executive summary - aeso · executive summary project overview ... existing transmission system in...

Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: SS-7 Substation Upgrade

Project and System Access Studies (PSAS) Group

Page 1 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Executive Summary

Project Overview

ENMAX Power Corporation (EPC), in its capacity as the legal owner of an electric distribution

system (DFO), has submitted a request for system access service to the Alberta Electric

System Operator (AESO), to reliably serve load growth within the City of Calgary.

The DFO’s request for system access service includes a request for a Rate DTS, Demand

Transmission Service, contract capacity increase of 5 MW, from 35 MW to 40 MW, for the

system access service provided at the existing SS-7 substation,1 and a request for transmission

development (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested upgrades to the existing

SS-7 substation.

The requested in-service date (ISD) for the Project is December, 2018.

This report details the engineering studies undertaken to assess the impact of the Project on the

performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system (AIES).

Existing System

Geographically, the Project is located in the AESO planning area of Calgary (Area 6), which is

part of the AESO Calgary Planning Region. Calgary (Area 6) is adjacent to the planning areas

of Seebe (Area 44), Airdrie (Area 57), Strathmore / Blackie (Area 45), and High River (Area 46).

From a transmission system perspective, Calgary (Area 6) consists primarily of 138 kV and

240 kV transmission systems. The existing SS-7 substation is a point-of-delivery (POD)

substation, which is connected to the AIES by two existing 138 kV transmission lines:

138 kV transmission line 7.82L, which connects the SS-7 substation to Sarcee 42S

substation; and,

138 kV transmission line 7.84L, which connects the SS-7 substation to SS-36 substation.

The existing constraints in the Calgary Planning Region are managed in accordance with the

procedures set out Section 302.1 of the ISO Rules, Real Time Transmission Constraint

Management (TCM Rule).

Study Summary

Study area for the Project

The Study Area for the Project consists of Calgary (Area 6), including the tie lines connecting

Calgary (Area 6) to the rest of the AIES. All transmission facilities within the Study Area were

studied and were monitored to assess the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES,

including any violations of the Reliability Criteria (as defined in Section 2.1.1).

1 The SS-7 substation is also referred to as the No. 7 Substation.



Page 2 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Studies performed for the Project

Power flow studies were performed for the 2018 winter peak (2018 WP) and the 2019 summer

peak (2019 SP) pre-Project and post-Project scenarios.

Voltage stability studies were performed for the 2018 WP post-Project scenario.

Results of the Pre-Project Studies

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition. A thermal

criteria violation was observed under Category B conditions. No voltage criteria violations were

observed under Category B conditions.

Connection Alternatives

The AESO, in consultation with the DFO and the legal owner of transmission facilities (TFO)

examined three connection alternatives to meet the DFO’s request for system access service:

Alternative 1- Replace Two Transformers at SS-7 Substation

Alternative 1 involves upgrading the existing SS-7 substation, including replacing both of the

existing 138/25 kV transformers with two 138/25 kV transformers of higher capacity.

Alternative 1 also involves adding one 138 kV circuit breaker, and associated equipment. In

addition, Alternative 1 involves adding a new 25 kV distribution feeder, approximately 5 km in

length.

Alternative 2- Add a Third Transformer at SS-7 Substation

Alternative 2 involves upgrading the existing SS-7 substation, including adding one 138/25 kV

transformer. Alternative 2 also involves adding one 138 kV circuit breaker, four 25 kV feeder

circuit breakers and associated equipment. To complete the required upgrades, the TFO has

advised the AESO that expansion and/or modification of the 138 kV and 25 kV busses would be

required. In addition, Alternative 2 involves adding a total of approximately 14 km of 25 kV

distribution feeders.

Alternative 3- Replace one Transformer at SS-7 Substation and Add a Transformer at SS-

28 Substation

Alternative 3 involves upgrading the existing SS-7 substation, including replacing one of the

existing 138/25 kV transformers with one 138/25 kV transformer of higher capacity and adding

one 138 kV circuit breaker and associated equipment. Alternative 3 also involves upgrading the

existing SS-28 substation, including adding one 138/25 kV transformer, one 138 kV circuit

breaker, four 25 kV circuit breakers and associated equipment. In addition, Alternative 3

involves adding a total of approximately 10 km of 25 kV distribution feeders.

Connection Alternative Selected for Further Examination

Alternative 1 was selected for further examination. Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 would both

involve increased transmission and distribution development, and hence overall increased cost

compared to Alternative 1. Therefore, these alternatives were not selected for further study.



Page 3 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Results of the Post-Project Studies

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition. Identical to the

pre-Project studies, a thermal criteria violation was observed under Category B conditions. No

voltage criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions. The voltage stability

margin was met for all studied conditions.

Mitigation Measures

The thermal criteria violation, observed both pre-Project and post-Project, is currently being

managed by real time operational practices, and can continue to be managed by real time

operational practices in the future. This thermal criteria violation will be permanently mitigated

once the Downtown Calgary 138 kV Transmission Reinforcement Project is in service.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the study results, Alternative 1 is technically viable. The connection assessment

identified a system performance issue, which was identical in pre-Project and post-Project

scenarios. Real-time operational practices can continue to be used to manage the identified

system performance issue, until the Downtown Calgary 138 kV Transmission Reinforcement

Project is in service.

It is recommended to proceed with the Project using Alternative 1 as the preferred option to

respond to the DFO’s request for system access service. It is also recommended to use real-

time operational practices to manage the identified system performance issue.



