The document summarizes a presentation made to the Commission Meeting on March 20, 2012 regarding approval of the top-ranked firm from a request for proposals (RFP) process to commence negotiations for solid waste disposal services. The RFP was issued to seek competitive market options for disposal as the city's previous interlocal agreement was set to expire. Based on evaluation of proposals received, the evaluation team ranked the joint proposal of Sun Recycling and Bergeron Environmental as the top proposal over Wheelabrator Technologies' proposal. The recommendation is to approve this ranking and authorize negotiations with the top-ranked firm, and if unsuccessful, begin negotiations with the second ranked firm.

1. Temp. Resolution No. R-5103
Solid Waste Disposal RFP
Approval of Top-Ranked Firm to
Commence Negotiations
OFFICE OF OPERATIONAL SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Commission Meeting
March 20, 2012 @ 6:00 p.m.

2. Discussion Topics
• Presentation team
• Overview
• Why issue an RFP
• Key RFP elements
• Procurement process
• Recommended next steps
• Process Value

3. Presentation Team
• Vernon Hargray
– ACM Operational Services
• Thomas Good
– Public Works Director
– Resource Recovery Board – Technical Advisory Committee (RRB/TAC) representative for
over 10 years w/ 4 years as Chair
• Randy Cross
– Procurement Director
– National Institute of Government Procurement
• Sandy Gutner, P. E.
– President Value Added Consulting
– Over 25 years solid waste management w/ 6 years as the RRB and Broward County Solid
Waste Consultant

4. Overview
• City enters into an ILA with Broward County for solid
waste disposal services in 1986 becoming a
“contract community”
• Other Cities executed same ILA creating the
Broward Solid Waste Disposal District (BSWDD)
dependent to the county
• Broward County issued bonds to support the
BSWDD and required all contract communities to
deliver wastes to system to ensure revenue stream
(Flow Control)

5. Overview (cont.)
• The Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for solid waste
disposal is set to expire in 2013
• City Manager recognized the City had a
window of opportunity to engage in free market
options that could return greater benefits to the
City
• City Commission voted to not sign the ILA on
November 26, 2010 and to proceed with its
own RFP for disposal services

7. Let’s Review
• 2010 Proposed Service Agreement would have
exposed City to many undefined risks and
liabilities:
– Pay for capital upgrade/replacements
– Cover increasing costs for treatment of ash landfill runoff
– Make up lost revenues due to changes in law
– Increase in property taxes
• No control on District programs and how they are
funded
• Potential exists for disproportionate costs to
Contract Communities

8. What Could’ve Happened?
Service District Miramar
Agreement Fee Program Tipping
Expenses Fee
$53.19 $12.00 $65.19
to To To
$110.02 $30.17 $140.21
Low range is a conservative firm price beginning 2013 and high range is potential
cost increase (risks and pass-thru’s) throughout 10-year term

9. Also Considered
• The private disposal facilities no longer require
public obligation to share in risk after July 2013
• 2.5 year window of opportunity for market
competition
• Commission philosophy to competitively bid
services
Hence, City deferred ILA until results of an
formal competitive process
Note: Broward County and Ft. Lauderdale voted down the ILA Extension and Service
Agreement

10. Disposal RFP Participation
• BCCMA Coconut Creek (1/13/2011)
• Stakeholder Meeting Miramar (1/27/11)
– All City Managers throughout Broward County
invited to participate;
– Total of 16 participating agencies:
• Lauderdale by-the-Sea, Hallandale Beach, Coconut Creek,
Coral Springs, Margate, Broward County, Davie, Southwest
Ranches, Oakland Park, Sunrise, Fort Lauderdale, Weston,
Deerfield Beach, Plantation, Cooper City, and Miramar
• RFP Review by Stakeholders (3/23/11)

11. Leadership Objectives for RFP
• Minimize Risks and Liabilities
• Competitive Rate Structure for Residents
• Uninterrupted Waste Disposal Services at
expiration of ILA
• Environmentally Sound Solid Waste Management
• Service Reliability
• Opportunity for Market Participation

13. RFP Highlights
RFP Element Overview
Scope Requested Disposal services or Processing, Transfer
and Disposal.
Term 5 year initial term, up to (3) 5 year
renewals.
Technical Proposal • Technical and financial qualifications
• Project technical approach
• Business terms
Cost Proposals • Disposal (including receiving)
• Revenue Sharing (optional)
• Maximum Inflation (optional)

14. Technical Proposals
• Team experience
• Financial qualifications
• Technical Approach
– Direct disposal services
– Receipt, Processing and Disposal
– Existing or Proposed facilities
– Transition plan, if facility not existing
• Acceptance/Modification of RFP Business Terms

15. General Business Terms
• Scope of service
• Contract Term
• Project Security
• Transition period responsibilities
• Addresses Unusual Circumstances

16. Cost Proposals
• Disposal charges
– Service Fee ($/ton received)
• Inflationary Adjustments
– Bureau of Labor Statistics index, specified in RFP
– RFP allowed for optional reduced %. (% of index)
– Option for maximum inflationary adjustment
• Revenue Sharing
– $/ton of waste delivered
– Not based on performance or market pricing

17. City Protections

18. Unusual Circumstances
• If Unusual Circumstances result in Contractor
total costs to increase > 10%, Contractor may
request relief.
• Applies to total cost, not to individual cost items
(e.g. fuel or labor)
• Contractor must demonstrate cost increase.
• City is not obligated to grant relief.

19. Project Guarantee
• Guarantees performance of all Contractor’s
obligations and responsibilities.
• If Contractor fails to perform, Guarantor is
obligated to perform.
• Guarantee by corporate parent company,
or all corporate parents, if Joint Venture.

