Generation

Interconnection Queue
Process

Technical Update

Project Manager
M. Bello

Product ID: 3002020483

September 2021

11884796

www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liabilities
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY
MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS
DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY
OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
REFERENCE HEREIN TO ANY SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL PRODUCT, PROCESS, OR SERVICE BY ITS TRADE NAME, TRADEMARK, MANUFACTURER, OR OTHERWISE, DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE OR IMPLY ITS
ENDORSEMENT, RECOMMENDATION, OR FAVORING BY EPRI.
THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE (EPRI) PREPARED THIS REPORT.

This is an EPRI Technical Update report. A Technical Update report is intended as an informal report of continuing research, a meeting, or a topical study. It is not a final EPRI technical report.

NOTE
For further information about EPRI, call the EPRI Customer Assistance Center at 800.313.3774 or e-mail [email protected].
© 2021 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. in the U.S. and worldwide.

11884796

2 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Acknowledgments
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) prepared this report.
Principal Investigators
Mobolaji Bello
Sujit Tripathy
Aidan Tuohy
Anish Gaikwad

This report describes research sponsored by EPRI.

This publication is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Generation Interconnection Queue Process. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2021. 3002020483
11884796

3 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Deliverable Summary
Various interconnection entities (such as variable generation), depending on the size and location, must apply for grid access for
transmission interconnection. Interest in generation interconnection (GI) keeps growing resulting in a backup of requests in the
study phase. On average, these interconnection requests take several months or years before projects are closed out.

There are also challenges with the queue process since if a developer or set of projects withdraws after signing the
interconnection agreement, the projects below them on the queue are trapped with the transmission network upgrades.
Further, project withdrawals result in re-studies, and in some cases, the anticipated network upgrades may not be built. Hence,
there is a substantial accumulation in GI queue across network service providers/grid operators causing deferrals in approval
and construction of new projects. This is an industry wide issue that needs to be addressed.
The main objective of this project was to conduct a detailed literature review to better understand the factors and causes
complicating the generation interconnection process. With those causes identified; the goal is to use this deliverable to
highlight possible solutions. This work also identifies constraints and highlights current EPRI efforts to address these needs.
It should be noted that this deliverable does not address policy, regulatory, tariff or market issues. The review highlighted in this
document is also limited to variable generation, with generation sizes of 20 MW plant sizes and above which are connected to
the bulk system.

11884796

4 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 List of acronyms
 AEMC: Australian Energy Market Commission
 ISO: Independent System Operator
 AEMO: Australian Energy Market Operator
 ISO NE- Independent System Operator New England
 AESO: Alberta Electric System Operator
 LBNL: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
 AUC: Alberta Utilities Commission
 LCRI: Location Constrained Resource Interconnection Facility
 CA: Connection Applicant
 LFIP: Large facility interconnection procedures
 CAISO: California Independent System Operator
 MISO: Midcontinental Independent System Operator
 CE: Connection Enquiry
 MVP: Multi-value projects
 CNRIS: Capacity Network Resource Interconnection Service
 NERSA: National Energy Regulator
 CREZ: Competitive Renewable Energy Zones
 NID: Needs Identification Document
 CRIS: Capacity Resource Interconnection Service
 NRIS: Network Resource Interconnection Service
 DISIS: Definitive Interconnection System Impact Study
 NWA: Non wires alternative
 DPP: Definitive Planning Phase
 NYISO: New York Independent System Operator
 EMT: Electromagnetic Transients
 OFES: Optional Feasibility Study
 ENTSOE: European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity
 OIS: Optional Interconnection Study
 ERCOT: Electric Reliability Council of Texas
 PJM: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Maryland
 ERIS: Energy Resource Interconnection Service
 RETI: Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative
 FERC: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 RTO: Regional Transmission Operator
 FIS: Full Interconnection Study
 SIS: System Impact Study
 GET: grid enhancing technology
 SPP: Southwest Power Pool
 GIA: Generator Interconnection Agreement
 SRIS: System Reliability Impact Study
 GI: Generation interconnection
 SS: Security Screening
 GSAT: Grid Strength Assessment Tool
 SSR: Sub Synchronous Resonance
 HECO: Hawaiian Electric Company
 THCT: transmission hosting capacity tool
 IC: Interconnection Customer
 TO: Transmission Operator
 IE: Interconnection Entity
11884796  TSP: Transmission Service Provider
 IP: Interconnection Practices
5 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Contents Slide
Number

 Introduction 7

 Current Interconnection Practices (IP) 10

 Comparative analysis of IP 14

 Suggested technical solutions 33

 EPRI efforts to alleviate the problems 38

Source: https://www.nrdc.org/stories/renewable-energy-clean-facts

 Conclusion 41

11884796

6 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Introduction

11884796

7 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Introduction
 Over the past few years, the challenges relating to generation interconnection queues keep growing.
There have been many interconnection requests to connect variable generation resources to the
transmission system. Most interconnecting entities, such as utilities, network service providers,
transmission service providers, regional transmission operators (RTOs) and independent System
Operators (ISOs) are having significant backlogs in clearing interconnection queues within their areas and
regions.
 Within the interconnecting entities, several system studies need to be conducted to confirm feasibility
and viability of grid access, while maintaining system reliability and system security. These system studies
and analysis take a considerable period of time. In addition, there are other associated factors, such as
land acquisition, commercial, and legal issues which serve as hold points, causing interconnection delays
in the approval and construction of new projects.
 This deliverable summarizes the state of art of interconnection processes across the United States and
other parts of the world to address the questions - How different planning entities across the world are
managing the interconnection queue process and how are they dealing with the bottlenecks? What are
the research challenges and how can EPRI assist?
 The goal of this work is to provide a succinct summary of interconnection queue process, highlight the
problems and challenges relating to queue delays and identify any foreseeable research application and
needs that EPRI can provide in ensuring that long term solutions can be achieved.
 This deliverable does not address regulatory, policy, tariff or market issues relating to the interconnection
process and variable generation sizes of 20 MW and above, connected to the bulk system are considered.
11884796

8 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Regions reviewed
North America Europe Others
 Independent System  Germany  Australia
Operators (ISOs)  Denmark  South Africa
 Other interconnecting  The Netherlands
entities such as utilities,
 United Kingdom
network service
providers, transmission  Ireland
service providers, and
regional transmission
operators (RTOs)

11884796

9 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Current interconnection practices

11884796

10 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Common current practices
 North American (USA & Canada) Utilities, RTOs and ISOs – Duke Energy, Southern Company,
Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO), SPP, NYISO, ISO-NE, PJM, CAISO, MISO, ERCOT, AESO.
– Mostly subjected to FERC rules and process (Large facility interconnection procedures -LFIP).
– Also adhere to their local transmission planning criteria.

 European/ ENTSO-E – Germany, Denmark, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Ireland.

– Mostly subjected to individual country legislation.
– Have a firm target for interconnecting renewables in generation mix.
– Uses scenario-based planning to develop 10-year network development plans; evaluating options using key metrics such
as unserved energy (load), curtailed energy, CO2 emissions, cost differentials between regions (average hourly cost and
marginal cost yearly average), and cross-border and country-internal bottlenecks.

Sources:
• Large facility interconnection procedures https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/LGIP-procedures.pdf (February 2, 2021)
• Generation, Storage, and Hybrid Capacity in Interconnection Queues, LBNL report, May 2021 https://emp.lbl.gov/generation-storage-and-hybrid-capacity (June 1, 2021)
• Interconnection Plugging RE-Powering Sites into the electric grid, EPA report, Oct 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
10/documents/interconnection_plugging_re_powering_sites_into_the_electric_grid_oct2019_508.pdf (March 11, 2021)
• Report by Scott madden management consultants, titled “Informing the Transmission Discussion”, January 2020.
11884796
https://www.scottmadden.com/content/uploads/2020/01/ScottMadden_WIRES_Informing-the-Transmission-Discussion_4-Interregional-Considerations_2020_0115.pdf (March 16, 2021)

11 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Common current practices
 Others
– Australia: Subjected to Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC),
Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) and Australian Energy
regulator rules.

– Eskom (South Africa): Grid access adheres to government legislation that

is either regulated (competitive bids) and unregulated programs
(wheeling of energy) and the requirements of the grid codes is developed
by the National Energy Regulator (NERSA).

Sources:
• Generator connections to the Western Victoria Transmission Network Questions and Answers, October 2019 https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/new-
generator-connections-nw-vic-q-and-a-oct-2019.pdf (March 3, 2021)
• Australian Energy Market Commission – Supply chain model of electricity. https://www.aemc.gov.au/energy-system/electricity (May 12, 2021)
• Eskom Grid Access Unit, available at https://www.eskom.co.za/Whatweredoing/GAU/Pages/Process.aspx (April 14,2021)
11884796

12 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Typical interconnection process (simplified)

Initial
screens/ Advanced Detailed
Application Approval
studies design
feasibility

Interconnection
Grid operator/Owner/
Customer/entity
Network service provider

• This process may be slightly different for various interconnection entities

• There are several hold points in each phase between the interconnecting customer
and interconnecting entities i.e., network service provider or grid operator/owner

Source:
• On the path to SunShot – interconnection process https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/downloads/path-sunshot-interconnection-process (March 15, 2021)
11884796

13 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparative analysis of Interconnection Practices

11884796

14 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 System studies in various phases
 Initial phase (feasibility/screening):
Localized
– Load flow analysis
– Short circuit studies
Clustered

 Advanced phase (impact studies) Localized

– Reliability
Clustered
– Stability
– Sub Synchronous Resonance (SSR) Across
– Harmonic analysis and others boundaries/regions

 Facilities studies (impact studies at developers' location)

– Done by interconnecting entities in some cases
– Mostly applicable to North America
11884796

15 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 System studies in various phases
 Localized studies are limited to the individual plants
seeking interconnection
 Clustered studies consider all the interconnection Feasibility
applications grouped together in one study studies

 These interconnection system studies vary for different Special

interconnecting entities. studies
 Sub-synchronous resonance studies is only conducted Grid impact
studies
by some interconnecting entities.
Facilities
studies

11884796

16 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison Summary – Large Gen Interconnection (US)
Interconnecting Entity NYISO ISO-NE CAISO ERCOT PJM MISO SPP

Applicable Generator Capacity > 20 MW > 20 MW > 20 MW > 10 MW > 20 MW > 20 MW* > 20 MW*

SS or SS and FIS
Generator Interconnection Application Energy or Option A or B Energy Resource or Capacity
ERIS or CRIS NRIS or CNRIS study (No ERIS or NRIS ERIS or NRIS
Type capacity deliverability Resource
Capacity Market)
Optional Interconnection Study ->
DPP Phase I Preliminary System
Optional Feasibility Study Feasibility Study -> Phase-1 DISIS Phase I Study ->
Feasibility Study -> System Impact Study -> DPP Phase II
-> System Reliability System Impact Study -> Interconnection Study - DISIS Phase II Study ->
Study Sequence SS -> FIS Impact Study -> Facilities Revised System Impact Study ->
Impact Study -> Facilities Interconnection > Phase-2 Interconnection Facilities
Study DPP Phase III Final System Impact
Study Facilities Study Interconnection Study Study
Study including Interconnection
Facilities Study
Feasibility study for
SRIS study for a facility -> SS for each facility individual facility -> SIS study
Class year study Separate study mode Separate study mode -> FIS separately for an individual Separate study mode
Separate study mode available:
Study Mode Available (equivalent to cluster available: available: unless otherwise project/group of projects -> available: Cluster / Stand
Cluster / Individual
study) for a group of Cluster/Independent Cluster/Independent agreed by the IE Facilities study for an Alone
Interconnection projects and TSPs individual project/group of
Study projects

Entity Determining
ISO ISO ISO IE and TSPs ISO TSP TSP
Study Mode

Assessment of
Energy/Capacity Separate Separate Together N/A Together Together Together
(Together or Separate)

Biannual (SIS and Facilities

Cluster Cycle Annual (class year study) N/A Annual N/A Annual Annual
studies twice a year)

11884796
*allows all sizes, but <5 MW are fast tracked
17 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (US)
Interconnecting Entity NYISO ISO-NE CAISO ERCOT PJM MISO SPP

