2024-STM 00002 Published On: 06/14/2024
Question: Could you please advise where can I register to attend the 2024 RFP Technical Conference on June 17, 2024?
Answer: The materials for the Technical Conference are filed in the following NCUC dockets E-2, Sub 1340 and E-7, Sub 1310. The conference will also be broadcast on the NCUC You Tube channel a link is available here NCUC: Public Hearings
2024-STM 00001 Published On: 06/07/2024
Question: When will the 3rd Stakeholder Meeting for the 2024 RFP be held and will a registration link be sent out?
Answer: The 3rd Stakeholder Meeting is planned for June 14, 2024. An email annoucenement was sent out to registered users on the RFP Website on June 7, 2024. To become a registered user on the website, follow the steps on https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/Registration.
A link to register to attend the meeting is posted on the 2024 RFP Process Timeline section of the Home page: Duke Energy RFP Carolinas > Home.
2024-GEN 00020 Published On: 09/05/2024
Question: Under this RFP, Duke has the right to terminate the PPA under Section 20.1.2, if the System Upgrade Costs in the executable version of the Interconnection Agreement are greater than 125% of the SUC estimate in the RSC Phase I Study results. Does Duke have to exercise this right to terminate the PPA under Section 20.1.2 before the Seller has to make the M4 payment deposit under the RSC process with DEP Transmission?
Answer: No, State projects will have paid M4; the “M4” deposit is due 10 days after receiving the Facilities Study results for the state jurisdictional projects.
This is described in Section 4.4.10.4 of the North Carolina Interconnection Procedures ncip-appr-oct292021-eff-oct112021-searchable.pdf (duke-energy.com) and in Section 5.3.10.4 in the SC Appendix CS.
2024-GEN 00019 Published On: 09/04/2024
Question: As a follow-up to FAQ 2024-GEN-00008, how will Duke ensure that BESS bids are comparable? Much like Duke requires all bidders to use a consistent platform (PVSyst) and even provides modeling parameters for production data, how will Duke verify if BESS performance estimates (losses, auxiliary load, degradation, etc.) provided by bidders in Appendix Q2 consistently complied with the modeling requirements in Appendix Q1?
Answer: Similar to solar only evaluations, SPS bids will be evaluated with tools that are designed for the evaluation of the BESS degradation. Market Participant provided information will be utilized as inputs and all of the proposals will be evaluated with a consistent approach.
2024-GEN 00018 Published On: 09/03/2024
Question: For an SPS bid, the RFP requires a BESS at about 40% capacity of the solar PV. What assumptions about discharge for the BESS and solar PV should we make? For instance, if the BESS is grid charged, will there be operating scenarios in which the PV and BESS will discharge simultaneously? In other words, should our maximum interconnection be the sum of the max PV capacity and the BESS capacity or should we assume the combined discharge will never exceed the PV, since the BESS will be used during low solar hours?
Answer: For the solar plus storage projects, DEC and DEP will use the maximum output of the solar facility for purposes of interconnection study. Using an 80MW solar facility paired with 32 MW of BESS as an example: the solar generating facility’s maximum output at the Point of Interconnection should not exceed 80MW, because in the interconnection study assumptions made by DEC and DEP, the BESS will not discharge when the solar facility is generating at its full capacity. For more information on how DEC and DEP study solar plus storage projects, please see the OATI Oasis posting “Duke Energy Business Practice: Studying Storage Interconnection Requests in DEC and DEP”at Storage_Studies_-_Duke_Energy_Business_Practice_2022-10-26.pdf (oati.com).
2024-GEN 00017 Published On: 08/30/2024
Question: Would a project be able to submit two 75 MW projects (either under the PPA or UOT track) that are located on sites next to each other and targeting the same transmission line?
Answer: Two projects interconnecting on separate transmission lines does not alleviate the requirements of the FERC 1 mile rule, which does not distinguish between the same transmission line or not. Projects owned by the same Interconnection Customer shall be in compliance with the FERC guidelines for the projects to be considered as qualifying facilities. Please also review the 2024 RFP, Section IV.B for additional guidance on PPA proposals. Note also if there are two projects in close proximity to each other, a multi-breaker switching station will likely be needed to connect into the transmission line.
2024-GEN 00016 Published On: 08/22/2024
Question: How is CRA managing confidentiality of project information for bidders that previously were shortlisted but did not either get selected or choose to execute a PPA or LOI for a UOT bid. Duke would have access to things like POIs, landowner information, cost estimates, design and other EPC information as well as a variety of other project information that could be used to create an unfair advantage?
