Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-11-28 PT 2018 SW Collection RFP Addendum #1 QA Response Table final RFP ADDENDUM #1, ATTACHMENT A - CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND SOLID WASTE COLLECTION RFP RESPONSE TO RFP QUESTIONS/COMMENTS NOVEMBER 28, 2018 Section Hauler Question/Comment Response Action RFP Section Recology Please revise this section so that any extension is by mutual agreement The City and contractor may renegotiate terms of the contract at No change at this time. 1. 1.1 between the City and contractor. This provides an opportunity for both parties any time, upon mutual agreement. The extension is intended as to revisit the needs of the agreement, allowing for the inclusion of new written: a clear option to extend by the City without restriction or programs, development of new pilot programs, and other programmatic or requirements to renegotiate the contract. That said, the City contractual changes that may be beneficial after a ten-year contract. would consider language allowing the contractor to submit a proposal for a new contract for consideration at the time that the City exercises its extension. RFP Section Recology Free commercial recycling has been shown to increase contamination rates; by Commercial recycling is already provided at no additional cost to No change. 2. 1.2 including recycling as a separate line item on the invoice, customers are many commercial customers. The City is willing to discuss options encouraged to take responsibility for proper sorting. We strongly recommend with the successful proponent, but base proposals must reflect the City itemize the cost of commercial recycling. the draft contract provided with the RFP. RFP Section Recology The current collection system notes that customers can utilize their own No change at this time. 3. Yes, it is the City’s hope that universal containers will increase 1.2 containers. Can you confirm that, under the new contract, all customers will be collection efficiency and offer customer savings. required to use contractor-provided carts and containers? If customers will still be permitted to use their own containers, the contractor must have the ability to reject certain customer-owned containers if they are not compatible with the contractor’s collection system. RFP Section Recology Alternative 2 requests a single-family cart-based recycling program that could Not currently, but all materials will be delivered to the County 4. No change. 1.3.2 include fully-comingled recyclables. Does the City’s recycling facility have the system. A proponent should discuss their potential ideas with the ability to handle a mixed stream? Or would proposers have to propose taking County’s contractor. A mix of facility improvements or other the material to a different recycling facility for processing? arrangements to do some pre-processing and then transfer could be possible with collection contractor funding (outside of the County’s existing recycling processing contract). The materials split could also be modified to reflect a commingled fiber/container stream in a cart with glass in a separate bin. Proponents should propose the most cost-effective and efficient system available. RFP Section Recology 5. Please revise the evaluation scoring to place a greater emphasis on quality of Rates are an important criteria for the City. No change. 2.11.1 services, such as 50 points for rate evaluation and 50 points for qualitative aspects. This provides the City a greater opportunity to ensure a higher quality of service, more reflective of the City’s values while maintaining competitive rates. The City of Seattle’s recent RFP for Solid Waste Collection Services has similarly weighted evaluation criteria. 50% of possible points were assigned to 1 qualitative aspects of proposals (such as operations, customer service, community response, and background/past performance). The other 50% was weighted to total system price. This enabled the City of Seattle to ensure they were receiving proposals with innovative, high-quality programs, while still focusing on a fair cost for services. RFP Forms Recology RFP Forms: No change.  The Form 2a numbers include some assumptions about 6. customer shift and are the counts that will be used for  Since the city is migrating trash service to EOW from weekly, there will calculating rate scores. However, the RFP has also certainly be a migration to larger containers. Please confirm that Form provided current customers counts by service level and 2a reflects the expected migration or otherwise, please revise the frequency, so proponents should model their expected quantities in Form 2a. costs based on their judgment and experience and  The RFP says the city has 4,400 single-family customers; however the propose appropriate rates. Form 2a and the addendum states a figure around 3,800. Which  Please use the Form 2a numbers. number should we use for assessing our costs?  Since this is a relatively small contracting jurisdiction  Please remove Form 2b from the RFP. Most other King County cities are distant from large markets, it is expected that smaller removing this form from the RFP process. The information in Form 2b is companies and possibly start-ups may submit proposals. best discussed in negotiations, when possible alternatives and program For that reason, the City needs to be in a position to details have been identified. evaluate the reasonableness of the proponents estimated costs in case a proposal with widely varying rates is received. Contract – WC Unclear. Residential extra unit should be based whether it is a bag, can, or box. The current contract has one rate for can extras, without No change at this time. 7. definition and one rate for container extras, set at one yard. The Definitions If minimum is 32-gallons and the customer has out an extra 13-gallon kitchen draft RFP contract defines extras at the levels described. The City bag it is still extra garbage and residential extras should not be billed in partial is willing to discuss changing extra increments with the successful units. Commercial service is billed as yardage in quarter yard increments, not as proponent, if there are clear benefits. 