Conclusions and Recommendations For the reasons stated herein, Merrimack Energy concludes that the shortlisting decisions by PG&E in the 2007 RPS RFO were reasonable and based on the requirements and evaluation criteria set forth in the Solicitation Protocol. The selection of the shortlist was very inclusive and erred on the side of including more offers in what was a very ample shortlist relative to the procurement target. In the Shortlist Report, Merrimack Energy recommended a number of changes to the RPS procurement process, several of which were adopted by PG&E in the 2008 RPS RFO. Despite recommending certain changes, our assessment is that the PG&E evaluation methodology was appropriate and that it was administered fairly and reasonably. Consistent with suggestions we had made in and after the Shortlist Report, PG&E developed a negotiation prioritization strategy with shortlisted bidders that created an active group of negotiations based on price and viability factors. The Mojave Solar bid was consistently placed in the secondary group and although its proposal changed over time from the proposal initially shortlisted, it remained in the secondary group during the course of contract negotiations. While the project sponsor is a very viable and experienced developer of solar thermal projects and is capable of developing the project effectively, there are concerns associated with the timing of the project that adds risk to the ultimate success of the project. PG&E has done an effective job in managing these risks through contract provisions in both the original contract and the amended and restated agreement. The details of the PPA and the amended and restated agreement are addressed in the Confidential Appendix to this report. While the positive attributes of the project should be balanced against the negative attributes in assessing whether or not the amended and restated agreement should be approved, the IE has concerns about project value for the customers. In addition to the high project cost and low market value, the project contains a number of challenges to meet its proposed construction start date primarily associated with transmission interconnection and access. While PG&E has negotiated provisions in the Amended and Restated contract that generally protects the interests of consumers, should the firm interconnection be delayed longer than anticipated, PG&E customers may be exposed to higher RA costs to back-up the project should the cost of capacity in the market exceed the price caps established in the contract. In conclusion, the IE has reservations about the contract based on project value including the levelized net market value calculations relative to project benchmarks from other recent solicitations. PG&E Gas and Electric Advice Filing List General Order 96-B, Section IV AT&T Dept of General Services Northern California Power Association Xxxxxxxx & Xxxx LLP Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx Occidental Energy Marketing, Inc. Ameresco Downey & Brand OnGrid Solar Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxx Xxxx Energy Praxair Arizona Public Service Company Economic Sciences Corporation X. X. Xxxx & Associates XXXX Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx LLP RCS, Inc. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxx, Inc. Xxxxxx Farms Recurrent Energy Xxxxxx Xxxxx Associates G. A. Xxxxxx & Assoc. SCD Energy Solutions Bloomberg GLJ Publications SCE Bloomberg New Energy Finance GenOn Energy, Inc. SMUD Boston Properties Goodin, MacBride, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx XXXXX Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx XxXxxxxxxx, P.C. Green Power Institute San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Brookfield Renewable Power Xxxxx & Xxxxxx Seattle City Light CA Bldg Industry Association Hitachi Sempra Utilities CLECA Law Office In House Energy Sierra Pacific Power Company CSC Energy Services International Power Technology Silicon Valley Power California Cotton Ginners & Growers Assn Intestate Gas Services, Inc. Silo Energy LLC California Energy Commission Xxxxxxxx Berkeley National Lab Southern California Edison Company California League of Food Processors Los Angeles Dept of Water & Power Spark Energy, L.P. California Public Utilities Commission Xxxx, Forward, Xxxxxxxx & Scripps LLP Sun Light & Power Calpine MAC Lighting Consulting Sunshine Design Cardinal Cogen MBMC, Inc. Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx XXX & Associates Tabors Caramanis & Associates Xxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx Tecogen, Inc. City of Palo Alto XxXxxxxx & Associates Tiger Natural Gas, Inc. City of Palo Alto Utilities Merced Irrigation District TransCanada City of San Xxxx Xxxxxxx Irrigation District Turlock Irrigation District Clean Energy Fuels Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx United Cogen Coast Economic Consulting Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxx Utility Cost Management Commercial Energy NLine Energy, Inc. Utility Specialists Consumer Federation of California NRG West Verizon Crossborder Energy NaturEner Wellhead Electric Company Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx LLP Navigant Consulting Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association (WMA) Day Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxx & Xxxx Associates eMeter Corporation Defense Energy Support Center North America Power Partners
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
Decisions The General Assembly shall be free to act on its own initiative to formulate proposals and take decisions in accordance with the procedures set out herein. In addition, all proposals made by the Executive Board shall also be considered and decided upon by the General Assembly. The following decisions shall be taken by the General Assembly: Content, finances and intellectual property rights - Proposals for changes to Annexes 1 and 2 of the Grant Agreement to be agreed by the Funding Authority - Changes to the Consortium Plan - Modifications to Attachment 1 (Background Included) - Additions to Attachment 3 (List of Third Parties for simplified transfer according to Section 8.2.2) - Additions to Attachment 4 (Identified Affiliated Entities)] Evolution of the consortium - Entry of a new Party to the consortium and approval of the settlement on the conditions of the accession of such a new Party - Withdrawal of a Party from the consortium and the approval of the settlement on the conditions of the withdrawal - Identification of a breach by a Party of its obligations under this Consortium Agreement or the Grant Agreement - Declaration of a Party to be a Defaulting Party - Remedies to be performed by a Defaulting Party - Termination of a Defaulting Party’s participation in the consortium and measures relating thereto - Proposal to the Funding Authority for a change of the Coordinator - Proposal to the Funding Authority for suspension of all or part of the Project - Proposal to the Funding Authority for termination of the Project and the Consortium Agreement Appointments On the basis of the Grant Agreement, the appointment if necessary of: Executive Board Members
Final Decisions The Contracting Officer will issue a final decision as required by 33.211 if—
Written Decisions Decisions rendered at Level One which are unsatisfactory to the aggrieved person and all decisions rendered at Levels Two and Three of the grievance procedure shall be in writing setting forth the decision and the reasons therefore, and shall be transmitted promptly to all parties in interest and to the Association.
Impartial Decisions The Design Professional is the interpreter of the conditions of the Construction Contract and the judge of its performance, in the first instance. The Design Professional shall side neither with the Owner nor with the Contractor, but shall use its powers to enforce performance by both.
PUBLIC RELATIONS AND PUBLICITY 43.1 The Provider must not by itself, its employees or agents and procure that its Sub-Contractors must:
Recommendations It is recommended that:
