AG1-135 Final System Impact Study (Retool 1) Report
v1.00 released 2025-12-08 18:21
Garner-Lancaster 115 kV
36.0 MW Capacity / 60.0 MW Energy
Introduction
This Final System Impact Study (SIS) Report has been prepared in accordance with the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 314 for New Service Requests (projects) in Transition Cycle 1 (TC1). The Project Developer/Eligible Customer (developer) is Virginia Electric and Power Company (d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia), and the Transmission Provider (TP) is PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM). The interconnected Transmission Owner (TO) is Virginia Electric and Power Company (d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia).
Preface
The Final 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 summary format and (ii) an individual project-level basis. The Final System Impact Study Results (for both the summary and individual reports) will be publicly available on PJM’s website. Project Developers must obtain the results from the website.
In accordance with PJM Manual 14H, section 5, Final Agreement Negotiation Phase, the purpose of the Final Agreement Negotiation Phase is to:
- Negotiate, execute and enter into the applicable final interconnection related service agreement found in Tariff, Part IX;
- Conduct any remaining analyses or updated analyses based on New Service Requests withdrawn during Decision Point III (DP3); and
- Adjust the security obligation based on New Service Requests withdrawn during Decision Point III and/or during the Final Agreement Negotiation Phase.
Retool 1:
In accordance with PJM Tariff Part VII.D 314 B(1)(a), Final Agreement Negotiation Phase:
- PJM will perform a retool (Retool 1) after the conclusion of DP3 considering only the TC1 projects moving on in the Final Agreement Negotiation Phase (Removes DP3 withdrawals).
- The Final System Impact Study reflecting results from the retooled analysis (Retool 1) will be publicly available on PJM’s website; Project Developers and Eligible Customers must obtain the results from the website.
- PJM will provide updated final electronic agreements to Project Developers and Eligible Customers in the Cycle reflecting updates from the Final System Impact Study after Retool 1 including the adjusted Security requirements.
Retool 2 (if needed):
If particular New Service Requests do not sign their final agreements after receiving the updated information after Retool 1, there may be the need to run a second retool (Retool 2) to identify if any network upgrades are no longer necessary:
- PJM will perform Retool 2 (if necessary) considering only the removal of TC1 projects from the model which chose not to execute their agreements after Retool 1.
- The updated Final System Impact Study reflecting results from Retool 2 will be publicly available on PJM’s website; Project Developers and Eligible Customers must obtain the results from the website.
- If there are any adjustments to the agreements required after Retool 2, the necessary network upgrade or Security changes will be handled via the scope change process post-GIA.
General
The Project Developer has proposed a Solar generating facility located in the Virginia Electric and Power Company (d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia) zone — Richmond County, Virginia. The installed facilities will have a total capability of 60.0 MW with 36.0 MW of this output being recognized by PJM as Capacity.Project Information
Physical Interconnection Facility Study
The transmission owner has completed the Physical Interconnection Facilities Study. This report is available for download.
Point of Interconnection
AG1-135 will interconnect on the Dominion transmission system via a newly constructed 115 kV three breaker ring bus on the line between Garner and Lancaster substations
Cost Summary
The table below shows a summary of the total cost estimates for this New Service Request project. The Facilities Studies for the Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades were performed by the Transmission Owner in Phase II. Facilities Studies are available for download on PJM.com (see General Section for document links). The Interconnected Transmission Owner has performed a Facilities Study for the required System Reliability Network Upgrades in Phase III (see System Reinforcement Section for document links).
Based on the Final SIS results, the AG1-135 project has the following allocation of costs for interconnection. The Security amount required after the Final SIS and revised agreements is also shown below.
| Cost Summary | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Description | Cost Allocated to AG1-135 | Cost Subject to Security* | |
| Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) | $1,085,295 | $1,085,295 | |
| Other Scope | $0 | $0 | |
| Option To Build Oversight | $0 | $0 | |
| Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades | |||
| Stand Alone Network Upgrades | $10,597,741 | $10,597,741 | |
| Network Upgrades | $6,808,564 | $6,808,564 | |
| System Reliability Network Upgrades | |||
| Steady State Thermal & Voltage (SP & LL) | $21,177,648 | $21,177,648 | |
| Transient Stability | $3,642,915 | $3,642,915 | |
| Short Circuit | $0 | $0 | |
| Transmission Owner Analysis | |||
| SubRegional | $0 | $0 | |
| Distribution | $0 | $0 | |
| Affected System Reinforcements | |||
| AFS - PJM Violatons | $0 | $0 | |
| AFS - Non-PJM Violations | $0 | $0 | |
| Total | $43,312,162 | $43,312,162 | |
* Contributes to calculation for Security. See Security Section of this report for additional detail.
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, 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 deliverability 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.
Security Requirement
Per Tariff Part VII, Subpart D, section 314 (Final Agreement Negotiation Phase) A.1 and PJM Manual 14H, Section 5, if a Transition Cycle 1 New Service Request is withdrawn during Decision Point III and/or the Final Agreement Negotiation Phase, PJM shall remove the New Service Request from the Cycle and adjust the Security obligations of other New Service Requests based on the withdrawal. The Final System Impact Study results will reflect the updated Security amount for this project. Security may be in the form of cash, letter of credit, or other form of Security acceptable to PJM (see PJM M14H, Section 6.4).
Security is calculated for a New Service Request based on the Network Upgrade costs allocated pursuant to the Final System Impact Study results.
Note 1: "Network Upgrades" referred to in the calculation include both (i) the Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades and (ii) the System Reliability Network Upgrades as shown in the Cost Summary table.
Security Due for AG1-135
Security has been calculated for the AG1-135 project(s) based on the Final System Impact Study results and is shown in the table below. This Security must be provided at Final SIS through either a wire transfer or letter of credit or other form of Security deemed acceptable by PJM per Manual 14H, Section 6.4.
Security Due for AG1-135
In accordance with Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 314(B)(4)(a) (Final Agreement Negotiation Phase) failure to provide any required adjustments to Security within the 15 Business Day period will result in the New Service Request project being terminated and withdrawn.
Please see the cover letter for more details on Letter of Credit/Wire details to satisfy the additional Security requirement.
If no additional Security is required, please coordinate with your assigned Project Manager to initiate any refunds of Security reductions.
Transmission Owner Scope of Work
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 Scope
| Network Upgrades | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
| Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
| n9399.0 | Perform relay upgrades at Moon Corner substation. Build new fiber path (estimated ~ 1.46 miles) from structure 1078/498 to structure 1078/509 at Moon Corner substation, build new fiber path (estimated ~ 4 miles) from structure 65/510 to structure 65/5401 at future Chilton substation, and build two new fiber path (estimated ~ 0.11 miles each) from structure 1078/509 to structure 65/510. | $189,172 | $71,311 | $34,366 | $12,575 | $307,424 | $307,424 |
| n8213.1 | Cut the #65 Moon Corner - Rappahannock 115 kV line to loop into the new interconnection substation. | $2,948,227 | $2,610,093 | $282,291 | $64,594 | $5,905,205 | $5,905,205 |
| n8213.3 | Remote protection and communication work at Garner DP, Lancaster Substation, Orcan Substation, White Stone Substation, and Rappahannock Substation. | $499,400 | $0 | $96,535 | $0 | $595,935 | $595,935 |
| Stand-Alone Network Upgrades | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
| Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
| n8213.2 | Construct a new 115 kV three-breaker ring switching station tapping the #65 Moon Corner - Rappahannock 115 kV line. | $5,358,429 | $3,372,235 | $1,421,229 | $445,848 | $10,597,741 | $10,597,741 |
| Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
| Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
| (Pending) | A 115 kV backbone structure and foundation within the fence of the interconnection substation, to terminate the Project Developer’s generator lead line. Line conductor from the backbone structure to the bus position in the switchyard of the interconnection substation. | $632,521 | $256,712 | $164,059 | $32,003 | $1,085,295 | $1,085,295 |
Based on the scope of work for the Interconnection Facilities, it is expected to take 39 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.