96-gallons. Section 1 Recology It is unclear how these definitions would enhance the contract at 8. Please add definitions for the following terms that are commonly used No change at this time. this time. The City and the selected proponent can discuss adding throughout the contract: definitions during contract finalization if there is a specific reason  Contamination or advantage to incorporate additional definitions.  Embedded service  Comingle The Jefferson County CSWMP does not reference the Oregon Recycled Commodity (we recommend the definition used by the state of definition for determining what is recyclable. Further, valuing recycling in terms of simple avoided disposal cost overlooks any Oregon, ORS 459.005, which defines recycled material as “any material or group additional value recycling has for toxics reduction, sustainability of materials that can be collected and sold for recycling at a net cost equal to or or other factors. There may be circumstances where recycling is less than the cost of collection and disposal of the same material.”) preferred, even though it costs more than disposal. Section 2 Recology We recommend that the notice of extension be for 1 year. Less than 1 year is Variable extensions are useful in the event that the City and 9. No change at this time, but extension Contractor wish to negotiate a new contract and need additional unreasonable at the end of a 10 year contract, when assets may be beyond arrangement will be discussed with time to complete negotiations without limiting the City’s option their useful lives. Furthermore, as noted in Comment 1 above, we request that the selected proponent. to do an RFP in the event that negotiations are not successful. any agreement extension be mutually agreed upon between the City and the Contractor. See response to #1. Section 4.1.2 Recology The City would prefer to have consistent rates across a customer No change.  Please consider a change in the pricing structure where homes with 10. sector. A proponent’s choice of vehicles may be such that no limited access vehicles incur a charge similar to, but not as high as drive- “LAV routes” are necessary. Alternatively, a proponent may in services. This will allow traditional curbside service to be offered at a 2 cheaper rate. choose to use a very large capacity collection vehicle that would force the use of an additional vehicle to handle tight quarters.  Please provide a comprehensive list of current addresses that are The former choice makes more sense, but the RFP and contract utilizing drive in service. does not limit the size of vehicles, other than requiring that they  Please provide a list of current addresses services by Limited Access observe local laws. The City does not have any information on Vehicle (LAV) vehicles? how current routes are collected.  Homeowners that require service on private driveways or private roads will need to sign a hold harmless agreement, stating that the contractor A hold harmless agreement is acceptable, upon approval by the is not responsible for damage to the roadways caused by the weight of City. the vehicles. Section 4.1.3 Recology Perhaps, depending on the actual impact of plastic containers on No change at this time, contract 11. Will the city change commercial collection hours for areas adjacent to collection noise levels. allows discretion to permit earlier residential areas if the customer is utilizing plastic front load containers, collection upon City approval. which produce less noise? Section 4.1.3 WC 1.Commercial collection should be six days per week: 12. 1.Why is there 7 days a week collection for commercial? No changes at this time. Monday through Saturday. It is our understanding that 2.Commercial Collection is documented in this section with hours of daily collection (including Sunday) has been provided for servicing 7:00 am to 6:00pm. This poses a risk for our employees to on-street litter containers during peak tourist season. It operate in this time frame set. Is this going to be negotiable? may be useful for the Contractor to also provide Sunday service to certain tourist-impacted businesses with limited container space. This possibility could be discussed during contract finalization. 2.Earlier hours in commercial areas may be possible and could be discussed during contract finalization. The draft contract also provides some discretion for adjusting hours as needed, upon City approval. Section 4.1.4 Recology Does the employee need to wear photo identification on his or her person, No, the draft contract just requires that the photo ID be available. No change. 13. visible at all times, or is the driver required to simply have photo identification available upon request? No. The contractor is responsible for determining how to manage Will the City consider changing its policy of “reserving the right to request at their employees, including additional training, reassignment, any time” that an employee be removed from performance of additional work discipline and/or other actions in the event that contractor under this contract? These employees are covered by a Collective Bargaining employee performance is unsatisfactory to the City. Agreement (CBA). We believe that an employee should only be removed for actions deemed unsatisfactory or subject to discipline per the CBA. Section 4.1.5 Recology Would the City please outline the process to determine whether customers The Contractor would be responsible for establishing and No change. 