Page 4 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Contents

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5

1.1. Project............................................................................................................................................ 5 1.1.1. Project Overview .................................................................................................................... 5 1.1.2. Load Component ................................................................................................................... 5 1.1.3. Generation Component ......................................................................................................... 5

1.2. Study Scope .................................................................................................................................. 5 1.2.1. Study Objectives .................................................................................................................... 5 1.2.2. Study Area ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.2.3. Studies Performed ................................................................................................................. 8

1.3. Report Overview ............................................................................................................................ 8 2. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions ............................................................................. 10

2.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements ....................................................................................... 10 2.1.1. AESO Standards and Reliability Criteria ............................................................................. 10 2.1.2. ISO Rules and Information Documents ............................................................................... 11

2.2. Study Scenarios .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.3. Load and Generation Assumptions ............................................................................................. 11

2.3.1. Load Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 11 2.3.2. Generation Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 12 2.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions ................................................................................................... 13 2.3.4. HVDC Power Order ............................................................................................................. 13

2.4. System Projects ........................................................................................................................... 14 2.5. Connection Projects .................................................................................................................... 14 2.6. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements ........................................................................................... 14 2.7. Voltage Profile Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 17

3. Study Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 19 3.1. Connection Studies Carried Out .................................................................................................. 19 3.2. Power Flow Studies ..................................................................................................................... 19

3.2.1. Contingencies Studied ......................................................................................................... 19 3.3. Voltage Stability Studies .............................................................................................................. 20

3.3.1. Contingencies Studied ......................................................................................................... 20 4. Pre-Project System Assessment ..................................................................................................... 21

4.1. Power Flow .................................................................................................................................. 21 4.1.1. Scenario 1: 2018 WP Pre-Project ........................................................................................ 21 4.1.2. Scenario 2: 2019 SP Pre-Project ......................................................................................... 21

5. Connection Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 22 5.1. Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 22 5.2. Connection Alternatives Identified ............................................................................................... 22

5.2.1. Connection Alternatives Selected for Further Studies ......................................................... 22 5.2.2. Connection Alternatives Not Selected for Further Studies .................................................. 23

6. Technical Analysis of the Connection Alternative ........................................................................ 24 6.1. Power Flow .................................................................................................................................. 24

6.1.1. Scenario 3: 2018 WP Post-Project ...................................................................................... 24 6.1.2. Scenario 4: 2019 SP Post-Project ....................................................................................... 24

6.2. Voltage Stability ........................................................................................................................... 24 6.2.1. Scenario 3: 2018 WP Post-Project ...................................................................................... 24

7. Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................................... 26 8. Project Interdependencies ............................................................................................................... 27



Page 5 Public

R3-2015-07-01

9. Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................................................................ 28

Attachments

Attachment A Pre-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 1 & 2)

Attachment B Post-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 3 & 4)

Attachment C Post-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 3)

Figures

Figure 1-1: Existing Transmission System in the Study Area ......................................................................................... 7

Tables

Table 2.1-1: Post Contingency Voltage Deviation Guidelines ...................................................................................... 11 Table 2.2-1: List of the Connection Study Scenarios ................................................................................................... 11 Table 2.3-1: Forecast Area Load (2016 LTO at Calgary Planning Region Peak) ........................................................ 12 Table 2.3-2: Existing Generator Dispatch in the Study Scenarios ................................................................................ 12 Table 2.3-3: HVDC Power Order by Scenario .............................................................................................................. 13 Table 2.4-1: System Projects in the Study Area ........................................................................................................... 14 Table 2.5-1: Connection Projects Included in the Studies ............................................................................................ 14 Table 2.6-1: Transmission Line Ratings in the Study Area .......................................................................................... 15 Table 2.6-2: Ratings of Key Transformers in the Study Area ....................................................................................... 16 Table 2.6-3: Details of Shunt Elements in the Study Area ........................................................................................... 17 Table 3.1-1: Engineering Studies Performed ............................................................................................................... 19 Table 4.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for the 2019 SP Pre-Project Scenario Under Category B Conditions ............ 21 Table 6.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for the 2019 SP Post-Project Scenario Under Category B Conditions .......... 24 Table 6.2-1: Voltage Stability Analysis Results for the 2018 WP Post-Project Scenario .............................................. 25



Page 5 Public

R3-2015-07-01

1. Introduction

This report details the engineering studies conducted to assess the impact of the Project (as

defined below) on the performance of the Alberta interconnected electrical system (AIES).

1.1. Project

1.1.1. Project Overview

ENMAX Power Corporation (EPC), in its capacity as the legal owner of an electric distribution

system (DFO), has submitted a request for system access service to the Alberta Electric

System Operator (AESO), to reliably serve load growth within the City of Calgary.

The DFO’s request for system access service includes a request for a Rate DTS, Demand

Transmission Service, contract capacity increase of 5 MW, from 35 MW to 40 MW, for the

system access service provided at the existing SS-7 substation,2 and a request for transmission

development (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested upgrades to the existing

SS-7 substation.

The requested in-service date (ISD) for the Project is December, 2018.

1.1.2. Load Component

The Project includes a load component:

The existing Rate DTS contract capacity for the system access service provided at the existing SS-7 substation is 35 MW.

The DFO requested a Rate DTS contract capacity of 40 MW on December, 2018

The project load was studied assuming a 0.9 power factor (pf) lagging.

Load type: residential and commercial loads.

1.1.3. Generation Component

There is no generation component associated with the Project.

1.2. Study Scope

1.2.1. Study Objectives

The objectives of the studies are as follows:

Assess the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES.