Note that the TO findings were made from a conceptual review of this project. A more detailed review of the connection facilities and their cost will be identified in a future study phase. Further note that the cost estimate data provided should be considered high level estimates since it was produced without a detailed engineering review. The Project Developer will be responsible for the actual cost of construction. TO herein reserves the right to return to any issues in this document and, upon appropriate justification, request additional monies to complete any reinforcements to the transmission systems.
Remote Terminal Work: During Phase II of the PJM interconnection process, TO’s System Protection Engineering Department will review transmission line protection as well as anti-islanding required to accommodate the new generation and interconnection substation. System Protection Engineering will determine the minimal acceptable protection requirements to reliably interconnect the proposed generating facility with the transmission system. The review is based on maintaining system reliability by reviewing TO’s protection requirements with the known transmission system configuration which includes generating facilities in the area. This review may determine that transmission line protection and communication upgrades are required at remote substations.
Transmission Owner Analysis
PJM performed a power flow analysis of the transmission system using a 2027 load flow model and the results were verified by Dominion.
Developer Requirements
The developer is responsible for all design and construction related activities on the developer’s side of the Point of Change in Ownership. Dominion interconnection requirements can be found here.
To the extent that these Applicable Technical Requirements and Standards may conflict with the terms and conditions of the Tariff, the Tariff shall control.
Revenue Metering and SCADA Requirements
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.Meteorological Data Reporting Requirement
The solar generation facility shall provide the Transmission Provider with site-specific meteorological data including:Transmission Owner Requirements
- Temperature (degrees Fahrenheit)
- Atmospheric Pressure (hectopascals)
- Irradiance
- Forced outage data
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.
Summer Peak Analysis
The New Service Request AG1-135 was evaluated as a 60.0 MW (36.0 MW Capacity) injection in the Dominion area.
Note: The capacity portion of Generation Interconnection Requests are evaluated for single or N-1 contingencies. The full energy output of Generation Interconnection Requests are evaluated for multiple facility contingencies (double circuit tower line, fault with a stuck breaker, and bus fault).
The following flowgates remain after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Study | Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GD1 | DVP | 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | DVP_P1-3: 6NORNECK-TX#4_SRT-A | Single | AC | 104.41 % | 177.38 | B | 185.21 | 22.24 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | DVP_P4-2: H2T557_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 132.14 % | 1065.0 | C | 1407.28 | 9.75 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6LADYSMITH-8LADYSMITH 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | DVP_P4-2: H2T574_SRT-S_SENS | Breaker | AC | 134.99 % | 1031.0 | C | 1391.73 | 7.61 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AE1-155 TAP-3NORNECK 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-1: G_SRT-A | Breaker | AC | 131.48 % | 249.0 | C | 327.39 | 36.82 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Study | Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GD1 | DVP | 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 574_SRT-S | Single | AC | 102.41 % | 548.02 | B | 561.23 | 7.4 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: 574T581_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 102.09 % | 671.0 | C | 684.99 | 12.34 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: H1T574_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 102.01 % | 671.0 | C | 684.51 | 12.33 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FINES-6FREDBRG 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 574_SRT-S | Single | AC | 102.36 % | 548.02 | B | 560.95 | 7.4 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FINES-6FREDBRG 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: 574T581_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 102.05 % | 671.0 | C | 684.77 | 12.34 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FINES-6FREDBRG 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: H1T574_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 101.98 % | 671.0 | C | 684.26 | 12.33 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8CHCKAHM-8ELMONT 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: 563T576_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 104.31 % | 3637.0 | C | 3793.69 | 14.95 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 576_SRT-A | Single | AC | 111.92 % | 4070.2 | B | 4555.56 | 9.32 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 563_SRT-S-1 | Single | AC | 101.04 % | 4070.2 | B | 4112.5 | 7.91 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: 545T552_SRT-S | Breaker | AC | 107.93 % | 3940.0 | C | 4252.57 | 8.59 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 581_SRT-S | Single | AC | 100.32 % | 3220.44 | B | 3230.79 | 5.08 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8NO ANNA-8SPOTSYL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 581_SRT-S | Single | AC | 114.22 % | 3220.44 | B | 3678.49 | 6.37 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8NO ANNA-8SPOTSYL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 552_SRT-S | Single | AC | 112.04 % | 3220.44 | B | 3608.12 | 6.23 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8OX-8CLIFTON 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P7-1: LN 2101-569_SRT-S | Tower | AC | 105.43 % | 3144.0 | C | 3314.57 | 7.62 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8SPOTSYL-8MORRSVL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 552_SRT-S | Single | AC | 120.07 % | 3220.44 | B | 3866.79 | 6.22 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8SPOTSYL-8MORRSVL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 581_SRT-S | Single | AC | 119.0 % | 3220.44 | B | 3832.16 | 6.13 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AD2-074 TP-3LANCAST 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | Single | AC | 116.08 % | 203.98 | B | 236.78 | 35.99 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AE1-155 TAP-3NORNECK 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P4-2: 65T1021_SRT-A | Breaker | AC | 195.84 % | 249.0 | C | 487.63 | 59.98 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AE1-155 TAP-3NORNECK 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-A | Single | AC | 118.26 % | 203.98 | B | 241.23 | 35.99 |
Summer Potential Congestion due to Local Energy Deliverability
PJM also studied the delivery of the energy portion of this interconnection request. Any problems identified below are likely to result in operational restrictions to the project under study. The developer can proceed with network upgrades to eliminate the operational restriction at their discretion by submitting an Upgrade Request into the New Service Request process.
Note: Only the most severely overloaded conditions are listed below. There is no guarantee of full delivery of energy for this project by fixing only the conditions listed in this section. With an Upgrade Request, a subsequent analysis will be performed which shall study all overload conditions associated with the overloaded element(s) identified.
