Site Visit Information
The site visit will take place on April 28, 2022 from 10 a.m. - 12 p.m. PDT. The site is located near TEP's Vail Substation. Attendees will need to drive an SUV/Truck and wear boots due to site conditions. As a reminder, those planning on attending should have their NDAs submitted by April 25, 2022. Additional information will be available after NDAs have been signed and at the site visit.
The RFP mentions that TEP will request 300 MW of capacity resources and 250 MW of clean energy resources. Which category(ies) would a solar + storage project would qualify under?
Solar + storage would check both categories, especially if the project(s) address(es) the peak demand needs for capacity. A standalone storage project will be considered a capacity resource while a standalone solar is considered clean energy.
Will TEP accept PPA contracts for projects located on TEP land or would BTA-only contracts be accepted for these projects?
TEP is not accepting PPA contracts for projects located on TEP land. A single site near Vail Substation is designated for BESS and to be TEP owned.
Is the Vail site for EPC bidders only? Is it also for Developers proposing a new solar and storage project?
The TEP-owned Vail site is designated for BESS only for EPC or build-own transfer. Other proposals, to include new solar and storage, must demonstrate site control by Respondents.
We would like to encourage TEP to consider submission to this RFP for geothermal power development. Could you please let us know about your thoughts on this matter?
Please see section 4.1 Renewable Energy Technologies. TEP and UNSE will accept proposals for geothermal power generation.
Will the procurement of the 200 MW/800 MWh battery be included as part of the EPC bids?
TEP/UNSE is looking for a fully wrapped EPC including the engineering design, procurement and construction of the entire facility. TEP/UNSE will also evaluate build-own transfer agreements at Respondent designated sites as well as the build-ready site.
Would the UNSE team consider delivery at the Vail substation to be a part of their transmission system?
The Vail substation is not part of the UNSE transmission system. However, in addition to delivery into the UNSE system, UNSE may consider deliveries from alternate TEP locations such as Vail.
Will linear generation be an eligible technology for participation in the open RFP?
This is an All-Source RFP. All energy resources are welcome to bid.
The Company has outlined an offer limit of 200 MW per project, unless single point of failure mitigation is employed. How does this limit treat hybrid resources? For instance, if respondent offers a paired 200 MW PV + 100 MW / 400 MWh BESS, will that be in violation of the outlined limit? Or, if the respondent wishes to offer a wind+PV+BESS offer of 200 MW + 100 MW + 100 MW / 400 MWh, would that be considered above the limit?
The 200 MW limitation is for energy resources located in the TEP local service area and is not required for remote energy resources.
Please advise what "imminent" site control implies? Is an option sufficient?
Yes, an option is sufficient and we would expect documentation that substantiates the option.
How will the binding nature of the bid be upheld without a security prior to contract execution?
While not contractually binding, we would expect for the bid to be honored as specified in the RFP. Changes to the bid after submission may result in re-evaluation or even disqualification.
Regarding Table 3-1, will the development and post-development securities for hybrid projects be summed (e.g., New Solar + New Energy Storage = $140/kWh) or reached by some other methodology? For PV + storage, the dispatch of power to the grid from solar production as opposed to the storage system discharging will be dependent on TEP’s use case, amongst other factors.
The storage component of the project would require $40/kWh of contract security while the new solar project would require $100/kW. To further clarify by example, a 100 MW/ 4 hour BESS would require $16 million in security. 100 MW of solar will require $10 million. The security amounts are half for post commercial operation.
For hybrid PV + storage projects, will separate generation profiles be required for each technology component?
TEP/UNSE is interested in resources that provide capacity or clean energy that best meet it's need as shown in Appendix A. A hybrid project that includes PV, a generation profile is required. Unless the storage is proposed with a static/known dispatch, a generation profile is not required. Presumably, TEP/UNSE would dispatch storage based on capacity and energy requirements.
Regarding the requirement to show that bidders have successfully achieved COD with project(s) at least 10% of the capacity we are proposing, do these example projects need to meet other requirements (e.g., operability in AZ, same technologies chosen as what is being proposed, recent COD, etc.)?
In general TEP/UNSE is interested in reviewing the successful completion of completed projects from respective bidders. The ability to demonstrate projects with like technology, scale and domestic operational success will weigh more favorably for bidders.
Regarding supply-side resource eligibility, can you please elaborate on the statement that projects over 200 MW will be considered "provided that the interconnection configuration for the proposed resource limits any single point of failure to 200 MW"? Is this simply stating that the 200 MW site must be a single project as opposed to several projects using the same interconnection facilities?
The 200 MW limitation is for energy resources located in the TEP local service area and is not required for remote energy resources.
Considering that TEP and UNSE exist under the same corporate umbrella, would wheeling fees from TEP to UNSE territory be necessary, or would delivery of power into TEP service territory be sufficient for UNSE’s purposes?
UNSE and TEP do not share the delivery points. However, in addition to delivery into the UNSE system, UNSE may consider deliveries from alternate TEP locations. Available transmission capacity and associated wheeling would be evaluated, as required.
