AG1-354 Phase II Study Report
v1.00 released 2024-12-18 14:07
Summershade-Green County 161 kV
90.0 MW Capacity / 150.0 MW Energy
Introduction
This Phase II System Impact Study Report (PH2) has been prepared in accordance with the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 310 for New Service Requests (projects) in Transition Cycle #1. The Project Developer/Eligible Customer (developer) is Exie Solar, LLC, and the Transmission Provider (TP) is PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM). The interconnected Transmission Owner (TO) is East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc..
Preface
The Phase II System Impact Study is conducted on an aggregate basis within a New Services Request’s Cycle, and results are provided in both (i) a single Cycle executive summary format and (ii) an individual project-level basis. The Phase II System Impact Study Results (for both the executive summary and individual reports) will be publicly available on PJM’s website. Developers must obtain the results from the website.
In accordance with PJM Manual 14H, section 4.5, PJM takes the following actions during the Phase II System Impact Study:
- PJM will retool load flow results from Phase I System Impact Study (summer peak, winter peak[1] and light load) based on decisions made by Project Developers or Eligible Customers during Decision Point I.
- PJM will conduct any required voltage analyses.
- PJM will perform short circuit and stability analyses as required.
- PJM will coordinate with the Affected System to confirm which projects in PJM Cycle will require Affected System studies. If the Affected System Operator indicates that an Affected System study is required, PJM will:
- Notify the Project Developer or Eligible Customer of the need for an Affected System study and the requirement to execute an Affected System study agreement with the impacted Affected System Operator, and;
- Include the results of the Affected System Operator’s Affected System Study in the Phase II System Impact Study results, if applicable and available
- The Phase II System Impact Study Results will be publicly available on PJM’s website. Project Developers and Eligible Customers must obtain the results from the website.
The Transmission Owner takes the following actions during the Phase II System Impact Study:
- Verify Interconnection Facilities and Network Upgrades required to accommodate the New Service Request.
- Perform a Facilities Study. The Facilities Study in Phase II System Impact Study phase will be for the physical Interconnection Facilities. The Facilities Study requirements are outlined in Attachment C of PJM Manual 14H. The study will be conducted pursuant to Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 307(A)(7).
Decision Point II Requirements
At the close of Phase II System Impact Study, PJM will initiate Decision Point II (DP2). During DP2, the Project Developer will have 30 days to decide whether to proceed with their project. If the Project Developer elects to proceed, they should provide the elements defined in the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 311.A. Additional information on these elements is available in PJM Manual 14H sections 4.6, 6, and 7.
Allowable project modifications at Decision Point II are defined in PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 311.B. Additional information regarding allowable project modifications can be found in PJM Manual 14H, section 9.8.
Adverse Test Eligibility
This New Service Request meets the Adverse Study Impact Criteria and has the option to either move forward in the Cycle process or withdraw at DP2 with Readiness Deposits refunded. See Readiness Deposit calculation below.
This section details whether a Project Developer or Eligible Customer qualifies for the Adverse Study Impact clause outlined in the PJM OATT, Part VII, Subpart D, section 311.B and Manual 14H, section 6.2.2. In order to qualify for an Adverse Study Impact at Decision Point II, the Network Upgrade cost from Phase I to Phase II must:
- Increase overall by 25% or more
- Increases by more than $10,000 per MW (Includes Costs identified in Affected System studies)
If a New Service Request meets the criteria above and chooses to withdraw the request, PJM will refund the cumulative Readiness Deposit amounts paid at the Application Phase and at Decision Point I (RD1 and RD2, respectively).
The below calculations show the computation of this New Service Request's Adverse Study Impact
General
The Project Developer has proposed a Solar generating facility located in the East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. zone — Green County, Kentucky. The installed facilities will have a total capability of 150.0 MW with 90.0 MW of this output being recognized by PJM as Capacity.
Project Information | |
---|---|
New Service Request Number | AG1-354 |
Project Name | Summershade-Green County 161 kV |
Project Developer Name | Exie Solar, LLC |
State | Kentucky |
County | Green |
Transmission Owner | East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. |
MFO | 150.0 MW |
MWE | 150.0 MW |
MWC | 90.0 MW |
Fuel Type | Solar |
Basecase Study Year | 2027 |
Physical Interconnection Facility Study
The transmission owner has completed the Physical Interconnection Facilities Study. This report is available for download.
Point of Interconnection
AG1-354 will interconnect on the EKPC transmission system tapping the Summer Shade to Greene County 161 kV line.
Cost Summary
The table below shows a summary of the total cost estimates for this New Service Request project. In Phase II SIS, the interconnected Transmission Owner has performed a facilities study for both the Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades. The System Reliability Network Upgrade shown in the table are planning level cost estimates which are subject to change as a result of a facility study performed by the TO during Phase III System Impact Study.
Based on the Phase II SIS results, the AG1-354 project has the following allocation of costs for interconnection. The cost contribution towards Readiness Deposit #3 are also shown below.
