ARTICLE
24 February 2026

Interconnection Deposit Financing: A Novel Approach

FL
Foley & Lardner

Contributor

Foley & Lardner LLP looks beyond the law to focus on the constantly evolving demands facing our clients and their industries. With over 1,100 lawyers in 24 offices across the United States, Mexico, Europe and Asia, Foley approaches client service by first understanding our clients’ priorities, objectives and challenges. We work hard to understand our clients’ issues and forge long-term relationships with them to help achieve successful outcomes and solve their legal issues through practical business advice and cutting-edge legal insight. Our clients view us as trusted business advisors because we understand that great legal service is only valuable if it is relevant, practical and beneficial to their businesses.
Topping the early to-do list for developers of renewable energy projects is snagging a spot in the interconnection queue.
United States Finance and Banking
Foley & Lardner are most popular:
  • within Coronavirus (COVID-19), Cannabis & Hemp and Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring topic(s)

Topping the early to-do list for developers of renewable energy projects is snagging a spot in the interconnection queue. This task has become particularly important as high demand has led to long wait times to interconnect – estimated at four to nine years for wind, solar and battery storage projects – so developers often seek a place in line even before permitting and site control is in place. In exchange for a spot in the interconnection queue, developers must pay costly, though initially refundable, interconnection deposits that vary by project size and interconnection provider. As the project hits certain milestones in development, the interconnection deposits become non-refundable.

Foley & Lardner recently represented a sponsor client in a novel development financing for these interconnection deposits. The loan was sized using a “borrowing base” consisting of refundable interconnection deposits made by the borrower, and these deposits were pledged as collateral to the lender. As projects advanced through development and the deposits became non-refundable, those deposits would drop out of the borrowing base and the loan sizing would be recalculated. In the event of a default under the loan facility, the lender would have the right to withdraw the project from the interconnection queue, and thus liquidate the collateral by triggering a refund of the interconnection deposits which would be paid directly to the lender to pay off the outstanding loan. This structure required the lender to conduct extensive due diligence on the refundable nature of the interconnection deposits, resulting in higher legal costs at the front end. However, the lender viewed this structure as lower risk, resulting in lower borrowing costs. Therefore, the transaction costs were ultimately more than offset by the lower cost of the borrowings.

Historically, because projects have few assets in the early development phase, development loans have largely been backed by relying on the borrower's or upstream parent's balance sheets. Instead, these parties have successfully pioneered an asset-based project finance model, with an opportunity for it to be replicated by sponsors in the future to address a crucial step in the development of energy projects. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More