What is TEP's targeted COD date for the Vail ESS Project?
TEP will consider projects at Vail and alternate locations with COD in either 2024 or 2025. TEP has a need beginning May 1, 2024. Proposals with this COD would be preferred.
Can TEP clarify the Site Control requirements? Would an Letter of Intent granting exclusive negotiations to a developer satisfy this requirement?
TEP expects bidder to demonstrate rights to the property sufficient to develop on the property it is proposing to site its project. A letter of intent does not satisfy TEP's requirement.
Can TEP take delivery in New Mexico at the Luna 115kV or Luna 345kV substations?
Luna 115/345 kV is not part of the TEP transmission system however, TEP will consider bids at this location subject to 3rd party available transmission.
Acknowledging section 5.3 of the TEP 2022 All-Source RFP - Rev 1 statement "While the Respondent may propose a form of such agreement, TEP reserves the right to negotiate such terms and conditions, and/or propose a form of a contract as the basis of negotiating applicable terms and conditions." Please confirm that the intent is to allow EPC self-build BESS Respondents to propose a form of contract should the Respondent be short-listed and proceed through negotiations.
TEP is willing to consider EPC self-build BESS respondents form of contract.
Can a project be offered to both TEP and UNSE simultaneously? Are the interconnections the same?
Yes, Respondents may offer the same project(s) to both TEP and UNSE. TEP and UNSE transmission systems do not overlap, transmission wheeling will be required.
If the technology is scalable like solar and storage and would be supported by a development partner, would we still need to pass the threshold of having at least 10% of the bid capacity already installed?
In general TEP/UNSE is interested in reviewing the successful completion of other completed projects from respective bidders (or their partners). The ability to demonstrate projects with like technology, scale and domestic operational success will weigh more favorably for bidders.
In Section 4.2 Energy Storage Technologies, Section 3a asks the project's equipment/design to meet all safety requirement as specified in the TEP term sheet. However, in the term sheet provided for Energy Storage Agreement, we do not see any safety requirements by TEP.
Energy storage safety requirements must adhere to industry standards. The term sheets do not include these requirements. An update will be made to the ASRFP in Revision 4.
Assuming TEP moves forward with the Vail 200 MW stand-alone BESS, does that mean TEP would only be looking for a maximum of 100 MW of additional BESS capacity or is TEP open to procuring more than the 300 MW total referenced in section 1.5 of the RFP?
TEP is targeting 300 MW but depending on bids may consider additional capacity to meet requirements.
The "Download Documents" tab does not appear to include Term Sheets for the full list of eligible supply-side resources (specified in 3.1 of the RFP) or Summer Capacity Resources per 1.5 of the RFP. Will this be made available or is the on the Respondent to draft a Term Sheet unilaterally?
Term sheets are provided for energy storage and renewable projects. TEP/UNSE will work with Respondents on term agreements for supply-side resources during the short-list negotiations.
Please confirm the location of the POI.
The point of interconnection (POI) for the build-ready site is Vail. All other proposed interconnection points must demonstrate transmission availability to reach the TEP/UNSE load centers.
What are all of the RFP documents required for submission for the EPC Bidders?
All appendices need to be submitted by the deadline outlined in the schedule on the homepage of the website. EPC bidders will also need to submit all EPC only documents.
Could TEP Provide feedback if they have any preference on the size of an overbuild before an augmentation is planned for capacity maintenance? For instance a 5 year overbuild vs a 2 year overbuild may require that more equipment is installed up front but would also potentially lower augmentation costs.
TEP does not have a preference.
Does TEP have a schedule for when the GSU would be delivered to site?
Preliminary delivery date is Q4 2023.
There are several tables included in the EPC Specification that appear to have fields for bidders to fill out. Is it requested that bidders fill out these tables?
Yes. EPC bidders will need to fill out the tables in the EPC specification document and submit with their proposal and data form on or before 7/1.
For EPC self-build BESS proposals, please confirm that the following requirements from Appendix G are not required: 1) Generator IA 2) Litigation related to PPAs or asset purchases 3) Description of zoning requirements 4) Description of tax credits 5) Description of site control 6) Description of any other contractual commitments of the project that would be bind to TEP upon acquisition.
Correct. The items listed will not be required for any parties bidding into the Vail TEP owned Build Ready Site.
Can the Owner provide power throughout the duration of construction from the substation?
Bidders should assume that they, the bidder, have to provide or procure power to the site. This assumption should be made clear in the bidder's proposal.
Will not having an interconnection application prior to bid reduce our ability to win the project?
Please see section 3.11 of the RFP that outlines the requirements for interconnection applications and states "For purposes of this ASRFP, Respondents will not be required to enter the interconnection queue process unless and until its Proposal is selected for Short List evaluation, which the Company expects to determine on or about September 15, 2022."
What contract term lengths will TEP consider for new gas resource proposals in response to this RFP?
