Unit 1 assignment 3 rfp clarification

Will it be a requirement of the Wind and Solar procurement event Initial Forward Procurement that projects be located in Illinois? No, projects may be located in Illinois or in a State that is adjacent to Illinois. However, for renewable energy credits to qualify for the Illinois RPS for projects located in a state adjacent to Illinois, then the project must meet the public interest criteria specified in Section c 1 I of the IPA Act. Please review Section 5 d of the REC Contract regarding the consequences for an adjacent-state project being subsequently found to be ineligible for the Illinois RPS under application of the public interest criteria.

Unit 1 assignment 3 rfp clarification

The agency concedes that, for contract reference numbers one and three, the contract numbers and the size values are incorrect, because they are based on the swapped background information.

For the "Recent," "Scope" and "Complexity" columns, the values are the same for the first and third contract references, such that reliance on the incorrect background information did not result in incorrect values being listed. The agency repeated this mistake in the PPET report's finding sections, which are the only sections of the report that explain DHS's basis for its assignment of confidence ratings to the two contract references.

In these sections, DHS expressly based its confidence ratings for the first and third contract references on the incorrect size information. As a result of these errors, substantial portions of the PPET report are either inaccurate or are based upon inaccurate information, including those portions of the report where the agency documented its rating determinations.

We further note that the SSA, in turn, relied on these findings in the source selection decision, even citing the incorrect size information for Inserso's first and third past performance references in the tradeoff section. The above demonstrates that the contemporaneous record is inconsistent with the post-protest statements provided by the agency, which attempt to downplay the agency's reliance on the incorrect size information.

We therefore give little weight to the agency's post hoc representation that it would have reached the same result even if the PPET had considered the correct size information.

Further, we note there is reason to question the correctness of this representation. For example, while the agency contends that it would have assigned a substantial confidence rating to the third contract reference, which received outstanding past performance questionnaire PPQ ratings but was only partially similar in size, scope, and complexity to the instant requirement, it contemporaneously assigned only a satisfactory confidence rating to a contract reference reference number one that it believed had similarly received outstanding PPQ ratings but was only partially relevant in size, scope, and complexity.

It is therefore not clear from the contemporaneous evaluation record what a past performance evaluation that considered the correct size information would have concluded.

Ace Info Solutions, Inc. In this connection the RFP provides: SRTR argues that the agency simply failed to evaluate the considerations noted above at the time it evaluated proposals and maintains that, had it done so, it would have concluded that SRE's technical approach was not viable.

However, SRTR argues that this study does not demonstrate the viability of SRE's proposed approach, and instead shows that its approach may in fact not be possible. We sustain this aspect of SRTR's protest. As noted, the RFP specifically required the agency to evaluate the viability of the offerors' technical approaches and to consider the offerors' key technical assumptions and justifications.

As the foregoing discussion demonstrates, SRE's technical approach relies on processing waste at [deleted] than has ever been demonstrated, either in a laboratory setting or in practice.

The agency's evaluation record is devoid of any discussion of this concern, or any conclusion regarding the agency's view of the probability for success of the SRE technical approach.

During the protest, the agency submitted an affidavit executed by the chairman of the technical evaluation board TEB.

Unit 1 assignment 3 rfp clarification

In his affidavit, he states that the agency was aware of the report referenced by the protester and quoted above, that the report was reviewed by the chairman and several members of the TEB, and that the agency also sought input from a subject matter expert on this question.

TEB Chairman's Affidavit at The affidavit goes on to represent that, during discussions with the subject matter expert, it was noted that there were several possible approaches to mitigating levels of Isopar L in the DSS.

He also specifically stated the following with respect to the findings of the test report: Finally, he characterized any potential solution to this problem as a "yet[-]to[-]be[-]fully[-]developed technical improvement that would be required to facilitate the high rates of processing contemplated by the RFP.

Connect with Us

First, and perhaps most significantly, there is nothing in the contemporaneous record that shows that the agency actually considered this question during its evaluation of proposals.

The only evidence in the record is the declaration prepared by the TEB chairman submitted during the course of the protest. In addition, even the evidence tendered--the TEB chairman's affidavit--suggests that there are reasons for concern about the viability of the SRE technical solution.

As noted, SRE based its proposal to process waste at [deleted]M entirely on the results of the test report.

However, the TEB chairman himself characterizes the test results as significantly uncertain and not a predictor of SRE's possible success in implementing its technical solution.

TEB Chairman's Affidavit at 2. He also characterized solution of the Isopar L concentration problem as a "yet-to-be-fully-developed technical improvement.

In other words, the TEB chairman himself concludes that the test report--which provides the sole underlying scientific support for SRE's never-before-tried technical approach--provides, at best, uncertain evidence to demonstrate its viability, and that resolution of the Isopar L concentration problem itself is a yet-to-be fully developed technical solution.

Moreover, as noted, although the TEB sought the input of a subject matter expert, it did not inform her that SRE proposed to process the waste at[deleted]M; it follows that the TEB did not have the benefit of her views concerning viability of SRE's technical approach.

Finally, we note that SRE's proposed technical solution afforded it a significant competitive advantage, providing--at least in part--a way for it to significantly reduce the overall amount of waste to be processed. As noted, SRE proposed to prepare approximately [deleted] Mgal.

When to file an application

Under these circumstances, we conclude that the agency unreasonably failed to evaluate the viability of SRE's proposed technical solution. We therefore sustain this aspect of SRTR's protest.

Feb 8, TSI argues that the Bureau evaluated its quotation in an unequal manner as compared to four awardees: In response, the agency asserts that TSI is requesting that GAO reevaluate quotations and that TSI's failure to address these two important laws and regulations in its quotation left the TEP unable to determine whether TSI would in fact provide training on those laws.

Additionally, the agency contends that TSI's allegations of disparate treatment fail to show that "any awardee received a higher rating for a quote that contained the same or similar omissions as TSI.

It is a fundamental principle of government procurement that competition must be conducted on an equal basis; that is, the contracting agency must treat all offerors or vendors equally; it must even-handedly evaluate offers against common requirements and evaluation criteria. Yet, these awardees' quotations were not assessed weaknesses for their omission.Activity 1.

A scheduling term 2. The smallest work unit within a project; the basic building block of a project. ADA The Americans with Disabilities Act which gives civil rights protection to individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the basis .

Order in Case No of dated 8-Dec In the matter of Petition for approval of procurement of MW under Case 1 Phase 1 and approval of amendments in the Power Purchase Agreement initialed between MSEDCL and M/s JSW Energy Ltd. The Department of State’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons leads the United States' global engagement against human trafficking, an umbrella term used to describe the activities involved when someone obtains or .

How Does a Person file a Charge of Discrimination (a compliant)? The Civil Rights Division investigates claims involving discrimination based on a protected class in three categories: employment, housing and places of public accommodation.

It is a State Funded Division, and a neutral party. UNDP, the United Nations Development Programme, the UN's global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and .

ASSISTANT TO REGISTRAR FULL TIME – FULL BENEFITS 35 hrs/week, 12 months/year. Application Deadline: Open Until Filled; Priority Screening November 19, at 4 pm Position Summary: The Assistant to Registrar shall be responsible to the Registrar and assist in the maintenance and integrity of student academic records and registration procedures.

Public Procurement Regulatory Authority