The following flowgates remain after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Study | Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GD1 | DVP | 3GARNER-AE1-155 TAP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-A | OP | AC | 113.88 % | 203.98 | B | 232.29 | 60.0 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | DVP_P1-3: 6NORNECK-TX#6_SRT-A | OP | AC | 200.74 % | 179.92 | B | 361.18 | 35.63 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | Base Case | OP | AC | 110.23 % | 171.17 | A | 188.67 | 18.48 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | DVP_P1-3: 6NORNECK-TX#4_SRT-A | OP | AC | 206.3 % | 177.38 | B | 365.93 | 37.06 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | Base Case | OP | AC | 123.29 % | 170.05 | A | 209.66 | 22.23 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6AQUI_HARB_B-6GARSVL 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 2157_SRT-A | OP | AC | 100.58 % | 898.64 | B | 903.82 | 7.15 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 2090_SRT-A | OP | AC | 111.99 % | 548.02 | B | 613.72 | 11.96 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6CHCKAHM-8CHCKAHM 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | DVP_P1-2: LN 567_SRT-A | OP | AC | 117.72 % | 934.92 | B | 1100.62 | 11.33 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6CHESTF A-6IRON208 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 557_SRT-S | OP | AC | 119.65 % | 663.64 | B | 794.05 | 4.43 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | DVP_P1-2: LN 557_SRT-S | OP | AC | 108.08 % | 879.84 | B | 950.94 | 6.59 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FINES-6FREDBRG 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 2090_SRT-A | OP | AC | 111.92 % | 548.02 | B | 613.37 | 11.96 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FREDBRG-6CRANES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 9296_SRT-A | OP | AC | 103.41 % | 984.18 | B | 1017.75 | 7.81 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6IRON208-6SOUWEST 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 557_SRT-S | OP | AC | 110.61 % | 663.64 | B | 734.04 | 4.43 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6LADYSMITH-8LADYSMITH 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | DVP_P1-2: LN 574_SRT-S_SENS | OP | AC | 103.88 % | 889.43 | B | 923.97 | 5.05 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6NRTHEST-6ELMONT 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 557_SRT-S | OP | AC | 117.46 % | 678.68 | B | 797.16 | 5.16 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8CHCKAHM-8ELMONT 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 563_SRT-S-1 | OP | AC | 136.21 % | 2442.12 | B | 3326.4 | 14.09 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 576_SRT-A | OP | AC | 115.81 % | 4070.2 | B | 4713.59 | 15.3 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8LADYSMITH-8KRAKEN 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 581_SRT-S | OP | AC | 113.6 % | 3220.44 | B | 3658.56 | 12.01 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8SPOTSYL-8MORRSVL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 552_SRT-S | OP | AC | 105.3 % | 3220.44 | B | 3390.97 | 9.05 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AD2-074 TP-3LANCAST 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-D | OP | AC | 115.89 % | 203.98 | B | 236.4 | 60.0 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AG1-135 TP-3GARNER 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-A | OP | AC | 118.88 % | 203.98 | B | 242.5 | 60.0 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Study | Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GD1 | DVP | 3GREYSPT-3HARMONY 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 157.98 % | 269.78 | B | 426.19 | 59.98 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3HARMONY-6HARMONY 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 132.35 % | 224.38 | B | 296.96 | 28.78 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3LANCAST-3OCRAN 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 204.17 % | 219.96 | B | 449.08 | 59.98 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3OCRAN-3WHIT STONE 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 198.94 % | 219.96 | B | 437.59 | 59.98 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3RAPP TR-3GREYSPT 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 162.34 % | 132.54 | B | 215.17 | 29.99 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3RAPP TR-3GREYSPT 115.0 kV Ckt 2 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 162.34 % | 132.54 | B | 215.17 | 29.99 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3WAN 89-3WHITEMARSH 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 120.03 % | 169.2 | B | 203.1 | 16.37 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3WEST PT-3LANEXA 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 110.04 % | 224.66 | B | 247.21 | 14.77 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3WHIT STONE-3RAPPAHNCK 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 136.26 % | 315.84 | B | 430.37 | 59.98 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 3WHITEMARSH-3HAYES89 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 115.52 % | 169.2 | B | 195.45 | 16.37 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | Base Case | OP | AC | 104.63 % | 548.02 | A | 573.4 | 11.69 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 6FINES-6FREDBRG 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | Base Case | OP | AC | 104.58 % | 548.02 | A | 573.11 | 11.69 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8CHANCE-8BRISTER 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 594_SRT-S | OP | AC | 103.49 % | 4070.2 | B | 4212.31 | 10.76 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8CHCKAHM-8ELMONT 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | Base Case | OP | AC | 104.11 % | 2442.12 | A | 2542.46 | 13.05 | |
| GD1 | DVP | 8LADYSMITH-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 573_SRT-A | OP | AC | 103.53 % | 4070.2 | B | 4213.9 | 11.0 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AD2-074 TP-3LANCAST 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | Base Case | OP | AC | 101.31 % | 203.98 | A | 206.65 | 23.15 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AE1-155 TAP-3NORNECK 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | Base Case | OP | AC | 159.51 % | 203.98 | A | 325.36 | 36.83 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AF1-114 TP-6DAHLGREN 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 574_SRT-S | OP | AC | 100.66 % | 571.52 | B | 575.28 | 12.34 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AF2-013 TP-6ARNOLDS 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 574_SRT-S | OP | AC | 102.08 % | 559.3 | B | 570.92 | 12.34 | |
| GD1 | DVP | AG1-135 TP-AD2-074 TP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | DVP_P1-2: LN 65_SRT-SW-E | OP | AC | 153.07 % | 203.98 | B | 312.22 | 59.98 |
Winter Peak Analysis
PJM will start performing Winter Peak analysis in Transition Cycle 2.
Winter Potential Congestion due to Local Energy Deliverability
PJM will start performing Winter Peak analysis in Transition Cycle 2.
Light Load Analysis
The New Service Request AG1-135 was evaluated as a 60.0 MW injection in the Dominion area.
Note: The capacity portion of Generation Interconnection Requests are evaluated for single or N-1 contingencies. The full energy output of Generation Interconnection Requests are evaluated for multiple facility contingencies (double circuit tower line, fault with a stuck breaker, and bus fault).
(No impacts were found for this analysis)
Light Load Potential Congestion due to Local Energy Deliverability
PJM also studied the delivery of the energy portion of this interconnection request. Any problems identified below are likely to result in operational restrictions to the project under study. The developer can proceed with network upgrades to eliminate the operational restriction at their discretion by submitting an Upgrade Request into the New Service Request process.
(No impacts were found for this analysis)
Short Circuit Analysis
Based on PJM’s Short Circuit Analysis, this project did not contribute >1% fault duty to previously identified overdutied breakers, nor did it cause any new overdutied breakers.
Stability Analysis
Analysis Complete - Issues Found
Executive Summary for Dynamic Stability Analysis using PSSE
New Service Requests (projects) in PJM Transition Cycle 1 Cluster 32 are listed in Table 1 below. This report will cover the dynamic analysis of Cluster 32 projects.
This analysis is effectively a screening study to determine whether the addition of the Cluster 32 projects will meet the dynamics requirements of the NERC, Dominion Energy, and PJM reliability standards.
Table 1: Transition Cycle 1 Cluster 32 Projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cluster | Project | Fuel Type | Transmission Owner | MFO (MW) | MWE (MW) | MWC (MW) | Point of Interconnection |
32 | AF2-120 | Solar | Dominion | 62 | 62 | 37.2 | Garner – Northern Neck 115 kV |
AG1-135 | Solar | Dominion | 60 | 60 | 36 | Garner – Lancaster 115 kV | |
AG1-536 | Battery | Dominion | 75 | 75 | 32 | Garner – Northern Neck 115 kV |
For the Cluster 32 base run, the latest data from DP3 was used to update the models for the Cluster 32 generation in addition to removing withdrawn generation from the dispatch. Contingencies were updated to account for withdrawn projects.
Cluster 32 projects were tested for compliance with NERC, PJM, Transmission Owner and other applicable criteria. 105 initial contingencies were studied, each with a 20 second simulation time period. The contingencies studied included:
- Steady-state operation (30 seconds)
- Three-phase faults with normal clearing time
- Single-phase bus faults with normal clearing time
- Single-phase faults with stuck breaker
- Single-phase faults with delayed clearing at remote end
- Three-phase faults with loss of multiple-circuit tower line.
The results of the analysis identified TO criteria violations for outages of the Northern Neck – AE1-155 Tap 115 kV circuit (P103, P105, P409, P410, P412, P423, P501, P502) as observed in the Phase 3 analysis. The mitigation recommended from the Phase 3 analysis resolved the violations. It is recommended that a new second 115 kV transmission line be constructed from Northern Neck to AE1-155 Tap on a separate tower or structure, not sharing with the existing 115 kV transmission line from Northern Neck to AE1-155 Tap, to mitigate voltage instability. A new 115 kV breakers will be required at Northern Neck to complete a 5-breaker ring bus and AE1-155 to complete a 5-breaker ring bus. The two 115 kV line shall not share a common breaker such that a breaker failure or breaker stuck event could take out the two 115 kV lines from Northern Neck to AE1-155 Tap.
With the mitigation identified above, the results of the contingencies tested on the RTEP 2027 summer peak case found:
- Cluster 32 projects were able to ride through the faults (except for faults where protective action trips a generator(s)),
- The system with Cluster 32 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.
- 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) and the final voltages are within the steady-state voltage ranges below per Dominion Energy’s transmission planning criteria.
- P1 Category Contingencies:
- 0.93 to 1.05 p.u. for 230, 115, 69 kV facilities
- 0.93 to 1.03 p.u. for 138 kV facilities due to legacy switches
- 1.01 to 1.096 p.u. for 500 kV facilities
- P2, P4, P5, and P7 Category Contingencies:
- 0.90 to 1.05 p.u. for 230, 115, 69 kV facilities
- 0.90 to 1.03 p.u. for 138 kV facilities due to legacy switches
- 1.00 to 1.096 p.u. for 500 kV facilities
- No transmission element tripped, other than those either directly connected or designed to trip as a consequence of that fault.