2 The SS-7 substation is also referred to as the No. 7 Substation.



Page 6 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Identify any violations of the relevant AESO criteria, standards or requirements, both pre-Project and post-Project.

Recommend mitigation measures, if required, to reliably connect the Project to the AIES.

1.2.2. Study Area

1.2.2.1. Study Area Description

Geographically, the Project is located in the AESO planning area of Calgary (Area 6), which is

part of the AESO Calgary Planning Region. Calgary (Area 6) is adjacent to the planning areas

of Seebe (Area 44), Airdrie (Area 57), Strathmore / Blackie (Area 45), and High River (Area 46).

From a transmission system perspective, Calgary (Area 6) consists primarily of 138 kV and

240 kV transmission systems. The existing SS-7 substation is a point-of-delivery (POD)

substation, which is connected to the AIES by two existing 138 kV transmission lines:

138 kV transmission line 7.82L, which connects the SS-7 substation to Sarcee 42S

substation; and,

138 kV transmission line 7.84L, which connects the SS-7 substation to SS-36

substation.

The Study Area for the Project consists of Calgary (Area 6), including the tie lines connecting

Calgary (Area 6) to the rest of the AIES. All transmission facilities within the Study Area were

studied and were monitored to assess the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES,

including any violations of the Reliability Criteria (as defined in Section 2.1.1).

Figure 1-1 shows the existing transmission system in the Study Area.



Page 7 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Figure 1-1: Existing Transmission System in the Study Area



Page 8 Public

R3-2015-07-01

1.2.2.2. Existing Constraints

The existing constraints in the Calgary Planning Region are managed in accordance with the

procedures set out Section 302.1 of the ISO Rules, Real Time Transmission Constraint

Management (TCM Rule).

1.2.2.3. AESO Long-Term Transmission Plan

The AESO 2015 Long-term Transmission Plan (2015 LTP) 3 includes the following system

transmission developments in the Study Area in the near term (to 2020):4

Build new 240 kV line from East Calgary substation in Highfield industrial area to SS-8 substation in northwest corner of downtown Calgary

Convert SS-8 to 240/138 kV substation

Add new 138 kV line between SS-47 substation north of Calgary airport and SS-36substation in northwest Calgary

Add new 138 kV line from SS-22 substation south of Calgary airport to SS-23 substation in Valleyfield industrial area of Calgary

Build 240 kV double-circuit line to connect Beddington (SS-162) substation in northeast Calgary to one of the 240 kV lines between Red Deer and Calgary in an in/out configuration

The above developments were not included in the system topology for the pre-Project and post-

Project studies because these transmission developments are not expected to be in service

before the scheduled Project ISD.

1.2.3. Studies Performed

The following studies were performed for the pre-Project scenarios:

Power flow studies

The following studies were performed for the post-Project scenarios:

Power flow studies

Voltage stability studies

1.3. Report Overview

The Executive Summary provides a high-level summary of the study and its conclusions.

Section 1 provides an introduction to the Project and provides a high-level description of the

study scope. Section 2 describes the criteria, system data, and other assumptions used in the

studies. Section 3 describes the study methodology. Section 4 discusses the pre-Project studies

results. Section 5 presents the alternatives examined and selected for further study. Section 6

3 The 2015 LTP document is available on the AESO website.

4 The 2015 LTP identifies the transmission developments in the City of Calgary sub-region on page 36.



Page 9 Public

R3-2015-07-01

provides post-Project studies results. Section 7 discusses the mitigation measures, if any,

required to enable the reliable connection of the Project to the AIES. Section 8 identifies any

dependencies the Project may have. Section 9 presents the conclusions and recommendations

of this assessment.



Page 10 Public

R3-2015-07-01

2. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions

2.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements

2.1.1. AESO Standards and Reliability Criteria

The Transmission Planning (TPL) Standards, which are included in the Alberta Reliability

Standards, and the AESO’s Transmission Planning Criteria – Basis and Assumptions

(collectively, the Reliability Criteria) were applied to evaluate system performance under

Category A system conditions (i.e., all elements in-service) and following Category B

contingencies (i.e., single element outage) prior to and following the studied alternatives. Below

is a summary of Category A and Category B system conditions.

Category A, often referred to as the N-0 condition, represents a normal system with no

contingencies and all facilities in service. Under this condition, the system must be able to

supply all firm load and firm transfers to other areas. All equipment must operate within its

applicable rating, voltages must be within their applicable range, and the system must be stable

with no cascading outages.

Category B events, often referred to as an N-1 or N-G-1 with the most critical generator out of

service, result in the loss of any single specified system element under specified fault conditions

with normal clearing. These elements are a generator, a transmission circuit, a transformer, or a

single pole of a DC transmission line. The acceptable impact on the system is the same as

Category A. Planned or controlled interruptions of electric supply to radial customers or some

local network customers, connected to or supplied by the faulted element or by the affected

area, may occur in certain areas without impacting the overall reliability of the interconnected

transmission systems. To prepare for the next contingency, system adjustments are permitted,

including curtailments of contracted firm (non-recallable reserved) transmission service electric

power transfers.

The Alberta Reliability Standards include the Transmission Planning (TPL) standards that

specify the desired system performance under different contingency categories with respect to

the Applicable Ratings. The transmission system performance under various system conditions

is defined in Appendix 1 of the TPL standards. For the purpose of applying the TPL standards to

this study, the Applicable Ratings shall mean:

Seasonal continuous thermal rating of the line’s loading limits.

Highest specified loading limits for transformers.

