To support the solicitation detailed in Exhibit R of the RFP, the portal will be reopened Friday October 4, 2024. The multi-round event is titled: 2029 AS RFP -Round 2 Zycus #1323042784
The key milestones for the Solicitation have been updated in accordance with the Public Utility Commissions of Oregon’s (OPUC) Docket UM 2317. For the purposes of clarity, reference tables located in sections 2.8 Schedule in both the main RFP Narrative and Exhibit R in the 2028 All-Source RFP have been updated to include the 2028/2029 Key Milestones for the Solicitation combining both 2028 and 2029 critical milestones.

Attachments:

2.1 In accordance with OPUC Order # 24-272: Exhibit 23 Availability Guarantees for Wind and Solar has been added to Exhibit F – Power Purchase Agreement are offered as a negotiated alternative to the language in Section 7.12 of the draft form agreement.

2.2 In addition, the following additional changes have been made for clarity: Exhibit F – Power Purchase Agreement has been modified to include the following:

a. Additional definitions:

• • • Balancing Authority: As defined in the NERC Reliability Standards of Glossary Terms, available at nerc.com
    • Reliability Coordinator: As defined in the As defined in the NERC Reliability Standards of Glossary Terms, available at nerc.com

b. Section 5.4.1 has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
“5.4.1 Non-Compensable Curtailment. Except for Compensable Curtailment Energy in accordance with Section 6.1.3, Idaho Power shall not be obligated to purchase, receive, pay for, or pay any damages associated with, Net Output if such Net Output is not delivered to the System or Point of Delivery for any of the following reasons:

a. the interconnection between the Facility and the System is disconnected, suspended or interrupted, in whole or in part, consistent with the terms of the Generation Interconnection Agreement,
b. the Balancing Authority, Reliability Coordinator, Transmission Provider or Network Service Provider directs a general curtailment, reduction, or redispatch of generation in the area, (which would include the Net Output) for any reason, including to operate within system limitations or otherwise, but excluding curtailment of purchases for general economic reasons), even if and no matter how such curtailment or redispatch directive is carried out by Idaho Power, which may fulfill such directive by acting in its sole discretion
c. the Facility’s Output is not received because the Facility is not fully integrated or synchronized with the System, or
d. an event of Force Majeure prevents either Party from delivering or receiving Net Output (each of the foregoing a “Non-Compensable Curtailment”).

Non-Compensable Curtailments do not include curtailments for general economic reasons, nor do they include curtailments or instructions to reduce output based on economics directed by an Independent System Operator (“ISO”) or Regional Transmission Operator (“RTO”), if Facility or buyer joins an ISO or RTO during the Term.”

Pursuant to Round 2 of the bidding event contemplated by Exhibit R “Supplemental 2029 and Later Bid Requirements,” is Exhibit Q “Hourly Renewable Production Template” required for non-renewable resources in the 2029 and later bid submissions?

Exhibit Q – Hourly Renewable Production Template is only required for renewable resources.

If we are participating in the 2028 RFP and have a project that can meet an April 1, 2028 COD, can we participate in the 2029 RFP, and if so, do we need to bid a later COD?

Yes, you can participate in both events with two project CODs. One for 2028 and one for 2029.

Just to clarify, all summer 2028 CODs projects which meet Bid Eligibility factor #6 do not need to do anything at this time to remain in the selection process?

Bid Eligibility Factor No. 6 was removed for proposals with an anticipated commercial operation date after June 1, 2028.  The intent is that no evidence of inclusion in the Generator Interconnection process to date is required.

Will Idaho Power send an updated Bid Definition for the 2029 COD bids?

Idaho Power will send updated Bid Entry Forms for 2029 COD Bids, based on the submitted Bid Definition Form. No updates to the Bid Definition Form (Exhibit A) were made. Please use the existing Exhibit A within the portal.

How will Idaho Power treat the bid fee for projects submitted to the first round that now have to be re-submitted into Round 2? Will Idaho Power reimburse bidders the bid fee or apply it to Round 2?

If projects submitted into the RFP with CODs of 2028 are found ineligible, bid fees shall be returned. For new submissions (projects with 2029 COD), evaluation fees will need to be submitted in accordance with Section 4.6 Evaluation Fees of the RFP.

Hello, are bidders allowed to modify the Bid Definition Form after the October 15, 2024, deadline by adding additional projects before the January 27, 2025, due date for this 2029 RFP?

If needed, bidders may submit an updated Bid Definition Form to ensure bid and project accuracy. Idaho Power will in turn provide an updated Bid Entry Form. It is important to note that no submittal dates will be extended for modifications that are submitted after the scheduled Milestones defined in  Table 2-1 of Section 2.8 in the RFP.

If we have a bid definition and bid entry forms from round 1 of the RFP, do we need to resubmit those forms for round 2?

Yes. If you intend to submit the same or a similar project with a COD of 2029, a new Bid Definition Form (Exhibit A) and Bid Entry Form (Exhibit C_B_D) will be required to ensure process continuity.

Pursuant to Round 2 of the bidding event contemplated by Exhibit R “Supplemental 2029 and Later Bid Requirements”, is Exhibit Q “Hourly Renewable Production Template” required for non-renewable resources in the 2029 and Later bid submissions?

If the technology is non-renewable, Exhibit Q- Hourly Renewable Production Template is not a requirement. Alternatively, if the submitted technology is a non-dispatchable resource, Exhibit Q is required.

Are we able to provide a 2029 and Later Bid, with a completed interconnection Feasibility Study from 2023, but a Queue position that has been withdrawn? And are we able to provide a 2029 and Later Bid, for a Project capacity that has not been previously studied by Idaho Power’s Generation Interconnection Group, and has never had an active Queue position?

Yes. For 2029 and later bids, the concept is that a project is allowed to enter the GI queue after submittal of the proposal.

If there are bids that are in a respondent’s bid entry form that are now locked and a respondent is not going to bid that variation, does the bidder need to submit a new bid definition form or just clarify what bids are not being bid as part of the response documents?

Not all bids in the Bid Definition Form are required to be submitted as a proposal. If a new Bid Entry Form is required due to a change that can’t be accomodated or wasn’t contemplated, please reach out through Zycus.

What are the bid fees for the following situation? Same location, COD, and PPA/BSA for all bids. Bid 1: 200 MW PV. Bid 2: 200 MW PV + 240 MWh BESS. Bid 3: 200 MW PV + 800 MW BESS?

Bid 1 = $9,928. Bid 2 = $9,928. Bid 3 = $4,964

In Exhibit H – IPC Solar PV Technical Specifications, what does Idaho Power define to be “direct buried cables?” Does trenching fall under this category?

For clarification, direct buried cable implies underground cable installed and not in conduit.

Could you please clarify the process for Exhibit R? I see that the Bid Portal is closing in 3 days and 6 hours. If we were to propose a bid through Exhibit R, will the Bid Portal re-open in October in accordance with the posted Exhibit R schedule? Or will Exhibit R be an entirely separate “Event” within the Zycus platform?

Once the initial bids are received by Idaho Power on Sept. 16, 2024, the solicitation will be re-opened as a Round 2 in support of Exhibit R.

Please provide the site layouts for Hemingway Storage 2 and Boise Bench Storage 2.

Hemingway Storage 2 ultimately was not submitted as a bid and is not a viable option after further review and analysis of the site parameters by the Benchmark Bid team. Boise Bench Storage 2 does not have a defined site layout and is conceptual in nature given the site control and Idaho Power land ownership.