Cost Summary | |||
---|---|---|---|
Description | Cost Allocated to AG1-354 | Cost Subject to Readiness* | |
Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) | $904,000 | $0 | |
Other Scope | $0 | $0 | |
Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades | |||
Stand Alone Network Upgrades | $11,233,000 | $11,233,000 | |
Network Upgrades | $6,127,000 | $6,127,000 | |
System Reliability Network Upgrades | |||
Steady State Thermal & Voltage (SP & LL) | $31,895,695 | $31,895,695 | |
Transient Stability | $0 | $0 | |
Short Circuit | $0 | $0 | |
Transmission Owner Analysis | |||
SubRegional | $0 | $0 | |
Distribution | $0 | $0 | |
Affected System Study Reinforcements | $0 | $0 | |
Total | $50,159,695 | $49,255,695 |
* Contributes to calculation for Readiness Deposit #3 (RD3). See Readiness Deposit section of 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, such as other projects withdrawing, reducing in size, etc, the cost responsibilities can change and a cost allocation may be assigned to this project. In addition, although this project presents cost allocation to a System Reinforcement is presently $0, this project may need this system reinforcement completed to be deliverable to the PJM system. If this project desires to come into service prior to completion of the system reinforcement, the Project Developer will need to request PJM to perform an interim study to determine if they would be deliverable for all or a portion of their output for each delivery year until the system reinforcement is complete.
Note 4: Please see the ‘Affected Systems Studies’ section of this Phase 2 SIS report for details on your project’s need for an Affected Systems Study. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study, the Affected Systems impacts may not be available from the Affected System Operator at the time of the PJM Phase II SIS. Therefore, the cost in this section would not reflect any required upgrades by the Affected System until the study is completed. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study and your results are not provided for Phase II SIS, PJM anticipates providing them in the Phase III SIS per Tariff Part VII.D.312.
Readiness Deposit
Per Tariff Part VII, Subpart D, section 311 (Decision Point II) A.1.b and PJM Manual 14H, section 6.2, Readiness Deposit #3 (RD3) are funds committed by the Project Developer or Eligible Customer based upon the applicable contribution to Network Upgrades as defined below. Readiness Deposits are not used to fund studies nor to offset Security.
During Decision Point II (DP2), the Project Developer or Eligible Customer is required to submit Readiness Deposit #3, which is calculated as 20% of cost allocation for required Phase II Network Upgrades minus Readiness Deposit #1 & Readiness Deposit #2.
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.
Note 2: Readiness Deposit #1 (RD1) = ($4,000 * Project Size (MW))
Note 3: Readiness Deposit #2 (RD2) = 10% of cost allocation for required Network Upgrades minus RD1. Readiness Deposit #2 (RD2) can be zero, but may not be a negative number.
Note 4: Readiness Deposit #3 can be zero, but may not be a negative number.
Readiness Deposit #3 Due for Project AG1-354
Readiness Deposit #3 has been calculated for the AG1-354 project based on the Phase II System Impact Study results and is shown in the table below. This Readiness Deposit #3 must be provided at Decision Point II through either a wire transfer or letter of credit per Manual 14H, Section 6.2.
Readiness Deposit | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project ID | 20% of cost allocation for Phase II Network Upgrades | Sum of Readiness Deposit #1 & Readiness Deposit #2 Received (RD1+RD2) | Readiness Deposit #3 (RD3) for AG1-354 Project due at DP2 |
A | B | A - B | |
AG1-354 | $9,851,139 | $3,173,960 | $6,677,179 |
Note: Failure to provide an acceptable form of Readiness Deposit #3 by the end of Decision Point II will result in withdrawal and termination of the New Service Request.
For additional detail regarding Readiness Deposit Refunds, reference PJM Manual 14H, section 6.2.1. The Readiness Deposit Letter of Credit template can be found here.
Transmission Owner Scope of Work
EKPC will construct a 161 kV switching station and a new 161 kV loop-in tap from the EKPC Summer Shade-Green County 161 kV line to accommodate the direct connection of the PD’s substation facilities to the EKPC transmission system. EKPC will also construct a 161 kV disconnect switch structure which will be the POI interface. EKPC will also complete the required network upgrades at existing EKPC substations, which are system protection changes necessary at the Green County and Summer Shade substations to accommodate the addition of this new facility, and installation of OPGW on the existing 161 kV line section from the new Liletown Road switching station to the Green County and Summer Shade substations in order to provide necessary communications infrastructure for EKPC.
The total preliminary cost estimate for the Transmission Owner scope of work (including TOIF and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades) is given in the table below. These costs do not include CIAC Tax Gross-up.
Transmission Owner Build Option
Network Upgrades | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
(Pending) |
Remote Relay Settings at Greene County Sub |
$130,000 | $4,000 | $11,000 | $1,000 | $146,000 | $146,000 |
(Pending) |
Remote Relay Settings at Summer Shade Sub |
$130,000 | $4,000 | $11,000 | $1,000 | $146,000 | $146,000 |
(Pending) |
Interconnection Substation Tie-In |
$620,000 | $333,000 | $79,000 | $9,000 | $1,041,000 | $1,041,000 |
(Pending) |
Fiber Installation in Existing ROW |
$3,372,000 | $1,015,000 | $366,000 | $41,000 | $4,794,000 | $4,794,000 |
Stand-Alone Network Upgrades | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
(Pending) |
Liletown Road Substation |
$5,202,000 | $5,079,000 | $857,000 | $95,000 | $11,233,000 | $11,233,000 |
Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
(Pending) |
Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities |
$477,000 | $350,000 | $69,000 | $8,000 | $904,000 | $904,000 |
Developer Build Option
Project Developer has the option ("Option to Build") to assume responsibility for the design, procurement and construction of Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities and/or Stand-Alone Network Upgrades.
If Option to Build is elected, the Project Developer must fulfill additional requirements in accordance to PJM Manual 14C, section 5.1 and PJM Manual 14H, section 8.6.2.