14. maintaining fair criteria for this service. receive “Disabled Persons Service” free of charge? Section 4.1.6 WC Why do we need to be concurrent with the Jefferson County Transfer Stations Mostly to eliminate the need to store materials overnight in No change at this time. 15. collection vehicles. This schedule may be changed during Holiday schedule? contract finalization to match the contractor’s preferences, provided that the storage of garbage overnight in trucks is consistent with local and state regulations. Section 4.1.7 Recology It is not possible to report all stops missed due to weather by noon, when in There is no such requirement in the draft contract. No change. 16. most cases routes will go well beyond noon on any given day. Please revise. Section 4.1.8 WC The City is continually evaluating its mandatory collection No change at this time. 17. 1.Does not clearly address suspending for non-payment here or in billing enforcement and expects to work with the next contractor to 3 section 4.3.3. develop appropriate policies and procedures for enforcement. The specific contract language addressing this could be discussed 2.Would City entertain other options other than lowest level of service. during contract finalization. Section 4.1.9 Recology The City would like photos to resolve disputes over repeated No changes at this time. 18. This section requires the Contractor to provide return trip service for free, misses. Specific procedures for how to handle this may be unless it can prove it attempted collection but containers were not set out. discussed when the contract is being finalized. Would GPS coordinates of the vehicle, combined with a driver note that containers were not set out, constitute sufficient proof? Would the City consider revising the requirement to leave written notification tags on “inappropriately, improperly prepared, or contaminated with This would be considered, as part of the overall contamination unacceptable materials?” These tags could get lost or damaged by weather. reduction protocol developed by the contractor and city. Instead, would the City agree to a follow up call from customer service, conducted the same day, explaining to the customer why the material was not picked up? Section Recology Some reports could be submitted less than monthly. Those No changes at this time. 19. Would the City want all the requested reports on a monthly basis, or are there details can be determined at the time the contract is finalized. 4.1.13 some report elements that the City could do without on a monthly basis (i.e. back up truck hours)? The level of detail in the monthly reports is onerous and could contribute to higher costs. Section Recology This has been reviewed at length and City staff provisionally 20. Please require proposers to utilize all new collection vehicles at the Agreement No change at this time. agree. This issue will be reviewed with City Council on December 4.1.13 term. There are safety and environmental concerns when using older trucks at 10 th and an addendum will be issued following that meeting to the beginning of a 10-year contract. Ten years is the useful life for most confirm the final decision. collection vehicles; therefore, it is logical to require proposers to use new collection vehicles at the beginning of the 10-year term. Furthermore, allowing the current contractor to use existing (and potentially aging) inventory allows them a significant cost advantage to the point where it will not make sense for us to submit a proposal. Section Recology When a customer uses their own container for extra material that material Section 4.1.14.5 of the draft contract limits manually loaded No changes. 21. extras to no more than 50 pounds. 4.1.14 should be in a container 32 gallons or less, since containers are manually collected and excess weights can injure the drivers. Section WC What’s the need for a large variety of cart sizes? Customer choice. No changes. 22. 4.1.14.1 Section Recology The Contractor’s ability to perform in the event of an emergency will be Yes. No changes at this time. 23. 4.1.24 dependent on available resources and is likely to be subject to competing demands across jurisdictions. Is the City willing to work with the Contractor on a reasonable emergency response plan? Section Recology Those draft contract sections require that garbage be properly No change. 24. These sections ask that the Contractor collect all Garbage set out “adjacent to” prepared and contained. 4.2.1.1 and or “next to” Garbage containers. This could be read as requiring the Contractor §4.2.4.1 to clean up customer-spilled Garbage, or improperly set out Garbage. We suggest revising so it’s clear that Garbage set out next to a container must be properly prepared in accordance with the contract requirements. 4 Section Recology This provision addresses the possibility that a very dirty or No changes. 25. These sections seemingly allow customers to request a “replacement” cart or obviously damaged compostables (or any) cart is delivered to a 4.2.2.2 and “reject” a cart. Please clarify the intent of this language. Our experience is that household. While we appreciate that tight operations on the part §4.2.3.2 carts are only replaced if the Contractor determines they have been damaged. of the contractor should prevent that from ever happening, if it does, the customer is not forced to accept a dirty or damaged cart. Section Recology “Residue” in this case refers to containers that have not been No changes. 