Artist Concept of the FutureGen Power Plant

Final Site RFP Questions & Answers

Please clarify whether the sum of all target formations proposed must support a CO₂ injection rate of 1 MMT of CO₂ per year (Criterion 2.4.3) or, as stated in response to questions on the draft RFP, "a minimum of 1 MMT per year must go into primary formation. Any CO₂ generated beyond 1 MMT/yr could be diverted into a secondary formation."
Answer: The sum of all target formations proposed must support a CO₂ injection rate of 1 MMT of CO₂ per year and 50 MMT over 30 years, with the primary deep saline formation accounting for at least 60 percent of annual injection rate (i.e., at least 600 kilotons) and a total of 30 MMT over 30 years. An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this clarification and previous Q&As posted on the website will be clarified to be consistent with this answer.
Please clarify the page limitation for a proposal that addresses more than one target formation for carbon sequestration.
Answer: For those criteria that require information on separate target formations, the offeror will be allowed one page for each criterion for each target formation. An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this clarification.
Please clarify whether offerors must have valid title to the property and full authority to enter into a site agreement with the Alliance prior to submitting a proposal in response to the Final RFP.
Answer: At the time the offeror submits its proposal to the Alliance, it must be able to demonstrate that it has title or a binding option to acquire title. The Alliance will enter into a site agreement with the successful offeror following the completion of DOE's NEPA process, which is expected in summer 2007.
Please clarify whether an offeror may file a notice of intent to propose on several sites and then later choose to file fewer site proposals.
Answer: The offeror may choose to file fewer site proposals than the number indicated in the notice of intent to propose to be submitted by March 24, 2006. No formal notice of rescission is required. However, the Alliance would appreciate being informed as soon as an offeror makes a decision to file fewer proposals than originally stated in order to facilitate the proposal evaluation process.
With respect to Criterion 2.6.3 relating to sensitive features, please clarify whether there is a limit on dam height/length or volume of water stored in order for a dam to be considered to be a sensitive feature. A very small earthen dam that retains a very small amount of water should not be an issue.
Answer: Criterion 2.6.3 is meant to apply to large dams. A large dam is defined according to the International Commission on Large Dams as any dam of 15 meters (50 feet) or more in height or a dam greater than 5 meters high and having a reservoir volume of more than 3 million cubic meters. An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this clarification.
Please clarify the apparent discrepancy between the requirement for 2,500 gpm of makeup water in Criteria 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 and the requirement for 1,500 gpm in Criterion 3.6.2.

Answer: Criteria 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 are correct.

Criterion 3.6.2 should read:

Volume of Water Available. Flexibility in meeting cooling water requirements is desirable. It is preferable that water be available in excess of the minimum 2,500 gpm [Criterion 1.4.2].

Data requested: Provide the location and quantity of available water in excess of 2,500 gpm and demonstrate its availability to the project.

An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this change.
Please clarify whether offerors may contact organizations listed in Section 1.5.2 to gather pre-existing information not specifically developed for the FutureGen project (e.g., such as information originating from prior projects or the DOE Regional Carbon Partnerships) in support of their proposal.
Answer: The Alliance supports offerors drawing upon the work of the DOE Regional Carbon Partnerships and prior work. Prior to contacting organizations listed in Section 1.5.2, send an email to SiteRFP@FutureGenAlliance.org addressed to Mike Mudd, Alliance CEO, with the subject line, "Notification of Contact with a Potentially Conflicted Party" and in a very brief statement indicate: 1) the organization and specific person to be contacted; and 2) the nature of the request. It is the offeror's responsibility to assure the substance of the FutureGen RFP is not discussed during the conversation. Under no circumstances may organizations listed in Section 1.5.2 be allowed to participate in proposal preparation through written correspondence, brainstorming, verbal discussions, or otherwise. Further, these parties may conduct no new work or data gathering in support of the offerors' efforts. They may only transmit information developed prior to December 2, 2005.
Please clarify whether offerors may contact Alliance members to obtain transmission interconnect and power off-take information to meet RFP requirements and how to obtain permission from the Alliance CEO for such contact.
Answer: Offerors may contact Alliance members as necessary to meet the requirements of Criteria 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, power off-take considerations, and the Transmission Interconnection criterion in the Best Value Assessment section.

Prior to contacting Alliance members listed in Section 1.5.2, offerors must send an email to SiteRFP@FutureGenAlliance.org addressed to Mike Mudd, Alliance CEO, with the subject line, "Notification of Contact with a Potentially Conflicted Party". Include a very brief statement indicating: 1) the organization to be contacted and 2) the nature of the request. It is the offeror's responsibility to assure the substance of the FutureGen RFP is not discussed during the conversation, except for Criteria 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, power off-take considerations, and the Transmission Interconnection criterion in the Best Value Assessment section. While supporting information may be provided by the Alliance member to address these criteria, the Alliance member may not be a party to the proposal.

An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this change.
Please clarify whether Criterion 2.6.1 relating to proximity to public access areas was meant to include state or local properties that are used for low density recreation / seasonal hunting, i.e. a city square, and numerous legally-mandated areas for access to lakes and rivers. Including state and local areas in the definition of public access area is very restrictive.
Answer: The definition for public access areas will be modified to exclude local parks. The Alliance wants to avoid any potential impacts to the areas noted in the definition. While subsequent projects may have less stringent requirements, responsible risk management dictates that the first commercial-scale carbon capture and storage project in the country be sited in an area away from environmentally sensitive areas such as national and state parks. The Alliance agrees that excluding local parks may be overly restrictive.
With respect to Criterion 4.1.2 related to orientation, please clarify what range of dips would be classified as "lower."
Answer: Dips less than 5 (five) degrees would be classified as "lower" dips. An amendment to the final RFP will reflect this clarification.
Please clarify the basis for Criterion 1.1.4 relating to seismic stability, which uses peak ground acceleration as a seismicity hazard metric. A more appropriate requirement would be to define the seismic hazard within which the proposed plant site lies based spectral acceleration values (1.0 second spectral acceleration with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years based on the USGS 2002 map).
Answer: Spectral acceleration, as suggested by the commentor, is appropriate for tall buildings and conventional power plants. However, peak ground acceleration, as included in the RFP, is a more suitable criterion for the wellheads, wellbores, and near-surface infrastructure integral to FutureGen's CO₂ storage goals.

While subsequent projects may have less stringent requirements, as with some other RFP criteria, responsible risk management dictates that the first-of-a-kind project in the country be sited in a location with low seismic potential.
How much coal will the FutureGen plant consume annually?
Answer: Formal estimates for coal consumption will be prepared as part of this year's conceptual design activities and will depend on the operational regime of the plant, and are, in part, a function of the coals and equipment tested at the plant. However, preliminary estimates are that the plant will gasify up to 1 million tons per year.
How much of the daily water use specified in the RFP will be consumptive?
Answer: For the purposes of responding to the RFP the water usage rates cited in the RFP should be considered 100% consumptive.
Does a wildlife management area constitute a public access area?
Answer: No. A wildlife management area is not included in the definition of a public access area.