Agenda and minutes

Adrian Gabriel, Waste Manager, to report.

-  to report the current arrangements for the collection of Clinical Waste in Rotherham, highlights our statutory duty and provides an option for consideration, with respect to the future provision of clinical waste services to domestic households.

The Waste Manager, Streetpride, submitted a report detailing the current arrangements for the collection of Clinical Waste in Rotherham highlighting the Council’s statutory duty.  A proposal was submitted for consideration with respect to the future provision of the Service to domestic households.

The Clinical Waste Service operated 4 specialist vehicles with drivers working 5 days a week.  Collections were made from 3 types of premises; NHS Rotherham, domestic households and other Council premises with the waste classified into either infectious waste, syringes, needles or other sharp instruments, offensive waste and municipal waste (SANPRO).

Household waste could be classed as waste which was the same as, or similar to, waste from accommodation purely used for living purposes.  Waste from domestic first aid and self-care was assumed to be non-infectious unless a healthcare practitioner indicated otherwise.  Non-infectious soiled nappies, sanitary products (incontinence pads) and plasters may be disposed of in the black bin, however, it was current Council Policy to collect it separately as Offensive Clinical Waste.

This type of waste made up approximately 50% of the collections that were carried out on this Service.  There were approximately 2,100 customers of which 1,000 had been identified as producing small amounts of SANPRO only waste.  As it was collected along with infectious wastes, sharps and offensive waste, it attracted a higher gate fee for disposal than general municipal waste.

Many other authorities already adopted the practice of placing SANPRO waste within the black residual waste bin and collected as part of the domestic refuse collection service.

If Rotherham was to adopt this practice, it would release 2 vehicles and members of staff who would then be redeployed into other (Waste Management) work thereby realising savings on vehicle hire and agency staff.  Savings would be approximately £79,000 due to reduced disposal costs as a consequence of SANPRO waste being disposed of to landfill and a reduction in the resources required for separate collections.

The importance of communicating with members of the public especially vulnerable service users was stressed and the need for the crews to be pro active in identifying properties.

Resolved:-  That the collection and disposal of Municipal Waste (SANPRO) through the domestic refuse collection service be approved with effect from 1^st April, 2011.

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A (as amended March 2006) to the Local Government Act 1972 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council)).

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council)).

Wendy Foster, Interim Landlord Relations Manager, to report.

-  to consider the outcomes of investigations around the alleged non-payment of invoices.

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report regarding a private company which had been regularly contracted by the Council’s Building Works, pre ALMO, to carry out works to Council properties.  The Company had contacted 2010 Rotherham Ltd. in October, 2009, regarding the alleged non-payment of invoices relating to various works carried out to 5 properties dating back to 2004.

Discussions had taken place with the company, RBT, 2010 Rotherham Ltd., Internal Audit, Legal Services, Finance officers and members of the Landlord Relations Team.  However, no evidence of the work could be found nor had the company provided any form of proof.

Resolved:-  That the request for payment be refused in light of the lack of evidence submitted.

The Leisure Services Manager reported that expressions of interest had been invited for the above contract by advertising in the Official Journal of the European Union in October, 2010.

17 companies returned the Pre Qualification Questionnaire and scored accordingly with the 11 highest scoring companies progressing to the technical capability stage.  5 contractors scored sufficiently high enough (more than 50%) to be included on the select list of tenderers.

Resolved:-  That the approved select list of tenderers for the Term Contract for the Hire of Grounds Maintenance Equipment be as follows:-

Ashtead Plant Hire

CG Robinson

County Grass

GAP Group

SGM Contracts Ltd.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act – information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))