Feasibility Study on Load Flow and Short Circuit Project #111510-01 ...

<strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> on LoadFlow and Short CircuitProject #111510-01Prepared by:Transmission Planning DepartmentCleco Corporation, Inc.2180 St. Landry HwyP.O. Box 70St. Landry, LA 71367January 2011Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 1 of 20

I. IntroductionThis <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> is the first step of the interconnection process and is based onInterconnection Customer request for interconnection on Cleco Power LLC’s (“TransmissionProvider”) transmission system on the Ville Platte to West Fork 230 kV transmission line locatednear Ville Platte, LA for Project #111510-01 (see Appendix II for the definition ofInterconnection <strong>Study</strong>). The requested interconnection will be evaluated as a Network ResourceInterconnection Service (NRIS) and as an Energy Resource Interconnection Service (ERIS). Theproposed interconnection will be as follows:• Installation of 87 new 2.3 MW (2.556MVA) Siemens SWT 2.3MW 101m rotor WindTurbine Generators (WTG) for a total incremental generating capacity of 200.1 MW.• Installation of a 230/34.5kV transformer to be used as a collection station for theoutput of the WTGs.• Construction of a new 230 kV transmission line from the 230/34.5 kV collectionstation to the new substation that will tap into the Ville Platte to West Fork 230 kVtransmission line.• Construction of a new substation that will tap into the existing Ville Platte to WestFork 230 kV transmission line. This new substation will be located approximatelyfour (4) miles south of the Ville Platte 230 kV substation. This new 230 kVsubstation will comprise a three (3) breaker ring bus to accommodate the transmissionline from the Wind Farm.The objective of this feasibility study is to assess the reliability impact of the new facility on theCleco transmission system as well as determine if first tier neighboring transmission systems areaffected. Though this study is not intended to examine pre-existing problems unrelated to theIssued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 2 of 20

proposed plant, it is intended to determine whether the transmission system meets TransmissionProvider’s performance criteria when the plant is in-service. If not, transmission improvementswill be identified and evaluated.Interconnection Customer intends to install 87 new Siemens SWT 2.3MW 101m rotor WindTurbine Generators (WTG) rated 2.556 MVA each with a power factor of ±0.95, for anincremental generating capacity of 2.3 MW each. This configuration with 87 WTGs would yielda maximum incremental output of 200.1 MW to the Transmission Provider’s transmissionsystem. Interconnection Customer anticipates injecting approximately 200.1 MW incrementalinto the Cleco transmission system.The proposed in-service date for this facility is December 31, 2013.The installation of this generation required a load flow analysis to determine if the existingtransmission facilities are adequate to reliably carry this additional generation, and a short circuitanalysis to determine if the generation would cause the available fault current to surpass the faultduty of previously installed equipment on the Cleco system as well as neighboring systems.This <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> was based on information provided by Interconnection Customer andassumptions made by Cleco’s Transmission System Planning department. If the actualequipment installed is different from the supplied information or the assumptions made, theresults outlined in this report are subject to change.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 3 of 20

It should be noted that carrying out the mandatory upgrades identified in this report doesnot guarantee transmission service for the customer. Transmission Service should berequested through OASIS and the request will be granted on a first-come, first servedbasis.Any assumptions or scenarios the Interconnection Customer deems appropriate for completenessof the Interconnection System Impact <strong>Study</strong> process must be submitted in writing with or beforethe receipt of the signed request for the Interconnection System Impact <strong>Study</strong>.II. MODEL & CRITERIAA. Model InformationThe load flow analysis was performed based on the 2016 (Summer Peak, Winter Peak, Lowload)and 2021 Summer Peak SPP load flow model. All firm power transactions betweenTransmission Provider and its neighboring balancing authorities were modeled. ExistingTransmission Provider designated network resource generation was modified to accommodatethe proposed plant generation. In addition, as stated in the Large Generator InterconnectionProposal (LGIP) all proposed generation with a prior position in Transmission Provider’sinterconnection queue was modeled in an attempt to reflect worst case conditions. Mandatorytransmission upgrades were also included to build a revised case for the load flow analysis.Therefore, for this request the dispatch scenario considered the transfer of 200 MW ofincremental generation at Interconnection Customer’s delivery point to displace existing networkresources and contracts for NRIS service and to Entergy for ERIS service.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 4 of 20

