Posted: 10/26/2022

Question: Question: Proposer shall certify that it has no ownership in the energy tracking software proposed for this project? I am asking if we can use our own world class energy and water management software in the performance of this program, and not be deemed non-responsive in the RFP response.

Response: See Addenda No. 1 for a response to this question.

Posted: 10/26/2022

Question: Establishing a 20% savings goal over 10 years is perfectly reasonable for the RRPS School District. The idea that solely behavioral conservation measures can get you to goal in a pre-existing direct digital control building automation system environment presumes that the basics of building management and the basics of continuous commissioning are not in place at RRPS. Feels like an incorrect initial assumption or project premise. Could you consider a proposal that collaborates with and listens to the RRPS Facilities Team to drive an 'all of the above' strategy that could include all behavioral energy conservation measures but also includes maintenance performance metrics (emergency, preventive, corrective work order metrics), repair & replace strategies, new construction/retrofit strategies, with renewable, storage, electrification where it makes sense, and advanced digital strategies to name a few. It feels like the 20% behavioral only performance with penalties means there will be little flexibility (i.e. rigid baseline requirements) to adapt with RRPS over a 5 year contract term. Seems a bit limited. An 'all of the above' approach to accomplish student learning and development goals while delivering world class energy and water management strategies and STEM opportunities with 20% savings or cost avoidance as the end result seems like a more realistic win-win approach. If a proposed approach like this would not be deemed un-responsive, we'd be happy to propose such an approach.

Response: See Addenda No. 1 for a response to this question.