AG1-553 Phase III Study Report
v1.00 released 2025-09-18 17:11
Cordova 345 kV
0.0 MW Capacity / 260.0 MW Energy
Introduction
This Phase III System Impact Study Report (PH3) has been prepared in accordance with the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 312 for New Service Requests (projects) in Transition Cycle 1. The Project Developer/Eligible Customer (developer) is Beacon Solar, LLC, and the Transmission Provider (TP) is PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM). The interconnected Transmission Owner (TO) is Commonwealth Edison Company.
Preface
New Service Requests meeting the requirements of Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, Decision Point II, were included in the Phase III System Impact Study. The Phase III 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 III 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 4.7, PJM takes the following actions during the Phase III System Impact Study:
- PJM will retool load flow, short circuit and stability results based on decisions made by Project Developers or Eligible Customers during Decision Point II.
- PJM will coordinate with Affected System Operators to conduct any studies required to determine the final impact of a New Service Request on any Affected System and will include the final Affected System Study results in the Phase III System Impact Study, if available from the Affected System.
- The Phase III System Impact Study Results will be publicly available on PJM’s website; Project Developers and Eligible Customers must obtain the results from the website.
- PJM will tender draft final agreements to Project Developers or Eligible Customers.
The Transmission Owner takes the following actions during the Phase III 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 III System Impact Study phase will be for the System Reliability Network Upgrades. 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 III Requirements
At the close of Phase III System Impact Study, PJM will initiate Decision Point III (DP3). During DP3, 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 313.A. Additional information on these elements is available in PJM Manual 14H sections 4.8, 6, and 7.
As stated in PJM Tariff, Part VII, Subpart D, section 313.C, New Service Requests may not be changed or modified in any way for any reason during Decision Point III. A New Service Request must be withdrawn and resubmitted in a subsequent Cycle to the extent a Project Developer or Eligible Customer wants to make any changes to such New Service Request at this point in the Cycle process.
Adverse Test Eligibility
This New Service Request does not meet the Adverse Study Impact Criteria and has the option to either move forward in the Cycle process or withdraw at DP3 with cumulative Readiness Deposits forfeited. See adverse study impact calculation below.
This section details whether a Project Developer or Eligible Customer qualifies for the Adverse Study Impact clause outlined in the PJM OATT, Part VII, Subpart D, section 313.B and Manual 14H, section 6.2.2. In order to qualify for an Adverse Study Impact at Decision Point III, the Network Upgrade cost from Phase II to Phase III must:
- Increase overall by 35% or more
- Increases by more than $25,000 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, Decision Point I, and Decision Point II (RD1, and RD2 and RD3, 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 Commonwealth Edison Company zone — Rock Island County, Illinois. The installed facilities will have a total capability of 260.0 MW with 0.0 MW of this output being recognized by PJM as Capacity.
Project Information
- New Service Request Number:
- AG1-553
- Project Name:
- Cordova 345 kV
- Project Developer Name:
- Beacon Solar, LLC
- State:
- Illinois
- County:
- Rock Island
- Transmission Owner:
- Commonwealth Edison Company
- MFO:
- 260.0
- MWE:
- 260.0
- MWC:
- 0.0
- 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
AG1-553 will interconnect on the ComEd transmission system via a direct connection into the TSS 940 Cordova 345 kV substation.
Cost Summary
The table below shows a summary of the total cost estimates for this New Service Request project. In Phase III SIS, the interconnected Transmission Owner has performed a facilities study for the required System Reliability Network Upgrades. The Facilities Studies for the Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) and Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades were performed by the Transmission Owner in Phase II and are available for download on PJM.com (see General Section for document links).
Based on the Phase III SIS results, the AG1-553 project has the following allocation of costs for interconnection. The Security amount required at DP3 is also shown below.
| Description | Cost Allocated to AG1-553 | Cost Subject to Security |
|---|---|---|
| Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities (TOIF) | $2,167,424 | $2,167,424 |
| Other Scope | $0 | $0 |
| Option to Build Oversight | $0 | $0 |
| Physical Interconnection Network Upgrades | ||
| Stand Alone Network Upgrades | $0 | $0 |
| Network Upgrades | $16,617,794 | $16,617,794 |
| System Reliability Network Upgrades | ||
| Steady State Thermal & Voltage (SP & LL) | $14,840,658 | $14,840,658 |
| Transient Stability | $0 | $0 |
| Short Circuit | $0 | $0 |
| Transmission Owner Analysis | ||
| SubRegional | $0 | $0 |
| Distribution | $0 | $0 |
| Affected System Study Reinforcements | ||
| AFS - PJM Violatons | $0 | $0 |
| AFS - Non-PJM Violations | $816,076 | $0 |
| Total | $34,441,952 | $33,625,876 |
* 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, 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 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 313 (Decision Point III) A.1.a and PJM Manual 14H, section 8.6.1, Project Developers and Eligible Customers are required to provide Security in a form acceptable to PJM at Decision Point III which runs concurrently with the projects' Final Agreement Negotiation Phase. 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 Phase III 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 AG1-553
Security has been calculated for the AG1-553 project(s) based on the Phase III System Impact Study results and is shown in the table below. This Security must be provided at Decision Point III 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 AG1-553
Transmission Owner Scope of Work
As shown in the one line diagram, this Interconnection Request is sharing the Point of Interconnection (POI) with one or more other Interconnection Requests. Should other requests withdraw from Transition Cycle 1, the cost allocation for Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities, Stand Alone Network Upgrades, and applicable Network Upgrades identified in the study report will be updated for the remaining project(s). Refer to the one line for other Interconnection Requests at this POI.