Please provide the single line diagrams for the Hemingway 34.5 kV Substation and Boise Bench 138 kV Substation. Could you confirm whether the BESS for Hemingway Storage 2 and Boise Bench Storage 2 will be connected to existing transformers at these substations? If so, please provide the datasheets for these transformers.

Hemingway Storage 2 ultimately was not submitted as a bid and is not a viable option after further review and analysis of the site parameters by the Benchmark Bid team. It is anticipated the Boise Bench Storage 2 project will procure and install a main power transformer as part of the project to connect to the 138 kV bus as outlined in Exhibit P.

What is the current status of the interconnection process for Hemingway Storage 2 and Boise Bench Storage 2?

Hemingway Storage 2 ultimately was not submitted as a bid and is not a viable option after further review and analysis of the site parameters by the Benchmark Bid team. As stated in Exhibit P, the Boise Bench Storage 2 has an LGIA and can support an April 1, 2028, commercial operation date. The LGIA queue number is 640 and can be found on Idaho Power’s OASIS site https://www.oasis.oati.com/ipco/

Confirm that the power and capacity requirements for BESS (80 MW / 320 MWh) outlined in Exhibit G do not apply to the Benchmark Bids.

Correct. This exhibit is indicative and based on an example. It will be revised as applicable to the specific contract terms.

If already available for Sites 1 & 2 of Exhibit P, please provide any reports and permits, including Geotechnical Studies, Hydrology Studies, Environmental Permits, etc.

The Benchmark Bids are in concept at this point and specific studies, analysis, etc. are not available at this time.

Given the current lack of site information on benchmark bids, can a two-week extension be granted to submit a full EPC proposal?

The schedule in the RFP remains intact. There is no intention that additional information related to Benchmark Bids will be updated.

We’d like to propose equivalent technology to what is listed in Exhibit G — Attachment B. Can you outline the process for updating the vendor list to include additional providers?

Anticipated vendors/suppliers can be updated through redline markup to the technical exhibits as well as addressed in the narrative. Note the technical exhibits are not meant to be exhaustive but rather indicative.

I see in the newly attached documents that there are new uploads of the form PPA, BSA, and letter of credit. Our legal team began review of the form documents several months back. Are there significant changes to any of these documents?

There are no material changes to the form agreements, however the Exhibit L – Counterparty Financial Questionnaire has been updated.

Does Idaho Power have a preferred dollar per MW amount or structure they are targeting for performance security under the BTA?
Idaho Power does not typically base the BTA performance security on MWs but rather a dollar value that protects Idaho Power’s interests during developer’s performance of the BTA (e.g., performance security in the amount of developer’s termination payment and/or damages Idaho Power would suffer if the developer fails to meet timeframes within the agreement, etc.).

Exhibit L – Counterparty Financial Questionnaire includes draft commitment letters for a guaranty and a letter of credit. It appears that bidders do not need to sign and submit a commitment letter with our bid, and instead submit this upon Idaho Power request in the shortlist process?
This is correct.

Confirm that bidders must submit a letter from the credit assurance provider that commits to providing financial assurances on behalf of the respondent.
Yes, this is correct. Please provide Idaho Power’s standard letter of credit template to bidders credit assurance provider for review and submit any applicable redlines.

We have been preparing bid submissions on two projects: with commercial operations dates of 4/1/2029. Please clarify if we should continue preparing these bids to be submitted by September 6, 2024, or should we change and follow the schedule posted in Exhibit R – Supplemental 2029 and Later Bids?
The schedule posted in the Exhibit R – Supplemental 2029 and Later Bids of the DRAFT RFP is applicable to all proposals with commercial operation dates post 2028. Please note, all schedules are subject to approval by the Oregon Public Utilities Commission and may be updated once the DRAFT RFP is approved by the commission.

It looks as if the provided Exhibit F PPA is solar-specific. Is there a wind PPA we can use to redline?
Generally the terms and conditions provided in Exhibit F – Power Purchase Agreement have been reviewed and approved by Idaho Power’s regulators. As such, this version does contain technical and commercial aspects related to solar generation. Please redline the agreement as necessary, specific to your proposal.

Does Idaho Power perceive any difference or benefit to a project achieving COD in October 2027 vs April 1, 2028?
A project with a COD prior to April 2028 will be evaluated consistently with all projects that meet the criteria outlined in the RFP. There are not specific benefits that will influence evaluation and scoring, but there likely are qualitative benefits and reduced risks with a project that has additional float prior to the summer 2028 peak needs.

Canadian Solar is not listed on the approved vendor list included in the Solar Technical Specifications. Does this preclude Idaho Power from considering projects for which Canadian Solar modules are proposed? If Idaho Power will consider a project with Canadian Solar modules, is that bid’s score impacted by the vendor’s absence on the approved vendor list?
The specifications are not meant to be exhaustive. Inclusion of this vendor will not preclude the bid’s eligibility nor will it impact the evaluation.

The Feasibility Study and Transitional Cluster Study both show wildly different economics and COD timelines for the project. Can we submit to the current RFP under the assumptions from the feasibility report and meet the April 1, 2028, COD as specified in the RFP? A project was added to our cluster after the feasibility report that made the current COD non-conforming and the upgrades much more expensive. This project could still be feasible if the other queue position drops?
The evaluation will be based on the most current data available from the generator interconnection process.

With regards to the NDA, it’s stated in the RFP instructions that the NDA is only required for bids that have advanced to the shortlist stage (Section 2.6, page 7 of the RFP instructions). Is it possible to execute the NDA earlier when we submit our bid by 9/16, rather than waiting for a shortlist notification?
Yes, Idaho Power will execute an NDA earlier than the shortlist notification.

Our project has a summer 2029 COD, so we plan to resubmit our project to the second round of this RFP for projects with first delivery 2029 or later. Please let me know if there are any steps I need to take to remove our current Bid Definition Form.
None needed. The Bid Definition Form only outlines the intention, the Bid Entry Form is the submittal that will be evaluated. If an updated Bid Definition Form is needed, please request an update through the Zycus portal.

Does Idaho Power have an expected date or date range for the Notice to Proceed and Regulatory Approval from the Public Utility Commission for contracted projects?
Regulatory approval typically takes approximately 6 months from the time the request is made. Anticipated contract execution is identified in the schedule in the RFP.

Are we able to bid with a completed interconnection Feasibility Study from 2023, but a Queue position that has been withdrawn?
A withdrawn project from the Generator Interconnection Queue would not meet the eligibility criteria for a project to meet a 2028 COD. However, the project could meet the criterial outlined in Exhibit R.

If we ran an interconnection study for a combined Project with multiple technologies (wind, solar and storage), are we still able to break those technologies apart into multiple bids? For example, if we have a Feasibility Study for a combined wind-solar-storage project, can we bid the total project, as well as each individual technology as separate bids, for a total of 4 bids? Additionally, would this scenario with 4 total bids require 4 bid fees of $9,928 each?
Yes. See Section 4.6 for Bid Fees.

Do you have a date for the Bidders conference?
A meeting has not yet been established. If one is established, it will be noticed through the Zycus platform.

BESS Terminal Value Evaluation – Standard life of a BESS is 20 years, but due to augmentation schemes can be expected to continue operating beyond 20 years at a diminished capacity. How will BESS bids be evaluated to account for residual value of BESS?
The cost evaluated in the RFP is the cost to Idaho Power customers or the present value of the revenue requirement over the life of a project. As is the case with all projects, the BESS projects will be evaluated over the book life of its specific technology type (20 years for BESS projects).

How will the impact of Section 301 tariffs be handled in bid evaluation considering the lack of clarity on the impact to planned BESS? In the interest of bids being evaluated equally we recommend requiring bid submissions to exclude tariff impacts until cost impacts can be clearly determined by suppliers.
Bidders should clarify in the written narrative and in the BEF notes, any assumptions related to Section 301 tariffs. It is the Bidders responsibility to provide comprehensive, all-inclusive, and firm pricing proposals based on the information known or assumed.

Regarding the commercial operations date (COD) for bidders, since I am finding conflicting references in the RFP document. Page 7 of the RFP states that IPC will accept bids for incremental energy or capacity beginning in summer 2028 and will consider proposals beyond 2028 as well. Page 12 of the RFP, however, states that a ‘Winning Bid Guaranteed Commercial Operation Date’ is before summer 2028.
Do bids with a COD within 2028 but not planning to deliver power by summer have no chance of being selected?
See Section 7.2 to identify which category a bid of this nature would fall into. Proposals that have a COD after April 1, 2028, can be eligible but would not be categorized and evaluated relative to proposals that can meet April 1, 2028, COD.

According to Section 6 of the BSA, Seller shall be responsible for obtaining and paying cost for station service. In order for our bids to provide the most accurate price for their BSA project, we’d like to confirm a few assumptions about station power/aux load (for the purpose of these questions, station power and aux load are being used interchangeably.)

1. Typically, Seller nets out aux load during discharging of the BESS, which results in aux load energy costs only during charging and when the BESS is idle.
   1. Are the aux load energy costs during charging and while idle billed at the wholesale rate or at IPC’s Retail rate?
   2. If these costs are billed at IPC’s Retail rate? Which rate applies? For reference, the Aux Load total monthly kWh is ~25,000 kWh and the Peak Aux is ~78 kW.
2. The Seller is also assuming that thermal management and control systems that are part of the BESS system itself are not considered station power loads, so they have not included such load in the station power load and idling station power calculations. Is this assumption correct, meaning thermal management and control systems will not be charged at the Retail rate?
   1. Additionally, at least one of the top BESS solutions on the market is designed such that thermal management loads cannot be separately metered and are inherently parasitic to operation. Does IPC have processes for how thermal management loads would be treated under these circumstances?

It is correct that Seller is responsible for obtaining and paying for station service. Station service is billed at the appropriate IPC retail rate based on the retail tariff that the service is eligible for, which is determined when the Seller requests the service. Information on Idaho Power’s retail rates and tariff is available at https://www.idahopower.com/about-us/company-information/rates-and-regulatory/.

The details as to which specific systems within an overall BESS contribute to station service, and which may not, is, as the question notes, contingent on the particular system’s configuration, and will be subject to discussion between Seller and Idaho Power.

Are identified network upgrades (i.e., reimbursable costs) used in levelized bid pricing evaluation? If the project believes that network upgrade costs will decrease following unsuspension and restudy of the project, is it acceptable to reduce or omit these costs from the bid pricing with a note in the Bid Entry Form?
Network upgrade costs impact the overall cost to Idaho Power customers and are considered in the levelized cost. Include the network upgrade costs in the bid price and note the potential for a reduction in network upgrades.

For proposed O&M contract structures are there any costs that should be omitted? (i.e., insurance and property tax)
All O&M costs excluding property tax and insurance should be included.

Is exhibit Q, Hourly Renewable Production Template, required for standalone BESS Systems, either under a BTA or BSA contract?
Not required for BESS systems.

Once bid fees are determined upon submission of our Bid Definition Form, how will these bid fees be submitted to Idaho Power? I am assuming that bid fees are also due on September 6 at 6 PM EST, but please confirm if they are due in advance?
Bid fee instructions will be posted to the Zycus event. Generally, all payments will be made by ACH or Wire Transfer and are required to reference, “2028 Resource RFP” in the Originator to Beneficiary Information (OBI). Payments with no OBI reference may be rejected. Bid fees are due by close of business on Monday September 6, 2024.

What is the Bid Definition Forms Due Date?
The preliminary Bid Definition Form due date was 7/8/2024. IPC will accept updated Bid Definition Forms through 8/21/2024. Any Bid Definition Forms submitted after 8/21/2024 may not provide sufficient time for IPC to return a Bid Entry Form prior to the Bid Due date. Although IPC will attempt to accommodate later submittals, in no case will the Bid Due date be extended.

Are we able to bid with a completed interconnection Feasibility Study from 2023, but a Queue position that has been withdrawn?
If a submitted proposal does not have an active GI Queue, it will not meet the eligibility criteria identified.

If we ran an interconnection study for a combined Project with multiple technologies (wind, solar and storage), are we still able to break those technologies apart into multiple bids? For example, if we have a Feasibility Study for a combined wind-solar-storage project, can we bid the total project, as well as each individual technology as separate bids, for a total of 4 bids? Additionally, would this scenario with 4 total bids require 4 bid fees of $9,928 each?
Yes, components of a single GI application are eligible individually. The LGIA will be studied to a total POI limitation, and anything less is acceptable. Each Selectable Portfolio (which is a unique bid that stands on its own) requires a bid fee. As defined in Section 4.6 of the RFP, different resources as different bids require the full fee.

Please let me know where I can find the document titled eForum Tips and Tricks within the Attachments section of this RFP event. I have reviewed the Attachments section but do not see it there.
Please see the eForum message thread titled: “eForum Tips and Tricks” in the eForum messaging tool.

We are interested in bidding on four projects outlined in Exhibit P (Projects 1-4), all of which fall under the same resource type (BESS stand-alone) and are classified as Resource-Based Proposals. Given their shared minimum requirements as detailed in Exhibit G – IPC BESS Technical Specifications, we request that our bids for these projects be considered as a single bid for the evaluation fee. The primary differences are their sizes, point of delivery voltages, and corresponding pricing. Evaluating these bids collectively, rather than as four distinct bids, would be more efficient and fairer. Additionally, our solutions are modular, allowing project sizes to be scaled once the technical specifications are defined.
As defined in Section 4.6 of the RFP, different sites require the bid fee for each bid. Please see updated Exhibit P – Benchmark Bids. As noted in the exhibit, only bids 1 and 2 are available to third parties to be bid as an asset purchase. Bids 3 and 4 are partnership arrangements with third parties, and IPC does not have any rights to offer, therefore they are not available. Please revise your BDF accordingly.

Could you confirm that we will be considered as “third-party” bidders when bidding for the benchmark bids outlined in Exhibit P? This is important to ensure we follow the correct timeline, as benchmark bids and third-party bids have different deadlines.
Yes, all bidders except for Idaho Power’s Internal Bid Team are considered third-party bidders.

Regarding the GIA Status listed in Exhibit P, we understand that the interconnection agreement is either in place or pending, with Idaho Power being responsible for it. However, Chapter 4.3 (Ownership and Agreement Types) of the RFP draft states that the bidder is responsible for the interconnection. Could you clarify the division of responsibilities to finalize the Generation Interconnection Agreement for these projects?
Idaho Power’s Internal Bid Team, who is responsible for submitting Benchmark Bids, is considered a bidder, distinct from Idaho Power’s Evaluation Team. Thus, the same as any other bidder, the Internal Team is responsible for coordinating with the Transmission Provider to complete and execute the LGIA.

For a build-transfer ownership structure, is there a preferred land ownership profile (i.e., lease, own, lease with option to purchase, etc.)?
IPC’s preference is to own land in fee whenever possible. Alternative solutions may be proposed and should detail the terms of the land acquisition.