For Category A conditions: Voltage range under normal operating condition per the

AESO Information Document # 2010-007RS007RS General Operating Practices –

Voltage Control (ID #2010-007RS). ID #2010-007RS relates to Section 304.4 of the ISO

rules, Maintaining Network Voltage. For the busses not listed in ID#2010-007RS, Table

2-1 in the Transmission Planning Criteria – Basis and Assumptions applies.

For Category B conditions: The extreme voltage range values per Table 2-1 in the

Transmission Planning Criteria – Basis and Assumptions.



Page 11 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Desired post-contingency voltage change limits for three defined post event timeframes as provided in Table 2.1-1.

Table 2.1-1: Post Contingency Voltage Deviation Guidelines

Parameter and reference point

Time Period

Post Transient (up to 30 sec)

Post Auto Control (30 sec to 5 min)

Post Manual Control (Steady

State)

Voltage deviation from steady state at POD low voltage bus.

±10% ±7% ±5%

2.1.2. ISO Rules and Information Documents

ID #2010-007RS will be applied to establish pre- contingency voltage profiles in the Study Area.

The TCM Rule was followed in setting up the study scenarios and assessing the impact of the

Project. In addition, due regard was given to the AESO’s Connection Study Requirements

document and the AESO’s Generation and Load Interconnection Standard.

2.2. Study Scenarios

The scheduled ISD of the Project is December, 2018. Therefore, the studies were performed

using the 2018 winter peak (WP) and 2019 summer peak (SP) and scenarios.

Table 2.2-1 provides a list of the study scenarios. This connection assessment will assume a

pf of 0.9 lagging for the load associated with the Project.

Table 2.2-1: List of the Connection Study Scenarios

Scenario No.

Year/Season Load

Pre-Project/Post-

Project

Project Load (MW)

System Generation Dispatch

Conditions

1 2018 WP Pre-project 0

Zero inter-tie, zero wind

2 2019 SP Pre-project 0

3 2018 WP Post-Project 5 (total of 40)

4 2019 SP Post-Project 5 (total of 40)

2.3. Load and Generation Assumptions

2.3.1. Load Assumptions

The AESO planning area and region forecasts used for the studies are shown in Table 2.3-1

and are based on the AESO 2016 Long-term Outlook (2016 LTO) at Calgary Planning Region

peak. For the studies, when POD loads for the Alberta internal load (AIL) were modified to align

with the load forecast from the 2016 LTO, the active power to reactive power ratio in the base



Page 12 Public

R3-2015-07-01

case scenarios was maintained. While the AESO has updated its regional forecasts since the

connection studies were performed, the use of the current AESO forecast, the AESO 2017

Long-term Outlook, would not materially alter the connection study results or affect the

conclusions and recommendations in this report.

Table 2.3-1: Forecast Area Load (2016 LTO at Calgary Planning Region Peak)

AESO Planning Area or Region

Year/Season Forecast

Peak Load (MW)

Calgary (Area 6) 2018 WP 1662

2019 SP 1692

Calgary Planning Region

2018 WP 1778

2019 SP 1800

2.3.2. Generation Assumptions

The generation assumptions for the studies are described in Table 2.3-2.The study identified the

gas turbine generator (CECGT) at the Calgary Energy Centre plant at Beddington SS-162

substation as the critical generator and it was turned off to represent the N-G study condition for

all studies. As a consequence of the CECGT being turned off in the study, the steam generator

(CECST) at the Calgary Energy Centre plant was also turned off in the study, as CECST is

dependent on CECGT.

Table 2.3-2: Existing Generator Dispatch in the Study Scenarios

Generating Facility Name/Type and Unit Code

Unit ID

Bus Number

AESO Planning

Area

Pmax (MW)

Unit Net Generation (MW)

a

2018 WP 2019 SP

Enmax Calgary Energy Center

CEC GT n/a 4187 6 320

N-Gb

CEC ST n/a 3187 N-Gb

Bow River Hydro

Spray G1 1 174

44

97 49.2 47.7 Spray G2 2A 190

Three S9 1 381 3 1.5 1.5

Kananas9 1 196

19 9.6 9.3 Kananas9 2 196

Kananas9 3 196

POCATEA9 1 214 13 6.6 6.4

Rundle H 1 479 48 24.4 23.5

Rundle G 2 197

GHOST G9 1 3181

58 29.4 28.4 GHOST A9 2 181

GHOST A9 3 181

GHOST G9 4A 181

HORS GEN 1 172 16 8.1 7.8



Page 13 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Generating Facility Name/Type and Unit Code

Unit ID

Bus Number

AESO Planning

Area

Pmax (MW)

Unit Net Generation (MW)

a

2018 WP 2019 SP

HORS GEN 2 172

HORS GEN 3 172

HORS GEN 4 172

INTERLA9 1 377 5 2.5 2.4

BARRIER9 1 222 11 5.6 5.4

BEARSPWB 1 183 16 8.1 7.8

CASCADE9 1 176 34 17.3 16.6

CASCADE9 2 176

Shepard

SECCT1 2 774

6 860 444 454 SECCT2 3 775

SECST 1 773

Nexen Inc #1

BALZ 3 1 4290

6 120 28 24 BALZ 1&2 2 3290

BALZ 1&2 3 4290

a “Unit Net Generation” refers to gross generating unit output (MW) less unit service load.

b “N-G” indicates the critical generating unit that is assumed by the AESO to be offline to test the N-G

contingency condition

2.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions

Intertie assumptions are included for the British Columbia-Alberta (BC-AB), Saskatchewan-

Alberta (SK-AB), and Montana-Alberta Tie Line (MATL) interties. All interties were assumed to

have zero import and zero export for all study scenarios.