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.
| Network Upgrades | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
| Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
| n9369.0 |
Expand existing 345 kV TSS 940 Cordova station from a bus ring switchyard to the ultimate breaker-and-a-half bus configuration. |
$14,863,348 | $9,596,433 | $3,565,686 | $569,803 | $28,595,270 | $14,297,635 (See Note 1) |
| n9368.0 |
Reconfigure 345 kV line terminations within the existing TSS 940 Cordova substation to accommodate the substation expansion. |
$2,511,153 | $1,050,749 | $602,420 | $62,390 | $4,226,712 | $2,113,356 (See Note 1) |
| n9367.0 |
Perform relay upgrades at STA4 Quad Cities station. |
$281,309 | $61,180 | $67,485 | $3,633 | $413,607 | $206,804 (See Note 1) |
| Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTEP ID | Description | Direct | Indirect | Total Cost ($USD) | Allocated Cost ($USD) | ||
| Labor | Materials | Labor | Materials | ||||
| (Pending) |
Construct Transmission Owner Interconnection Facilities from the Point of Change in Ownership to the existing TSS 940 Cordova 345 kV substation. |
$544,460 | $1,408,955 | $130,339 | $83,670 | $2,167,424 | $2,167,424 |
Based on the scope of work for the Interconnection Facilities, it is expected to take a range of 24 to 36 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 2 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.
Note 1: A Common Use Upgrade is a Network Upgrade that is needed for the interconnection of Generating Facilities or Merchant Transmission Facilities of more than one Project Developer or Eligible Customer and which is the shared responsibility of each Project Developer or Eligible Customer. If multiple Project Developers request to connect to the same interconnection substation, the Transmission Owner will determine the cost to accommodate all the requests at the substation. The cost for the interconnection will be allocated in proportion to the number of required terminations into the substation.
Notes on Cost Estimate:
- These estimates are Order-of-Magnitude estimates of the costs that ComEd would bill to the Project Developer for this interconnection. These estimates are based on a one-line electrical diagram of the project and the information provided by the Project Developer.
- There were no site visits performed for these estimates. There may be costs related to specific site related issues that are not identified in these estimates. The site reviews will be performed during the Facilities Study or during detailed engineering.
- These estimates are not a guarantee of the maximum amount payable by the Project Developer and the actual costs of ComEd's work may differ significantly from these estimates. The Project Developer will be responsible for paying actual costs of ComEd's work in accordance with the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff.
- The Project Developer is responsible for all engineering, procurement, testing and construction of all equipment on the Project Developer’s side of the Point of Change in Ownership.
These cost estimates do not include cost of acquiring right-of-way for the transmission line and purchasing any additional land, if needed, for the line terminations.
Transmission Owner Analysis
No Transmission Owner impacts identified.
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. ComEd interconnection requirements can be found here. Refer to AG1-553 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 260.0 MW (0.0 MW Capacity) injection in the ComEd 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.
| Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE |
AF2-041 TP-ELECT JCT; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
957470 to 270730 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-8___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-8___SRT-A' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270678 TO BUS 270679 CKT Z1 /*BYRON ; B 345.0 - BYRON ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 274768 TO BUS 270678 CKT 1 /*LEE CO EC;BP 345.0 - BYRON ; B 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 119.08 % | 1837.0 | STE | 2187.47 | 61.9 |
| CE |
AF2-041 TP-ELECT JCT; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
957470 to 270730 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-4___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-4___SRT-A' REMOVE UNIT 1 FROM BUS 274656 /*BYRON ;1U 25.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 274768 TO BUS 270678 CKT 1 /*LEE CO EC;BP 345.0 - BYRON ; B 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 118.45 % | 1837.0 | STE | 2175.96 | 61.67 |
| AEP/AMIL |
J1180 POI-05SULLIVAN 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
956820 to 247712 ckt 1 |
AEP_P4_#3128_05EUGENE 345_A2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'AEP_P4_#3128_05EUGENE 345_A2_SRT-A' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 243221 TO BUS 249504 CKT 1 /*05EUGENE 345.0 - 08CAYSUB 345.0 OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 243221 TO BUS 348885 CKT 1 /*05EUGENE 345.0 - 7BUNSONVILLE 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 108.18 % | 1635.0 | B | 1768.74 | 20.92 |
| AEP/AMIL |
J1180 POI-05SULLIVAN 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
956820 to 247712 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_080-45-BT4-5___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_080-45-BT4-5___SRT-A' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270852 TO BUS 270668 CKT 1 /*PONTIAC ; B 345.0 - BLUEMOUND; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270852 TO BUS 270704 CKT 1 /*PONTIAC ; B 345.0 - LORETTO ; B 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 104.63 % | 1635.0 | B | 1710.77 | 17.36 |
| AEP/AMIL |
J1180 POI-05SULLIVAN 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
956820 to 247712 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_080-45-BT7-8___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_080-45-BT7-8___SRT-A' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270853 TO BUS 270717 CKT 1 /*PONTIAC ; R 345.0 - DRESDEN ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270853 TO BUS 270819 CKT 1 /*PONTIAC ; R 345.0 - MCLEAN ; R 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 104.17 % | 1635.0 | B | 1703.12 | 16.99 |
| CE |
NELSON ; B-AF2-041 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270828 to 957470 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-8___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-8___SRT-A' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270678 TO BUS 270679 CKT Z1 /*BYRON ; B 345.0 - BYRON ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 274768 TO BUS 270678 CKT 1 /*LEE CO EC;BP 345.0 - BYRON ; B 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 112.6 % | 1656.0 | B | 1864.65 | 61.9 |
| CE |
NELSON ; B-AF2-041 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270828 to 957470 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-4___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_006-45-BT3-4___SRT-A' REMOVE UNIT 1 FROM BUS 274656 /*BYRON ;1U 25.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 274768 TO BUS 270678 CKT 1 /*LEE CO EC;BP 345.0 - BYRON ; B 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 112.16 % | 1656.0 | B | 1857.3 | 61.67 |
| CE |
ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270730 to 270812 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_111-45-L11126__SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_111-45-L11126__SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 275239 /*ELECT JCT;2M 138.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270846 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - PLANO ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270916 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WAYNE ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270928 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270916 TO BUS 270917 CKT 1 /*WAYNE ; B 345.0 - WAYNE ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270928 TO BUS 272794 TO BUS 275334 CKT 1 /*WOLFS ; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 138.0 - WOLFS ;1C 34.5 END |
Breaker | AC | 101.9 % | 1568.0 | STE | 1597.86 | 33.83 |
| CE |
ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270730 to 270812 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_111-45-L16704T_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_111-45-L16704T_SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 275239 /*ELECT JCT;2M 138.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270916 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WAYNE ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270928 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270846 TO BUS 270730 CKT 1 /*PLANO ; B 345.0 - ELECT JCT; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270846 TO BUS 272278 TO BUS 275354 CKT 1 /*PLANO ; B 345.0 - PLANO;1I 138.0 - PLANO;1C 34.5 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270928 TO BUS 272794 TO BUS 275334 CKT 1 /*WOLFS ; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 138.0 - WOLFS ;1C 34.5 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 272250 TO BUS 272278 CKT 2 /*PLANO ; B 138.0 - PLANO;1I 138.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 272250 TO BUS 272278 CKT Z1 /*PLANO ; B 138.0 - PLANO;1I 138.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 101.7 % | 1568.0 | STE | 1594.72 | 34.13 |
| CE |
ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270730 to 270812 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4-6_111-345-R______SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4-6_111-345-R______SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270731 /*ELECT JCT;4R 345.0 DISCONNECT BUS 270733 /*ELECT JCT;3R 345.0 DISCONNECT BUS 275183 /*ELECT JCT;3M 138.0 DISCONNECT BUS 275184 /*ELECT JCT;4M 138.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 100.69 % | 1568.0 | STE | 1578.74 | 17.37 |
| CE |
ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270730 to 270812 ckt 1 |
COMED_P2-2_111_EJ-345B__2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P2-2_111_EJ-345B__2_SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 275239 /*ELECT JCT;2M 138.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270846 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - PLANO ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270916 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WAYNE ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270730 TO BUS 270928 CKT 1 /*ELECT JCT; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270928 TO BUS 272794 TO BUS 275334 CKT 1 /*WOLFS ; B 345.0 - WOLFS ; B 138.0 - WOLFS ;1C 34.5 END |
Bus | AC | 100.26 % | 1568.0 | STE | 1572.01 | 33.1 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4-6_116-345-R______SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4-6_116-345-R______SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270767 /*GOODINGS ;1R 345.0 DISCONNECT BUS 270769 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 DISCONNECT BUS 275240 /*GOODINGS ;1M 138.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270729 TO BUS 271385 TO BUS 275351 CKT 1 /*E FRANKFO; R 345.0 - E FRANKFO; R 138.0 - E FRANKFO;3C 34.5 END |
Breaker | AC | 111.94 % | 2297.0 | STE | 2571.36 | 23.41 |
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_116-45-L11614__SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_116-45-L11614__SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270769 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270667 TO BUS 270665 CKT 1 /*BLUE ISL ;RT 345.0 - BLUE ISL ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270667 TO BUS 270927 CKT 1 /*BLUE ISL ;RT 345.0 - WILTON ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270769 TO BUS 270667 CKT 1 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 - BLUE ISL ;RT 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 107.16 % | 2297.0 | STE | 2461.53 | 20.7 |
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_116-45-TR82____SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_116-45-TR82____SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270769 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270769 TO BUS 271565 TO BUS 275324 CKT 1 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 - GOODINGS ; R 138.0 - GOODINGS ;2C 34.5 END |
Breaker | AC | 103.69 % | 2297.0 | STE | 2381.75 | 20.66 |
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
COMED_P4_116-45-L0303___SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P4_116-45-L0303___SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270769 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 REMOVE SWSHUNT FROM BUS 270827 /*NEVADA ; R 345.0 TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 936290 TO BUS 270827 CKT 1 /*AD2-038 TP 345.0 - NEVADA ; R 345.0 END |
Breaker | AC | 102.07 % | 2297.0 | STE | 2344.58 | 20.66 |
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
COMED_P2-2_116_GG-345R__2_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P2-2_116_GG-345R__2_SRT-A' DISCONNECT BUS 270769 /*GOODINGS ;2R 345.0 END |
Bus | AC | 103.69 % | 2297.0 | STE | 2381.82 | 20.66 |
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.
| Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE |
GARDEN PR; R-SILVER LK; R 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
276670 to 270883 ckt 1 |
COMED_P1-2_345-L0626__B-R_SRT-A-2
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P1-2_345-L0626__B-R_SRT-A-2' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 930480 TO BUS 270916 CKT 1 /*AB1-089 TP 345.0 - WAYNE ; B 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 138.08 % | 1479.0 | B | 2042.19 | 26.14 |
| CE |
AF2-041 TP-ELECT JCT; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
957470 to 270730 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 132.62 % | 1334.0 | A | 1769.14 | 45.46 |
| CE |
CHERRY VA; B-GARDEN PR; R 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270694 to 276670 ckt 1 |
COMED_P1-2_345-L0626__B-R_SRT-A-2
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P1-2_345-L0626__B-R_SRT-A-2' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 930480 TO BUS 270916 CKT 1 /*AB1-089 TP 345.0 - WAYNE ; B 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 127.92 % | 1479.0 | B | 1891.97 | 26.14 |
| CE |
GARDEN PR; R-SILVER LK; R 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
276670 to 270883 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 123.41 % | 1201.0 | A | 1482.14 | 18.7 |
| CE |
LEE CO EC;BP-BYRON ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
274768 to 270678 ckt 1 |
COMED_P1-2_345-L15502_B-R_SRT-A-2
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P1-2_345-L15502_B-R_SRT-A-2' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 957470 TO BUS 270730 CKT 1 /*AF2-041 TP 345.0 - ELECT JCT; B 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 120.0 % | 1726.0 | B | 2071.18 | 67.71 |
| CE |
CHERRY VA; B-GARDEN PR; R 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270694 to 276670 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 111.83 % | 1201.0 | A | 1343.13 | 18.7 |
| CE |
NELSON ; B-AF2-041 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270828 to 957470 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 109.8 % | 1334.0 | A | 1464.79 | 45.46 |
| CE |
ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270730 to 270812 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 110.02 % | 1201.0 | A | 1321.35 | 14.77 |
| AEP/AMIL |
J1180 POI-05SULLIVAN 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
956820 to 247712 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 110.12 % | 1334.0 | A | 1468.99 | 17.41 |
| CE/MEC |
QUAD 6-7-SUB 91 3 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270866 to 636610 ckt 1 |
EXT_636600 SUB 39 3 345 636605 MEC CORDOVA3 345 1 _SRT-S
CONTINGENCY 'EXT_636600 SUB 39 3 345 636605 MEC CORDOVA3 345 1 _SRT-S' OPEN BRANCH FROM BUS 636600 TO BUS 636605 CKT 1 /*SUB 39 3 345.0 - MEC CORDOVA3 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 109.0 % | 1471.0 | B | 1603.34 | 75.16 |
| CE |
AB1-089 TP-WAYNE ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
930480 to 270916 ckt 1 |
COMED_P1-2_345-L97104__-R_SRT-A
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P1-2_345-L97104__-R_SRT-A' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 270883 TO BUS 276670 CKT 1 /*SILVER LK; R 345.0 - GARDEN PR; R 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 104.06 % | 2058.0 | B | 2141.62 | 29.38 |
| CE |
AF1-280 TP-LEE CO EC;BP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
946150 to 274768 ckt 1 |
COMED_P1-2_345-L15502_B-R_SRT-A-2
CONTINGENCY 'COMED_P1-2_345-L15502_B-R_SRT-A-2' TRIP BRANCH FROM BUS 957470 TO BUS 270730 CKT 1 /*AF2-041 TP 345.0 - ELECT JCT; B 345.0 END |
OP | AC | 102.52 % | 1479.0 | B | 1516.22 | 68.67 |
The following flowgates were eliminated after considering the topology reinforcements required by the cycle.
| Area | Facility Description | Contingency Name | Contingency Type | DC|AC | Final Cycle Loading | Rating (MVA) | Rating Type | MVA to Mitigate | MW Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE |
GOODINGS ;4B-GOODINGS ;3B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line
270770 to 270766 ckt 1 |
Base Case | OP | AC | 101.29 % | 1754.0 | A | 1776.61 | 18.41 |
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
The Phase III Short circuit analysis was conducted for the following two study scenarios:
- Scenario 1 - TC1 Project Impacts;
- Scenario 2 - TC1 Topology-Changing Upgrade Impacts;
The starting TC1 Phase III short circuit case is an updated Phase II case that accounted for the DPII outcomes (project changes & withdrawals) and other pre-TC1 changes. The starting Phase III case was utilized for the Scenario 1 studies to determine the impact of TC1 projects without modeling any topology-changing upgrades required for TC1. To conduct the Scenario 2 studies, the required topology-changing upgrades from the latest Load Flow & Stability studies were incorporated into the Scenario 1 case and utilized for the Scenario 2 studies to determine the impact of the topology-changing upgrades on the short circuit results from Scenario 1. The result is detailed in the following table:
Short Circuit Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bus Name | Breaker | Interrupting Capability (Amps) | Duty Percent TC1 Phase 3 - Scenario 2 Topology Upgrades (%) | Duty Percent TC1 Phase 3 - Scenario 2 No Topology Upgrades (%) | Duty Percent Difference (%) | Reinforcement | Projected In Service Date (ISD) |
GOODING 345 kV | 270769 | 57267 | 100.77% | 98.71% | 2.06% | s3011 | 12/31/2028 |
Stability Analysis
Analysis Complete - No Issues
Executive Summary
New Service Requests AF1-296, AG1-462 and AG1-553 in PJM Transition Cycle 1, Cluster 17 are listed in Table 1 below. This report will cover the dynamic analysis of Cluster 17 projects.
This analysis is effectively a screening study to determine whether the addition of the Cluster 17 projects will meet the dynamics requirements of the NERC, ComEd 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 17 projects have been dispatched online at maximum power output, with 1.0 pu voltage at the terminal bus, except AF1-296, which was allowed to have a terminal voltage of 1.027 pu.
Cluster 17 projects were tested for compliance with NERC, PJM, Transmission Owner and other applicable criteria. Steady-state condition and 197 contingencies were studied, each with a 20 second simulation time period. Studied faults included:
- Steady-state operation (20 second run);
- Three-phase faults with normal clearing time;
- Three-phase bus faults with normal clearing time;
- Three-phase faults with single-phase delayed clearing due to a stuck breaker (IPO breaker with FD Logic).
- Three-phase faults with three-phase delayed clearing due to a stuck breaker (GO Breakers with A-contact Logic);
- Three-phase faults with single-phase delayed clearing due to a stuck breaker (GO Breakers with FD Logic);
- Three-phase faults with three-phase delayed clearing due to a stuck breaker (GO breakers with FD Logic);
- Single-phase faults with stuck breaker (for MISO substations);
- Three-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;
- 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 (for MISO substations);
- Three-phase faults with loss of multiple-circuit tower line.
No relevant high-speed reclosing (HSR) contingencies were identified for this study.
Buses at which the faults listed above were applied are:
- Cordova E.C. TSS 940 (AG1-553/AG1-462 POI) 345 kV
- Cordova M.E.C. 345 kV
- Nelson TSS 155 (AE1-134/AA2-030/AA1-146 POI) 345 kV
- E. Molin (Barstow SUB. 39 M.E.C.) 345 kV
- Quad Cities STA. 4 345 kV
- Garden Plain TSS 132 (AF1-296 POI) 138 kV
- Nelson TSS 155 138 kV
- AF2-392 TAP 138 kV
- Sterling Steel (ESS H71) 138 kV
- Rock Falls TSS 133 138 kV
- Albany S.S. 138 kV & 161 kV
- Beaver Channel 161 kV
- York 161 kV
- Savanna 161 kV
- Rock Creek 161 kV
- SUB 49 161 kV
For all simulations, the queue 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:
- Cluster 17 projects were able to ride through the faults (except for faults where protective action trips a generator(s)),
- The system with Cluster 17 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).
- No transmission element tripped, other than those either directly connected or designed to trip as a consequence of that fault.
AG1-553, AG1-462 and AF1-296 meet the 0.95 leading and lagging PF requirement.