Feasibility study (90

calendar days – Cluster:
schedule 22, 45 Phase – 1
calendar days – ISO-NE Interconnection Study
OFES (45 to 90 calendar OIS
website) (170 calendar days) Normal:
days) Scope: sensitivity analysis,
Study scope: limited Study scope: short Security Screening Study
OFES scope: preliminary identify interconnection
power flow, thermal circuit analysis, (10 to 90 calendar days)
study of project by facilities, network upgrades
analysis, voltage stability analysis, Study scope: high level DISIS Phase I Study (90
conducting steady-state Feasibility Study (90 etc.
analysis and short- power flow analysis, review of project by power calendar days)
analysis calendar days)
circuit analysis on-peak deliverability flow and transfer studies Scope: steady-state thermal
Study scope: short- DPP Phase I Preliminary
assessment, and off- and voltage analysis
SRIS (90 calendar days) circuit studies and System Impact Study (140
System Impact Study peak deliverability Full Interconnection Study
SRIS scope: short-circuit load flow analysis calendar days)
(270 calendar days – assessment (10 months) DISIS Phase II Study (120
analysis, local steady Scope: power flow analysis,
schedule 22, 90 Study scope: steady-state calendar days)
state analysis (more System Impact voltage stability analysis
calendar days – ISO-NE Phase – 2 and transfer analysis (3 Scope: steady-state thermal
Scope and extensive than the OFES), Study (120 calendar
Interconnection website) Interconnection Study months), protection and voltage analysis,
Target and local stability days) DPP Phase II Revised System
Study Study scope: short (205 calendar days) analysis (1 month), dynamic and transient
Timeline analysis (not included in Study scope: AC Impact Study (80 calendar
circuit analysis, Study scope: identify dynamic and transient stability analysis, short-
the OFES) power flow analysis, days)
stability analysis, network upgrades and stability analysis (3 circuit analysis
short circuit analysis Scope: power flow analysis,
power flow analysis, their cost months), facility study (3
Class year voltage stability analysis,
electromagnetic months), SSR study Interconnection Facilities
Interconnection Facilities Facilities Study (180
transient analysis, Independent: conducted parallelly with Study (135 calendar days)
Study (12 months) calendar days) DPP Phase III Final System
thermal analysis, System Impact and FIS (6 months) Scope: obtain cost
Study scope: detailed Study scope: Impact Study (135 calendar
voltage analysis and Facilities Study (120 estimates (+/- 20%) of
system study (with group stability analysis days)
system protection calendar days) Fast: network upgrades
of projects) to identify Scope: final system impact
analysis etc. Study scope: short SS and FIS studies
cost of network upgrades study, interconnection
circuit analysis, conducted simultaneously
facilities study to identify
Facilities Study (90 to stability analysis, takes 10 months
cost of network upgrades
180 calendar days) power flow analysis
Study scope: identify etc., identify network
network upgrades and upgrades and cost
11884796 their cost

18 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (US)
Interconnecting Entity NYISO ISO-NE CAISO ERCOT PJM MISO SPP

Cluster: Open Season (12 months)

Initial application and Cluster window: 11 months
Initial steps including scoping scoping meeting (3 months) Interconnection request DISIS review: 1 month
meeting (~45 calendar days) window (6 months) Screening of
Phase-1 study (6 months) interconnection DISIS Phase I Study (90 calendar
Initial processing of
Feasibility study (90 calendar Scoping meeting and model request including days)
interconnection request
days) Phase-1 results meeting build (1 month) scoping call (90
including scoping
and posting (4 months) calendar days) DISIS Decision Point One (15
meeting (~45 calendar
SIS (270 calendar days) Feasibility study (3 months) business days)
days)
Phase-2 study (7 months) DPP Phase I Study (140
Re-study of SIS (0 to 60 calendar System impact study calendar days) DISIS Phase II Study (120 calendar
OFES and SRIS (135 to
days) Phase-2 results meeting agreement and model build (3 days)
180 calendar days) Normal:
and posting (6 months) months) DPP Phase II Study (80
Total time (24
Facilities study (90 to 180 calendar days) DISIS Decision Point Two (15
Class year facilities study to 30 months)
calendar days) Interconnection agreement System impact study (4 business days)
Interconnection Target (12 months)
(2 months) months) DPP Phase III including
Process Timeline Fast:
Re-study of facilities study (0 to facilities study (135 Facilities Study (135 calendar
Operating committee Total time (20
60 calendar days) Total time (28 months) Facilities study agreement (1 calendar days) days)
approval of facilities months)
month)
study (2 months)
Study approval and Independent track: Process for GIA Facilities Study Decision Point (15
interconnection agreement (2 Initial application and Facilities study (6 months) including facilities business days)
Interconnection
months) scoping meeting (2 months) study review, tender
agreement (2 months)
Results meeting and draft GIA, IC and TO IC and Final TO comments on
Total time (19 months to 26 SIS study (4 months) interconnection agreement (2 execute GIA (150 facilities study report ( 30 calendar
Total time (22 months to
months) months) calendar days) days + 15 business days)
24 months)
Results meeting and
*Timeline for clustering study posting of results (2 Total time (~26 months) Total time (~ 595 GIA Negotiations (60 calendar
was vague (not sure about the months) calendar days) days)
entire duration)
Total time (8 months) Total time from DISIS review
(~ 550 calendar days)
11884796

19 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (US)
Large Gen Interconnection Summary Duke - Carolinas* Southern Company Large Gen Interconnection Summary Duke – Carolinas Southern Company

Applicable Generator Capacity 20 MW# 20 MW

Generator Interconnection Application Feasibility Study (45 calendar days)

NRIS ERIS or NRIS
Type Scope: preliminarily evaluate
feasibility of the proposed
Feasibility Study -> System interconnection, includes power
System Impact Study ->
Study Sequence Impact Study -> Optional flow, and short circuit analysis
Facilities Study
Study -> Facilities Study
System Impact Study (timeline
System Impact Study (90 calendar
Study Mode Available Individual Individual, Cluster set in study agreement)
days)
Scope: evaluate the impact of the
Scope: evaluate the impact of the
proposed interconnection on the
proposed interconnection on
Entity Determining Study reliability of the electric system
Interconnection Interconnecting Utility Transmission Operator Scope and system reliability, includes reactive
Mode Interconnection
Study Target power analysis, regional transfer
Study Facilities Study
Timeline capability, stability analysis, etc.
(timeline set in study agreement)
Assessment of Scope: identify cost of
Optional Study (timeline set in the
Energy/Capacity N/A Together interconnection
study agreement)
(Together or Separate) facilities/upgrades
Scope: sensitivity analysis based on
assumptions specified by IC
Cluster Cycle N/A N/A
Facilities Study (90 to 180 calendar
days)
Scope: identify cost of
* Applies to IC not selling the output from its gen facility to an entity interconnection facilities/upgrades
other than the interconnecting utility

# allows all sizes, but ≤ 2 MW are fast tracked

11884796

20 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (US)
Large Gen Interconnection Summary Duke – Carolinas Southern Company

Initial processing of interconnection application including scoping meeting

(~50 calendar days)

Feasibility Study Agreement (30 calendar days)

Initial processing of interconnection application including scoping meeting (~40 business
Feasibility Study (45 calendar days)
days)
System Impact Study Agreement (30 calendar days)
System Impact Study (timeline set in study agreement)
Interconnection Target Timeline
System Impact Study (90 calendar days)
Process Facilities Study
(timeline set in study agreement)
Optional Study (timeline set in the study agreement)
Construction planning meeting, execution of interconnection agreement, payment for
Facilities Study Agreement (30 calendar days)
facilities/upgrades (~60 business days)
Facilities Study (90 to 180 calendar days)

Interconnection Agreement Negotiation and Execution (90 calendar days)

11884796

21 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (others)

Interconnecting Entity AESO AEMO ESKOM

Applicable Generator Capacity N/A N/A > 20 MW (>33kV connected, location voltage dependent)

Yes. Selling power to Eskom is dependent on

Generator Interconnection Application
N/A N/A government bid program (informed by the IRP) and self
Type
consumption through wheeling.

Pre-Project Study -> Post-Project Preliminary Impact Assessment -> Full Phase I Study
Study Sequence
Study Impact Assessment Phase II Study

Indicative cost estimate study -> Detailed System Impact

Study Mode Available N/A N/A
Study

Entity Determining Study Mode NSP NSP NSP

Interconnection Study

Assessment of Energy/Capacity
N/A N/A N/A
(Together or Separate)

Cluster Cycle N/A N/A N/A

11884796

22 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Comparison Summary – Generation Interconnection (others)
Interconnecting Entity AESO AEMO ESKOM
Pre-Project Study
Pre-project – Power flow analysis,
Scope: power-flow analysis, voltage-
Preliminary Impact Assessment short circuit analysis, voltage
stability analysis, short-circuit analysis
Scope: steady-state analysis, fault level stability analysis
analysis
Post-Project Study
Interconnection Study Scope and Target Timeline Post-Project Study
Scope: power-flow analysis, voltage-
Full Impact Assessment Scope: power-flow analysis, voltage-
stability analysis, short-circuit analysis,
Scope: transient stability analysis, EMT stability analysis, short-circuit
transient stability analysis
modeling and analysis analysis,
transient stability analysis
Time required for both studies (14 weeks)

Application – submission of system access

service request (2 weeks)
Pre-feasibility - development of CE by CA Stage 1 (Indicative Cost Estimate)-
Scope – development of project plan, scope (as required) scope definition and connection
(8 weeks) assessment
Enquiry – review of CE, preliminary impact (120 days)
Assessment – engineering studies, cost assessment ( ~ 6 months)
estimate (14 weeks) Stage 2 (Budget Quotation)– Detailed
Interconnection Process Target Timeline
Application – final, impact assessment, design study. Includes facility design
Regulatory Preparation - prepare NID agree on performance standards of (80 days or negotiated).
Application, facility application (32 weeks) generating units for construction (2 to 10 Stage 1 and 2 may have varying
months) validity periods
AUC Application – NID, facility application
filing and approval (24 weeks) Total time from Enquiry (~ 8 to 16 months) Total time (depends)

Total time (~ 80 weeks)

11884796
Timelines is based on target duration, actual time may vary
23 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Comparison references
 NYISO, Transmission Expansion and Interconnection Manual (Issued: December 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
(https://www.nyiso.com/documents/20142/2924447/tei_mnl.pdf/b2f926e9-2faa-2c42-5a09-2402cdb8bacc)
 ISO-NE, Schedule 22 Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (Effective: March 2019), Accessed on: April 2021 (https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/regulatory/tariff/sect_2/sch22/sch_22_lgip.pdf)
 ISO-NE, Summary and discussion of interconnection group study processes in the NYISO, CAISO, PJM, SPP, MISO and ISO-NE, Accessed on: April 2021 (https://www.iso-
ne.com/static-assets/documents/2016/03/a2_summary_of_clustering_approaches.pptx)
 CAISO, Business Practice Manual For Generator Interconnection and Deliverability Allocation Procedures v. 26 (Effective: December 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
 ERCOT, Planning Guide, Section 5: Generation Resource Interconnection or Change Request (Effective: March 2021), Accessed on: April 2021
(http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/current_guides/53526/05-030121.docx)
 PJM, Manual 14G: Generation Interconnection Requests Revision: 6 (Effective: September 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
 PJM generation interconnection, Generation Interconnection Fact Sheet (pjm.com), Accessed on: April 2021
 MISO, Attachment X, Generator Interconnection Procedures (GIP) (Effective: February 2021), Accessed on: May 2021
 MISO, Generator Interconnection Process, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://cdn.misoenergy.org/GI%20Process%20Flow%20Diagram106549.pdf)
 SPP, Attachment V Generator Interconnection Procedures (GIP) including Generator interconnection agreement (GIA) (Effective: December 2020), Accessed on: May 2021
 AESO, The Connection Process, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://www.aeso.ca/assets/Uploads/Connection-Process-Quick-Reference-Guide-2021.pdf)
 AEMO, Connection Process Diagram, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/nsp-connction-process-diagram-
v20.pdf?la=en&hash=EFA71EEEC722058C7B225C22593A1649)
 Eskom Grid Access Unit, available at https://www.eskom.co.za/Whatweredoing/GAU/Pages/Process.aspx , Accessed on: April 14,2021
 South Carolina Generator Interconnection Procedures, Forms, and Agreements. (https://desitecoreprod-
cd.azureedge.net/_/media/pdfs/rates/c3scinterconnectionprocedures.pdf?la=en&rev=dfb4b93b1ebc45be897c931a2fb695be) Accessed on: June 8, 2021.
 Southern Company, Standard Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (LGIP) including Standard Large Generator Interconnection Agreement (LGIA).
(https://www.oasis.oati.com/woa/docs/SOCO/SOCOdocs/LGIP,LGIA,SGIP,SGIA_2020-02-18.pdf) Accessed on: June 8, 2021
11884796

24 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Summary of standard methods for North America
 Mostly have open window to allow for Generation Interconnection application as seen
from the comparison tables.
– Interconnecting entities typically have an application window for generation interconnection request applications from
a period to another; in which interconnection customers may only submit application requests during the window.

 Generation interconnection studies are done for individual applications and clusters.
– While this approach varies between interconnecting entities, a large percentage of applications goes through clustering
in most interconnecting entities.
 System impact associated to each application; cluster connections and across
boundaries/regional impacts are identified.
– System reliability and impact on transmission plans are taken into consideration. This is essential since limiting
interconnection assessment to individual interconnecting entities will not result is optimal bulk system plans for
generation resource mix.