Answer: All information provided by a Market Participant for a Utility Ownership Track Proposal is subject to the confidentiality agreement signed by the parties at the time of bid submittal. Further, for both the 2023 and 2024 RFP processes, the RFP established separation requirements pursuant to which (i) Utility Ownership Team members (which develop Utility-Developed Proposals) will not be involved in or responsible for the economic evaluation of any Proposals (which will be performed by the Independent Evaluator and the Duke Evaluation Team); and (ii) a separate Utility Bid Sub-Team that will solely and exclusively be responsible for any pricing refreshes to any Utility-Developed Proposals or Asset Transfer Proposal after Step 1 (i.e. don’t not have access to any Build-Own-Transfer Proposals).
More information is available in Section V.E of the 2024 RFP.
2024-GEN 00015 Published On: 08/22/2024
Question: Can you confirm that the $1.5M cap on Winners' Fees refers to the total of all Winners' Fees combined and that it is not capping the Winners' Fee per project at $1.5M per project. The most that a Winners' Fee would be for a project would be $1.5M divided and allocated on a pro-rata basis in solar MW among all Winners, correct?
Answer: Correct, the total Winners’ Fee is capped at $1.5 million, see 24 DEC DEP RFP Document, Section VIII Winners' Fee.
2024-GEN 00014 Published On: 08/19/2024
Question: For a UOT SPS proposal, a significant overbuild on day 1/COD will be required to maintain the BESS Performance Guarantees for the first 15 years of asset life without the ability to augment. Please confirm you are asking bidders to overbuild the BOT option to include enough extra batteries to cover degradation over the first 15 years of the asset life. Would Duke be open to a 2-7 year overbuild in conjunction with additional buildable acreage to accommodate additional BESS equipment in order to meet original nameplate capacity?
Answer: Technical requirements for UOT SPS proposals can be found in Appendix Q1. Appendix Q1 provides that “Cell replacement is only allowed at year 15. No other augmentation or replenishments are allowed throughout 15-year project life.” UOT SPS bidders are required to adhere to Appendix Q1, which does not permit cell replacement during the 15-year operating period for the BESS.
2024-GEN 00013 Published On: 08/13/2024
Question: Would Duke be open to a portion of a bigger facility as PPA and remainder as UOT, under a shared or separate POI? The RFP mentions "full output of Facility" under the PPA track, but any clarifications is appreciated here.
Answer: Yes, Duke Energy would consider a bigger facility split into a PPA (maximum output 80MW) and the remainder UOT as long as the POI is separate for each. Each unit requires its own metering and telemetry.
2024-GEN 00012 Published On: 08/07/2024
Question: If a project is located in a cooperative territory and a Duke Energy transmission line crosses the territory and would be used for interconnection, can this project be included in the RFP?
Answer: Facilities must be located in the Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (DEC) or Duke Energy Progress, LLC (DEP) North Carolina or South Carolina service territory and must also physically interconnect with the DEC or DEP transmission system.
2024-GEN 00011 Published On: 08/07/2024
Question: Can you please confirm that Network Upgrade costs should not be included in the proposal price for an Asset Transfer? Additionally, would an Asset Transfer proposal be required to provide Network Upgrade security and hold that cost until closing if selected?
Answer: The proposal price provided by an Asset Transfer project should not include any Network Upgrade costs; new projects bidding into the 2024 RFP and participating in the Resource Solicitation Cluster will not know their Network Upgrades cost at the time the proposal price is due to be submitted. An Asset Transfer proposal would be required to provide M4 security to cover the cost of Network Upgrades once the Facilities Study is complete. The Asset Transfer proposal will also be responsible for executing and maintaining an Interconnection Agreement, including any additional securities that may be required under such Interconnection Agreement, until the Interconnection Agreement is assigned to DEC/DEP at closing of the definitive Asset Purchase Agreement.
Asset Transfer proposal that bids in the 2024 RFP with a fully executed Interconnection Agreement shall be solely responsible for the cost of any interconnection facilities and System Upgrades assigned to it under its Interconnection Agreement and shall bid accordingly as participation in the 2024 RFP will not alter any contractual obligations included in the MP’s executed Interconnection Agreement.
2024-GEN 00010 Published On: 08/02/2024
Question: Is there an updated estimated curtailment schedule that Duke can share based on the prior schedule that was shared in the 2023 RFP?
Answer: The updated File for Annual Solar Curtailment Estimates Due to Excess Energy is now posted here. All solar-only PPAs will be subject to the 5%/10% non-reliability curtailment rights as specified in the PPA. Other possible curtailment events include reliability curtailments for transmission events (these are infrequent and impact resources local to the transmission constraint that are exacerbating the constraint), and reliability curtailments for excess energy (these will presumably grow as more solar is on the system). From the modeling work that supports the Companies’ 2024 Carolinas Resource Plan filed on 1/31/2024 for Portfolio P3 Fall Base, we are providing year over year solar curtailment estimates due to excess energy (as a percent of the total solar generation). Please note that these figures are modeled assumptions and outputs based upon a snapshot in time as of when the modeling was produced and numerous factors can impact the need for curtailment in the future. Resource Solicitation/Procurement participants should review the terms of the applicable solar-only PPA for terms and conditions related to resource curtailment.
2024-GEN 00009 Published On: 07/31/2024
Question: re: 2024 RFP, can Duke provide up to date historical solar curtailment in its sub regions?
Answer: DEC and DEP publicly file quarterly reports with the NCUC providing historical solar curtailment data in Docket Nos. E-2, Sub 1178 Docket Details (ncuc.gov) and E-7, Sub 1175 Docket Details (ncuc.gov). Please note all solar-only PPAs will be subject to the 5%/10% economic curtailment rights as specified in the 2024 RFP PPA.
2024-GEN 00008 Published On: 07/29/2024
Question: In the evaluation of UOT bids for SPS Facilities, will Duke perform its own independent battery modeling to ensure that the requirements of Appendix Q1 and Q2 are met? If so, is there a specific tool that Duke uses for this modeling?
Answer: In the evaluation of SPS UOT bids, the utility’s Evaluation team will use the data provided in forms Appendix Q1 and Appendix Q2 by the Bidder to evaluate the operational profile and degradation of the BESS. No single specific tool or model is utilized for the evaluation.
2024-GEN 00007 Published On: 07/26/2024
Question: Can you confirm the following requirement applies only for UOT track proposals and not for PPA track proposals? "Bidders are expected to provide valid due diligence terms through mid-2028 (July), or longer, with a minimum of 18 months of a construction term and a minimum of 35 years of an operating term commencing at placed in service (if lease agreement);"
Answer: This requirement is listed in Section IV.A of the 2024 RFP, which only applies to UOT proposals.
2024-GEN 00006 Published On: 07/24/2024
Question: Can an MP submit a project under the UOT that does not meet the site control requirements outlined in Section IV.A of the 2024 RFP, provided that the project has a signed interconnection agreement from a previous serial process and the site due diligence term is sufficient to achieve the ISD under the interconnection agreement? I.e., can an MP submit a project that has site control through 2027, if the project COD is 2027?
Answer: Yes, an MP may bid a project into the UOT track that has site control through 2027; however, the proposal will be scored accordingly. Site control requirements are provided in “Section IV Proposal Tracks, A. Utility Ownership Track Proposal” bullet 6 -
"Provide sufficient and satisfactory site control rights for the Facility including delivery to the Point of Interconnection (POI) to develop and construct the proposed Facility within the timeframe laid out in the RFP. Bidders are expected to provide valid due diligence terms through mid-2028 (July), or longer, with a minimum of 18 months of a construction term and a minimum of 35 years of an operating term commencing at placed in service (if lease agreement);”.
There are other factors beyond just a fully executed interconnection agreement that may impact a project’s construction lead time, such as equipment availability, construction subcontractor availability, outage coordination, etc. As such, all UOT projects will be scored in accordance with the requirements provided.
2024-GEN 00005 Published On: 07/17/2024
Question: Is the maximum size project allowed to bid into this RFP 80 MWac? Will projects larger than 80 MW not be allowed?
Answer: For a power purchase agreement (PPA) track project, the maximum size is up to and including 80 MWac (based on the interconnection request) in both DEC and DEP. However, projects bidding into the Utility Ownership Track (UOT) of the RFP can be larger than 80 MWac (and any project greater than 80 MWac would be submitting their interconnection request as a FERC jurisdictional project).
2024-GEN 00004 Published On: 07/16/2024
Question: I’m trying to understand whether bat studies are required prior to RFP submission or only if the project is selected in the [2024] RFP. The RFP requirements and FAQ GEN 00070 on https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/FAQ/General contradict each other. Thanks in advance for clarifying. From the tariff: UTILITY OWNERSHIP TRACK PROPOSALS In addition to the requirements in Section III, Proposals for Facilities in the Utility Ownership Track must also meet all of the following: Include 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 this RFP within bidder scope. Duke Energy, as project owner, shall have the ability to review and approve the scope of said studies before authorized. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") has listed or proposed to be listed several bats species with habitat range in North and South Carolina. These species include the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalist) and Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), both currently listed as endangered. The tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) is proposed to be listed in the fall of 2023 as either a threatened or endangered species.
Answer: To clarify the guidance provided in GEN 00070 and 00007 for the 2023 RFP, for Asset Transfer and BOT bids, the Seller (the Market Participant) will be required to complete habitat assessment(s) and onsite acoustic survey(s), as established in Section IV.A. This will be the responsibility of the Market Participant and must be completed, along with all other applicable scope, as a condition to close pursuant to the applicable definitive agreement (Asset Purchase Agreement or Build Transfer Agreement). So, the assessment and surveys do not need to be completed prior to bidding a project into the RFP.
2024-GEN 00003 Published On: 07/16/2024
Question: Is the habitat assessment and acoustic survey for bats required prior to RFP submission for UOT projects? Considering the changing habits of bats which often change roosts seasonally, can it be assumed that a habitat assessment and acoustic survey will be required every year for the same project?
Answer: The habitat assessment and onsite acoustic survey requirements established in Section IV.A of the RFP, which apply to Utility Ownership Track projects, are not required to be completed prior to bid submission. The RFP provides guidance for bidders to plan to complete the habitat assessment and an onsite acoustic survey as part of their scope submission; whether and how often an assessment or survey will be required to be updated will depend on project specifics and then-current rules and regulations .
For additional information please see 2024-GEN 00003 and Q&As from the 2023 RFP - GEN00006, GEN00007 and GEN 00070.
2024-GEN 00002 Published On: 07/10/2024
Question: To clarify, for the 2024 RFP only the UOT proposals need to submit a habitat and onsite acoustic survey for all listed and proposed to be listed bat species, correct? PPA proposals are not required to submit that bat species information?
Answer: Correct, the habitat assessment and onsite acoustic survey requirements estimated in Section IV.A of the RFP only apply to Utility Ownership Track projects.
For additional information please see GEN00006, GEN00007 and GEN 00070, available at www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/FAQ/General.
2024-GEN 00001 Published On: 06/17/2024
Question: This question is regarding the upcoming 2024 RFP. Will Duke permit projects on local coop infrastructure to wheel power to them in this RFP?
Answer: Facilities must be located in the Duke Energy Carolinas (DEC) or Duke Energy Progress (DEP) North Carolina or South Carolina service territory and will physically interconnect with the DEC or DEP transmission system.
2024-DOC 00013 Published On: 09/06/2024
Question: Could you please clarify if Solar Anywhere is acceptable for any of the proposal tracks?
Answer: Solar Anywhere is not acceptable. Please refer to guidance provided in FAQs 2024-DOC 00009 & 2024-DOC 00004. Meteonorm or SolCast are acceptable.
2024-DOC 00012 Published On: 09/06/2024
Question: Could you please clarify which proposal tracks these modeling requirements apply to: Exhibit A-4 – PPA guidance PVsyst Parameters and Modeling Assumptions?
Answer: The modeling assumptions document provides guidance for the PPA proposals and is required for the UOT proposals.
2024-DOC 00011 (revised 08/30/2024) Published On: 08/28/2024
Question: Can you confirm that production model meteorological data must be sourced from Meteonorm? Are alternate sources such as Solar Anywhere acceptable? Does this requirement apply to all tracks (PPA, UOT, BTO)?
Answer: Please refer to guidance provided in FAQs 2024-DOC 00009 & 2024-DOC 00004, available at www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2024-FAQ/2024-Documents. Meteonorm or SolCast are acceptable. Solar Anywhere will not be acceptable.
2024-DOC 00010 Published On: 08/22/2024
Question: Is an electrical model required with the proposal submission? Where can I find more information on the model requirements?
Answer: For PPA proposals, review the "PPA guidance PVsyst Parameters and Modeling Assumptions" document, available at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2024-RFP-Documents.