The cost estimates for eligible facilities and Option to Build oversight are highlighted below:
Network Upgrades | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
(Pending) |
Remote Relay Settings at Greene County Sub |
$130,000 | $4,000 | $11,000 | $1,000 | $146,000 | $146,000 |
(Pending) |
Remote Relay Settings at Summer Shade Sub |
$130,000 | $4,000 | $11,000 | $1,000 | $146,000 | $146,000 |
(Pending) |
Fiber Installation in Existing ROW |
$3,372,000 | $1,015,000 | $366,000 | $41,000 | $4,794,000 | $4,794,000 |
(Pending) |
Interconnection Substation Tie-In |
$620,000 | $333,000 | $79,000 | $9,000 | $1,041,000 | $1,041,000 |
Other | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
(Pending) |
Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (Oversight) |
$66,000 | $15,000 | $9,000 | $9,000 | $99,000 | $99,000 |
(Pending) |
New Interconnection Substation (Oversight) |
$806,000 | $212,000 | $110,000 | $110,000 | $1,238,000 | $1,238,000 |
Build Option Price Comparison | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Build Option | Total Cost | Allocated Cost | |||||
Transmission Owner Build Option | $18,264,000 | $18,264,000 | |||||
Developer Build Option | $7,464,000 | $7,464,000 |
Based on the scope of work for the Interconnection Facilities, it is expected to take 51 month(s) after the signing of a Generator Interconnection Agreement (as this is a FERC connection) and construction kickoff call to complete the installation of the physical connection work. This assumes that there will be no environmental issues with any of the new properties associated with this project, that there will be no delays in acquiring the necessary permits for implementing the defined interconnection work, and that all system outages will be allowed when requested.
The schedule for any required Network Impact Reinforcements will be more clearly identified in the Phase II and Phase III System Impact Studies.
EKPC anticipates that it will take 51 months after the signing of the Generator Interconnection Agreement and the project kickoff call is subsequently held to complete the physical interconnection projects. This assumes no delays due to permitting or environmental issues, and that all necessary outages can be taken as needed to maintain this schedule.
Transmission Owner Analysis
No violations.
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. EKPC interconnection requirements can be found here. Refer to AG1-354 Physical Interconnection Facilities Study for additional requirements found in the General Section of the report.
To the extent that these Applicable Technical Requirements and Standards may conflict with the terms and conditions of the Tariff, the Tariff shall control.
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 and in the Physical Interconnection Facilities Study.
Summer Peak Analysis
The New Service Request was evaluated as a 150.0 MW (90.0 MW Capacity) injection in the EKPC area. Project was evaluated for compliance with applicable reliability planning criteria (PJM, NERC, NERC Regional Reliability Councils, and Transmission Owners). Potential summer peak period network impacts were as follows:
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.
Summer Peak Analysis | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | ||
EKPC |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line
341563 to 342325 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_MAR W38-1014_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_MAR W38-1014_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342760 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5LIBERTY J 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342770 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*4MARION CO 138.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 145.19 | 39.0 | B | 56.62 | 9.2 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
5COOPER2-5ELIHU 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342718 to 324141 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P4-5_LAURL S50-1024_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P4-5_LAURL S50-1024_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324688 TO BUS 342781 CKT 1 /*2PITTSBRG KU 69.0 - 5PITTSBURG 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342781 TO BUS 342820 CKT 1 /*5PITTSBURG 161.0 - 5TYNER 161.0 OPEN BUS 342754 /*5LAUREL CO 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 133.61 | 277.0 | B | 370.11 | 17.8 | ||
EKPC |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line
341563 to 342325 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_SSHAD S11-1014_SRT-A-1
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_SSHAD S11-1014_SRT-A-1' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341059 TO BUS 342694 CKT 1 /*2BARREN CO 69.0 - 5BARREN CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 361788 TO BUS 342814 CKT 1 /*5SUM SHAD TP 161.0 - 5SUMM SHADE 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 964900 TO BUS 342814 CKT 1 /*AG1-354 TP 161.0 - 5SUMM SHADE 161.0 OPEN BUS 361788 /*5SUM SHAD TP 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 125.97 | 39.0 | B | 49.13 | 20.28 | ||
EKPC |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line
341563 to 342325 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_SSHAD S11-1004_SRT-A-1
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_SSHAD S11-1004_SRT-A-1' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341059 TO BUS 342694 CKT 1 /*2BARREN CO 69.0 - 5BARREN CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 964900 TO BUS 342814 CKT 1 /*AG1-354 TP 161.0 - 5SUMM SHADE 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 125.16 | 39.0 | B | 48.81 | 20.23 | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
DEOK_P2-3_1537_MELDAHL345_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'DEOK_P2-3_1537_MELDAHL345_SRT-A' OPEN BUS 249581 /*08MELDAL 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 119.57 | 1532.0 | B | 1831.83 | 14.37 | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
DEOK_P2-3_1535_MELDAHL345_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'DEOK_P2-3_1535_MELDAHL345_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 249581 TO BUS 342838 CKT 1 /*08MELDAL 345.0 - 7SPURLOCK 345.0 OPEN BUS 250145 /*08MELDAL 138.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 119.57 | 1532.0 | B | 1831.8 | 14.37 | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
DEOK_P2-3_1539_MELDAHL345_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'DEOK_P2-3_1539_MELDAHL345_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 249581 TO BUS 249577 CKT 1 /*08MELDAL 345.0 - 08ZIMER 345.0 OPEN BUS 250145 /*08MELDAL 138.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 119.55 | 1532.0 | B | 1831.43 | 14.37 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