Executive Summary for Dynamic Stability Analysis using PSCAD/EMT
Model Quality Testing Report
PSCAD model for Queue project AF2-120, AG1-135, AG1-146/147 and AG1-536 was developed and tested individually to ensure the model was in compliance with the PJM requirements. Test summary and result of test been summarized below in table 2. it is confirmed that PSCAD model was set up properly and satisfied the PJM requirement.
Table 2. MQT Result for each project |
|
Test | Status |
Flat Start Test | Pass |
Voltage Step-Down | Pass |
Voltage Step-Up | Pass |
Frequency Step-Down, No Headroom | Pass |
Frequency Step-Down, Headroom | Pass |
Frequency Step-Up, Headroom | Pass |
HVRT Leading | Pass |
HVRT Lagging | Pass |
LVRT Leading | Pass |
LVRT Lagging | Pass |
System Strength Test | Pass |
Voltage Ride Through | Pass |
Phase Angle Step-Down | Pass |
Phase Angle Step-Up | Pass |
Weak Grid Assessment
This Weak Grid Assessment evaluates five projects from PJM Transition Cycle 1 (TC1) Cluster 32 for risk of voltage instability due to weak grid conditions in an EMT simulation environment. The five projects, AF2-120, AG1-135, AG1-146, AG1-147, and AG1-536, were identified in the Cluster Study as having risk of undamped oscillations in multiple contingency cases, indicating system instability after dynamic simulation analysis in PSS/E. A network upgrade, a new second 115 kV transmission line from Northern Neck to AE1-155 Tap, was recommended along with evaluation using detailed models in an EMT simulation.
This assessment, completed by INS Engineering, aims to evaluate the risk of weak grid instability and verify the effectiveness of the recommended network upgrade in EMT simulation. A summary description of each project is listed below:
Table 3. Summary Description of TC1 Cluster 32 Projects |
|
|
|
|
Project Name | Project Type | Project Size (MW) | POI | POI Bus Number |
AF2-120 Cerulean Solar | PV | 62 | Garner – Northern Neck 115 kV | 939240 |
AG1-135 Moon Corner | PV | 60 | Garner – Lancaster 115 kV | 962860 |
AG1-146/AG1-147 Merry Point 1 and 2 Solar | PV | 100 | Garner – Lancaster 115 kV | 962970 |
AG1-536 Mulberry | BESS | 75 | Garner – Northern Neck 115 kV | 939240 |
First, the individual project PSCAD models were evaluated for data consistency and model performance as part of the standard Model Quality Tests process, model updates being made where needed. INS confirmed that the PSCAD models were set up properly and satisfied the requirements of PJM. After satisfactory configuration and performance of the individual project models were obtained, the models were integrated into a translated reduced network in PSCAD to create an overall detailed system model.
A representative contingency case from the Cluster Study, considered effectively the worst case in terms of risk for weak grid instability, was then simulated in the PSCAD detailed system model. For Cluster 32, the following contingency case was chosen.
- Fault ID P1.03: Fault at AE1-155 Tap 115 kV on AE1-155 Tap – Northern Neck 115 kV circuit #1059. Fault cleared with loss of Northen Neck 115/34.5 kV Transformer #1
Simulation results in PSCAD are summarized below. In Case 1a with the PSCAD detailed system model, weak grid oscillations and unstable recovery are observed without the network upgrade. With the network upgrade added in Case 1b, stable recovery is observed due to sufficient grid strength. These results are consistent with the results in the Cluster Study.
Table 4. Summary of cases tested in PSCAD system study |
|
|
|
Case ID | Fault Description | Cluster Study Result [1] | PSCAD Study Result |
Case 1a | P1.03, without network upgrade | Unstable | Unstable |
Case 1b | P1.03, with network upgrade | Stable | Stable |
Case 2a | P1.03, without network upgrade, modified PPC tuning | - | Stable* |
* Details in Appendix B. Although a stable response was observed in this case, a detailed tuning evaluation over multiple operating conditions would be needed to verify robustness of the modified tuning.
As a potential alternative solution, PPC parameter were tuned to be more appropriate for weak grid conditions and this configuration was evaluated in base case P1.03, without the network upgrade – Case 2a. A stable response was observed in Case 2a, however, a detailed tuning evaluation over multiple operating conditions would be needed to verify robustness of this modified tuning. As such, the modified tuning results in Appendix B should be considered for information only.
Based on the simulation results described above, the results of this assessment show stable recovery in the worst-case contingency when the network upgrade is included. These results support the conclusion from the Cluster Study that the proposed network upgrade mitigates potential weak grid instability issues.
Reactive Power Analysis
The reactive power capability of AG1-135 meets the 0.95 leading and lagging PF requirement at the high side of the main transformer.
Steady-State Voltage Analysis
Steady State Voltage Analysis is Not Required.
New Service Request Dependencies
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.
| New Service Requests Dependencies | ||
|---|---|---|
| Project ID | Project Name | Status |
| AA1-063A | Carolina–Seaboard 115kV | In Service |
| AA1-065 | Earleys 230kV | In Service |
| AA1-139 | Hickory-Shawboro 230kV | In Service |
| AA1-145 | Four Rivers 230kV | In Service |
| AA2-088 | Boykins-Handsome 115kV | In Service |
| AA2-178 | Mackeys 230kV | In Service |
| AB1-027 | Old Church 34.5 KV | In Service |
| AB1-132 | Thelma 230kV | In Service |
| AB1-173 | Brink-Trego 115kV | In Service |
| AB2-022 | Elizabeth City 34.5kV | In Service |
| AB2-024 | Correctional 34.5kV | In Service |
| AB2-025 | Sapony 34.5kV | In Service |
| AB2-040 | Brink 115kV | In Service |
| AB2-099 | Ahoskie 34.5kV | In Service |
| AB2-100 | Clubhouse-Lakeview 230kV | In Service |
| AB2-134 | Hopewell-Surry 230kV | In Service |
| AB2-161 | Waverly #2 DP 115kV | In Service |
| AB2-174 | Emporia-Trego 115kV | In Service |
| AB2-190 | Hopewell-Surry 230kV | In Service |
| AC1-027 | Pendleton 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC1-065 | Harmony Village-Shackleford 115kV | Under Construction |
| AC1-086 | Thelma 230kV | Suspended |
| AC1-112 | Old Church 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC1-118 | Westmoreland 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC1-147 | Grassfield 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC1-161 | Septa 500kV | In Service |
| AC1-164 | Chickahominy 230kV | Partially in Service - Under Construction |
| AC1-191 | Elmont 115kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AC1-216 | Hopewell-Surry 230kV | In Service |
| AC2-012 | Grassfield-Great Bridge 115kV | In Service |
| AC2-079 | Ivor-Oak Ridge 115kV | Suspended |
| AC2-137 | Elko 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC2-138 | Northern Neck 34.5kV | In Service |
| AC2-141 | Septa 500kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-022 | Cashie-Trowbridge 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-025 | Hopewell-Surry 230 kV | Partially in Service - Under Construction |
| AD1-033 | Fentress-Landstown 230 kV | In Service |
| AD1-041 | Harmony Village-Shackleford 115 kV | In Service |
| AD1-063 | Harmony Village 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AD1-074 | Trowbridge 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-075 | Trowbridge 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-076 | Trowbridge 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-082 | Bakers Pond-Ivor 115kV | In Service |
| AD1-105 | Kings Dominion DP 115 kV | Under Construction |
| AD1-144 | Kings Fork 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AD1-151 | Hopewell-Surry 230 kV | Suspended |
| AD2-030 | Wan 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AD2-073 | Sanders DP 230 kV | In Service |
| AD2-074 | Garner DP-Lancaster 115 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD2-085 | Myrtle-Windsor DP 115kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE1-072 | Shawboro-Sligo 230 kV | Under Construction |
| AE1-074 | Winterpock 34.5 kV | Under Construction |
| AE1-103 | Holland-Union Camp 115 kV | Suspended |
| AE1-149 | Disputanta-Poe 115 kV | Suspended |
| AE1-155 | Garner-Northern Neck 115 kV | In Service |
| AE1-157 | Ladysmith CT-St. Johns 230 kV | Suspended |
| AE1-162 | Smithfield 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AE1-173 | Carson-Suffolk 500 kV | Under Construction |
| AE1-175 | Light Foot 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AE1-190 | Harmony Village-Shackleford 115 kV | In Service |
| AE1-191 | Harmony Village-Shackleford 115 kV | In Service |
| AE2-027 | Harrowgate-Locks 115kV | Under Construction |
| AE2-033 | Clubhouse-Sapony 230 kV | Suspended |
| AE2-034 | Mackeys 230 kV | Partially in Service - Under Construction |
| AE2-040 | Sapony 34.5 kV | Partially in Service - Under Construction |
| AE2-041 | Harmony Village 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-051 | Carson-Septa 500 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-094 | Carson-Rogers Road 500 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-104 | Suffolk 115 kV | Suspended |
| AE2-156 | Yadkin 115 kV | Active |
| AE2-212 | Harrowgate 34 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-247 | Myrtle-Windsor 115 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-253 | Hickory-Moyock 230 kV | In Service |
| AE2-346 | Ahoskie 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AF1-017 | Myrtle-Windsor 115 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-018 | Harmony Village 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-032 | Suffolk 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AF1-042 | Garner DP-Lancaster 115 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-069 | Carson-Rogers Rd 500 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-114 | Oak Grove-Dahlgren 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-123 | Harper 230 kV | Active |
| AF1-124 | Harper 230 kV | Active |
| AF1-125 | Harper 230 kV | Active |
| AF1-128 | Chesterfield 230 kV | Active |
| AF1-129 | Chesterfield 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-291 | Tyler 34.5 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-292 | Fields 34.5kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-013 | Arnold's Corner-Dahlgren 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-043 | Suffolk 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AF2-054 | Wan 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AF2-077 | White Marsh 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AF2-081 | Moyock 230 kV | Active |
| AF2-091 | Oak Grove-Dahlgren 230 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-110 | Suffolk 115 kV | Suspended |
| AF2-120 | Garner-Northern Neck 115 kV | Active |
| AF2-299 | Fields 34.5 kV | Active |
| AG1-037 | Ahoskie 34.5 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AG1-038 | Garner DP-Lancaster 115 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AG1-106 | Thelma 230 kV | Active |
| AG1-145 | Lightfoot 34.5 kV | In Service |
| AG1-210 | Northern Neck 34.5 kV | Withdrawn |
| AG1-282 | Dunnsville 34.5 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AG1-532 | Fields 34.5 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AG1-536 | Garner-Northern Neck 115 kV | Active |
| AG1-558 | Buckner 34.5 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AG1-559 | Caroline Pines 22 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| V4-068 | Murphy's 34.5kV | In Service |
| W1-029 | Winfall 230kV | In Service |
| Y1-086 | Morgans Corner | In Service |
| Z1-036 | WinFall-Chowan 230kV | In Service |
| Z1-068 | Birdneck 34.5kV | In Service |
| Z2-027 | Pasquotank 34.5kV | In Service |
Affected System - PJM Identified Violations
As part of PJM's analysis, PJM evaluated the potential impacts on tie line facilities between PJM and an affected system entity, which were identified per PJM planning analysis criteria. This upgrade may be required on the affected system portion of the tie line along with cost allocation of such upgrade if applicable, in coordination with the affected system. Depending on the affected system, this project may not be contingent on upgrade based on PJM planning analysis criteria, but may be contingent on this upgrade based on the Affected System Operator's planning criteria, provided in the Affected Systems Study Section, herein.
Affected System - Non-PJM Identified Violations
In accordance with PJM Tariff Part VII, Subpart D, section 312.A.1.b and as outlined in PJM Manual 14H, Section 13, in Phase III of the Cycle, PJM coordinates with the Affected System Operators to conduct any studies required to determine the impact of the New Service Request on any Affected System and will include the Affected System Study results in Phase III System Impact Study, if available from the Affected System Operator.
If your project required an Affected System Study, the results are shown below from the Affected System Operator.
For more details, please refer to your Affected System Study report by the Affected System Operator. If the Affected System Operator identified the need for a system reinforcement on their system due to their planning criteria, Project Developer must follow the Affected System Operator Tariff for construction of the network upgrade. PJM will list any required network upgrades identified by the Affected System Operator in the PJM Project Developer’s GIA under Schedule F.
System Reinforcements
Based on the Final System Impact Study analysis results, this project is contingent on and may have cost responsibility for the following System Reinforcements:
PJM evaluated the impact of topology changing reinforcements to mitigate the impacts driven by New Service Requests. PJM determined which reinforcements were eliminated as a result of modeling the topology changing reinforcements. PJM then grouped the topology changing and eliminated reinforcements by region and computed a discount factor to apply to reinforcements to reduce the cost of all these reinforcements down to the cost of contstructing only the topology changing reinforcements. For additional details, please click the icon below
Shown below are the details of the cost allocated, contingent, eliminated, topology and potential aggregate contributor reinforcements for this project. Please refer to the System Reinforcement table above and the information below for more detail.
System Reinforcement: n9267.0
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9267.0 / TC1-PH2-DOM-067
- Title
- Construct new 10.21 mile 115 kV line between Northern Neck and Moon Corner.
- Description
- Construct new 10.21 mile 115 kV line between Northern Neck and Moon Corner substations with single (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW “Maumee” at 250 degrees C. This new line will be on separate transmission towers from the existing Northern Neck and Moon Corner line 1059. Station expansion is required at Northern Neck and Moon Corner to accommodate the new line.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $45,730,074
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $11,960,771
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $3,642,915
- Time Estimate
- 45 to 46 Months
ContributorTopology Changing Note: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement. Hence, this project is receiving a cost allocation based on its MW contribution to the need for this topology changing reinforcement but at a reduced amount considering the other reinforcements that were able to be eliminated. This project's cost allocation is based on the pro rata share of the MW impacts from all cost allocated contributors multiplied by the relevant regional discount factor listed in the executive summary report.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3NORNECK-AE1-155 TAP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 | 124.0 MW | 31.5% | $3,764,365 |
| AG1-135 | 120.0 MW | 30.5% | $3,642,915 |
| AG1-536 | 150.0 MW | 38.1% | $4,553,491 |
System Reinforcement: n9267.0
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9267.0 / TC1-PH2-DOM-067
- Title
- Construct new 10.21 mile 115 kV line between Northern Neck and Moon Corner.
- Description
- Construct new 10.21 mile 115 kV line between Northern Neck and Moon Corner substations with single (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW “Maumee” at 250 degrees C. This new line will be on separate transmission towers from the existing Northern Neck and Moon Corner line 1059. Station expansion is required at Northern Neck and Moon Corner to accommodate the new line.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $45,730,074
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $2,424,803
- Time Estimate
- 45 to 46 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $6,812,002 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $6,836,106 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $6,706,414 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $141,049 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $13,302,788 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $86,007 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $2,530,589 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $1,734,362 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $68,806 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $1,380,077 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $2,424,803 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $1,298,164 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $2,408,908 |
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending) / dom-281
- Title
- ELIMINATED FOR TC1 - Rebuild 7.91 miles of 230 kV Line 2083 from Birchwood to Fines with (2) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" conductor 250 degrees C.
- Description
- Rebuild 7.91 miles of 230 kV Line 2083 from Birchwood to Fines with (2) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" conductor 250 degrees C.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $35,735,843
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $9,346,765
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $3,152,212
- Time Estimate
- 43 to 44 Months
ContributorEliminated Note: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle. However, this project is receiving cost allocation based on its MW contribution to this eliminated reinforcement to fund the topology reinforcements which together alleviated the need for this reinforcement. This project's cost allocation is based on the pro rata share of the MW impacts from all cost allocated contributors multiplied by the relevant regional discount factor listed in the executive summary report. Since this project contributed to a violation with a reinforcement that was eliminated by the topology changing reinforcements, this project is contingent on all of the topology changing reinforcements within the region in which the eliminated reinforcement belongs.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6BIRCHWD-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 7.8 MW | 35.6% | $3,330,221 |
| AG1-135 | 7.4 MW | 33.7% | $3,152,212 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 6.7 MW | 30.6% | $2,864,331 |
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending) / dom-286
- Title
- ELIMINATED FOR TC1: Rebuild 6.46 mi miles of 2-545.6 ACAR (15/7) 90 MOT 230 kV Line 2083 from Fredericksburg to Fines with (2) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" conductor @ 250 degrees C.
