DOCSLIB.ORG

The Law of Easements and Rights of Way in Vermont

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Law of Easements and Rights of Way in Vermont The Law of Easements and Rights of Way in Vermont May 31, 2007 Presented By: Liam L. Murphy, Esq. MSK Attorneys 275 College Street P.O. Box 4485 Burlington, VT 05406-4485 (802) 861-7000 www.mskvt.com [email protected] Presenter: Liam Murphy graduated from Drew University in 1976 and the Georgetown University Law Center in 1981. He was an associate with the Washington office of the Houston, Texas firm of Butler, Binion, Rice, Cook and Knapp from 1981 to 1983. In 1983, he returned to Vermont and became an associate with the Burlington office of Langrock, Sperry and Wool. He became a partner in that firm in 1987 and remained until 2004 when, together with Brian Sullivan and Catherine Kronk, he became a founding member of Murphy Sullivan Kronk, now MSK Attorneys. Since 1983, Liam's practice has focused on real estate transactions and litigation, land use and zoning law, environmental law and related business, commercial and financial transactions. From 1997 to 2000, Liam served as the Chair of the Real Property Committee of the Vermont Bar Association, and in 2001 was awarded the "Service Award" by the Vermont Bar Association. Since 1988, Liam has almost annually taught a course on "Title to Real Estate in Vermont" for lawyers and paralegals, and has published a companion publication. He is a frequent lecturer on land use and development law and related regulatory issues, appearing regularly at events sponsored by the Vermont Bar Association, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, and the Municipal Clerks and Treasurers Association. In addition to his practice, Liam is actively involved in community activities, helping to establish the Champlain Valley Greenbelt Alliance, a conservation group dedicated to the preservation of the scenic and working landscape along Vermont's major roadways with an initial focus on Route 7 from Shelburne to Middlebury. In addition, he was a Director of the Lake Champlain Land Trust from 1995 to 2001, and also provides volunteer legal services to a variety of Vermont land trusts and conservation organizations. LAW OF EASEMENTS IN VERMONT Index 1.0 EASEMENTS DEFINED…………………………………………………………………………...2 1.1 Easements Distinguished From Possessory Estates…………………………………….3 1.2 Easements Distinguished From Licenses……………………………………………….5 1.3 Easements Distinguished From Covenants………………………………………….....9 1.4 Easements Distinguished From Natural Rights……………………………………….11 1.5 Easements Distinguished From Profits………………………………………………..13 2.0 TYPES OF EASEMENTS…………………………………………………………………………15 2.1 Appurtenant v. Gross…………………………………………………………………..15 2.1.1 Transferability …………………………………………………………………..20 2.2 Affirmative v. Negative………………………………………………………………...21 3.0 CREATION OF EASEMENTS…………………………………………………………………...22 3.1 Express Easements……………………………………………………………………...22 3.1.1 Reserved Easements Versus Easement By Exception;……………………….22 3.1.1.a Excepted Easements not granted………………………………...26 3.2 Implied Easements……………………………………………………………………...27 3.2.1 Easements By Necessity……………………………………………………….27 3.2.2 Easements Implied By Prior Use (Quasi Easements)………………………..37 3.2.3 Easements By Prescription…………………………………………………….39 3.2.3.a Not Applicable To Certain Public Uses…………………………47 3.2.3.b Not Applicable To Utilities………………………………………61 3.2.4 Easements By Estoppel………………………………………………………...64 3.2.5 Easements By Reference To Plats……………………………………………..67 3.2.6 Easement By Dedication………………………………………………………74 3.2.7 Implied Easements for Lateral Support/Party Walls/ Light and Air 4.0 INTERPRETATION OF EASEMENTS…………………………………………………………..78 4.1 Intent Of The Parties……………………………………………………………………78 4.2 Scope Of Use By Owners Of Dominant Estate And Servient Estates………………82 4.3 Duty Of Care And Maintenance………………………………………………………89 5.0 LOCATION AND RELOCATION OF EASEMENTS…………………………………………..91 6.0 EXTINGUISHMENT AND ABANDONMENT OF EASEMENTS……………………………..96 6.1 Merger…………………………………………………………………………………..96 i 6.2 Extinguishment And Abandonment…………………………………………………...97 7.0 SPECIFIC EASEMENT TYPES………………………………………………………………….110 7.1 Scenic And View Easements and Light……………………………………………...110 7.2 Water…………………………………………………………………………………..112 7.4.1 Flowing………………………………………………………………………..112 7.4.2 Subsurface…………………………………………………………………….115 7.4.3 Public Trust…………………………………………………………………...118 7.4.4 Railroads………………………………………………………………………123 ii Toddler Property Law 1. If I like it, it's mine. 2. If it's in my hand, it's mine. 3. If I can take it from you, it's mine. 4. If I had it a little while ago, it's mine. 5. If it's mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way. 6. If I'm doing or building something, all the pieces are mine. 7. If it looks just like mine, it's mine. 8. If I saw it first, it's mine. 9. If I can see it, it's mine. 10. If I think it's mine, it's mine. 11. If I want it, it's mine. 12. If I "need" it, it's mine (yes, I know the difference between "want" and "need"!). 13. If I say it's mine, it's mine. 14. If you don't stop me from playing with it, it's mine. 15. If you tell me I can play with it, it's mine. 16. If it will upset me too much when you take it away from me, it's mine. 17. If I (think I) can play with it better than you can, it's mine. 18. If I play with it long enough, it's mine. 19. If you are playing with something and you put it down, it's mine. 20. If it's broken, it's yours (no wait, all the pieces are mine). The Toddler Property Law humorously reflects two attributes of human nature: we are born with an innate sense of property, and we tend to be very self-serving in our view of the world. RESTATING IMPLIED, PRESCRIPTIVE, AND STATUTORY EASEMENTS Real Property, Probate and Trust Journal, Spring 2005 by Hernandez, Michael V - 1 - 1.0 EASEMENTS DEFINED THE LAW OF EASEMENTS AND LICENSES IN LAND, Bruce and Ely (bold added) ¶1.01 “EASEMENT” DEFINED An easement is commonly defined as a nonpossessory interest in land of another. Several aspects of this definition are noteworthy. First, an easement is an interest in land, not merely a contract right. This distinction is important for various purposes, including resolving questions about the applicability of the Statute of Frauds and the availability of compensation for condemnation. Second, the nonpossessory feature of an easement differentiates it from an estate in land. An easement holder many only use the land burdened by the easement; he may not occupy and possess it as does an estate owner. Third, an easement burdens land possessed by someone other than the easement holder. This characteristic is a corollary of the nonpossessory element of an easement. It emphasizes the distinction between possession and use and highlights the fact that a possessor and an easement holder can simultaneously utilize the same parcel of land. An easement is an acquired interest, not a natural incident of landownership as are water rights and the right to support. Easements are created expressly, implied in certain circumstances, established by prescriptive use, or obtained by estoppel, custom, public trust, or condemnation. Land burdened by an easement is appropriately termed a servient tenement or a servient estate. If the easement benefits a particular parcel of land, that parcel is known as the dominant tenement or the dominant estate, and the easement is said to be appurtenant to it. If the easement only benefits an individual personally, not as owner of a particular parcel of land, the easement is termed in gross. In such cases, no dominant tenement exists. RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW, PROPERTY, SERVITUDES (American Law Institute, 3rd Edition, 2000) (bold added) § 1.1 Servitude Defined; Scope of Restatement (1) A servitude is a legal device that creates a right or an obligation that runs with land or an interest in land. (a) Running with land means that the right or obligation passes automatically to successive owners or occupiers of the land or the interest in land with which the right or obligation runs. (b) A right that runs with land is called a “benefit” and the interest in land with which it runs may be called the “benefited” or “dominant” estate. (c) An obligation that runs with land is called a “burden” and the interest in land with which it runs may be called the “burdened” or “servient” estate. (2) The servitudes covered by this Restatement are easements, profits, and covenants. To the extent that special rules and considerations apply to the following servitudes, they are not within the scope of this Restatement: (a) covenants in leases; (b) covenants in mortgages and other property security devices; (c) profits for the removal of timber, oil, gas, and minerals. - 2 - (3) Zoning and other public land-use regulations, the public-navigation servitude, the public-trust doctrine, and rights determined by riparian, littoral, prior- appropriation, or ground-water doctrines are not servitudes within the meaning of the term as used in this Restatement. § 1.2 Easement and Profit Defined (1) An easement creates a nonpossessory right to enter and use land in the possession of another and obligates the possessor not to interfere with the uses authorized by the easement. (2) A profit à prendre is an easement that confers the right to enter and remove timber, minerals, oil, gas, game, or other substances from land in the possession of another. It is referred to as a “profit” in this Restatement. (3) The burden of an easement or profit is always appurtenant. The benefit may be either appurtenant or in gross. (4) As used in this Restatement, the term “easement” includes an irrevocable license to enter and use land in the possession of another and excludes a negative easement. A negative easement is included in the term “restrictive covenant” defined in § 1.3. § 1.4 Terms “Real Covenant” and “Equitable Servitude” Dropped The terms “real covenant” and “equitable servitude” describe servitudes encompassed within the term “covenant that runs with land” and are not used in this Restatement except to describe the evolution of servitudes law.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Anti-Lien: Another Security Interest in Land*
    The Anti-Lien: Another Security Interest in Land* Uriel Reichmant The law recognizes various security interests in land, which are de- signed to provide two distinct advantages over unsecured interests: the right to priority over general creditors in bankruptcy proceedings, and the right to satisfy the debt from a specified parcel of property. This article proposes recognition of an intermediate concept between secured and unsecured debt: an interest in land that secures to some extent the repayment of a debt, but does not possess the twin characteristics of full security interests. This interest in land, the "anti-lien,"1 is a preventive measure; the debtor's power of alienation and power to grant another security interest are suspended while the debt remains outstanding. The anti-lien creditor has no powers or rights other than this passive rem- edy; for all other purposes, he is treated as a simple debt creditor. The few cases that have dealt with contracts containing anti-lien re- strictions have limited the analysis to a narrow question: did the con- tract create an equitable lien (that possesses the characteristics of a traditional security interest) or merely a personal obligation? Framing the question in this way eliminated consideration of the anti-lien alter- native-an alternative that is potentially useful when a regular security interest is unavailable or economically impractical. This paper attempts to explain deficiencies in the application of the equitable lien analysis to the anti-lien situation and argues the case for the anti-lien concept. Just a decade ago, documents evidencing an anti-lien approach were widely used in California.
    [Show full text]
  • Contracts Becomes in the Purchaser with Notice a Specific Duty to Perform the Covenant
    Sec. 3 PRIVATE ADJUSTMENTS S437 contracts becomes in the purchaser with notice a specific duty to perform the covenant. (2) The other theory explains the enforcement of restrictive equitable servitudes as an extension of the legal doctrine of negative easements to new situations. Few if any courts follow either the “contract” theory or the “property” theory of equitable servitudes consistently, but the general view that one takes of the theories may affect results. Thus, the fact that the English courts came not to apply Tulk to affirmative covenants and, as we shall see infra, p. S444, did not allow the benefit of equitable servitudes to be held in gross, may reflect [p*962] a “property” theory of equitable servitudes. In England, as we have seen supra, p. S418, the benefit of an easement may not be held in gross, and courts throughout the Anglo-American world have had difficulty with enforcing easements that compel the holder of the burdened land to do something. See note 3, supra. Other questions the answers to which might depend on whether one espoused a “contract” or a “property” theory of equitable servitudes are: (1) Is the original convenantor still bound on the contract after he or she has sold the land? (The original covenantor is bound as surety where the covenant is contained in a lease. See DKM3, p. 693. By and large, the original covenantor is not bound after he or she has conveyed away a fee estate. 2 A.L.P. § 9.18.) (2) What formalities must be followed in creating the covenant? (You will recall that the Statute of Frauds has different requirements for contracts concerning land and conveyances of interests in land.
    [Show full text]
  • GOOGLE LLC V. ORACLE AMERICA, INC
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus GOOGLE LLC v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT No. 18–956. Argued October 7, 2020—Decided April 5, 2021 Oracle America, Inc., owns a copyright in Java SE, a computer platform that uses the popular Java computer programming language. In 2005, Google acquired Android and sought to build a new software platform for mobile devices. To allow the millions of programmers familiar with the Java programming language to work with its new Android plat- form, Google copied roughly 11,500 lines of code from the Java SE pro- gram. The copied lines are part of a tool called an Application Pro- gramming Interface (API). An API allows programmers to call upon prewritten computing tasks for use in their own programs. Over the course of protracted litigation, the lower courts have considered (1) whether Java SE’s owner could copyright the copied lines from the API, and (2) if so, whether Google’s copying constituted a permissible “fair use” of that material freeing Google from copyright liability. In the proceedings below, the Federal Circuit held that the copied lines are copyrightable.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Claremore Public Works Authority Meeting Council Chambers, City Hall, 104 S
    MINUTES OF CLAREMORE PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 104 S. MUSKOGEE, CLAREMORE, OKLAHOMA MARCH 03, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order by Mayor Brant Shallenburger at 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Nan Pope called roll. The following were: Present: Brant Shallenburger, Buddy Robertson, Tony Mullenger, Flo Guthrie, Mick Webber, Terry Chase, Tom Lehman, Paula Watson Absent: Don Myers Staff Present: City Manager Troy Powell, Nan Pope, Serena Kauk, Matt Mueller, Randy Elliott, Cassie Sowers, Phil Stowell, Steve Lett, Daryl Golbek, Joe Kays, Gene Edwards, Tim Miller, Tamryn Cluck, Mark Dowler Pledge of Allegiance by all. Invocation by James Graham, Verdigris United Methodist Church. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Motion by Mullenger, second by Lehman that the agenda for the regular CPWA meeting of March 03, 2008, be approved as written. 8 yes, Mullenger, Lehman, Robertson, Guthrie, Shallenburger, Webber, Chase, Watson. ITEMS UNFORESEEN AT THE TIME AGENDA WAS POSTED None CALL TO THE PUBLIC None CURRENT BUSINESS Motion by Mullenger, second by Lehman to approve the following consent items: (a) Minutes of Claremore Public Works Authority meeting on February 18, 2008, as printed. (b) All claims as printed. (c) Approve budget supplement for upgrading the electric distribution system and adding an additional Substation for the new Oklahoma Plaza Development - $586,985 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment. (Serena Kauk) (d) Approve budget supplement for purchase of an additional concrete control house for new Substation #5 for Oklahoma Plaza Development - $93,946 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment. (Serena Kauk) (e) Approve budget supplement for electrical engineering contract with Ledbetter, Corner and Associates for engineering design phase for Substation #5 - Oklahoma Plaza Development - $198,488 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles Transportation Transit History – South LA
    Los Angeles Transportation Transit History – South LA Matthew Barrett Metro Transportation Research Library, Archive & Public Records - metro.net/library Transportation Research Library & Archive • Originally the library of the Los • Transportation research library for Angeles Railway (1895-1945), employees, consultants, students, and intended to serve as both academics, other government public outreach and an agencies and the general public. employee resource. • Partner of the National • Repository of federally funded Transportation Library, member of transportation research starting Transportation Knowledge in 1971. Networks, and affiliate of the National Academies’ Transportation • Began computer cataloging into Research Board (TRB). OCLC’s World Catalog using Library of Congress Subject • Largest transit operator-owned Headings and honoring library, forth largest transportation interlibrary loan requests from library collection after U.C. outside institutions in 1978. Berkeley, Northwestern University and the U.S. DOT’s Volpe Center. • Archive of Los Angeles transit history from 1873-present. • Member of Getty/USC’s L.A. as Subject forum. Accessing the Library • Online: metro.net/library – Library Catalog librarycat.metro.net – Daily aggregated transportation news headlines: headlines.metroprimaryresources.info – Highlights of current and historical documents in our collection: metroprimaryresources.info – Photos: flickr.com/metrolibraryarchive – Film/Video: youtube/metrolibrarian – Social Media: facebook, twitter, tumblr, google+,
    [Show full text]
  • Vergara V. State of California: a Political Analysis and Implications for Principal Practice
    Vergara v. State of California: A Political Analysis and Implications for Principal Practice This manuscript has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and endorsed by the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration as a significant contribution to the scholarship and practice of school administration and K-12 education. Lolita A. Tabron Texas A&M University Beverly J. Irby Texas A&M University This political analysis uses the Vergara case as an example of how principals can be dynamic leaders who are well prepared for and engaged in their political terrain. This will be important to decrease judicial dependency and legislative interference to better ensure that reform begins with those closest to the problem. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, Vol. 16, No. 1– April, 2015 ISSN: 1532-0723 © 2015 National Council of Professors of Educational Administration 31 Introduction Public schools have moved at a glacial pace to reform the existing system to one that is responsive to a nation whose students have become increasingly more diverse (Cohen, Moffitt, & Goldin, 2007; Plank & Davis, 2010). Indeed, it seems the public education system has insulated itself and become reluctant to change. At least four waves of education reform have been directed towards the United States public education system with little change in performance gaps among racially diverse students (Boyd, 2010; Gay, 2009). As a result, third party criticisms (businesses, teacher unions, taxpayers) have created a space for the government to intervene (Plank & Davis). The 2012 the Vergara v. State of California case became a prime example of how a tug of war between political actors led to government intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhaustion and the Limits of Remote-Control Property
    Denver Law Review Volume 93 Issue 4 Symposium - Future World IP: Legal Article 7 Response to the Tech Revolution December 2020 Exhaustion and the Limits of Remote-Control Property Molly Shaffer Van Houweling Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Molly Shaffer Van Houweling, Exhaustion and the Limits of Remote-Control Property, 93 Denv. L. Rev. 951 (2016). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. EXHAUSTION AND THE LIMITS OF REMOTE-CONTROL PROPERTY MOLLY SHAFFER VAN HOUWELING t ABSTRACT In this Article I argue that intellectual property (IP) exhaustion should be understood against the backdrop of a long history of skepti- cism toward what I call "remote-control" property rights. IP is not the only field of law that gives remote rights-holders the ability to constrain the behavior of other people to use things in their rightful possession. Tangible property law-in particular the law of servitudes-features similar mechanisms, but hems them in with doctrinal limitations. Look- ing to this body of law helps us more clearly to recognize remote-control property's benefits and costs and, thus, to articulate a rationale for IP exhaustion as a limitation on remote-control IP. At the same time, re- mote-control IP is special. Restrictions on the use of works of creativity and invention have implications for the promotion of progress of science and the useful arts.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Artistic Property with the Equitable Servitude Doctrine Thomas W
    Marquette Law Review Volume 46 Article 4 Issue 4 Spring 1963 Protecting Artistic Property With the Equitable Servitude Doctrine Thomas W. Bertz Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Thomas W. Bertz, Protecting Artistic Property With the Equitable Servitude Doctrine, 46 Marq. L. Rev. 430 (1963). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol46/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROTECTING ARTISTIC PROPERTY WITH THE EQUITABLE SERVITUDE DOCTRINE* TiOMAS W. BERTZ** Law like nature abhors a vacuum. And if there be no law fostering and protecting the business interests of a growing segment of indus- try, the courts will readily adapt existing legal doctrines to meet the commercial needs of an industrial innovation. This principle of law has asserted itself repeatedly and the time may be ripe for it to assert itself again. The vacuum, so to speak, is the void in the law caused by the inadequate coverage of the Copyright Act; the filling force is the resurgence of the doctrine of equitable servitudes as applied to chattels. Although the doctrine has existed for over a century, the employ- ment of it to enforce restrictions placed upon personalty in the mer- cantile world has been judicially restrained. The infrequent use of the doctrine was caused by the courts' rejection of it as an enforceable equitable device and by their past refusal to give full recognition to it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neighborly Substation the Neighborly Substation Electricity, Zoning, and Urban Design
    MANHATTAN INSTITUTE CENTER FORTHE RETHINKING DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION Hope Cohen 2008 er B ecem D THE NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION THE NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION Electricity, Zoning, and Urban Design Hope Cohen Deputy Director Center for Rethinking Development Manhattan Institute In 1879, the remarkable thing about Edison’s new lightbulb was that it didn’t burst into flames as soon as it was lit. That disposed of the first key problem of the electrical age: how to confine and tame electricity to the point where it could be usefully integrated into offices, homes, and every corner of daily life. Edison then designed and built six twenty-seven-ton, hundred-kilowatt “Jumbo” Engine-Driven Dynamos, deployed them in lower Manhattan, and the rest is history. “We will make electric light so cheap,” Edison promised, “that only the rich will be able to burn candles.” There was more taming to come first, however. An electrical fire caused by faulty wiring seriously FOREWORD damaged the library at one of Edison’s early installations—J. P. Morgan’s Madison Avenue brownstone. Fast-forward to the massive blackout of August 2003. Batteries and standby generators kicked in to keep trading alive on the New York Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ. But the Amex failed to open—it had backup generators for the trading-floor computers but depended on Consolidated Edison to cool them, so that they wouldn’t melt into puddles of silicon. Banks kept their ATM-control computers running at their central offices, but most of the ATMs themselves went dead. Cell-phone service deteriorated fast, because soaring call volumes quickly drained the cell- tower backup batteries.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Chevrolet Volt Battery System
    2016 CHEVROLET VOLT BATTERY SYSTEM 2016 CHEVROLET VOLT BATTERY SYSTEM KEY WINS GEN 1 GEN 2 ■ Revolutionary liquid cooled ■ Mass reduction of 13 battery pack kg (196 kg) • Foundation for battery life performance ■ Useable capacity ■ World class Quality, Reliability, increase of 25% Durability and Capacity Retention (11.2kWh to 14kWh) • GM study of more than 300 ■ Power increase of 9% Volts in service in CA since launch in 2011: Approximately ■ Modular system 15 percent of owners achieve architecture more than 40 miles of EV range ■ All climate operation GEN 1 VOLT Cell Chemistry NMC-LMO Pouch BATTERY PACK Cell Configuration 96S 3P (288 cells) Discharge Power (10 s) 110 kW Charge Power (10 sec) 60 kW Usable Energy 10.2 – 11.2 kWh Total Energy 16.0 – 17.1 kWh Energy Density-Volume 118 Wh/l Energy Density-Mass 87 Wh/kg Nominal Voltage 360 V Mass 196 kg Pack Volume 145 L Cooling System Direct liquid fin # of Modules 9 Module Sizes 18 & 36 Cells GEN 2 VOLT Cell Chemistry NMC-LMO Pouch BATTERY PACK Cell Configuration 96S 2P (192 cells) Discharge Power (10s) 120 kW (+9%) Charge Power (10s) 60 kW Usable Energy 14.0 kWh (+25%) Total Energy 18.4 kWh (+8%) Energy Density-Volume 119 Wh/l (+1%) Energy Density-Mass 101 Wh/kg (+16%) Nominal Voltage 360 V Peak Voltage 395 V Peak Current 430 A Mass 183 kg Pack Volume 154 L Cooling System Direct liquid fin # of Modules 7 Module Sizes 24 & 32 Cells COMPARISONS GEN1 VOLT BATTERY PACK GEN2 VOLT BATTERY PACK Cell Chemistry NMC-LMO Pouch NMC-LMO Pouch Cell Configuration 96S 3P (288 cells) 96S 2P (192 cells) Discharge
    [Show full text]
  • Vermont Public Transit Policy Plan
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. ES-1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ ES-1 Vermont’s Existing Transit System ................................................................................................................. ES-1 Critical Themes and Challenges ....................................................................................................................... ES-1 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. ES-2 Policy Plan Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... ES-3 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 Role of the PTPP ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Current State Policy .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Role of the Human Service Transportation Coordination Plan
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia State Infrastructure Report (January 1, 2019 – December 31, 2019)
    2019 Virginia State Infrastructure Report (January 1, 2019 – December 31, 2019) May 2020 (updated July 2020) This report reflects information for the portion of Virginia within the PJM service territory. www.pjm.com | Public PJM©2020 Table of Contents 1. Planning • Generation Portfolio Analysis • Transmission Analysis • Load Forecast 2. Markets • Market Analysis 3. Operations • Emissions Data www.pjm.com | Public 2 PJM©2020 Executive Summary (May 2020) • Existing Capacity: Natural gas represents approximately 49.1 percent of the total installed capacity in the Virginia service territory while coal represents approximately 12.4 percent. In PJM natural gas and coal account respectively for 42.4 and 28.7 percent of total installed capacity. • Interconnection Requests: Solar represents 57.1 percent of new interconnection requests in Virginia, while natural gas represents approximately 29.4 percent of new requests. • Deactivations: 1,397.8 MW in Virginia gave notification of deactivation in 2019. • RTEP 2019: Virginia’s 2019 RTEP projects total approximately $1.4 billion in investment. Approximately 23.6 percent of that represents supplemental projects. These investment figures only represent RTEP projects that cost at least $5 million. www.pjm.com | Public 3 PJM©2020 Executive Summary (May 2020) • Load Forecast: Virginia’s load is projected to grow between 0.7 and 1.4 percent annually over the next ten years. Comparatively, the overall PJM RTO projected load growth rate is 0.6 percent. • 2022/23 Capacity Market: No Base Residual Auction was conducted in 2019. For the most recent auction results, please see the 2018 Virginia State Infrastructure Report. • 1/1/19 – 12/31/19 Market Performance: Virginia’s average hourly LMPs were slightly higher than PJM average hourly LMPs.
    [Show full text]