4MARION CO-4LEBANON 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342770 to 324271 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_LIB J S4-1024_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_LIB J S4-1024_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 OPEN BUS 342760 /*5LIBERTY J 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 111.61 | 220.0 | B | 245.55 | 22.31 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
4MARION CO-4LEBANON 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342770 to 324271 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_CASEY S89-1008_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_CASEY S89-1008_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342760 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5LIBERTY J 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 111.52 | 220.0 | B | 245.35 | 22.32 | ||
EKPC |
AG1-354 TP-5SUMM SHADE 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
964900 to 342814 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_MAR W38-1014_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_MAR W38-1014_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342760 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5LIBERTY J 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342770 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*4MARION CO 138.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 111.09 | 298.0 | B | 331.06 | 126.86 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342769 to 342770 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_LIB J S4-1024_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_LIB J S4-1024_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 OPEN BUS 342760 /*5LIBERTY J 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 105.24 | 234.0 | B | 246.26 | 22.31 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342769 to 342770 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-3_CASEY S89-1008_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-3_CASEY S89-1008_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 341269 TO BUS 342703 CKT 1 /*2CASEY CO 69.0 - 5CASEY CO 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342760 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5LIBERTY J 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342703 TO BUS 342769 CKT 1 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 - 5MARION CO 161.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 105.15 | 234.0 | B | 246.05 | 22.32 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
4MARION CO-4LEBANON 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342770 to 324271 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-2_CASEY CO 161_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-2_CASEY CO 161_SRT-A' OPEN BUS 342703 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 END |
Bus | AC | 111.52 | 220.0 | B | 245.35 | 22.32 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342769 to 342770 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P2-2_CASEY CO 161_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P2-2_CASEY CO 161_SRT-A' OPEN BUS 342703 /*5CASEY CO 161.0 END |
Bus | AC | 105.15 | 234.0 | B | 246.05 | 22.32 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
5COOPER2-5ELIHU 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342718 to 324141 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P1-2_LAUR-L DAM161_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P1-2_LAUR-L DAM161_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342754 TO BUS 342757 CKT 1 /*5LAUREL CO 161.0 - 5LAUREL DAM 161.0 END |
Single | AC | 111.55 | 277.0 | B | 309.01 | 10.71 | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
Base Case | Single | AC | 100.84 | 1240.0 | A | 1250.44 | 7.5 | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
DEOK_P1_ZIMMER-MELDAHL 34576_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'DEOK_P1_ZIMMER-MELDAHL 34576_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 249577 TO BUS 249581 CKT 1 /*08ZIMER 345.0 - 08MELDAL 345.0 END |
Single | AC | 100.2 | 1532.0 | B | 1535.08 | 8.59 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
2SOMERSET KU-2FERGUSON SO 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342287 to 324531 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324141 TO BUS 342718 CKT 1 /*5ELIHU 161.0 - 5COOPER2 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342718 TO BUS 342757 CKT 1 /*5COOPER2 161.0 - 5LAUREL DAM 161.0 END |
Tower | AC | 155.93 | 105.0 | B | 163.73 | 12.11 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
5COOPER2-5ELIHU 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342718 to 324141 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P7-1_LAURL 161 DBL_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P7-1_LAURL 161 DBL_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342754 TO BUS 342757 CKT 1 /*5LAUREL CO 161.0 - 5LAUREL DAM 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342754 TO BUS 342781 CKT 1 /*5LAUREL CO 161.0 - 5PITTSBURG 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342781 TO BUS 342820 CKT 1 /*5PITTSBURG 161.0 - 5TYNER 161.0 END |
Tower | AC | 133.61 | 277.0 | B | 370.11 | 17.8 | ||
EKPC/TVA |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342814 to 360334 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P7-1_BULL 161 DBL_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P7-1_BULL 161 DBL_SRT-A' OPEN BUS 326975 /*5CEDAR GRV 161.0 OPEN BUS 361788 /*5SUM SHAD TP 161.0 END |
Tower | AC | 123.14 | 289.0 | B | 355.89 | 99.43 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
4MARION CO-4LEBANON 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342770 to 324271 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324141 TO BUS 342718 CKT 1 /*5ELIHU 161.0 - 5COOPER2 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342718 TO BUS 342757 CKT 1 /*5COOPER2 161.0 - 5LAUREL DAM 161.0 END |
Tower | AC | 111.75 | 220.0 | B | 245.86 | 19.17 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342769 to 342770 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P7-1_COOP 161 DBL 2_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324141 TO BUS 342718 CKT 1 /*5ELIHU 161.0 - 5COOPER2 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 342718 TO BUS 342757 CKT 1 /*5COOPER2 161.0 - 5LAUREL DAM 161.0 END |
Tower | AC | 105.36 | 234.0 | B | 246.54 | 19.17 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
(No impacts were found for this analysis)
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.
