2026-SC-DOC 00008 Published On: 08/04/2026
Question: Can you clarify the COD expectations? One part of the RFP states three years after the contract phase and another section says "by 12/31/31".
Answer: Per the RFP, all resources are required to achieve COD or be capable of completing Facility construction (as opposed to network upgrades being complete) within three years following the end of the contract phase.
Duke Energy is seeking projects that achieve commercial operation (following any applicable network upgrades) by the beginning of year 2032 to meet system capacity needs. However, Duke Energy may decline to acquire a UOT facility or enter an ESSA if it is determined that the System Upgrades or interconnection facilities required cannot be constructed in time to achieve COD by December 31, 2031. More information is available in Section II of the RFP.
2026-SC-DOC 00007 Published On: 07/31/2026
Question: Could you please confirm whether the LOI security that will remain in place through APA closing may be posted in the form of a surety bond? The current LOI language only explicitly lists cash and letter of credit as acceptable forms of security, so we wanted to verify whether a surety bond would also be permissible.
Answer: Per document 07 - Asset Acquisition Letter of Intent, only cash or a letter of credit will be accepted as a security deposit from UOT Finalists and will remain in place until the closing of the transaction occurs.
2026-SC-DOC 00006 Published On: 07/16/2026
Question: Can you clarify if the Project Evaluation Confidentiality Agreement should be completed by each project entity anticipating submittal?
Answer: We will accept a single Project Evaluation Confidentiality Agreement executed by the project owner(s) versus separate Project Evaluation Confidentiality Agreements from each project LLC.
2026-SC-DOC 00005 Published On: 07/14/2026
Question: Could you please provide the NOIR form? We have not received it and would like to register our projects.
Answer: The Notice of Intent to Respond (NOIR), Confidentiality Agreement, and Bid Input Forms will become available at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2026-SC-Battery-Documents once the RFP bid window opens on July 15.
2026-SC-DOC 00004 Published On: 07/14/2026
Question: Would Duke Energy be open to incorporating an asset buyout option after Year 15 of the ESSA term, structured via redline to the current Pro Forma ESSA?
Answer: A buyout option is not a consideration for the ESSA in this RFP. Projects can bid in both the UOT track and the ESSA track, and bidders have a deadline of October 21, 2026, for a project that bid both UOT and ESSA to withdraw only from the ESSA track.
2026-SC-DOC 00003 Published On: 07/13/2026
Question: The Duke RFP materials state that for the ESSA track a developer must have completed a 50MW battery and for the UOT proposal must have "completed or directly managed the completion of the development and preliminary engineering of >50 MWAC or 3x the nameplate capacity of the Proposal, whichever is greater, of battery facilities..." Is failure to meet the full criteria for the relevant track disqualification from the process or a lower score in the experience subcategory?
Answer: The language about the developer experience is part of Section VI.B of the RFP ("NON-ECONOMIC SCORING CRITERIA"). Not meeting the described criteria will not result in disqualification, however may yield a lower score for this part of the proposal evaluation.
2026-SC-DOC 00002 Published On: 07/08/2026
Question: The DEC/DEP Interconnection Cost Estimates provided in the document do not explicitly say that the cost estimates are relevant to the 2026 SC Battery RFP. Can you please confirm that these costs are relevant? Additionally, there is no 230 kV DEC figure given despite applicable 230 kV POIs on the system. Please confirm why this is the case.
Answer: The document header identifies that the interconnection cost estimates posted at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2026-SC-Battery-Documents pertain to the 2026 SC Battery RFP.
This document covers standard interconnections, and DEC does not permit single breaker taps to 230 kV lines, which is why the document indicates “N/A” for 230 kV for DEC. Interconnection to an existing Multibreaker Switching Station in DEC is covered by the last row of Table 1.
2026-SC-DOC 00001 Published On: 06/18/2026
Question: In the revised Draft RFP document UOT requirements in Section III.B(a) there was from "...Onsite acoustic survey" to "...onsite acoustic survey schedule". Can you please confirm that the intention is for bidders to have scheduled an onsite acoustic survey but that this does not need to be complete prior to bid submittal?
Answer: This is consistent with the response to 2025-DOC 00012 in the 2025 RFP, which confirms that the applicable bat studies do not need to be performed prior to bid submittal, but are required as part of selling a fully developed project as part of an Asset Transfer proposal. Response to 2025-DOC 00012 is provided for convenience:
For Asset Transfer proposals, as part of selling a fully developed project, the MP must complete a habitat assessment and onsite acoustic survey for all listed and proposed to be listed bat species, as well as any bat species listed or proposed to be listed after the issuance of the RFP. This is included as a condition to close, as part of selling a fully developed project to the Utility. The MP should provide a copy of the both the assessment and survey plan, prior to submittal to applicable agencies. If the MP has completed said surveys, they should include them in their bid submittal, if assessment/surveys have not been completed, Duke will review them as they are provided either in context of the RFP evaluations or within the governing Asset Purchase Agreement.