1. Bidders Conference December 2015
Clean Energy RFP
Bidders Conference
December 2015

2. How We Got Here
Objective: Solicit offers of Clean Energy and Transmission to deliver Clean Energy pursuant to Clean Energy goals of Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island
Collaborative process involving utilities and state agencies
Coordinated by the New England States Committee on Electricity (NESCOE)
February 2015 draft RFP issued for comment
June 2015 filed proposed RFP with MA and RI Commissions, final approval received October 26
RFP issued November 12

3. Collaboration In Development
CT DEEP, Eversource, Unitil, National Grid, United Illuminating Company (“UI”), the Connecticut Procurement Manager, the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General, the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (“DOER”), Massachusetts DPU, Rhode Island Division of Public Utilities and Carriers and Rhode Island office of Energy Resources New England States Committee on Electricity (“NESCOE”), Independent Consultants, specific consultants separately to the Utilities, to NESCOE, and to the states

4. RFP Team Composition
Soliciting parties – Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (“CT DEEP”), Unitil, National Grid, NSTAR and WMECO (Collectively, “Massachusetts EDCs”), and National Grid in Rhode Island
Evaluation Team – CT DEEP, Massachusetts EDCs, National Grid for Rhode Island, Connecticut Light and Power (“CL&P”), United Illuminating Company (“UI”), the Connecticut Procurement Manager, the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General, the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (“DOER”), Independent Consultants
Selection Team – Will vary by state requirements, but in each case Selection Team members and others who signed the Utility Standard of Conduct are prohibited from communicating non-public information regarding the RFP with those developing bids
Massachusetts - the Massachusetts EDCs with DOER as an advisory participant
Connecticut - CT DEEP acting in consultation with the Connecticut Procurement Manager, the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, and the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General [The selection team may consult with the Evaluation Team]
Rhode Island - National Grid working with the Division of Public Utilities and Carriers and office of Energy Resources as advisory participants

5. Incremental Qualified Clean Energy
The goal is to increase the amount of Qualified Clean Energy delivered in or to New England
Construction of a new generating unit
An upgrade to an existing unit
An increase in the capacity factor of an existing unit
An increase in imports into New England
Qualified Clean Energy
Energy produced by a “Tier 1” facility under the Renewable Portfolio Standard (“RPS”) statutes of at least one of the procuring states
Energy from a resource otherwise qualifying as a “Tier 1” facility, except that it is located in a non-contiguous control area
Energy produced by Hydropower resources that meet the requirements of one of the states

6. Products Being Solicited
Section Qualified Clean Energy and/or RECs via a PPA
Example: a new wind farm proposing to sell Energy and RECs via a PPA
Example: a qualifying hydro facility bidding to sell firm Energy via a PPA
Section – Qualified Clean Energy and/or RECs via a PPA with a Transmission Project Under a FERC Tariff
Example: a new wind farm proposing to sell Energy and RECs via a PPA with a Transmission Project needed to get the Energy to market
Example: a qualifying hydro facility bidding to sell firm Energy via a PPA with a Transmission Project needed to get the Energy to market
Section – Qualified Clean Energy via a Transmission Project Under a Performance-Based Tariff Containing a Qualified Clean Energy Delivery Commitment; No PPA, [Delivery Commitment Model (DCM)]
Example: Transmission Project that will be willing to commit to delivery of Clean Energy into the ISO-NE energy market without signing a PPA with any of the soliciting parties under this RFP

7. Transmission Projects
Significant new AC or DC lines or facilities
Significant upgrades to existing lines or facilities, including network upgrades required by ISO-NE to accommodate such new or upgraded facilities.
Network Upgrades excludes local generator interconnection facilities.
Delivery Commitment Model (DCM), No PPA
A FERC-accepted rate schedule and/or,
A tariff and service agreement for a Transmission Project
A specified amount of Qualified Clean Energy must be delivered
Payments must be reduced for failure to meet the qualified Clean Energy delivery commitment

8. Potential Procurement Levels By State
Connecticut
2,750 GWh per year of Qualified Clean Energy under Section 1(c) of Public Act
1,375 GWh per year of Qualified Clean Energy under Section 7 of Public Act ; and
125 GWh of Class I Qualified Clean Energy Under Section 6 of Public Act
Massachusetts
817 GWh per year of Class I Qualified Clean Energy under Section 83(a) of the Green Communities Act, as amended
Additional Qualified Clean Energy of an undefined amount, so long as bids for such are in the form of the DCM, for contributing to achievement of the goals of the Massachusetts 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA)
Rhode Island
Qualified Clean Energy of an undefined amount, sought by Narragansett only in the form of the DCM, for contributing to the goals of Chapter 31 of Title 39 of the General Laws of Rhode Island, the Affordable Clean Energy Security Act (“Chapter 39-31”)
Amounts to be delivered under the DCM (which may qualify under one or more of the above statutes) are not capped  and are subject to bids received

9. Communication and Bid Submission
All communications with the Evaluation Team must be submitted electronically to
Section – Bidders must submit a public version and a confidential version of their bids
Sensitive material must be redacted from the public version by the bidder
The required public version will be posted to the Clean Energy website cleanenergyRFP.com
Evaluation team can accept no responsibility for sensitive material appearing in the public version – this is strictly the responsibility of the bidder
Copies of each version must be submitted by January 28, 2016 at Noon EPT to each of the entities identified in accordance with the instructions in the RFP Appendix I.
Bidders must submit the required non-refundable bid fee with each bid at the time of bid submission in accordance with the instructions in the RFP Appendix I.