Summer Potential Congestion due to Local Energy Deliverability | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution | ||
DAY/EKPC |
7SPURLOCK-09STUART 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342838 to 253077 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 123.4 | 1240.0 | A | 1530.17 | 12.49 | ||
EKPC |
5GREEN CO-2GREEN CO 161.0/69.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342733 to 341563 ckt 1 |
EKPC_P1-2_GRE-TAY-MAR161_SRT-A-C
CONTINGENCY 'EKPC_P1-2_GRE-TAY-MAR161_SRT-A-C' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 944150 TO BUS 342817 CKT 1 /*AF1-083 TP 161.0 - 5TAYLOR CO J 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 964890 TO BUS 342817 CKT 1 /*AG1-353 TP 161.0 - 5TAYLOR CO J 161.0 END |
OP | AC | 122.0 | 109.0 | B | 132.98 | 19.27 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
5COOPER2-5ELIHU 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342718 to 324141 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 116.63 | 219.0 | A | 255.41 | 15.2 | ||
EKPC |
5LAUREL DAM-5LAUREL CO 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342757 to 342754 ckt 1 |
P2-3-228_SRT-S
CONTINGENCY 'P2-3-228_SRT-S' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324100 TO BUS 324102 CKT 1 /*7ALCALDE 345.0 - 7BROWN NORTH 345.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324100 TO BUS 324112 CKT 1 /*7ALCALDE 345.0 - 7PINEVILLE 345.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324100 TO BUS 324130 CKT 1 /*7ALCALDE 345.0 - 5ALCALDE 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324130 TO BUS 324141 CKT 1 /*5ALCALDE 161.0 - 5ELIHU 161.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324130 TO BUS 324143 CKT 1 /*5ALCALDE 161.0 - 5FARLEY 161.0 END |
OP | AC | 106.37 | 211.0 | B | 224.45 | 9.11 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-5CASEY CO 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342769 to 342703 ckt 1 |
P2-3-102_SRT-S
CONTINGENCY 'P2-3-102_SRT-S' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324219 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4BROWN T1 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324220 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4BROWN T2 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324239 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4DANVILE N T 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324248 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4FAWKES KU 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324318 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4WEST CLIFF 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 324318 CKT 2 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 4WEST CLIFF 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324217 TO BUS 325012 CKT 1 /*4BROWN PLANT 138.0 - 1BROWN SOLAR 13.2 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324238 TO BUS 324239 CKT 1 /*4DANVILLE N 138.0 - 4DANVILE N T 138.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 324239 TO BUS 950000 CKT 1 /*4DANVILE N T 138.0 - AG9-001 138.0 END |
OP | AC | 109.23 | 182.0 | B | 198.81 | 13.13 | ||
LGEE/OVEC |
7TRIMBL REAC-06CLIFTY 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
324010 to 248000 ckt 1 |
AEP_P1-2_#10136_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'AEP_P1-2_#10136_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 243208 TO BUS 243209 CKT 1 /*05JEFRSO 765.0 - 05ROCKPT 765.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 243209 TO BUS 243443 CKT 2 /*05ROCKPT 765.0 - 05RKG2 26.0 REMOVE UNIT 2H FROM BUS 243443 /*05RKG2 26.0 REMOVE UNIT 2L FROM BUS 243443 /*05RKG2 26.0 END |
OP | AC | 110.53 | 1451.0 | B | 1603.74 | 22.82 | ||
EKPC/LGEE |
4MARION CO-4LEBANON 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line
342770 to 324271 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 104.47 | 187.0 | A | 195.36 | 16.73 | ||
EKPC |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer
342769 to 342770 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 102.02 | 192.0 | A | 195.88 | 16.73 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
(No impacts were found for this analysis)
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
Light Load Analysis is Not Required.
Light Load Potential Congestion due to Local Energy Deliverability
Light Load Analysis is Not Required.
Short Circuit Analysis
Based on PJM Short Circuit Analysis, this project did not contribute >1% fault duty to previously identified overduty breakers, nor did it cause any new overduty breakers.
Stability Analysis
Analysis Complete - No Issues
Executive Summary
New Service Requests (projects) in PJM Transition Cycle 1, Cluster 25 are listed in Table 1 below. This report will cover the dynamic analysis of Cluster 25 projects.
This analysis is effectively a screening study to determine whether the addition of the Cluster 25 projects will meet the dynamics requirements of the NERC, EKPC and PJM reliability standards.
The load flow scenario for the analysis was based on the RTEP 2027 summer peak load case, modified to include applicable projects. Cluster 25 projects have been dispatched online at maximum power output, and voltage schedules set to achieve near unity power factor at the high side of the main transformer.
Cluster 25 projects were tested for compliance with NERC, PJM, Transmission Owner and other applicable criteria. Steady-state condition and 142 contingencies were studied, each with a 20 second simulation time period. Studied faults included:
a) Steady-state operation (20 second run);
b) Three-phase faults with normal clearing time;
c) Single-phase bus faults with normal clearing time;
d) Single-phase faults with stuck breaker;
e) Single-phase faults placed at 80% of the line with delayed (Zone 2) clearing at line end remote from the fault due to primary communications/relay failure;
f) Single-phase faults with loss of multiple-circuit tower line.
No relevant high speed reclosing (HSR) contingencies were identified for this study.
For all simulations, the Cluster 25 projects under study along with the rest of the PJM system were required to maintain synchronism and with all states returning to an acceptable new condition following the disturbance.
For all of the fault contingencies tested on the 2027 peak load case:
a) Cluster 25 projects were able to ride through the faults (except for faults where protective action trips a generator(s)),
b) The system with Cluster 25 projects included is transiently stable and post-contingency oscillations were positively damped with a damping margin of at least 3%.
c) Following fault clearing, all bus voltages recovered to a minimum of 0.7 per unit after 2.5 seconds (except where protective action isolates that bus).
d) No transmission element tripped, other than those either directly connected or designed to trip as a consequence of that fault.
AG-353, AG1-354 and AG1-471 meet the 0.95 leading and lagging PF requirement.
Fictitious voltage response at AF1-083 generator terminal bus at fault clearance caused the generator terminal voltage to exceed 1.2 pu for longer than 0.019 seconds resulting in the unit being tripped by voltage relay instance 94415404. The relay pickup time was extended to 0.05 seconds to resolve tripping of the unit.
Fictitious voltage response at AF1-050 generator terminal bus at fault clearance caused the generator terminal voltage to exceed 1.2 pu for longer than 0.0292 seconds resulting in the unit being tripped by voltage relay instance 94382404. The relay pickup time was extended to 0.05 seconds to resolve tripping of the unit.
