8/2/2017 UPPER CAPE REGIONAL TRANSFER STATION BOARD OF MANAGERS Minutes

Home Browse Search

that the issue with the performance bond was not the cost but that his insurance company determined that there was no material duty beyond paying rent. Mr. Jack agreed, adding that the performance bond would typically finish the job, which was a rent.obligation, Ir. Costello stated that the initial terra of 4.5 years rent would be in excess of$200.5000. Mr. Cavossa stated that the insurance company would not pay $200,000 if the UCRTS could rent the facility to another contractor,. Mr. Costello stated that the 5-year base rent payments would total $390,000 and recommended a $200,000 performance bend for,rent/performance, which should be bendable, Mr. Oppenheim suggested ars amoui,,it on a declining basis. Mr. Barrett emphasized a need to protect oneself. Mr. Costello stated that the RFP required $200,000. There was also discussion about completed projects and pollution insurance policies that would be unrelated to a performance bond which Cavo.ssa Corporation would have. Mr. Costello agreed that there was comprehensive insurance coverage required in the contract, There was agreement to maintain -the 00',000 performance bond. Mr. Oppenheim suggested that it would be irresponsible of the Board to do nothing with the facility if the contractor failed. The Chair stated that it had been a year since the process started and a new permit was still needed, it could be two plus years before someone else could operate the facility. Mr. Costello stated that although the amount required was $200,000, the amount claimed may not be $200,000., Mr: Costello stated that $200,000 was within the range of income and felt that it was not an unreasonable amount. There Was agreement to require a $200,000 performance bond. Mr. Costello referenced the Termination of Agreement Terns and the various elements -f termination, including termination for Convenience. The contractor requested a reciprocal Termination fdr Convenience to which Mr. Costello disagreed. A compromise was suggested in the form of a Termination Due to Governmental Action. Mr. Jack and the Chair agreed it was reasonable. Mr. Cavossa stated that an opportunity to renegotiate would be necessary if the railroad tracks were inoperable. Mr. Costello described the revision that the contractor would propose to post an annual escrow account in the amount of$2,500 for costs''incurred by the towns for permitting, engineering or inspection costs, with respect to his operations. Mr. Richard confirmed that the amount should be sufficient for added security,, Another issue involved the operational start time of the facility. Mr. Costello reported that the contractor wished to have an earlier opening time of 5:00 a.m. for access for their own vehicles and 7:00 a,r . for other vehicles, as opposed to 6.00 a.m. and 8:15 a.m. Mr. Cavossa stated that, within the industry, most facilities were open earlier and this site did not necessarily have neighbors. Mr. Cavossa stated that the sooner the trucks dumped their loads there would be less traffic on the road} a benefit to the community., Mr. Barrett inquired about site assignment times. The Chair responded that the contractor would have to resolve the issue, Ir. Cavossa stated that andwich was the original site assignment. -Mr. Costello recommended adding"subject to" in case of any permit issues. Mr. Jack responded that it may not be a permit issue, and that the contractor was willing to be flexible to address issues if needed. Where was agreement regarding consideration of-the permits. Mr. Costello referenced the contractor maintaining full containers on the site for more than 24 hours, but the contractor wished that a provision be added that it not pertain to recycling or rail 3