AG1-483 Phase II Study Report

AG1-483 meets the criteria for acceleration at Decision Point II (DP2).

This Phase II System Impact Study Report (PH2) has been prepared in accordance with the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 310 for New Service Requests (projects) in Transition Cycle #1. The Project Developer/Eligible Customer (developer) is Fourth Quarter BESS, LLC, and the Transmission Provider (TP) is PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM). The interconnected Transmission Owner (TO) is Potomac Electric Power Company.

The Phase II System Impact Study is conducted on an aggregate basis within a New Services Request’s Cycle, and results are provided in both (i) a single Cycle executive summary format and (ii) an individual project-level basis. The Phase II System Impact Study Results (for both the executive summary and individual reports) will be publicly available on PJM’s website. Developers must obtain the results from the website.

In accordance with PJM Manual 14H, section 4.5, PJM takes the following actions during the Phase II System Impact Study:

1. PJM will retool load flow results from Phase I System Impact Study (summer peak, winter peak^[1] and light load) based on decisions made by Project Developers or Eligible Customers during Decision Point I.
2. PJM will conduct any required voltage analyses.
3. PJM will perform short circuit and stability analyses as required.
4. PJM will coordinate with the Affected System to confirm which projects in PJM Cycle will require Affected System studies. If the Affected System Operator indicates that an Affected System study is required, PJM will:
1. Notify the Project Developer or Eligible Customer of the need for an Affected System study and the requirement to execute an Affected System study agreement with the impacted Affected System Operator, and;
2. Include the results of the Affected System Operator’s Affected System Study in the Phase II System Impact Study results, if applicable and available
5. The Phase II System Impact Study Results will be publicly available on PJM’s website. Project Developers and Eligible Customers must obtain the results from the website.

The Transmission Owner takes the following actions during the Phase II System Impact Study:

1. Verify Interconnection Facilities and Network Upgrades required to accommodate the New Service Request.
2. Perform a Facilities Study. The Facilities Study in Phase II System Impact Study phase will be for the physical Interconnection Facilities. The Facilities Study requirements are outlined in Attachment C of PJM Manual 14H. The study will be conducted pursuant to Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 307(A)(7).

This New Service Request meets the criteria for acceleration at Decision Point II (DP2).

Please note that additional requirements apply to accelerated projects at DP2 per PJM Tariff Part VII, Subpart D, section 311. Failure to meet the requirements by the close of DP2 will result in withdrawal.

This New Service Request does not meet the Adverse Study Impact Criteria and has the option to either move forward in the Cycle process or withdraw at DP2 with Readiness Deposit #1 forfeited. See adverse study impact calculation below.

This section details whether a Project Developer or Eligible Customer qualifies for the Adverse Study Impact clause outlined in the PJM OATT, Part VII, Subpart D, section 311.B and Manual 14H, section 6.2.2. In order to qualify for an Adverse Study Impact at Decision Point II, the Network Upgrade cost from Phase I to Phase II must:

1. Increase overall by 25% or more
2. Increases by more than $10,000 per MW (Includes Costs identified in Affected System studies)

If a New Service Request meets the criteria above and chooses to withdraw the request, PJM will refund the cumulative Readiness Deposit amounts paid at the Application Phase and at Decision Point I (RD1 and RD2, respectively).

The below calculations show the computation of this New Service Request's Adverse Study Impact

The Project Developer has proposed a Storage facility located in the Potomac Electric Power Company zone — Montgomery County, Maryland. The installed facilities will have a total capability of 500.0 MW with 500.0 MW of this output being recognized by PJM as Capacity.

Capacity Interconnection Rights (CIR) Transfer Details

This project intends to claim and transfer CIRs from the following Deactivation capacity generation resources. PJM performed a reliability analysis of the impacts to the system capability for the proposed transfer of CIRs from the Deactivation generation resources.

Physical Interconnection Facility Study

The transmission owner has completed the Physical Interconnection Facilities Study. This report is available for download.

AG1-483 will interconnect on the PEPCO transmission system at the Dickerson 230kV (Bus D) substation. AG1-483 is claiming CIR rights from Dickerson's available 544.8 MW.

The table below shows a summary of the total cost estimates for this New Service Request project. In Phase II SIS, the interconnected Transmission Owner has performed a facilities study for both the Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades. The System Reliability Network Upgrade shown in the table are planning level cost estimates which are subject to change as a result of a facility study performed by the TO during Phase III System Impact Study.

