Q1)  What is the date for the selection of the short list?

A1)  The January 25, 2012 date indicated on page 5 of the RFP is not correct. The correct date for the selection of the short list is January 25, 2013.

Q2)  Relative to the self-build option Supply Side Term Sheet, please provide definition of ambient conditions for calculated Seasonal Maximum Capacity, Seasonal Minimum Capacity, and Heat Rate for the following periods:

          a. January-March
          b. April-October
          c. November-December

A2)  For Seasonal Maximum Capacity, Seasonal Minimum Capacity, and Heat Rate requirements, please use the average ambient conditions anticipated for the plant during the respective seasonal periods present at the plant’s location (and please state assumed ambient conditions). Note that the specific Summer Capacity rating should be stated at the summer ambient condition of 100 degrees F, 40% relative humidity, and 95% lagging power factor.

Q3)  The RFP states that proposals will be evaluated against a DEC self-build and own option. This benchmark option is clearly one which involves a combined cycle asset that will both (a) be owned and operated by DEC and (b) have a lifetime greater than 20 years. At the same time, the RFP precludes any bidders from submitting proposals that (a) involve a combined cycle or any other asset which is sold to DEC for DEC’s ownership and operation and (b) have terms greater than 20 years. Please explain, in as much detail as possible, why options which mirror DEC’s own benchmark option in both ownership and term are precluded from consideration, while DEC’s own benchmark option is considered a viable alternative?

A3)  Purchase power proposals up to 20 years in length can provide a valuable resource alternative resource option to compare against a company “self-build” alternative. Competitively priced existing resources may offer financial advantages to our customers. Developers that offer newly built resource purchase power alternatives for up to 20 year terms may also offer competitively priced proposals when recognizing that additional value exists in the marketplace after the initial contract term expires.

Duke’s evaluation methodology will compare 15 to 20 year purchase power proposals to self-build alternatives allowing the company to select resources that provide the highest value to customers.

Website Designed and Hosted by
Burns & McDonnell Business & Technology Services