2008 NORTHSIDE CARTING RFQ/RFP REQUEST FOR QUOTES
The City of Salem requests qualifications and quotes from engineering
firms with project development experience in Massachusetts, including
all phases of environmental permitting. The use of specialty sub-
consultants with pertinent experience is acceptable in meeting the
qualification and experience requirements outlined herein. Such
services are anticipated to include technical review of recent
environmental documents related to evaluation of environmental impacts
of expanding the existing 100 ton-per-day Transfer Station at 12
Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton-per-day facility at the same location.
Overview
After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for
redevelopment of the subject site, the City of Salem selected Northside
Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts, as the preferred
developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and
design, including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem
Conservation Commission and preparation of the following study reports
to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submittal
to MEPA:
• Traffic Impact Study prepared by Vanasse&Associates, Inc.;
and
• Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses prepared by Epsilon,
Inc.
The technical review of the Air Quality Report may be conducted by a
different vendor. If this does not occur, an additional$1200 will be added
to the funds for this project for review of the Air Quality Report.
Additional environmental assessments and documents to support an
expanded ENF will also be made available for review.
Proposed Scope of Services
As part of the review, the selected Consultant will be required to perform
the following tasks:
• Attend a meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer and
other City representatives to discuss the objective of the review
process, including compliance with 310 CMR 16.00 and
specifically 310 CMR 16.30 (2) (c) 3,
• Review and provide written comment on proposed closure costs
as presented by applicant.
• Review and provide written comments to the Board of Health
and City Engineer related to the technical information presented
in the respective reports and supporting documents;
• Attend a review meeting with the Board of Health, the City
Engineer, NSC and their representatives, to discuss any
questions or concerns related to review of the available
documents; and
• Attend the Board of Health Public Hearing and address
residents' technical concerns at the Public Hearing or in writing
within one week of the end of the Public Hearing.
Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis.
Expenses may not exceed $10,000.
Qualifications
Respondents to this RFQ must demonstrate compliance with the
following minimum selection criteria:
• Three representative development projects within the past five
years that have at a minimum involved the evaluation of traffic,
air quality and noise impacts. The use of specialty
subconsultants on such projects is permissible.
• One or more registered Professional Engineer(s) and/or
Licensed Site Professional(s)who will be responsible for signing
all review submittals to the City.
Proposal Requirements
Please provide your letter response, your hourly rate, along with any
supplemental understandings and/or clarifications of the stipulated scope
of work and resumes of key staff and sub-consultants, if any, by 6:00 PM
on Thursday, June 19, 2008. Any questions related to this RFQ, or your
proposal, shall be addressed to Joanne Scott, for the Salem Board of
Health, at 978-741-1800 orjscott@salem.com.
Schedule
The review meeting is anticipated to be held in late June or early July
2008. The timeline will follow that required in 310 CMR 16.00
Page 1 of 1
David Greenbaum
From: Joanne Scott
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:48 PM
To: Janet Dionne
Subject: FW: Tech Assistance
From: Joanne Scott
Sent:Thursday, June 05, 2008 3:23 PM
To: Beth Rennard
Subject: Tech Assistance
Dear Beth:
I think that NSC has to submit the payment to us when it submits its/the City's application for the
modification. So I will follow Al Hill's requirements. It also gives me peace of mind to know that I can pay
the bills in a timely fashion.
Joanne
7/21/2009
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The City of Salem requests qualifications and proposals from engineering firms with project
development experience in Massachusetts, including all phases of environmental permitting. The
use of specialty sub-consultants with pertinent experience is acceptable in meeting the
qualification and experience requirements outlined herein. Such services are anticipated to
include technical peer review of recent environmental documents related to evaluation of
environmental impacts of expanding the existing 100 ton-per-day Transfer Station at 12
Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton-per-day facility at the same location. Review of documents
associated with closure of the landfill is not included under this solicitation.
Overview
After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for redevelopment of the subject
site, the City of Salem selected Northside Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts,
as the preferred developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and design,
including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission and preparation
of the following study reports to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form
(ENF) submittal to MEPA:
• Traffic Impact Study prepared by Vanasse &Associates, Inc.; and
• Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses prepared by Epsilon, Inc.
Additional environmental assessments and documents to support an expanded ENF will also be
made available for review.
Proposed Scope of Services
As part of the peer review, the selected Consultant will be required to perform the following tasks:
• Attend a kick-off meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer and other City
representatives to better understand the objective of the peer review process;
• Review and provide written comments to the City Engineer related to the technical
information presented in the respective reports and supporting documents; and
• Attend a review meeting with the BOH, the City Engineer, NSC and their representatives
to discuss any questions or concerns related to review of the available documents.
Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis.
Qualifications
Respondents to this RFP must demonstrate compliance with the following minimum
selection criteria:
• Three representative development projects within the past five years that have at a
minimum involved the evaluation of traffic, air quality and noise impacts. The
use of specialty subconsultants on such projects is permissible.
• One or more registered Professional Engineer(s)and/or Licensed Site Professional(s)
who will be responsible for signing all review submittals to the City.
Proposal Requirements
Please provide your letter response, along with any supplemental understandings and/or
clarifications of the stipulated scope of work and resumes of key staff and sub-consultants, if any,
by 5:00 PM on . Any questions related to this RFQ/P shall be
addressed to at P8/
Schedule
The schedule is extremely critical due to the time lines established in the Administrative Consent
Order with the DEP. It is expected that the selected Consultant will need to review all documents
and provide written comments within two weeks after receipt. The review meeting will anticipated
to be held during the last week of May 2008.
Page 1 of 3
David Greenbaum
From: Joanne Scott
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:51 PM
To: Janet Dionne
Subject: FW: Engineering Company
Attachments: Trasnsfer st. RFP for BOH.doc
From: Joanne Scott
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:43 PM
To: Beth Rennard
Cc: 'Paulette Puleo'
Subject: FW: Engineering Company
Dear Beth:
The following are comments regarding the attached RFP.
How does this RFP allow for the contract with the Air Quality review expert from BU?
I don't think what the Board of Health is requesting a "peer" review" but a "technical
review."
What does the paragraph "to understand the objectives of the peer review process'
mean? If the engineering company has done this before, they will understand that the
objective is to comply with the DEP code, 310 CMR 16.00.
Written comments should be submitted to the Board of Health, not the City Engineer,
because the company is working for the Board in this review.
Under qualifications, we should ask for Registered Professional Engineers, and not
LSP's since LSP's are mainly concerned with remediating contaminated soils and water
under different DEP requirements and laws.
The wording in the RFP needs to reflect what is said in the Code regarding Technical
Review. You could site that part of the code, 310 CMR 16.30 (2) (c) 3 or include its
wording. It says that the Technical Review is to assist the Board of Health in:
Reviewing the application (which could mean the MEPA application); reviewing the
request for the minor modification; reviewing public comments and any subsequent
amendments or additions to the application. Tasks could include: Determining
completeness and accuracy of the data in the application; determining whether the
correct analytical techniques were used, whether valid data was obtained; whether the
data support the proposed conclusions; determining what other data should be
obtained, the means to obtain it and its potential significance; examining municipal and
other relevant documents and consulting with DEP staff; visiting the site to make a
visual inspection; preparing and submitting comments to the Board of Health on
technical issues relating to the site; reviewing data submitted prior to and during the
public hearing; preparing a written report of comments and determinations.
7/21/2009
Page 2 of 3
Under:" Schedule" I would ask the engineering company for a review of all documents
submitted to MEPA so that any deficiencies or concerns could be addresses prior to filing with
the Board of Health. Once the MEPA determination is made, I would anticipate a filing with the
Board of Health. If I understand the Code correctly, the Board is required to advertise a public
hearing within 7 days, hold a public hearing within 30 days, and make a determination within
45 days of the public hearing. Of course, the public hearing could last more than one day.
The Board will need this time to make an informed, articulate determination.
On a different note, I was told that NSC has Attorney Thomas Mackie of Mackie, Shea &
O'Brien, 137 Newbury Street, working for them. Since you will be representing the City in this
application before the Board of Health, and NSC has a firm who advertises a completed
project as, "Solid Waste- Negotiation of a multi-faceted host community agreement for the new
owner of a regional solid waste landfill", the Board must have independent council. It has
discussed writing a formal request for legal council to assist it in this process. This is
extremely common in all communities that we know have gone through this process.
Separate, independent legal counsel is needed to ensure the best possible outcome of this
process, in accordance with the Site Assignment Regulation, for the City and its residents.
The attorney, air quality expert, and the technical assistance do add a cost for NSC, however,
without such review and assistance, the Board will not be able to adequately evaluate this
application.
Thank you,
Joanne
From: Beth Rennard
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:24 AM
To: Joanne Scott
Subject: RE: Engineering Company
Yes, here is RFP language which you/AI Hill can incorporate into AI's boilerplate RFP format.
Elizabeth Rennard, Esq.
City Solicitor
City Hall
93 Washington Street
Salem, MA 01970
978-619-5631
978-744-9327 (fax)
From: Joanne Scott
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:15 AM
To: Beth Rennard
Subject: Engineering Company
Dear Beth:
I have two engineering companies that are interested in reviewing the Transfer Station plans for the Board of
Health. Are you writing an RFP for that? Also, I think that you were including Air Quality review in that document
so that we can move forward with that part of the review with the BU professor, once we receive the information.