Based on the Phase II SIS results, the AG1-483 project has the following allocation of costs for interconnection.

Definitions

Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities: Facilities that are owned, controlled, operated and maintained by the Transmission Owner on the Transmission Owner’s side of the Point of Change of Ownership to the Point of Interconnection, including any modifications, additions or upgrades made to such facilities and equipment, that are necessary to physically and electrically interconnect the Generating Facility with the Transmission System or interconnected distribution facilities.

Stand Alone Network Upgrades: Network Upgrades, which are not part of an Affected System, which a Project Developer may construct without affecting day-to-day operations (e.g. taking a transmission outage) of the Transmission System during their construction.

Network Upgrades: Modifications or additions to transmission-related facilities that are integrated with and support the Transmission Provider’s overall Transmission System for the general benefit of all users of such Transmission System. Network Upgrades have no impact or potential impact on the Transmission System until the final tie-in is complete.

Notes

Note 1: PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT), Part VII, Subpart D, section 307.5 outlines cost allocation rules. The rules are further clarified in PJM Manual 14H, section 4.2.6. PJM shall identify the New Service Requests in the Cycle contributing to the need for the required Network Upgrades within the Cycle. All New Service Requests that contribute to the need for a Network Upgrade will receive cost allocation for that upgrade pursuant to each New Service Request’s contribution to the reliability violation identified on the transmission system in accordance with PJM Manuals.

Note 2: There will be no inter-Cycle cost allocation for Interconnection Facilities or Network Upgrades identified in the System Impact Study costs identified in a Cycle; all such costs shall be allocated to New Service Requests in that Cycle.

Note 3: For Project Developers with System Reinforcements listed: If this project presents cost allocation to a System Reinforcement indicates $0, then please be aware that as changes to the interconnection process occur, such as other projects withdrawing, reducing in size, etc, the cost responsibilities can change and a cost allocation may be assigned to this project. In addition, although this project presents cost allocation to a System Reinforcement is presently $0, this project may need this system reinforcement completed to be deliverable to the PJM system. If this project desires to come into service prior to completion of the system reinforcement, the Project Developer will need to request PJM to perform an interim study to determine if they would be deliverable for all or a portion of their output for each delivery year until the system reinforcement is complete.

Note 4: Please see the ‘Affected Systems Studies’ section of this Phase 2 SIS report for details on your project’s need for an Affected Systems Study. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study, the Affected Systems impacts may not be available from the Affected System Operator at the time of the PJM Phase II SIS. Therefore, the cost in this section would not reflect any required upgrades by the Affected System until the study is completed. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study and your results are not provided for Phase II SIS, PJM anticipates providing them in the Phase III SIS per Tariff Part VII.D.312.

A summary of this New Service Requests costs are summarized in the Cost Summary section, herein. Final security will be shown in the Generation Interconnection Agreement (GIA).

The total preliminary cost estimate for the Transmission Owner scope of work (including TOIF and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades) is given in the table below. These costs do not include CIAC Tax Gross-up.

Transmission Owner Build Option

Developer Build Option

Project Developer has the option ("Option to Build") to assume responsibility for the design, procurement and construction of Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities and/or Stand-Alone Network Upgrades.

If Option to Build is elected, the Project Developer must fulfill additional requirements in accordance to PJM Manual 14C, section 5.1 and PJM Manual 14H, section 8.6.2.

The cost estimates for eligible facilities and Option to Build oversight are highlighted below:

(No Developer Build Option for this project.)

Based on the scope of work for the Interconnection Facilities, it is expected to take a range of 46 to 62 month(s) after the signing of a Generator Interconnection Agreement (as this is a FERC connection) and construction kickoff call to complete the installation of the physical connection work. This assumes that there will be no environmental issues with any of the new properties associated with this project, that there will be no delays in acquiring the necessary permits for implementing the defined interconnection work, and that all system outages will be allowed when requested.

The schedule for any required Network Impact Reinforcements will be more clearly identified in the Phase II and Phase III System Impact Studies.

No Transmission Owner impacts identified.

The developer is responsible for all design and construction related activities on the developer’s side of the Point of Change in Ownership. PEPCO interconnection requirements can be found here. Refer to AG1-483 Physical Interconnection Facilities Study for additional requirements found in the General Section of the report.

To the extent that these Applicable Technical Requirements and Standards may conflict with the terms and conditions of the Tariff, the Tariff shall control.