AG1-471 generator unit remained in High Voltage Ride Through mode for several contingencies. As a result, the AG1-471 generator terminal voltage remained at approximately 1.12 pu after fault recovery causing the voltage relay stage set to 1.1 pu for 10 seconds to pick up and trip AG1-471 generating unit. Modifying CON(J+1): Vup to 1.16 pu of the REECA1 model resolved the issue of AG1-471 getting stuck in HVRT mode and resolved the tripping of the unit.
The stability study results in this report are considered preliminary, as PJM is actively performing simulations to assess the impacts of potential dynamic model parameter changes required to address identified stability issues. Additionally, feedback from the Transmission Owner is being incorporated into the stability study. The study will be finalized at the conclusion of Phase III of Transition Cycle 1.
No mitigations were found to be required.
Table 1: TC1 Cluster 25 Projects
Cluster | Project | Fuel Type | Transmission Owner | MFO | MWE | MWC | Point of Interconnection |
25 | AG1-353 | Solar | EKPC | 98 | 98 | 58.8 | Greene County - Marion County 161 kV |
AG1-354 | Solar | EKPC | 150.0 | 150.0 | 90.0 | Summershade - Green County 161 kV | |
AG1-471 | Solar | EKPC | 60.0 | 60.0 | 36.0 | Up Church-Wayne County 69 kV |
Reactive Power Analysis
The reactive power capability of AG1-354 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 |
AC1-074 | Jacksonville-Renaker 138kV I | Under Construction |
AC1-089 | Hillsboro-Wildcat 138kV | In Service |
AC2-075 | Jacksonville-Renaker 138 kV | Under Construction |
AD2-048 | Cynthia-Headquarters 69 kV | Under Construction |
AD2-072 | Van Arsdell-Mercer Industrial 69kV | Withdrawn |
AE1-143 | Marion County 161 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AE2-071 | Patton Rd-Summer Shade 69 kV | In Service |
AE2-138 | Avon-North Clark 345 kV | Active |
AE2-210 | Avon-North Clark 345 kV | Active |
AE2-221 | Clinton-Stuart 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AE2-254 | Garrard County-Tommy-Gooch 69 kV | In Service |
AE2-275 | J.K. Smith-Fawkes 138 kV | Active |
AE2-308 | Three Forks-Dale 138 kV | Active |
AE2-339 | Avon 138 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AF1-038 | Sewellton Jct-Webbs Crossroads 69 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AF1-050 | Summer Shade - Green County 161 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AF1-083 | Green County-Saloma 161 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AF1-116 | Marion County 161 kV | Active |
AF1-203 | Patton Rd-Summer Shade 69 kV | In Service |
AF1-233 | Flemingsburg – Spurlock 138kV | Active |
AF2-090 | Central Hardin 138 kV | Withdrawn |
AF2-111 | North Clark-Spurlock 345 kV | Active |
AF2-260 | Stephensburg-Central Hardin 69 kV | Active |
AF2-306 | Hope-Blevins Valley Tap 69 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
AF2-307 | Hope-Belvins Valley Tap 69 kV | Active |
AF2-308 | Central Hardin-Stephensburg 69 kV | Withdrawn |
AF2-309 | Central Hardin-Stephensburg 69 kV | Withdrawn |
AF2-348 | North Clark-Spurlock 345 kV | Active |
AF2-355 | West Gerrard-J.K. Smith 345 kV | Active |
AF2-365 | Munfordville KU Tap-Horse Cave Jct. 69 kV | Active |
AF2-391 | Central Hardin 69 kV | Active |
AG1-066 | Bonnyman 69 kV | Active |
AG1-067 | Temple Hill 69 kV | Active |
AG1-070 | Bon Ayr 69 kV | Active |
AG1-071 | Bon Ayr 69 kV | Active |
AG1-320 | Glendale-Stephensburg 69 kV | Active |
AG1-341 | Summer Shade 161 kV | Active |
AG1-353 | Green County-Marion County 161 kV | Active |
AG1-405 | Walnut Grove-Asahi 69 kV | Active |
AG1-406 | Walnut Grove-Asahi 69 kV | Active |
AG1-471 | Up Church-Wayne County 69 kV | Active |
AG1-526 | West Garrard 345 kV | Active |
Affected Systems
In Phase II of the Cycle, PJM provides the Affected System Operator any updates on the PJM projects that require an Affected Systems Study based on their response at DP1. New Service Requests that require an Affected Systems Study are required to enter into an Affected Systems Study Agreement with the Affected System Operator, as applicable, prior to the close of DP2 or they will be withdrawn from the Cycle.
If the Project Developer already entered into the necessary agreement and the results are available, PJM will supply them in the Phase II SIS report. See below for the status of any required Affected Systems Study. A status of “Pending” means that the study is not yet completed by the Affected System Operator. If your project requires an Affected Systems Study and your results are not provided for Phase II SIS, PJM anticipates providing them in the Phase III SIS per Tariff Part VII.D.312.