26. Could the City please define other “residues?” If any “residues” are found is the rinsed and have an unacceptable level of contamination. The 4.2.2.3 Contractor required to collect the customer? decision on the threshold between acceptable and non- acceptable will be addressed in the contamination protocol develop by the contractor and City. Section Recology The City will consider a rental fee for additional recycling carts if a No change at this time. 27. This section states that: “No limits shall be placed on set-out volumes for customer requests additional capacity. 4.2.2.3 Curbside Recyclables, other than those specifically listed in Exhibit C.” We encourage the City to implement an extras charge for recycling amounts over 96 gallons. Unlimited recycling does not encourage reduced consumption. In addition, offering unlimited recycling has been shown to increase contamination. Furthermore, there are operational costs associated with collecting recyclables. Section WC Roll outs up to 25 feet. This needs to be a shorter distance than 25 before we Please include the costs of moving containers up to 25 feet in 28. No change. your proposal. 4.2.4.3 establish a fee. This service is level in the peak tourist season of seven days week. Is this See response to #12. needed or will there be a better way of collecting in the near future? Section Recology If the Contractor is not allowed to charge for opening gates or unlocking The City would like to roll out upgraded service as part of a new No change. 29. collection program. Many businesses (particularly along the 4.2.4.3 containers it will increase costs on those customers who do not have such waterfront) have space constraints and illegal dumping exposure, requirements. Is the City willing to reconsider this requirement? so this is a useful service enhancement. Section Recology Please revise to include a minimum charge for recyclables: The Contractor shall The City will continue the current embedded recycling approach. No change. 30. 4.2.5.2 provide Recycling Containers at no additional charge to all Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers requesting Containers Section 4.3.1 WC 1.At this time we do not provide information via text. Some If your company is unable to provide this service, please address No changes at this time. 31. this as a contract exception in Section E of your proposal. communication is via robo calls and emails at the company’s discretion. 2.We do not use mobile applications at this time. Section 4.3.2 Recology This section notes that operations and management staff must be located at This change is acceptable. The contract will be revised as noted. 32. the site. A contractor’s location in the city may be a satellite location; therefore, please revise the sentence as follows to better reflect the staffing that may be present at the site: Operations, and management, or supervisory staff shall be located at that site, provided that call center operations may be remotely provided. Section 4.3.2 Recology Please expand the radius for the location of the service base to 35 miles. This change is acceptable. The contract will be revised as 33. 5 needed. Section 4.3.2 WC This should read 50 miles from Port Townsend. Not the 30 in the proposal. Is This change is acceptable. The contract will be revised as 34. this something we could agree on? needed. Section 4.3.2 Recology Since the call center does not need to be in the vicinity of the city, is there a No. An in-city customer service location is not needed. No changes. 35. requirement for the “service base” to be staffed for walk-in customer traffic? If so, what are the requirements? We would recommend staffing for walk-in traffic for two days per week, from 10am-3pm. Section WC At this time we do not accept text message correspondence. If your company is unable to provide this service, please address No changes at this time. 36. this as a contract exception in Section E of your proposal. 4.3.2.1 Section Recology The City should consider on-site inspection of call centers, which should include The City evaluation team will consider this. No changes. 37. 4.3.2.3 a review of call center staff knowledge of City-specific needs. This would help ensure a good customer service experience for Port Townsend residents and businesses. Section WC 1.Should be revised based on fluctuating call volumes. Many things affect 1.These are standard response times for many contract and No change at this time. 38. volume such as billing, collections, route changes, etc. It is unreasonable are set to ensure that contractor’s maintain sufficient 4.3.2.4 to commit to these timelines. staffing and procedures to minimize customer’s needs to 2.Like most companies, an automated phone answering system is used to call and to manage call traffic. direct customers to the proper person or department. 2.A short automated greeting with one call menu level may be acceptable. This could be discussed during contract finalization. Section WC Our company already has acceptable customer service goals for all service The City is interested in measurable performance standards to No change at this time. 39. ensure that excellent customer service is maintained throughout 4.3.2.4 areas. the life of the contract. WC 1.That change may be acceptable and would be discussed No changes at this time. 40. Section 4.3.3 1.Our invoices are not used to relay service suspension/container removal during contract finalization. dates. This information is provided in subsequent notices after the 2.There may be waste management-related messages that account is past due. the City would like to distribute to customers without 2.Why would the City need to use our invoices to provide messages or incurring additional mailing costs. inserts to our customers? Various Recology We noted several requirements to provide free or embedded services which Container winches and locks without