10. Bid Fee Example
Bidders must submit the required non-refundable bid fee with each bid at the time of bid submission in accordance with the instructions in the RFP Appendix I
The fee for one pricing offer is calculated as follows:
Minimum bid fee $7,500 for a 20 MW Project
Bid fee increases by $375 for each additional MW of Project size
Maximum bid fee is $100,000
For each additional pricing offer only, for the same Project the additional bid fee is:
$10,000 for a Project of less than 100 MW and $25,000 for all others
If a Project wants to vary any other aspect of their bid a new bid fee is required.
Bid Fee Calculation
Example 1
50 MW
$7,500 + (30 MW * $375) = $18,750
200 MW
$7,500 + (180MW * $375) = $75,000
Example 2: 50 MW Project has a second pricing offer, 200 MW Project has a second delivery location
An additional bid fee of $10,000 is required for a total bid fee of 28,750 for both offers
An additional bid fee of $75,000 is required for a total bid fee of $150,000 for both offers

11. Bid Completion Section 2.2.14 –
Bids must be complete in every aspect to fully describe their Project and enable a thorough review
A redlined version of the applicable draft contract in a form that the bidder would be willing to sign must accompany each bid, alternatively the draft contract must be accepted as is
For Connecticut bids including storage or balancing energy will require some contract changes but the risk profile must be maintained
Both bid forms, Excel and Word form, must be filled out and every question answered in each of those bid forms

12. Bid Evaluation
Each Project will be subject to stage 1 evaluation for minimum threshold criteria (more fully described in Section 2.2 of the RFP), including but not limited to:
Eligible Bidder – owns the development rights to the Project
Eligible Project – satisfies state statutes, DCM to be considered
Site Control - generation Project must demonstrate unconditional site control by the time contracts are signed, Transmission Projects must have rights to a substantial portion of the property required
Minimum contract size, term lengths etc.
Any bid that does not meet stage 1 threshold requirements in section 2.2 of the RFP is subject to rejection
Bids that meet the minimum criteria will move on to stage 2 evaluation

13. Stage 2 Quantitative Evaluation [Criteria to be finalized before bids are due]
Projects that move to stage 2 evaluation will be subject to a quantitative and qualitative analysis
More fully described in Section 2.3
A screening process to compare the economic competitiveness of the each bid
If the consensus view of the Evaluation Team is that a bid is not economically competitive it will be removed from consideration
Bids will then be evaluated for their direct and indirect economic benefits for customers (this portion of the evaluation is worth a maximum of 75 points)
Indirect benefits will be measured using a nodal electric market simulation model comparing outputs with and without the bid
Direct benefits will be measured comparing the bid prices of the offered products with the projected market price
The metric to be used for rankings is a benefit to cost ratio based upon the combination of direct and indirect benefits
Bids deemed uneconomic will be eliminated from further consideration

14. Each state will perform this portion of the evaluation independently
Stage 2 – Qualitative Evaluation [Criteria to be finalized before bids are due]
The qualitative portion of the evaluation is worth up to 25 points out of a total score of 100 points
Each state will perform this portion of the evaluation independently
May include different criteria
Will weight some or all criteria differently
Will depend on specific state mandates and other factors

15. Stage 2 - Qualitative Evaluation (continued)
Each state will conform to its statutory obligation but criteria likely to include, (but not limited to):
Project Viability
Team financing experience, likelihood of subsidies, viability of Transmission plans
Project Feasibility
Bidder experience in developing similar Projects, status of permits, conformance to FERC and state regulatory requirements
Development Status
Progress in interconnection, ability to meet proposed schedule
Price Firmness
Extent to which the offered price is firm, contains cost containment provisions for cost of service transmission projects, or proposes purely cost of service pricing
Selection Team is unlikely to select a project without significant cost containment features
At the conclusion states will come together to see if a mutually acceptable portfolio of Projects to reduce costs and meet state Clean Energy goals can be created
Note that it cannot be guaranteed that any projects will be selected, and that the RFP does not create any legal obligation running from the Evaluation or Selection Teams or their members to the bidders

16. Contracting
Bidders will be notified whether they have been selected to negotiate a PPA or other agreement with one or more of the EDCs
Selected Bidders will enter into separate contracts with one or more EDCs if the negotiations are successful
Bidders are responsible for satisfying all state and FERC requirements, and making all necessary filings and submissions to obtain all approvals for their projects
Each bidder will be responsible for posting 50 percent of their development period security with the EDCs at contract execution

17. Schedule Release RFP to bidders Bidder conference
11/12/15
Bidder conference
12/03/15
Deadline for submitting written questions
12/29/15
Official responses to Q&A posted on the website
01/14/16
Due date for submission of proposals
01/28/16
Selection of winning bidders for contract negotiation
04/26/16 to
07/26/16
Execute contracts
06/23/16
09/22/16
Submit contracts for regulatory approval
10/25/16
Regulatory approval expected
2016

18. Today’s Q&A Protocol
All answers provided at this forum are for information only
Official answers will be provided in writing to questions submitted to
The Moderator will guide the question and answer phase today
When called on please announce your name and entity you represent
Panelists will attempt to answer questions but may call on other members of the team to assist