Collaborative Procurement for Sustainability Projects

1. Collaborative Procurement for Sustainability Projects CGSAConference April 2, 2014

2. Agenda • Intro • Why collaboration? • What we’ve done • Lessons learned • Q&A

3. Sustainability at Alameda County

4. Why Collaboration? Competitive pricing Improved regional cooperation/efficiency to advance common goals Participating agencies benefit by finding support despite lack of expertise, bandwidth, and funding for these projects More streamlined processes for bidders

5. Collaborative Procurement Projects Local Government EV Fleet Demonstration Project

6. InSearch of aCreativeSolution In a time of shrinking budgets and scarce staff resources, how do we increase the use of renewable energy at public facilities to save on energy costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from government operations?

7. Agencies across four counties collaborating on the procurement of distributed renewable energy systems for public facilities

8. Utilize Proven Model • Silicon Valley Renewable Energy Procurement (SV-REP) • Completed in 2010 • Led by Santa Clara County and Joint Venture Silicon Valley Network • 9 Agencies • 70 Sites

9. R-REP Project Team • Lead Agency • Conveners • Participating Agencies • 19 Public Agencies • Cities (11) • Special Districts (4) • Counties (3) • Educational Institutions (1) • Consultants

10. R-REP Sites • 19 Agencies • 186 Sites • 31 MW

11. R-REP Timeline

12. Alameda County as Regional Leader • Achieving policy objectives • Increasing the use of renewable energy • Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from County operations • Regional leadership • Leader in renewable energy adoption – 14 solar projects in operations at its facilities

13. The challenges of renewable energy adoption are weighing public agencies down Public Agency $$$ Time Renewable Energy Complexity

14. Collaboration allows public agencies to tip the scales Public Agency Public Agency $$$ Public Agency Time Complexity Public Agency Renewable Energy

15. Leverage Investment of the Lead Agency • Leverage prior experience of lead agency in renewable energy procurement Complexity • Lead agency invests significant staff resources, participating agencies save resources: • SV-REP – Agencies saved 75-90% in admin costs and time Time

16. Leverage Investment of Lead Agency • Outreach • Negotiated MOU • IRFQ for sites assessments • RFP for consultants • Managed consulting team • RFI - Vendor outreach

17. Leverage Investment of Lead Agency • Wrote RFQ/P • Gathered detailed information on sites • Standardized template documents • Led evaluation of bids

18. Leverage Investment of the Lead Agency • Consulting team funded through County’s Designated Energy Fund – incentives from past energy projects and rebates from current projects $$$

19. Leverage Investment of the Lead Agency • Consultants Play Key Role • Bundling strategy • Economic/technical analysis of sites • Assistance in writing RFP • Advised on the evaluation of bids $$$ Time Complexity

20. Collaboration Leads to Lower Pricing • Economies of scale leads to lower pricing • Standardized procurement documents lowers transaction costs • Lower pricing translates to higher energy cost savings over the life of the project $$$

21. Financing Projects • Vendor asked to offer pricing under both a PPA and cash purchase. • Most agencies interested in 3rd party ownership model. • Workshops hosted for Participating Agencies on financing and renewable energy economics. $$$ Time Complexity

22. Environmental Benefits • Annual emissions reductions across all sites: • Equivalent to the CO2emissions from the electricity use of over 6,300 homes in Alameda County

23. Regional Economic Growth • Regional economic growth: If all projects paid for through a cash acquisition, total project costs would be an estimated $131.4 million. • Job creation: 839 jobs created as a result of the initiative if all projects are developed. • RFP included 40% GFE Workforce Requirement.

24. Lessons Learned • Engage internal staff early • Executive sponsor • Purchasing Department • Legal • Maintain engagement of all outside stakeholders • Education is key • Standardize assumptions for site assessments • Expert consultants are key

25. Collaborative ProcurementA Creative Solution Public Agency Public Agency $$$ Public Agency Time Public Agency Complexity Renewable Energy

26. Local Government EV Fleet Demonstration Project

27. Electric Vehicle (EV) Initiatives at Alameda County • Installed 40 EV Charging Stations in 2013 – free to the public until end of 2014 • Will purchase 26 EVCS in 2014 • Over 20 EVs in fleet (Miles Electric, Volt, Focus, RAV4, C-MAX, Prius) • Additional 26 EVs in next few months

28. Why EVs? • Eliminate tailpipe pollution, drastically reduce GHG emissions • “Greener” over time • Fits duty-cycle: most trips under 40-50 miles • Cost savings • Fun to drive!

29. Challenges ??

30. Local Government EV Fleet Demonstration Project Partners • Collaborative procurement with 10 other Bay Area municipal government • 90 all-electric vehicles and charging stations

31. Grant Funding for EVs • 40 EV Charging Stations • BAAQMD TFCA - $84,960 • CEC/ABAG - $182,762 • Total - $267,722 • 26 EV Charging Stations • $286,000 • 26 EVs • $526,000. • Total - $812,000

32. Local Government EV Fleet Demonstration Project - Grant Details • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) • $2.8 million to fund the incremental cost of an all-electric fleet vehicle and fully fund purchase and install of EV charging stations

33. Cost Breakdown • Incremental cost covered in grant (about $19K - $21K per vehicle) • “Match” = appx. $15K • Full cost of charging station and install (up to $11K) Estimated EVCS costs: • $4,000 -$7,000 per station (level 2) • Appx. $9,500 - $11,000/station for installation • $13,500 - $16,000 total • Dual ports reduce cost!

34. Project Team • Lead Agency • Convener • Participating Agencies • 10 Public Agencies • Cities (5) • Water Districts (2) • Counties (2) • City/County (SF) • Consultants • Funding

35. EV Charging Station Locations

36. Non-profit project convener – lead agency • “Buy America” waiver • Environmental clearance • Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) • Preparation of bids • Procurement and award • * Handover to partner agencies * How we did this Process Stakeholders Project partner contacts (fleet & sustainability) Alameda County purchasing & legal Partner’s purchasing & legal Caltrans liaisons (Alameda County) Partner’s engineering External consultants

37. Role of lead agency • Led RFQ/P process, including review/approval by all participating agencies, drafting of procurement documents, purchasing process • Developed MOU and coordinated approval • Managed environmental review • Caltrans liaison (federal funding) • Created A/E site designs for project

38. Timeline Process

39. Tangible financial benefits • EV bid saved over $349,000 in the purchase of new EVs (based on manufacturer's MSRP) – nearly $4,000 per vehicle. • Focus - $31,360 • Leaf (SV) - $33,947 • Successful utilization of federal tax-incentive in vehicle bid

40. Tangible environmental benefits • EV fleet is expected to achieve fuel costs savings of $500,000 and 1.5 million lbs. of net CO2 pollution prevention over the next five years.

41. EV + PV • 3 sites (11 charging stations total) currently connected to buildings with PV solar arrays • Approx. 26%-52% of power for charging stations from solar panels • R-REP - potential for EV + PV at 2 more sites

42. Lessons learned • Anticipate delays – participating agencies need various Council/Board approval and budget appropriations • Engage all stakeholders early (purchasing department, legal, etc.) • Balance inclusiveness and expedience

43. For more… http://www.acgov.org/sustain/documents/2013_Alameda_County_Transportation_Annual_Report.pdf

44. Q&A • www.acgov.org/sustain