⚡ SLATE RD

MEMORANDUM

TO: Sunland America Corp. Development Committee
FROM: Senior BESS Site Evaluation Analyst
DATE: October 26, 2023
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Site Diligence Analysis - SLATE RD, Chicopee, MA (APN: 0372_00001)

This report provides a comprehensive due diligence analysis for a potential distribution-scale Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project on a 7.9-acre parcel located on Slate Rd in Chicopee, Hampden County, Massachusetts. The analysis evaluates the site's suitability based on key development criteria.

1. Site Access & Topography

Road Access: The subject property has frontage on Slate Rd. Based on satellite imagery review, Slate Rd appears to be a two-lane, paved local road. It seems to be in reasonable condition, likely capable of supporting standard construction traffic. However, its width and turning radii leading from major thoroughfares like MA-33 or I-90 would need to be confirmed with a physical site visit to ensure it can accommodate oversized and overweight vehicles.

Equipment Delivery: The primary concern for BESS development is the delivery of heavy equipment, including 40-foot battery containers (up to 80,000 lbs), medium-voltage transformers, and large cranes for placement. While Slate Rd itself seems adequate, the final access point onto the parcel is an undeveloped dirt path. A proper crushed-stone or paved construction entrance would need to be engineered and permitted, including a potential culvert if a drainage ditch is present. The feasibility of this entrance is high, but it represents a development cost.

Topography & Terrain: The parcel is currently wooded and appears relatively flat near the road, with a gentle slope downwards towards the rear (east). Significant tree clearing and grading will be required to create a level pad for the BESS compound, switchgear, and access roads. The cost of this site work could be moderate to significant and must be factored into the project pro forma.

Easements: Requires Verification. No access easements appear necessary given the direct road frontage. However, a title search is required to confirm there are no existing utility, conservation, or access easements burdening the property that could conflict with development.

2. Environmental Constraints

FEMA Flood Zone: Requires Verification. The FEMA flood zone designation is currently unknown. This is a critical data gap. Any portion of the site within a 100-year floodplain (Zone A/AE) would be undevelopable for critical infrastructure like a BESS or would require significant and costly elevation and mitigation measures. This must be investigated immediately via the FEMA Flood Map Service Center as a primary go/no-go screen.

Wetlands: Requires Verification. The presence of wetlands is unknown. Given the wooded nature of the site and its topography, there is a moderate to high probability of wetlands or vernal pools, especially in the lower-lying rear portion of the parcel. Massachusetts has stringent wetlands protection regulations (Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act) with significant buffer zone requirements (typically 100 feet). The presence of wetlands could severely constrain the buildable area and is a major development risk.

Critical Habitat / Species: The initial screening shows no designated critical habitat or protected areas on site, which is a positive finding. A formal Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) will be required to confirm this and consult state-level databases like the MA Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP).

Brownfield/Superfund Status: The data indicates 13 contaminated sites within a 2-mile radius. While this raises a concern about potential migratory contamination from off-site sources, the subject parcel itself is not listed. This is a double-edged sword:

• Risk: A Phase I ESA is critical to ensure the site itself is clean.
• Potential Advantage: If the site could be classified as a brownfield under IRA guidelines (e.g., due to prior undocumented dumping), it could qualify for the 10% ITC adder. However, given its "Vacant Land" history, this is unlikely. The primary takeaway is a risk that must be cleared via an ESA.

Pipeline Proximity: The absence of major gas pipelines within a 3-mile radius is a significant safety and layout advantage, eliminating concerns related to pipeline setbacks and explosion risk.

3. Grid Infrastructure & Interconnection

Nearest Substation: The Chicopee Hydroelectric Station is located 1.4 miles from the site. The provided voltage data (-999999 kV) is an error. Research indicates this station is part of the Chicopee Electric Light (CEL) municipal utility system and is likely a distribution-level facility (e.g., 13.8 kV). A 1.4-mile distance is challenging for a distribution-scale project; it will necessitate a costly and time-consuming line extension. The capacity of the substation and the specific feeder serving this area are critical unknowns.

Transmission Access: A 115kV transmission line is located 0.4 miles away but is noted as "NOT AVAILABLE." This likely means it is owned by a separate utility (e.g., Eversource) and/or has no available capacity. For a sub-5MW project, a transmission-level interconnection would be cost-prohibitive regardless. We should proceed assuming a distribution-level interconnection only.

Recommended Interconnection: A 13.8 kV (or similar) distribution-level interconnection to the CEL system is the only viable path. This will require constructing a new 1.4