7/21/2009
Page 3 of 3
Thank you,
Joanne
7/21/2009
Possible Conditions
1. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name,
address, and telephone number of the project (site) manager who will be on site and directly
responsible for the construction of the project.
2. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, no
structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site meets
the DEP standards for the proposed use.
3. A copy of the Licensed Asbestos Inspector's Report must be sent to the Health Agent.
4. A copy of the Demolition Notice sent to the DEP, Form BWPAO6, must be sent to the Health
Agent.
5. The developer will give the Health Agent a copy of the 21 E report.
6. A radon remediation kit shall be installed and operational in each below grade dwelling unit.
7. A radon test shall be conducted following installation and operation of the remediation kit.
8. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer.
9. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to
construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the
Health Agent.
10. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction.
11. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping
which will occur during construction.
12. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of
debris, vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition
and/or construction.
13. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting.
14. Noise levels from the resultant establishment(s) generated by operations, including but not limited
to refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A)
above the ambient levels measured at the property line.
15. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for
the project.
16. The resultant establishment shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operation in an
environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of health.
17. The drainage system for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Northeast Mosquito
Control and Wetlands Management District.
18. Proposed food establishments must have their plans reviewed by the Health Agent prior to their
build-out.
19. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and
confirmation that above conditions have been met.
Page 1 of 3
David Greenbaum
From: Paulette Puleo [prp600@msn.com)
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 3:54 PM
To: David Greenbaum
Subject: RE:
Well, that is something that should be address. The jail came before us twice and we only
discussed the housing and dumpster site, because at the time they had not secured a
restaurant lease. So we maybe running into similar problems with them.
So, if they are not free standing does mean that they do not before us?
There is a new restaurant opening to the left of City Hall.
Subject: RE:
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:39:37 -0400
From: DGreenbaum@Salem.com
To: prp600@msn.com
It appears that Tavern in the Square specifically did not come before the board. Looking at the minutes it
appears that a developer came before the board an there was only a slight mention that a restaurant
would be part of the development. That was in December of 2007.
David J. Greenbaum, Sanitarian
City of Salem Board of Health
120 Washington Street, 4th Floor
Salem, MA 01970
Phone 978-741-1800
Fax 978-745-0434
From: Paulette Puleo [mailto:prp600@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 3:11 PM
To: David Greenbaum
Subject: RE:
Lets pull the minutes to the meeting in which Traven on the Sq. came before the BOH and
bring a copy to Wed meeting. Will you email me the date so I can look them up on line.
Thank you.
Subject: RE:
Date: Thu, it Jun 2009 12:53:23 -0400
From: DGreenbaum@Salem.com
To: prp600@msn.com
Here are the attachments.
David J. Greenbaum, Sanitarian
City of Salem Board of Health
120 Washington Street, 4th Floor
Salem, MA 01970
Phone 978-741-1800
Fax 978-745-0434
6/11/2009
Page 2 of 3
From: Paulette Puleo [mailto:prp600@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:10 PM
To: David Greenbaum
Subject: RE:
sure, we can make 2 separate files for this.
Subject: RE:
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:01:34 -0400
From: DGreenbaum@Salem.com
To: prp600@msn.com
I think it makes sense to delete steps 3 &4. Do you think we should delete step 5 as it also pertains to
notification?
Dave
David J. Greenbaum, Sanitarian
City of Salem Board of Health
120 Washington Street, 4th Floor
Salem, MA 01970
Phone 978-741-1800
Fax 978-745-0434
From: Paulette Puleo [mailto:prp600@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:46 AM
To: David Greenbaum
Subject: RE:
Look great.
I thought we should include the request procedure form and either delete step 3&4 or place a line
threw steps 3& 4. therefore there would be fewer questions from petitioners.
Paulette
Subject: RE:
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:10:24 -0400
From: DGreenbaum@Salem.com
To: prp600@msn.com
Hi Paulette,
I am attaching the memo to the establishments regarding open air seating for your review. I hope to send this out
with the application to the establishments today. At this point I think the application is sufficient, I don't think that
the establishments need to notify the abutters as I think that is more related to construction. I have placed a call
to Diane Bernazzani regarding the conditional variance, I believe that the Board of Health can place restrictions
and rescind a variance if the establishment is not meeting the rule of the variance. I will let you know when I here
from Diane.
Dave
David J. Greenbaum, Sanitarian
City of Salem Board of Health
120 Washington Street, 4th Floor
6/11/2009