Source:
• Kay B, “Interconnection cluster studies”, Planning advisory committee, MA, https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/2016/05/a7_new_generation_interconnection_clustering_approaches_presentation.pdf (May 12, 2021)
• PV plant interconnection procedures, Sandia Laboratories, https://www.esig.energy/wiki-main-page/pv-plant-interconnection-procedures/ (February 1, 2021)
• Interconnection Plugging RE-Powering Sites into the electric grid, EPA report, Oct 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
10/documents/interconnection_plugging_re_powering_sites_into_the_electric_grid_oct2019_508.pdf (March 11, 2021)
11884796

25 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Summary of standard methods for North America
 All active, prior Generation interconnection queues are considered.
– This information available to system planners is limited to what is provided in the existing queues, although generating
plant sizes may differ just before agreements are signed.

 All the system assessments are staged i.e., have various phases.
– Some initial grid access analysis are conducted, and additional assessments are needed to identify more detailed system
constraints. These are all impacted on the existing grid capacity availability and the willingness of the interconnecting
customers to accept the terms and conditions of required system upgrades.

 Most consider mutual planning and inter-regional coordination.

– This is essential to identify the impact of the interconnection application on the reliability of neighboring RTOs or ISOs or
transmission service provider.

Source:
• J. Caspary, M. Goggin, R. Gramlich and J. Schneider, “Disconnected: the need for a new generator interconnection policy”, January, 2021
• Kay B, “Interconnection cluster studies”, Planning advisory committee, MA, https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/2016/05/a7_new_generation_interconnection_clustering_approaches_presentation.pdf (May 12, 2021)
• PV plant interconnection procedures, Sandia Laboratories, https://www.esig.energy/wiki-main-page/pv-plant-interconnection-procedures/ (February 1, 2021)
• Interconnection Plugging RE-Powering Sites into the electric grid, EPA report, Oct 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
11884796
10/documents/interconnection_plugging_re_powering_sites_into_the_electric_grid_oct2019_508.pdf (March 11, 2021)

26 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Common practices across Europe
 The European approach varies between countries.
– In Germany, the transmission system operator (TSO) carries all the
risks. The TSO develops the grid and carries all related costs,
including building the backbone network.
– The Danish and Netherlands situations are similar because the
government builds the transmission infrastructure upfront.
– In Ireland, there are fixed months for the batch application window,
batch formation and batch processing each year. Planning
permission is required before a grid connection offer is issued.
– In the United Kingdom, the developers dominate a competitive
development process, but requires third party ownership of Courtesy: Renewables Grid Initiative

transmission infrastructures. https://renewables-grid.eu/topics/tyndp-and-pcis.html

Source:
• M. Hassan and D. M-Russell, Electricity regulation in the UK: overview, available at https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Cosi/SignOn?redirectTo=%2f1-523-
9996%3ftransitionType%3dDefault%26contextData%3d(sc.Default)%26firstPage%3dtrue (April 17, 2021)
• Renewable Energy Policies in a Time of Transition, IRENA report https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Apr/IRENA_IEA_REN21_Policies_2018.pdf
• Offshore wind- A European perspective, NYPA report, August, 2019
• Enduring 11884796
Connection Policy Stage 2 (ECP-2) Decision, report (CRU/20/060) by Commission for Regulation of Utilities. June, 2020

27 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Common practices across Australia
 In Australia, specifically for the Victoria region.
– An exploration on project feasibility begins with discussions with
the AEMO, landowners, and relevant government authorities.
– Then, a connection enquiry is submitted to AEMO to determine the
information required to submit an application to connect. AEMO
receives the enquiry and coordinates response and provide
transmission network data if requested.
– Once an application to connect is submitted to AEMO, it initiates
key activities for a new/modified transmission connection. AEMO
reviews and coordinates assessment and prepares an offer to
connect.
– The developer normally pays for system upgrades and sometimes
Western Victoria Connections Map: Courtesy: AEMO
hand it over to AEMO for free to maintain.
Source:
• AEMO, Connection Process Diagram, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/nsp-connction-process-diagram-
v20.pdf?la=en&hash=EFA71EEEC722058C7B225C22593A1649)
• Generator connections to the Western Victoria Transmission Network Questions and Answers, October 2019 https://aemo.com.au/-
/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/new-generator-connections-nw-vic-q-and-a-oct-2019.pdf (March 3, 2021)
11884796

28 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Good practices……
 Competitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZ) in
ERCOT: The Texas public utility commission
approved the proactive expansion of ERCOT’s
transmission grid to allow more wind power to
reach load centers. ERCOT planned the scenarios
and provided grid access to blocks of
interconnecting customers.
 Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI)
in California: Like the CREZ, this program was
also authorized by the California public utilities
commission to identify potential transmission
infrastructure that can access and integrate
renewables. https://www.ferc.gov/electric/power-sales-and-markets/rtos-and-isos Courtesy: FERC

Source:
• N Lee, F. Flores-Espino and D. Hurlbut, “Renewable energy zone (REZ) Transmission planning process: A guidebook for practitioners”, NREL, 2017
• Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI) 2.0 gateway,
https://reti.databasin.org/#:~:text=The%20Renewable%20Energy%20Transmission%20Initiative,renewable%20energy%20with%20the%20most
11884796

29 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Good practices……
 The Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project in California: Approved by CAISO was designated as a
Location Constrained Resource Interconnection Facility (LCRI), allowing its costs to be recovered through
the transmission owner’s revenue requirement until generators are interconnected, at which point they
are responsible for paying a pro rata share of the going-forward costs of the line. The need assessment for
the project included consideration of its role in supporting California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard
(RPS) goals.
 Multi-value projects (MVP) program in MISO: Was set up based on a consolidated transmission plan to
meet local energy and reliability needs.
 Priority Projects in SPP: A program designed to help SPP to prepare for and quickly respond to national
energy priorities.

The backlogs of queue surfaced again with the depleting of available capacities
Source:
• Securing Grids for a Sustainable Future: Case Studies, https://www.raponline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rap-securinggridsforasustainablefuturecasestudies-2011-10-17.pdf
• https://www.misoenergy.org/planning/planning/multi-value-projects-mvps/#t=10&p=0&s=&sd=
• SPP Priority Projects Phase II Report, February 2010. https://www.spp.org/documents/11467/priority%20projects%20phase%20ii%20report.pdf
11884796

30 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Key observations
 Resource location is key, since most interconnecting entities don’t have transmission infrastructure to move
renewable generation from remote locations.
 Most interconnecting entities are trying to catch up with generation interconnection (GI) queue, so they are
all deploying several strategies and schemes to reduce the GI queues. For example,
– MISO is reviewing the processing time (named queue priority update) based on the workgroup effort on
reducing queues.
– NYISO road to 2040: Transmission developers are rolling out multiple projects by upgrading transmission
lines around the state as part of New York state’s plans for future needs.