charge, live call response 41. No changes. and website accessibility are part of high quality service. would result in higher rates. The City may wish to consider eliminating some of these services or enabling the Contractor to charge for them. These services The monthly 35-gallon garbage cart service is a fee-service and include, but are not limited to: free winches for drop box covers (§4.1.14.2), not a “free or embedded” service. collection of non-putrescible Garbage in 35g cart (§4.2.1.3), free container locks (§4.2.4.3), free lock and gate service (§4.2.4.3), and development of a mobile The provision of a mobile app is optional, however the quality and app (§4.3.1). availability may be considered during the qualitative evaluation of proposals. If provision of the app is a major cost, a proponent can include a contract exception indicating the cost savings of removing this service. Section 5.1.2 Recology Itemization should include a separate line indicating the cost of the recycling The City will continue the current embedded recycling approach. No changes. 42. 6 program Section 5.3 WC 1.Procurements of this sort require a significant amount of No change. 43. 1.Explain why the contractor upon execution of new contract would pay City staff and consultant time. As a start up cost of a new the city $35,000 for cost of procuring this contract? contract, it is reasonable to include that in the rates as an 2.What’s the city’s fair estimation of the percentage that would be applied amortized start-up cost, along with the rest of the for Admin Fees? contractor’s costs. 2.The City’s administrative fee will depend to some degree on the final contractor rates as well as the City Council’s preferences. The rate is unknown at this time. Section 5.3.1 Recology No, however you may provide the rate impacts of modifying the No change. 44. The cap of 5% on CPI should be removed. floor, cap or both in Section E of your proposal. Section 5.3.3 Recology Annual changes in sites that accept yard debris or compost or other recyclables Please review the RFP and note that the contractor will deliver No changes. 45. recyclables and yard debris to County/City facilities at no charge should be part of the annual rate process. Even if the county does not mandate to the contractor, except for the potential additional funding the a site, it is reasonable to expect costs will go up. Increases in disposal related to contractor may require under the cart-based recycling compost and other recyclables should either be passed through in the disposal alternative. component of the rates or, at a minimum, be allowed an increase via the annual CPI process. Section 6.1 WC Three business days would be a more reasonable time frame to replace a The City may entertain a different performance standard, but No changes. 46. note that in a cart-based system, not having a usable cart for damaged cart. several days can be a significant burden to customers. Section 6.2(4) Recology Define “uncontaminated.” Nearly all loads are contaminated in some way. This section addresses collecting recyclables (e.g. an entire No changes. 47. residential route) and then disposing of them as garbage rather than delivering them for processing. Section Recology The pollution liability insurance described is claims-based, but such This change is acceptable. The contract will be revised as noted. 48. 8.3.1(4) coverage is typically occurrence-based. Could the City revise this section as follows: Contractor’s Pollution Liability insurance coverage covering any claim occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, property damage, cleanup costs, and legal defense expenses applying to all work performed under the contract, including that related to transported cargo. The City shall be named as an additional insured under the Contractor’s Pollution Liability insurance policy. Section 8.3.6 Recology Our vicarious liability for the acts of those working on our behalf are The City has reviewed the original draft contract language and the The draft contract will be changed as 49. proposed change. This section of the contract will be revised to covered under contractual liability. Responsibility for acts of noted. the following: subcontractors can be addressed in express contractual provisions to that effect and do not need to be included in the insurance provisions. “The Contractor shall cause each and every Subcontractor Moreover, we cannot promise that all subcontractors will maintain the to provide insurance coverage that complies with all same levels and types of insurance that we carry because subcontractors applicable requirements of the Contractor-provided may play very small roles in the agreement and the size of their businesses insurance as set forth herein, except the Contractor shall may be substantially smaller. have sole responsibility for determining the limits of coverage required to be obtained by Subcontractors. The Therefore, we recommends striking this section entirely and including Contractor shall ensure that the City is an additional separate insurance requirements for subcontractors as follows: insured on each and every Subcontractor’s Commercial 7 General liability insurance policy using an endorsement as least as broad as ISO CG 20 10 10 01 for ongoing Contractor will request all subcontractors performing work in connection with operations and CG 20 37 10 01 for completed operations.” this Agreement to maintain the following minimum insurance: Workers’ Compensation in accordance with applicable law or regulation, Employer’s Liability with limits of $1,000,000, Commercial General Liability with limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 in the annual aggregate, and Automobile Liability insurance with limits of $1,000,000. Unspecified Olympia Do the Commercial Customer counts reflect the number of billed accounts It’s believed to be the container count, but the City has not No changes. 