The composite short-circuit ratio (CSCR) assessment was performed for inverter-based renewable generation units which are within one (1) substation away of Cluster 17. The CSCR results for AF1-296 are summarized in Table 7 through Table 17 and revealed a minimum and maximum CSCR values of 2.64 for P4.84 & P4.86 and 4.45 for P1.64, respectively. The CSCR results for AG1-553 and AG1-462 revealed a minimum and maximum CSCR values of 3.81 for P4.08 & P4.10 and 7.24 for P1.02 & P4.03, respectively.
Specific findings from the simulations for each of the queue projects of Cluster 17 are indicated below.
AG1-553 and AG1-462
The IPCMD and IQCMD states in the REGCA1 models of AG1-553 GEN 1&2 and AG1-462 GEN 1 showed erratic behavior for some contingencies in which AG1-553 or AG1-462 generators have been disconnected as part of the contingency event. Since the machines are disconnected and no active or reactive power is injected into the system, this behavior is likely fictitious and a limitation of the software. This does not cause instability in the system.
High voltage spikes on the terminal voltages of AG1-462 and AG1-553, occurred in the simulations immediately after fault clearing for a few of the contingencies studied (i.e. fault where spike is observed). The voltage spike is a known artifact of the WECC generic renewable models as stated in the WECC Solar Plant Dynamic Model Guidelines: “It should be noted that generic dynamic models for inverter-based generator tend to produce a short-duration (a cycle or shorter) voltage spike at fault inception and clearing. These spikes should be ignored in most cases, as they do not represent the performance of actual hardware. They are simply a consequence of the model’s limited bandwidth, integration time step, and the way current injection models interface with the network solution.”
AF1-296
For 24 contingencies out of 197, the steady state post-contingency terminal voltage of AF1-296 went slightly above 1.05 pu (Et ≈ 1.056 pu – 14 contingencies, Et ≈ 1.051 pu – 10 contingencies). This is due to the fact that the terminal voltage of AF1-296 pre-contingency is 1.027 pu.
High voltage spikes at the terminals of AF1-296 and its POI, Garden Plain 138 kV, occurred in the simulations immediately after fault clearing for some of the contingencies studied (i.e. fault where spike is observed]). As, with the WECC models, these voltage spikes are considered a consequence of the model’s limited bandwidth, integration time step and the way it interfaces with the network solution. Therefore, it is estimated that they do not represent the performance of actual equipment and can be ignored in most cases. The spike at Garden Plain is a consequence of the spike at the terminals of AF1-296.
No mitigations were found to be required. However, it is recommended that the developer of AF1-296 provides an adjusted model that allows specifying the generator’s reactive power output at levels that support initial conditions with a terminal voltage close to 1.0 pu.
Table 1: Cluster 17 Projects
Cluster | Project | Fuel Type | Transmission Owner | MFO | MWE | MWC | Point of Interconnection |
17 | AF1-296 | Wind | ComEd | 190.89 | 190.89 | 33.6 | Garden Plain 138 kV |
AG1-462 | Solar | ComEd | 255 | 255 | 153 | Cordova 345 kV | |
AG1-553 | Solar | ComEd | 260 | 260 | 0 | Cordova 345 kV |
Reactive Power Analysis
The reactive power capability of AG1-553 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 |
| AA1-018 | Powerton-Goodings Grove | In Service |
| AA1-146 | Nelson | In Service |
| AA2-030 | Nelson | In Service |
| AA2-123 | Marengo 34kV | In Service |
| AB1-087 | Sullivan 345kV #1 | Under Construction |
| AB1-088 | Sullivan 345kV #2 | Engineering & Procurement |
| AB1-089 | Byron-Wayne 345kV #1 | Withdrawn |
| AB2-047 | Brokaw-Pontiac Midpoint | In Service |
| AB2-070 | Mt. Pulaski-Brokaw | In Service |
| AC1-033 | Kewanee 138 kV | In Service |
| AC1-053 | Lanesville-Brokaw | Under Construction |
| AC1-168 | Kewanee-Streator | Suspended |
| AC1-214 | Crescent Ridge | In Service |
| AC2-157 | Sullivan 345 kV | Under Construction |
| AD1-013 | Twombly Road 138kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD1-031 | Kewanee - E.D. Edwards 138 kV | Withdrawn |
| AD1-148 | Brokaw-Lanesville | In Service |
| AD2-038 | Powerton-Nevada 345 kV | Under Construction |
| AD2-066 | Mazon-Crescent Ridge 138 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AD2-100 | Kincaid-Pana 345 kV | Suspended |
| AD2-131 | Kincaid-Pana 345kV | Suspended |
| AD2-134 | Shady Oaks | Partially in Service - Under Construction |
| AD2-172 | Lena 138kV | In Service |
| AE1-113 | Mole Creek 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE1-114 | Maryland-Lancaster 138 kV | Active |
| AE1-134 | Nelson 345 kV | In Service |
| AE1-163 | Powerton-Nevada 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE1-172 | Loretto-Wilton Center | Active |
| AE1-205 | McLean 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-035 | Lena 138 kV | In Service |
| AE2-173 | McLean 345 kV | Active |
| AE2-223 | McLean 345 kV | Active |
| AE2-255 | Molecreek 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-261 | Kincaid-Pana 345 kV | Active |
| AE2-281 | Powerton-Nevada 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AE2-321 | Belvidere-Marengo 138 kV | Active |
| AE2-341 | Sandwich-Plano 138 kV | Active |
| AF1-030 | Sandwich-Plano 138 kV | Active |
| AF1-088 | Sullivan 345 kV | Active |
| AF1-090 | Kincaid-Pana | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF1-280 | Nelson-Lee County | Active |
| AF1-296 | Garden Plain 138 kV | Active |
| AF1-331 | Twombley Road | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-032 | Kincaid 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-041 | Nelson-Electric Junction 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-069 | Crescent Ridge 138 kV | Active |
| AF2-142 | Nevada 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-143 | Powerton-Nevada 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-182 | Nelson-Lee County 345 kV II | Active |
| AF2-199 | Nelson-Electric Junction 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-200 | Nelson-Electric Junction 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-225 | McLean 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-226 | Katydid Road 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-252 | Blue Mound 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-305 | Brokaw-Lanesville 345 kV | In Service |
| AF2-317 | Hill Topper 345 kV | In Service |
| AF2-319 | Katydid Road 345 kV | Active |
| AF2-349 | SILVER LAKE- CHERRY VALLEY 345 KV | Active |
| AF2-352 | Blue Mound 345 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-366 | Crego Rd 138 kV | Engineering & Procurement |
| AF2-392 | Nelson-Dixon 138 kV | Active |
| AG1-044 | Whiteside County | In Service |
| AG1-118 | Sugar Grove-Waterman 138kV | Active |
| AG1-127 | Crego Rd 138 kV | Active |
| AG1-236 | Lanesville-Brokaw 345 kV | Active |
| AG1-374 | Blue Mound 345 kV | Active |
| AG1-398 | Brokaw-Lanesville 345 kV | In Service |
| AG1-460 | Kincaid-Pana 345 kV | Active |
| AG1-462 | Cordova 345 kV | Active |
| AG1-513 | Aurora 138 kV | Suspended |
| W2-048 | Brokaw-Lanesville | In Service |
| W4-005 | Blue Mound-Latham | In Service |
| X2-022 | Brokaw-Lanesville | In Service |
| Z1-073 | Mendota Hills | In Service |
| Z1-108 | McHenry 34kV | In Service |
| Z2-087 | Pontiac MidPoint-Brokaw 345kV | 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.
Affected System network upgrade costs are included in the Adverse Study Impact calculation for DP3. See the Adverse Test Eligibility section of this Phase III SIS report.
| Impacted Facility | Transmission Owner | Reinforcement | Cost | Cost Allocated to AG1-553 | Scenarios |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
DEI |
DEI: Rebuild 1 mile of Wvrich - Rochester TP 69 kV
DEI: Rebuild 1 mile of 69kV with 477ACSR/VR2 @ 100/120C the ratings assume that NIPSCO terminal upgrades would not limit our T-Line rating. $1.5M NIPSCO: Rebuild line, NIPSCO owns 0.037 miles of 0.9 mile line. NIPSCO portion included in Argos to Rochester tap mitigation/cost. |
$1,500,000 | $49,943 |
|
|
NIPS |
NIPSCO: Rebuild line (.3miles)Wvrich - Rochester TP 69 kV
DEI: Rebuild 1 mile of 69kV with 477ACSR/VR2 @ 100/120C the ratings assume that NIPSCO terminal upgrades would not limit our T-Line rating. $1.5M NIPSCO: Rebuild line, NIPSCO owns 0.037 miles of 0.9 mile line. NIPSCO portion included in Argos to Rochester tap mitigation/cost. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
NIPS |
Rebuild Argos - Plymouth 69 kV line
Rebuild line, approx 10 miles |
$12,654,948 | $405,888 |
|
|
NIPS |
Rebuild Argos - Rochester TP 69 kV
Rebuild line, approx 3.2 miles |
$4,049,583 | $134,833 |
|
|
DEI |
Install 144 MVAR cap bank at Gallagher sub.
Install 144 MVAR cap bank at Gallagher sub. |
$3,000,000 | $75,209 |
|
|
DEI |
Install 28.8 MVAR cap bank at Shoals sub
Install 28.8 MVAR cap bank at Shoals sub |
$3,000,000 | $82,278 |
|
|
DEI |
Install 28.8 MVAR cap bank at Avon East sub
Install 28.8 MVAR cap bank at Avon East sub |
$3,000,000 | $67,925 |
|
|
NIPS |
LRTP-16: Morrison Ditch – Reynolds – Burr Oak
Install single circuit 345kV transmission line from the existing Morrison Ditch Substation, to the existing Reynolds Substation, to the existing Burr Oak Substation, to the existing Leesburg Substation, to the existing Hiple Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
ITCT |
LRTP-33: Greentown - Sorenson - Lulu
Install single circuit 765kV transmission line from the existing Greentown Substation to the existing Sorenson Substation, to the existing Lulu Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
DEI |
LRTP-35: Southwest Indiana-Kentucky
Install double circuit 345kV transmission line from the existing Petersburg Substation to the new Pike County Substation. Install single circuit 345kV transmission line from the new Pike County Substation to the existing Duff Substation, to the existing Culley Substation, to the existing Reid EHV Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
DEI |
LRTP-36: Southeast Indiana
Install single circuit 345kV transmission line from the new Madison County Substation to the existing Greensboro Substation. Install single circuit 138kV transmission line from the existing Decatur County Substation to the existing Greensburg Substation. Install double circuit 138kV transmission line from the existing Batesville Substation to the existing Hubbell Substation, to the existing Greendale Substation, to the existing Miami Fort Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
AMIL |
LRTP-37: Maywood - Belleau - MRPD - Sioux - Bugle
Install single circuit 345kV transmission line from the existing Maywood Substation to the existing Belleau Substation, to the new MRPD Substation, to the existing Sioux Substation, from the new MRPD Substation to the existing Bugle Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
|
NIPS |
LRTP-42: Burr Oak - Schahfer
Install single circuit 345kV transmission line from the existing Burr Oak Substation to the existing Schahfer Substation. |
$0 | $0 |
|
System Reinforcements
Based on the Phase III analysis results, this project is contingent on and may have cost responsibility for the following System Reinforcements:
PJM evaluated the impact of topology changing reinforcements to mitigate the impacts driven by New Service Requests. PJM determined which reinforcements were eliminated as a result of modeling the topology changing reinforcements. PJM then grouped the topology changing and eliminated reinforcements by region and computed a discount factor to apply to reinforcements to reduce the cost of all these reinforcements down to the cost of contstructing only the topology changing reinforcements. For additional details, please click the icon below
Shown below are the details of the cost allocated, contingent, eliminated, topology and potential aggregate contributor reinforcements for this project. Please refer to the System Reinforcement table above and the information below for more detail.
System Reinforcement: n6639.2
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n6639.2 / CE_NUN_L15502_4
- Title
- Reconductor the Electric Junction 345 kV line 93407, perform sag mitigation on 345 kV line 93407, upgrade one 345 kV circuit breaker and associated motor operated disconnect switches.