System Reinforcements
Based on the Phase II analysis results, this project has potential cost responsibility for the following System Reinforcements:
AG1-354 System Reinforcements Cost Breakdown: | Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Load Flow | EKPC | n9175 / EKPC-tc1-r0022a | Rebuild the AG1-354 TP-Summer Shade 161 kV line section (19.5 miles) using 556 MCM ACSS conductor. | 126.9 MW | 67.1% | $22,160,563 | ||||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8369 / EKPC-tc1-r0015a | Replace the existing Marion County 161/138 kV, 200 MVA transformer with a 300 MVA transformer. | 19.2 MW | 41.7% | $3,680,715 | ||||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8368.2 / EKPC-tc1-r0012b | Rebuild the Cooper-Elihu 161 kV line section using 795 MCM ACSS conductor (4.2 miles) | 17.8 MW | 41.6% | $3,405,719 | ||||
Load Flow | EKPC | n6834.1 / EKPC-tc1-r0001a | Rebuild the 4/0 ACSR Green County-Summersville 69 kV line section (4.2 miles) using 556 MCM ACSR. | 9.2 MW | 44.6% | $2,370,458 | ||||
Load Flow | EKPC | n9174 / EKPC-tc1-r0019a | Rebuild the Summer Shade EKPC-Summer Shade TVA 161 kV line (0.13 mile) using bundled 556 MCM ACSR conductor. | 99.4 MW | 72.6% | $203,262 | ||||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8364.1 / EKPC-tc1-r0009b | Replace the 636 MCM ACSR conductor in the Marion County-KU Lebanon 138 kV line with 954 MCM ACSS conductor. | 19.2 MW | 37.5% | $74,978 | ||||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15527 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P2 contingency | 19.2 MW | 37.5% | $0 | ||||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15521 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P7 contingency | 19.2 MW | 14.0% | $0 | ||||
Grand Total: | $31,895,695 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n9175 / EKPC-tc1-r0022a | Rebuild the AG1-354 TP-Summer Shade 161 kV line section (19.5 miles) using 556 MCM ACSS conductor. | $33,030,000 | $22,160,563 | 30 to 36 Months |
Contributor
Description: Rebuild the AG1-354 TP-Summer Shade 161 kV line section (19.5 miles) using 556 MCM ACSS conductor.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5SUMM SHADE-AG1-354 TP 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5SUMM SHADE-AG1-354 TP 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 325.0 MVA |
5SUMM SHADE-AG1-354 TP 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 360.0 MVA |
5SUMM SHADE-AG1-354 TP 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | C | 369.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 62.2 MW | 32.9% | $10,869,437 |
AG1-354 | 126.9 MW | 67.1% | $22,160,563 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8369 / EKPC-tc1-r0015a | Replace the existing Marion County 161/138 kV, 200 MVA transformer with a 300 MVA transformer. | $8,825,000 | $3,680,715 | Dec 31 2024 |
Contributor
Description: Replace the existing Marion County 161/69 kV, 200 MVA transformer with a 300 MVA transformer.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | SUM | A | 239.0 MVA |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | SUM | B | 280.0 MVA |
5MARION CO-4MARION CO 161.0/138.0 kV Ckt 1 transformer | SUM | C | 295.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 26.8 MW | 58.3% | $5,144,285 |
AG1-354 | 19.2 MW | 41.7% | $3,680,715 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8368.2 / EKPC-tc1-r0012b | Rebuild the Cooper-Elihu 161 kV line section using 795 MCM ACSS conductor (4.2 miles) | $8,195,000 | $3,405,719 | 30 to 36 Months |
Contributor
Description: Rebuild the Cooper-Elihu 161 kV line section using 795 MCM ACSS conductor (4.2 miles)
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | A | 308.0 MVA |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 373.0 MVA |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | C | 373.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 12.9 MW | 30.1% | $2,469,443 |
AG1-354 | 17.8 MW | 41.6% | $3,405,719 |
AG1-471 | 12.1 MW | 28.3% | $2,319,838 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n6834.1 / EKPC-tc1-r0001a | Rebuild the 4/0 ACSR Green County-Summersville 69 kV line section (4.2 miles) using 556 MCM ACSR. | $5,320,000 | $2,370,458 | 18 to 24 Months |
Contributor
Description: Rebuild the 4/0 ACSR Green County-Summersville 69 kV line section (4.2 miles) using 556 MCM ACSR.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 57.0 MVA |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 63.0 MVA |
2GREEN CO-2SUMMERSVIL 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | C | 63.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 11.4 MW | 55.4% | $2,949,542 |
AG1-354 | 9.2 MW | 44.6% | $2,370,458 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n9174 / EKPC-tc1-r0019a | Rebuild the Summer Shade EKPC-Summer Shade TVA 161 kV line (0.13 mile) using bundled 556 MCM ACSR conductor. | $280,000 | $203,262 | 24 to 30 Months |
Contributor
Description: Rebuild the Summer Shade EKPC-Summer Shade TVA 161 kV line (0.13 mile) using bundled 556 MCM ACSR conductor.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 244.0 MVA |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 298.0 MVA |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | C | 312.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 37.5 MW | 27.4% | $76,738 |
AG1-354 | 99.4 MW | 72.6% | $203,262 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n8364.1 / EKPC-tc1-r0009b | Replace the 636 MCM ACSR conductor in the Marion County-KU Lebanon 138 kV line with 954 MCM ACSS conductor. | $200,000 | $74,978 | Dec 31 2024 |
Contributor
Description: Replace the 636 MCM ACSR conductor in the Marion County-KU Lebanon 138 kV line with 954 MCM ACSS conductor.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 202.0 MVA |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 248.0 MVA |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | C | 248.0 MVA |
Cost Allocation | |||
---|---|---|---|
Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
AG1-353 | 26.8 MW | 52.4% | $104,791 |
AG1-354 | 19.2 MW | 37.5% | $74,978 |
AG1-471 | 5.2 MW | 10.1% | $20,232 |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n5780.3 / EKPC-tc1-r0020b | Replace the 1500A interconnection metering CTs at Spurlock Station with 2000A equipment. | $1,235,000 | $0 | 18 to 21 Months |
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
Description: Replace the 1500A interconnection metering CTs at Spurlock Station with 2000A equipment.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 1777.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 1867.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | C | 1910.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | Dayton | n5780.1 / DAYr190040 | Replace Stuart substation riser conductor with 2500AAC (parallel) | $300,000 | $0 | 12 to 18 Months |
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
Description: Replace Stuart substation riser conductor with 2500AAC (parallel)
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | A | 1561.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 1800.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | C | 1800.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | Dayton | n5780 / DAYr190039 | Reconductor Stuart-Spurlock line with twin bundle 1033 Curlew ACCR conductor. | $47,681,589 | $0 | 36 to 48 Months |
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
Description: Reconductor Stuart-Spurlock line with twin bundle 1033 Curlew ACCR conductor.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | A | 1339.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 1556.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | C | 1556.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | Dayton | n5780.2 / DAYr190041 | Reconductor Stuart substation conductor with twin bundle 1033 Curlew ACCR conductor Reconductor Stuart Substation conductor with a bundled 795 hi-temperature conductor. | $650,000 | $0 | 18 to 24 Months |
Potential Aggregate Contributor Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 is a potential Aggregate Pool Contributor.
