Laserfiche WebLink
Ills. Laurent- Advantageous-Proposing to use rail, which would reduce traffic on the <br /> bridge and MSW operation would be similar to prior use, though concerned about truck <br /> traffic for C&D <br /> M-. Jack- Advantageous-Proposed use of rail for MSW and specified traffic volumes for <br /> MSW and C&D would require further discussion due to increases <br /> Mr. Tilton- Advantageous-Identified traffic impacts and committed to offering solutions <br /> but no specific mitigation. Traffic appeared to be Cape based, so traffic limited at the <br /> bridges with use of rail. <br /> Mr. Seguira-Highly Advantageous-Reduction of truck traffic over bridges <br /> Mr. Barrett- Advantageous-Due to lack of mitigation measures <br /> . regional Benefit <br /> Ms. Laurent- Advantageous-Providing potential alternate disposal site for local haulers, <br /> but unsure how it would provide a greater benefit to the region <br /> Mr. Jack-Highly Advantageous-Proposal provided for localized/Cape wide MSW options <br /> and other options such as salt and continued use for CDL training <br /> Ili-. Tilton-Highly Advantageous-Solid waste and C&D services to Cape residents <br /> Mr. Segura-Highly Advantageous-Solid waste and C&D and retention of CDL training <br /> N1. Barrett-Highly Advantageous-Their control of transfer station could prevent other <br /> haulers from using it and could control pricing <br /> 10. Summary Composite Rating <br /> Ms, Laurent-Advantageous/Highly Advantageous-Use is compatible but less of a regional <br /> benefit <br /> Mr. Jack- Advantageous/Highly Advantageous-Met and exceeded RFP requirements and <br /> allowed continuous use of the CDL site <br /> Mr. Tilton-Highly Advantageous-Provided MSW and potentially C&D services to the <br /> Cape while minimizing traffic issues at the bridge <br /> -W. Segura-Highly Advantageous-Non-complex operational process <br /> 11r. Barrett- Advantageous-Ikon-complex but concerned about learning curve and <br /> impacts to the Board of Managers <br /> Recycling Solutions <br /> 1. Minimum Evaluation Criteria <br /> Ms. Laurent-Complete-leo specific financial information provided <br /> Mr. Jack- Complete-No financial statement and questioned whether bond or check was <br /> acceptable <br /> Mr. Tilton- Complete-Accepted bank letter <br /> Mr. Segura- Complete-Financial letter of reference but questioned the acceptance of <br /> certified check in place of the bond. Mr. Costello stated that if the bond was required, that would <br /> be the method of security. There was discussion regarding whether a bond was required or a <br /> certified check allowed. Mr. Mowbray, of Recycling Solutions, stated that the RFP document <br /> indicated that a certified check was allowable. <br /> Mr. Barrett-No comment <br /> . Compatibility with JBCC &the 102" Intelligence Wing <br /> 8 <br />