- Description
- • Reconductor 27.2 Miles of 345kV transmission line 93407 from structure 339 to structure 454 • Perform sag mitigation on 13.5 miles of 345kV transmission line 93407 from structure 454 to TSS 111 Electric Junction • Upgrade the existing substation TSS 111 Electric Junction by replacing L.93407 CB motor-operated disconnect switches on both sides of the breaker.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $146,197,759
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $146,197,759
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $12,196,415
- Time Estimate
- 42 Months
Contributor
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| ELECT JCT; B-AF2-041 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| AF2-041 TAP-AG1-434 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| NELSON ; B-AF2-041 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| ELECT JCT; B-AF2-041 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| AF2-041 TP-AG1-434 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AE1-114 | 22.0 MW | 3.0% | $4,333,722 |
|
AF1-280
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
67.2 MW | 9.1% | $13,240,386 |
| AF1-296 | 44.0 MW | 5.9% | $8,676,903 |
|
AF2-041
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
159.4 MW | 21.5% | $31,417,862 |
|
AF2-182
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
100.8 MW | 13.6% | $19,860,480 |
|
AF2-199
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
53.1 MW | 7.2% | $10,472,621 |
|
AF2-200
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
118.1 MW | 15.9% | $23,272,600 |
| AF2-392 | 54.6 MW | 7.4% | $10,764,846 |
|
AG1-462
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
60.7 MW | 8.2% | $11,961,925 |
|
AG1-553
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
61.9 MW | 8.3% | $12,196,415 |
System Reinforcement: n7023.1
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n7023.1 / CE_NUN_L11124.1
- Title
- Reconductor the Electric Junction - Lombard line L11124 345 kV Line and perform associated station relay and protection upgrades.
- Description
- • Upgrade 13.5 Miles of 345kV transmission line 11124 from TSS 111 Electric Junction to TSS 120 Lombard • Upgrade relay & protection at 345kV substation TSS 111 Electric Junction & TSS 120 Lombard to support upgrade of 345kV transmission line, L1124
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $38,797,273
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $38,797,273
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $2,460,556
- Time Estimate
- 36 Months
Contributor
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| ELECT JCT; B-LOMBARD ; B 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AE1-114 | 18.5 MW | 3.5% | $1,347,650 |
|
AE2-341
⧉
Sandwich - Plano 138kV - ComEd: 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:
AE2-341, AF1-030, AF2-329 |
14.9 MW | 2.8% | $1,081,553 |
|
AF1-030
⧉
Sandwich - Plano 138kV - ComEd: 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:
AE2-341, AF1-030, AF2-329 |
9.9 MW | 1.9% | $721,036 |
|
AF1-280
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
31.2 MW | 5.8% | $2,268,876 |
| AF1-296 | 24.8 MW | 4.6% | $1,800,625 |
|
AF2-041
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
98.8 MW | 18.5% | $7,185,987 |
|
AF2-182
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
46.8 MW | 8.8% | $3,403,314 |
|
AF2-199
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
32.9 MW | 6.2% | $2,395,305 |
|
AF2-200
⧉
Nelson-Electric Junction 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF2-041, AF2-199, AF2-200, AG2-660, AH1-044, AH1-150, AH1-151 |
73.2 MW | 13.7% | $5,322,948 |
| AF2-349 | 18.1 MW | 3.4% | $1,319,935 |
| AF2-392 | 32.0 MW | 6.0% | $2,326,344 |
| AG1-118 | 49.0 MW | 9.2% | $3,565,896 |
| AG1-127 | 16.3 MW | 3.1% | $1,184,049 |
|
AG1-462
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
33.2 MW | 6.2% | $2,413,200 |
|
AG1-553
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
33.8 MW | 6.3% | $2,460,556 |
System Reinforcement: n9165.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9165.0 / CE_NUN_L15502.1
- Title
- Perform TSS 155 Nelson Substation conductor upgrades.
- Description
- • Update relay settings at 345kV substation TSS 155 Nelson to support upgrade of 345kV L.15502. • Replace the cables between the 345kV BT2-3 circuit breaker and the adjacent 345kV MODs on Bus 2 and Bus 3 with cables that have a minimum rating of 1966 MVA SSTE. • Upgrade TSS 155 Nelson by upgrading existing 345kV L.15502 disconnect switch and 345kV Bus 4 disconnect switches.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $1,220,445
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $1,220,445
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $183,687
- Time Estimate
- 36 Months
Contributor
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| NELSON ; B-AG1-434 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| NELSON ; B-AF2-041 TP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
| Project | MW Impact | Percent Allocation | Allocated Cost ($USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AE1-114 | 22.0 MW | 5.3% | $65,269 |
|
AF1-280
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
67.2 MW | 16.3% | $199,410 |
| AF1-296 | 44.0 MW | 10.7% | $130,681 |
|
AF2-182
⧉
Nelson - Lee County 345kV - ComEd: 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:
AF1-280, AF2-182 |
100.8 MW | 24.5% | $299,114 |
| AF2-392 | 54.6 MW | 13.3% | $162,127 |
|
AG1-462
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
60.7 MW | 14.8% | $180,156 |
|
AG1-553
⧉
Cordova 345 kV (ComEd): 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:
AG1-462, AG1-553, AG2-675 |
61.9 MW | 15.1% | $183,687 |
System Reinforcement
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- AEP
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- (Pending)
- Title
- *Ameren Limit* AEP Ratings: 1443/1635 MVA SN/SE. (AMEREN: 1681/1793 MVA SN/SE)
- Description
- AEP Ratings: 1443/1635 MVA SN/SE. (AMEREN: 1681/1793 MVA SN/SE)
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 0 to 1 Months
Note: This reinforcement is fictitious and will not be cost allocated to projects. It is listed for information purposes only.