2.3.4. HVDC Power Order

The Western Alberta Transmission Line (WATL) and the Eastern Alberta Transmission Line

(EATL) are high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission lines. The HVDC power order

assumptions for the studies will be set to minimize losses for the pre-Project and post-Project

study scenarios, as shown in Table 2.3-3.

Table 2.3-3: HVDC Power Order by Scenario

Scenario No. Scenario Name WATL (MW) EATL (MW)

1 2018 WP Pre-Project 900 N S Blocked

2 2019 SP Pre- Project 800 N S Blocked

3 2018 WP Post - Project 900 N S Blocked

4 2019 SP Post- Project 800 N S Blocked

Notes: N S indicates that HVDC flow direction is North to South



Page 14 Public

R3-2015-07-01

2.4. System Projects

Table 2.4-1 lists the system transmission projects that occur within the Study Area and indicates

whether they were included in the studies. The near-term system projects identified in the 2015

LTP (see Section 1.2.2.3) were not considered in the studies.

Table 2.4-1: System Projects in the Study Area

AESO Project

No. AESO Project Name

Scheduled ISD

AUC Decision

No.

AUC NID Approval

No.

Date of original

AUC approval

Included/ Excluded

from Studies

1354 Foothills Area Transmission Development - Third Circuit

Oct 20, 2017 3386-

D01-2016 3386-D02-

2016 Jan-12-2016 Included

1456 Downtown Calgary 138 kV

Transmission Reinforcement project

Q1 2021 21038-

D01-2016 21038-D02-

2016 Jun-1-2016 Excluded

2.5. Connection Projects

Connection projects that have passed Gate 2 of the AESO Connection Process as of June 2017

were modelled in the study scenarios based on their respective positions in the AESO

Connection Queue. Table 2.5-1 lists the connection projects that were included in the studies.

Information in this table is subject to change as projects progress.

Table 2.5-1: Connection Projects Included in the Studies

AESO Planning

Area

AESO Queue

Position*

Scheduled In-Service

Date AESO Project Name

AESO Project

No.

Project Gen (MW)

Project

Load (MW)

6 42 Nov 12,

2018 ENMAX No. 31 Substation 13 kV

Breaker Addition 1601 0 0

6 46 Mar 15,

2018 ENMAX 162 Substation 138/25

kV 2nd Transformer Addition 1644 0 14

6 51 Jul 1, 2019

Calgary Energy Centre Peaking Plant New Generator Capacity

1566 150 0

* Per the AESO Connection Queue posted in June 2017 The connection projects in the Study Area, if any, that have queue positions after the Project are not listed in this table and were not modelled in the study cases.

2.6. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements

The legal owners of transmission facilities (TFOs) provided thermal ratings for the transmission

lines in the Study Area. The seasonal continuous ratings and short-term emergency ratings for

the transmission lines in the Study Area are shown in Table 2.6-1.



Page 15 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Table 2.6-1: Transmission Line Ratings in the Study Area

Line ID Line Description Voltage Class (kV)

Seasonal Continuous Rating (MVA)

Short-term Emergency Rating (MVA)

Summer Winter Summer Winter

936L East Calgary 5S -

Langdon 102S 240 481 581 577 697

937L East Calgary 5S -

Langdon 102S 240 481 581 577 697

1064L Langdon 102S - Janet

74S 240 974 1039 1039 1039

1065L Langdon 102S - Janet

74S 240 974 1208 1169 1247

916L East Calgary 5S - Sarcee

42S 240 408 494 593 490

1106L Foothills 237S - SS-65 240 971 1207 1071 1330

1107L Foothills 237S - SS-65 240 971 1207 1071 1330

1080L SS-65 - SS-25 240 487 604 584 725

1003L SS-25 - Janet 74S 240 973 1039 1017 1039

611L Balzac 391S - Dry Creek

186S 138 119 147 131 162

1.80L SS-1 - SS-28 138 160 199 176 219

1.81L SS-1 - SS-20 138 160 177 176 195

1.82L SS-1 - SS-5 138 226 228 249 251

1.83L SS-1 - SS-8 138 218 232 240 255

1.84L SS-1 - SS-5 138 226 228 249 251

1.85L SS-1 - SS-8 138 218 232 240 255

2.80L SS-2 - SS-23 138 285 350 285 350

2.81L SS-2 - SS-9 138 287 287 316 316

2.82L SS-2 - SS-5 138 322 349 354 384

2.83L SS-2 - 138-2.83-70 138 338 354 372 389

2.83L 138-2.83-70 - SS-5 138 287 287 316 316

2.83L 138-2.83-70 - SS-13 138 287 287 316 316

3.82L SS-3 - SS-8 138 156 191 171 210

3.84L SS-3 - SS-13 138 161 191 177 210

6.80L SS-6 - SS-35 138 164 191 180 210

6.82L SS-6 - SS-41 138 161 191 177 210

7.82L SS-7 - Sarcee 42S 138 287 287 287 287

7.84L SS-7 - SS-36 138 287 287 316 316

9.80L SS-9 - SS-31 138 287 287 316 316

9.83L SS-9 - SS-43 138 191 191 210 210

11.81L SS-11 - SS-13 138 287 287 316 316

11.82L SS-11 - SS-14 138 161 191 177 210

11.83L SS-11 - SS-162 138 305 379 335 417

13.60L SS-13 - SS-27 69 66 72 73 79

13.82L SS-13 - SS-22 138 161 204 177 225

14.83L SS-14 - SS-36 138 176 215 194 236



Page 16 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Line ID Line Description Voltage Class (kV)

