Alectrona
Commercial procurementCouncils, NHS trusts, academy trusts, universities and housing associations buy solar through a formal tender, and so do most large commercial buyers. A good specification is what lets you compare bids like for like, and it is built around the engineering rather than a from-price.
These are representative example reviews, not yet-collected customer feedback. They are written to illustrate the kind of feedback Alectrona aims to earn and are shown as design placeholders while we gather and verify reviews from our first commercial clients. Alectrona is the commercial solar trading brand of RVTC LTD.
What set Alectrona apart was the documented design pack. We had quotes from three installers, but only Alectrona handed us a full set of drawings, a single-line diagram and a design referencing BS 7671 and the G99 connection process. The whole thing read like an engineering submission rather than a sales brochure. Our M&E consultant reviewed it and signed it off without a single query. That gave the board the confidence to release the capital.
Other firms priced our roof off a satellite image and a desktop guess. Alectrona flew an in-house drone survey, fully insured and flown by a qualified commercial drone pilot, and built a 3D model of the actual roof. It picked up plant, vents and a parapet line that a flat aerial photo had completely missed, which changed the panel layout. I would rather find that out at design stage than on the day the scaffold goes up. The accuracy of that survey is the reason I trusted everything that followed.
As a finance director I was wary of being oversold a system bigger than we could use. Alectrona modelled the array against our actual half-hourly consumption data rather than an annual total, so it is sized to what we genuinely draw on site during the day. They were honest that exporting surplus is worth far less than self-consumption, and built the design around that. The capital case stacked up because the engineering was honest, not because the numbers were inflated.
We were undecided between buying outright, leasing and a PPA. Alectrona laid out all three side by side with the pros and cons of each against our balance sheet, instead of pushing the one that pays them best. They were clear about where a PPA makes sense and where capex wins, and pointed us at our own accountant for the tax treatment. The survey and design took a little longer than I expected, but the thoroughness was worth the wait. Genuinely consultative.
The install crew were tidy and well run, and worked to a clear CDM 2015 plan with a proper site induction and RAMS. What impressed me most was the handover. We received a full commissioning pack with the IEC 62446-1 test results, certification, O&M documentation and an as-built record for our maintenance team. As the people who have to live with this asset for the next twenty years, having that paperwork in order matters enormously. Nothing was left loose.
I expected the usual hard sell and got the opposite. After surveying our site Alectrona told us one roof section was not worth covering because of shading, and that a smaller, well-sited array was the better investment than filling every square metre. There was no commission-driven upselling and no pressure. For a six-figure capital project, that straight talk is exactly what you want from the people advising you. We will be using them again on our second site.
A commercial solar system above 50 kWp is rarely bought on a quote. It is bought through procurement: an Invitation to Tender or Request for Proposal, often after a Pre-Qualification Questionnaire or Selection Questionnaire, and frequently through a public-sector framework. The buyer writes a specification, several installers respond, and the responses are scored. The single thing that decides whether that process gives you a fair comparison is the quality of the specification you put out, because a weak brief invites a race to the lowest headline figure and a strong one forces every bidder to price the same engineered system.
This page explains how solar procurement via tender works, what a good solar ITT should ask for so the bids are genuinely comparable, the red flags that mark a weak response, and how Alectrona, the commercial solar arm of RVTC LTD, responds to a tender. We have written it for the people who actually run these processes: procurement officers, estates and facilities managers, sustainability leads and finance teams. The non-MCS assurance stack referenced throughout is the framework that applies to systems this size, since MCS is a domestic certification scheme that does not cover commercial-scale installations.
Most large solar projects move through a recognised sequence, whether or not your organisation is bound by public procurement rules.
The process usually opens with a PQQ or Selection Questionnaire, which qualifies bidders on financial standing, insurance, health-and-safety record and relevant experience before any design work begins. Qualified bidders then receive the Invitation to Tender or Request for Proposal, which contains the specification, the scope, the contract terms and the scoring method. Bidders respond with a technical proposal and a price, the responses are evaluated against published criteria, and a contract is awarded. Public bodies frequently run this through a framework, a pre-procured panel of suppliers that removes the need to run a full open tender each time and gives a compliant route under the Procurement Act 2023.
The part that most affects the outcome is the evaluation split. A tender scored purely on price drives bidders towards the cheapest panel, the thinnest design effort and the smallest commissioning scope, because that is what wins. A most economically advantageous tender split, where quality and whole-life value carry real weight alongside price, rewards a bidder who has actually surveyed the building and modelled the load. We respond best to the second kind, and the rest of this page is written to help you write one.
A strong specification makes every bidder price the same engineered system, so the prices you compare mean something. These are the clauses that do that work.
An evidenced design rather than a panel count. Ask for the system to be sized from a site survey and a yield model, with the assumptions stated. We size from an on-site 3D drone survey and model the array in PV*SOL against your half-hourly consumption data, so the generation figure in the bid is specific to your building. A bidder who cannot show how a figure was reached has guessed it.
Half-hourly load modelling. The value of a commercial system is set by how much generation you use on site versus export, and that is only knowable from your half-hourly demand profile. Require it in the specification, supply your data, and ask each bidder to state the modelled self-consumption. A bid that skips this cannot have priced the return honestly.
Bankable, named modules. Ask for the panel to be named by manufacturer and model, with its bankability evidence stated: the BloombergNEF Tier 1 list it appears on and the quarter of that list. Tier status is periodised, so naming the quarter and re-verifying before contract is what keeps the claim honest. This stops a bidder swapping to an unknown panel after award.
A compliant grid design under G99. A system this size connects under ENA Engineering Recommendation G99, assessed by your Distribution Network Operator, which across Yorkshire and North and North-East Lincolnshire is Northern Powergrid. Require the bidder to set out the connection route and any export limitation, because the connection can shape both the cost and the timetable. Our how-we-quote process covers where this sits in the design.
Commissioning to BS 7671 and IEC 62446-1. Specify that the installation is designed and tested to BS 7671, the wiring regulations, and commissioned and documented to IEC 62446-1, the standard for grid-connected PV system documentation, commissioning tests and inspection. Require the test certificates and the handover pack as deliverables. This is the evidence the system was built and proven correctly.
CDM 2015 duties named. A commercial install is construction work, so the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 apply. Ask each bidder to state its duties and how it will discharge them. A bidder who does not mention CDM 2015 on a project this size is a concern.
An Insurance-Backed Guarantee and a real O&M scope. Require an Insurance-Backed Guarantee so the workmanship warranty survives the installer, and ask for a defined operations-and-maintenance scope with response times, not a line that says maintenance is included. Our design and engineering page sets out the documented pack these deliverables come from.
Note what is deliberately absent from that list: MCS. MCS is the domestic microgeneration certification scheme and does not apply to systems above 50 kWp, so requiring it in a commercial ITT excludes the engineering-led firms best suited to the work. Our guide to quality without MCS sets out the standards that do apply.
When you evaluate the responses, a few patterns reliably mark a bid that has not done the engineering.
A from-price or a cost per kWp with no survey. A figure quoted before anyone has been to the building cannot reflect your roof structure, your shading or your connection, and a per-kWp rate hides what is actually included. A real commercial price follows a survey and a model. We do not publish a from-price for this reason, and a bid that leads with one has priced a generic system rather than yours.
An MCS claim. A bidder citing MCS certification on a system above 50 kWp has either misunderstood the scope of the scheme or is using a domestic trust badge where it does not apply. Either way it tells you the engineering framework for this scale is not where their attention is.
No half-hourly load modelling. If a bid states a saving or a payback without showing the self-consumption it is built on, the number is unsupported. The whole economic case for commercial solar turns on how much generation is used on site, and that is only knowable from the half-hourly profile. Our guide on choosing a commercial installer goes deeper on what to test for.
An undisclosed panel or a substitution clause. A bid that will not name the module, or that reserves the right to substitute it after award, is keeping the option to fit something cheaper later. The specification should close that door, and the evaluation should mark down any bid that leaves it open.
We respond as an engineering-led firm, which means the proposal is built from the building rather than dropped onto it.
A documented design pack. Where the timetable and access allow, our response is built on an on-site 3D drone survey by our own fully insured in-house pilot and a PV*SOL yield model run against your half-hourly load. That gives a generation and self-consumption figure specific to your site, with the assumptions visible, rather than a figure carried in from another job. The pack and the method behind it are set out on our design and engineering page.
The non-MCS assurance stack, stated in full. Because the system sits outside MCS, we assure it through the framework that applies at this scale: a design and installation to BS 7671, commissioning and documentation to IEC 62446-1, a grid connection under G99 with the DNO, CDM 2015 duties discharged across the construction phase, and an Insurance-Backed Guarantee on the workmanship. We name these in the response so the evaluator can score the engineering directly.
The whole-life view. Our response covers the operations-and-maintenance scope and the funding context, so a finance team can read it as a whole-life case rather than a single headline figure. The economics route to the commercial finance pages rather than a single quoted figure, because the right number for your organisation depends on your tariff, your load and your funding route.
A note on status, stated plainly. Alectrona is the commercial trading identity of RVTC LTD, an engineer-led firm. What we bring to a tender is the engineering: the survey, the model, the documented design pack and the non-MCS assurance standard described above.
The procurement route varies by the kind of body running it, and the detail of each sector sits on its own page.
For local authorities, the tender usually runs through a framework or a compliant open process under the Procurement Act 2023, often tied to a net-zero or estate-decarbonisation target. Our public-sector and councils page covers the estate and reporting context. For NHS bodies, procurement is shaped by the Greener NHS programme and by the operational constraints of a live clinical site, which our NHS and hospitals page addresses. For academy trusts and schools, the route runs through trust procurement and the relevant education frameworks, with funding routes that differ from the commercial market, set out on our schools and academies page. Universities and housing associations typically run their own formal tenders with sustainability weighting built into the scoring.
Yes. We respond to Invitations to Tender and Requests for Proposal for commercial solar above 50 kWp, including those issued by councils, NHS trusts, academy trusts, universities and housing associations. We build the response from an on-site survey and a PV*SOL model where the timetable allows, and we state the full non-MCS assurance stack so the engineering can be scored. If your process runs through a named framework, tell us which one and we will confirm whether we can respond through it.
Ask for the things that make bids comparable and honest. A system sized from a site survey and a yield model with the assumptions stated; half-hourly load modelling with the modelled self-consumption declared; the panel named with its BloombergNEF Tier 1 status and quarter; a compliant grid design under G99 with your Distribution Network Operator, which across Yorkshire and North and North-East Lincolnshire is Northern Powergrid; commissioning to BS 7671 and IEC 62446-1 with the certificates as deliverables; CDM 2015 duties named; and an Insurance-Backed Guarantee with a defined operations-and-maintenance scope. Do not require MCS, because it is a domestic scheme that does not apply above 50 kWp.
Because MCS is the domestic microgeneration certification scheme and does not cover systems above 50 kWp, requiring it in a commercial tender excludes the engineering-led firms best suited to the work without adding any real assurance. At this scale the standards that apply are BS 7671 for the electrical design, IEC 62446-1 for commissioning and documentation, G99 for the grid connection, CDM 2015 for the construction duties and an Insurance-Backed Guarantee for the workmanship. Specify those instead, and you score the engineering that actually governs a commercial install.
There is no honest single figure, and we do not publish a from-price or a cost per kWp, because the right number depends on your roof, your half-hourly load, your grid connection and your funding route. A real commercial price follows a site survey and a yield model rather than a headline rate. In a tender, that is the point of a good specification: it makes every bidder price the same engineered system from your data, so the prices you compare actually mean something. The whole-life economics route to our commercial finance pages rather than a quoted figure here.
It varies with the procurement route and the grid connection rather than the installation itself. The tender stage, from issuing the ITT to awarding the contract, is set by your own timetable and any framework rules. After award, the gating item is usually the G99 connection agreement with your Distribution Network Operator, which on a constrained part of the network can take time, and a well-judged export design often keeps the project moving without waiting on reinforcement. We give a realistic programme in the response once we have seen the building and the connection position, rather than a fixed promise up front.
Send the ITT or specification, the scope and the scoring method, and your half-hourly consumption data if you can release it, because that is what lets us model the self-consumption properly. Access for an on-site drone survey strengthens the response, so flag whether and when that is possible within your timetable. We then build the technical proposal around the survey and the PV*SOL model and set out the non-MCS assurance stack against your evaluation criteria. Our how-we-quote and design-and-engineering pages describe the underlying method in full.
A guide can only take you so far. The figure you get is modelled from your own half-hourly load and a system sized from the on-site drone survey. No obligation, and systems this size sit outside the domestic MCS scheme, so the assurance is the engineering stack.