I have a question regarding Idaho Power’s preferred commercial operations date (COD) for bidders, since I am finding conflicting references in the RFP document. Page 7 of the RFP states that IPC will accept bids for incremental energy or capacity beginning in summer 2028 and will consider proposals beyond 2028 as well. Page 12 of the RFP, however, states that a ‘Winning Bid Guaranteed Commercial Operation Date’ is before summer 2028. Do bids with a COD within 2028 but not planning to deliver power by summer have no chance of being selected?
Clarifying language was added to Section 7.2 of the RFP.

If we are submitting two project proposals (i.e., two different solar and battery projects with different locations and points of interconnection), should we include one narrative with both projects, or two separate narratives?
Each proposal is unique, and thus supporting documentation needs to be complete for each proposal. However, a comprehensive narrative can be provided and submitted with each proposal if desired.

If a bidder is submitting a resource proposal for a PPA/ESA, would you please confirm that we do not need to redline Exhibit G and Exhibit H (BESS and solar technical specifications)?
Correct. See Table 6-1 – Bid Package Requirements.

By July 17, 2024, do bidders also need to submit Exhibits C and D, or just Exhibit B?
Only Exhibit A – Bid Definition Form is due on July 17, 2024. Idaho Power will in turn provide an Excel based Exhibit B, C, and D. Exhibit B, C, and D are due September 6, 2024, as noted in Table 2-1 – Key Milestones for the Solicitation “Third-Party Bids Due.”

Do bidders offering a PPA or ESA proposal need to redline the draft Letter of Credit (Exhibit M)? I am finding conflicting answers in the RFP document.
Yes. See Table 6-1 – Bid Package Requirements.

Section 6.2 Bid Naming of the RFP references that unique name for each bid (Bid Code) that must be used in the naming of every file. Upon review of the Bid Entry Form (BEF), there is no indication of a “Bid Code”. However, there appears to be a unique “Proposal #”. Is the Proposal # the Bid Code that we are to use for file naming? If not, can you please advise on the source of the Bid Code.
Yes, the Proposal # is the automatically generated bid code to be utilized for file naming.

Can you please help find the Bid Eligibility Checklist that references Exhibits B_C_D Excel Workbook?
Exhibits B_C_D are located in your Bid Entry Form that is custom to your individual portfolio submittal.

In our review of the draft form contracts, we cannot seem to find the mentioned appendices on the website for download. Will these be made available prior to the bid submittal date?
Drafts for agreements and appendices referenced in the RFP are available for download in the Zycus Portal.

Regarding the guarantees. The PPA only contains an Output Guarantee, which is separate from Exhibit H (Wind Performance Guarantee). The PPA doesn’t reference any of the terms or a Wind Performance Guarantee in the text. Is the intent for both the Output Guarantee and Wind Performance Guarantee to be considered under the PPA or not?
Please redline the form based on your specific technology, including any wind performance guarantee and output guarantee.

Is it possible to receive a redline of the changes Idaho Power has made to the form PPA and BSA from the initial draft to the final version?
Both versions are available for download in the portal for comparison purposes.

Does IPC have a preferred naming convention for the attachments uploaded by the bidder?
Yes. Please refer to Section 6.2 of the RFP Narrative.

I see in section 6.2 that a Bid Code will be provided for each bid; is that synonymous with the Proposal #? If so, is the intention to have each file include each of those numbers?
That is correct.

Is a solar project considered a different resource type than a solar + BESS project?
Yes, that is correct.

It appears the BEF provided is a Macro-Enabled worksheet, which does not appear to be supported on upload, please advise.
Please upload your proposals using a .zip file.

Is Idaho Power Company tax efficient? Will they be able to absorb the tax benefit from a solar project?
Idaho Power will evaluate the utilization of any tax benefits associated with the project proposal to determine their relative tax efficiency.

Can you please let us know the difference between the AS RFP Bids Due and Open AS RFP Bids as reflected in the draft RFP schedule?
AS RFP Bids Due means all submittals from bidders are due to Idaho Power. Open AS RFP Bids is reflective of the date Idaho Power can open submitted bids, and maintain the established timeframe between reviewing the benchmark bids in accordance with the Oregon Competitive Bidding Rules.

For a wind PPA, can you please confirm if Exhibit O Draft form Letter of Credit is required for submission/execution?
Development security is required for a power purchase agreement structure. That said, please redline the agreement with the applicable development security (parent guaranty, letter of credit, or cash collateral) as applicable for your portfolio.

As shown in Exhibit 6.1 of RFP, can you please confirm the Technical Specification are not required for a Wind PPA.
Yes, Table 6-1 does not require redlines to technical specifications for PPAs.

If we are only submitting 1 proposal column in the Bid Entry Form, but we have multiple columns formatted due to the BDF we submitted, do we need a new Bid Entry Form?
It is not necessary to request a new Bid Entry Form if one column correctly identifies your proposal. However, should discrepancies exist, please request an updated Bid Entry Form.

Regarding the “Lifetime Year-Over-Year 8760 Shape of Generation Output in Excel”, requested in the Bid Entry Form, does Idaho Power want the years in the 8760 table to be labeled 1-20 or 2026-2045 for an example 20-year term? Also, should day 1 of 8760 table be the day after COD, or should day 1 be January 1 of the first full year of operation?
The years should be labeled 2026-2045, for example. The 8760 should be labeled with appropriate hours, days, months, and years, so the first row of forecasted 8760 generation could be the day after the COD, if desired.

Under Main Power Step-Up Transformers in Exhibit J – Idaho Power Solar PV Technical Specifications Appendix A. Please clarify if Idaho Power accepts GE Prolec as an Acceptable Manufacturer knowing that GE Prolec purchased an SPX factory?
The technical specifications are provided on a technology basis. Bidders can source equipment that generally meets the specifications and can be discussed in more detail at the time of contract negotiations to ensure applicable standards are met.

According to Tables 3-1 and 3-2 of the RFP, the proposed pricing for Asset Purchase bids shall include Operations & Maintenance (O&M), Long-Term Services Agreement (LTSA), and warranty costs. Is the Long-Term Services Agreement only necessary for the BESS component?
Idaho Power is asking for ongoing Operations & Maintenance costs of the specific project to maintain its original state and keep it in good working condition.

We would be interested in submitting a proposal to aggregate distributed energy resources into a turnkey virtual power plant that can provide dispatchable capacity to Idaho Power. This can be contracted as a PPA or Capacity Agreement and will have similar availability and dispatch characteristics as other resource types, but with several unique advantages over centralized power plants. The project would include distributed storage assets and electric vehicles alongside demand response resources, both residential and commercial/industrial. It is not clear whether this qualifies within one of the Eligible Products specified in the RFP. Would such a proposal be appropriate for this RFP, and competitively evaluated alongside more traditional utility scale generation projects? Which Eligible Product would be appropriate for this type of project?
As described in Section 3.2 Alternative Products, “IPC may also accept other Products that meet the ownership and electrical functionality criteria outlined in the Product Tables. Bidders who propose a product not specifically identified in the Product Tables must fully describe how their product can meet the general desires and intent of the Product Table.” Regarding which specific product would be applicable, the bidder should choose the most appropriate product and provide supporting documentation in the proposal to sufficiently address project readiness and deliverability.

