Agency Commerce Dept

Contractor TPR Enterprises LLC – EcoEngineers

SWIFT Contract Number 249598

Project Name Natural Gas Innovation Act Plan Reviews

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Legislation passed in 2021 enacted the Natural Gas Innovation Act, Minn. Stat. § 216B.2427 (NGIA). The NGIA allows for natural gas utilities to submit Innovation Plans subject to review by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The State issued a solicitation identified as COMM-EPA01-20231127 on November 27, 2023 for a technical expert or experts to investigate the reasonableness of Innovation Plans filed by rate-regulated natural gas utilities.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 05/29/2024 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 01/31/2025 - 00:00

Actual end date Wed, 04/30/2025 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $95000

Amendments $410500

Contract total $505500

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State utility investigation funds

Is this a sole source contract? No

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) {Empty}

Evaluator Name Peter Teigland

Evaluator Email Address peter.teigland@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor met what were at times very tight timelines to make substantial contributions to the Department’s comments filed with the PUC. Deliverables were completed within the established timelines.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality of the finished product from the contractor was very good. The contractor’s expertise in life cycle analysis was evident in the work provided. The contractor needed to adapt—and did adapt well—to the stylistic and procedural conventions for the Department of Commerce’s regulatory filings before the PUC.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor’s amended cost was expensive, but within reason.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the contractor delivered quality product on a tight timeline. The work contributed to the Department’s effort to deliver value to Xcel Energy’s natural gas customers out of the Innovation Plan.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? Yes

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): N/A

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied