Project Identification

BTU uses a number of sources to build and maintain its database of projects under development and their corresponding characteristics. These include, but are not limited to, regional balancing authorities’ development queues, federal organizations, state permitting and utility commissions, local permitting and siting authorities, developer announcements, as well as independent research.

BTU Grade

BTU risks projects on a scale from 0 to 5. This grade is meant as a measure of the risk a project will come to market and does not necessarily speak to whether that project will meet its announced in-service date. Each grade corresponds to the following risk categories and the typical criteria projects in each category meet

Grade	Risk Level	Criteria
0	Cancelled	Project has been cancelled by developer or is no longer under regulatory consideration
1	Proposed	Feasibility Study or analogous early interconnection study completed State or local filings not initiated Projects identified with one source Strong regulatory setbacks
2	Speculative	System Impact Study or analogous interconnection study completed State and/or local filings begun News or announcements about the project, however typically 2+ years old
3	Likely, but material risk remaining	Interconnection Agreement in place Material progress or completion of state and/or local filings News or announcements about the project, however, can be 2+ years old
4	Very likely to come to market	Interconnection Agreement in place State and/or local filings complete or almost complete Recent news or announcements about the project PPA in place Pre-construction
5	Minimal risk remaining	Interconnection Agreement in place State and/or local filings completed Recent news or announcements about the project Under construction or construction to begin shortly

While BTU does its best to grade projects along the criteria above other factors can alter a project’s grade including, but not limited to: quality of developer, duration in queue, queue and regulatory application status.

Locational Accuracy

Locations are meant to approximate a project’s location. BTU uses varied data sources to source a project’s location. When locational data is limited only to the project’s county, BTU uses county center coordinates.

Other Terms

Assumed Heat Rates

BTU uses historical generation and fuel heat content/consumption data to calculate a facilities’ heat rate for a specific fuel type. For facilities with multiple fuel types, these unit heat rates are then averaged, on a generation-weighted basis, to arrive at a facility’s assumed heat rate.

Capacity

Capacities are reflective of a project’s nameplate capacity. BTU’s posted project capacity may change as a project’s capacity is revised or as more recent or more accurate data comes to light.

Capacity Factor

Capacity factor, or utilization, is a plants real generation divided by its theoretical maximum output.

Generation

Generation is defined as a facility’s output, net any internal plant usage.

ISO and Regional Definitions

ISO Regional definitions generally fall within definitions as outlined on the respective ISO websites.

BTU groups the remaining balancing authorities into Southeast and West groups each including the following:

• Southeast: Associated Electric Cooperative, Duke Energy Progress East, Duke Energy Progress West, Duke Carolinas, Florida Municipal Power Pool, Duke Energy Florida, Florida Power and Light, Gainesville Regional Utilities, City of Homestead, JEA, Utilities Commission of New Smyrna Beach, South Carolina Public Service Authority, South Carolina Electric and Gas, Seminole Electric Cooperative, Southeastern Power Administration, Southern Company, City of Tallahassee, Tampa Electric Company, Tennessee Valley Authority
• West: Avista Corporation, Avangrid Renewables, Arizona Public Service Company, Bonneville Power Administration, Public Utility District #1 of Chelan County, Arlington Valley, Public Utility District #1 of Doulas County, El Paso Electric Company, Public Utility District #2 of Grant County, Griffith Energy, Gila River Power, NaturEner Power Watch, New Harquahala Generating Company, Idaho Power Company, Los Angelese Department of Water and Power, Nevada Power Company, NorthWestern Energy, PacifiCorp – East, PacifiCorp – West, Portland General Electric Company, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Public Service Company of Colorado, Puget Sound Energy, Seattle City Light, Salt River Project, Tuscon Electric Power Company, City of Tacoma

Multiple Fuel Types

A facility with more than one fuel type is defined as having multiple fuel types. The most common example of this is a solar facility with accompanying storage.

Repower

A repower project is defined as an existing facility that is undergoing a capacity change or addition. Common examples of these include wind turbines that are being outfitted with new technology or new unit additions to existing natural gas-fired facilities.

Retirement and In-Service Dates

BTU does not risk a project’s in-service and/or retirement date, instead announced dates are used and are therefore subject to change as a project progresses.