letter of invitation€¦ · letter of invitation. mail: c/o waste management services division...

Appendix 1Letter of Invitation

Mail: c/o Waste Management Services Division Phone Niagara: 905.687.9595 • Toll Free: 1.800.594.5542 Niagara Region Public Works Department Phone Hamilton: 905.546.CITY (2489) 2201 St. David’s Road, P.O. Box 1042 Fax: 905.687.8056 • Email: [email protected] Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7 Web: www.wasteplan.ca

March 8, 2004

Mr. Robert Desnoyers President Hamilton Community Energy 77 James Street North Suite 306; Box 54 Hamilton, Ontario, L8R 2K3 Canada Subject: I N V I T A T I O N :

W o r k s h o p f o r A l t e r n a t i v e D i s p o s a l T e c h n o l o g y V e n d o r s

Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan Study Preparation of Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference Dear: Mr. Desnoyers,

On behalf of the Region of Niagara and City of Hamilton, we are writing to invite your company to attend and participate in a workshop scheduled as part of the ongoing development of environmental assessment (EA) terms of reference (ToR) for the Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan EA study. The WastePlan study involves a planning process under the Province of Ontario’s Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) to evaluate alternative approaches, technologies, and locations for the management of the two municipalities’ waste that will remain after achievement of 65 percent waste diversion targets. The first step in the study involves the development of EA ToR which will be submitted to the Minister of the Environment for approval. Once approved, the EA ToR will guide the specific tasks and considerations to be completed and forming the EA planning and evaluation process.

Invitations to the workshop are being forwarded to only those technology vendors and companies that have expressed an interest and provided specific information to the two municipalities with regards to the management of future post-diversion wastes. These companies include Hamilton Community Energy and the companies identified in the fourteen responsive submissions received by the Region of Niagara from their November 2002 request for expressions of interest (REOI). That REOI was completed as part of the Niagara Long-term Disposal Planning Study. A list of the specific contacts to which workshop invitations are being forwarded is attached to this letter. Where more than one company was included in a Niagara EOI submission, representation from all of the partners identified in the submission will be permitted at the workshop.

Mr. Desnoyers March 8, 2004 Hamilton Community Energy Page 2 of 6

The technology vendor workshop is considered an important activity in the EAToR development as the EA study to be undertaken in accordance with the EA ToR will likely depend on vendor input to the study. In particular, should it be decided to pursue an alternative disposal technology such as combustion or gasification, access to the most up-to-date information and expertise regarding specific technologies is best achieved by engaging the companies involved in developing, implementing and operating the respective facilities. Examples of vendor input in this case and the types of questions we feel are best addressed by the specific technology vendors include:

• A competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process would be utilized to identify the preferred technology vendor to be included in the EAA approval submission. The types of questions to be discussed at the workshop could include: At what point in the planning process do we issue the RFP? How much involvement should we assume from the vendor in completeing the approvals process? What are the critical elements of the RFP process from the standpoint of the vendors and municipalities.

• The option of allowing technology vendors to offer/identify sites in their Proposals is being considered by Niagara and Hamilton. The types of questions to be discussed at the workshop could include: Recognizing that planning processes to address Ontario’s EAA can result in an implementation timeframe of up to 10 years, how early in the process should the vendor be required to commit a parcel of land and, what kinds of controls should be afforded to the municipalities with respect to access to and future acquisition of the offered lands? Who would be responsible for assembling the necessary approvals supporting documentation for a vendor offered site?

Additional background and documentation on the WastePlan Study can be obtained from the following website: www.wasteplan.ca . We are currently developing a list of questions and considerations to be discussed at the workshop and, once completed, it will be posted on this website. Prior to the workshop, and even if you cannot attend, please feel free to make suggestions for consideration at the workshop. The date, time, location of the workshop are as follows:

Date: April 7th, 2004

Time: 10:00am to 3:00pm

Location: (directions

attached)

Sheraton Hamilton Hotel Heritage Room – Kings Court Level 116 King Street West Hamilton, Ontario L8P 4V3 Canada


Please be advised that this workshop is not compulsory for the purpose of qualifying to be included in any competitive procurement process related to WastePlan. However, Niagara and Hamilton hope to have the opportunity to actively engage a representative number of companies which we feel have a high likelihood of participating in a future WastePlan RFP process. The WastePlan technical team hopes that a technology vendor workshop will allow for the early and successful identification of issues and challenges regarding the engagement of vendors in the potential selection and implementation of an alternative disposal technology. It is anticipated that the combined efforts of municipal, technical, and vendor representatives at the workshop will allow for the successful resolution of identified issues during design of the EA planning process. In addition, awareness will be raised of important issues to all parties at the outset of the study which should allow for effective issues management over the course of the study.

If you would like to attend the workshop please complete the attached workshop registration form and fax or mail it to: Jim McKay

Earth Tech Canada Inc. 80 King Street, 2nd Floor St. Catharines, Ontario, CANADA L2R 7G1

Fax: 905-688-5812 Phone: 905-688-2091 Email: [email protected]

This workshop should be a real opportunity to kick-off a potential future public-private partnership on solid footing. Accordingly, we hope that attendance will be good. Please contact Jim or a Niagara/Hamilton staff representative if you have any questions or would like to discuss matters related to the workshop or WastePlan in general.

Very truly yours,

The Regional Municipality of Niagara

Janine Ralph Manager, Waste Policy and Planning

The City of Hamilton

Beth Goodger Acting Director, Solid Waste Management

c. Steve Plaice, Earth Tech Canada Inc. David Merriman, MacViro Consultants Inc.


LIST OF INVITEES

Mr. Neil O’Neil American Ref-Fuel Company

Ms. Jean Lucas Eco Waste Solutions Inc.

Mr. Brad Moorman Barlow Projects, Inc.

Ms. Lori Hogarth Bear Necessities Waste & Food Storage Inc. (BN Waste)

Ms. Margretta (Meg) Morris EAC Operations, Inc.

Mr. Tom Morton Montenay Inc./Montenay Power Corporation

Mr. Mark R. Lyons Wheelabrator Technologies Inc.

Mr. Francis Campbell Interstate Waste Technologies, Inc.

Mr. Irvin H. Kew Gryphen Technologies Inc.

Mr. Mike Deprez Intergrated Municipal Services Inc.

Mr. Ron Menville Brightstar Environmental,LLC

Mr. Ernie Downes E.S. Fox Ltd. (MCW/Borealis)

Mr. Peter Mann Sanderson Consulting

Mr. Ken Lewis The State Group Industrial (Ecomaster)

Mr. Robert Desnoyers Hamilton Community Energy


DIRECTIONS TO MEETING LOCATION

Sheraton Hamilton Hotel 116 King Street West Hamilton, Ontario L8P 4V3 Canada

FROM HAMILTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Turn right onto Fiddler's Green to 403 East and exit at Main Street East. Turn left on Dundurn and then right on York. Turn right on James, right on King and the hotel is 1/2 a block down on the right.

FROM TORONTO PEARSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Take Highway 401 West to Highway 403 South. Take Highway 403 West Hamilton to the York Street Exit. Turn right on James Street. Continue one block to King Street and turn right. The hotel is 1/2 a block on the right.

FROM WEST

Take Highway 401 to Highway 403 West. Follow Highway 403 West until you reach the York Street Exit. Follow York to James Street and turn right. Turn right on King and the hotel is 1/2 a block on the right.

FROM NIAGARA FALLS/BUFFALO

Take Queen Elizabeth Way Westbound to Highway 403, Hamilton. Take the York Street Exit to James Street and turn right. Continue one block to King and turn right. The hotel is 1/2 a block down on the right.

Sheraton Hamilton Hotel (parking available underground)


FAX BACK SHEET To: Jim McKay Date: March 19, 2004

Company: Earth Tech Canada Inc Fax #: 905-688-5812

From:

Company:

I N V I T A T I O N :

W o r k s h o p f o r A l t e r n a t i v e D i s p o s a l T e c h n o l o g y V e n d o r s

Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan Study Preparation of Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

Will Attend Workshop

Yes No

Names of Attendees

1.

2.

3.

4.

Comments:

Appendix 2Powerpoint Presentation

1

Niagara-Hamilton Joint EA Study for Waste Disposal

The Niagara-Hamilton Long-term Disposal Planning Initiative

April 7, 2004

Overview

Background – Niagara and Hamilton’s Waste

Management Planning; and, – the Joint Study of Waste Disposal

(WastePlan)The Environmental Assessment Study Process and Work PlanProvincial Level Issues

2

Niagara’s Waste Management Planning Background

Planning of waste diversion system, identification of preferred waste management system, and establishment of 65% diversion target completed in 1999

Working towards 65% diversion by 2012

Long-term Disposal Planning Study initiated in 2002 recognizing that additional disposal capacity will be required in long term

Niagara’s Background (cont’d)

Diversion rate has increased from 23% to 38% since implementation began in 1999System’s Expanded Diversion programs:– Source separated organics collection– Enhanced recycling collection– Reduction initiatives (e.g. backyard composting,

grass-cycling, partial user-pay, collection bans)– Expanded re-use centres– Environment days– Textile collection

3

Niagara’s Long-term Disposal Study

Three phase study initiated in 2002– Phase 1: Data Collection on Disposal

Alternatives– Phase 2: Development of Alternative

Disposal Systems– Phase 3: Evaluation of Alternative

Disposal SystemsStudy completed up to Phase 2 when partnership discussions were initiated with Hamilton

Niagara’s Long-term Disposal Study Results

Landfill will continue to form part of long-term disposal system:– Not all Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) can be processed by

alternative technologies– Residues from Alternative Disposal Technologies (ADT’s) in

range of 25% to 30% by weight and 15% by volume

Disposal Systems developed that consider:– Type of technology (combustion or gasification)– Facility Throughputs

Results of Niagara Study will be used in the Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan initiative

4

Hamilton’s Waste Management Planning Background

Long-term waste management planning began in 2000Public Advisory Committee identified a preferred waste management system that focused on waste diversion and set a target 65% diversion from landfill by 2008Council approved plan in December 2001Early closure of SWARU in late 2002 dictated need to accelerate development of long-term disposal strategy and consideration of alternative disposal technologies

Hamilton’s Background (cont’d)

Diversion rate has increased from 14% to 20% since inception of Solid Waste Management Master PlanPrimary components of Plan:– Expanded collection of recyclables and processing

at a new Materials Recovery Facility– New organics collection and processing at new

Centralized Composting Facility– Community Recycling Centres– Collection of remaining 35% after diversion and

management at a disposal facility

5

The Joint Disposal StudyTwo communities undertaking a joint Environmental Assessment (EA) Study to identify the best way to manage wastes that remain after achievement of 65% diversion targets. Why together?Common Solid Waste Management Goals:– Approved Solid Waste Management Plans– 65% Waste Diversion Targets– Limited remaining landfill space– Desire to manage their own waste

Cost savings in study process and economies of scale

Joint Disposal Study Activities To-Date

Partnership discussions between Niagara and Hamilton initiated in early 2003

July 2003, Joint Discussion Paper approved by both Councils, recommended examining EFW partnerships

September 2003, both Councils approved of proceeding with negotiations and Joint Working Group was formed

6


October/November 2003, both Councils approved of the Terms of Reference for the Joint Working Group and a ‘Statement of Intent’ for the new initiative‘Statement of Intent’ outlined activities required to proceed with initiative from Nov 2003 to Feb 2004Joint Working Group (JWG) consisting of politicians (5 from each municipality) and public members (1 from each municipality) direct the study


Staff from both municipalities meet regularly to review and discuss study results

Consultants retained to undertake EA planning process and technical review of alternatives

Communications and consultation plans developed to guide public and agency involvement in study

Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan Agreement has been prepared, being brought forward to Niagara PWUC on Feb 24 and Hamilton PWIEC on March 1

7


Preparation of Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference (EA ToR) currently underwayIn midst of Public Consultation process to support Draft EA ToR

What is an Environmental Assessment (EA) ?

Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.18

– “The purpose of this Act is the betterment of the people of the whole or any part of Ontario by providing for the protection, conservation and wise management in Ontario of the Environment”

Study that evaluates all reasonable alternatives for a project and which identifies a preferred project undertaking considering the advantages and disadvantages to the environment (natural, social, economic, etc.)

Includes extensive consultation with public, agencies, stakeholders, etc.

