2025-STM 00003 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: During the call on April 9, a “Tranche 1 report from 2024 RFP” was provided in chat. The provided pdf document actually appears to be dated 2019. Wondering if the wrong doc was attached? Is there a 2024 document that can be shared?
Answer: The link provided during the stakeholder meeting was to a 2019 CPRE report, not a 2024 RFP report. The latest RFP report from August 2024 is available at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/RFP-Documents.
2025-STM 00002 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: Is there any preference for SPS projects (hybrid vs co-located)?
Answer: Using the NERC definitions of these terms, the Companies are seeking co-located facilities.
2025-STM 00001 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: There was a request on the 1/29/2025 stakeholder call for comments to the pro forma documents. Which documents should stakeholders be using as the baseline?
Answer: 2025 RFP documents are not yet available. The Companies plan to use the 2024 RFP documents as a starting point, these are available on the IE’s website in the 2024 documents section - www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2024-RFP-Documents. The slide deck from the 2025 Stakeholder Engagement session is also available on the IE’s website at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/StakeholderMaterials.
2025-GEN 00009 Published On: 06/13/2025
Question: For a project submittal into the 2025 UOT, ALTA surveys that appear to meet Duke Survey requirements are completed, but were performed by a survey firm that is not listed in the "2025 RFP Appendix L-UOT Survey Requirements Attachment 2 Approved MSA Vendors". Is there a recommended course of action for remedying this in lieu of a complete resurvey?
Answer: Asset Transfer proposals are expected to comply with the provided requirements. That being said, if a market participant has an existing survey completed, Duke Energy is willing to review the survey and evaluate if acceptable and can provide comments if the survey is not satisfactory.
2025-GEN 00008 Published On: 06/13/2025
Question: I posed a previous question regarding eligibility of solar only projects sited in coop service territory able to connect directly to a DEP/DEC transmission line. I did not receive confirmation of a response to my question, but 2025-GEN 00004 appears to be a partial answer. It references special circumstances for grid charged batteries. To clarify further, are solar-only projects that pursue a utility transfer track of permitting and interconnection eligible even if the project is not in Duke service territory but connects to a Duke line and is in the Carolinas? In addition, how will auxiliary power be treated for the solar only project that is in coop service territory but connects to a DEP line? Will auxiliary power be considered a purchase by the project requiring the coop to provide service at the site or will aux power by netted out of the generation produced by the project?
Answer: Please see the response posted for 2025-GEN 00005.
2025-GEN 00007 Published On: 05/22/2025
Question: We would like to know what is Duke's policy on co-locating Qualified Facilities, where two projects are located next to each other? Would a phased approach for the two projects be possible through Qualified Facilities process? If two Qualified Facilities projects cannot be sited next to each other, could there be two adjacent projects (80 MW and 65 MW) that are not Qualified Facilities?
Answer: The FERC policy on Qualifying Facilities is that Qualifying Facilities within one mile of each other are deemed to be at the same site and their capacity is aggregated to determine whether they meet the 80 MW or less threshold for small power production QFs. Two QFs could be sited less than one mile from one another as long as the combined capacity is less than 80 MWs. If facilities are sited less than one mile from each other and the combined capacity is greater than 80 MW, then they would not qualify as QFs under FERC federal law. For facilities that would not qualify as QFs under FERC federal law, FERC has jurisdiction over their interconnections and they would be eligible for the Utility Ownership Track of the RFP. For further clarity please see the 2024 RFP, p.13-14 for explanation.
2025-GEN 00006 Published On: 05/20/2025
Question: Could you please confirm whether 100-ft setbacks are required only for UOT proposals, or for PPA proposals as well?
Answer: The technical guidance in Appendix I-1, including setback requirements, is applicable to UOT Proposals only.
2025-GEN 00005 Published On: 05/06/2025
Question: Did the site location eligibility intentionally change from the 2024 RFP? The 2024 RFP restricted projects to sites within Duke service territory. The 2025 RFP restricts projects to sites in North or South Carolina. (In both cases, the project must interconnect with a Duke transmission line.) Can you confirm a project site in South Carolina in a coop service territory is eligible IF the project physically interconnects with the DEC or DEP transmission system.?
Answer: A solar-only project located in South Carolina in another utility’s service territory is eligible for the 25 RFP if the project physically interconnects with the DEC or DEP transmission system. Pursuant to the 25 RFP solar-only PPAs, “Seller shall be responsible for arranging and obtaining, at its sole risk and expense, any station service [Station Power] required by the Facility.” However, a SPWS project must be eligible to receive service from DEP or DEC in order to grid-charge from the DEC or DEP system.
2025-GEN 00004 Published On: 04/28/2025
Question: Will projects outside Duke service territory capable of delivering into Duke be eligible for bid?
Answer: All facilities in the RFP, including facilities sited outside of Duke's service territory, must directly interconnect to the DEC or DEP transmission system. Solar paired with Storage facilities shall also be responsible for ensuring their site is eligible to receive electric service from DEP or DEC for grid-charging.
2025-GEN 00003 Published On: 04/28/2025
Question: 1. Can you confirm that Duke WILL accept Surety Bonds for Step 2 Proposal Security? 2. For the UOT track, will Surety Bonds be accepted as a final deposit and/or later in the RFP process should a Project move forward, or is there a point at which Surety is no longer acceptable and LOC is required? Any additional clarification that can be provided on Surety would be appreciated.
Answer: Surety bonds are an acceptable form of security for Step 2 proposal security for both tracks. The form acceptable is included in Appendix D. Surety bonds are not accepted for the Power Purchase Agreement’s Performance Assurance due within 5 days of signing the contract.
2025-GEN 00002 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: We had a question regarding co-located projects submitting into the Duke RFP. If a co-located project is selected to enter the RSC, would the project need to submit two separate queue positions, or can it submit a single queue position for the entire project?
Answer: A “co-located” solar paired with storage project still has only 1 point of interconnection. A project that chooses to bid both solar-only and solar paired with storage will only submit one interconnection request, which is the same approach as the 2023 and 2024 RFPs.
2025-GEN 00001 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: Any idea yet of what initial bid fees/ security postings will look like when the RFP is filed?
Answer: For the 2025 RFP, the Companies will share draft documents in April 2025 and as of early March, there are not yet proposed changes to the bid fee structure or security postings from the 2024 RFP. 2025 RFP Stakeholder meetings are still ongoing, the next session is planned for March 11.
2025-DOC 00004 Published On: 05/12/2025
Question: Where can we find the grid locational guidance as noted in Sec. VIII(C)? I do not see it in the 2025 RFP: Documents. Please advise.
Answer: The grid locational guidance document is expected to become available on the RFP website at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2025-RFP-Documents in mid-July.
2025-DOC 00003 Published On: 05/05/2025
Question: Looking to clarify something in the April 23rd document: Section III.A. suggests all facilities in DEP must be sized 50MWac, but III.F. seems to imply that only Controllable Track facilities must be sized at 50MWac. What is the minimum size in DEP for Utility Owned Track?
Answer: Section III.A of the RFP applies to all proposals in the RFP, including UOT and PPA track proposals. Section III.F reiterates the minimum facility sizes and lists additional requirements only applicable to PPA proposals. The minimum size in DEP for UOT and PPA proposals is 50 MW. UOT projects offered as SPWS must have a minimum storage size of 20MW (Section III C. REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO SOLAR PAIRED WITH STORAGE FACILITIES).
2025-DOC 00002 Published On: 04/25/2025
Question: Will Duke be providing redlines of the 2025 documents (RFP, PPA, etc.) for bidders to review against previous years?
Answer: No, there will not be redlines posted for draft documents.
2025-DOC 00001 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: When will 2025 RFP documents be released?
Answer: The bulk of the draft 2025 RFP documents will be posted by April 23, 2025.
2025-INT 00005 Published On: 06/13/2025
Question: Will projects with an executed interconnection agreement resulting from the serial interconnection process be allowed to enter the 2025 RFP?
Answer: Yes, based on stakeholder feedback and further internal discussions, Duke will allow projects with an executed interconnection agreement from the serial interconnection process to enter the 2025 RFP.
2025-INT 00004 Published On: 05/28/2025
Question: Is a developer allowed to connect two Solar facilities at the same point of interconnection and file one application as a phased project?
Answer: No. The RFP and PPA do not contemplate “phased” projects, as there is one date that begins the term of the PPA and the facility is expected to perform at its as-bid MW and MWh. See Section III (Facility Eligibility Requirements and Proposal Tracks) for additional details.
2025-INT 00003 Published On: 05/15/2025
Question: After reading Appendix O, it looks like we post a study deposit to enter the RSC cluster of $35,000 + $1/kWac. Then, to enter Phase I, we post 1X the study deposit. There is guidance on refundability / withdrawal penalties for those that withdraw after Phase I, but there’s no guidance on refundability / withdrawal penalties on the initial study deposit posted to enter the cluster. What happens to that study deposit our project is not selected to the “Short List” on 1/6/26?
Answer: If the interconnection request is withdrawn, any refunds of unspent deposit will be processed in accordance with the applicable procedures (Sections 6.3.3 of the NCIP; or Section 6.3.3 of the SCGIP ; or Section 4.7 of Attachment K to the LGIP).
2025-INT 00002 Published On: 04/24/2025
Question: We are trying to understand all the financial requirements and corresponding refundability for the Resource Solicitation Cluster that will take place in parallel with the bid process. • What are the study costs / fees to enter Phase 1? • What is the refundability, if any, of the study costs during Phase 1? • How are the study costs remitted to Duke Energy. Is that cash? LOC? Bond? • As we understand it, if our project is invited to Short List, we enter Phase 2. Are there are additional study costs / deposits required to remain in RSC into Phase 2? o If so, what is the refundability of these additional study costs? • We understand that if our project is invited to Short List, we are to post a security in connection with the RFP. o How is that calculated? o What is the refundability of the security? o If Duke accepts our project, but requires us to offer a PPA price that is lower than we originally submitted, are we able to withdraw and keep our security? • Other than Network / Facility upgrade costs, are there any other financial requirements on the project to continue on through the RSC or the bidding process (other than what’s stated above)?
Answer: Please refer to the RFP Guidance document for the solicitation along with the applicable interconnection procedures for details regarding the financial requirements. The North Carolina Interconnection Procedures, the South Carolina Appendix CS and the Large Generator Interconnection Procedures are all available online. The LGIP is part of the Open Access Transmission Tariff and is posted on OATI OASIS.
2025-INT 00001 Published On: 04/15/2025
Question: Can you confirm that the pending FERC approval interconnection service procedures dated 1/9/25 is the applicable procedure for the 2025 RFP/RSC? If not, can you please confirm the applicable rules and tariff?
Answer: The currently effective LGIP can be viewed here.