The generator step-up transformers, generators, and interconnecting lines were modeledaccording to the information provided by Interconnection Customer.Modifications to ModelAll interconnection requests that are in a prior (higher) position in the queue are required to bemodeled when studying the current interconnection request.B. Software & Criteriai) AC Load Flow Analysis:The purpose of the load flow analysis is to stress the transmission system with the newgeneration addition by simulating outages on facilities in Cleco, Entergy, AEP, LEPA, andLafayette Utility System while monitoring these same facilities to determine the impact ofaffected systems. The objective is to identify potential criteria violations of current and voltageas identified in the Performance Criteria section of this report. This analysis was performedusing PTI’s Power System Simulator for Engineering (PSS/E) and MUST software to determinethe reliability impact on the transmission system under single contingencies. Line loading levelswere monitored for each contingency. If any additional facilities were found to be overloaded asa result of the upgrades, those facilities were upgraded as well and put back in the revised loadflow case. The analysis was considered to be complete once no facilities were found to beoverloaded.ii) Short Circuit Analysis:The objective of the short circuit analysis is to determine the impact if any that the newgeneration will have on system fault current. The new fault current levels will be evaluated toIssued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 5 of 20

determine if existing fault interrupting devices exceed their rating under simulated faultconditions as a result of the new generation addition. The software used in this fault analysis isASPEN short circuit program.iii) Performance CriteriaThe criteria for overload and voltage violations are as follows:A) With All Lines in Service• All bus voltages must remain within a 0.95 to 1.05 p.u. voltage range.• The MVA flow in any branch should not exceed Rate A (normal rating).B) Under Contingencies• All bus voltages must remain within a 0.92 to 1.05 p.u. range.• Voltage deviation of no more than 0.03 p.u. between pre-contingency and postcontingencycases.• The MVA flow through any facility should not exceed the emergency Rate B.• If the flow on a transmission facility exceeds 100% of its emergency rating with the newgeneration in service for a particular contingency, the loading shall be compared with thecorresponding loading on the transmission facility under a similar situation without thenew generation. If the new generation causes a difference in flow higher than 3.0%, thefacility is expected to require improvement.• Elements on affected systems are allowed to be overloaded by as much as 3.0%.• If more than one scenario is used for dispatching power from the new plant, overloadedfacilities that appear in all dispatch scenarios are expected to be improved regardless oftheir proximity to the new plant.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 6 of 20

C) Short Circuit• Fault interrupting devices which exceed 90 % of rating will be designated as mandatoryupgrades and replaced.iv) Power Factor Consideration / CriteriaCleco requires the customer to be capable of supplying at least 0.33 MVAR (i.e., 0.95 laggingpower factor) and absorbing at least 0.25 MVAR (i.e., 0.97 leading power factor) for every MWof power injected into the grid. In the event that, under normal operating conditions, thecustomer facility does not meet the prescribed power factor requirements at the point ofinterconnection, the customer shall take necessary steps, such as the installation of reactivepower compensating devices, to achieve the desired power factor.III. NETWORK RESOURCE INTERCONNECTIONA. Network Resource Interconnection <strong>Study</strong> GuidelinesTransmission Provider must conduct the necessary studies and construct the Network Upgradesneeded to integrate the Large Generating Facility (1) in a manner comparable to that in whichTransmission Provider integrates its Generating Facilities to serve native load customers; or(2) in an ISO or RTO with market based congestion management, in the same manner as allother Network Resources. Network Resource Interconnection Service Allows InterconnectionCustomer 's Large Generating Facility to be designated as a Network Resource, up to the LargeGenerating Facility's full output, on the same basis as all other existing Network ResourcesIssued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 7 of 20

interconnected to Transmission Provider's Transmission System, and to be studied as a NetworkResource on the assumption that such a designation will occur.The Interconnection <strong>Study</strong> for Network Resource Interconnection Service shall assure that theInterconnection Customer's Large Generating Facility meets the requirements for NetworkResource Interconnection Service and as a general matter, that such Large Generating Facility'sinterconnection is also studied with Transmission Provider’s Transmission System at peak load,under a variety of severely stressed conditions, to determine whether, with the Large GeneratingFacility at full output, the aggregate of generation in the local area can be delivered to theaggregate of load on Transmission Provider’s Transmission System, consistent withTransmission Provider’s reliability criteria and procedures. This approach assumes that someportion of existing Network Resources are displaced by the output of Interconnection Customer'sLarge Generating Facility. Network Resource Interconnection Service in and of itself does notconvey any right to deliver electricity to any specific customer or Point of Delivery.B. Power Flow Resultsi) After performing the AC Contingency analysis, it was determined that the elementsshown in Attachment I are the limiting elements for NRIS service.ii)After performing the AC Contingency analysis, it was determined that the elementsshown in Attachment II are the limiting elements for ERIS service.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 8 of 20

