The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR-93-0250J-93-230 3/24/98 93-r 250 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE AS TO THE MOST QUALIFIED FIRMS IN RANK ORDER, WHICH SUBMITTED PROPOSALS IN CONNECTION WITH REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 91-92-102, TO DESIGN, CONSTRUCT, ACCEPTANCE TEST, FINANCE AND OWN/OPERATE A SOLID WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY,, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO UNDERTAKE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE MOST QUALIFIED FIRMS, IN RANK ORDER, UNTIL HE ARRIVES AT AN AGREEMENT WHICH IS FAIR, COMPETITIVE AND REASONABLE, AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR ITS RATIFICATION AND APPROVAL. WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 91-450, adopted June 20, 1991, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to design, oonstruot, aooeptanoe test, finanoe and own/operate a solid waste prooessing faoility; and WHEREAS, four responses to said RFP were reoeived and evaluated; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 92-476, adopted July 16, 1992, the City Commission rejeoted all responses to said RFP and direoted that a new RFP be issued to inoorporate tipping fees, revenue sharing and performanoe bond requirements as oriteria for said faoility; and WHEREAS, in August, 1992, the City issued a new RFP to inoorporate all oonoerns, in a000rdanoe with the direotives of the City Commission on July 16, 1992; and CITY COM MSION P&TTING OF APR 15 W3 a.duflm No. 93- 250 r- - WHEREAS, Seven responses were reoeived for said new solicitation; and WNEREAS, an Evaluation Committee evaluated the proposals reoeived, in response to the City's Request for Proposals and _ seleoted in rank order, the five firma most qualified to provide the required servioes for said faoility; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Seotion 1. The reoitals and findings oontained in the Preamble to this Resolution are hereby adopted by referenoe thereto and inoorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Seotion. Seotion 2. The City Commission hereby approves the - findings of the Evaluation Committee of the following firms, in rank order, as the most qualified to provide design, oonstruot, aooeptanoe test, finanoe and own/operate a solid waste prooessing faoility: F=$X RAHgBD #i Bedminster Bi000nversion/Seaoor JV FIRM R&R MD ea Daneoo, Ino. FTEN RANM e3 Coastal Reoyoling Industries Flax RAC f4 Amereoyole, Ino. FIRM RwNM #5 Ecology Conoepts/Straub Capital OV Seotion 3. The City Commission hereby authorizes the City Manager to negotiate an agreement on behalf of the City of 93- 250 -2- vz 4__yyi �S�i ��.,'�- '.ar_. #'_-.t.*ti.�%�`s�'�. - ++�-��.a 0."��;Y'��'."k4�� - %• r.i �i�.rsa"`av:..,�"S�= Miami with the Firm ranked first as set forth in Seotion 2 herein. In the event that the City Manager oannot negotiate an agreement which, in his opinion, is fair, oompetitive and reasonable with the Firm ranked first, then he is hereby authorized to terminate suoh negotiation and to prooeed to negotiate with the seoond most qualified Firm. In the event that he fails to negotiate a satisfaotory agreement with the seoond Firm, then he is authorized to undertake negotiations with the third most qualified Firm. In the event that he fails to negotiate a satisfaotory agreement with the third ranked Firm, then he is authorized to undertake negotiations with the fourth most qualified Firm. In the event that he fails to negotiate a satisfaotory agreement with the fourth ranked Firm, then he is authorized to undertake negotiations with the fifth most qualified Firm. Seotion 4. The City Manager is hereby direoted to present the negotiated agreement to the City Commission at its earliest soheduled meeting for its ratification and approval. Seotion B. This Resolution shall beoome effeotive immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of April �r.. 1993. AT S NATTY HIRAI CITY CLERK -3- XAVIER L.,SII.4REZ.AAYOR 93- 250 - �4 _ t y k. J . i . PREPARED AND APPROV BY: U MBBRTO g$RNAND92 ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: A-.