of the design, KAUST is urged to provide technical reasons behind their consistent stance and in reply to our letter L-154/13 where SAPMT provided various technical reasons behind designers choice of option 1.