Seasonal Continuous Rating (MVA)

Short-term Emergency Rating (MVA)

Summer Winter Summer Winter

15.60L SS-15 - SS-21 69 72 72 79 79

15.62L SS-15 - SS-16 69 72 72 79 79

16.60L SS-16 - SS-34 69 72 72 79 79

16.61L SS-16 - SS-27 69 72 72 79 79

16.63L SS-16 - SS-36 69 72 72 79 79

20.82L SS-20 - SS-21 138 160 191 176 210

21.61L SS-21 - SS-34 69 72 72 79 79

21.80L SS-21 - Sarcee 42S 138 236 262 285 287

22.81L SS-22 - SS-39 138 285 287 285 316

23.80L SS-23 - Janet 74S 138 285 287 287 287

24.81L SS-24 - SS-31 138 287 287 316 316

24.82L SS-24 - SS-65 138 285 350 285 350

24.83L SS-24 - Janet 74S 138 322 408 341 409

26.81L SS-26 - SS-32 138 260 287 290 316

26.83L SS-26 - SS-65 138 285 350 285 350

28.80L SS-28 - Sarcee 42S 138 273 273 286 287

30.81L SS-30 - Sarcee 42S 138 162 191 178 210

31.84L SS-31 - SS-32 138 161 191 177 210

32.82L SS-32 - SS-54 138 287 287 290 316

32.83L SS-32 - SS-40 138 164 191 180 210

33.83L SS-33 - SS-41 138 191 191 210 210

33.84L SS-33 - SS-43 138 191 191 210 210

36.81L SS-36 - Bearspaw 44S 138 143 172 172 186

37.81L SS-37 - SS-38 138 287 287 316 316

37.82L SS-37 - Janet 745 138 287 287 287 287

38.83L SS-38 - SS-39 138 287 287 316 316

39.82L SS-39 - SS-162 138 287 287 316 316

40.81L SS-40 - SS-41 138 161 191 177 210

162.81L SS-162 - Turbo Balzac

391S 138 287 287 287 287

The TFO also provided the facility ratings of the key existing transformers in the Study Area, as

shown in Table 2.6-2.

Table 2.6-2: Ratings of Key Transformers in the Study Area

Substation Name and Number Transformer ID Transformer Voltages (kV)

Rating (MVA)

Janet 74S 74ST1 240/138 400

74ST2 240/138 400



Page 17 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Substation Name and Number Transformer ID Transformer Voltages (kV)

Rating (MVA)

Sarcee 42S 42ST1 240/138 400

42ST2 240/138 400

East Calgary 5S 5ST1 240/138 400

5ST2 240/138 400

SS-162 162.1TR 240/138 400

162.2TR 240/138 400

SS-65 65.1TR 240/138 400

65.2TR 240/138 400

The details of shunt elements in the Study Area, as provided by the TFOs, are shown in Table

2.6-3.

Table 2.6-3: Details of Shunt Elements in the Study Area

Substation Name and Number

Voltage Class (kV)

Capacitors

Number of Switched

Shunt Blocks

Total at Nominal Voltage (MVAr)

Status in Study

2017SP

(MVAr)

2017WP

(MVAr)

SS-2 138 2 160 80 80

SS-14 138 2 48.91 24.46 24.46

SS-21 138 1 48.91 48.91 48.91

SS-31 138 1 48.11 48.11 48.11

SS-38 138 1 48.11 48.11 48.11

SS-41 138 1 53.96 53.96 53.96

Janet 74S 240 2 268.8 134.4 134.4

138 2 146.74 0 0

Sarcee 42S 240 2 201.6 0 100.8

138 1 48.91 0 48.91

Langdon 102S 240 (High Voltage

Terminal) SVC

(Continuous) 216.28 to

-269.2 Within +40 to -80 Operating Range

2.7. Voltage Profile Assumptions

ID #2010-007RS was used to establish system normal (i.e. pre-contingency) voltage profiles for

key area busses prior to commencing any studies. Table 2-1 of the Transmission Planning

Criteria – Basis and Assumptions applies for all the busses not included in the ID #2010-007RS.



Page 18 Public

R3-2015-07-01

These voltages were used to set the voltage profile for the study base cases prior to power flow

studies.



Page 19 Public

R3-2015-07-01

3. Study Methodology

All connection studies were completed using PTI PSS/E version 33.

3.1. Connection Studies Carried Out

The studies to be completed for this connection assessment are identified in

Table 3.1-1.

Table 3.1-1: Engineering Studies Performed

Scenario Number and Name System Conditions Category Power Flow

Voltage Stability

1 2018 WP Pre-project Category A and Category B X

2 2019 SP Pre-Project Category A and Category B X

3 2018 WP Post-Project Category A and Category B X X

4 2019 SP Post-Project Category A and Category B X

3.2. Power Flow Studies

Power flow studies were completed for all study scenarios to identify any thermal or

transmission voltage violations as per the Reliability Criteria, and to identify any POD voltage

deviations from the desired limits in Table 2-1. The purpose of the power flow analysis is to

quantify any violations in the Study Area both for the pre-Project and post-Project study

scenarios. For the Category B power flow studies, transformer taps and switched shunt reactive

compensating devices such as shunt capacitors and reactors were locked and continuous shunt

devices were enabled.

POD low voltage bus deviations were assessed for both the pre-Project and post-Project

networks by first locking all tap changers and area shunt reactive compensating devices to

identify any post-transient voltage deviations above 10%. Second, tap changers were allowed to

move while shunt reactive compensating devices remained locked to determine if any voltage

deviations above 7% would occur in the area. Third, all taps and shunt reactive compensating

devices were allowed to adjust, and voltage deviations above 5%, if any, were reported.

3.2.1. Contingencies Studied

Power flow studies were performed for all Category B contingencies in the Study Area. All

transmission facilities in the Study Area were monitored for Reliability Criteria violations.



Page 20 Public

R3-2015-07-01

3.3. Voltage Stability Studies

The objective of the voltage stability analysis is to determine the ability of the network to

maintain voltage stability at all the busses under Category A and Category B conditions. The

power-voltage (PV) curve is a representation of voltage change as a result of increased power

transfer between two systems. The incremental transfers are reported to the collapse point.

Voltage stability studies were performed for the post-Project scenario only. For load connection

projects, the load level modelled in post-connection scenarios are the same or higher than in

pre-connection scenarios. Therefore, voltage stability analysis for pre-connection scenarios will

only be performed if post-Project scenarios show voltage stability criteria violations.

Voltage stability (PV) analyses were performed according to the Western Electricity

Coordinating Council (WECC) Voltage Stability Assessment Methodology. WECC voltage

stability criteria state, for load areas, post-transient voltage stability is required for the area

modeled at a minimum of 105% of the reference load level for Category A and Category B

conditions. For this standard, the reference load level is the maximum established planned load.

Typically, voltage stability analysis is carried out assuming the worst case loading scenarios.

For the Project’s worst case scenario, load was increased in the Study Area and the

corresponding generation was increased in Wabamun (Area 40), Edmonton (Area 60) and the

Fort McMurray (Area 25).

3.3.1. Contingencies Studied

Voltage stability studies were performed for all Category B contingencies in the Study Area. All

transmission facilities in the Study Area were monitored for Reliability Criteria violations.



Page 21 Public

R3-2015-07-01

4. Pre-Project System Assessment

4.1. Power Flow

The pre-project power flow diagrams are provided in the Attachment A.

4.1.1. Scenario 1: 2018 WP Pre-Project

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A or Category B conditions.

4.1.2. Scenario 2: 2019 SP Pre-Project

Category A condition

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.

Category B conditions

No voltage criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions. A thermal criteria

violation was observed under Category B conditions, as shown in Table 4.1-1.

Table 4.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for the 2019 SP Pre-Project Scenario Under Category B Conditions

Contingency Limiting Branch

Seasonal Continuous

Line

Rating (MVA)

Short-term Emergency

Rating (MVA)

Pre-Project

Power Flow (MVA)

% Loading

2.83L (SS-2 substation - SS-5 substation - SS-13 substation)

2.82L (SS-2 substation - SS-5 substation)

322 354 366 113



Page 22 Public

R3-2015-07-01

5. Connection Alternatives

5.1. Overview

The AESO, in consultation with the DFO and the TFO, examined three transmission alternatives

to meet the DFO’s request for system access service.5

5.2. Connection Alternatives Identified

Below is a description of the developments associated with the transmission alternatives that

were examined for the Project.

Alternative 1- Replace Two Transformers at SS-7 Substation


existing 138/25 kV transformers with two 138/25 kV transformers of higher capacity.

Alternative 1 also involves adding one 138 kV circuit breaker, and associated equipment. In

addition, Alternative 1 involves adding a new 25 kV distribution feeder, approximately 5 km in

length.

Alternative 2- Add a Third Transformer at SS-7 Substation

Alternative 2 involves upgrading the existing SS-7 substation, including adding one 138/25 kV

transformer. Alternative 2 also involves adding one 138 kV circuit breaker, four 25 kV feeder

circuit breakers and associated equipment. To complete the required upgrades, the TFO has

advised the AESO that expansion and/or modification of the 138 kV and 25 kV busses would be

required. In addition, Alternative 2 involves adding a total of approximately 14 km of 25 kV

distribution feeders.

Alternative 3- Replace one Transformer at SS-7 Substation and Add a Transformer at SS-28 Substation

Alternative 3 involves upgrading the existing SS-7 substation, including replacing one of the

existing 138/25 kV transformers with one 138/25 kV transformer of higher capacity and adding

one 138 kV circuit breaker and associated equipment. Alternative 3 also involves upgrading the

existing SS-28 substation, including adding one 138/25 kV transformer, one 138 kV circuit

breaker, four 25 kV circuit breakers and associated equipment. In addition, Alternative 3

involves adding a total of approximately 10 km of 25 kV distribution feeders.

5.2.1. Connection Alternatives Selected for Further Studies

Alternative 1 is considered technically feasible and was selected for further study.

5 These alternatives reflect more up to date engineering design than the alternatives identified in EPC’s Statement of Need, No. 7 Substation 138/25 kV Transformer Upgrade, which is filed under a separate cover.



Page 23 Public

R3-2015-07-01

5.2.2. Connection Alternatives Not Selected for Further Studies

Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 would both involve increased transmission and distribution

development, and hence overall increased cost compared to Alternative 1. Therefore, these

alternatives were not selected for further study.



Page 24 Public

R3-2015-07-01

6. Technical Analysis of the Connection Alternative

The technical analysis of Alternative 1 was completed with a total load of 40 MW at SS-7

substation, which includes a Project load addition of 5 MW at SS-7 substation.

