2025-STM 00006 Published On: 07/10/2025
Question: With the 12-month gap between executing a PPA prior to executing an IA via the RSC, is there any guidance on the earliest achievable COD that should be targeted after IA signing?
Answer: Each project has unique requirements for interconnection; the best resource is the 2024 RSC study results which include an estimated in-service date.
2025-STM 00005 Published On: 07/10/2025
Question: (1) Where is there information on the Early Winner’s Path? (2) Under the Early Winner’s Path, will there be any size limitations since the cost of interconnection is known and economics can be valued without unknown costs? (3) For Early Winner’s Path interconnection, will the state jurisdictional or FERC LGIA be required?
Answer: Additional information on the Early Winners' / Early Finalists' path will be available in the finalized RFP documents. These documents will be posted here https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2025-RFP-Documents in mid-July 2025.
2025-STM 00004 Published On: 07/10/2025
Question: Where are the solar reference costs available to review?
Answer: The solar reference cost for the 2025 RFP will be provided in February 2026.
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 00015 Published On: 07/25/2025
Question: Regarding the criterion that slopes greater than 7 degrees (12.3%) will be removed from the buildable area outlined in Appendix I-1 "UOT Asset Transfer Technical Guidance", can Duke please clarify whether this standard is meant to reference acceptable post-construction slopes?
Answer: Slopes greater than 7 degrees (12.3% ) will be removed from buildable area, is in reference to pre-construction topography/slopes. Duke Energy avoids these areas, within reason, due to constructability/safety challenges.
2025-GEN 00014 Published On: 07/25/2025
Question: Will a Solar Only project with an executed IA in good standing with a completed affected system study that is pursuing the Early Selection Track need to meet the size requirements listed in Section III. A. (b)? 30 MWac for DEC and 50 MWac for DEP?
Answer: Yes, Early Selection proposals must meet the requirements listed in section III.A of the RFP, including the facility size requirements.
2025-GEN 00013 Published On: 07/22/2025
Question: Can you please clarify the PV & BESS design characteristics for DEC projects submitted into the UOT track? The RFP documents state that minimum project size is 30MW of PV and that the minimum BESS for UOT projects is 20MW, which would be greater than the 35-40% specified for the BESS sizing. Are MPs allowed to submit any DEC project that hits both those minimums?
Answer: In DEC if a project is offered as a Solar Paired with Storage (SPWS) proposal in the Utility Ownership Track, the 20 MW BESS minimum is the binding minimum constraint that would then determine the Solar facility minimum size of 50 MW ( = 20 / 0.40). If the project is only offered as a Solar facility, the minimum size is 30 MW in DEC.
2025-GEN 00012 Published On: 07/22/2025
Question: In a prior FAQ about the utility ownership track, Duke wrote: "As such, MP’s CANNOT SUBMIT A PROPOSAL to sell a project prior to it being fully developed." This seems incorrect, since the RFP document says that "the developed project assigns or transfers all assets, rights, etc. to DEC/DEP UPON SATISFACTION of all development and closing conditions." Please confirm the idea of the UOT is that a project is selected in the RFP, but asset transfer does not occur until development is complete later on.
Answer: Correct, the RFP is seeking bids to sell a fully developed project, see response to FAQ 2025-GEN 00011 on this page. The MP’s project may not be 100% developed at the time of bid submittal, but the proposal being submitted by the MP is to sell a fully developed project, not a partially developed project, so any development scope not complete must be completed by the MP, in accordance with the executed Asset Purchase Agreement, such that the MP has delivered a fully developed project. Asset Purchase Agreement closing typically can occur within one to two years after agreement execution depending on the timing of MP’s completion of the remaining development items and closing conditions. To clarify, the Asset Purchase Agreement associated with an Asset Transfer bid, is not an as-is sale, the MP is required to complete the development of the project, to bring the project to a fully developed status, before the utility will close on the acquisition agreement.
2025-GEN 00011 Published On: 07/18/2025
Question: Will the Companies consider the purchase of a development asset prior rather than a fully developed project, for a reduced price?
Answer: Section III.D.E provides eligibility requirements for Utility Ownership Track Proposal and provides that Asset Transfer proposals are “the MP is proposing to sell a fully developed project and is responsible for, but not limited to, project siting, land control, development, site investigation, environmental studies, surveying, title work, permitting, limited engineering, and all interconnection studies.” As such, MP’s cannot submit a proposal to sell a project prior to it being fully developed. The Utility Ownership Track of the 2025 RFP will be open to Utility-Developed and Asset Transfer contract structures only. Please review Appendix J on the 2025 RFP Documents page for additional information on the Letter of Intent and Term Sheets for Asset Acquisition Proposals.
2025-GEN 00010 Published On: 06/19/2025
Question: If a project site has space to accommodate a design larger than 80 MWac, is it possible to submit a PPA track proposal at 80 MW and UOT track proposal at a larger size at the same POI as long as two separate IRs are submitted for the two different designs (state-jurisdictional for the PPA track and FERC-jurisdictional for the UOT track)? Would the bid fee requirement in that case be two $10k bid fees instead of one $15k bid fee?
Answer: Market participants cannot enter more than one configuration of a project for a POI in the interconnection queue; they must select one project size for evaluation in the RSC to participate in the RFP.
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 00012 Published On: 07/29/2025
Question: The UOT RFP draft documents state that "Duke Energy, as project owner, shall have the ability to review and approve the scope of [bat studies] before authorized." Should this be interpreted as Duke wanting to review bat study plans prior to submission to US Fish and Wildlife Service, and if so who should they be sent to for review?
Answer: 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.
2025-DOC 00011 Published On: 07/29/2025
Question: Appendix M Energy Storage Requirements for all UOT SPS proposals provides guidance to bidders on BESS modeling to provide a BESS degradation profile. Can Duke please verify what assumptions bidders should account for with overbuild and augmentation strategies when accounting for their project designs and BESS degradation?
Answer: Bidders should assume 365 equivalent discharge cycles per year and either ‘no augmentations for 15 years’ or ‘two augmentations at years 5 and 10’ depending on their project’s size.
2025-DOC 00010 Published On: 07/21/2025
Question: The grid locational guidance was supposed to be posted on the week of 7/14/25. Is this expected to be posted sometime this week?
Answer: The finalized RFP documents are now expected to become available around July 25, 2025.
2025-DOC 00009 Published On: 07/15/2025
Question: APA Closing and Non-Discretionary Permits: For a UOT project submission, will the APA closing be contingent on obtaining non-discretionary permits, such as stormwater and erosion control permits or DOT permits?
Answer: Stormwater and erosion control or DOT permits will not be required to be obtained by Seller as closing conditions within the APA, these are construction related permits that the Buyer will be responsible for.
2025-DOC 00008 Published On: 07/15/2025
Question: Obtaining CECPCN/CPCN: In the FAQ during the 2024 RFP, question 2024-GEN 00049 was posted that outlined if a UOT project does not have an issued or pending CECPCN/CPCN, then Duke Energy would prepare and apply for the permit after definitive contract execution. In this instance, will a fully issued CECPCN/CPCN be a condition precedent/required for APA closing or would the pending application (submitted by Duke) allow for closing to take place? Furthermore, footnote 10 on page 7 of the RFP document indicates that the Market Participant (MP) is not required to obtain a CECPCN/CPCN but must establish a reasonable plan for obtaining all necessary permits (including CECPCN/CPCN). Can you elaborate on what Duke will require to be included in the reasonable plan for obtaining all permits?
Answer: A CECPCN/CPCN is not required to be approved and in hand at the time of bid submittal, i.e. a project without an approved CECPCN/CPCN can bid into the RFP, however, for selected UOT bids, an approved CECPCN/CPCN (as applicable), will be a closing condition to the APA.
2025-DOC 00007 Published On: 07/15/2025
Question: Scope of Hydrology Study in LOI and Term Sheet: For a project submitting on the UOT track, what is the scope of the hydrology study required as part of the LOI and Term Sheet? Can the hydrology study rely on preliminary data derived from desktop analysis or publicly available topographic data, or are there specific requirements for field-based data collection?
Answer: A Hydrology Scope of Work document has been uploaded to the 2025 RFP Documents section of this website to provide guidance on what will be required. The hydrology study should utilize the data from the boundary and topographical surveys, geotechnical investigation, and wetlands delineation to produce the most accurate results.
2025-DOC 00006 Published On: 07/15/2025
Question: Site Control Boundary KMZ Requirements: Please confirm the KMZ for the Site Control Boundary should contain polygons for the site control boundary AND polygons for “keep out” areas.
Answer: Yes, site control boundary and keep out areas files, if applicable, should be separate files and should be polygon type. Boundary file should only include the polygon(s) that are under site control with no additional layers/information, and the Keep out file should only include polygon(s) that are keep out areas within the Site Control Boundary. Bidder should also provide a narrative explanation describing the keep out areas within the bid form as well.
2025-DOC 00005 Published On: 07/10/2025
Question: When will the final RFP document be posted?
Answer: The finalized RFP document is expected to become available on the 2025 RFP Documents page of this website the week of July 14. To receive a notification when the finalized RFP document becomes available, follow the instructions on the Registration page.
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 00006 Published On: 07/07/2025
Question: Would you please clarify if both user written models and generic models are required for both 2025 RFP and RSC submittals or will providing the recommended generic model be sufficient for submittals?
Answer: PSSE models are required. If the PSSE models are not included with the initial Interconnection Request submission, the interconnection study team will request them during the Customer Engagement Window as this information is required for the Resource Solicitation Cluster study performed by Transmission Planning. Sections 7h and 8h of the Inverter Based Resource Data Request form located on the OASIS site (Duke_Energy_Inverter_Based_Resource_Data_Request_Form_(DEC,DEF,DEP).pdf (oati.com)) provides guidance for inverter and reactive power PSSE modeling.
2025-INT 00005 (revised 07/08/2025) 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: Initially, the draft 2025 RFP did not anticipate allowing projects with executed interconnection agreements resulting from the serial interconnection process to participate. However, in response to stakeholder feedback, these projects may now be considered for inclusion in the 2025 RFP. Additional details will be provided when the finalized RFP is released at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/2025-RFP-Documents. To receive a notification when the finalized RFP documents become available, register at https://www.dukeenergyrfpcarolinas.com/Registration.
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.