2024-DOC 00009 Published On: 08/21/2024
Question: For the PVsyst requirements, is there a reason why the Meteo File Data Source changed from SolCast (DEC & DEP 2023 RFP) to Meteonorm (DEC & DEP 2024 RFP)? Last year, some bidders subscribed to SolCast solely to participate in the DEC & DEP 2023 RFP.
Answer: For Exhibit A-4 – Attachment – PVsyst Parameters and Modeling Assumptions: Based on Market Participant feedback from the 2023 RFP regarding the requirement to use a Meteo File Data Source service that requires a fee, Duke Energy reevaluated suppliers and found Meteonorm acceptable. Meteonorm weather files are available within PVsyst and require no additional subscription or financial burden. However, Duke Energy will still accept Solcast as an alternative weather source for purposes of the 2024 RFP.
2024-DOC 00008 Published On: 08/19/2024
Question: Regarding the UOT technical guidance discussed in Appendix I-1, can Duke confirm if the 100' project boundary setback includes the fence?
Answer: The 100’ setback is intended to denote a setback from the property line where equipment is typically not permitted or for general good practice not advisable to site. Project fencing is generally assumed to be allowable within this 100’ setback guidance.
2024-DOC 00007 Published On: 08/19/2024
Question: Are SLDs required to be stamped by a PE?
Answer: Yes, the single line diagram (SLD) provided should be a signed, stamped drawing.
2024-DOC 00006 Published On: 08/13/2024
Question: The Approved Vendor List (AVL) says that Sungrow inverters "may be considered if submitted as a cost alternative line item." Can you please explain what this means and how it should be done?
Answer: Sungrow inverters are currently an acceptable inverter supplier on the AVL on a project by project exception basis.
For Asset Transfer proposals, Market Participants are able to submit Utility Ownership Track proposals utilizing Sungrow inverters; however, the Utility Ownership Team reserves the right to require the Market Participant to change the inverter supplier to an AVL compliant supplier upon request.
For BOT proposals, Market Participants must submit a proposal utilizing an AVL compliant supplier (TMEIC or SMA); however, they may also provide a bid alternative with Sungrow as a “separate cost alternative line item.” Only one bid form is required, and the price difference should be clearly noted by the Market Participant. The Utility Ownership Team then has discretion to accept the bid alternative with Sungrow or not.
2024-DOC 00005 Published On: 08/12/2024
Question: Is a site plan required for projects submitting into the UOT Asset-Transfer track? If so, what are the site layout requirements? Are they all included Appendix I1? Will there be any forthcoming site layout requirements as seen in the '23 RFP Appendix I1?
Answer: Minimum technical deliverables for Asset Transfer proposals are provided in Appendix I-1. A site plan is not required, however, Market Participants are encouraged to include one in their proposal submittal if one is available.
2024-DOC 00004 Published On: 08/09/2024
Question: On subsection "C. PRODUCTION ESTIMATES" of section "IX. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION" of the "DEC DEP 2024 RFP Document", it is mentioned that all Proposals should see Appendix I in connection to the PVSyst requirements or specifications. However, on the RFP's website (https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com > 2024 RFP: Documents), there is no such Appendix I. Could you please clarify which exact document Market Participants have to review in connection to the PVSyst requirements or specifications? Thank you!
Answer: For PPA track bids, the MP is responsible for the development and submittal of a proposal’s PVSyst production profile in accordance with the guidance included in the Appendix L – Solar BESS EPC Agreement Exhibits. Please see the 2024 RFP Document titled “PPA guidance PVsyst Parameters and Modeling Assumptions.pdf” taken from the Appendix L – Solar BESS EPC Agreement Exhibits and now available for MPs on the 2024 RFP Website.
Appendices I1-I4 apply to UOT bids only. For Asset Transfer bids, the Utility Ownership Team will develop and provide the IE with the proposal’s energy production profile. For BOT projects, the MP is responsible for developing and providing the PVSyst production profile in accordance with the guidance of Appendix I2.
2024-DOC 00003 Published On: 07/29/2024
Question: In the 2024 RFP, the title "C. REQUIREMENT TO BID SPS RESOURCES AS NEW SOLAR-ONLY" implies that SPS projects are required to also bid as solar-only. Is this interpretation correct?
Answer: Correct, all projects submitted in the 2024 RFP will be required to submit a solar-only proposal and may opt to also submit a solar-plus-storage proposal. This requirement is unchanged from the 2023 RFP.
2024-DOC 00002 Published On: 07/24/2024
Question: Will projects that failed to submit a NOIR by August 15 be disqualified from participating in the RFP?
Answer: No, respondents for projects will not be disqualified if they failed to submit the Notice of Intent to Respond form by August 15. Respondents are encouraged to submit this non-binding form by the due date.
2024-DOC 00001 Published On: 07/16/2024
Question: The RFP mentiones "Grid locational guidance identifying transmission constraints" will be available on the IE webiste. Where can I find that?
Answer: The grid locational guidance document is now available on the IE's website, https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2024-RFP-Documents
2024-INT 00011 Published On: 09/06/2024
Question: Understanding that FERC jurisdictional projects (80MW+) will be allowed to submit into the RFP via the UOT bid track only, will this also mean that FERC jurisdictional projects (80MW+) would be allowed to submit for an interconnection queue position during this RSC window?
Answer: No, the Resource Solicitation Cluster is open for Solar and Solar plus Storage projects participating in the 2024 RFP. The next opportunity to participate in the Definitive Interconnection System Impact Study (DISIS) begins January 1, 2025.
2024-INT 00010 Published On: 08/22/2024
Question: For FERC-Jurisdictional IRs, is there a requirement for ERIS vs NRIS? And if we choose NRIS on the IR, will there be a chance to switch to ERIS after Phase 1?
Answer: ERIS and NRIS are terms that are only applicable to the FERC-Jurisdictional generator interconnection study process. Market Participants submitting FERC-Jurisdictional bids (UOT only) into the 2024 RFP are required to request NRIS (Network Resource Interconnection Service) to deliver their full capacity and energy output to serve native load customers. The Large Generator Interconnection Procedures allow for a FERC customer to request both NRIS and ERIS studies, but the FERC-jurisdictional UOT winner(s) that proceed in the RSC and RFP will be required to have NRIS service.
2024-INT 00009 Published On: 08/09/2024
Question: Are Asset Transfer Proposals that are also bidding into the PPA track the only Asset Transfer projects that can submit State-Jurisdictional interconnection requests? Or could an Asset Transfer Proposal that is not also bidding into the PPA track follow the same path of going through the whole State-Jurisdictional process, terminating the State-Jurisdictional Interconnection Agreement, and then executing an LGIA?
Answer: Pursuant to Section IV.B of the RFP, PPA Track proposals must be sized over 20 MWac in DEC or over 40 MWac in DEP and up to and including 80 MWac, among other things. If a project is bidding a proposal into both the UOT Track and the PPA Track, and the project size is therefore between 20-80 MWac, the interconnection request (IR) submitted should be a state jurisdictional IR. Pursuant to Section IV.A of the RFP, projects bidding UOT-Track only and not also PPA Track must have a FERC-jurisdictional interconnection request under the Companies’ FERC Joint OATT Attachment K Large Generator Interconnection Procedures.
2024-INT 00008 Published On: 08/09/2024
Question: If an Asset Transfer Proposal were to be selected with a State-Jurisdictional IR, would the Market Participant be able to terminate the associated State-Jurisdictional Interconnection Agreement and execute the necessary LGIA without going through a re-study? Can you explain the process of converting the State-Jurisdictional IA to an LGIA?
Answer: If an Asset Transfer Proposal were to be selected with a State-Jurisdictional IR, the Market Participant would first work with the Utility Ownership Team to execute a letter of intent, followed by the definitive agreement (Asset Purchase Agreement (“APA”)). Then per the APA, the Market Participant is responsible for completing all interconnection studies and execution of an interconnection agreement (“IA”). The Market Participant will execute a State-Jurisdictional IA, which coinciding with closing under the APA, will be terminated and the Market Participate will execute a FERC-Jurisdictional IA. The FERC IA is then assigned to DEC or DEP at APA closing. The conversion of a State-IA to a FERC-IA must be commensurate with the sale of the project assets to the utility and is highly coordinated between the Renewable Integration Team, the Utility Ownership Team and the Market Participant. The Renewable Integration Team is the best resource for questions related to the interconnection agreement.
2024-INT 00007 Published On: 07/23/2024
Question: We reviewed the recently posted Locational Guidance document, which was very helpful. In the document, Duke stated that any additional generation in the Brunswick County region would cause additional, unacceptable limitations in the operation of the Brunswick nuclear generators. Moreover, the transmission solutions to fix these limitations would cost +$100 million. Can you confirm a rough radius of this region? If projects are +50 miles away, would they still trigger these upgrades?
Answer: The Brunswick limitation is for new generation connected directly to any of the 8 transmission lines connected to / coming out of Brunswick Plant. It is not a mileage radius around the plant.
2024-INT 00006 (revised 07/24/2024) Published On: 07/23/2024
Question: The 2024 RFP is scheduled to extend past Duke Energy's FERC O2023-A compliance filing effective date i.e. 11/1/2025. Will this RSC process be affected by these planned tariff changes? What are the changes expected for this RSC process?
Answer: If FERC approves the Order 2023-A Compliance filing with effective date 11/1/2025, FERC interconnection customers would have 60 days to comply with the order. If the 2024 Resource Solicitation Cluster (RSC) follows the same schedule as the 2023 RSC and a Phase 3 restudy is not required, then the 2024 RSC Phase 2 study would likely end in early November, 2025. The readiness requirements to move to Facilities Study would therefore be administered pursuant to the new Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (LGIP) effective 11/1/2025. The Order 2023-A Compliance filing includes a readiness requirement of 15% of the facility’s assigned Network Upgrade costs in order to move to the Facilities Study phase in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash, a surety bond, or other form of security that is reasonably acceptable to Duke Energy. This financial readiness requirement is based upon a different calculation than the calculation included in the currently-effective LGIP.
2024-INT 00005 Published On: 06/27/2024
Question: If an MP is bidding SPS into the 2024 RFP, should they submit a Solar-Only interconnection request to the RSC including the SPS configuration documents (SLDs, site layouts, etc.) as attachments, or should they submit an SPS interconnection request including the Solar-Only configuration documents as attachments?
Answer: The MP should submit an SPS Interconnection Request during the Open Enrollment Window into the Resource Solicitation Cluster (RSC). The Interconnection Request submitted into the RSC must be for one generating facility and the facility can elect to bid as both solar only and SPS. One facility cannot bid multiple solar only and multiple SPS sizes or configurations. For additional information related to submitting an Interconnection Request in the RSC, please see Appendix O, Section I – “New Interconnection Request during 2024 RSC Bid Window”.
2024-INT 00004 Published On: 06/03/2024
Question: Will projects with an interconnection agreement from a previous DISIS be able to participate [in the 2024 RFP] without participating in the resource solicitation cluster? Or is the RSC required for all participants regardless of Interconnection status?
Answer: For eligibility requirements for the 2024 RFP, please see Section V. RFP Process, D. 2024 RFP-Specific Resource Solicitation Cluster of the RFP document, available at www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2024-RFP-Documents.
2024-INT 00003 Published On: 05/20/2024
Question: In the 2024 draft RFP, under section B. Requirements specific to Solar Only Facilities, part (a) states that a project qualifies for the RFP if it has a “fully executed Interconnection Agreement with DEC or DEP and have participated in the serial interconnection study process.” Since a DISIS has been completed and projects might have an IA executed under that process, will the 2024 RFP amend the current language to include projects from earlier DISIS processes?
Answer: The Companies are not accepting projects in the 2024 RFP that have an executed Interconnection Agreement under a prior cluster study process.
2024-INT 00002 Published On: 04/19/2024
Question: Can you please confirm that projects planning to participate in the upcoming 2024 RFP and associated RSC should not enter into DISIS at this time?
Answer: Projects that plan to participate in the upcoming 2024 RFP will be required to participate in the 2024 Resource Solicitation Cluster (opening in August) and not the 2024 DISIS.
2024-INT 00001 Published On: 04/19/2024
Question: In the upcoming 2024 RFP if my project is selected as a finalist, but the RSC Phase 1 report indicates it would not able to reach commercial operation until after the RFP’s target time (presumably 11/30/2029), can my proposal decline the offer and have our proposal security refunded?
Answer: As currently contemplated, the Commercial Operation Date for 2024 RFP Winning Bids is November 30, 2029. Under the current version of the proposed 2024 RFP, a bidder may decline a winning bid offer and have their proposal security released if the 2024 RSC Phase 1 report indicates the project would have an online date past the assumed RFP target date (11/30/2029) due to network upgrade, contingent facilities, and interconnection facilities construction.