Addendum 1 22-099-G Power Transformers.pdf

May 12, 2022

ADDENDUM # 1

Title: Station Class Power Transformers

RFP # 22-099-G

This addendum adds additional information to the original ITB document.

PLEASE NOTE:

EWEB realizes that the lead time for the transformers has increased of late. The language in section 2.2 of the RFP states that EWEB plans on ordering the transformers within 5 years of the contract. EWEB expects some of the transformers to be delivered within 5 years, but not necessarily all.

QUESTION & ANSWER:

Question: Would EWEB approve the use of other brands of arresters, in lieu of Cooper/Eaton arresters?

Response: We would consider it yes, but Proposer should submit documentation verifying that the parts they are proposing have equivalent electrical properties and similar physical properties or it could downgrade Proposer’s score.

CHANGES TO RFP DOCUMENT:

Material changes are made to the RFP document and process as shown in the red-lined sections of Exhibit #1 to this Addendum.

Please review carefully. A clean version is attached as Exhibit #2. Please be sure to use these revised sections instead of the originals issued.

Some of the key changes include:

Section 4 – Evaluation Criteria has a new criterion included as Item D (Delivery Capabilities) and most of the criteria has been assigned different scoring points.

Section 5 – Evaluation Process & Contractor Selection has been revised to show an overview of the new point schedule and the numbering has been corrected to reflect Section 5.

The Proposal Form was incorrectly identified as Section 7 and has been corrected to

Section 6.

CLOSING DATE AND TIME

The closing date for this RFP has been extended to June 6, 2022 (previously May 31, 2022).

This addendum constitutes a MATERIAL CHANGE to the Request for Proposals.

Addendum prepared by:

Sandra Hahn Purchasing Analyst

EXHIBIT #1- Red lined Changes

RFP 22-099-G Station Class Power Transformers

4. EVALUATION CRITERIA

Instructions - Include in your proposal package a response to the following questions, listing the question first and the response directly beneath. Failure to respond to one or more questions could lower total score or cause the response to be deemed Non-Responsive and rejected.

4.1 SCORED CRITERIA

The Total Number of Points Possible for Written Proposals is 150 100.

A. Compliance with EWEB Specifications (65 50 Points Possible)

1. Provide information requested in the referenced specifications: Pages 38-42.

2. Provide the following information:

i. Preliminary layout drawings [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.27]

ii. Short circuit compliance report [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.28]

iii. Complete listing of short circuit tested transformers [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.28]

iv. Supporting evidence to support guaranteed sound levels below NEMA standards

[Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.2]

v. Written list of exceptions taken to specification and/or bid documents with stated issues taken and proposed exceptions [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.3]

vi. Documentation explaining the manufacturer’s manufacturing process, Quality Assurance measures/checkpoints, testing process, and other elements relative to the manufacture of the units as related to this specification [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.4]

vii. In uncommon cases, EWEB may require transformers that are similar to the transformers in the specification, but of larger size or smaller primary voltage. Discuss the manufacturer’s ability to provide 115kV / 12.47 kV transformers up to 50MVA meeting the desired specs and 69 kV / 12.47 kV transformers up to 33MVA

B. Maintenance (10 points Possible)

1. Explain the maintenance required on the transformer. Include a list of suggested maintenance, as well as their intervals.

2. Please list all service locations within the United States. Provide the contact information and address of these service locations.

C. Client References and Past Performance (15 20 Points Possible)

Client references provided by Contractor in the Minimum Qualifications section will be used to evaluate bidder past performance. Client’s opinions regarding the offeror's past performance on related contracts will be evaluated to determine, as appropriate, successful performance of contract requirements, quality and timeliness of delivery of goods, cost management, level of communication between the contracting parties, proactive management and customer satisfaction.

Bidder is welcome to provide any additional information regarding performance under the cited contracts.

D. Delivery Capabilities (20 Points Possible)

1. Initial order of 5 transformers:

Delivery: _________ weeks after receipt of order

Warranty (Must be a minimum of 5 years): _________

Manufacturer: ________________________________

2. Provide a detailed discussion of your company’s approach and methods of obtaining on-time delivery, from the manufacturing site to EWEB delivery site, including any ground transport information. Provide any statistics of on-time delivery available for the last 3 years. Discuss your company’s strategy to successfully navigate the rapidly changing supply chain environment.

D. E. Pricing Proposals (40 20 Points Possible)

Provide the unit price for transformers and spare parts as requested in the Bid Schedule below. All unit prices shall include all costs of handling, testing, and freight/delivery to Eugene, Oregon.

Estimates Not Binding - While EWEB estimates usage of 8 to 13 units, EWEB makes no guarantee of the actual number of goods that will be purchased. (That number may be more or less than those indicated).

The Bidder shall not rely upon those numbers as a guarantee of the purchases from the resulting Contract.

BID SCHEDULE

Item Description Estimated

Quantities Unit Price Extended Cost

1 12/16/20MVA

115 kV-12.47 kV Power Transformer 5 each

2 20/27/33MVA

115 kV-12.47 kV Power Transformer 8 each

E. Additional Information – The following information is required but not scored

1. Spare Parts (Not scored) EWEB may purchase spare parts on an as-needed basis. Provide description and pricing for such items as part of your pricing proposal:

Item Description Price per unit

Pricing information shall be included for any manufacturer recommended spare parts or EWEB requested spare parts. The cost of these spare parts will not be included in the total lifecycle cost equation used to evaluate proposals.

2. Country of Origin for Major Components (Not Scored) Provide the following information for all major components or pieces of the Transformers proposed:

Major components or pieces

Country of Origin Manufacturer Number of Units of each asset

Other Comments

3. Delivery Information

DELIVERY: _________ weeks after receipt of order

WARRANTY: _________ (Must be a minimum of 5 years)

MFG: _________________

E. F. Evaluation of Pricing

The Total Lifecycle Cost (TLC) of the transformer will be used in an equation to evaluate pricing.

Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the attached Material Specifications details what parameters are used for these calculations.

The sum of each transformer’s total lifecycle cost (TLC) will be used in an equation to evaluate pricing.

Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the attached Material Specifications details what parameters are used for these calculations.

The following loss values will be used for calculating transformer loss costs:

No Load Losses = $5,785/kW

Load Losses = $4,596/kW

TLC for each Transformer = Bid Cost + No Load Loss Cost + Load Loss Cost – Sound Level Credit at Base Rating – Sound Level Credit at Max Rating

Total points will be determined according to the following formula:

A = Total Possible points = 40 20 L = Lowest cost proposed (sum of TLC for first five Transformers) X = Cost being scored (sum of TLC for first five Transformers) B = Awarded Score

Formula: "L" divided by "X" times "A" = "B"

Example: If A = 40 20 Points, L = $50,000; X = $75,000; then: $50,000 / $75,000 x 40 20 = 26.67 13.33 points

5. EVALUATION PROCESS & CONTRACTOR SELECTION

EWEB will use a Multi-Tier evaluation process. In Tier One, ranked scores are determined by evaluating their qualifications and proposed pricing to fulfill the Work. If an apparent awardee is not yet determined, however, EWEB reserves the right to utilize Tier Two and visit the factory of any of the three (3) highest ranked Proposers per the information below.

Points are assigned as follows:

Criteria Total Possible Points

Tier One

Minimum Qualifications Pass/No Pass only Compliance with EWEB’s Specifications 50 65 Maintenance 10 Client References / Past Performance 2015 Delivery 20 Pricing 2040

Tier Two (Optional to EWEB)

Factory Tour Points are finalized

TOTAL POSSIBLE SCORE 100150

65.1 Review and Acknowledgment of Defective Proposals

Due to limited resources, EWEB generally will not completely review or analyze proposals that on their faces fail to comply with the minimum mandatory requirements of the solicitation documents nor will EWEB generally investigate the references or qualifications of such proposals. Therefore, EWEB will not acknowledge whether or not an unsuccessful proposal was complete, responsive, responsible, sufficient, or lawful in any respect. This is a public solicitation, the processes and procedures which are established and required by Oregon law and EWEB adopted rules. Proposers are advised to strictly follow the process, procedures, and requirements as set forth in the RFP documents and not anticipate or rely on any opportunity to negotiate, beyond such limitations that are identified herein.

65.2 Right of Rejection

Proposers must comply with all of the terms of the RFP, EWEB Rules, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, administrative rules, and regulations. The Purchasing Contact may reject any proposal that does not comply with all of the material and substantial terms, conditions, and performance requirements of the RFP.

Proposers may not make stipulations or restrict the rights of EWEB. If an Proposer does so, the Purchasing Contact may determine the proposal to be a non-responsive counter-offer and the proposal may be rejected.

The Purchasing Contact may waive minor informalities that:

• do not affect responsiveness,

• are merely a matter of form or format,

• do not change the relative standing or otherwise prejudice other offers,

• do not change the meaning or scope of the RFQ/RFP,

• are trivial, negligible, or immaterial in nature,

• do not reflect a material change in the work, or,

• do not constitute a substantial reservation against a requirement or provision, EWEB reserves the right to refrain from making an award if it determines that to be in its best interest.

A proposal from a debarred or suspended Proposer shall be rejected.

65.3 References

EWEB reserves the right to investigate any and all references and the past performance information provided in the proposal with respect to Respondent's successful performance of similar projects, compliance with specifications and contractual obligations, completion or delivery of a project on schedule, and lawful payment of employees and workers.

EWEB reserves the right to check any and all sources for information and to include sources other than the references provided in the Proposer's proposal. EWEB may consider information available from any such source including government bodies and regulatory authorities in evaluating respondents, including past experience EWEB has had with the proposer.

65.4 Responsibility

EWEB reserves the right to investigate and evaluate, at any time prior to award and execution of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer’s responsibility for performing the Contract, as defined in Rule 3-0500. Submission of a signed proposal shall constitute approval for EWEB to obtain any information EWEB deems necessary to conduct the evaluation. EWEB reserves the right to request additional information or documentation from the successful Proposer prior to award of a contract. Such information may include, but is not limited to, current and recent balance sheets, income statements, cash flow statements, or a performance bond from an acceptable surety. Failure to provide this information will result in the rescission of EWEB's Intent to Award.

EWEB may postpone the award of the Contract after announcement of the apparent successful Proposer in order to complete its investigation and evaluation. Failure of the apparent successful Proposer to demonstrate responsibility shall render the Proposer non-responsible and shall constitute grounds for rejection of the proposal.

65.5 Clarification of Response

EWEB reserves the right to request clarification of any item in any proposal, or to request additional information necessary to properly evaluate a particular proposal. All requests for clarification and responses shall be in writing.

During the evaluation of Proposals, Proposers must respond to any request for clarification from the Evaluation Committee within 24 hours of request (Monday through Friday). Inability of the Evaluation Committee to reach a Proposer for clarification and/or failure of a Proposer to respond within the time stated may result in rejection of that Proposer’s Proposal.

65.6 Evaluation Process

Written Proposals will be evaluated based on qualifications and proposed pricing. EWEB reserves the right to conduct meetings or calls to clarify and further refine scores. Proposals will then be ranked from highest score to lowest.

Pursuant to Rule 3-0230(14)(d), EWEB may employ methods of Contractor selection that include without limitation:

(A) An award or awards based solely on the ranking of proposals;

(B) Discussions leading to best and final offers, in which EWEB may not disclose private discussions leading to best and final offers;

(C) Discussions leading to best and final offers, in which EWEB may not disclose information derived from proposals submitted by competing proposers;

(D) Serial negotiations, beginning with the highest ranked proposer;

(E) Multiple-tiered competition designed to identify, at each level, a class of proposers that fall within a competitive range or to otherwise eliminate from consideration a class of lower ranked proposers;

(G) A multi-step Request for Proposals that require additional information designated in Rule 3-0232;

or

(H) Any combination of methods described in this Section.

After ranking the proposals, EWEB may consider the scores final, determine an apparent awardee, and issue an Intent to Award. Alternatively, EWEB may decide to use a two-tier process at this point. In Tier Two, EWEB will consider the scores as preliminary scores and determine a shortlist of the three (3) highest ranked proposers (Competitive Range).

65.7 Factory Tours (Optional to EWEB)

In Tier Two, EWEB may opt to visit the factory of the one, two, or all three of the shortlisted proposers and finalize their scores thereafter. Factory visits will be of the most interest to EWEB if EWEB has never conducted business with a shortlisted Proposer but may be for other reasons in EWEB’s best interest.

EWEB reserves the right to forego factory tours with any of the three highest ranked Proposers if in EWEB’s best interest to do so. Scores are then finalized and ranked and an Intent to Award to the highest ranked Proposer will be announced.

65.8 Contractor Selection

If a Contract is awarded, EWEB shall award the Contract to the responsible Proposer whose proposal EWEB determines in writing to be the most advantageous to EWEB based on:

a) The evaluation process and evaluation factors described in this Request for Proposals;

b) Any applicable preferences allowed by EWEB Rules, Division 2; and when applicable,

c) The outcome of any negotiations authorized by this Request for Proposals

If this Request for Proposal specifies or authorizes the award of multiple public contracts, EWEB shall award public contracts to the responsible Proposers who qualify for the award of a Contract under the terms of this Request for Proposals.

The firm with the highest total score as a result of written proposal, pricing, and a potential factory visit will be awarded the Contract.

65.9 Notice of Intent to Award

After the completion of the evaluation and ranking, the Purchasing Contact will issue a written notice of

Intent to Award and send copies to all Proposers. The notice will set out the names and ranks of all Proposers and identify the Contractor selected for award.

65.10 Contract Negotiation

EWEB will begin negotiating a Contract with the highest ranked Proposer and will direct negotiations toward obtaining written agreement on:

a) The statement of work;

b) The Contract price as it is affected by negotiating the Statement of Work; and

c) Any other terms and conditions reasonable related to those expressly authorized for negotiation in

Sections 1.3 and 1.4 of the Request for Proposal.

A sample contract (Exhibit 1) is attached for Proposer reference.

At any time during discussions or negotiations, EWEB may terminate such discussions or negotiations with the highest-ranked Proposer if it reasonably believes that:

a) The Proposer is not discussing or negotiating in good faith; or

b) Further discussions or negotiations with the Proposer will not result in the parties agreeing to the terms and conditions of a final Contract in a timely manner.

If EWEB terminates negotiations, EWEB may then commence negotiations with the next highest ranked Proposer and continue the process until EWEB has determined to award the Contract to the Proposer with whom it is currently discussing or negotiating. If negotiations with any Proposer do not result in a Contract within a reasonable amount of time, as determined solely by EWEB, EWEB may reject all proposals and cancel the RFP. Nothing in the rule precludes EWEB from proceeding with a new formal solicitation for the same Work described in the RFP that failed to result in a Contract.

65.1311 Protests and Judicial Review of competitive Bidding and Proposals Pursuant to Rule 3-0740, a bidder or proposer may protest the award of a public contract or a notice of intent to award a public contract, whichever occurs first, if the bidder or proposer is adversely affected because the bidder or proposer would be eligible to be awarded the public contract in the event that the protest were successful; and the reason for the protest is that all higher ranked proposals are nonresponsive; EWEB has failed to conduct the evaluation of proposals in accordance with the criteria or processes described in the solicitation materials; EWEB has abused its discretion in rejecting the protestor's proposal or proposal as nonresponsive; or EWEB's evaluation of proposals or EWEB's subsequent determination of award is otherwise in violation of EWEB Rules. The protest process may not be used to protest non-inclusion in the Competitive Range.

Eligible proposers protesting award shall follow the procedures described herein. Protests that do not follow these procedures will not be considered. This protest procedure constitutes the sole administrative remedy available to proposers.

a) Protests must be received within seven (7) days after issuance of the notice of intent to award the

Contract. EWEB will not consider late protests.

b) All protests must be in writing, signed by the protesting party or an authorized Agent and submitted to the EWEB Purchasing Contact listed on page 1. The protest must state all facts and arguments on which the protesting party is basing the protest.

c) Only protests stipulating an issue of fact concerning a matter of bias, discrimination or conflict of interest, non-compliance with procedures described in the procurement documents, or EWEB policy shall be considered. Protests based on procedural matters will not be considered.

d) EWEB’s Purchasing Supervisor will review the protest and will email or mail the protesting party a written response within three (3) business days of receipt of the written protest to the email or postal address provided in Proposer’s proposal. Any written response may be comprised of a determination of the protest, a notice to the protesting party of the need for additional time in which to evaluate the matter, or other notice to the protesting party.

e) If the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response) is adverse to the protester, any further appeal of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response) by the party must be submitted in writing to EWEB’s General Manager within three (3) business days of issuance of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response).

f) EWEB’s General Manager will review any appeal of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination and shall email or mail, the protesting party a written response within three (3) business days of receipt of written appeal to the email/postal address provided in Proposer’s RFP response,

g) If the determination of the General Manager is adverse to the protesting party’s interest, the protesting party may only appeal to EWEB’s Board of Commissioners by filing a written notice of appeal to the Board with the General Manager within two (2) business days of issuance of the General Manager’s written determination.

h) The Contract Review Board, in considering the protest, shall review the documentation presented to the Purchasing Supervisor and the General Manager on or before the next regularly scheduled Board Meeting, but in no event shall they be required to review in less than ten (10) business days, and thereafter, base their decision on such material. The Board review will be limited to the evaluation of compliance with EWEB’s policies and procedures, requirements of the RFP and the equal and fair application of EWEB’s contracting rules. The Contract Review Board's determination shall be EWEB's final decision.

An adversely affected or aggrieved Proposer must exhaust all avenues of administrative review procedures and relief before seeking judicial review of EWEB's Contractor selection or Contract award decision.

76. PROPOSAL FORM

Proposals should be prepared and organized in a clear and concise manner and must include all information required by this RFP. Headers, Titles or Tabs should be used to identify required information. Responses to the Evaluation Criteria found in Section 6 shall be organized in the order listed in Section 5, preferably by re-stating the Criteria, then responding below.

A. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR RESPONSE:

(Place a check in front of the item indicating inclusion in your response)

COVER SHEET, with introduction of firm and the following:

o Contractual Acceptance: Statement accepting ALL terms and conditions contained in this solicitation. Statement may include request for negotiation of proposed terms and conditions as allowed per Section 1.8(B).

o Termination for Default: Proposers shall indicate if they have had a contract terminated for default in the last five years. Termination for default is defined as notice to stop performance that was delivered to the Proposer due to the Proposer’s non-performance or poor performance and the issue of performance was either (a) not litigated due to inaction on the part of the Proposer, or (b) litigated and determined that the Proposer was in default.

NOTE: If a Proposer has had a contract terminated for default in this period, then the Proposer shall submit full details including the other party’s name, address and phone number. EWEB will evaluate the facts and may, at its sole discretion, reject the proposal on the grounds of proposer’s past performance.

PROPOSAL FORM – Section 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ADDENDA (see Section B below) RESPONSE TO MINIMUM QUALFICAITIONS per Section 3 RESPONSE TO ALL EVALUATION CRITERIA listed in Section 4

ATTACHMENT B – BIDDER RESIDENCY INFORMATION

ATTACHMENT C – SUSTAINABILITY QUESTIONNAIRE

FLASH DRIVE COPY – Combine all documents in one pdf file

B. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDA TO RFP DOCUMENTS:

Proposer acknowledges receipt of Addenda posted and agrees to be bound by their contents.

Circle each RFP Addendum receivedposted: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Check if not applicable or no Addenda postedwere received: ____

C. MWESB STATUS

EWEB encourages contracting with minority owned, woman owned, and emerging small businesses (MWESB).

The State of Oregon offers a certification process. Indicate below if your business is a MWESB and if so, which categories have been state certified.

MWESB Certified? Yes _____ No _____. If yes, indicate which categories below:

Minority Owned _____ Woman Owned _____ Emerging Small Business _____ Veteran Owned _____

D. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS

The undersigned acknowledges that:

1. Contractor certifies its status as an independent contractor in satisfaction of Oregon law, including ORS 670.600, and shall perform all required Work as an independent contractor. EWEB holds the right (i) to determine the delivery schedule for the Work to be performed and (ii) to evaluate the quality of the completed performance, but EWEB cannot and will not control the means or manner of Contractor’s performance. Contractor is responsible for determining the appropriate means and manner of performing the Work.

2. The parties covenant that Contractor, its Subcontractors, Agents, Officers and Representatives do not qualify as officers, employees, or agents of EWEB as those terms are used in ORS 30.265 nor shall they seek such qualification relating to performance of the Work.

3. Contractor agrees it is responsible for all federal and state taxes or other payments or withholdings applicable to compensation or payments paid to Consultant under this Contract and shall hold EWEB harmless from such financial exposures.

CONTRACT SIGNATURE / EXECUTION

E. ASSURANCES:

The undersigned attests that they:

Have read and understand all instructions, requirements, Addenda, site conditions, and terms and conditions contained herein (including the attachments and exhibits listed in this solicitation).

Have the authority and/or responsibility to submit a proposal and to bind their organization in all phases of this RFP process.

Confirm the information provided is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge.

Understand that any false statement may disqualify this offer from further consideration or may be cause for Contract termination.

Have not and will not discriminate against a subcontractor in the awarding of a subcontract because the subcontractor is a disadvantaged minority, women or emerging small business enterprise certified under ORS 200.055.

Represent and warrant to EWEB that they have the power and authority to enter into and perform work under an awarded Contract and that the Contract, when executed by EWEB and Contractor, the Contract shall be a valid and binding obligation of Contractor, enforceable in accordance with its terms.

Arrived at the specifics of the proposal, including price and amounts, independently and without communication or agreement with another Proposer, except as disclosed in a separately attached statement;

Have not directly or indirectly induced or solicited another Proposer, in order to benefit a third person, to submit a false or sham proposal, to refrain from proposing, or to change a proposal;

Have not directly or indirectly disclosed the Proposer's proposal price, a breakdown of the price, the contents of the price or information or data related to the price to another Proposer;

Have not sought through communication or agreement with a person to fix the proposal price of the Proposer or another Proposer, to fix an overhead, profit or cost element of the proposal price of the Proposer or another Proposer or to secure any advantage against the contracting agency or any other person interested in the public contract;

Have not directly or indirectly expressed an interest or lack of interest in the public contract, or paid or offered to pay a fee to a person, to cause a collusive or sham proposal;

Contractor, by signing this Proposal Form, represents and warrants that, if awarded, Contractor’s performance under this contract will create no potential or actual conflict of interest, including but not limited to conflicts of interest as defined in ORS 244.020. Contractor further warrants that no state or federal law or EWEB rule will prevent Contractor's lawful performance of an awarded contract. If Contractor is currently performing work for EWEB or another governmental entity, Contractor’s participation in other public contracts will not create a potential or actual conflict of interest in performance of this Contract, if awarded.

PROPOSER INFORMATION:

Proposer Company Name

Company Address (from which work will be performed)

Telephone Number Fax Number FEDERAL ID NUMBER

Person Signing RFP_______________________________________Title_______________________________ Please print or type Name

Signature: _________________________________________________________________________________

Email Address: _____________________________________________________________________________________

RFP CONTACT (if different than above)

RFP Representative_______________________________________Title_______________________________

Email Address: _____________________________________________________________________________

Phone: ____________________________________________________________________________________

4. EVALUATION CRITERIA

Instructions - Include in your proposal package a response to the following questions, listing the question first and the response directly beneath. Failure to respond to one or more questions could lower total score or cause the response to be deemed Non-Responsive and rejected.

4.1 SCORED CRITERIA

The Total Number of Points Possible for Written Proposals is 150.

A. Compliance with EWEB Specifications (65 Points Possible)

1. Provide information requested in the referenced specifications: Pages 38-42.

2. Provide the following information:

i. Preliminary layout drawings [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.27]

ii. Short circuit compliance report [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.28]

iii. Complete listing of short circuit tested transformers [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 3.28]

iv. Supporting evidence to support guaranteed sound levels below NEMA standards

[Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.2]

v. Written list of exceptions taken to specification and/or bid documents with stated issues taken and proposed exceptions [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.3]

vi. Documentation explaining the manufacturer’s manufacturing process, Quality Assurance measures/checkpoints, testing process, and other elements relative to the manufacture of the units as related to this specification [Specification ES3-9.130 REV 15, Section 5.4]

vii. In uncommon cases, EWEB may require transformers that are similar to the transformers in the specification, but of larger size or smaller primary voltage. Discuss the manufacturer’s ability to provide 115kV / 12.47 kV transformers up to 50MVA meeting the desired specs and 69 kV / 12.47 kV transformers up to 33MVA

B. Maintenance (10 points Possible)

1. Explain the maintenance required on the transformer. Include a list of suggested maintenance, as well as their intervals.

2. Please list all service locations within the United States. Provide the contact information and address of these service locations.

C. Client References and Past Performance (15 Points Possible)

Client references provided by Contractor in the Minimum Qualifications section will be used to evaluate bidder past performance. Client’s opinions regarding the offeror's past performance on related contracts will be evaluated to determine, as appropriate, successful performance of contract requirements, quality and timeliness of delivery of goods, cost management, level of communication between the contracting parties, proactive management and customer satisfaction.

Bidder is welcome to provide any additional information regarding performance under the cited contracts.

D. Delivery Capabilities (20 Points Possible)

1. Initial order of 5 transformers:

Delivery: _________ weeks after receipt of order

Warranty (Must be a minimum of 5 years): _________

Manufacturer: ________________________________

2. Provide a detailed discussion of your company’s approach and methods of obtaining on-time delivery, from the manufacturing site to EWEB delivery site, including any ground transport information. Provide any statistics of on-time delivery available for the last 3 years. Discuss your company’s strategy to successfully navigate the rapidly changing supply chain environment.

E. Pricing Proposals (40 Points Possible) Provide the unit price for transformers and spare parts as requested in the Bid Schedule below. All unit prices shall include all costs of handling, testing, and freight/delivery to Eugene, Oregon.

Estimates Not Binding - While EWEB estimates usage of 8 to 13 units, EWEB makes no guarantee of the actual number of goods that will be purchased. (That number may be more or less than those indicated).

The Bidder shall not rely upon those numbers as a guarantee of the purchases from the resulting Contract.

BID SCHEDULE

Item Description Estimated

Quantities Unit Price Extended Cost

1 12/16/20MVA

115 kV-12.47 kV Power Transformer 5 each

2 20/27/33MVA

115 kV-12.47 kV Power Transformer 8 each

Additional Information – The following information is required but not scored

1. Spare Parts (Not scored) EWEB may purchase spare parts on an as-needed basis. Provide description and pricing for such items as part of your pricing proposal:

Item Description Price per unit

Pricing information shall be included for any manufacturer recommended spare parts or EWEB requested spare parts. The cost of these spare parts will not be included in the total lifecycle cost equation used to evaluate proposals.

2. Country of Origin for Major Components (Not Scored) Provide the following information for all major components or pieces of the Transformers proposed:

Major components or pieces

Country of Origin Manufacturer Number of Units of each asset

Other Comments

F. Evaluation of Pricing

The Total Lifecycle Cost (TLC) of the transformer will be used in an equation to evaluate pricing.

Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the attached Material Specifications details what parameters are used for these calculations.

The sum of each transformer’s total lifecycle cost (TLC) will be used in an equation to evaluate pricing.

Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the attached Material Specifications details what parameters are used for these calculations.

The following loss values will be used for calculating transformer loss costs:

No Load Losses = $5,785/kW

Load Losses = $4,596/kW

TLC for each Transformer = Bid Cost + No Load Loss Cost + Load Loss Cost – Sound Level Credit at Base Rating – Sound Level Credit at Max Rating

Total points will be determined according to the following formula:

A = Total Possible points = 40 L = Lowest cost proposed (sum of TLC for first five Transformers) X = Cost being scored (sum of TLC for first five Transformers) B = Awarded Score

Formula: "L" divided by "X" times "A" = "B"

Example: If A = 40 Points, L = $50,000; X = $75,000; then: $50,000 / $75,000 x 40 = 26.67 points

5. EVALUATION PROCESS & CONTRACTOR SELECTION

EWEB will use a Multi-Tier evaluation process. In Tier One, ranked scores are determined by evaluating their qualifications and proposed pricing to fulfill the Work. If an apparent awardee is not yet determined, however, EWEB reserves the right to utilize Tier Two and visit the factory of any of the three (3) highest ranked Proposers per the information below.

Points are assigned as follows:

Criteria Total Possible Points

Tier One

Minimum Qualifications Pass/No Pass only Compliance with EWEB’s Specifications 65 Maintenance 10 Client References / Past Performance 15 Delivery 20 Pricing 40

Tier Two (Optional to EWEB)

Factory Tour Points are finalized

TOTAL POSSIBLE SCORE 150

5.1 Review and Acknowledgment of Defective Proposals

Due to limited resources, EWEB generally will not completely review or analyze proposals that on their faces fail to comply with the minimum mandatory requirements of the solicitation documents nor will EWEB generally investigate the references or qualifications of such proposals. Therefore, EWEB will not acknowledge whether or not an unsuccessful proposal was complete, responsive, responsible, sufficient, or lawful in any respect. This is a public solicitation, the processes and procedures which are established and required by Oregon law and EWEB adopted rules. Proposers are advised to strictly follow the process, procedures, and requirements as set forth in the RFP documents and not anticipate or rely on any opportunity to negotiate, beyond such limitations that are identified herein.

5.2 Right of Rejection

Proposers must comply with all of the terms of the RFP, EWEB Rules, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, administrative rules, and regulations. The Purchasing Contact may reject any proposal that does not comply with all of the material and substantial terms, conditions, and performance requirements of the RFP.

Proposers may not make stipulations or restrict the rights of EWEB. If an Proposer does so, the Purchasing Contact may determine the proposal to be a non-responsive counter-offer and the proposal may be rejected.

The Purchasing Contact may waive minor informalities that:

• do not affect responsiveness,

• are merely a matter of form or format,

• do not change the relative standing or otherwise prejudice other offers,

• do not change the meaning or scope of the RFQ/RFP,

• are trivial, negligible, or immaterial in nature,

• do not reflect a material change in the work, or,

• do not constitute a substantial reservation against a requirement or provision, EWEB reserves the right to refrain from making an award if it determines that to be in its best interest.

A proposal from a debarred or suspended Proposer shall be rejected.

5.3 References

EWEB reserves the right to investigate any and all references and the past performance information provided in the proposal with respect to Respondent's successful performance of similar projects, compliance with specifications and contractual obligations, completion or delivery of a project on schedule, and lawful payment of employees and workers.

EWEB reserves the right to check any and all sources for information and to include sources other than the references provided in the Proposer's proposal. EWEB may consider information available from any such source including government bodies and regulatory authorities in evaluating respondents, including past experience EWEB has had with the proposer.

5.4 Responsibility

EWEB reserves the right to investigate and evaluate, at any time prior to award and execution of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer’s responsibility for performing the Contract, as defined in Rule 3-0500. Submission of a signed proposal shall constitute approval for EWEB to obtain any information EWEB deems necessary to conduct the evaluation. EWEB reserves the right to request additional information or documentation from the successful Proposer prior to award of a contract. Such information may include, but is not limited to, current and recent balance sheets, income statements, cash flow statements, or a performance bond from an acceptable surety. Failure to provide this information will result in the rescission of EWEB's Intent to Award.

EWEB may postpone the award of the Contract after announcement of the apparent successful Proposer in order to complete its investigation and evaluation. Failure of the apparent successful Proposer to demonstrate responsibility shall render the Proposer non-responsible and shall constitute grounds for rejection of the proposal.

5.5 Clarification of Response

EWEB reserves the right to request clarification of any item in any proposal, or to request additional information necessary to properly evaluate a particular proposal. All requests for clarification and responses shall be in writing.

During the evaluation of Proposals, Proposers must respond to any request for clarification from the Evaluation Committee within 24 hours of request (Monday through Friday). Inability of the Evaluation Committee to reach a Proposer for clarification and/or failure of a Proposer to respond within the time stated may result in rejection of that Proposer’s Proposal.

5.6 Evaluation Process

Written Proposals will be evaluated based on qualifications and proposed pricing. EWEB reserves the right to conduct meetings or calls to clarify and further refine scores. Proposals will then be ranked from highest score to lowest.

Pursuant to Rule 3-0230(14)(d), EWEB may employ methods of Contractor selection that include without limitation:

(A) An award or awards based solely on the ranking of proposals;

(B) Discussions leading to best and final offers, in which EWEB may not disclose private discussions leading to best and final offers;

(C) Discussions leading to best and final offers, in which EWEB may not disclose information derived from proposals submitted by competing proposers;

(D) Serial negotiations, beginning with the highest ranked proposer;

(E) Multiple-tiered competition designed to identify, at each level, a class of proposers that fall within a competitive range or to otherwise eliminate from consideration a class of lower ranked proposers;

(G) A multi-step Request for Proposals that require additional information designated in Rule 3-0232;

or

(H) Any combination of methods described in this Section.

After ranking the proposals, EWEB may consider the scores final, determine an apparent awardee, and issue an Intent to Award. Alternatively, EWEB may decide to use a two-tier process at this point. In Tier Two, EWEB will consider the scores as preliminary scores and determine a shortlist of the three (3) highest ranked proposers (Competitive Range).

5.7 Factory Tours (Optional to EWEB)

In Tier Two, EWEB may opt to visit the factory of the one, two, or all three of the shortlisted proposers and finalize their scores thereafter. Factory visits will be of the most interest to EWEB if EWEB has never conducted business with a shortlisted Proposer but may be for other reasons in EWEB’s best interest.

EWEB reserves the right to forego factory tours with any of the three highest ranked Proposers if in EWEB’s best interest to do so. Scores are then finalized and ranked and an Intent to Award to the highest ranked Proposer will be announced.

5.8 Contractor Selection

If a Contract is awarded, EWEB shall award the Contract to the responsible Proposer whose proposal EWEB determines in writing to be the most advantageous to EWEB based on:

a) The evaluation process and evaluation factors described in this Request for Proposals;

b) Any applicable preferences allowed by EWEB Rules, Division 2; and when applicable,

c) The outcome of any negotiations authorized by this Request for Proposals

If this Request for Proposal specifies or authorizes the award of multiple public contracts, EWEB shall award public contracts to the responsible Proposers who qualify for the award of a Contract under the terms of this Request for Proposals.

The firm with the highest total score as a result of written proposal, pricing, and a potential factory visit will be awarded the Contract.

5.9 Notice of Intent to Award

After the completion of the evaluation and ranking, the Purchasing Contact will issue a written notice of

Intent to Award and send copies to all Proposers. The notice will set out the names and ranks of all Proposers and identify the Contractor selected for award.

5.10 Contract Negotiation

EWEB will begin negotiating a Contract with the highest ranked Proposer and will direct negotiations toward obtaining written agreement on:

a) The statement of work;

b) The Contract price as it is affected by negotiating the Statement of Work; and

c) Any other terms and conditions reasonable related to those expressly authorized for negotiation in

Sections 1.3 and 1.4 of the Request for Proposal.

A sample contract (Exhibit 1) is attached for Proposer reference.

At any time during discussions or negotiations, EWEB may terminate such discussions or negotiations with the highest-ranked Proposer if it reasonably believes that:

a) The Proposer is not discussing or negotiating in good faith; or

b) Further discussions or negotiations with the Proposer will not result in the parties agreeing to the terms and conditions of a final Contract in a timely manner.

If EWEB terminates negotiations, EWEB may then commence negotiations with the next highest ranked Proposer and continue the process until EWEB has determined to award the Contract to the Proposer with whom it is currently discussing or negotiating. If negotiations with any Proposer do not result in a Contract within a reasonable amount of time, as determined solely by EWEB, EWEB may reject all proposals and cancel the RFP. Nothing in the rule precludes EWEB from proceeding with a new formal solicitation for the same Work described in the RFP that failed to result in a Contract.

5.11 Protests and Judicial Review of competitive Bidding and Proposals Pursuant to Rule 3-0740, a bidder or proposer may protest the award of a public contract or a notice of intent to award a public contract, whichever occurs first, if the bidder or proposer is adversely affected because the bidder or proposer would be eligible to be awarded the public contract in the event that the protest were successful; and the reason for the protest is that all higher ranked proposals are nonresponsive; EWEB has failed to conduct the evaluation of proposals in accordance with the criteria or processes described in the solicitation materials; EWEB has abused its discretion in rejecting the protestor's proposal or proposal as nonresponsive; or EWEB's evaluation of proposals or EWEB's subsequent determination of award is otherwise in violation of EWEB Rules. The protest process may not be used to protest non-inclusion in the Competitive Range.

Eligible proposers protesting award shall follow the procedures described herein. Protests that do not follow these procedures will not be considered. This protest procedure constitutes the sole administrative remedy available to proposers.

a) Protests must be received within seven (7) days after issuance of the notice of intent to award the

Contract. EWEB will not consider late protests.

b) All protests must be in writing, signed by the protesting party or an authorized Agent and submitted to the EWEB Purchasing Contact listed on page 1. The protest must state all facts and arguments on which the protesting party is basing the protest.

c) Only protests stipulating an issue of fact concerning a matter of bias, discrimination or conflict of interest, non-compliance with procedures described in the procurement documents, or EWEB policy shall be considered. Protests based on procedural matters will not be considered.

d) EWEB’s Purchasing Supervisor will review the protest and will email or mail the protesting party a written response within three (3) business days of receipt of the written protest to the email or postal address provided in Proposer’s proposal. Any written response may be comprised of a determination of the protest, a notice to the protesting party of the need for additional time in which to evaluate the matter, or other notice to the protesting party.

e) If the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response) is adverse to the protester, any further appeal of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response) by the party must be submitted in writing to EWEB’s General Manager within three (3) business days of issuance of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination (response).

f) EWEB’s General Manager will review any appeal of the Purchasing Supervisor’s determination and shall email or mail, the protesting party a written response within three (3) business days of receipt of written appeal to the email/postal address provided in Proposer’s RFP response,

g) If the determination of the General Manager is adverse to the protesting party’s interest, the protesting party may only appeal to EWEB’s Board of Commissioners by filing a written notice of appeal to the Board with the General Manager within two (2) business days of issuance of the General Manager’s written determination.

h) The Contract Review Board, in considering the protest, shall review the documentation presented to the Purchasing Supervisor and the General Manager on or before the next regularly scheduled Board Meeting, but in no event shall they be required to review in less than ten (10) business days, and thereafter, base their decision on such material. The Board review will be limited to the evaluation of compliance with EWEB’s policies and procedures, requirements of the RFP and the equal and fair application of EWEB’s contracting rules. The Contract Review Board's determination shall be EWEB's final decision.

An adversely affected or aggrieved Proposer must exhaust all avenues of administrative review procedures and relief before seeking judicial review of EWEB's Contractor selection or Contract award decision.

6. PROPOSAL FORM

Proposals should be prepared and organized in a clear and concise manner and must include all information required by this RFP. Headers, Titles or Tabs should be used to identify required information. Responses to the Evaluation Criteria found in Section 6 shall be organized in the order listed in Section 5, preferably by re-stating the Criteria, then responding below.

A. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR RESPONSE:

(Place a check in front of the item indicating inclusion in your response)

COVER SHEET, with introduction of firm and the following:

o Contractual Acceptance: Statement accepting ALL terms and conditions contained in this solicitation. Statement may include request for negotiation of proposed terms and conditions as allowed per Section 1.8(B).

o Termination for Default: Proposers shall indicate if they have had a contract terminated for default in the last five years. Termination for default is defined as notice to stop performance that was delivered to the Proposer due to the Proposer’s…