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J2170 POI 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 POI 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement: n7925.1
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- AEP
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n7925.1 / AEPI0010a
- Title
- Reconductor ~0.41 miles of the Sullivan – West Casey (Ameren) line
- Description
- •Remove ~0.41 miles of 1024.5 ACAR 30/7 conductor on the Sullivan – West Casey (Ameren) 345 kV line. •Rebuild line with ACSS Cardinal 974 KCM (54/7) •Evaluate line settings
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $1,216,000
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $1,216,000
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 11 Months
Contingent Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-553 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) AG1-553 could receive cost allocation. Although AG1-553 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-553 may need this upgrade in-service to be deliverable to the PJM system. If AG1-553 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.
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 TAP 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J2170 POI 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) | |
| 05SULLIVAN-J1180 POI 345.0 kV Ckt 1 line | (Any) |
System Reinforcement: s3011
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- s3011 / CE_S3011
- Title
- Replace 345kV straight bus at TSS 116 Goodings Grove with a gas insulated switchgear ("GIS") breaker and a half configuration.
- Description
- Replace 345 kV open air straight bus with GIS in a breaker and half configuration (34 Circuit Breakers) at Goodings Grove with 80kA capability.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Dec 31 2028
ContingentTopology Changing Note 1: Although AG1-553 may not presently have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-553 may need this upgrade in-service to be deliverable to the PJM system. If AG1-553 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. 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 | |
|---|---|---|
| (Any) | COMED_P4_116-45-TR82____SRT-A | |
| (Any) | COMED_P4_116-45-L11614__SRT-A | |
| (Any) | COMED_P4-6_116-345-R______SRT-A | |
| (Any) | COMED_P2-2_116_GG-345R__2_SRT-A | |
| (Any) | COMED_P4_116-45-L0303___SRT-A |
System Reinforcement: s3011
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- s3011 / CE_S3011
- Title
- Replace 345kV straight bus at TSS 116 Goodings Grove with a gas insulated switchgear ("GIS") breaker and a half configuration.
- Description
- Replace 345 kV open air straight bus with GIS in a breaker and half configuration (34 Circuit Breakers) at Goodings Grove with 80kA capability.
- Cost Information
- Time Estimate
- Dec 31 2028
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: n5808
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- AEP
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n5808 / N5808
- Title
- CON Upgrade_AEP: eliminate the Eugene stuck breaker contingency. (AMIL upgrade will not be required)
- Description
- • AEP will install two (2) new 345 kV circuit breakers into the "A1" and "B1" breaker positions at the Eugene 345 kV Station. • AEP will relocate the Bunsonville 345 kV line connection from bus #2 to bus #1. The metering associated with this line connection will also be replaced and relocated accordingly.
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $3,424,014
- Discounted Total Cost ($USD)
- $3,424,014
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- May 15 2026
Contingent Note: Based on PJM cost allocation criteria, AG1-553 does not receive cost allocation towards this upgrade which has been securitized by a prior Queue/Cycle.. Although AG1-553 may not have cost responsibility for this upgrade, AG1-553 may need this upgrade in-service to be deliverable to the PJM system. If AG1-553 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.
| Facility | Contingency | |
|---|---|---|
| (Any) | AEP_P4_#3130_05EUGENE 345_B2 | |
| (Any) | AEP_P4_#3128_05EUGENE 345_A2 | |
| (Any) | AEP_P4_#3128_05EUGENE 345_A2_SRT-A |
System Reinforcement: b3811.1
AG1-553 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: b3811.1
System Reinforcement: b3775.1
AG1-553 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: b3775.1
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- b3775.1
- Title
- Swap the NIPSCO Green Acre Tap towers from the St. John-Green Acres-Olive 345 kV line
- Description
- Outside of the Green Acres substation, swap the NIPSCO Green Acre Tap towers from the St. John-Green Acres-Olive 345 kV line to the University Park N-Olive 345 kV line to create a University Park N-Green Acres-Olive and St. John-Olive 345 kV lines.
- Cost Information
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: n9243.0
AG1-553 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: n9243.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- AEP
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9243.0 / AEPSERG13
- Title
- Expand Jefferson 345 kV station. Install a second 765/345 kV 750 MVA transformer. Install a second Jefferson - Clifty Creek 345 kV single circuit ~0.8 miles.
- Description
- At the Jefferson Station: • Expand the northeast corner of the station • Remove Circuit breaker C1 • Install one (1) new 765/345 kV transformer and associated equipment • Install one (1) new 765 kV circuit breaker with associated control relaying and breaker disconnect switches • Install one (1) new 345 kV circuit breaker with associated control relaying and breaker disconnect switches • Install a new station service center At the Clifty Creek Station: • Extend 345 kV bus 1 and 2 to make room for a new breaker string • Move a section of the 138 kV bus underground to make room for the new breaker string • Relocate circuit breaker S to the new string • Install two (2) new 345 kV circuit breakers on the new string •Remove the existing Jefferson – Clifty Creek 345 kV line •Construct a new Jefferson – Clifty Creek 345 kV double circuit line •Evaluate line settings for all appropriate lines •Install direct fiber relaying between the Jefferson and Clifty Creek station •Associated conductors (buswork, ground grid, jumpers), telecom terminal equipment, insulators, arresters, foundations, and structures
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $200,238,000
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 55 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
System Reinforcement: n9195.0
AG1-553 did not load into this reinforcement directly however this project contributed to an topology or eliminated upgrade and therefore this project is responsible for relevant regional upgrades.
System Reinforcement: n9195.0
- Type
- Load Flow
- TO
- ComEd
- RTEP ID / TO ID
- n9195.0 / CE_NUN_STA12_345 NEW CB
- Title
- Install a new 345 kV circuit breaker at Station 12 Dresden.
- Description
- • Upgrade the existing substation STA 12 Dresden by adding 345kV BT 14-15 circuit breaker and associated disconnect switches. • Upgrade relay & protection at 345kV substation STA 12 Dresden to support installation of 345kV BT 14-15
- Total Cost ($USD)
- $3,357,627
- Allocated Cost ($USD)
- $0
- Time Estimate
- 45 Months
- Cost Alloc Type
- Contingent
Attachments
AG1-553 One Line Diagram
[1]Winter load flow analysis will be performed starting in Transition Cycle 2.