Minimum of 1 year for thermal and maximum of 30 years.
What is the penetration of AMI meters for C&I customers in the territory? Is there a kW minimum customer size to have an AMI meter? If a potential participant does not have an AMI will TEP install, is there a charge associated with this? How will TEP’s AMI data be made available for M&V? Please explain the security costs with an example for a 10 MW demand side proposal? What is the baseline methodology to determine verification of load reduction? Would you be open to alternative dispatch parameters, such as higher number of events or shorter notification?
Currently we are 85% deployed with AMI. There is not a minimum limit to AMI deployed meters. Data for partnership can be made available, but not live, and a few days delay is typical. Security costs are dependent on partnerships requirements. Our current DR verification is based on internal reports comparing event days to historical non-event & like-days, this ends in a manual evaluation to determine compliance. Yes, we are open to hear how alternate parameters may best meet the requirements.
In Appendix E – in the “Hourly Shape” tab, are you requesting that bidders provide the hourly aux load profile or discharge capacity profile?
Please provide the net generation profile to include auxiliary loads.
For a solar + battery project, should we review and comment on both (UNSE and TEP) term sheets provided?
For a solar plus storage project, each term sheet should be reviewed separately.
Should Respondent Partner(s) sign the NDA in Appendix C separately from the Respondent's NDA? If separate, can Respondent submit their partner(s)'s NDA through the Respondent's RFP manager account (and clearly label each NDA document)?
Under Section 3.5, each project must remain available for the Appendix A envelope. Does this availability include the Demand Response or Ancillary programs, or could TEP/UNSE dispatch demand response or ancillary capacity and require immediate recharge?
TEP/UNSE have capacity need for 2024 and 2028 as illustrated in Appendix A. Capacity projects will be evaluated on the ability to meet this required need.
Under section 3.2.2 – Is TEP open to Build-Own-Transfer or Asset-Purchase agreements that allow respondent to provide software services to the systems? TEP retains full control over dispatching, however respondent handles scheduling and dispatching of the battery system, which would involve some fixed monthly/yearly operations and software payment.
TEP has no objection with respondents offering third party services as part of a Build-Own-Transfer or Asset-Purchase agreement.
Does the summer capacity product request of 300MW include the Vail energy storage facility, so the total summer capacity request is actually 100MW?
TEP will evaluate all capacity proposals including the Vail build-ready site on the basis of best value and least risk. If a project at the Vail build-ready site is selected, then this capacity would offset the 300 MW.
Does TEP have transmission rights on any of APS or SRP’s systems that you would make available to a project outside TEP’s Balancing Authority Area to serve TEP's load? If not, it appears any project outside of your Balancing Authority Area will be prohibitively expensive.
TEP and UNSE do not have any available transmission on third-party transmission systems that will be made available to project developers. Project developers are responsible for obtaining adequate transmission capacity to deliver both energy and capacity to the TEP and UNSE systems.
Given current market and supply chain volatility, will short-listed proposals have an opportunity to revise their best and final offer in negotiations?
TEP/UNSE are aware of current market and supply chain volatility, respondents should factor the market and supply chain volatility in their proposals. Changes to the bid after submission may result in re-evaluation or even disqualification.
The RFP calls for three hourly production profiles using Solar Anywhere data sets. Our analytics team does not use Solar Anywhere data sets and instead uses “Vaisala” for input data. Please confirm if this is an issue. Secondly, should the P50, P75, or P90 be used in the last tab of the bid form?
TEP/UNSE have requested Solar Anywhere data sets for the sake of bid consistency. Vaisala production profiles will be accepted. Please replicate (and label accordingly) the last tab and provide P50, P75 and P90 data sets as requested in Section 4.1-3b of the RFP.
For a hybrid solar + storage project, are the development and post-development security costs based on the sum of the solar and storage components (i.e. $40/kWh AND $100/kW development security), or the greater of the two (i.e. $40/kWh for a four-hour battery with power capacity matched 1:1 with the solar)?
Yes, by this example the security costs are the sum of Solar + Storage.
Can you provide an explanation of the security fees using a 10 MW example as requested? Our proposal would be for a demand response solution. If you need to make any assumptions please do so, but provide an explanation of these.
A line of credit or cash deposit as stated in Section 3.17 and 3.18 of the ASRFP is required. A 10 MW demand response solution would require a line of credit of $1,000,000 (10,000 kW x 100 $/kW) at contract execution and half that amount at COD.
In 3.18, can you clarify what you mean by "term of the longest transaction"? How long does the LOC need to stay in place?
By example, a hybrid solar + storage project may potentially have two different terms. If secured with a Letter of Credit, the portion of the project with the longest term must be secured 45 days past the term.
Is Tucson Electric Power going to request a pricing refresh from all respondents in light of the Inflation Reduction Act passing through the House last week?
Currently TEP is processing and reviewing bids for consideration. With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, TEP is aware this could impact proposals and plans to communicate the opportunity to refresh pricing during the shortlisting period.