-f QTjm Jo , In I CITY ATTO: BSS:M3S06 -4- A 16N CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA 21 INTEq-OFFICE MEMORANDUM to. The Honorable Mayor and Members DATE of the City Commission SUBJECT FROM REFERENCES APR - 91993 FILE Resolution Accepting the Findings of the Selection Committee Ces r H. Odio City Manager ENCLOSURES: I "i RECOMMENDATION It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt the attached Resolution approving the findings of the Evaluation Committee for RFP No. 91-92-102, as to the most qualified firm, in rank order, to design, construct, acceptance test, finance, own/operate a solid waste processing facility. BACKGROUND The City Commission authorized issuance of Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 90-91-098, by Resolution No. 91-450, to select a firm with the capabilities to undertake the above noted project, The RFP was duly advertised, four (4) responses were received and were evaluated by the selection committee. At its meeting of July 16, 1992, the City Commission after presentations from two proposers (Amerecycle, Inc. and Ecology Concepts/BDX), rejected the findings of the selection committee and directed that a new RFP be issued, to incorporate tipping fees, revenue sharing and a performance bond among other criteria. With the second RFP issuance, seven proposals were received on February 31 1993. The evaluation committee was cgmprised of the following seven (7) members: Members from City Staff Adrienne MacBeth, Deputy Director, Solid Waste Division Carlos Poce, Accountant Supervisor, General Services Administration and Solid Waste Peter Serrao, Supervisor, Hurricane Recovery Team Members from the Public Dr. Manuel Cereijo, Florida International University Andres Mejides, Miami Dade Community College Dr. David Kuhn, Florida International University Mosi Kitwana, Composting Director, US Conference of Mayors The honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission Page 2 Two of the seven proposals were deemed non -responsive, therefore, the selection committee evaluated and interviewed the remaining five (5), which were ranked as listed below: Company Name Rank Bedminster Bioconversion/Seacor JV 1 Deneco, Inc 2 Coastal Recycling Industries 3 Amerecycle, Inc. 4 Ecology Concepts/Straub Capital JV 5 A synopsis of each firm is attached to this package. Though none of the companies are headquartered in Dade County, Coastal is located in Hollywood, Straub Capital in Palm Beach and Amerecycle in Tampa, Florida. In addition, one of the firms, Daneco, is a female -owned firm, while the others had minority participation and/or subcontractors. Enc Proposed Resolution Ranking Summary Exhibits a- i EXHIBIT A Proposer Profile RFP 91-92-102 Solid Masts► Processing Facility Proposer/Firms AMERECYCLE ADDRESS/PLACE OF BUSINESSt 10002 Princess Palm Avenue Suite 230 Tampa, Florida 33619 OFFICERS & DIRECTORSt Richard J. Brown, Board Chairman, HFG Expansion Fund Stephen R. Goldberg, CEO Steven C. Howard, President and Director Eric B. Gray, Vice President and Director Cecil E. Miles, Secretary/Treasurer Joseph A. Eosco, Director William Ware, Director, HFG Expansion Fund 10% AND ABOVE PARTNERS/STOCKHOLDERSt Amerecycle's sole stockholder is Coastland Corporation. Stockholders holding 10% or more of Coastland aret HFG Expansion Fund I, O.P. Joseph A. Bosco Union Limited Partnership FROFOSSR'S SOURCES/MBTHODS OF ARRANGING FINANCINGt Amerecycle's financing will be through construction and permanent debt provided through the Company's affiliation with Banc One Capital Corporation, in conjunction with the equity provided by Coastland's major shareholders. Financing Optionst Tax exempt private activity bonds (IDBs), Certificate of Participation or