- Description
- Rebuild 6.46 mi miles of 2-545.6 ACAR (15/7) 90 MOT 230 kV Line 2083 from Fredericksburg to Fines with (2) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" conductor @ 250 degrees C.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $33,559,690
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $8,777,589
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $2,960,257
- Time Estimate
- 43 to 44 Months
ContributorEliminated Note: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle. However, this project is receiving cost allocation based on its MW contribution to this eliminated reinforcement to fund the topology reinforcements which together alleviated the need for this reinforcement. This project's cost allocation is based on the pro rata share of the MW impacts from all cost allocated contributors multiplied by the relevant regional discount factor listed in the executive summary report. Since this project contributed to a violation with a reinforcement that was eliminated by the topology changing reinforcements, this project is contingent on all of the topology changing reinforcements within the region in which the eliminated reinforcement belongs.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6FREDBRG-6FINES 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 7.8 MW | 35.6% | $3,127,426 |
| AG1-135 | 7.4 MW | 33.7% | $2,960,257 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 6.7 MW | 30.6% | $2,689,906 |
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending) / TC1-PH2-DOM-030
- Title
- ELIMINATED FOR TC1: Reconductor 6.01 miles of 115 kV Line 65 from AG1-146 Tap to Lancaster with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/70 "Maumee" conductor @ 250 degrees C.
- Description
- Reconductor 6.01 miles of 115 kV Line 65 from AG1-146 Tap to Lancaster with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/70 "Maumee" conductor @ 250 degrees C.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $27,984,346
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $7,319,349
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $2,504,746
- Time Estimate
- 43 to 44 Months
ContributorEliminated Note: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle. However, this project is receiving cost allocation based on its MW contribution to this eliminated reinforcement to fund the topology reinforcements which together alleviated the need for this reinforcement. This project's cost allocation is based on the pro rata share of the MW impacts from all cost allocated contributors multiplied by the relevant regional discount factor listed in the executive summary report. Since this project contributed to a violation with a reinforcement that was eliminated by the topology changing reinforcements, this project is contingent on all of the topology changing reinforcements within the region in which the eliminated reinforcement belongs.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3LANCAST-AD2-074 TP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 37.2 MW | 35.4% | $2,588,200 |
| AG1-135 | 36.0 MW | 34.2% | $2,504,746 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 32.0 MW | 30.4% | $2,226,402 |
System Reinforcement: n9651.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9651.0 / TC1-PH2-DOM-009
- Title
- Wreck and rebuild 10.05 miles of Line 1059 between Northern Neck and Moon Corner with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" at 250 degrees C and replace line lead at Moon Corner (AE1-155).
- Description
- Wreck and rebuild 10.05 miles of Line 1059 between Northern Neck and Moon Corner with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/7) "MAUMEE" at 250 degrees C and replace line lead at Moon Corner (AE1-155).
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $28,476,954
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $28,476,954
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $8,673,193
- Time Estimate
- Mar 31 2029
Contributor
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3NORNECK-AE1-155 TAP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 62.0 MW | 31.5% | $8,962,270 |
| AG1-135 | 60.0 MW | 30.5% | $8,673,193 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 75.0 MW | 38.1% | $10,841,491 |
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending) / dom-461
- Title
- ELIMINATED FOR TC1: Reconductor 3.53 miles of 115 kV Line 65 from AD2-074 Tap to AG1-146 Tap with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/70) "Maumee" conductor @ 250 degrees C
- Description
- Reconductor 3.53 miles of 115 kV Line 65 from AD2-074 Tap to AG1-146 Tap with (1) 768.2 ACSS/TW (20/70) "Maumee" conductor @ 250 degrees C
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $16,493,251
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $4,313,835
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $1,476,233
- Time Estimate
- 43 to 44 Months
ContributorEliminated Note: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle. However, this project is receiving cost allocation based on its MW contribution to this eliminated reinforcement to fund the topology reinforcements which together alleviated the need for this reinforcement. This project's cost allocation is based on the pro rata share of the MW impacts from all cost allocated contributors multiplied by the relevant regional discount factor listed in the executive summary report. Since this project contributed to a violation with a reinforcement that was eliminated by the topology changing reinforcements, this project is contingent on all of the topology changing reinforcements within the region in which the eliminated reinforcement belongs.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3LANCAST-AD2-074 TP 115.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 37.2 MW | 35.4% | $1,525,419 |
| AG1-135 | 36.0 MW | 34.2% | $1,476,233 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 32.0 MW | 30.4% | $1,312,184 |
System Reinforcement: n7553
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n7553 / dom-427
- Title
- Replace Northern Neck 115/230 kV transformer #6 with a 224 MVA (260/271/295 MVA).
- Description
- Replace Northern Neck 115/230 kV transformer #6 with a 224 MVA (260/271/295 MVA).
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $7,242,347
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $7,242,347
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $2,411,008
- Time Estimate
- 59 to 60 Months
Contributor
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3NORNECK-6NORNECK 115.0/230.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) |
|
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AF2-120 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 24.0 MW | 35.9% | $2,597,162 |
| AG1-135 | 22.2 MW | 33.3% | $2,411,008 |
| AG1-536 ⧉ AE1-155 115 kV - Dominion: This project's cost allocation eligibility was based on the grouped impact of all New Service Requests which shared this POI within this cycle. The following project shared this POI: AF2-120, AG1-536 | 20.6 MW | 30.8% | $2,234,177 |
System Reinforcement: n9207.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9207.0 / TC1-PH2-DOM-018
- Title
- Replace 6ELMONT 230 kV to 8ELMONT 500 kV circuit 1 with larger transformer (3-480 MVA single phase transformer).
- Description
- Replace 6ELMONT 230 KV to 8ELMONT 500 kV ckt 1 with Larger XFRM. (3-480 MVA Single Phase XFRM).
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $38,254,469
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $38,254,469
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 59 to 60 Months
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-135 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-135 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-135 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-135 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement: n9380.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9380.0 / TC1-PH3-DOM-012
- Title
- Replace existing Ladysmith 230/500 kV transformer 1 with four (4) 480 MVA single phase transformers.
- Description
- Replace existing Ladysmith 230/500 kV transformer 1 with four (4) 480 MVA single phase transformers.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $37,587,605
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $37,587,605
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- Dec 31 2029
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-135 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-135 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-135 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-135 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6LADYSMITH-8LADYSMITH 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement: b4000.345
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.345
- Title
- Build a 500kV line from a new substation called Kraken to a new substation called Yeat. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Description
- Build a 500kV line from a new substation called Kraken to a new substation called Yeat. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.345
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.345
- Title
- Build a 500kV line from a new substation called Kraken to a new substation called Yeat. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Description
- Build a 500kV line from a new substation called Kraken to a new substation called Yeat. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.346
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.346
- Title
- Cut-in 500kV line from Kraken substation into Yeat substation
- Description
- Cut-in 500kV line from Kraken substation into Yeat substation
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2029
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.348
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.348
- Title
- Build a new 500/230kV substation called Kraken. The 500kV, 5000A ring bus will be set up for a redundant breaker configuration. Install (2) 1400MVA 500/230 kV transformers.
- Description
- Build a new 500/230kV substation called Kraken. The 500kV, 5000A ring bus will be set up for a redundant breaker configuration. Install (2) 1400MVA 500/230 kV transformers. A new redundant breaker ring will be added at Kraken to accommodate the new 500kV line from North Anna to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2029
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.348
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.348
- Title
- Build a new 500/230kV substation called Kraken. The 500kV, 5000A ring bus will be set up for a redundant breaker configuration. Install (2) 1400MVA 500/230 kV transformers.