Regarding PDF page 14, it is unclear to us how to evaluate Idaho Power’s need for 4+ hours in comparison with 6+ hours of storage, and on a related note, Exhibit G does not distinguish between the individual value of each hour. Please explain Idaho Power’s specific needs for 4+ versus 6+ hours of storage capacity.
4+ hour and 6+ hour storage will be evaluated alongside each other in the RFP evaluation for creation of the initial shortlist. For AURORA shortlist modeling, the specific durations would be input into the model and the model will best optimize resource selections for Idaho Power’s system. Idaho Power does not have a specific preference for 4+ hour duration vs. 6+ hour duration storage at this time, although Idaho Power will note that 6+ hour duration storage will generally have a higher ELCC then 4+ hour duration storage.

Can a party bid different capacity ratings of the same project, although one variant may be a capacity smaller than that in the interconnection agreement or other interconnection documents provided?
A party can bid various capacity sizes within the limits of any relevant generator interconnection agreement(s) or transmission service agreement(s). Idaho Power’s understanding is that there is no requirement that a project exactly meet or match the capacity granted in a generator interconnection agreement. Rather, a project cannot inject more energy onto the grid (or, for transmission service, schedule or transmit more energy) than what is allowed in a generator interconnection agreement or transmission service agreement. In any event, compliance with a party’s generation interconnection agreement or transmission service agreement is the responsibility of that party.

What is meant by “Idaho Power will separate and prioritize bids that can conform to meet a June 1, 2026, commercial operation separately from those that confirm to meet a June 1, 2027, commercial operation.” in terms of project scoring?
To effectively evaluate projects as they relate to Idaho Power’s energy and capacity needs for the years 2026 and subsequently 2027, Idaho Power will group projects by the proposed Commercial Operation Date (i.e., 6/1/2026 or 6/1/2027) to ensure the benefit of each resource is recognized. Idaho Power will then score projects based on the scoring methodology defined in the RFP.

The mention of imputed debt cost in scoring is confusing, as some of the publications in the UM2255 docket suggested that this would be removed from scoring. Does Idaho Power intend to keep imputed debt considerations in bid scoring.
Idaho Power will include or exclude imputed debt in the scoring as directed by the PUC upon approval of the Final RFP.

In terms of the bid fees, assuming a single project site, resource type and same capacity. How many terms and ownership structures can a bid propose before it is considered a separate bid or sub-bid? For example, a single site with the same resource type and capacity, proposes two different PPA terms and 1 Build Transfer term. Does it count as one bid? If not, please explain the breakdown of the bid fee.
A single project site and resource type with multiple contract structures is one bid.

Can you provide the payment details to wire the bid Evaluation Fees?
Idaho Power will provide applicable payment details related to the bid Evaluation Fees once the OPUC approves the final RFP.

Will Idaho Power update the RFP and its associated form contracts in response to the Public Utility Commission of Oregon’s Supplemental Staff Report published on May 31? If so, when can bidders expect to have access to the updated docs? Is it possible for Idaho Power to extend the Bid Deadline to grant bidders sufficient time to review and incorporate changes into their bids?
Idaho Power expects the OPUC to approve the final RFP on June 7, 2023, at a Special Public Meeting. The RFP will be updated and circulated as final with the applicable schedule at that time. Bids are due June 23, 2023.

Our bid fee process can take a couple of weeks, could you please confirm that our bid fee will be accepted after the bids are due?
Idaho Power will work with bidders to coordinate bid fee submittals, as we understand this process can take some administrative effort.

Our project is located near a retiring coal facility and Idaho Power currently owns or has rights to the transmission capacity on the path. Assuming Idaho Power retains these transmission rights after the facility’s retirement scheduled for 2025, would an offer of Products #1, #2, #3, #10-14 assuming Idaho Power facilitates transmission capacity to the Idaho Power system?
Idaho Power is evaluating potential exit dates and other options for its coal units as part of its ongoing 2023 IRP effort (prior IRP-identified coal exit dates are subject to change). As described in the RFP, Idaho Power intends to designate any resources procured as a result of this RFP as Designated Network Resources under the Idaho Power Open Access Transmission Tariff. Transmission availability would be determined by the Idaho Power Transmission Provider at the time the associated transmission service request is submitted. Bidders may refer to the Idaho Power Transmission Provider’s OASIS site for information regarding transmission availability. Regarding transmission rights, Idaho Power’s rights today may be different than Idaho Power’s rights in the future, and those rights may be subject to preexisting contractual or other requirements.

The project has a signed interconnection agreement in place with another utility entity. Does Idaho Power required grid-charging ability for Battery Storage offers, and if viable for the project, would Idaho Power be able to supply grid energy to a site outside of Idaho?
Idaho Power expects that storage would be capable of grid-charging when necessary to provide firm capacity. Idaho Power does not have long-term transmission capacity to deliver energy to locations outside its system (including potential charging energy). Idaho Power would evaluate the total potential costs associated with battery storage outside of its system, including but not limited to transmission costs (for both charging energy and discharging energy), of obtaining charging energy from the host utility, and any other costs associated with a resource outside of Idaho Power’s balancing authority area.

Please confirm the Exhibit H – Wind Performance Guarantees, is a supplemental document to Exhibit H – Draft Form Agreements and needs to be submitted with a PPA offer?
Correct.

The Bid Entry Form requests a “Lifetime Year-Over-Year 8760 Shape of Generation Output in Excel” for wind resources. Can Idaho Power provide an 8760 template to confirm the preferred format? If not, can Idaho Power further describe the format the data should be in?
Idaho Power expects an Excel spreadsheet with a column for hour, day, month, year and expected generation in MW for each of those hours.

For transmission-voltage interconnected standalone BESS that choose to self supply auxiliary loads (eg, HVAC) behind the POI (as opposed to a separate distribution tap), what retail delivery charges or rate, if any, will apply to any net aux load consumption at the project?
The auxiliary load service configuration is not specified and can be accomplished through typical retail service as a customer of the load serving utility or can be self-supplied by the bidder behind the POI (assumed on the medium voltage bus). Each configuration has different complexities related to the rate and the capacity at the point of interconnection and should be clarified in the bidder proposal. For example, if a standalone BESS chooses to self-supply auxiliary loads behind the POI, it needs to be clear what capacity should be expecting at the POI for price evaluation. If retail service is utilized (for example, a distribution tap), the applicable retail rate would be charged to the entity requesting service.

Due to the quick turnaround time according to the draft RFP schedule between the final RFP and the submission, our team needs to properly prepare our exhibits. Can you confirm whether or not Exhibits H-O are the final versions or will contain minimal changes?
All exhibits are currently in draft form and not final until commission approval. However, Idaho Power does not anticipate any substantial modifications to Exhibits H-O of the 2026 Draft RFP.

Idaho Power can clarify section 7.12.1.2 of the PPA. It says “Seller may revise any future estimated monthly Net Output amounts in Exhibit 4…”. If proponents can adjust the monthly Net Output then it seems this would result in a change to Expected Energy as well since Net Output as a defined term is a component of the Expected Energy definition. Adjusting Expected Energy would then adjust Output Guarantee as currently defined. With all that being said, couldn’t proponents just submit adjustments to monthly Net Output each month in advance and therefore bypass any risk of ever tripping the Output Guarantee? We doubt that is the intention of Idaho Power so we would appreciate clarification on our interpretation of the draft language. Additionally we would like to highlight that Estimated Net Output is stated as a defined term on p. 44 but is not included as a defined term in Section 1. If Idaho Power can provide this definition that would also be appreciated.
Any clarifications to these provisions that a bidder want to make may be proposed in the bidder’s redlines or during negotiations. In section 7.12.1, the intent is that estimated Net Output is synonymous with monthly Expected Energy. Idaho Power confirms that under 7.12.1, Sellers may adjust the monthly estimated Net Output, and that the resulting updated estimates will be used in the calculation of whether the Output Guarantee has been met.

