4/13/2016 UPPER CAPE REGIONAL TRANSFER STATION BOARD OF MANAGERS Minutes

Home Browse Search

insurance. Mr. Hunt inquired whether the government would be added as the insured and confirmed that it would be the Mass Air National Guard, the Air Force and the Commonwealth. Mr. Barrett discussed another insurance option and offered to forward more information. There was discussion regarding previous studies available in order to establish a baseline, though Mr. Hunt believed that an environmental study would likely be required. Mr. Jack felt that a study would be based on the decided use. Mr. Richard indicated that it remained flexible in the RFP, adding that terms could be negotiated in the future based on usage. The RFP requires that the operator maintain a performance in the amount of$200,000 and would be required to operate the facility in accordance with all laws and regulations. The Board could also negotiate liquidated damages and the operator would be required to operate the facility in a clean and sanitary manner. Mr. Barrett recommended that the facility be left in the manner in which it was received. Chairman Laurent inquired whether any improvements or permits would belong to the Board. Mr, Richard responded that it could depend upon DEP and what they are looking for. Mr. Barrett inquired who would be responsible for the permit. Mr. Scipione indicated that the permit holder could be the operator along with the owner but that the operator could be held liable for fines. Mr. Scipione suggested that the Board should own improvements, unless they were mobile equipment. Mr. Richard discussed the minimum and weighted criteria for the RFP and noted that the proposal must be complete and compatible. Mr. Jack recommended more definition and questioned the statement "allow the facility to go into disrepair." The Chair inquired about multiple uses of the site. Mr. Richard will strike the statement in question. Mr. Barrett also wants to leave it open in case another use was identified that would not require maintenance of the building if not utilizing. Mr. Goddard stated that whatever facility was used, would need to be maintained. Mr. Richard inquired whether wage rates would apply. The Chair responded that Town Counsel felt that if leasing the property, wage rate would not apply except for improvements to the facility. There was further discussion regarding the perceptions of whether dismantling the facility would be an advantage or disadvantage, or if the building would be replaced. Mr. Tilton noted the importance of it being a benefit to the towns. Mr. Hunt expressed concern about dismantling the rail and Mr. Jack agreed that he would consider it non-advantageous to dismantle the rail spur. There was agreement that there was no interest in having any of the three rail spurs dismantled. Mr. Jack referenced page 9, section 2.06 and recommended the addition of"or operations." On page 15, Mr. Jack suggested the addition of a period. Mr. Jack recommended adding a dispute resolution clause,such as through mediation or arbitration. Mr. Tilton referred to page 4 under the selection process to correct"publicly" and on page 9 inquired how increased traffic would be determined. Chairman Laurent agreed and referenced page 3, section 1 which requests traffic projections. Mr. Barrett suggested the involvement of the Cape Cod Commission, who may have information or suggestions available. Ms. Rooney indicated that a new use would trigger review by the Cape Cod Commission, Mr. Richard suggested that traffic information could be submitted and if it were to exceed the threshold, more study may be necessary. 2