Laserfiche WebLink
LWJ <br />REGULAR FETING OCTOBER 25, 1982 <br />OPENING OF BIDS - DIESEL REFUELING STATIONS <br />('14UNICIPAL SERVICES FACILITY) <br />This was the date set for receiving sealed bids for the relocation <br />and installation of two diesel refueling stations at the Municipal <br />Services Facility and related work. The Clerk tendered proofsof <br />publication of notice in the South Bend Tribune and the Tri- <br />County News which were found to be sufficient. The following <br />bids were opened and publicly read: <br />Petroleum Equipment, Inc. Bid was signed by James P. Knapp, <br />1112 N. Clay St. non -collusion affidavit was in <br />Mishawaka, Ind. 46545 order, and a 57/0 bid bond was <br />submitted. <br />$38,383.00 <br />Ziolkowski Construction, Inc. Bid was signed by Ben Ziolkowski, <br />1005 S. Lafayette non -collusion affidavit was in <br />South Bend, Ind. 46624 order, and a 5i0 bid bond was <br />submitted. <br />$44,485.00 <br />Dye Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Bid was signed by Charles Prestin, <br />3535 Monroe Street non -collusion affidavit was in <br />LaPorte, Indiana 46350 order, and a 5% bid bond was <br />submitted. <br />$37,500.00 <br />Ritschard Bros., Inc. <br />1204 W. Sample St. <br />South Bend, Ind. 46619 <br />$39,666.00 <br />Bid was signed by Donald Ritschard, <br />non -collusion affidavit was in <br />order, and a 5% bid bond was <br />submitted. <br />Upon a motion made by Mr. Kernan, seconded by Mr. Leszczynski and <br />carried, the bid of Clifford Hamilton, Inc. 60689 U.S. 31 South, <br />South Bend, Indiana, was rejected because it was received at <br />9:35 a.m., five minutes after the legally -advertised bid deadline <br />of 9:30 a.m. <br />Mr. Robert Lovett from Coffield Supply Company in South Bend, <br />objected to the specifications as written which called for a <br />used 10,000 gallon underground tank. Ile felt there was a severe <br />problem with underground leakage and, if that situation should <br />occur, the savings realized by the city in attempting to obtain <br />a used tank would be of no avail and the city would be spending <br />more money to rectify the problem. Also, he felt the city would <br />not be able to determine the size of the tank it received. He <br />asked that the specifications be revised and new bids sought. <br />r1r. Leszczynski advised Mr. Lovett that he was very comfortable <br />with seeking bids for a used tank. Ile stated that the city <br />would have no guarantee that a new tank would not leak, and <br />the city was very interested in saving money on the cost of the <br />refueling station since it was operating under budget restrains. <br />Mr. Lovett felt that, if the city was interested in saving money, <br />other changes could be made in the specifications. Prior to <br />adjournment of the meeting, Mr. Lovett again raised his objection <br />to the specifications. He felt there would be no way for the city <br />to inspect and check out a used tank for defects. He referred to <br />an incident when a used tank had been sandblasted and was found <br />to be defective. Mr. Leszczynski assured Mr. Lovett that the <br />bidder would be responsible for submitting defective materials <br />and his bid bond would protect the city in that regard. Mr. <br />Lovett also wondered about the requirements of the State Fire <br />Marshall regarding the underground storage tanks. Mr. Leszczynski <br />advised Mr. Lovett that the tanks would be inspected and the city <br />still had the option to reject the bids if it was determined there <br />could be a potential problem. Mr. Lovett stated that he would <br />have preferred submitting a bid to the city on a used tank <br />because his profit would be greater than on a new one; however, <br />he disagreed with the use of a used tank for underground storage <br />purposes. Mr. Leszczynski thanked Mr. Lovett for his comments <br />and concerns and assured him that the city would take the <br />necessary precautions. <br />1 <br />1 <br />