50. confirmed the customer list. Organics or the number of containers billed? If it reflects the billed accounts, what is the container count? Unspecified Olympia Are the multi-family customers included in the commercial account totals? The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 51. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia If so, what is the breakdown of multi-family vs other commercial counts? The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 52. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia In the description of existing services, it mentions commercial cans The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 53. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics serviced daily, are those accounts represented by the commercial can addendum will be issued if the City receives additional customers serviced 5 times weekly? information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia Beyond the street cans listed in the draft contract, how many customers The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 54. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics are currently served on Saturday or Sunday? How does this change addendum will be issued if the City receives additional seasonally? information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia Do the Roll Off customer counts reflect the number billed accounts or the The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 55. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics number of hauls performed per month? addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia Do the Roll Off Haul counts reflect only permanent accounts? Probably. No changes. 56. Organics Unspecified Olympia What is the count of temporary roll off hauls performed? The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 57. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia Does the Roll Off Rent represent the number of permanent containers The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 58. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics rented from the current Contractor or some other number? addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia How many current residential customers utilize carry out service? The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 59. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. 8 Unspecified Olympia How many customers are currently serviced on private roads and/or that The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 60. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics require a tight access service vehicle? addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia How many special needs customers currently receive utilize carry out The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 61. Connections. No additional information has been provided. Note Organics service? that the current contract allows customers over 61 to receive carry-out at no additional charge. This has not been continued. Unspecified Olympia How many commercial or multi-family can or detachable customers are The City only has the annual report provided by Waste No changes. 62. Connections. No additional information has been provided. An Organics currently rolled out as described in the draft contract? addendum will be issued if the City receives additional information from the current contractor. Unspecified Olympia What historical customer counts or service level data is available for Past Annual reports can be requested from the City contact listed No changes. 63. in the RFP. Organics commercial recycling or yard waste service? Unspecified Olympia The Draft Contract requires a map illustrating collection days. Does such a The current contractor has indicated that they will provide a map, No changes. 64. which will be released via additional addendum when received. Organics map exist for the existing services? Unspecified Olympia While the RFP contains specific Alternatives, can proposers offer additional Yes, additional ideas are welcome. No changes. 65. Organics Alternatives? Unspecified Olympia The cart sizes listed do not match some of the primary cart manufactures Yes. No changes. 66. Organics standard capacities. Can slightly different cart sizes be utilized? An example would be a 21 gallon mini-can (Toter Inc) vs the 20 gallon specified. Unspecified Olympia What records are currently available regarding customer complaints? This City has no records regarding customer complaints. No changes. 67. Organics Unspecified Olympia How many “special events” are typically seen each calendar year? The City does not have data on how many private events use No changes. 68. specialized event-type collection services. They may range from Organics very small private events (one set of carts) to very large events such as the Wooden Boat Festival. Some service may be provided as a community donation and other may be charged regular rates. Unspecified Olympia While the customer counts seem to trend upward, the tonnage numbers That is unknown. Note that all collected material must be No changes. 69. delivered to the Jefferson County solid waste system. Organics for 2017-2018 seem to be down. What is thought to be the reason behind this? Unspecified Olympia Is there a listing of all current accounts, with addresses and/or current Yes, this can be requested from the City contact listed in the RFP. No changes. 70. Organics levels of service available for review? Unspecified Olympia Are any of these services expected to be covered under any prevailing No. No changes. 71. Organics wage provisions? 9