Taxable bonds AEROBIC COMPOST FACILITIES DESIGNED, BUILT, CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTIONt Sumter County Facility (current operators) The Bell Group of Wichita Falls, Texas 1 F �p 3 r. YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN OPERATION/MANAGEMENT OF AEROBIC COMPOSTINO FACILITIES: 4 years (principals were involved in initial stages of Sumter facility) 'LIPPING FEEL $77.00 per Ton acceptable MSW, residuals included; excludes land acquisition costs and county surcharges REVENUE SHARING FROM RECYCLABLES: 50% to City 50% to Proposer (at 900 TPD input) P^OPOSED SITE% Either a northwest, west or southwest Dade or out -of -county rural site M/WBE PARTICIPATION/SUBCONTRACTORS: Tony Zamora Attorney - H Luis Morse Consulting Engineer - H Darryl Sharpton Accounting/Auditing - B Jorge Avino, P.E. Site Engineering Arsenio Milian Environmental Permitting - H Jorge Mas, Jr. Construction Manage:: - H Humberto Arguelles Project Manager Jack Reiner Compost Soil Amendment Broker Steve Smith Realtor G8 2so 44 t- a YYYi E �T El �XHIBIfi B .=y. Proposer profile RFP 91-92-102 Solid Waste Processing facility Proposer/Firm: Joint venture ADDRESS/PLACE OF BUSINESS$ Bedminster 52 Haddonfield -Berlin Road, Suite 4000 Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034 SEACOR 200 East Park Drive, Suite 600 Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 OFFICERS & DIRECTORS$ Charles Carter, President and CEO Bedminster Bioconversion Corp. Charles L. Rech, President SEACOR Services, Inc. 10% AND ABOVE PARTNERS/STOCKHOLDERS: Dorothy Dillon Eweson Kathleen Widell'Trust H. L. Yoh, Jr.. PROPOSER'S SOURCES/METHODS OF ARRANGING FINANCING$ BBC has an ,agreement with The Chase Manhattan Bank (New York) for financing projects, secured by a long-term put -or - pay contract. AEROBIC COMPOST FACILITIES CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION: Big Sandy, Texas Pinetop, Arizona Sevierville, Tennessee DESIGNED, BUILT, AND OPERATED 'OR 3 Olt YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN OPERATION/MANAGEME.IT OF ':lv.ROBIC COMPOSTING FACILITIESt 12 years TIPPING FEEL $63.50 per ton, to be adjusted annually for inflation, assuming pass -through costs to City and 215,000 p yr. MSW 100,000 tons sludge being processed; REVENUE SHARING/RECYCLABLES: 50% to City 50% to Proposer PROPOSED SITE: Would purchase or lease at least 15 acres Virginia Rey would be alternative site M/WBE P)LITICIPATION/SUBCONTRACTORS: Miami Ecology Services - H { 9 3— 25 € # . 4. n r i }r r �: U Proposor profile RFP 91-92-102 Solid Waste Processing Facility proposer/Firm$ COASTAL RECYCLING INDUSTRIES/ADDINGTON ENV'IRONMENTAt,, INC. (A wholly -owned subsidiary of Addington Resources, Inc.) ADDRESS/PLACE OF BUSINESS$ Coastal Recycling Industries, Inc. 2316 S.W. 56th Terrace West Hollywood, Florida 33023 ' Addington Environmental, Inc. (A91 ) 721 Corporate Drive, Suite 1000 Lexington, Kentucky 41101 Addington Resources, Inc. Route 180, Big Pine Road Ashland, Kentucky 41101 OFFICERS & DIRECTORS$ Larry Addington Robert Addington Bruce Addington Kathy Addington R. Douglas Striebel Jack C. Fisher Carl R. Whitehouse President, CEO, Director V.P./Operations & Engineering V.P./Operations, Director V.P./Accounting, Sec./Treasurer V.P. and C.F.O. Director Director 10% AND ABOVE PARTNERS/STOCKHOLDERS: Larry Addington 27.3% Robert Addington 11.4% Bruce Addington 10.5% PROPOSER'S SOURCES/METHODS OF ARRANGING FINANCING: AEI has been induced and approved for allocation of a minimum of $30,000,000 in IRB's by the Dade County Industrial Revenue Authority. Through its parent, Addington Resources, Inc., it supports a credit standing sufficient to obtain investment grade ratings on long term debt. 93- 250. LIST ALL AEROBIC COMPOST FACILITIES DESIGNED, BUILT, AND OPERATED OR CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION: Ashland, Kentucky (current owners/operators) YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE OPERATION/MANAGEMENT OF AEROBIC COMPOSTING FACILITIES: 2 years TIPPING FEE: $62 per Ton 1st year (as a base) Up to $75.37 per Ton in 5th year REV1:1UE SHARING PROPOSAL FROM RECYCLABLESs 0% to City PROPOSED SITES Hialeah in Dade County (private) M/WBE PARTICIPATION/SUBCONTRACTORS: Howard Gary & Co - B Proposer Profile _} RFP 91-92-102 Solid Waste Processing Facility Proposer/Firm: DANtSCO, INC. A Subsidiary of DANtco, S.p.A. ADDRESS/PLACE OF BUSINESS% Textile Building, #508 119 N. Fourth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 OFFICERS & DIRECTORSt Joseph E. Blankenship President and CEO Rita Campanile Secretary Annachiara Danieli Board Director Chairperson Luigi Castelli Board Director Carlo Paris Board Director 10% AND ABOVE PARTNERS/STOCKHOLDERSt r Luigi Castelli 25% - Daneco, S.p.A. 75%* *(64% owned by Ms. A. Danieli) PROPOSER'S SOURCES/METHODS OF ARRANGING FINANCINGt As credit enhancement, Daneco proposes to secure a direct pay Letter of Credit from a bank. Credit Suisse has indicated the general terms and conditions under which a letter of credit will be issued. Furthermore, Banco Di Napoli expressed a strong commitment to work closely with Daneco to issue a,direct pay letter of credit in the amount requested in the RFP for project financing. LIST ALL AEROBIC COMPOST FACILITIES DESIGNED, BUILT, AND OPERATED OR CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION% I. Lignano, Italy 2. Ceresara, Italy 3. Pieve di Coriano, Italy - 4. Dubai, U.A.B. 5. Tolmezzo, Italy 6. Fujairah, U.A.E. 7. Ajman, U.A.E. {fi 7 9=3-- 250 $. 4��T+ c ). IF 4 W B. Mora, Minnesota 9. Udine, Italy 10. vasto, Italy 11. Cape May, NJ 12. San Giorgio, Italy 13. Springfield, MO 14. San Diego, CA 15. St. Louis Co., MN 16. Nantucket, MA YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE OPERATION/MANAGEMENT OF AEROBIC COMPOSTING FACILITIES: 4 years (18 years parent company) TIPPING FEE: $63.00 per Ton, 1st year, to be escalated annually as mutually agreed (land acquisition & residuals are including in base) REVENUE SHARING/RECYCLAHLES: 80% City and 20% Daneco (Expenses also to be shared) PROPOSED SITE: Within 15 miles of Solid Waste Processing Facility. (Krome Avenue or South West Dade Facility) 1 � � � i"} 7 Proposer Profile RFP 91-92-102 Solid Waste Processing Facility Proposer/Firm: ECOLOGY CONCEPTS, INC./STRAUB CAPITAL CORP. Joint Venture PLACE OF BUSINESS: Ecology Concepts, Inc. 6040 Camp Howie, Suite 1 Forth Worth, Texas 76116 Straub Capital Corp. 440 Royal Palm Way, #202 Palm Beach, FL 33460 OFFICERS & DIRECTORSt Perry R. Senn President Mike P. Olson Vice -President Dorothy N. Greer Secretary/Treasurer 10% AND ABOVE PARTNERS/STOCKHOLDSRSt Perry R. Senn 22.5% Mike P. Olson 22.5% Dorothy N. Greer 20% Allen Guerierri 10% Andrew N. Farnese 10% Note z, The ,financial -statements for Straub Capital Corp were submitted in the proposal package but were marked confidential. They are available for review upon _ request, with confidentiality. They are audited and appear in order and satisfactory. — PROPOSER'S SOURCES/METHODS OF'ARWGING FINANCINGt � s_ Ecology Concepts, Inc. proposes' to utilize one or more of the following financing sources: 1. First w tion is the issuance and sale of Industrial Development Bonds (IDH e). 2. Private activity bonds or general revenue'bonds' 93 250 . 3. Use of private financing through contacts and associations of Straub Capital Corp until such time, the public funds would be utilized to take out the private institutional funding sources LIST ALL AEROBIC COMPOST FACILITIES DESIGNED, BUILT, AND OPERATED OR CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTIONS None listed for Ecology Concepts as a firm, but see below. YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE OPERATION/MANAGEMENT OF AEROBIC COMPOSTING FACILITIES: None listed for Ecology Concepts as a firm, however principals were involved in Sumter facility: 5/88 to 7/89 - Perry