Issue - meetings

This report reviewed the bids submitted following Invitation to Tender (ITT) for the Household Waste Recycling Centres. It considered the options presented and proposed the Most Economically Advantageous Tender option.

An exempt appendix identified the tenderers for the contracts and provided details of the procurement and evaluation processes.

It was noted that the Procurement Board on 30 June 2010 and the Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 6 July 2010 had considered this report. Both Procurement Board and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had supported the recommendations as set out in the report.

During the discussion on this item it was noted that at 4.1.3 of the report “compromises” should read, “comprises”.

This report sets out the recommendations for the award of the contract for the management and operation of the Household Waste Recycling Centres.

Please note that there is an exempt appendix to this report.

Discussion:

The Acting Head of Waste Services introduced the report advising that the contract would cover the management of the three sites within Medway and for finding the markets for most of the materials disposed of there. The tender had set out that a 50% recycling rate should be achieved in the first year of the contract and 60% for each subsequent year.

Four bidders had been found to be compliant and an overview of their proposals were set out in paragraph 8.4 of the report. After a full technical, professional ability and financial scoring system had been undertaken the bid from Bidder 4 was found to be the most economically advantageous tender.

The reason for urgency accepted by the Chairman was that the report had to be submitted to this meeting in order that the committee’s views could be forwarded to Cabinet on 20 July 2010.

Members asked various questions and commented on:

·        the layout of entry into the site at Cuxton to avoid any lengthy traffic delays;

·        the types of chemical waste that could be disposed of at the household waste sites. Officers advised that a strict list of chemicals were allowed on site but this would be reviewed with the contractor to allow as many products as possible to be disposed of safely at the sites;

·        staff incentive schemes – assurance that this would not turn into shortcuts and compromise safety at the sites. Officers advised that the incentive scheme was to encourage staff to separate out rubbish into the correct bins and that staff also took ownership to ensure that residents did the same to achieve the best recycling rates. It was noted that that the scheme did not apply to any council staff;

·        private house clearance – entry of vans into the household sites. Officers advised that current arrangements would continue, allowing un-signed or hired vans into the Capstone site on certain dates by pre-appointment;

·        what happened to wood waste? The committee was advised that this was a separate contract in partnership with Kent County Council where a minimum of 70% of the wood collected would be recycled.

Decision:

The committee agreed to recommend that Cabinet agrees:

(a)               the award of the contract for the management of the household waste recycling centres to Bidder 4 as the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT);

(b)               to authorise the Chief Finance Officer (who is the officer responsible for the proper administration of the Council’s financial affairs under section 151 of the Local Government Act 1972) as the officer responsible for signing certificates issued under the Local Government (Contracts) Act 1997 in respect of the management of the household waste recycling centre contracts to be entered into by the Council.