Playbook

• Frame every project in five questions: MW (requested, initial, later, evidence-supported) · Date (needed vs. forecast, and what controls it) · Cost (company exposure, scope, allocation) · Risk (what could change MW, date, cost or the commercial outcome) · Decision (what, who, by when, why).
• The Director owns the quality of the discussion; Engineering validates technical conclusions; Legal owns contract meaning; Finance assesses exposure; authorized owners approve commitments.
• A useful update states the outcome, the change, the business consequence and the decision needed. Polish never substitutes for evidence.

1. Site identification — define the load and date that make the site viable; commitments: land option, diligence spend.
2. Preliminary power screening — find obvious obstacles; nearby lines are not spare capacity; spend buys information, not MW.
3. Utility inquiry — reach the right utility contact and process; informal comments are not commitments.
4. Load definition — a controlled load specification at the delivery point (not IT MW); later changes risk restudy.
5. Utility feasibility assessment — preliminary capacity, phasing and unknowns; concept timing is not a promise.
6. Formal large-load request — a complete submission under the right load process (not generator interconnection); verify the amount, refundability and trigger of any fees, deposits or security.
7. System studies — what binds first, under which case, at what MW; review restudy fees before authorizing extra work.
8. Constraints & upgrades — which upgrade unlocks which MW, and who owns it; count each upgrade once.
9. Commercial negotiation — align service terms, economics, milestones and risk; watch cancellation exposure and tariff limits.
10. Agreements — confirm covered MW, dates and remaining conditions; execution is not unconditional service.
11. Engineering / permitting / procurement — long-lead items, rights-of-way and orders; capture cancellation and change terms.
12. Construction — find the activity that controls energization; percent complete can hide it.
13. Testing & commissioning — physical completion is not operational approval; watch service and minimum-demand triggers.
14. Energization — record exactly what is energized and authorized; it is not the full request.
15. Load ramp — keep demand within authorized capacity; watch later-upgrade slippage and minimum-demand obligations.

Phase, accountable coordinator, evidence date, open questions, next gate and commitment owner.

• Utility: large-load / key-account lead (the coordinator), transmission and distribution planning, substation engineering, system operations, power supply, regulatory and commercial teams, economic development.
• External: ISO/RTO where applicable, consultants, state and local economic development.
• Internal: Development and sales/leasing, design and engineering, preconstruction, construction and supply chain, Finance, Legal and Tax, Energy and Policy, leadership and authorized decision owners.

• RTOs/ISOs run regional grid and market functions; retail service is a separate relationship. Jurisdiction and entity type matter.
• Before a utility meeting, align the question, facts and desired outcome. Afterwards, record what was confirmed vs. preliminary, the source, owner and next date. Keep one consistent load story.

• MW is active power; MVA is apparent power. MVA ≈ MW ÷ power factor (100 MW at 0.95 ≈ 105.3 MVA) — not a sizing method.
• Transmission moves power across the network; distribution delivers it locally. Substations connect them, transformers change voltage, and feeders carry power from a substation into the area it serves.
• N-1 means loss of a single element; the contingencies, criteria and permitted actions must still be defined. It is not a promise of uninterrupted service.
• UPS and backup generation support equipment through an interruption; neither replaces permanent utility service, and generation needs its own fuel, controls and permitting review.
• In this prototype: MW is measured at the utility delivery point; phases are separate increments with separate evidence and dates; "firm" means only what the tariff or agreement says; stronger/committed MW counts only capacity covered by active agreements or energized service.

Two redundant 200 MW feeds are not 400 MW of usable capacity. Orion's 200 MW initial phase is part of its 500 MW request, not added to it.