Source:
• Transmission investments can pave the way to a carbon-neutral future in the U.S, Hitachi White paper, 2021
• MISO https://cdn.misoenergy.org/20210426%20IPWG%20Item%2006%20Queue%20Priority%20Update543380.pdf
• Road to 2040: Our Role Expanding Transmission to Meet the Needs of a Clean Energy Grid NYISO https://www.nyiso.com/2040grid
11884796

31 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Key observations
 Hold up isn’t with interconnecting entities only, but a combination of factors such as contracting, and
negotiation are difficult to change.
 Although there has been huge successes across Europe, adopting European approach may not solve all the
issues. European countries have aggressive and robust net carbon-zero policies, goals and targets.
 Solution may need to be a combination and could be staggered. Some of the solutions could be:
– Short-term solutions.
– Long term solutions.

Source:
• Generation, Storage, and Hybrid Capacity in Interconnection Queues, LBNL report, May 2021 https://emp.lbl.gov/generation-storage-and-hybrid-capacity (June 1, 2021)
• J. Caspary, M. Goggin, R. Gramlich and J. Schneider, “Disconnected: the need for a new generator interconnection policy”, January, 2021
• Group pushes for generation interconnection reforms at FERC in new report, https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/videos/covid-19-impact-
recovery-energy-outlook-for-h2-2021 (February 12, 2021)
• J, St. John, Report: Renewables Are Suffering From Broken US Transmission Policy, https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/report-renewables-are-suffering-from-
11884796
broken-u.s-transmission-policy (January 31, 2021)

32 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Suggested technical solutions

11884796

33 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Potential short-term solutions
 Building transmission power lines, getting appropriate land rights and permission to
construct towers take several years. However, some solutions can be implemented sooner.
Examples of such short-term solutions include the following:
– Grid enhancing technologies (GET): Additional power can be transmitted across existing lines by adopting newer
technologies by utilizing power flow controls, topology optimization, etc.
– Ratifying methods to provide improved utilization of the existing network is also a short-term solution. A typical
example of the methods could be enabling congestion management by the use of dynamic and adaptive line rating
technology.
– A hybrid or combination of several energy resources such as wind and solar plants, at the same location will enable
better utilization of transmission assets and infrastructures. This is sometimes described as cable pooling.
– Further, a Non-Wires Alternatives (NWA) solution that entails a combination of variable generation with appropriate
energy storage size could be useful. However, proper and detailed cost benefit analysis will be required to check the
economic viability of this option.
– Introduction of FACTs devices to existing AC transmission systems is a viable option since additional capacities can be
created to existing transmission infrastructures.
Source:
• Transmission investments can pave the way to a carbon-neutral future in the U.S, Hitachi White paper, 2021
• J. Caspary, M. Goggin, R. Gramlich and J. Schneider, “Disconnected: the need for a new generator interconnection policy”, January, 2021
• The road ahead Gaining momentum from energy transformation, PWC white paper, https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/utilities/publications/assets/pwc-the-road-ahead.pdf (May 21, 2021)
• J, St. John, Report: Renewables Are Suffering From Broken US Transmission Policy, https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/report-renewables-are-suffering-from-broken-u.s-
11884796
transmission-policy (January 31, 2021)
34 All rights reserved.
 Potential Long-term solutions
 As part of strategic grid development, grid planners can consider creating macro grids, by connecting areas of
high renewable resources with areas of high electric demand to enhance grid resiliency. The planning and
operation of several macro grids can be complex but do-able.
 A holistic long-term strategic scenario-based planning should, along with appropriate and applicable
mechanisms for execution by RTOs and ISOs may be required.
 Enhanced discussions and implementation of robust cross-border/regional coordination will allow better
leveraging and control of planned transmission infrastructures, accomplish more resource flexibility and
increase economies of scale.
 Creation of generation corridors, such as strategic energy areas, along with extensive transmission backbone in
these corridors will provide grid access. This should be a competitive process, since competition often creates a
broader benefit through coordinated planning and execution.

Source:
• Transmission investments can pave the way to a carbon-neutral future in the U.S, Hitachi White paper, 2021
• J. Caspary, M. Goggin, R. Gramlich and J. Schneider, “Disconnected: the need for a new generator interconnection policy”, January, 2021
• J, St. John, Report: Renewables Are Suffering From Broken US Transmission Policy, https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/report-renewables-are-suffering-from-
broken-u.s-transmission-policy
11884796 (January 31, 2021)

35 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Opportunities for improvement
 In order to really identify opportunities for improvement, several research questions
need to be answered.
 Some of these research questions include:
o Why are the interconnection requests fast tracked in some regions when compared to others?
o Why can’t multiple generation resource developers “pool together” while applying for grid access?
o Are the generation plant models readily available and close to commissioned plant data?
o Do planning models and/or processes reflect the expected real-time operations and economic dispatch
of generation resources?
o Are there simple interconnection guides that allows young engineers to quickly get abreast of what
studies are required and how they are conducted?
o Can the time it takes to conduct system studies be considerably reduced?
o What solutions can be tailored to address what specific situation?

11884796

36 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Research applications and needs
– Why are the interconnection requests fast tracked in some regions when compared to
others?
 Answer: These depend on the volumes of generation interconnection requests and
the existing transmission capacities in various regions.

– Why can’t multiple generation resource developers “pool together” while applying for
grid access?
 Answer: Most resource developers have different business cases and funding
models. Pooling with other developers may not guarantee them financial close with
their funders.

– The remaining research questions are addressed in the subsequent slides, focusing
on EPRI’s efforts in providing research applications and needs.

11884796

37 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 EPRI efforts to alleviate the problems

11884796

38 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Understanding how much renewables or load can be accommodated in an area

 EPRI developed the transmission hosting capacity tool (THCT) to screen through a wide range of scenarios
representing different load levels, network conditions, and generation dispatch to compare regions of
transmission network for future renewable generation/DER deployments.
 In addition, it provides an understanding of where and how much these new generation resources would
impact the system.

The Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool (THCT) can be used to

determine the amount of renewable generation and distributed
energy resource (DER) that can be accommodated in a
transmission region without any network upgrades.
THCT can also compare across various possible generator
retirement profiles/orders to ascertain whether there will be
reactive power shortage or voltage constraints across the network.

Source:
• Program on Technology Innovation: Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool—Development and Initial Results, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID #
3002012302.
• PRE-SW: Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool PSS®E Version (THCT PSS®E), v3.0 , EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002018152.
• PRE-SW: Transmission
11884796 Hosting Capacity Tool PSLF Version (THCT PSLF), v2.0, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002018151.

