with the land disposal process already established in the community. The requirement to acquire additional lands needs to be addressed. It has cost and timing issues.

4.   If a recommendation for one of the alternatives were to be made on the basis of the above issues, the Northern Watertek option would be identified as the recommended solution. One further consideration, however, is noted. Recommending the implementation of a single solution from the three identified puts the City of Ottawa in a difficult situation with regards to the ability to negotiate a competitive price by virtue of a sole sourced recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION

In view of the balanced nature of the evaluated options detailed in the quantitative analysis represented by the matrix (Table 1 and Table 2), consideration of the further qualitative evaluation reviewing the features of the alternatives, and the fact that the previous design-build bids have no current binding status, given the time that has transpired when they were submitted, the following is recommended:

a.  That the City of Ottawa proceeds with the implementation of a communal wastewater treatment system for Munster Hamlet;

b.  That the City of Ottawa selects a communal wastewater treatment system from one of the two alternatives identified and reviewed in this report, namely Northern Watertek system (Snowfluent / Intermittent sand filtration); and, CMS treatment system (Rotordisk / Dynasand filter);

R.V. Anderson Associates Limited                                 - 40 -