- Description
- Build a new 500/230kV substation called Kraken. The 500kV, 5000A ring bus will be set up for a redundant breaker configuration. Install (2) 1400MVA 500/230 kV transformers. A new redundant breaker ring will be added at Kraken to accommodate the new 500kV line from North Anna to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2029
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.349
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.349
- Title
- Update relay settings at Ladysmith to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Possum Point to Kraken.
- Description
- Update relay settings at Ladysmith to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Possum Point to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.349
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.349
- Title
- Update relay settings at Ladysmith to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Possum Point to Kraken.
- Description
- Update relay settings at Ladysmith to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Possum Point to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.350
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.350
- Title
- Update relay settings at Possum Point to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Description
- Update relay settings at Possum Point to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.350
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.350
- Title
- Update relay settings at Possum Point to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Description
- Update relay settings at Possum Point to change the destination of 500kV line #568 from Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.351
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.351
- Title
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating Line #9517 Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Description
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating Line #9517 Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.351
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.351
- Title
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating Line #9517 Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Description
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating Line #9517 Ladysmith to Kraken.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.352
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.352
- Title
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating new Line #568 Kraken to Possum Point.
- Description
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating new Line #568 Kraken to Possum Point.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.352
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.352
- Title
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating new Line #568 Kraken to Possum Point.
- Description
- Cut in Line #568 Ladysmith - Possum Point into Kraken, creating new Line #568 Kraken to Possum Point.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.357
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.357
- Title
- Build a new 765/500/230 kV substation called Yeat. Install (2) 765/500 kV transformers. Cut in 500 kV line Bristers-Ox and 500 kV line Meadowbrook-Vint Hill into Yeat.
- Description
- Build a new 765/500/230 kV substation called Yeat. Install (2) 765/500 kV transformers. Cut in 500 kV line Bristers-Ox and 500 kV line Meadowbrook-Vint Hill into Yeat.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2029
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.357
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.357
- Title
- Build a new 765/500/230 kV substation called Yeat. Install (2) 765/500 kV transformers. Cut in 500 kV line Bristers-Ox and 500 kV line Meadowbrook-Vint Hill into Yeat.
- Description
- Build a new 765/500/230 kV substation called Yeat. Install (2) 765/500 kV transformers. Cut in 500 kV line Bristers-Ox and 500 kV line Meadowbrook-Vint Hill into Yeat.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2029
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.344
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.344
- Title
- Build a 500kV line from North Anna substation (bypassing Ladysmith Substation) to a new substation called Kraken. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Description
- Build a 500kV line from North Anna substation (bypassing Ladysmith Substation) to a new substation called Kraken. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.344
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.344
- Title
- Build a 500kV line from North Anna substation (bypassing Ladysmith Substation) to a new substation called Kraken. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Description
- Build a 500kV line from North Anna substation (bypassing Ladysmith Substation) to a new substation called Kraken. New conductor to have a minimum summer normal rating of 4357MVA.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Sep 16 2030
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.326
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.326
- Title
- At Elmont substation, install/upgrade associated equipment to accommodate a 4000A line rating for the new 230kV line between Elmont - Ladysmith.
- Description
- At Elmont substation, install/upgrade associated equipment to accommodate a 4000A line rating for the new 230kV line between Elmont - Ladysmith.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Feb 24 2029
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.326
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.326
- Title
- At Elmont substation, install/upgrade associated equipment to accommodate a 4000A line rating for the new 230kV line between Elmont - Ladysmith.
- Description
- At Elmont substation, install/upgrade associated equipment to accommodate a 4000A line rating for the new 230kV line between Elmont - Ladysmith.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Feb 24 2029
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b4000.327
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.327
- Title
- Upgrade/install equipment at Ladysmith Substation to 4000A. Expansion will be required to accommodate a total of three (3) new 230 kV strings of breaker and a half scheme.
- Description
- Upgrade/install equipment at Ladysmith substation to 4000A. Expansion will be required to accommodate a total of three (3) new 230kV strings of breaker and a half scheme.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Feb 24 2029
Not ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade. Note 2: This topology changing reinforcement was developed by the transmission owner and modeled in PJM analysis to address cycle overload(s). A flowgate that this project contributed to was identified as requiring this topology reinforcement.
| Facility | Contingency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 8BRISTER-8CHANCE 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8CHANCE-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8ELMONT-8LADYSMITH 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 8LADYSMITH-8POSSUM 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ELMONT-8ELMONT 230.0/500.0 kV Ckt 2 transformer | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6ARNOLDS-AF2-013 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. | |
| 6DAHLGREN-AF1-114 TP 230.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | No new ratings for this Flowgate. |
System Reinforcement: b4000.327
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.327
- Title
- Upgrade/install equipment at Ladysmith Substation to 4000A. Expansion will be required to accommodate a total of three (3) new 230 kV strings of breaker and a half scheme.
- Description
- Upgrade/install equipment at Ladysmith substation to 4000A. Expansion will be required to accommodate a total of three (3) new 230kV strings of breaker and a half scheme.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Feb 24 2029
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3692
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3692
- Title
- Rebuild approximately 27.7-miles of 500 kV transmission line from Elmont to Chickahominy.
- Description
- Rebuild approximately 27.7-miles of 500 kV transmission line from Elmont to Chickahominy with current 500 kV standards construction practices to achieve a summer rating of 4330 MVA. Projected ISD: 06/01/2026
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Jun 01 2026
Not Contingent Note: AG1-135 contributes to the loading of an overloaded facility that is being mitigated by a planned baseline upgrade. AG1-135 is not contingent on this baseline upgrade as it does not meet the criteria for being a contingent facility or for having cost allocation for the upgrade.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8CHCKAHM-8ELMONT 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement: n6161
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n6161 / dom-039
- Title
- ELIMINATED FOR TC1: Replace 500 kV circuit breaker H1T561 at Clifton with a higher rated device (Clifton - Ox).
- Description
- Replace 500 kV circuit breaker H1T561 at Clifton with a higher rated device (Clifton - Ox).
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $2,634,901
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $2,634,901
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- Dec 31 2029
Potential Aggregate ContributorEliminated Note 1: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-135 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-135 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-135 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-135 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor. Note 2: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8CLIFTON-8OX 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending) / TC1-PH2-DOM-040
- Title
- ELIM TC1: Wreck and rebuild 18.75 miles of Line 594 btwn Morrisville and Spotsylvania with (3) 1351.5 ACSR (45/7) Dipper at 110 degrees C and assoc substation work (new rating: 4356/4356/5009 MVA)
- Description
- Wreck and rebuild 18.75 miles of Line 594 between Morrisville and Spotsylvania with (3) 1351.5 ACSR (45/7) "Dipper" at 110 degrees C and associated substation work to achieve new rating of 4356/4356/5009 MVA.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $128,018,212
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $128,018,212
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 60 to 61 Months
Potential Aggregate ContributorEliminated Note 1: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-135 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-135 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-135 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-135 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor. Note 2: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8MORRSVL-8SPOTSYL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement: n9247.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9247.0 / TC1-PH2-DOM-041
- Title
- ELIM TC1: Wreck and rebuild 14.02 miles of Line 573 btwn Spotsylvania and North Anna with (3) 1351.5 ACSR (45/7) "Dipper" at 110 degrees C and assoc substation work (new rating: 4356/4356/5009 MVA)
- Description
- Wreck and rebuild 14.02 miles of Line 573 between Spotsylvania and North Anna with (3) 1351.5 ACSR (45/7) "Dipper" at 110 degrees C and associated substation work to achieve new rating of 4356/4356/5009 MVA
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $99,636,684
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $99,636,684
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 48 Months
Potential Aggregate ContributorEliminated Note 1: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-135 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-135 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-135 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-135 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor. Note 2: The topology changing reinforcements listed in the Cycle executive summary report eliminated the need for this reinforcement and it is no longer required by the Cycle.
| Facility | Contingency | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8NO ANNA-8SPOTSYL 500.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
|
System Reinforcement: n8492
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n8492
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n8492
- Title
- Wreck and rebuild the existing Yadkin to Fentress 500 kV Line #588 to share the right of way with the new Yadkin to Fentress #5005 line.
