NSP 2016 WIND RFP QUESTIONS (UPDATED OCTOBER 21, 2016)

Transcription

1 NSP 2016 WIND RFP QUESTIONS (UPDATED OCTOBER 21, 2016) CONTENTS RFP Question 24 Clarification Posted October RFP Questions Posted October (Questions 16 through 27)... 3 RFP Questions Posted October 5, 2016 (Questions 8 through 15)... 6 RFP Questions Posted September 30, 2016 (Questions 1 through 7)... 8 Note: NSP will not provide responses to any additional questions. The deadline for submitting questions was October 10, NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 1

2 RFP QUESTION 24 CLARIFICATION POSTED OCTOBER Question 24 Clarification: The bidder is not allowed to provide a bid increase mechanism, as a component of their bid. All bids must incorporate the full risk of any and all transmission costs assigned by MISO or any other RTO(s) and will be considered a firm price bid. The information required in Addendum 1 10/4/16, does not change or modify this fundamental requirement of the RFP NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 2

3 RFP QUESTIONS POSTED OCTOBER (QUESTIONS 16 THROUGH 27) Question 16: Please confirm that PPA Project submissions should be priced assuming delivery at Point of Interconnection as stated in the pro forma agreement, or instead assuming delivery at a common delivery point (ex: Minn Hub), or to the nearest Xcel load zone? Answer: PPA Project submissions should be priced assuming delivery at the Point of Interconnection. The interconnection point with the MISO facility will be the Point of Delivery ( POD ). The Wind Energy Purchase Agreement states in Article 7, Section 1 (A) that beginning on the Commercial Operation Date, Seller shall generate from the Facility, deliver to the Point of Delivery, and sell to Company, and Company shall receive and purchase at the Point of Delivery. Question 17: Of the total 1,500 MW desired, is there a particular breakdown of megawatts NSP is seeking between PPA and B/T? Answer: NSP does not have a desired proportion of PPA and BOT and will select projects offering the greatest benefit to customers, as stated in the RFP. Question 18: Does NSP have any preference to the project located in one particular state over other? Answer: NSP does not have a preference for project location. NSP will only consider RFP projects with a Point of Interconnection ( POI ) location within MISO, in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located, including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). The interconnection point with the MISO facility will be the Point of Delivery ( POD ). If the POI of the proposed project is not within the Project Region, described above, it will not meet the requirement described in Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP. Question 19: Does NSP have any preference for a project that has signed Interconnect Agreement vs. one in the August 2016 DPP stage? Answer: NSP has a preference for projects that have signed Interconnection Agreements. This preference will be included in NSP s evaluation of the projects as well as price and other factors described in the RFP and the Bidder Forms. NSP explains in RFP Addendum 1 that transmission upgrade costs for all proposed projects will be assessed by an independent consultant. Question 20: Does NSP have an upper limit on the single PPA/BT transaction? (e.g., NSP will not sign PPA/BT contract for more than 400 MW from a single project) Answer: NSP does not have a specific upper limit for individual PPA and BOT transactions. The RFP on page 17 explains Company intends to select a portfolio of bids consisting of at least two or more vendors to provide diversity and mitigate single supplier risk. NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 3

4 Question 21: How long does NSP expect the regulatory timeframe to be? Can NSP obtain the regulatory approvals from different states in concurrent? Answer: NSP cannot predict how long the regulatory process will be for obtaining an order from its State Commissions in response to NSP s filings requesting approval of the successfully negotiated PPA and BOT proposals. NSP intends to obtain regulatory approval as quickly as possible and filings will be submitted to State Commissions accordingly. Question 22: For PPA contracts, does NSP have any preference for the specific contract length (e.g. 20 year vs. 25 year)? Answer: NSP does not have a preference for a specific contract term. Section 5.3 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP discusses the economic evaluation of proposed projects, including those with different contract terms. Question 23: Is the 5k fee for each project, or each proposed arrangement? (e.g., does bidder have to pay an additional 5K if a proposal consists an alternate pricing for the reduced MW from the same project?) Answer: Each proposed arrangement must be submitted as a separate proposal, with a bid fee of $5,000 for each proposal. Section 4.5 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP states a separate bid evaluation fee is required for projects on the same site with different COD, turbine, pricing, contract term or MW size. Question 24: Section 11 on RFP page 13 states: "To the extent that bidders actual transmission interconnection and/or system upgrade costs are lower than projections included in the pricing in their proposal(s), bidders must also provide a proposed bid price reduction mechanism." In the event actual transmission interconnection and/or system upgrades costs are higher than projections included in the pricing, may the bidder provide a bid increase mechanism? Answer: The bidder is required to submit bid adjustment values for both incremental and decremental transmission upgrade costs in the event actual costs assigned by MISO is different than the costs included in the bid. Addendum 1-10/4/16 Additional Transmission Cost Information Requested requests this type of pricing detail. Appendix A 10/4/16 Bidder Forms was also updated to reflect the addition of this pricing detail. Question 25: Are operating projects subject to the RFP or only new build? Answer: Existing resources are eligible project types. Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP identifies eligible RFP project types. NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 4

5 Question 26: Would a project located in Iowa be subject to the RFP if the project can deliver into one of the states of the project region? Answer: NSP will only consider RFP projects with a Point of Interconnection ( POI ) location within MISO, in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located, including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). The interconnection point with the MISO facility will be the Point of Delivery ( POD ). If the POI of the proposed project is not within the Project Region, described above, it will not meet the requirement described in Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP. Question 27: Bidder Form 11 does not allow me to input URLs in some cells where requested and the last five response cells do not allow alphanumeric inputs. Answer: A revised bidder form that addresses these problems has been posted on the NSP Wind RFP website. NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 5

6 RFP QUESTIONS POSTED OCTOBER 5, 2016 (QUESTIONS 8 THROUGH 15) Question 8: We attempted to develop a 50 megawatt wind project in a thinly populated area. We had easements, an anemometer, studies completed and were close to a 69 kilovolt line. But after the Great Recession hit and energy purchase prices fell we ran out of money. The wind regime in the area was pretty good at low 30s percent. Would you have any interest in looking into this defunct project to develop yourself? We probably don t have the resources to pick it up ourselves but would be willing to work with you. Answer: NSP will consider only projects that are submitted as formal proposals and that comply with all requirements of the RFP. Question 9: I have read through all the documents on your Wind Generation web page. Do you procure the FAA aviation lights directly or do you leave that to the General Contractor? If you procure or recommend is there someone specifically I could speak to or send an to give them specifications about our obstruction light? Answer: Respondents should address all exceptions to equipment selection in written exceptions to NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements as part of the bid submittal. Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP states all BOT proposals shall be compliant with the conditions and requirements stated in NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements and proposals may also include any written exceptions from those stated in NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements. Individual exceptions will be reviewed at the time of bid evaluation. The only means of communication allowed between NSP and bidders is the RFP account at NSP2016WINDRFP@xcelenergy.com. Question 10: Are there any requirements to submit of any materials/forms/etc. prior to the October 25 due date? Answer: There is no requirement to submit any materials prior to the October 25, 2016 due date. All responses received prior to the submittal due date will remain sealed and not be opened until after the submittal due date and time. Question 11: The RFP states The RFP project must have a Point of Interconnection ( POI ) location within MISO in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). We assume that a Project that has a MISO POI within one of the afore-mentioned five states would be compliant, even if all or a portion of the Project s actual site boundary is located in an adjacent State. Is this correct? Or, do the actual Project site boundary and turbine locations need to be located within the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota? Answer: A project that has a MISO POI within the Project Region would be compliant, even if all or a portion of the project s actual site boundary is located in an adjacent State. The NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 6

7 requirement for the project to have MISO POI within the Project Region, however, cannot be met using long term firm point-to-point transmission from a project location to a MISO POI within the Project Region. NSP will only consider RFP projects with a Point of Interconnection ( POI ) location within MISO in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). The interconnection point with the MISO facility will be the Point of Delivery ( POD ). Question 12: Does NSP require that projects have an NRIS designated interconnection? Or, is ERIS designation also compliant? Does NSP have a preference for NRIS designated projects? Answer: The RFP does not specify that a project must have an ERIS or NRIS designated MISO interconnection. NSP does have a preference for low cost projects that currently have an NRIS designated interconnection. Question 13: Can we propose different PPA term lengths for an individual wind project and have that considered as one proposal, for the purposes of the bid evaluation fee? Answer: A project proposed with multiple PPA term lengths will need to be submitted as separate proposals, with a bid fee of $5,000 for each proposal. Section 4.5 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP states a separate bid evaluation fee is required for projects on the same site with different COD, turbine, pricing, contract term or MW size. Question 14: We have a wind project with POI in WAPA region in South Dakota, would that be eligible for this RFP? Answer: Projects must have a Point of Interconnection (POI) within MISO. Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP requires projects to have a POI location within MISO in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). If the POI of the proposed project is within SPP it will not meet the requirement for the POI to be within MISO. Question 15: There are several areas in Appendix A (for example, all of Tab 12 Creditworthiness) that require a much longer explanation than the space provided on the spreadsheet. The RFP says we can attach additional sheets with the heading Form [ ] Additional Information. Do those sheets also need to be in Excel format, or may we use Word? Would it be permissible instead to cover the requested information in the Executive Summary and provide a reference in the tab? My goal is to provide the information you need in the most efficient and concise manner possible. Since we will be touching on quite a bit of the information in the Executive Summary, it seemed like it might be a reasonable way to provide it without adding extra sheets. Answer: Responses to Appendix A that require a much longer explanation than the space provided should be included as attachments to Appendix A. Explanations that exceed the space provided may be submitted in Microsoft Word format. NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 7

8 RFP QUESTIONS POSTED SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 (QUESTIONS 1 THROUGH 7) Question 1: The links on your website for the recently issued wind RFP are not all working properly and some of the documents cannot be downloaded. Answer: Downloading of these documents has been successful using the web browsers Internet Explorer and Google Chrome. We recommend using these two web browsers. Question 2: We have a project that meets the RFP criteria other than the size limit (it is below 75MW). Would NSP evaluate a proposal from this project, or would the proposal be rejected for failure to meet the criteria in RFP Section 2.2? Answer: A project with a nameplate electric rating less than 75 MW will be rejected. Proposals must meet all the criteria specified in Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP. One of those criteria is that the minimum project size must have a nameplate electric greater than or equal to 75 MW. Question 3: We would like to know if a Project is located within MISO, but has access to SPP as well (Overlap between RTOs) and an interconnection application with SPP, can it qualify as a candidate for this RFP? Answer: Projects must have a Point of Interconnection (POI) within MISO. Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP requires projects to have a POI location within MISO in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). If the POI of the proposed project is within SPP it will not meet the requirement for the POI to be within MISO. Question 4: I wanted to inquire about Alstom/GE Grid Solutions being added as an approved manufacturer for Circuit Breakers. They re currently the primary supplier for NSP on 345kV units, and have a blanket in place. They were also added to the approved manufacturer list for the Rush Creek Wind Project RFP. Answer: Respondents should address all exceptions to equipment selection in written exceptions to NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements as part of the bid submittal. Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP states all BOT proposals shall be compliant with the conditions and requirements stated in NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements and proposals may also include any written exceptions from those stated in NSP s Wind Farm Technical Requirements. Individual exceptions will be reviewed at the time of bid evaluation. Question 5: Can a proposal that offers multiple 1) turbine options, 2) contract terms, and/or 3) size differences of ±0.5%, but maintains the same committed energy and price for all options, be considered a single proposal for purposes of the bidding fee? An example of this might be a proposal for a 100 MW wind farm in the same location that lists 3 different turbine options that may vary project size from MW, but NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 8

9 regardless of which turbine is selected, would result in 400,000 MWh/yr committed energy and a price of $30.00/MWh Answer: A project that has three different turbine options would have to be submitted as three separate proposals. A bid fee of $5,000 is required for each proposal. Section 4.5 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP states a separate bid evaluation fee is required for projects on the same site with different COD, turbine, pricing, contract term or MW size. Question 6: I have read the RFP, including the text in section 3.1 stipulating the need for a MISO interconnection in order to qualify to bid. I represent a wind project in excess of 100 MW that is not currently interconnected to MISO. Would it be possible to consider a bid from our project, so long as we have a long term firm point-to-point transmission path from our point of interconnection to one of the MISO interconnection points? Our project, other than not being directly interconnected to MISO, is a very good fit for the RFP requirements. We are willing to consider both PPA as well as BOP pricing and our COD is in late The Project is qualified for the full 30% ITC/PTC. Answer: NSP will only consider RFP projects with a Point of Interconnection ( POI ) location within MISO in a state where NSP customers or generation resources are located including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Dakota or South Dakota ( Project Region ). The interconnection point with the MISO facility will be the Point of Delivery ( POD ). If the POI of the proposed project is not within the Project Region it will not meet the requirement described in Section 2.2 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP. Question 7: In order to prepare for submission of Bid Evaluation Fees, we will need a W- 9 from Xcel. Can you provide? Answer: The Company will provide the Federal Tax ID Number as part of the bid fee transmittal instructions. Section 4.5 of the 2016 NSP Wind RFP describes bid evaluation fees and states the Company will a response with wire transfer instructions in response to a Bidder sending an to the 2016 Wind RFP address, NSP2016WINDRFP@xcelenergy.com no earlier than 5 business days prior to the Proposal Due Date. NSP 2016 Wind Resources RFP 9