The developer will be required to install equipment necessary to provide Revenue Metering (KWH, KVARH) and real time data (KW, KVAR) for their generating Resource. See PJM Manual 01, PJM Manual 14D, and PJM Tariff Part IX, Subpart B, Appendix 2, section 8.

The Project Developer will be required to comply with all interconnected Transmission Owner’s revenue metering requirements located at the following link: PJM - Transmission Owner Engineering & Construction Standards and in the Physical Interconnection Facilities Study.

Based on PJM Short Circuit Analysis, this project did not contribute >1% fault duty to previously identified overduty breakers, nor did it cause any new overduty breakers.

Analysis Complete - No Issues

Executive Summary

New Service Requests (projects) in PJM Transition Cycle 1, Cluster 81 are listed in Table 1 below. This report will cover the dynamic analysis of Cluster 81 projects.

This analysis is effectively a screening study to determine whether the addition of the Cluster 81 projects will meet the dynamics requirements of the NERC, Exelon/PEPCO, and PJM reliability standards.

The load flow scenario for the analysis was based on the RTEP 2027 summer peak load case, modified to include applicable projects. Cluster 81 projects have been dispatched online at maximum power output, with approximately unity power factor at the high side of the GSUs, 1.02 pu voltage at the generator terminals, and 1.02 pu voltage at the POI buses.

Cluster 81 projects were tested for compliance with NERC, PJM, Transmission Owner and other applicable criteria. Steady-state condition and 75 contingencies were studied, each with a 20 second simulation time period (with 1.0 second initial run prior to any events). Studied faults included:

a)       Steady-state operation (Category P0);

b)       Three-phase faults with normal clearing time (Category P1);

c)       Single phase bus faults with normal clearing time (Category P2);

d)       Single-phase faults with stuck breaker (Category P4);

e)       Single phase faults placed at 80% of the line with delayed (Zone 2) clearing at line end remote from the fault due to primary communications/relay failure (Category P5);

f)       Single phase to ground faults with normal clearing for common structure (Category P7).

Multiple-circuit tower line faults were identified for this study.

No High Speed Reclosing (HSR) facilities were found in the vicinity of TC1 Cluster 81 projects.

For all simulations, the projects under study along with the rest of the PJM system were required to maintain synchronism and with all states returning to an acceptable new condition following the disturbance.

For all of the fault contingencies tested on the 2027 peak load case:

a)       Cluster 81 projects were able to ride through the faults (except for faults where protective action trips a generator(s)),

b)       The system with Cluster 81 projects included is transiently stable and post-contingency oscillations were positively damped with a damping margin of at least 3% for interarea modes and 4% for local modes.

c)       Following fault clearing, all bus voltages recovered to a minimum of 0.7 per unit after 2.5 seconds (except where protective action isolates that bus).

d)       No transmission element tripped, other than those either directly connected or designed to trip as a consequence of that fault.

AG1-483 meets the 0.95 leading and lagging PF requirement.

No mitigations were found to be required for TC1 Cluster 81.

Table 1: TC1 Cluster 81 Projects

The reactive power capability of AG1-483 meets the 0.95 leading and lagging PF requirement at the high side of the main transformer.

 No voltage issues identified.

The New Service Requests below are listed in one or more dispatch for the overloads identified in this report. These projects contribute to the loading of the overloaded facilities identified in this report. The percent overload of a facility and cost allocation you may have towards a particular reinforcement could vary depending on the action of other projects. The status of each project at the time of the analysis is presented in the table. This list may change as other projects withdraw or modify their requests. This table is valid for load flow analyses only.

In Phase II of the Cycle, PJM provides the Affected System Operator any updates on the PJM projects that require an Affected Systems Study based on their response at DP1. New Service Requests that require an Affected Systems Study are required to enter into an Affected Systems Study Agreement with the Affected System Operator, as applicable, prior to the close of DP2 or they will be withdrawn from the Cycle.

If the Project Developer already entered into the necessary agreement and the results are available, PJM will supply them in the Phase II SIS report. See below for the status of any required Affected Systems Study. A status of “Pending” means that the study is not yet completed by the Affected System Operator. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study and your results are not provided for Phase II SIS, PJM anticipates providing them in the Phase III SIS per Tariff Part VII.D.312.

No cost allocated system reinforcements were identified for this project in the Phase II System Impact Study load flow analysis.

Download all tables in report