Description: Reconductor Stuart substation conductor with twin bundle 1033 Curlew ACCR conductor Reconductor Stuart Substation conductor with a bundled 795 hi-temperature conductor.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | A | 1882.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 2062.0 MVA |
09STUART-7SPURLOCK 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | C | 1958.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | EKPC | n7773.1 / EKPC-tc1-r0004b | Change the 69 kV current transformer settings associated with circuit breaker S7-654 from 600A to at least 800A. | $345,000 | $0 | 9 to 12 Months |
Contingent Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 may need this upgrade in-service to be deliverable to the PJM system. If AG1-354 desires to come into service prior to completion of the upgrade, the Project Developer will need to request PJM to perform an interim study to determine if they would be deliverable for all or a portion of their output for each delivery year until the upgrade is complete.
Description: Change the 69 kV current transformer settings associated with circuit breaker S7-654 from 600A to at least 800A.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
2FERGUSON SO-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
2FERGUSON SO-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | A | 154.0 MVA |
2FERGUSON SO-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 180.0 MVA |
2FERGUSON SO-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | C | 185.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15519 | Invalid - P7 contingency 69kV not monitored by LGEE | $0 | $0 | TBD |
Note: This reinforcement is fictitious and will not be cost allocated to projects. It is listed for information purposes only.
Description: Invalid - P7 contingency 69kV not monitored by LGEE
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
2FERGUSON SO-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
2SOMERSET-2SOMERSET KU 69.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15527 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P2 contingency | $0 | $0 | TBD |
Contributor
Description: Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P2 contingency
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15521 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P7 contingency | $0 | $0 | TBD |
Contributor
Description: Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P7 contingency
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
4LEBANON-4MARION CO 138.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15510 | Upgrade terminal equipment at Elihu 161kV associated with the Elihu-Cooper (EKPC) 161kV line to a minimum SE rating of 1200 amps. | $300,000 | $0 | TBD |
Contingent Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-354 currently does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade. As changes to the PJM process occur (such as other projects withdrawing from the cycle or reducing in size) AG1-354 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-354 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-354 may need this upgrade in-service to be deliverable to the PJM system. If AG1-354 desires to come into service prior to completion of the upgrade, the Project Developer will need to request PJM to perform an interim study to determine if they would be deliverable for all or a portion of their output for each delivery year until the upgrade is complete.
Description: Upgrade terminal equipment at Elihu 161kV associated with the Elihu-Cooper (EKPC) 161kV line to a minimum SE rating of 1200 amps.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | A | 267.0 MVA |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | SUM | B | 335.0 MVA |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15524 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P7 contingency | $0 | $0 | TBD |
Note: This reinforcement is fictitious and will not be cost allocated to projects. It is listed for information purposes only.
Description: Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P7 contingency
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | LGEE | (Pending) / LGEE_TC1_15525 | Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P4 contingency | $0 | $0 | TBD |
Note: This reinforcement is fictitious and will not be cost allocated to projects. It is listed for information purposes only.
Description: Load shedding of 10% PC load is allowed for P4 contingency
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5ELIHU-5COOPER2 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | TO | RTEP ID / TO ID | Title | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | Time Estimate | |||
Load Flow | TVA | (Pending) / TVA_TC1_15534 | Replace breaker 924 and 944, switches 929, 943, 945, 947, 949 , 923 and 925, and line CT to a minimum of 2,000 amps. | $8,200,000 | $0 | TBD |
Info Note: AG1-354 contributes to the loading of an overloaded tie line facility between PJM and an affected system entity, which was identified per PJM planning analysis criteria. This upgrade may be required on the affected system portion of the tie line and will be confirmed in subsequent study phases, along with cost allocation of such upgrade if applicable, in coordination with the affected system.
Description: Replace breaker 924 and 944, switches 929, 943, 945, 947, 949 , 923 and 925, and line CT to a minimum of 2,000 amps. Replace pulloff, stinger, breaker leads, and jumper to the metering CT to a minimum of 2,000 amps.
Flowgates Addressed by this Reinforcement | |
---|---|
Facility | Contingency |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | EKPC_P7-1_BULL 161 DBL_SRT-A |
New Ratings | |||
---|---|---|---|
Facility | Rating Set | Rating Type | Rating Value |
5SUMM SHADE-5SUMMER SHAD 161.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (All) | B | 557.7 MVA |
Attachments
[1]Winter load flow analysis will be performed starting in Transition Cycle #2.