EA approval required for all new disposal capacity

8

EAA Approvals ProcessEA Terms of Reference (ToR) prepared and submitted to Minister of Environment for approval– EA ToR lays out how the EA Study will be

undertakenEA Study completed in accordance with approved EA ToREA Study submitted to Minister of Environment for approval

Issues Unique to Niagara-Hamilton EA

Will be first Municipal EA ToR submitted to MOE in wake of the Divisional Court decision on the Richmond Landfill EAAs a result of this decision, cannot either move forward traditionally (plan first, undertake EA only on specific undertaking) or use ‘scoping’ in the EA ToRConsequently all alternatives on table at outset –must define what is ‘reasonable’ to carry forward in studyWill be test case for how MOE deals with new EA ToR under current approvals milieu

9

Scope of EA Terms of Reference

Identification of Proponent – Regional Municipality of Niagara and

City of HamiltonPurpose and Description of the proposed undertakingDescription of alternatives to the undertakingDescription of alternative methods of implementing the undertaking

Scope of EA Terms of Reference (cont’d)

Description of the environment potentially affected– Initially, description of the Region and City

in accordance with the EAA’s broad definition of the environment

Methodology for assessing and evaluating the alternatives and selecting preferred alternative(s)Consultation Plan for Environmental Assessment

10

Purpose of the UndertakingNiagara and Hamilton have established diversion plans and have designated 65% of the waste stream to be managed by these plansPurpose of this EA will be to address remaining 35% or “post-diversion” waste streamInitial Task – Align Niagara and Hamilton Niagara projections for waste disposal needs over long-term:– Approximately 6 million tonnes of waste that

remain after 65% diversion will require disposal between 2013 and 2038

Alternatives Must be Considered !

Proponents are obligated to consider a reasonable range of two types of alternatives‘Alternatives to’ – Fundamentally different ways of addressing the

purpose of the undertaking (e.g. landfill, combustion, gasification, more diversion, etc.)

‘Alternative Methods’– Different ways of implementing a preferred

approach (Primarily ‘Siting’ in waste management EA’s)

11

Evaluation MethodologyMust provide sufficient information about proposed impact assessment methods and criteria– Must provide for a clear, traceable and replicable

evaluation of alternatives and selection of the preferred alternative

Any of the following to be applied during the EA should be referenced:– Any studies, research, surveys or tests to be completed– Formal standards or methods to be followed and

identified during consultation with relevant government departments and agencies

Consultation Plan for EAGeneral consultation methods proposed (e.g. open houses, workshops, newsletters, web site, etc.)

Identify general list of parties to be consulted and the manner in which additional parties will be identified (e.g. general public, public interest groups, Niagara WMAC, Hamilton WRTF, etc.)

Identify key decision-making milestones and how public consultation will factor into these decisionsShould reflect complexity of the undertaking and if necessary include appropriate conflict resolution techniques and provisions

12

EA ToR Consultation EventsPublic Workshops:– Feb 3,4 What types of alternative approaches and

technologies should be considered?– Feb 24, 25 What types of sites should be considered?– March 23,24 Development of the EA Study Consultation

Plan

Public Open Houses:– January 13, 14 Introduction to WastePlan and the process– April 20, 21 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of

reference

Timing…October / November 2003 – Development of detailed work programs and

budgets for Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference (EA ToR) development

March 2004 – Niagara and Hamilton sign agreement for Joint

Initiative2004– Prepare proposed EA ToR – submit for approval

in July 2004– Minister Approves EA ToR – late 2004 (plus 60

days with mediation)

13

Timing (cont’d)

Late 2004– Initiate Environmental Assessment (EA) Study

Late 2006– Submit EA approval documentation to Minister

Late 2007– Issuance of EAA approval by Minister

2008 to no later than 2013– Implementation of undertaking

Provincial Level IssuesWastePlan officials met with Niagara and Hamilton MPPs in January regarding challenges to:– Achieving Increased Diversion rates– Proceed with new Disposal EAs under the current process

Niagara and Hamilton developed a series of resolutions requesting action by the Minister of the EnvironmentWill bring these to other municipalities in the golden horseshoe and the Province as a whole for coordinated support

Appendix 3Copy of Workbook

WORKBOOK -

Please print clearly Name

Company

Street

City/Town

Postal Code

Telephone #

Email address

TECHNOLOGY VENDOR WORKSHOP

Date: April 7, 2004 Time: 10:00am to 3:00pm

AGENDA

10:00 am Welcome Peter Crockett, General Manager of Public Works, City of Hamilton

10:10 am Presentation – How WastePlan Came About

Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan • Pat Parker, Acting Manager of Solid Waste

Planning, City of Hamilton • Janine Ralph, Manager, Waste Policy and

Planning, Regional Municipality of Niagara

10:30 am The Environmental Assessment Process

• Steve Plaice, Earth Tech Canada Inc., WastePlan Study Project Manager

Including proposed Facility Siting Process

• David Merriman, MacViro Consultants Inc., Project Consultant

11:15 am Workshop

Commences

Steve Plaice • Why Vendors have been invited here today • Expectations of the day • Workbook distributed

12:30 pm LUNCH Vendors’ opportunity to visit with the WastePlan Team

1:30 pm Workshop Continues Steve Plaice and Dave Merriman • Discussion of Workbook continues

2:45 pm Next Steps Janine Ralph

3:00 pm Adjourn Pat Parker

Once you have completed your workbook, please return to:

David Merriman, Principal MacViro Consultants Inc.

90 Allstate Parkway Suite 600 Markham, Ontario, Canada

L3R 6H3 Tel: 905-475-7270 Ext 242

Fax: 905-475-5994 Email: [email protected]

Part A: General Questions re RFP 1. Proposal Preparation

Q1.1 Approximately how much would it cost for you to prepare a top quality proposal (assuming a site is provided and approvals covered by municipality) to design, build, finance, own and operate a 200,000 tpy facility?

Q1.2 How long would it take to prepare a firm price, design build finance own operate proposal?

2. Waste Supply

Q2.1 Could you finance a facility (assuming design, build, own & operate approach) if you were not offered a guaranteed waste supply on a “put or pay “basis?

Yes No Q2.2 Would you put the time and effort into preparing a proposal where you were not offered a

guaranteed waste supply on a “put or pay “basis?

Yes No 3. Recovered Recyclables & Residue Disposal

Q3.1 Who should be responsible for marketing recovered recyclable materials? (Facility operator or Municipality)

Q3.2 Who should be responsible for residue (e.g., ash/char) disposal? (Facility operator or Municipality)

4. Competitive Process

Q4.1 Two Stage or Single Stage

Should Niagara -Hamilton use a two stage competitive process where vendors are first invited to submit qualifications and then have only qualified vendors submit proposals? or

Should Niagara – Hamilton just issue a RFP that includes stringent commercial requirements (e.g., requirement to provide agreement to bond)?

Comment:

Q4.2 What is the preferred range of number of firms to be invited to submit competitive proposals (i.e., in which situation would you put the most effort into your proposal)?

2-3 Bidders

4-5 Bidders

5-10 Bidders

Q4.3 Should an honorarium be paid to vendors for preparing their proposals and if so how much?

Yes No How Much?

5. Facility Siting and Approvals

Q5.1 Which is your preferred approach to facility siting:

You are responsible for finding a site and obtaining the required approvals (including doing an EA) A generic site is offered for you to bid on in an RFP process with the assumption that the municipality will work with the successful vendor to identify and obtain a site for the facility and obtain approval for it in accordance with the requirements of the EA Act?

The municipality had already gone through to siting process in accordance with the requirements of the EA Act (including extensive public consultation) and requested a proposal for a facility on the site that the municipality had identified. The Municipality would then work with the successful vendor to obtain the required facility specific approvals?

Comment:

Q5.2 From your perspective, what are the issues and constraints (or advantages & disadvantages) associated with each of the above three approaches to facility siting and approvals.

You are responsible for finding a site and obtaining the required approvals Advantages:

Disadvantages:

Bid on a generic site and have the successful vendor work with the municipality to find a site and obtain the necessary approvals Advantages:

Disadvantages:

Bid on providing a facility on a site identified by the municipality in accordance with the requirements of the EA Act and work with the municipality to obtain the necessary site/facility specific approvals. Advantages:

Disadvantages:

Q5.3 Would you like the option, in addition to proposing to develop a facility on a preferred site identified by Niagara – Hamilton, of proposing to develop your own facility on your own site?

Yes No Comment:

Q5.4 Would you like the option, prior to any site identification activities, of proposing to develop your own facility on your own site?

Yes No Comment:

Part B: RFP Technical Requirements What technical items or parameters should be specified in an RFP in order for you to provide a top quality firm price (& technical) proposal to – at a minimum – design build a facility, and possibly design build own and operate (i.e., provide a service)? 1. Site Details

Site size & configuration

Site location

Approvals status Comment Or Other

Factors

2. Waste Delivery and Storage

Waste delivery truck queuing area/capacity

Waste delivery truck tip turn around time

Tipping floor/waste pit waste storage capacity Comment:Or Other

Factors

3. Availability and Cost of Utilities and Services

Water Sanitary Sewer

Storm water management

Electricity (input supply)

Natural gas Comment:Or Other

Factors

4. Details on Output Energy Market

Electrical Interconnection Point & Utility Interconnect requirements

Heat Load including nature, size & connection details

Electricity and steam price to be paid for energy products now and in the future Comment:Or Other

Factors

5. Nature of market for greenhouse gas and other emission reduction credits

Comment:Or Other

Factors

6. Input Waste Supply/Facility Size

Q6.1 Quantities to be delivered on a “Put or Pay” basis (specify minimum mandatory requirements)

Daily Min & Max

Weekly Min & Max

Monthly Min & Max (seasonal variation in waste generation)

Annual Min & Max Comment:Or Other

Factors

Q6.2 Waste Quality Details

a) Composition (e.g., paper, ferrous, glass, organic food waste, etc.) Assumed specific composition

Guaranteed range b) Energy Content Assumed specific Lower Heating Value (LHV)

Guaranteed range for LHV c) Proximate Analysis Assumed specific Value

Guaranteed range d) Other parameters re waste supply Comment:Or Other

Factors

7. Residue Management & Cost (if to be included in vendors bid price)

Requirement to recover recyclable materials (specified materials & Recovery rate)

Requirement to dispose of Ash/Char from thermal process (quality requirements for ash)

Requirement to dispose of Hazardous Waste from Air Pollution Control System Comment:Or Other

Factors

8. Approvals & regulatory requirements (i.e., should they be specified in RFP)

Yes No Comment:Or Other

Factors

9. What other technical parameters or items should be specified in a RFP? Any other comments related to technical requirements? Please specify

Comment:

Part C: RFP Commercial Requirements 1. What kind of agreement to bond and actual bonding requirements can you meet?

Q1.1 Provision of Agreement to Bond or provide Letter of Credit as part of a commercial pre-qualification or proposal

Standard CCA Performance bond (sticks & bricks) for 50% of facility capital cost

Standard CCA Labour and Material Payment Bond

Bond or letter of credit, renewable annually for term of a waste supply agreement (say 20 years), equal to 3 month Tip Fee (say $5 Million) to secure the provision of disposal service at the facility (assuming you own the facility and provide a service to the municipalities).

Bond or letter of credit - equal to say 50% of the facility capital cost - to guarantee the efficiency of the process/facility during acceptance testing of a municipally owned facility. (i.e., if facility did not meet performance specifications, funds from these securities could be drawn to fix the problems and meet the specified performance specs) Processing efficiency defined in terms of:

Input material processing capacity

Net energy output from facility

Quantity and quality of ash or char and other residue from facility

Air emissions complying with regulations (e.g. Guideline A-7) Comment:

Q1.2 Provision of actual Bonding or Letter of credit following the award of a contract Standard CCA Performance bond for 50% of facility capital cost

Standard CCA Labour and Material Payment Bond

Bond or letter of credit, renewable annually for term of a waste supply agreement (say 20 years), equal to 3 month Tip Fee (say $5 Million) to secure the provision of disposal service at the facility (assuming you own the facility and provide a service to the municipalities)

Bond or letter of credit- equal to say 50% of the facility capital cost - to guarantee the efficiency of the process/facility during acceptance testing of a municipally owned facility. Processing efficiency defined in terms of:

Input material processing capacity

Net energy output from facility

Quantity and quality of ash or char and other residue from facility

Air emissions complying with regulations (e.g. Guideline A-7) Comment:

2. Can you provide the following insurance from a company licensed to do business in

Ontario?

