Wide bid differences often come from different assumptions about duty, ambient, interfaces and scope rather than price alone. A good RFQ makes critical inputs, assumptions and deviations visible.
What the project should produce
Owners, EPC and procurement teams tendering new, expanded, replacement or multi-unit plants.
Reduce non-comparable bids caused by different assumptions and boundaries.
Produce a data sheet, responsibility matrix, deviation schedule and common return format.
Separate owner inputs, supplier calculations and mandatory declarations. Compare complete operable systems, handover evidence and long-term support—not only genset data sheets.
01
State the load and operating duty
Define prime, standby or mixed duty, operating hours, load profile, largest start and expansion stages.
- Attach load list and starting methods
- Separate continuous, peak and emergency cases
- State paralleling, N+1 and future objectives
02
Provide site and infrastructure conditions
Altitude, heat, dust, wet season, transport, fuel and building conditions change the solution.
- Give location, ambient range and photos
- State indoor, outdoor, container or mobile requirement
- Describe fuel quality, delivery and storage
03
Freeze electrical and control interfaces
Voltage and frequency are only the start; include bus, fault, earthing, protection and communications.
- Attach single-line and existing-system data
- Define ATS, paralleling, shedding and monitoring
- Allocate cable, switchgear and upstream interfaces
04
Include delivery, testing and service
Packing, transport, installation support, FAT/SAT, training, spares and response change total cost.
- Request document, drawing, software and certificate list
- Define FAT, SAT and site-support scope
- Request recommended spares, tools and training
05
Compare through one return and deviation schedule
Each bidder should answer the same fields and identify exclusions, alternatives and owner decisions.
- Require clause-by-clause response
- Separate exceptions, assumptions and options
- Compare lifecycle, lead time, evidence and service
Project review matrix
| State the load and operating duty | Attach load list and starting methods；Separate continuous, peak and emergency cases |
|---|---|
| Provide site and infrastructure conditions | Give location, ambient range and photos；State indoor, outdoor, container or mobile requirement |
| Freeze electrical and control interfaces | Attach single-line and existing-system data；Define ATS, paralleling, shedding and monitoring |
| Include delivery, testing and service | Request document, drawing, software and certificate list；Define FAT, SAT and site-support scope |
| Compare through one return and deviation schedule | Require clause-by-clause response；Separate exceptions, assumptions and options |
Three common mistakes
Issuing only total kW
Each bidder must invent starts, coincidence and duty.
Writing “supplier responsible” without interfaces
Responsibility remains disputed without a location and acceptance criterion.
Comparing package purchase price only
Switchgear, fuel, logistics, commissioning, spares and downtime disappear.
Information to prepare for engineering review
- Load list, profile, starts and expansion stages
- Duty, hours and redundancy target
- Location, ambient, fuel and transport
- Single-line, voltage, earthing, protection and communications
- Equipment, installation, FAT/SAT and documents
- Spares, training, service, deviations and bid return