39 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Understanding the short circuit strength of the existing interconnection location

 Short circuit level is an important identifier of strength for the power system. An increase in percentage of
inverter-based generation in large power systems causes a reduction in the available fault current, resulting
in a reduction of traditional system strength. The reduction in fault current is due to the displacement of
synchronous generation and introduction of current limited inverter-based resources.
 A tool developed by EPRI called the Grid Strength Assessment Tool (GSAT) calculates various system
strength metrics from a steady state analysis of the network model.

The GSAT tool can be used to screen for locations that need a
detailed study. A system planner running generation
interconnection studies for inverter-based resources would thus
be able to make use of GSAT to assess the potential for instability
from the proposed interconnection and evaluate the need for a
detailed dynamic study in electromagnetic time frame.

Source:
• Modeling and Study Guides for Integration of Inverter Based Resources in Low Short Circuit Grids, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002016199.
• PRE-SW: Grid Strength Assessment Tool (GSAT) Version 4.0 - Beta, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2021. Product ID # 3002020782.
• REGC_C Implementation in PSS/E (REGC_C (PSS®E)) v1.2, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002020781.
• Deepak Ramasubramanian, Wenzong Wang, Pouyan Pourbeik, Evangelos Farantatos, Anish Gaikwad, Sachin Soni, and Vladimir Chadliev, “Positive Sequence Voltage
Source Converter Mathematical Model for Use in Low Short Circuit Systems,” IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 87-97, Jan 2020.
11884796

40 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Conclusion

11884796

41 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Main takeaways
 The interconnection process itself is highly technical which involves detailed commercial,
technical and legal input.
 The process is quite similar across various regions.
 The interconnection delays is not limited to technical issues only, but due to a
combination of factors such as commercial, legal and environmental issues.
 There exists several good practices and most ISOs/RTOs are trying to catch up with the
various requests to reduce interconnection queues.
 Resource location is key and transmission infrastructure is required for access from
remote locations.
 The solution to the issues depends, which can be short term or long-term solutions.
 EPRI has developed and still developing several research applications and toolset to
address most of these interconnection challenges.
11884796

42 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 References
 Large facility interconnection procedures https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/LGIP-procedures.pdf (February 2, 2021)
 Report by Scott madden management consultants, titled “Informing the Transmission Discussion”, January 2020.
https://www.scottmadden.com/content/uploads/2020/01/ScottMadden_WIRES_Informing-the-Transmission-Discussion_4-Interregional-Considerations_2020_0115.pdf
(March 16, 2021)
 Australian Energy Market Commission – Supply chain model of electricity. https://www.aemc.gov.au/energy-system/electricity (May 12, 2021)
 Eskom Grid Access Unit, available at https://www.eskom.co.za/Whatweredoing/GAU/Pages/Process.aspx (April 14,2021)
 Queued Up: Characteristics of Power Plants Seeking Transmission Interconnection As of the End of 2020, LBNL report (May 2021) https://eta-
publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/queued_up_may_2021.pdf (June 1, 2021)
 https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/queued-characteristics-power-plants
 CAISO, Business Practice Manual For Generator Interconnection and Deliverability Allocation Procedures v. 26 (Effective: December 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
 ERCOT, Planning Guide, Section 5: Generation Resource Interconnection or Change Request (Effective: March 2021), Accessed on: April 2021
(http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/current_guides/53526/05-030121.docx)
 PJM, Manual 14G: Generation Interconnection Requests Revision: 6 (Effective: September 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
 MISO, Attachment X, Generator Interconnection Procedures (GIP) (Effective: February 2021), Accessed on: May 2021
 MISO, Generator Interconnection Process, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://cdn.misoenergy.org/GI%20Process%20Flow%20Diagram106549.pdf)
 SPP, Attachment V Generator Interconnection Procedures (GIP) including Generator interconnection agreement (GIA) (Effective: December 2020), Accessed on: May
2021
 NYISO, Transmission Expansion and Interconnection Manual (Issued: December 2020), Accessed on: April 2021
(https://www.nyiso.com/documents/20142/2924447/tei_mnl.pdf/b2f926e9-2faa-2c42-5a09-2402cdb8bacc)
 ISO-NE, Schedule 22 Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (Effective: March 2019), Accessed on: April 2021 (https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/regulatory/tariff/sect_2/sch22/sch_22_lgip.pdf)
 ISO-NE, Summary and discussion of interconnection group study processes in the NYISO, CAISO, PJM, SPP, MISO and ISO-NE, Accessed on: April 2021 (https://www.iso-
ne.com/static-assets/documents/2016/03/a2_summary_of_clustering_approaches.pptx)
11884796

43 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 References
 AESO, The Connection Process, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://www.aeso.ca/assets/Uploads/Connection-Process-Quick-Reference-Guide-2021.pdf)
 AEMO, Connection Process Diagram, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/nsp-connction-
process-diagram-v20.pdf?la=en&hash=EFA71EEEC722058C7B225C22593A1649)
 Kay B, “Interconnection cluster studies”, Planning advisory committee, MA, https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/2016/05/a7_new_generation_interconnection_clustering_approaches_presentation.pdf (May 12, 2021)
 PV plant interconnection procedures, Sandia Laboratories, https://www.esig.energy/wiki-main-page/pv-plant-interconnection-procedures/ (February 1,
2021)
 Interconnection Plugging RE-Powering Sites into the electric grid, EPA report, Oct 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
10/documents/interconnection_plugging_re_powering_sites_into_the_electric_grid_oct2019_508.pdf (March 11, 2021)
 https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Cosi/SignOn?redirectTo=%2f1-523-
9996%3ftransitionType%3dDefault%26contextData%3d(sc.Default)%26firstPage%3dtrue
 Renewable Energy Policies in a Time of Transition, IRENA report https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Apr/IRENA_IEA_REN21_Policies_2018.pdf
 Enduring Connection Policy Stage 2 (ECP-2) Decision, report (CRU/20/060) by Commission for Regulation of Utilities , June, 2020
 https://cdn.misoenergy.org/20210426%20IPWG%20Item%2006%20Queue%20Priority%20Update543380.pdf
 N Lee, F. Flores-Espino and D. Hurlbut, “Renewable energy zone (REZ) Transmission planning process: A guidebook for practitioners”, NREL, 2017
 Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI) 2.0 gateway,
https://reti.databasin.org/#:~:text=The%20Renewable%20Energy%20Transmission%20Initiative,renewable%20energy%20with%20the%20most
 Securing Grids for a Sustainable Future: Case Studies, https://www.raponline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rap-
securinggridsforasustainablefuturecasestudies-2011-10-17.pdf
 https://www.misoenergy.org/planning/planning/multi-value-projects-mvps/#t=10&p=0&s=&sd=
11884796

44 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 References
 AESO, The Connection Process, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://www.aeso.ca/assets/Uploads/Connection-Process-Quick-Reference-Guide-2021.pdf)
 AEMO, Connection Process Diagram, Accessed on: May 2021 (https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/network_connections/nsp-connction-
process-diagram-v20.pdf?la=en&hash=EFA71EEEC722058C7B225C22593A1649)
 Kay B, “Interconnection cluster studies”, Planning advisory committee, MA, https://www.iso-ne.com/static-
assets/documents/2016/05/a7_new_generation_interconnection_clustering_approaches_presentation.pdf (May 12, 2021)
 PV plant interconnection procedures, Sandia Laboratories, https://www.esig.energy/wiki-main-page/pv-plant-interconnection-procedures/ (February 1,
2021)
 Interconnection Plugging RE-Powering Sites into the electric grid, EPA report, Oct 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
10/documents/interconnection_plugging_re_powering_sites_into_the_electric_grid_oct2019_508.pdf (March 11, 2021)
 https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Cosi/SignOn?redirectTo=%2f1-523-
9996%3ftransitionType%3dDefault%26contextData%3d(sc.Default)%26firstPage%3dtrue
 Renewable Energy Policies in a Time of Transition, IRENA report https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Apr/IRENA_IEA_REN21_Policies_2018.pdf
 Enduring Connection Policy Stage 2 (ECP-2) Decision, report (CRU/20/060) by Commission for Regulation of Utilities , June, 2020
 https://cdn.misoenergy.org/20210426%20IPWG%20Item%2006%20Queue%20Priority%20Update543380.pdf
 N Lee, F. Flores-Espino and D. Hurlbut, “Renewable energy zone (REZ) Transmission planning process: A guidebook for practitioners”, NREL, 2017
 Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI) 2.0 gateway,
https://reti.databasin.org/#:~:text=The%20Renewable%20Energy%20Transmission%20Initiative,renewable%20energy%20with%20the%20most
 Securing Grids for a Sustainable Future: Case Studies, https://www.raponline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rap-
securinggridsforasustainablefuturecasestudies-2011-10-17.pdf
 https://www.misoenergy.org/planning/planning/multi-value-projects-mvps/#t=10&p=0&s=&sd=
11884796

45 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 References
 SPP Priority Projects Phase II Report, February 2010. https://www.spp.org/documents/11467/priority%20projects%20phase%20ii%20report.pdf
 On the path to SunShot – interconnection process https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/downloads/path-sunshot-interconnection-process (March 15,
2021)
 MISO generator interconnection process https://www.misoenergy.org/api/documents/getbyname/GI%20Process%20Flow%20Diagram.pdf
 Regional Development Programme South East Coast Regional Strategy Document Technical Report
https://www.nationalgrideso.com/document/140756/download
 Customer Journey to Connection, NGESO, https://www.nationalgrideso.com/document/182381/download
 S. Moore , Getting Interconnected How can interconnectors compete to help lower bills and cut carbon? https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2016/09/getting-interconnected.pdf
 SANDIA REPORT SAND2012-2090 Unlimited Release Printed February 2012 Utility-Scale Photovoltaic Procedures and Interconnection Requirements
https://energy.sandia.gov/wp-content/gallery/uploads/PV_Interconnection-SAND2012-2090.pdf
 J. Caspary, M. Goggin, R. Gramlich and J. Schneider, “Disconnected: the need for a new generator interconnection policy”, January, 2021
 Program on Technology Innovation: Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool—Development and Initial Results, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID #
3002012302.
 PRE-SW: Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool PSS®E Version (THCT PSS®E), v3.0 , EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002018152.
 PRE-SW: Transmission Hosting Capacity Tool PSLF Version (THCT PSLF), v2.0, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002018151.
 Modeling and Study Guides for Integration of Inverter Based Resources in Low Short Circuit Grids, Palo Alto, CA: 2020. Product ID # 3002016199.
 PRE-SW: Grid Strength Assessment Tool (GSAT) Version 4.0 - Beta, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2021. Product ID # 3002020782.

11884796

46 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Together…Shaping the Future of Energy™

11884796

47 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
 Export Control Restrictions The Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (EPRI, www.epri.com)
conducts research and development relating to the generation, delivery and
Access to and use of this EPRI product is granted with the specific understanding and
use of electricity for the benefit of the public. An independent, nonprofit
requirement that responsibility for ensuring full compliance with all applicable U.S. and foreign
organization, EPRI brings together its scientists and engineers as well as
export laws and regulations
experts from academia and industry to help address challenges in electricity,
is being undertaken by you and your company. This includes an obligation to ensure that any individual
including reliability, efficiency, affordability, health, safety and the
receiving access hereunder who is not a U.S. citizen or U.S. permanent resident is permitted access under
environment. EPRI also provides technology, policy and economic analyses
applicable U.S. and foreign export laws and regulations.
to drive long-range research and development planning, and supports
In the event you are uncertain whether you or your company may lawfully obtain access to this EPRI research in emerging technologies. EPRI members represent 90% of the
product, you acknowledge that it is your obligation to consult with your company’s legal counsel to electricity generated and delivered in the United States with international
determine whether this access is lawful. Although EPRI may make available on a case by case basis an participation extending to nearly 40 countries. EPRI’s principal offices and
informal assessment of the applicable U.S. export classification for specific EPRI products, you and your laboratories are located in Palo Alto, Calif.; Charlotte, N.C.; Knoxville, Tenn.;
company acknowledge that this assessment is solely for informational purposes and not for reliance Dallas, Texas; Lenox, Mass.; and Washington, D.C.
purposes.
Together…Shaping the Future of Energy™
Your obligations regarding U.S. export control requirements apply during and after you and your company’s
engagement with EPRI. To be clear, the obligations continue after your retirement or other departure from
your company, and include any knowledge retained after gaining access to EPRI products.
You and your company understand and acknowledge your obligations to make a prompt report to EPRI and
the appropriate authorities regarding any access to or use of this EPRI product hereunder that may be in
violation of applicable U.S. or foreign export laws or regulations.

© 2021 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute
and EPRI are registered marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. in the U.S. and worldwide.

3002020483

EPRI
3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • [email protected] • www.epri.com
11884796

48 www.epri.com © 2021 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.