- Description
- Wreck and rebuild one (1) overhead 500kV transmission line that will start at the existing Fentress 500 kV Substation and terminate at the existing Yadkin 500 kV Substation, located approximately 13.5 miles away.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $80,172,278
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $4,251,075
- Time Estimate
- 26 to 27 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $11,942,543 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $11,984,793 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $11,757,425 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $247,251 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $23,321,955 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $150,804 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $4,436,574 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $3,040,614 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $120,659 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $2,419,519 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $4,251,055 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $2,275,931 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $4,223,235 |
System Reinforcement: n9630.0
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n9630.0
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9630.0 / TC1-PH3-DOM-013
- Title
- Construct a new 230 kV line from the AG1-285 substation to the Finneywood 230 kV Substation. Expand AG1-285 substation and add two (2) new 230/115 kV transformers.
- Description
- n9630.0 addresses both stability and load flow violations. Construct a new 230 kV Line from the AG1-285 substation to the 230 kV Finneywood substation following the Line 1012 ROW for approximately 1.0 miles, then following the Line 556 ROW for approximately 3.5 miles to terminate at Finneywood. Expand the AG1-285 115 kV substation to accommodate two (2) new 115/230 kV transformers. Build a 230 kV substation at AG1-285 to connect the 115/230 kV transformers and the new 230 kV line to Finneywood. Expand the Finneywood 230 kV substation to accommodate the new line. The existing 1.0 miles of 115 kV from AG1-285 to Chase City does not need to be rebuilt to accommodate a new structure in the same right of way and therefore will be unchanged. The existing 3.5 miles of 500 kV towers from Structure 556/46 to Finneywood substation will need to be rebuilt as a double circuit tower to accommodate the new 230 kV line.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $71,697,833
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $3,801,724
- Time Estimate
- Dec 31 2029
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $10,680,181 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $10,717,966 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $10,514,631 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $221,116 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $20,856,756 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $134,864 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $3,967,615 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $2,719,212 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $107,905 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $2,163,769 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $3,801,706 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $2,035,358 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $3,776,827 |
System Reinforcement: n9259.0
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n9259.0
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9259.0
- Title
- Install two 230 kV gas insulated switchgear ("GIS") bus ties at the Fentress 230 kV substation.
- Description
- Install two 230 kV gas insulated switchgear ("GIS") bus ties at the Fentress 230 kV substation.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $25,304,902
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $1,341,774
- Time Estimate
- 38 to 39 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $3,769,444 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $3,782,779 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $3,711,014 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $78,040 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $7,361,145 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $47,599 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $1,400,323 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $959,714 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $38,084 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $763,677 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $1,341,767 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $718,356 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $1,332,986 |
System Reinforcement: n8492.1
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n8492.1
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n8492.1
- Title
- Two Breaker Additions at Fentress Substation.
- Description
- Install Two 5000 amp GIS Breakers at Fentress Substation to connect the new 500 kV line 5005.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $19,945,879
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $1,057,615
- Time Estimate
- 30 to 36 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $2,971,158 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $2,981,670 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $2,925,103 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $61,513 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $5,802,216 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $37,518 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $1,103,765 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $756,467 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $30,019 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $601,947 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $1,057,610 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $566,224 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $1,050,689 |
System Reinforcement: n8492.2
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n8492.2
- Type
- Stability
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n8492.2
- Title
- Expand Yadkin Substation to accommodate the new 500 kV line.
- Description
- Expansion of yadkins 500 kV switchyard to accommodate the new 500 kV line which includes addition of 5000 amp GIS breakers and relocation of the existing suffolk -yadkin 500 kV line#565
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $16,207,123
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $859,371
- Time Estimate
- 15 to 16 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Cost Allocated
| Project | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|
| AF1-123 | 14.8961 % | $2,414,229 |
| AF1-124 | 14.9488 % | $2,422,770 |
| AF1-125 | 14.6652 % | $2,376,807 |
| AF1-294 | 0.3084 % | $49,983 |
| AF2-042 | 29.0898 % | $4,714,620 |
| AF2-115 | 0.1881 % | $30,486 |
| AF2-120 | 5.5338 % | $896,870 |
| AF2-222 | 3.7926 % | $614,671 |
| AG1-021 | 0.1505 % | $24,392 |
| AG1-124 | 3.0179 % | $489,115 |
| AG1-135 | 5.3024 % | $859,366 |
| AG1-285 | 2.8388 % | $460,088 |
| AG1-536 | 5.2677 % | $853,743 |
System Reinforcement: b4000.325
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b4000.325
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b4000.325
- Title
- Build a new 26.38mi 230kV Line from Elmont – Ladysmith on the existing 5-2 structures between the two stations. New conductor has a summer rating of 1573 MVA.
- Description
- Build a new 26.38mi 230kV Line from Elmont – Ladysmith on the existing 5-2 structures between the two stations. New conductor has a summer rating of 1573 MVA.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: s3047.2
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: s3047.2
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- s3047.2
- Title
- Install two (2) 1400 MVA 500-230 kV transformers at Vint Hill Substation and loop 500 kV line #535 and #569 into the proposed 500 kV ring bus at Vint Hill Substation.
- Description
- Install (2) 1400 MVA 500-230 kV transformers and associated 500 kV and 230 kV equipment (breakers, switches, leads) at Vint Hill Substation to supply the area with a 500 kV source Cut and loop 500 kV line #535 Loudoun – Meadowbrook and #569 Loudoun - Morrisville as the 500 kV sources into the proposed 500 kV ring bus Vint Hill Substation will be expanded to the north of the existing site to accommodate the 500 kV ring required for the addition of the new transformers Existing terminations for 230 kV line #2174 Wheeler – Vint Hill, line #2101 Bristers – Vint Hill, and line #2163 Liberty – Vint Hill will be rearranged to terminate into the expanded Vint Hill Substation 230 kV line #2114 Remington CT – Rollins Ford will also be cut and looped into the expanded Vint Hill Substation due to spatial constraints along the existing right-of-way.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3800.312
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b3800.312
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3800.312
- Title
- Rebuild 500 kV Line #569 Loudoun - Morrisville to accommodate the new 500 kV line in the existing right-of-way.
- Description
- Rebuild 500kV Line #569 Loudoun - Morrisville to accommodate the new 500 kV line in the existing right-of-way. New conductor to have a summer rating of 4357 MVA.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3800.313
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b3800.313
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3800.313
- Title
- Rebuild approximately 10.29 miles line segment of Line #535 (Meadow Brook to Loudoun) to accommodate the new 500 kV line in the existing ROW.
- Description
- Rebuild approximately 10.29 miles line segment of Line #535 (Meadow Brook to Loudoun) to accommodate the new 500 kV line in the existing ROW.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3800.356
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b3800.356
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3800.356
- Title
- Build a new 500 kV line from Vint Hill to Wishing Star.
- Description
- Build a new 500kV line from Vint Hill to Wishing Star. The line will be supported on single circuit monopoles. New conductor to have a summer rating of 4357 MVA. Line length is approximately 16.59 miles
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3800.357
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b3800.357
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3800.357
- Title
- Build a new 500 kV line from Morrisville to Vint Hill.
- Description
- Build a new 500kV line from Morrisville to Vint Hill. New conductor to have a summer rating of 4357 MVA. Line length is approximately 19.71 miles.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: b3800.354
AG1-135 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: b3800.354
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- Dominion
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3800.354
- Title
- Install terminal equipment at Wishing Star Substation to support a 5000A line to Vint Hill. Update relay settings for 500 kV Lines #546 and #590.
- Description
- Install terminal equipment at Wishing Star substation to support a 5000A line to Vint Hill. Update relay settings for 500kV Lines #546 and #590.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent