Agenda - Council - 05/28/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ABATEMEICT TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS May 2, I After thorough analysis of all available information the Abatement Team and its consultants have been able to gather through the procurement process, the Abatement Team makes the followlng recommendations: That a staged procurement process continue to be pursued incorporating the following steps: I. Establishing a ranking of processes by technology and size; Developing a request for proposal and obtaining proposals from all vendors currently qualified in the existing process for the first-ranked process and sizei 3. Selecting o vendor or vendors whose proposals are acceptable in principle; Negotiating with the selected vendor or vendors to the point of contract or reiection; 5. If unable to secure an acceptable contract, repeating the process with the second-ranked process and size. That the technology and size for a resource recovery proiect be ranked as follows: An P, DF facility capable of processing a minimum of /~00 tons per day (TPD) or larger of mixed municipal waste, to be located in one of the designated working areas, and utilizing the waste stream in such a manner that not more than by weight, of that waste stream is landfilled (Qualified vendors: NSP/UPA, Swentec, and Waste Technology); A 400 TPD mass burn cogeneration facility to be located near one of the identified energy markets (Qualified vendors: Ogden Martin, Clark Kenith, Mont ahoy/Ebasco, Morrison/Volund, Waste Management, and Signal) A 400 TPD mass burn electrical generation facility to be located in one of the designated working areas (Qualified vendors: Ogden Martin, Clark Kenith, Montenay/Ebasco, Morrison/Volund, Waste Management, and Signal). C. That the following timeline goals be established: The request for proposals be transmitted, proposals be received and vendors be selected with a progress report to the County Board by August 13, 1985; 2. A progress report be made to the County Board by October 8, 1985; That negotiations be completed for o decision whether to contract or reject and move to the second-ranked alternative as soon as it is determined that on acceptable contract cannot be secured, if such is the case, and that a decision regarding the amount of the IDB allocation to be retained, be mode no later than October 22, 198S. De That the County Board give preliminary approval as potential sites for a resource recovery project to the working areas as shown on the map (Most Suitable Areas for o Potential Resource Recovery Facility) presented today and, further, that the County Board state its willingness to consider other sites, whether or not located within Anoka County, for location of such a facility.