CA Department of General Services Energy Efficiency (ESCO) Program Request for Qualifications (RFQ 07.01)
Ranked ESCO pool list New (6-29-2007)
The state of California has evaluated and ranked the 12 submissions received for the above referenced RFQ.
Ranked firms
1. Johnson Controls
2. Honeywell
3. Ameresco
4. DMJM Harris
5. ChevronTexaco
6. T.A.C.
7. Noresco
8. Siemens
9. APS Energy Services
10. Trane
Firms failing to meet mandatory criteria: Aircon Energy, Yamas.
The CA Department of General Services is currently finalizing contractual formats for this program.
In addition, initial energy efficiency projects are being identified by the state's retro-commissioning program.
Subsequently, three ESCOs, in ranked order, will be invited to submit responses to a project Request for Proposal, resulting in selection of a preferred ESCO to accomplish a Detailed Energy Survey, and subsequent project implementation, with the state's concurrence.
The state of California is seeking qualified energy services companies (ESCOs) to submit qualifications for performing energy services performance contracts.
A performance contract is an agreement made between the state and an ESCO, in which an ESCO guarantees energy savings that are expected to result from the implementation of an energy project.
Performance contracts are an essential component of a comprehensive state energy efficiency program, as described in the Governor's Green Building Initiative.
The state's primary energy efficiency investment goal is to capitalize on energy efficiency measure opportunities at each facility through equipment performance savings.
Q1 About: List of Project Implemented Over Past Five Years Under Performance Contract. Contractor includes more than 400 projects - impossible to list all within the 10 page limit-also an issue concerning confidentiality as contractor would be providing the state with our entire active PC customer list.
A1 The intent is that the contractor will list those projects (within the stated limits) that best represent examples that would be applicable to this program and the State of California. Refer to Exhibit F - "Confidential Material" (page 57) for confidentiality issues.
Q2 In Section 5.4.4 "Introduction" does "'Respondents must furnish verifiable evidence they meet the following requirements' mean - 'Respondents shall provide the required information as requested to demonstrate their firm has the technical management, and staff. . .' or is there more information being requested here?"
A2 The information being requested is as defined in sections 5.4.5 through 5.4.10. Section 5.4.4 is only intended as an introduction to the requirements that follow.
Q3 In Section 5.4.9 "Energy Projects Experience," page 14 through page 15 you mention Energy Efficiency and Conservation Projects Experience for projects for the past (5) years that totals a minimum of $50M. And then you ask for (3) references of projects implemented in California. Can these two items be the same clients?
A3 Yes.
Q4 "I have a question regarding the expectation for life-cycle cost analysis in section 5.4.8. For the first part of this section (projects performed in the last 5 years). Are you looking for the project debt coverage ratio number or do you want to see a full LCCA for each project?"
A4 The section you reference 5.4.8 - "Comprehensive Energy Projects Services" -does not reference LCCA. We are not requiring, for this RFQ, a copy of an LCCA from one of your projects. However, your firm should be aware that we will utilize the LCCA model (model on our website) to assess financial feasibility of the State's future energy efficiency projects.
Q5 Reference Section 4.2.2, page 12 of the RFQ: Can an "A - General Engineering" contractor's license be substituted for a "C" specialty license? By definition an "A" license allows a contractor to perform all B and C work except for asbestos and fire protection.
A5 Yes. The intent is that subcontractors have the appropriate "C" license, if required for the final scope of work for an energy efficiency project.
Q6 Reference Section 4.2.2, page 12 of the RFQ: If a firm has an A and B contractors license and utilizes subcontractors with "C" specialty license to perform all work requiring a "C" specialty license, will DGS consider the criteria met?
A6 Yes. See A5.
Q7 It is our understanding that we don't submit our DVBE info in this proposal; but it will be required as projects are assigned and finalized. Please confirm.
A7 Yes. Your understanding is correct.
Q8 The RFQ doesn't provide a specific project to bond against, or a specific minimum bonding amount, so it appears the ESCO is responsible to pick an arbitrary amount to have the bonding agent issue a bond letter against. Contractor has liberal bonding capacity (we initially picked $10M as a bond amount) so will the state specify a minimum bond requirement / project size to bond against in order that all ESCO's are evaluated for bonding capacity and capabilities from the same standard.
A8 The intent of this RFQ is to establish that a proposing firm has adequate bonding capacity to service the State in its energy efficiency program. You are correct, there is currently no project to "bond against." Please refer to section 5.4.7 - "bonding statement" for specifics. Since this is a mandatory requirement, it will not affect a firm's overall ranking.
Q9 In section "6.4.4 Reference Criteria" for the sample project; how will the DGS differentiate between excellent vs. satisfactory. Is this just in the judgment of the customer what constitutes an "excellent broad selection of energy technology and measures, or do they have more objective criteria.
A9 Excellent would indicate that the firm has demonstrated performance above and beyond industry standards; satisfactory would indicate that the firm has demonstrated performance up to industry standards.
Q10 We noticed that all of the scoring is stated as "scoring example." What is the actual scoring and criteria that will be used,
A10 Exactly as stated in the "scoring example."
Q11 If there is a tie between 3 and 4 how will the State decide to include 4 in the selection process for the first project?
A11 Theoretically, if there is a tie, both firms would be in the same rank-e.g., in your example, both firms would be ranked 3.
Q12 Since there is a ranking of the winning ESCO's with regard to who is awarded specific projects, how will DGS determine the higher ranking of two identical scores in the objective evaluation?
A12 If there are any ties, those firms would be classified in the same rank.
Q13 Will all of the questions and answers be distributed to all the bidders?
A13 Yes.
Q14 Will there be the possibility of oral interviews, to be used as the final "subjective" discriminator for the purposes of ranking the pool.
A14 No. Interviews will be conducted during the RFP process.
Q15 Which companies responded to the RFQ?
A15 Aircon Energy, Ameresco, APS Energy Services, Chevron, DMJM-Harris/AECOM, Honeywell, Johnson Controls, Noresco, Siemens, T.A.C., Trane, and, Yamas.