ATTACHMENT ITABLE I.a.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONNETWORK RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KV(All Lines in service)2016 LLWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 9 of 20

TABLE I.b.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONNETWORK RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KV2016 LLWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)146 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 4252016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)169 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 4252021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)92 Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 25996.6 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 425Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 10 of 20

TABLE I.c.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONNETWORK RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KVPlanningUPGRADES:EstimateSecond Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVA $-Total: $-2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)PlanningUPGRADES:EstimateSecond Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVA $-Total: $-2016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)UPGRADES:Second Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVAUpgrade Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV transmission line 2011 – 360 MVAPlanningEstimate$-$-Total: $-2021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 11 of 20

ATTACHMENT IITABLE II.a.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONENERGY RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KV(All Lines in service)2016 LLWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)2021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Limiting Facility> 200 NoneRating(MVA)BaseLoading(MW)Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 12 of 20

TABLE II.b.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONENERGY RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KV2016 LLWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)135 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 425170 Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 2592016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)123 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 425125 Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 2592021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for OverloadRating(MVA)7 Cocodrie 230/138 kV auto West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 42553 Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV West Fork to New Substation 230 kV line 259Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 13 of 20

TABLE II.c.WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) ADDITIONNETWORK RESOURCE INTERCONNECTION SERVICEPLANT MODELED ON VILLE PLATTE TO WESTFORK 230 KVUPGRADES:Second Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVAUpgrade Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV transmission line 2011 – 360 MVAPlanningEstimate$-$-Total: $-2016 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)UPGRADES:Second Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVAUpgrade Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV transmission line 2011 – 360 MVAPlanningEstimate$-$-Total: $-2016 WPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)UPGRADES:Second Cocodrie 230/138 kV autotransformer installed 2012-386/425 MVAUpgrade Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV transmission line 2011 – 360 MVAPlanningEstimate$-$-Total: $-2021 SPWTG Gen(MW) Overloaded Facility (Requires Upgrade) First Contingency Responsible for Overload> 200 No limits identifiedRating(MVA)Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 14 of 20

C. Short Circuit ResultsThe results of the short circuit analysis indicate that the addition of 200 MW of generationinjected on the Ville Platte to West Fork 230 kV transmission line does not cause an increase inshort circuit fault levels such that the interrupting capability of the existing Cleco TransmissionSystem Circuit Breakers exceed their ratings.D. Problem ResolutionTable I.c. and II.c identify upgrades that relieve the overload conditions caused by thegeneration addition of 200 MW at a new 230 kV substation. The upgrades that are required arelisted below:• Install a new, second 230/138 kV autotransformer at Cocodrie 230 kV / Coughlin 138 kVsubstations rated for 386/425 MVA to 500 MVA. This upgrade is in the ClecoConstruction plan for completion at the end of 2012 and will not require customerfunding.• Upgrade the existing Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kV transmission line to a rating of 360MVA. The estimated cost of this project is $18 million.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 15 of 20

V. Conclusion/RecommendationBased on the results of this feasibility study, to designate new generation at the proposed new230 kV substation on the existing Ville Platte to West Fork 230 kV transmission line will requiremandatory Network Upgrades and Entergy has been declared an affected system. Thisgeneration addition at will require the upgrade of Cleco’s Coughlin to Plaisance 138 kVtransmission line to a minimum capacity of 360 MVA at an estimated cost of $18 million.Installation of a new 230/138 kV autotransformer at the Cocodrie 230 kV substation is in theCleco’s construction plan, therefore customer is not required to fund upgrade. The totalestimated mandatory upgrade costs on Cleco’s transmission system associated with this project is$18 million.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 16 of 20

ATTACHMENT III(from Attachment K of the standard LGIP)DefinitionsEnergy Resource Interconnection Service shall mean an Interconnection Service that allowsthe Interconnection Customer to connect its Generating Facility to the Transmission Provider’sTransmission System to be eligible to deliver the Generating Facility's electric output using theexisting firm or nonfirm capacity of the Transmission Provider’s Transmission System on an asavailable basis. Energy Resource Interconnection Service in and of itself does not conveytransmission service.Network Resource shall mean any designated generating resource owned, purchased, or leasedby a Network Customer under the Network Integration Transmission Service Tariff. NetworkResources do not include any resource, or any portion thereof, that is committed for sale to thirdparties or otherwise cannot be called upon to meet the Network Customer’s Network Load on anon-interruptible basis.Network Resource Interconnection Service shall mean an Interconnection Service that allowsthe Interconnection Customer to integrate its Large Generating Facility with the TransmissionProvider’s Transmission System (1) in a manner comparable to that in which the TransmissionProvider integrates its generating facilities to serve native load customers; or (2) in an RTO orISO with market based congestion management, in the same manner as all other NetworkResources. Network Resource Interconnection Service in and of itself does not conveytransmission.Identification of Types of Interconnection Services.At the time the Interconnection Request is submitted, Interconnection Customer must requesteither Energy Resource Interconnection Service or Network Resource Interconnection Service,as described; provided, however, any Interconnection Customer requesting Network ResourceInterconnection Service may also request that it be concurrently studied for Energy ResourceInterconnection Service, up to the point when an Interconnection Facility <strong>Study</strong> Agreement isexecuted. Interconnection Customer may then elect to proceed with Network ResourceInterconnection Service or to proceed under a lower level of interconnection service to the extentthat only certain upgrades will be completed.Energy Resource Interconnection Service.The Product. Energy Resource Interconnection Service allows Interconnection Customer toconnect the Large Generating Facility to the Transmission System and be eligible to deliver theLarge Generating Facility’s output using the existing firm or non-firm capacity of theTransmission System on an “as available” basis. Energy Resource Interconnection Service doesnot in and of itself convey any right to deliver electricity to any specific customer or Point ofDelivery.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 17 of 20

The <strong>Study</strong>. The study consists of short circuit/fault duty, steady state (thermal and voltage) andstability analyses. The short circuit/fault duty analysis would identify direct InterconnectionFacilities required and the Network Upgrades necessary to address short circuit issues associatedwith the Interconnection Facilities. The stability and steady state studies would identifynecessary upgrades to allow full output of the proposed Large Generating Facility and wouldalso identify the maximum allowed output, at the time the study is performed, of theinterconnecting Large Generating Facility without requiring additional Network Upgrades.Network Resource Interconnection Service.The Product. Transmission Provider must conduct the necessary studies and construct theNetwork Upgrades needed to integrate the Large Generating Facility (1) in a mannercomparable to that in which Transmission Provider integrates its Generating Facilities to servenative load customers; or (2) in an ISO or RTO with market based congestion management, inthe same manner as all other Network Resources. Network Resource Interconnection ServiceAllows Interconnection Customer 's Large Generating Facility to be designated as a NetworkResource, up to the Large Generating Facility's full output, on the same basis as all otherexisting Network Resources interconnected to Transmission Provider's Transmission System,and to be studied as a Network Resource on the assumption that such a designation will occur.The <strong>Study</strong>. The Interconnection <strong>Study</strong> for Network Resource Interconnection Service shallassure that the Interconnection Customer's Large Generating Facility meets the requirements forNetwork Resource Interconnection Service and as a general matter, that such Large GeneratingFacility's interconnection is also studied with Transmission Provider’s Transmission System atpeak load, under a variety of severely stressed conditions, to determine whether, with the LargeGenerating Facility at full output, the aggregate of generation in the local area can be deliveredto the aggregate of load on Transmission Provider’s Transmission System, consistent withTransmission Provider’s reliability criteria and procedures. This approach assumes that someportion of existing Network Resources are displaced by the output of InterconnectionCustomer's Large Generating Facility. Network Resource Interconnection Service in and ofitself does not convey any right to deliver electricity to any specific customer or Point ofDelivery.Section 6. Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>.6.1 Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement.Simultaneously with the acknowledgement of a valid Interconnection RequestTransmission Provider shall provide to Interconnection Customer an Interconnection<strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement in the form of Appendix 2. The Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong><strong>Study</strong> Agreement shall specify that Interconnection Customer is responsible for the actualcost of the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>. Within five (5) Business Days followingthe Scoping Meeting Interconnection Customer shall specify for inclusion in theattachment to the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement the Point(s) ofInterconnection and any reasonable alternative Point(s) of Interconnection. Within five(5) Business Days following Transmission Provider’s receipt of such designation,Transmission Provider shall tender to Interconnection Customer the InterconnectionIssued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 18 of 20

<strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement signed by Transmission Provider, which includes a goodfaith estimate of the cost for completing the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>.Interconnection Customer shall execute and deliver to Transmission Provider theInterconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement along with a $10,000 deposit no later thanthirty (30) Calendar Days after its receipt.On or before the return of the executed Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement toTransmission Provider, Interconnection Customer shall provide the technical data calledfor in Appendix 1, Attachment A.If the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> uncovers any unexpected result(s) notcontemplated during the Scoping Meeting, a substitute Point of Interconnection identifiedby either Interconnection Customer or Transmission Provider, and acceptable to theother, such acceptance not to be unreasonably withheld, will be substituted for thedesignated Point of Interconnection specified above without loss of Queue Position, andRe-studies shall be completed pursuant to Section 6.4 as applicable. For the purpose ofthis Section 6.1, if Transmission Provider and Interconnection Customer cannot agree onthe substituted Point of Interconnection, then Interconnection Customer may direct thatone of the alternatives as specified in the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Agreement, asspecified pursuant to Section 3.3.4, shall be the substitute.If Interconnection Customer and Transmission Provider agree to forgo theInterconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>, Transmission Provider will initiate an InterconnectionSystem Impact <strong>Study</strong> under Section 7 of this LGIP and apply the $10,000 deposittowards the Interconnection System Impact <strong>Study</strong>.6.2 Scope of Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>.The Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> shall preliminarily evaluate the feasibility of theproposed interconnection to the Transmission System.The Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> will consider the Base Case as well as allGenerating Facilities (and with respect to (iii), any identified Network Upgrades) that, onthe date the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> is commenced: (i) are directlyinterconnected to the Transmission System; (ii) are interconnected to Affected Systemsand may have an impact on the Interconnection Request; (iii) have a pending higherqueued Interconnection Request to interconnect to the Transmission System; and (iv)have no Queue Position but have executed an LGIA or requested that an unexecutedLGIA be filed with FERC. The Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> will consist of a powerflow and short circuit analysis. The Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> will provide a listof facilities and a non-binding good faith estimate of cost responsibility and a nonbindinggood faith estimated time to construct.6.3 Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> Procedures.Transmission Provider shall utilize existing studies to the extent practicable when itperforms the study. Transmission Provider shall use Reasonable Efforts to complete theInterconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> no later than forty-five (45) Calendar Days afterIssued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 19 of 20

Transmission Provider receives the fully executed Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>Agreement. At the request of Interconnection Customer or at any time the TransmissionProvider determines that it will not meet the required time frame for completing theInterconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>, Transmission Provider shall notify InterconnectionCustomer as to the schedule status of the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>. IfTransmission Provider is unable to complete the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> withinthat time period, it shall notify Interconnection Customer and provide an estimatedcompletion date with an explanation of the reasons why additional time is required.Upon request, Transmission Provider shall provide Interconnection Customer supportingdocumentation, workpapers and relevant power flow, short circuit and stability databasesfor the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>, subject to confidentiality arrangementsconsistent with Section 13.1.6.3.1 Meeting with Transmission Provider.Within ten (10) Business Days of providing an Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong>report to Interconnection Customer, Transmission Provider and InterconnectionCustomer shall meet to discuss the results of the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong><strong>Study</strong>.6.4 Re-<strong>Study</strong>.If Re-<strong>Study</strong> of the Interconnection <strong>Feasibility</strong> <strong>Study</strong> is required due to a higher queuedproject dropping out of the queue, or a modification of a higher queued project subject toSection 4.4, or re-designation of the Point of Interconnection pursuant to Section 6.1Transmission Provider shall notify Interconnection Customer in writing. Such Re-<strong>Study</strong>shall take not longer than forty-five (45) Calendar Days from the date of the notice. Anycost of Re-<strong>Study</strong> shall be borne by the Interconnection Customer being re-studied.Issued By: Cleco Power Transmission Planning DepartmentIssued on: January 13, 2011 Page 20 of 20