Senn 7/89 to 6/90 - Mike Olson TIPPING FEE: Garbage Only $58.50* Trash Only $58.50 Clean Yard Waste $27.00 Construction/Demo $58.50 Garbage Mixed w/Trash $58.50 Trash Mixed w/Yard Waste $58.50 *Subject to normal inflationary items REVENUE SHARING/RECYCLABLES: First $200,000 of revenues to the City. Second $200,000 of revenues to Ecology Concepts Thereafter, 25 % of revenues to the City, 75% of revenues to Ecology Concepts. PROPOSED SITE: - Virginia Key Alternates: Either site.near South Dade Landfill or site near SW 200 ST, west Dade or site in Northwest Dade, near Dade County facility M/WBE PARTICIPATION/SUBCONTRACTORS: Ecology is 20% female -owned Jose.Villalobos, Attorney - H 10 H i'1111111.1'iillih I �111�1011 CITY OF MIAMI CONSULTANT SERVICES PROJECT RANKING SUMMARY RzFzRz=t (RFP 91-92-102,) To Design, Construct, Finance, Own Operate etc. a Solid Waste Composting Facility COMMITTEE !!EMBER TEAM DESIGNATION POINTS ASSIGNED Manuel Cereijo 72 84 -TO- 69 7r 67 -I-S 67 -82- A - Bedminster Bioconversion/Seacor Services 8 - Ecology Concepts/Straub Capital C - Coastal Recycling Industries, Inc. D - Amercycle E - Daneco, Inc. Carlos Poce -1-3 - T8- -74- David Kuhn OF 50 FT 7T- 69 Peter Serrao 85 65 40 - Adrienne Macbeth -3-5 -7-5 -75- 73- -To- -U- 70 Mosi Kitwana --2 3 70 -95- Andres Mejides -90- --55- 60Y 42-5 3-247 44-0 Total Points IMF 6-0-.7 74—.8 62—.8 75--.7 Average Score -87- FINAL RANK 5 3 4 2 I M OWN KELLEY OkYt & WARREN A &ANYNt*S"10 INCLUOINO 0"Crt SSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTOPNCYS At LAW NEW t6ftt. N.Y, 201 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD WAS"INOtoN, O.C. 2400 MIAMI CENTER L06 ANOtLES. CA. CMiCAAO, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131-2399 IL. !STAtiP640. CT. 43081 372.2AOO PAr!ffi "ANY. N.J. "MUSSELS. MSL6+uM tOKYO.JAPAN April 13, 1993 _�', -y) TtLt P/Cil (30811**-0 06 JON C. CHAserly OINtCT LINE #Soo) SAS Ms. Judy S. Carter VIA FACSIMILE (57E-S" O po Chief Procurement Officer and HAND DELIVERY Dept. of General Administration and ry Solid Waste Procurement Mgmt. Div. .o r� 1390 N.W. 20th Street t� Miami, Florida 33142 Re: RFP No. 91-92-102 - Corp. Protest Dear Ms. Carter: 'd National Resource Recovery ' cc w The undersigned law firm represents National Resource Recovery Corp. ("NRRC") with regard to its proposal in response to the City of Miami's RFP No. 91-92102 for the design, construction, financing and operation of the City's solid waste processing and composting facility ("Facility"). NRRC timely submitted a compre- hensive proposal which offers the most technologically advanced solid waste processing system available. NRRC's Triple -Sack -Single Stop Collection System offers a complete In -Plant recycle system which will eliminate the separation of collection of materials and save the .City` in excess of $6°.5 million per year. `' NRRC has previously built and operated two successful waste processing and composting facilities in Gainesville, Florida and Houston, Texas and has been involved in the building and operation of such facilities for over twenty five years. Despite NRRC's comprehensive proposal [which is superior to.or at a minimum competitive with each of the proposals consid- ered by the Certification Committee ("Committee*)], the Committee found the proposal non -responsive to the RFP and declined to consider the merits of the proposal. The Committee stated that the proposal was non -responsive because it did not provide all of the, requisite financial information and did not give details on the Reference Plant Technical Data as to a currently` operating facility.- The Committee did, however, consider other proposals which failed to comply with material aspects of the RFP. NRRC submits that the Committee's decision to exclude NRRC's proposal E Y— �4 93- 150 The undersigned law firm represents National Resource Recovery Corp. ("NRRC") with regard to its proposal in response to the City of Miami's RFP No. 91-92102 for the design, construction, financing and operation of the City's solid waste processing and composting facility ("Facility"). NRRC timely submitted a compre- hensive proposal which offers the most technologically advanced solid waste processing system available. NRRC's Triple -Sack -Single Stop Collection System offers a complete In -Plant recycle system which will eliminate the separation of collection of materials and save the .City` in excess of $6°.5 million per year. `' NRRC has previously built and operated two successful waste processing and composting facilities in Gainesville, Florida and Houston, Texas and has been involved in the building and operation of such facilities for over twenty five years. Despite NRRC's comprehensive proposal [which is superior to.or at a minimum competitive with each of the proposals consid- ered by the Certification Committee ("Committee*)], the Committee found the proposal non -responsive to the RFP and declined to consider the merits of the proposal. The Committee stated that the proposal was non -responsive because it did not provide all of the, requisite financial information and did not give details on the Reference Plant Technical Data as to a currently` operating facility.- The Committee did, however, consider other proposals which failed to comply with material aspects of the RFP. NRRC submits that the Committee's decision to exclude NRRC's proposal E Y— �4 93- 150 93- 150 a. .bmitted into the public KELLEY ORYE & WARREN Ms. audy 9. Carter April 13, 199� Page 2 record in connection with item _ on25 q �5 _ . Matty Hirdi city cle k because it wag non -responsive in certain respects while deciding to consider others which were similarly non -responsive is patently unfair and contrary to the equal treatment which must be provided to all entities bidding for City Contracts. The latest addendum to the RFP dated December 31, 19920 was received by NRRC approximately three weeks prior to the dead- line for submission of proposals, February 3, 1993. NRRC did not have sufficient time to gather the requisite financial information and it specifically stated in its proposal that the information would be forthcoming at or before the Committee's interviews. A review of the Committee's materials shows that other proposals considered by the Committee failed to contain at least some of the required financial information. Considering the short time period for compliance and NRRC' s assurance that it would fully comply with the RFP financial requirements prior to the Committee's interview process, the merits of NRRC's proposal should have been considered. With regard to the details on Reference Plant Technical Data, NRRC provided substantial information regarding its prior experience, including successful plants in Houston and Gainesville as well as references from highly respected individuals active in the industry. The fact that NRRC does not currently have an opera- tional facility should not have disqualified it from consideration as at least two other proposers ranked by the Committee do not have a currently operating facility. For example, Coastal Recycling Industries' proposal listed Reference Plant Technical Data on a facility which it does not own. Nor did it participate in the design, construction or operation of the facility. While Coastal stated in its proposal that it was being purchased by a company which owned and operated the facility, it clearly failed to comply with the'RFP requirement. Additionally, Ecology Concepts listed a facility that it has not operated for three years. NRRC's experience in the industry far exceeds that of the other proposers and accordingly it should not have been excluded pursuant to Section 2.4 of the RFP specifications. The Committee decided to review two proposals that failed to comply with one of the most fundamental aspects of the RFP, the proposal of a suitable site for the facility other than the City owned er Bioconversion failed to submit ( a:gy— alternative site and Ecology Con sed a site so far O - from the City that it would be cost pr a viable alternative site location pubstantial costs in comparison to th ohibitive. NRRC recomme which would save the City = e other proposals. emitted into the public KELLEY DRYS & WARRENrecordin Conn eotiOfi with item... 1.-� an 4 19" j1 Ms. Judy S. Carter April 13, 1993 Page 3 14ic1tty Hirai City Clerk - This project is one of the most important City projects since the Dinner Key Marina project, and is of significant importance to the City's citizens. The Committee and City Commis- sion should have the opportunity to review all viable and competi- tive plans prior to making its decision on the award of this important contract. Unfortunately, due to the arbitrary and inequitable certification process, NRRC has been excluded and its proposal was never considered. For the above stated reasons, we believe that it is in the best interests of the City of Miami for the City Commission to re -bid this project for alternatively give NRRC an opportunity to present its proposal to the Committee or directly to the City Commission). This will assure that the City awards this contract to the entity which can best serve the citizens' interests. We respectfully request that NRRC's protest be placed on the City Commission's April 15, 1993, agenda. cc: Very truly yours, City Commissioners Caesar H. Odio, City Manager a MAMGI%OWI (N=W) KELLEY DRYE & WARREN 93- 250 x �K fi as. Y . yam— 40 *An 31rocs) ovillmas COASTAL RECYCLING INDUSTRIES SEACOR • DANECO INC. RATIMIAL RESOURCE RECOVERY • ECOLOGY CONCOPTS www ZL - THE HARDWAY COMPANY AAERIC&4 RECYCLING 40, • • J4F or mme. v ra$t*-Pr*L-.Ur*Ment DLvielosi My vol4vtoeat) T I." -SOLID,-WASTE _PROCESSING FACILITY RFP 91-92-102 FEBRUARY 3, 1993 11:00 a.m. eo, a. BID fast, IR 8.15ass. RON E. WILLIAMS Admirrstrator RFP NO. 91-92=-102 December 31, 1992 CFSAR H. ODIO City Manager THIS ADDENDUM IS TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN AMENDMENT TO THE ABOVE NOTED RFP, SPECIFICALLY PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 'INTRODUCTION' OF THE RFP'S SPECIFICATIONS. THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE SHALL BE DELETED FROM SAID PARAGRAPH: The Proposer will, be responsible for any additional 'host' or landfill closure fees assessed by Metro Dade County, based on tonnage diverted from a County landfill site. IN ADDITION, THIS NOTICE IS TO ADVISE THAT THE RFP'S NEW OPENING DATE IS >?ERRIAgRY 3a 1993.0 AT 11tOQA.m. PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN THIS ADDENDUM WITH YOUR PROPOSAL SHEETS AS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT.: SIGNATURE SINCERELY, /,C.VJUDY S. CARTER CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER COMPANY NAME DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND SOLID WASTE/Procurement Management Division 1390 N.W. 20th Street/Miami, Florida 33142/(305) 575-5174/FAX: (305) 575-5180 Zss•�a s+tt�iites use; RON E. W1111AMS Administrator RFP NO. 91-92--102 December 31, 1992 CESAR H. ODIO City Manager THIS ADDENDUM IS TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN AMENDMENT TO THE ABOVE NOTED RFP, SPECIFICALLY PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 'INTRODUCTION' OF THE RFP'S SPECIFt ATTONS. THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE SHALL BE DELETED FROM SAID PARAGRAPH: The Proposer will be responsible for any additional 'host' or landfill closure fees assessed by Metro Dade County, based on tonnage diverted from a County landfill site. IN ADDITION, THIS NOTICE IS TO ADVISE THAT THE RFP'S NEW OPENING DATE IS: BRUARY 3, 1993, AT 11,00 A a4 PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN THIS ADDENDUM WITH YOUR PROPOSAL SHEETS AS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT. SIGNATURE SINCERELY, ar�C /ICIVJUDY S . CARTER CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER COMPANY NAME DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND SOLID WASTE/Procurement Management Division 1390 N.W. 20th Street/Miami, Florida 33142/(305) 57S-5174/FAX: (305) S75-Sloo LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT Proposals in response to this request for sealed proposals (RFP) will be received by the City of Miami City Clerk at her office _ located at City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida 33133 not later than 10130.a_m, Aitruat 31 1992 to select a firm that has the capabilities to design, cohstruc acceptance test, finance, own/operate a solid waste processing facility. This RFP is only for companies employing proven aerobic composting technologies. Proposals submitted past such deadline and/or submitted to any _ other location or office shall be deemed not responsive and will be rejected. Ordinance No. 10062 as amended, established a goal of Awarding 51% of the City's total dollar volume of all expenditures for All Goods and Services to Black, Hispanic and Women Minority Business Enterprises on an equal basis. Minority and women vendors who are interested in submitting _ proposals and who are not registered with the City as minority or women vendors are advised to contact the City Procurement Office, 1390 N.W. 20th Street, Second Floor, Telephone 575-5174.. Ordinance #10032 established a "First Source Hiring Agreement" program to stimulate the creation of employment for City of Miami residents. For details of the programs requirements, contact the Neighborhood Jobs Program at 579-2468. Detailed specifications for the proposal are available upon request at the City Procurement Office. The City Manager may reject all ro p gosals and readvertise. 1 (Ad No. 0808)` Cesar H. Odio City Manager 6 n�� M� N r� %0 m �. (A P: j 1-,. J � a - i � i � n 1 �ru City or Miami 0$08 REQUISITION FOR ADVERTISEMENT MOW '`wa i me and Mach 1.OeGpartme- Pzocureme:it- i:or So.l.ii,i Wa,,;,.t= A w1b MIA 2. Division: 3. Account Code number: 422001-320:102-287 4. Is this a confirmation: ❑ 5. Prepared by. Yes❑ No Anne Whittaker 6. Sire of advertisement: 7. Starting date: 8. Telephone number: 575--51'14 9. Number of times this advertisement is to be 10. Type of advertisement: ublished: l L i ❑ ❑ 11. Aemarks: RFP 91-9i- .; ; � f:qr « so,jid Wr�scc, P.r.ocf;;; ,iny f acilitr 12. Publication Dates) of Advertisement Invoice No. Arrbunt a t'�wi c4i.:l 'V Lew las l nw, r icaS =/ <^ D--r f ice_\7 rn A N —�� rn GIN w Approved ❑� Diaap�oved f / iJ-i"! � Or Department DirectoN nee Date Approved for PaLC yment ! i CiS/PC 503 Rev. _12/80 1 SOU&w Forward Whip &M rrnAww sa i lw...,...rY. POsTMOUTMW Mlhile • O.S.A.: Cofwy . Oeparbnsrrt A'. t f} 2 frwna�amengf end r"n ff* am r �s SOLID WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY �O.e RFP 91-92-102 IllIN,2! Inc$) 02920• FEHRUARY 3, 1993 11:00 a.m.ROTA COASTAL RECYCLING INDUSTRIES 0c) °O, ' • SEACOR DANECO INC. E" �,�, f �. i le , NATIONAL RESOURCE RECOVERY92 • ECOLOGY CONCEPTS 50 THE HARDWAY COMPANY .- A;•iERIC&4 RECYCLING o s wwww_ U r�r�ww__rar_ r�w_ww www_w•s_w��•� rrw•.rirw�r�._s w_N_�•rrw_pw�_ rrM_!r_�wr�.rw. N NrM_rNN••._ rrriw•r _w!M_ r.�oNw__r_ M _�wwwrN�r_M r _�r�ww�►NwowrN� r wrw N_N r MM_N�_rM Ngw..w ter•. 9 • r�•.w�__ rM�Mw r�fr�..�e� M�.�_iw.•�•�r �� _M�r••�_N_N NMw__wMs�rw �MM�►�.�N••_r.N� v'w�w�•lMN��lNMii� w�MM�•jNN_ww___r�r • M_r _�• �N_�•.ww •�_rww_wwrr••.r_we w+M_!w� .�M wiwNM•�4r _•►1_rMM r { @_ wwwwwww�r�.wr .._ ,.,r.,•,,,,,�s *calved t� 0XV02opes on t*b*29 oj — �t*soea ssaeieis� tits Solid waste -Procurement Division �wNw��w.r�w..�w�r�r�Aw _r��wl�•�.w+wprw�wwi•1�� .w��.wrwr•r.•rwr_rr.�.•.A•_w•r��* ry_ ic�ts� S�pasteeat� x - III i J , II II _k Ill ll l i ll l i ll l it 111_i. I� I I I 601, 1 I1 I I_ 1'I III l � llh ll l llll n �i � i l III 1, ii 1111111 —_-� _1 11 1 ili u 11 h i u 1 I11111111 a1 II � PITH �n ^o R meq qITm wrywavao m ptwea argna eqj nm Paufm9nS 15 0 i