• Thermal — an element exceeds its rating, often after a contingency. Ask: which element, rating and season; how many MW before the limit; what binds next. Evaluate: reinforcement, an added circuit, topology change, a studied limit on initial load.
• Generation / resource adequacy — enough dependable supply for the new load. Ask: is it supply, delivery or both; which additions are assumed; what if they slip. Evaluate: timing, phasing, validated flexibility, supply options with Energy.
• Substation / transformer capacity — transformer, bus or breaker limits; an MVA rating is not customer MW. Ask: what survives the specified outage; is there space; does a change create a new limit. Evaluate: added transformer or bay, replacement, alternate connection, phased loading.
• Voltage / reactive performance — voltage must hold in normal and disturbance conditions. Ask: steady-state or recovery; which criterion fails; are the devices and controls modeled. Evaluate: reactive support, control changes, reinforcement, reduced or phased load.
• N-1 / topology — the configuration limits service after losing an element. Ask: what disconnects; do "independent" feeds share a failure; are temporary operating measures acceptable. Evaluate: alternate topology, an added path, studied service limits.
• Stability / system strength — dynamic behavior can limit service even when steady-state studies pass. Ask: is the load model representative and manufacturer-backed; what triggers restudy; how is behavior checked at commissioning. Evaluate: validated controls, equipment changes, an operating envelope.
• Short-circuit / protection — fault duty vs. equipment ratings, and protection coordination. Ask: rating, coordination or modeling issue; who owns the equipment; does the fix change other studies. Evaluate: equipment upgrades, configuration or protection work.
• Constructability — a viable concept still needs a route, permits, equipment, labor and sequence. Ask: which date is evidenced; what is on the critical path; who owns rights-of-way and permits; what is the fallback if the route or equipment slot fails. Evaluate: route alternatives, early investigation, procurement sequencing, phasing.

1. Validate identity and scope — project, phase MW, delivery point, load version, draft or final, utility acceptance.
2. Read conclusions against assumptions — constraints, cases, limits, exclusions, dependencies.
3. Test decision relevance — screening, more study, negotiation, or a specific commitment.
4. Reconcile delivery and exposure — upgrades to milestones, owners, estimate basis, unknown allocation.
5. Close the review — findings, disputed points, next actions, approval sought; track open issues.

Agree the question, boundaries, input versions, cases, checkpoints, deliverables and exclusions up front; require a plain-language summary and documented responses to significant comments.

"The report evaluates [scope] using [assumptions]. The binding issue is [finding and case]. It supports [limited conclusion], subject to [conditions]. The MW/date/cost consequence is [implication]. [Owner] must resolve [open item] before [date]."

Covered MW, delivery point and phase; what the date means (target, estimate, obligation) and what starts the clock; tariff and charges; term; minimum demand and ramp; security and deposits (instrument, trigger, release); termination and remedies.

Scope, ownership and interfaces; estimate, company share, exclusions and contingency; overrun responsibility, change control and true-up; payment and procurement milestones; cancellation exposure; what is authorized now vs. later — an estimate is not a cap.

Technical requirements, studies, upgrades, milestones, operating and telemetry conditions and restudy triggers; reconcile its scope and dates with the other documents.

Verified land rights, parcels, route and access for construction and operations, with dates matched to the schedule. A mapped route is not an acquired right.

Allocation is who bears a cost; recovery is how it is collected. Ask for the tariff or agreement basis, the company share and the payment mechanism.

1. Public / desktop screening — a reason to investigate; justifies limited diligence spend.
2. Utility preliminary indication — a concept with stated assumptions; learn more before raising at-risk spend.
3. Study results — a result for a specified model, phase and case; does it justify the next commercial step?
4. Executed agreements — covered capacity and obligations within stated conditions; are the residual risks acceptable to authorized approvers?
5. Construction progress — evidence of delivery work; align payments with verified progress.
6. Commissioned capacity — energized service for the authorized increment; what remains for ramp and later phases?

• Confidence can fall when assumptions, scope, agreements or delivery conditions change.
• Keep three questions separate: What is the forecast cost? What must be paid or secured next? What could be lost if the project stops? Deposits, collateral and termination exposure can overlap — never add them blindly.
• Name stranded investment: company spending that loses value if service is delayed, reduced or cancelled.

• Commercial negotiation — MW, timing, cost allocation, deposits, payment milestones, phasing, overruns, termination economics, remedies.
• Contract negotiation — the agreement as a whole: how commercial outcomes, conditions and provisions work together.
• Legal support — counsel leads precise language: indemnity, liability limits, warranties, force majeure, governing law, drafting.

1. Prepare — the decision it enables, the evidence, target and acceptable alternatives, approvals needed; check which terms are tariff-controlled.
2. Discuss — what drives the utility's MW, date, cost and security position; explore conditional packages (such as a smaller first phase) only if the utility offers and validates them.
3. Document — one issue list with position, response, owner and date; distinguish an idea, an offer, an agreed business point and an executed term.
4. Escalate — the unresolved question, alternatives tried, cost of delay and help requested.

Public data → consultant screening → utility preliminary assessment → formal utility study → contractual commitment.

• Give Development a short memo: power and ramp needed, decision deadline, infrastructure context, utility position, service concept, major uncertainties and the next evidence step. Continuing diligence is not a commitment to a construction or leasing date.
• Compare sites on the same basis — delivery-point MW, initial and full service, date precision, cost scope and confidence — and name the unknown most likely to change the ranking.
• A regional plan entry is not site capacity, cost or a date. In a new market, bring in Energy and Policy early.

• Thermal — which element and contingency bind first? (Scenario A)
• Resource adequacy — is supply timing limiting service? (Scenario A)
• Substation / transformer — which rating or interface limits the phase? (Scenario B)
• Voltage / reactive — which condition and voltage criterion fail?
• N-1 / topology — what happens after the element is lost? (Scenario A)
• Stability / system strength — is the modeled load behavior credible?
• Short-circuit / protection — is equipment duty or coordination unresolved?
• Constructability — which permit, equipment or handoff controls the date? (Scenario D)

MW by phase, target vs. forecast, remaining study and approval work, exposure and estimate confidence, next commitment, dependencies, operating restrictions, business impact, owner and deadline — always including "continue the current plan" and "defer".

Interactions — phasing can change ramp obligations, equipment changes can trigger restudy, and temporary power needs its own engineering, environmental, fuel, cost and utility review.

• One summary per project, plus phases, milestones, constraints, risks, decisions, commitments, contacts and documents. Every material fact has an owner, source and as-of date; planned, forecast and actual dates stay separate.
• Weekly: gather updates, validate changes, reconcile records, issue a brief. Biweekly: resolve cross-functional tradeoffs, review upcoming commitments and assign leadership actions.
• Risk log: severity Low / Moderate / High / Critical (Unknown if unassessed), with rationale, trigger, mitigation and owner. Separate a future risk from an issue that has occurred; an empty log does not mean no risk.
• One process reference per utility: steps, sourced durations, financial commitments, cost responsibilities, when capacity becomes certain, change and exit terms, and review owner.
• Budget control: company exposure is the full forecast for the defined scope — separate from budget, cash calls and security. Never add deposits or overlapping scenarios to it; unknown stays unknown.
• Decision page: objective, evidence, options with MW/date/cost/risk impacts, reversibility, next commitment and the approval sought.

• A · 500 MW can't be delivered by the target date — Identify the binding constraint → validate assumptions → determine interim MW → evaluate phased energization → identify technical and commercial alternatives → quantify cost and schedule → negotiate → present decision options. Don't say "there is no power" if phased service exists, or "solved" when only a candidate mitigation exists.
• B · Utility can initially deliver only 200 MW — When can the 200 MW be energized, and on what conditions? What unlocks the remaining 300 MW? Can the campus ramp match the upgrade? What commitment applies to each phase? Can design preserve flexibility without unapproved spend? 200 + 300 = 500 MW, not 700.
• C · Upgrade estimate rises materially — Find the cause: scope change, estimate refinement, allocation change or escalation. Check who bears it and any cap or true-up actually present; reconcile forecast, budget and cash; compare continuing, revising and deferring; escalate beyond confirmed authority.
• D · Energization moves 12 months — Find the critical-path cause; test recovery, interim capacity and resequencing; consider temporary power only after full technical, environmental and commercial review; quantify the business impact; check actual rights and remedies with Legal; keep the old target, old forecast and new forecast distinct.

1. Orient — the framework and lifecycle; explain a lifecycle stage vs. power confidence.
2. Meet — relationship owners; know who validates, coordinates and decides.
3. Interpret — fundamentals and study review; name the binding constraint and the evidence limits.
4. Protect — agreements and commercial protection; separate forecast cost, deposit, security, minimum demand and cancellation exposure.
5. Apply — follow Orion from project record to playbook to brief.
6. Operate — prepare a traceable weekly update.
7. Improve — propose one evidence-based improvement.

• A study supports initial service but no capacity agreement is executed — can all MW be called committed? No.
• Does a large security amount raise the infrastructure forecast? No — record it separately.
• The target moved to match a delayed forecast — did the delay disappear? No.
• A risk is Closed — did it improve? Only if the records show it.
• Can AI approve engineering because a deadline is near? No.