Would you be able to provide instructions on how to add another user to our company’s Zycus supplier profile?
Yes. You are able to add company contacts to your Zycus supplier profile by selecting the “Address Tab” on the left-hand side, and then clicking the green “Add New” button under the contacts section. For full details on how to maintain your Zycus account, you can access our Quick Reference Guide here: docs.idahopower.com/pdfs/BusinessToBusiness/ZycusWorkingWithYourAccount.pdf.

If the same bid includes both PPA and Built Transfer/Asset Purchase ownership options, does it require separate proposal narratives files for each ownership structure or does 1 narrative file suffice?
One proposal narrative with specific discussion around the ownership structures to be offered will be fine.

Do you foresee the bid submittal deadline being moved to a further date given the June 7 OPUC meeting?
The posted updated Draft 2026 AS RFP has the most current schedule.

Would Idaho Power entertain or allow a COD of 12/1/2028? We realize that would be non-conforming, but if the BDF was submitted with that COD, would Idaho Power send a BEF with that COD back?
The BDF is not a screening tool and Idaho Power will send a BEF based on the criteria outlined in the BDF. The bid submittal, however, would not meet the criteria in Exhibit C – Bid Eligibility Checklist and would be screened from further evaluation.

How can I create a Zycus log in, even through my company is already registered within the Zycus portal? Can a company have more than one company representative associated with their supplier profile?
Yes. If your company is already registered, the employee with access to the Zycus portal can add you to your business profile. Once you’re a company contact, you will be able to log in and create your unique password, and the system will link your email address to the correct company.

To ensure you are added to the RFP Event, please email ResourceRFP@idahopower.com and let IPC know you would like to view the RFP Sourcing Event.

I am having trouble locating applicable documents in the Zycus event (PPA, Financial Information, etc.).
The RFP narrative, including exhibits are located in the attachment section of the RFP event for download.

Please provide additional clarity on the expectation for Exhibit I: BESS Technical Specifications, Attachment A. The form indicates it is “Provided for Information Only.” Is the expectation that the bidder populates the “data” column at this stage of the RFP?
No. The BESS Technical Specifications are to provide the Bidder with general information. If the Bidder objects to any particular aspects, they can redline the documents with their bid but populating blank or bracketed information is not necessary.

Can you please provide clarity regarding submittal of the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee, including wire instructions, and due date?
After the scheduled Oregon Public Utilities Commission’s public meeting, and subsequent approval of IPC’s DRAFT 2026 RFP, additional information regarding the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee will be communicated.

The Oregon Public Utility Commission has pushed back the meeting to discuss the Idaho Power RFP. Is Idaho planning to revise the schedule for the RFP to reflect this change?
Yes. The schedule has been updated and the Draft RFP was published and sent to Bidders through Zycus on 5/18/2023.

Can you please offer instructions on how to add another user to our company profile to the RFP event?
The employee with access to the Zycus portal can add you to your business profile. Once you’re a company contact, you will be able to log in and create your unique password, and the system will link your email address to the correct company.

To ensure you are added to the RFP Event, please email ResourceRFP@idahopower.com and let IPC know you would like to view the RFP Sourcing Event.

Would IPCo entertain or allow a COD of 12/1/2028? We realize that would be non-conforming, but if the BDF was submitted with that COD, would IPCo send a BEF with that COD back?
The BDF is not a screening tool and IPC will send a BEF based on the criteria outlined in the BDF. The bid submittal, however, would not meet the criteria in Exhibit C – Bid Eligibility Checklist and would be screened from further evaluation.

For co-located solar and storage facilities do we need to complete a redline for both a PPA and a BSA agreement? Is there a separate agreement for a hybrid project? Additionally, for co-located solar and storage projects are they grid charged or charged from the solar facility?
There is not a specific form agreement that fully contemplates a bidder owned hybrid resource. However, IPC believes the general terms and conditions of the PPA generally apply. The Bidder can provide a form agreement to IPC, choose to redline one or both, and provide comment. There is no penalty in the Non-Price Scoring for any of these methods. Regarding co-located solar and storage projects, IPC would expect that the storage component (if owned by IPC) would be capable grid-charging when necessary to provide firm capacity.

Is it possible to execute the Non-Disclosure Agreement (Exhibit M) with the Idaho Power RFP team before the Bid Submittal rather than waiting until the Initial Short List?
Yes, Idaho Power will negotiate a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) in advance of the Initial Short List. However, since the NDA is required of all bidders who make the Initial Shortlist, Idaho Power may request an additional NDA be negotiated in such case the bidder is advanced to the next evaluation phase.

Do you allow two separate bids with the same project and contract term but with different price escalation structures? If so, can we update our Bid Definition Form and receive an updated Bid Entry Form?
Yes. To receive an updated Bid Entry Form, please attach your modified Bid Definition Form to an eForum message with the Portal.

Section 7.7 of the draft PPA refers to the Solar Energy Production Forecast and that Seller will be responsible for an allocated portion of the total cost of this forecast. Where might one find information pertaining to Total MW (Total TMW) and Annual Solar Energy Production Forecasting Costs (AFCost) terms as included in the formula on p.38? We are trying to determine the quantum of this cost as it pertains to our project and believe we need these two datapoints in order to calculate the cost accordingly. Is this information publicly available and if so, where?
These data points are not specifically publicly available. As a general matter, as of 3/31/2023, Idaho Power had 850 MW of solar generation (nameplate) either online, or under contract but not yet online, but not all of these contracts include the provision in section 7.7. In general, over the past several years, the monthly cost allocation has been under $5.00 per MW-month (based on project nameplate capacity). While the costs may vary going forward, and Idaho Power cannot anticipate what they will be, the last sentence of section 7.7.2 provides a cap on the costs.

The Bid Entry Form asks for “Lifetime Year-Over-Year 8760 Shape of Generation Output in Excel”. Is it acceptable to use an annual average 8760 shape to represent the life of the product?
For RFP modeling purposes, Idaho Power would prefer an 8760 x project life shape for the generation output to accurately model the resource in Aurora.

Is there a template that IPC can supply to support the 8760 shape of generation output?
Idaho Power expects an Excel spreadsheet with a column for hour, day, month, year and expected generation in MW for each of those hours.

In the Zycus Platform after a bidder has confirmed participation in the RFP and received their GSID, there is the option for a bidder to not submit a BDF: “Bidder has chosen not to submit the BDF”. Can a bidder that made this election still participate in the RFP and submit a bid? If yes, can they participate without receiving and submitting a Bid Entry Form? If no, why was the option to not submit a BDF included in the portal? If a BDF and BEF are required for a bidder to submit a bid, is the best approach to “recall response” and proceed with a BDF?
The administrative intent of the Bid Definition Form was to provide IPC project information in advance of providing the Bid Entry Form to bidders. The option, “Bidder has chosen not to submit the BDF” was designed so bidders could withdraw from the RFP participation, and subsequently NOT receive a Bid Definition Form.
Bidders are required to submit a Bid Definition Form in order to participate in the RFP.

Can you please provide the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee payment instructions or point to the location of this information
After the scheduled Oregon Public Utilities Commission’s public meeting, and subsequent approval of IPC’s DRAFT 2026 RFP, additional information regarding the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee will be communicated.

We plan to pay the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee in advance of the final submission date? If payment of the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee is made in advance and the Bid/Proposal is not submitted will Idaho Power refund the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee?
After the scheduled Oregon Public Utilities Commission’s public meeting, and subsequent approval of IPC’s DRAFT 2026 RFP, additional information regarding the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee will be communicated.

The Bid Entry Form tab Resource Based Non-Pricing column “Response 1” includes the selection of Red, Yellow, or Green for the Bidder to Fill and complete. The language assigned to each Red, Yellow, and Green appears to be an assessment of the Bid or Proposal from the perspective of Idaho Power. Is Idaho Power seeking for the Bidder to assess their Response from the perspective of Idaho Power per the language provided? For example, Site Control includes the language for Red as “Documentation (or lack thereof) indicates that Bidder has not engaged with the landowner OR does not have a defined site OR has not made application to state/federal agencies.” Is the Bidder requested to categorize the response as Red, Yellow, or Green? If Idaho Power disagrees with the selection is that considered a non-compliance or inaccuracy of the Bid/Proposal? Can you please provide additional guidance on how to complete this Response?
Yes, the instructions of “red”, “yellow”, “green” are from IPC’s perspective of evaluation, so the evaluation standard of each item is transparent to each bidder. IPC seeks self-evaluation from the bidders based on their assessment of each proposal and documents provision, and IPC will review again to validate. If IPC has a different evaluation from the bidders’ based on the detailed review, it will not be considered as a non-compliance.

The Bid Entry Form tab Eligibility column “Response 1” includes the selection of Yes or No for the Bidder to Fill and complete. This column appears to be completed from the perspective and evaluation of Idaho Power. Is the Bidder requested to categorize the response as Yes, or No? If Idaho Power disagrees with the selection is that considered a non-compliance or inaccuracy of the Bid/Proposal? Can you please provide additional guidance on how to complete this Response?
Yes, these eligibility items are defined from IPC’s perspective to fit the objectives of this RFP. IPC requests bidders to provide “yes” or “no” of each item objectively based on their proposals, and IPC will review and validate. The eligible proposals are expected to comply with all the eligibility items, so if IPC assigns “no” to an item on this tab, it will be considered non-compliant.

The Bid Entry Form tab Resource Based Non-Pricing includes a row for Technical Specifications. Table 6-1 of the RFP illustrates that Redlines Exhibit I, J, K, and L (Technical Specifications) are not required for a PPA. Can you please clarify what is required for the Bid Entry Form tab Resource Based Non-Pricing for Technical Specifications if Technical Specifications is not required according to Table 6-1?
For PPA and BSA bids, review and redlines of Technical Specifications are not required, so only Draft Form Agreements and Draft Form Letter of Credit are applicable to PPA and BSA bids.

The BTA seems to be tailored more for Battery Storage Assets. Is Idaho Power planning on using the suggested BTA template “Exhibit H – Build Transfer Agreement” for both Wind/Solar and Battery Storage Assets?
Should the bidder choose to submit a Build Transfer Agreement for technologies other than a Battery Storage asset, please provide the applicable redlines to the Exhibit H – Build Transfer Agreement as part of your submittal. The Bidder may also provide or suggest a different or more applicable contract.

Could Idaho Power please provide some guidance on how bidders should think about the relative value of the critical hours identified in Exhibit G versus other hours … e.g., are those hours 2x or 10x or 100x as valuable as the non-critical hours? Or are they infinitely more valuable (meaning that energy supplied during non-critical hours is of zero value to Idaho Power)?
Idaho Power will evaluate the project specific contribution to capacity deficit (or ELCC) for each project in the initial short list. The shown critical hours are the identified hours of highest risk and projects that can deliver at those hours would have a higher contribution to capacity deficit (or ELCC) then projects that cannot. All things equal, projects with a higher contribution to capacity deficit (or ELCC) would be prioritized to meet identified capacity deficits. From a non-capacity perspective, Idaho Power in the RFP stated it would be looking to procure up to 1,100 MW of energy, with energy being asked for in critical and non-critical hours.

Are the items for mark-up (ex: PPA form) available in word form anywhere? Or are they distributed solely through the All-Source RFP pdf?
Word versions of all draft form agreements are provided in the Zycus Event.

Please provide the Bid Fee relative to our revised Bid Entry Form.
After the scheduled Oregon Public Utilities Commission’s public meeting, and subsequent approval of IPC’s DRAFT 2026 RFP, additional information regarding the Bid Fee/Evaluation Fee will be communicated.

Where can we find the Exhibit B_C_D Excel Workbook that is mentioned in the RFP document?
Exhibit B_C_D Excel Workbook are contained in the Bid Entry Form to be provided to bidder who have submitted the Bid Definition Form.

We noticed that in the Bid Entry Form that was provided, the Eligibility tab has a drop-down for Resource Type that includes Solar + BESS. The Bid Definition Form just had a Solar option or a BESS option but not a Solar + BESS. For this solicitation is Idaho Power accepting Solar + BESS projects? And if so, are we able to change our Solar-only bids to Solar + BESS?
Yes. The Bid Entry Form (BEF) is customized based on the submitted Bid Definition Form (BDF). In the BDF, the solar and BESS are each input separately in a unique column and then combined in the Bid Definition section by identifying Portfolio 1, 2, 3, etc. To receive an applicable BEF, an updated BDF needs to be submitted to identify the portfolio. The bidder should coordinate with Idaho Power and submit an updated Bid Definition Form.

The Bid Fee section of the RFP states that a bidder can pay $10,000 for a single bid inclusive of multiple structures and terms. Are bidders able to include multiple different PPA term lengths within a single $10,000 bid, even though each term length would have a different price? Or does each change in PPA price require a separate $5,000 fee? For example, if a bidder bids a 2026 COD project, and bids that same project with a different PPA term length (and therefore different price), and bids a third version of the project with a 2027 COD, would the correct fees be $10,000 for the first bid, then $5,000 for the different term length and another $5,000 for the 2027 COD?
The RFP will be adjusted to clarify that a bid with a different term length and price will not be required to pay an additional fee. In this example, the first project bids a 2026 COD project and submits a $10,000 bid fee, the same project with a different term length and price would not require an additional fee. The same project with a different COD (in this case 2027) would require an additional fee.

According to Exhibit E, Idaho Power has 200 MW of available transmission at Four Corners. If we are able to deliver up to 200 MW of solar to Four Corners — is that transmission available during heavy load hours?
Yes, the transmission identified in Exhibit E at Four Corners is available during heavy load hours.

What is the difference between an AS bid and a Benchmark Bid? Is it that AS bids are for resources online in the next 2 years?
AS simply references “All-Source” bids, meaning the general developer third-party bids. In contrast, the Benchmark Bid is only applicable to Idaho Power’s Internal Bid Team.

Pertaining to the Technical Specs, would Idaho Power accept a consolidated excel spreadsheet in place of the redlines. We believe that this will provide a more comprehensive and easier to read format for Idaho Power to review our submission.
That is acceptable.

Are there other documents required for bid submission besides the Bid Entry Form mentioned in section 4.5?
Yes. Section 6 of the RFP outlines the required submittals. The Bid Entry Form also calls attention to supporting documentation to be provided related to each answer.

In the RFP copy we have, there are several “Error! Reference source not found” references in the RFP document which relate to important sections or documents. Could you please provide a document that has these errors fixed?
The most current copy of the draft RFP can be found on our website at: idahopower.com/about-us/doing-business-with-us/request-for-resources. This version has all “Error! Reference source not found” references corrected. Idaho Power will provide an updated RFP after the Oregon Public Utilities Commission public meeting, scheduled for May 16, 2023.

Our plan is to be online in the 2026-2027 timeframe. Can you please tell me what the applicable deadline for submittal is? We are unable to tell if it is 5/29 or 6/12 per the RFP instructions table 2-1.
All bids that are not Idaho Power Internal Bid Team bids are due June 12, 2023.

What are the required bid submission documents for a Wind PPA, are there other items outside of the Bid Entry Form, Exhibit H, Exhibit N, and Exhibit P required? Do bidders need to fill out the Parent Guaranty or Letter of Credit forms?
The bid submission process is outlined in Section 5.4 for the RFP. Additionally, Section 6. Additional Requirements for All Products and Bids provides specific guidance for submittals. Section 6.4 provides an outline of exhibits required by proposal type.

Will IPC accept Bid Definition Forms up to the OPUC approval of the final draft?
Until the OPUC approves the final draft RFP, IPC will accept Bid Definition Forms, and provide in response a Bid Entry Form. Upon approval of the final RFP, IPC will issue the final RFP with conclusive due dates to all potential Bidders. Note, IPC does not anticipate extending the AS RFP Bids Due date.

Is it possible to receive an unlocked version of the Bid Entry Form?
Only the Bid Entry Form as provided is available with the applicable fields unlocked. If the bid is fundamentally different and requires a revised Bid Entry Form with applicable fields unlocked, the bidder should coordinate with Idaho Power and submit an updated Bid Definition Form.

Exhibit M in the Draft RFP is a mutual Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA). What are the next steps for executing this NDA, and how should we propose modifications or redlines to the language of this NDA?
Exhibit M is required for all Bidders whose bids are advanced to the Initial Short List.

We are still determining if a project will meet the requirements of this Draft RFP, and would like the opportunity to review questions and answers prior to submittal. Are we still able to participate in this process without submitting a Bid Definition Form?
Yes. The questions and answers are posted publicly on this webpage. Note that no extension will be granted for Bid Submittal Dates.

We have submitted a Bid Definition Form and received our Bid Entry Form. Is it possible to change the details on the projects of the Bid Entry Form (i.e., Facility Name, Capacity, Contract Term, Point of Interconnection, and County)?
These details can be revised. However, if other material or substantive changes are required, such as Resource Type, Structure, or Contract Term are revised, an updated Bid Definition Form will need to be completed and in turn, Idaho Power will provide an updated Bid Entry Form.

Will Idaho Power allow developers to interconnect directly to the new Boardman to Hemingway (B2H) transmission line?
There are no specific restrictions in the RFP process. Any requests to interconnect will need to be submitted and evaluated through the Generator Interconnection and Transmission Service study processes.

We thought we submitted our Bid Definition Form, but it was not attached to the eForum message in Zycus and therefore did not receive a Bid Entry Form. According to the Draft RFP Schedule – Bid Entry Forms were to be distributed on 4/21. Will Idaho Power accommodate the receipt the Bid Definition Form late and distribute a Bid Entry Form?
Yes. Note that no extension shall be granted to applicable bid submittal dates as defined in Section 2.8 of the Draft RFP.

For Exhibit O, the Draft RFP states that redlines are only needed for this document if we are proposing a resource for IPC ownership; however, in the Bid Entry Form, under the “Resource Based Non-Pricing” tab, it asks us to redline the Exhibit O. Can you please clarify if we need to fill this out if we are only proposing PPA options?
Section 4.8 does state that Bidders who “propose a resource for Idaho Power ownership must provide bids and pricing consistent and compliant with the Exhibit – O”. The intent of this statement was not meant to exclude the need to redline material changes to the language within the Exhibit O documents should a Bidder propose a structure type outside of Idaho Power ownership. Consistent with Section 4.8 of the Draft RFP, the Bidder should identify the terms they propose to change, in redline form, and submit with its bid.

For Exhibit P (or the narrative), would you like us to have each section be its own document or have one consolidated document with each section labeled?
The intent is to compile one document with each section labeled.

In the Bid Entry Form under “Storage Overbuild %”, it is grayed out and we cannot answer it. Is this something that is a requirement for standalone or for solar + BESS?
The field is open only to Asset Purchase bids for a standalone BESS or co-located BESS. For BSA, Idaho Power expects the “Contract Capacity” and related contract terms to provide capacity information.

Will there be a bidder workshop, and will we be able to attend remotely? What is the time and date of the bidder workshop?
A bidder workshop is not anticipated at this time. If that changes, it will be a remote workshop via virtual platform.

Does Idaho Power plan on building any substations along the new B2H transmission line, or will it be one continuous line between the existing Boardman to Hemingway substations? If a new substation will be built, will the location be disclosed?
See the Boardman to Hemingway Transmission Line webpage for more information.

Could MS Word documents be provided for the PPA contract, Wind BTA, and Wind Technical Specifications so that we can provide a marked-up version?
Word versions of all draft form agreements are provided in the Zycus event.

The Wind Technical Specification contains reference to an O&M Facility. In nearly all cases of the reference, it says “if applicable.” What is the expectation of the RFP Team for when an O&M facility is applicable to the project being proposed?
The technical specifications are intended as a baseline for review. An O&M Facility very likely isn’t needed specifically. All bids must contemplate and ensure a fully functional and operational facility. It is the bidder’s responsibility to ensure appropriate ancillary facilities are included as applicable.

Is there a desired amount of development and performance security per project or by project type, i.e. $/kW, to post during the development stage of the project and during operations of the project? (Also known as credit support, development security, and/or performance security.)
Credit support and any development and/or performance security will be reviewed as it pertains to each project submitted and may change depending on the size of the project and credit worthiness of the business entity. For reference purposes only, minimum requirements are defined in the Exhibit H Agreements to the Draft RFP.

What are Idaho Power’s assumed ELCC values for the allowable generation products? Will Idaho Power develop geographic/regional based ELCC values for wind-based generation products?
Idaho Power will develop bid-specific ELCC’s for shortlisted projects. For recently discussed proxy IRP resource ELCCs please see the March 9 IRPAC presentation titled “Loss of Load Analysis/ELCC Update,” which can be found on our IRP webpage.

Is the Draft RFP accepting Solar + Storage projects? We did not see this as an option in Table 3-1, 3-2, or 3-3, or as a resource type listed in the BDF. If yes, how should we complete the BDF?
The Bid Definition Form (BDF) was intended to provide Product Definition by technology and ownership option. One column per product and ownership structure (BESS – IPC Ownership, Solar – PPA). Then the Bid Definition section allows the bidder to define the selectable portfolio combination. (1.1 BESS – IPC Ownership. 2.1 – Solar – PPA, 3.1 BESS IPC Ownership + Solar PPA).

Is the Bid Definition Form (BDF) Exhibit A to the Draft RFP a binding document, or will the bidder be able to update their project with the bid submittal?
The BDF is not a binding document. This Exhibit A to the Draft RFP is intended to gather information from the bidder and allow Idaho Power to provide the bidder with a Bid Entry Form that contains accurate information for the product or technology to be submitted. If the bidder determines an update is required, Idaho Power will need to provide an updated and accurate Bid Entry Form, which could cause time constraints, and Idaho Power cannot guarantee it can accommodate an update.

Where should the Bid Definition Form (BDF) be uploaded?
Using the eForum collaboration function, please attach the BDF to a new message to ensure timely receipt.