20. Irrevocable Letter of Credit
• Issued by bank.
• $ value equal to 6 months of total disposal
charges.
• If facility not available by July 2013, City can draw
on the LOC to cover the difference between
proposed cost and actual cost.
• LOC use can last for a long time

21. Irrevocable LOC Example
Assume Proposed Cost is $40/ton
Assume Miramar disposes 65,000 tons/year
Letter of Credit Value = 32,500 tons x $40/ton = $1.3M
If Actual Cost = $50/ton Cost if proposed facility not available July 2013
Difference $10/ton Amount eligible for LOC draw
LOC available 2 years [$1.3M ÷ 65,000 ton/yr] ÷ [$10/ton]

22. Conditions Precedent Concept
• Assures City that contractor is
fully able to deliver service before
City is fully committed
• If Conditions can not be met,
allows City to seek alternatives.

23. Conditions Precedent in RFP
Contractor must provide:
• Evidence that all rights, permits and
approvals to provide the Disposal Services
• Executed Project Guaranty Agreement
• Executed Irrevocable Letter of Credit

24. Milestones and Check Points
Milestones and Check Points
Proposals Negotiat Agreement Contract Conditions Notice-to-
Ranking
Received e Agmt
on Terms? Date Precedent Proceed
Met? Yes
No No
2nd Ranked
Firm

26. RFP Process Timeline
• RFP formally issued on March 9th
• Pre-proposal conference held on March
28th
• RFP closed on June 2nd
• Three proposals received
– Wheelabrator Technologies
– Sun Recycling and Bergeron Environmental-Joint Venture
– Sun Recycling and Bergeron Environmental-Joint Venture
(Alternate Proposal)* * Alternate geared primarily
toward C&D disposal.

27. Wheelabrator Proposal
Waste-to-
Energy
Ash
Landfill

28. Sun/Bergeron Proposal
Waste-to-
Energy
Ash
Landfill
Recycle 25% Other

29. Evaluation Team Members
• Evaluation team charged with actual review and
scoring of proposals.
• Evaluation Team Members represents a
diversity of communities and decision makers:
– City Manager, Coconut Creek;
– Public Works Director, Hallandale Beach;
– Public Works Director, Oakland Park;
– Intergovernmental Affairs Manager, Davie;
– Finance Director, Miramar.

30. Evaluation Criteria
• Consists of three categories;
– Qualifications = 20 points
– Technical = 35 points
– Price = 45 points
• Proposers must receive 65 percent of max
points for technical and qualifications (each) to
have sealed prices opened;
• All proposals met technical/qualifications 65
percent requirements.

31. Best & Final Offer
• Both proposers to submit best and final
offer
• Prices to be based on a single per-ton cost
– Simplified price evaluation process
– Easy to recognize costs
– Recognizes economies of scale
• Proposers were accorded fair and equal
treatment

32. Price Tabulation
Disposal Revenue
Proposer % of CPI
Price/Ton Share/Ton
Wheelabrator
$52.50 $0.00 100%
Technologies
Sun/Bergeron $45.25 $2.00 100%

33. 5-Year Price Comparison
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Wheelabrator
$52.50 $52.50 $52.50 $52.50 $52.50
Fee/ton
Sun/Berg.
$43.25 $43.25 $43.25 $43.25 $43.25
Fee/ton
Difference
$9.25 $9.25 $9.25 $9.25 $9.25
/ton
Difference @
$601,000 $601,000 $601,000 $601,000 $601,000
65,000 ton/yr
Total 5-Year Difference for Miramar = $3.01M

34. Final Evaluation
• On December 12, 2011 the Evaluation team
completed its review and scoring for the
proposals:
– Wheelabrator disposal
– Sun/Bergeron receiving and disposal
• City Procurement Department completed final
tabulation;
• Evaluation team ranks;
– Sun/Bergeron = No. 1;
– Wheelabrator = No. 2

35. Final Ranking
Disposal of Solid Waste Sun/Bergeron Wheelabrator
Services
Proposal Ranking
Total 447.8 426.2
Ranking 1 2

37. Example of Items to Negotiate
• Time to meet Conditions Precedent
• Changes to disposal locations
• Reporting requirements
• Facility access
• Logistical and administrative details

38. Contract Negotiation Begins Clock
March 20,
2012
15 months July
2013
Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13
Commission Commission Approves
Approves 3/12 Contract 7/12
9+ months
Negotiate Conditions Notice-
Agreement
w/top Precedent to-
on Terms?
ranked Met? Proceed
No No Yes
Negotiate
w/next ranked

40. Proposed District Fee Offered in 2010 Compared to
Sun/Bergeron and Wheelabrator
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 TOTAL
ILA Proposed
$65.19 $67.80 $70.51 $73.33 $76.26
Fee/ton*
Sun/Berg.
$47.25 $47.25 $47.25 $47.25 $47.25
RFP Fee/ton**
Savings @ $1.12M $1.34M $1.51M $1.70M $1.89M $7.56M
65,000 ton/yr
Wheelabrator
$56.50 $56.50 $56.50 $56.50 $56.50
RFP Fee/ton**
Savings @
$0.56M $0.73M $0.91M $1.09M $1.28M $4.57M
65,000 ton/yr
* Proposed fee increases conservatively assumes risks and pass-thru’s at 4% per year
** Approximately $4/ton for ancillary services

41. Competitive
Inclusive
Transparent
Fair

42. Recommendation
• Approving the ranking of the solid waste
disposal proposals and authorize
negotiation with the top-ranked firm,
Sun/Bergeron, and should negotiations
be unsuccessful, begin negotiations with
the second ranked firm, Wheelabrator.

43. Questions……