General Liability coverage to a limit of $5,000,000

Professional Liability coverage to a limit of $2,000,000

Construction wrap-up liability coverage for the full value of the facility

All risk property insurance for the full replacement value of the facility 3. Reference Facility (i.e., facility using same technology that you would propose to

Niagara - Hamilton)

Q3.1 Do you have a reference facility with capacity of at least 100,000 tonnes per year presently operating in North America? How many such facilities do you have?

Yes No

Number of Facilities:

Q3.2 If you do not have a reference facility with capacity of at least 100,000 tonnes per year presently operating in North America what size reference facility do you have? Where is it operating?

Yes No

Q3.3 Is the technology used at your reference facility modular? What size modules (in tonnes per year) do you provide?

Yes No

Size range of modules:

Q3.4 For how long have these reference facilities been in operation?

4. Should the RFP specify liquidated damages/bonuses for completing the facility behind/ahead of schedule?

Yes No Comment:

5. Other commercial parameters or items that should be specified or requested in a RFP? Or other comments related to commercial requirements? Please specify.

Comment:

Part D: Facility Implementation & Operation 1. Facility Financing

Q1.1 Can you or your team finance and own a facility?

Yes No Q1.2 Would it be acceptable if Niagara - Hamilton financed and owned the facility?

Yes No Q1.3 What is your preferred financing approach?

Comment:

Q1.4 Do you have any suggested additional partnership approaches to financing?

Comment:

2. Managing uncertainties in approvals and implementation schedule

Q2.1 In the face of an uncertain schedule, could you provide a firm bid price, assuming price escalation (due to inflation) and interest rate adjustment clauses are specified in the RFP?

Yes No Comment:

Q2.2 What are your suggested escalation and interest rate adjustment method/formula?

a) For capital cost?

b) For operating costs?

c) For all-inclusive tipping fee (assuming you own the facility and provide a service to the municipalities)?

3. Facility Operation

Q3.1 Can you or your team operate a facility?

Yes No

Comment:

Q3.2 Would it be reasonable? Acceptable? Desirable? if Niagara - Hamilton operated the Facility?

Yes No Comment:

Q3.3 What is your preferred approach for facility operation?

Comment:

Q3.4 In your experience can municipal operational requirements & objectives be met through mechanisms such as a waste supply agreement or does the municipality have to own the facility if it wants to control certain aspects of how the facility is operated?

Comment:

4. What is your preferred implementation approach and why?

Vendor Design, build, with Municipal finance ownership & Operation

Vendor Design, build, operate with Municipal finance & ownership

Vendor Design, build, finance, ownership & Operation (i.e. provide a service to municipality)

Comment:

5. If you provide a service (i.e., design build own & operate facility) would you like the ability to accept waste from other sources?

Municipal Wastes from other municipalities

Industrial, Commercial & Institutional (IC&I) Sector Wastes

Biosolids (WPCP sludges) Comment:

6. Would you like to build a facility larger than required for the wastes from Niagara & Hamilton in order to accommodate these additional wastes?

Yes No Comment:

7. Size of Facility Relative to Seasonal Variations in Waste Generation

Q7.1 There is a seasonal variation in waste generation with maximum quantities generated in the summer and minimum quantities in the winter. Should the facility be sized for the seasonal maximum or minimum?

Comment:

Q7.2 If the municipality were only willing to guarantee to supply the minimum seasonal quantity, would you be willing to build a facility to accommodate the maximum seasonal quantity and take all the municipal waste generated throughout the year. In doing so you would be taking on the risk of finding IC&I sector waste to make up the difference during the winter months?

Yes No Comment:

8. Openness of Facility

Q8.1 Will you require municipal staff and their consultants to sign confidentiality agreements before visiting and investigating your reference facility?

Yes No Comment:

Q8.2 Will you allow members of the public (e.g., school groups) to tour a facility that you would provide to Niagara - Hamilton?

Yes No Comment:

9. Any other comments related to Facility implementation & operation?

Comment:

letter of invitation€¦ · letter of invitation. mail: c/o waste management services division...

Documents