⚡ 69 CARRIAGE HOUSE LN

MEMORANDUM

TO: Sunland America Corp. Development Team

FROM: Senior BESS Site Evaluation Analyst

DATE: October 26, 2023

SUBJECT: Comprehensive Site Diligence Analysis for APN 23323040030000 (69 Carriage House Ln, Cook County, IL)

This report provides a comprehensive due diligence analysis for the subject property, a 2.36-acre parcel in unincorporated Cook County, Illinois. The analysis evaluates the site's suitability for the development of a distribution-scale (≤5MW) Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The findings indicate the site possesses several fatal flaws, primarily related to zoning and grid interconnection, making it unsuitable for development.

1. Site Access & Topography

• Road Access Quality: The property is located on "Carriage House Lane," which, based on preliminary satellite imagery review, appears to be a minor residential road. Its width, surface quality, and load-bearing capacity are unknown and represent a significant risk. Requires Verification: A physical site visit is necessary to confirm if the road can support multi-ton, oversized loads associated with BESS construction.
• Terrain Characteristics: The site is located in Cook County, IL, an area characterized by generally flat topography. This is advantageous, as it would likely minimize the need for extensive civil work and grading, thereby reducing site preparation costs.
• Heavy Equipment Feasibility: Access for heavy equipment, including cranes, low-boy trailers carrying battery containers, and switchgear, is highly questionable. The residential nature of Carriage House Lane may present challenges such as tight turn radii, low-hanging utility lines, or municipal weight restrictions that would prohibit construction traffic.
• Easement Concerns: If Carriage House Lane is a private road, a formal, permanent access easement from all relevant landowners would be required. Furthermore, a separate utility easement would be necessary to run a gen-tie line from the project site to the Point of Interconnection (POI), which is currently a major unknown.

2. Environmental Constraints

• FEMA Flood Zone: The FEMA flood zone designation is currently unknown. Requires Verification: A FEMA FIRMette must be obtained immediately. If the site is located within a 100-year floodplain (e.g., Zone A or AE), development could be prohibited or require costly mitigation, such as elevating all equipment above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE), which could render the project uneconomical.
• Wetlands: The presence of jurisdictional wetlands is unknown. Requires Verification: A National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) screening is a critical next step. The presence of wetlands would trigger significant state (IEPA) and federal (USACE) setbacks, reducing the buildable area and potentially requiring a lengthy and expensive delineation and permitting process.
• Critical Habitat / Endangered Species: Initial desktop analysis indicates no designated critical habitats or protected areas on or immediately adjacent to the parcel. This is a positive finding, though a formal USFWS IPaC report should be run as part of standard diligence to confirm.
• Brownfield/Superfund Status: The site is not a listed brownfield, nor is it near a Superfund site. While this avoids environmental liability and remediation costs, it also means the project is ineligible for the 10% IRA brownfield tax credit adder.
• Pipeline Proximity: No major gas or hazardous liquid pipelines are identified within a 3-mile radius, which is a significant safety and permitting advantage. This eliminates risks associated with pipeline operator negotiations and safety setbacks.

3. Grid Infrastructure & Interconnection

• Nearest Substation: The location, voltage, and available capacity of the nearest distribution substation are all unknown. This is a critical, potentially fatal, information gap. A distribution-scale BESS requires a nearby substation with a robust 3-phase feeder with adequate thermal capacity. Without this, interconnection is not feasible.
• Transmission Line Proximity: A 345kV Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) transmission line is located approximately 0.4 miles from the site. While proximate, this asset is not a viable POI for a ≤5MW project.
• Recommended Interconnection Voltage: The ideal interconnection would be at a local distribution voltage, typically 12.47kV or 34.5kV. Interconnecting a small BESS at 345kV is technically complex and financially prohibitive, requiring a new switchyard, step-up transformer, and extensive protection equipment costing millions of dollars.
• Estimated Interconnection Cost & Timeline:
  • Transmission (345kV): Not a viable option. Estimated cost >$10M; timeline 4-6 years through the PJM transmission queue.
  • Distribution (Hypothetical): If a suitable 3-phase feeder is identified within 0.5 miles, costs could range from $750,000 to $2.5M, with a timeline of 24-36 months, pending ComEd studies and PJM approval. However, no such feeder has been identified.
• Utility & IX Process: The interconnecting utility is ComEd, within the PJM RTO. The PJM interconnection queue is notoriously backlogged. A distribution connection would be managed by ComEd but is still subject to PJM's oversight and market rules.
• Feeder Configuration: