Key Points

Current issues

  • Prequal approach varies across operators (system, questionnaires, categories, etc..).

  • Duplication of effort.

  • Time and resource intensive for contractor – as much as 2 to 4 weeks, utilizing at least 1 dedicated resource (not counting other cross-functional roles needed for documentation, follow-up, queries, etc.).

  • Disadvantage to smaller contractors who may not have available resources to allocate for multiple prequal efforts. 

  • Timeline for feedback from operator to contractor on prequal progress / outcome varies significantly and can also be lengthy.

Discussion Points

  • Local industry is supportive of standardized approach to vendor prequalification.

  • Opportunity to mirror benefits realized from STOW / drug testing / PPE standardization.

  • Uniform system can be a minimum requirement, then each operator company can determine additional requirements accordingly.

  • Internal controls, confidentiality and data security are critical to the success of a uniform portal.

  • Aspects such as standardization of prequal questionnaire, segmentation and categories of goods and services can improve procurement efficiency.

  • Database can then also be used for market intelligence, networking across the industry.

  • Suggested to be managed by Chamber.

  • Consideration to sync with OPR requirements.

Proposed  Benefits

  • Eliminates duplication of efforts for operators (i.e. all prequalifying same contractors)

  • Standardized approach -  industry specific questionnaire can be developed

  • Introduces transparency in the system -  equity and equality across the board for the contractors

  • Recommended tiered approach would benefit smaller companies as there will be visibility across all operators

  • Opportunities for new companies as there will be an increased market base for operators.

  • Opportunity for shared administrative costs (e.g. registration fee)

  • Use of existing databases (e.g. STOW) may reduction the implementation time of this initiative.

Next Steps

  • Recommend tiered approach.

  • There must be alignment on:

    • Show system would be operated.

    • transition (when/who/how) from current state to unified platform.

  • Ascertain where should we start as first phase of harmonization – suggested to start with upstream commonly used services.

  • Key principles around equity, understanding the unique characteristics across micro enterprises to large services.

  • Integrated discussion across Energy Chamber, GORTT and Companies.

  • Suggested shared cost (no clear agreement on who / distribution). Forum was open to considering small registration fee.