RFP for 3rd Party Interconnection Reviewer Services – Questions and Answers
Below are the Program Administrators’ responses to some questions received about our recently released Request for Proposal. Please see our last news post for more information about the RFP.
Task 1.2 – Deliverables reads: Participation and attendance at meetings between PM and utility staff as requested by the PM. How many meetings do we budget for? Are the meetings virtual?
Meetings will vary depending on the specific situation and the Consultant’s findings after reviewing each specific Utility Impact Study. However, to be as efficient and streamline the process as much as possible, the PM and Consultant should strive to have as few meetings with utility staff as needed while still meeting all goals. Consultant should expect that most Utility Impact Studies will include an average of 2-3 meetings with utility staff and the PM. Consultant should expect virtual meetings to be the standard practice with an occasional in-person meeting (but not for every Utility Impact Study and not while quarantine is still in effect).
Task 1.2 – Deliverables also reads: Other deliverables and due dates as agreed upon between PM and Consultant. This is an open ended commitment, what is the expectation of Other deliverables and due dates?
This is purposefully open ended as it depends on the findings of the Utility Impact Study. Consultant should be reviewing and potentially providing alternative pathways forward to the Utility Impact Study (Task 1.1), so additional deliverables are likely to only result if utility staff disagrees with the alternative pathways. The Consultant should expect to work closely with the PM to determine the best path forward, including additional deliverables in this case. In the case that additional deliverables are needed that go beyond the scope that the respondent outlines in the RFP response, then it will be on a Time and Materials basis under “hourly” consulting. In other words, we recognize it can be difficult to plan ahead for every possible scenario, so items that fall outside of scope will not be limited to the capped budget.
Task 1.2, page 6, reads: The consultant must attend a MINIMUM of two meetings as required by PM. Are the meetings teleconferences? MINIMUM is an open ended commitment, can it be changed to MAXIMUM?
Two meeting is the minimum required for each Utility Impact Study. However, if there are significant disagreements and/or issues found, this can escalate into additional meetings with utility staff. Similar to our response to question 1.2b, anything that goes beyond the scope will be on a Time and Materials basis under the “hourly” consulting.
Task 1.3, page 6, 1st paragraph talks about using a standardized template for the report to OPUC. Can a copy of the template be provided?
The template is being developed in coordination with OPUC and will be provided after contracting is set up. Preliminarily (but not finalized), we are thinking the template will include 4 parts: 1. Summary of the challenges; 2. Summary of the solutions and discussions with utility staff; 3. Insights into the utility process; 4. Any insights or proposals for process reform.
Task 1.3 – Deliverables reads: Report to the OPUC which summarizes the results of the review and documents utility coordination effort…. Is the intent that the report developed in Task 1.1 plus utility feedback in Task 1.2 be combined for the Task 1.3 report?
Correct, Task 1.3 is essentially summarizing all the efforts and information from Tasks 1.1 and 1.2 into a larger report.
Task 1.3 Deliverables reads: Other deliverables and due dates as agreed upon between PM and Consultant. This is an open ended commitment, what is the expectation of Other deliverables and due dates?
We expect that additional deliverables would be what is described in the 2nd paragraph under Task 1.3: “In addition to developing and delivering the report to OPUC, Consultant shall also ensure all reviewed materials and documentation of coordination with the utility will be available to OPUC and the PA Team. If Consultant does not receive at least 10 requests to review studies within the duration of the contract—including at least one study from PGE and PAC—OPUC and the PA Team may ask the consultant to review a sample of publicly posted studies and report to the Commission, in an audit-like capacity.”
We expect that additional deliverables beyond this are likely to be related to expanding upon / clarifications on what is delivered in the report to OPUC.
Task 1.4 – Deliverables reads: Bi-weekly status updates…. Is the format to be via email or teleconference?
Consultant should expect to have regular meetings with PA Team to check-in which would suffice the bi-weekly status updates (teleconference check-ins). However, there may be situations with little to report, so email would be acceptable as an update.
Task 2.1: What modeling software is needed to re-create utility analysis using the models provided by utility or third party models? CYME, PSSE, PSLF, Synergi?
This is open ended and is reliant on the Consultant’s expertise and/or recommendations. In other words, we are relying on the Consultant’s expertise to recommend what modeling software, methodology, etc.
Are all the generators proposing distribution interconnection? Or also transmission?
We anticipate that all CSP projects will propose distribution-level interconnection. CSP Projects are all Oregon-jurisdictional distribution-level generators.