6.1. Power Flow

The post-Project power flow diagrams are provided in Attachment B.

6.1.1. Scenario 3: 2018 WP Post-Project

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A or Category B conditions.

6.1.2. Scenario 4: 2019 SP Post-Project

Category A condition

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.

Category B conditions

No voltage criteria violations were observed under Category B contingency conditions. A

thermal criteria violation, identical to the pre-project 2019 SP scenario, was observed under

Category B conditions, as shown in Table 6.1-1.

Table 6.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for the 2019 SP Post-Project Scenario Under Category B Conditions

Contingency Limiting Branch

Seasonal Continuous

Line

Rating (MVA)

Short-term Emergency

Rating (MVA)

Pre- Project Post- Project

% Loading Differ-ence

Power Flow

(MVA) % Loading

Power Flow (MVA)

% Loading

Post-Pre

2.83L (SS-2 substation to SS-5 substation -SS-13 substation)

2.82L (SS-2 substation - SS-5

substation) 322 354 366 113 366 113 0

6.2. Voltage Stability

6.2.1. Scenario 3: 2018 WP Post-Project

Voltage stability analysis was performed for the 2018 WP post-Project scenario. The reference

load level for the Study Area is 1,662 MW. To meet the voltage stability criteria, the minimum

incremental load transfer for the Category B contingencies is 5.0% of the reference load or 83.1

MW (0.05 x 1662 MW = 83.1 MW). Voltage stability results for Category A and the worst five

Category B contingencies are summarized in Table 6.2-1. The voltage stability margin was met

for all studied conditions.

The voltage stability diagrams are provided in Attachment C.



Page 25 Public

R3-2015-07-01

Table 6.2-1: Voltage Stability Analysis Results for the 2018 WP Post-Project Scenario

Contingency From To Maximum

incremental transfer (MW)

Meets 105% transfer criteria?

N-G-0 Category A 975 Yes

Category B Conditions

Sarcee 42S Transformer T1

n/a

881 Yes

Sarcee 42S Transformer T2

887 Yes

928L (or 906L) Sarcee 42S Benalto 17S 893 Yes

918L SS-162 Johnson 81S 900 Yes

936L (or 937L) East Calgary 5S Langdon 102S 900 Yes



Page 26 Public

R3-2015-07-01

7. Mitigation Measures

The thermal criteria violation, observed both pre-Project and post-Project, on the 138 kV

transmission line 2.82L (between SS-2 substation and SS-5 substation), following the loss of the

138 kV transmission line 2.83L (between SS-2 substation and SS-5 substation and SS-13

substation), is currently being managed by real time operational practices, and can continue to

be managed by real time operational practices in the future. This thermal criteria violation will be

permanently mitigated once the Downtown Calgary 138 kV Transmission Reinforcement Project

is in service.6

6The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) approved the need for the Downtown Calgary 138 kV Transmission

Reinforcement Project in Decision 21038-D01-2016 and Approval 21038-D02-2016 issued on June 1, 2016. The scheduled ISD is Q1 2021.



Page 27 Public

R3-2015-07-01

8. Project Interdependencies

The Project does not require the completion of any AESO plans to expand or enhance the

transmission system prior to connection.



Page 28 Public

R3-2015-07-01

9. Conclusion and Recommendations

Based on the study results, Alternative 1 is technically viable. The connection assessment

identified a system performance issue, which was identical in pre-Project and post-Project

scenarios. Real-time operational practices can continue to be used to manage the identified

system performance issue, until the Downtown Calgary 138 kV Transmission Reinforcement

Project is in service.

It is recommended to proceed with the Project using Alternative 1 as the preferred option to

respond to the DFO’s request for system access service. It is also recommended to use real-

time operational practices to manage the identified system performance issue.


existing 138/25 kV transformers with two 138/25 kV transformers of higher capacity. Alternative

1 also involves adding one 138 kV circuit breaker, and associated equipment.

It is recommend that each of 138/25 kV transformers at SS-7 substation have a transformation

capability of 44.4 MVA, based on the requested Rate DTS contract capacity increase and the

DFO’s distribution system performance standard for POD substations.


Transmission Project Delivery

R[x]

29

Public

R2-2012-03-21

Attachment A

Pre-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 1 & 2)



R[x]

30

Public

R2-2012-03-21

Attachment B

Post-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 3 & 4)



R[x]

31

Public

R2-2012-03-21

Attachment C

Post-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 3)

AESO

-170.5

-6.8

* 0.0

0.0

* 170.7

15.6

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu)Branch - MW/MvarEquipment - MW/Mvar100.0%Rate A1.120OV0.950UV

CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 454.0 MW

-170.5

-6.8

* 0.0

0.0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -7.6 MW2019SP_PREPROJECT_FINALSYSTEM NORMALFIG A1-1THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 170.7

15.6

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 24.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 784.6 MW

Sask. Import: -0.1 MW

MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.5

1.0140.1

115.

1

7.9

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.5

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.5

88.7

21.0

566ENMX20S7

1.0139.6

38.1

23.0

555ENMX14S7

1.0139.6

-15.013.1

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0140.1

-41.1-4.3

569ENMX3S 7

1.0139.6

-20.2-12.6

1.0139.6

67.1

23.9

67.1

23.9

59.0

9.5

-10.8

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.6

195.2

113.7

0.97

83

1

185.3

108.4

0.97

8271

568ENMX5S 7

1.0139.7

-241.4

-90.7

-88.6-33.6

-88.6

-33.6

559ENMX13S7

1.0139.7

-20.3

-33.0

20.49.4

5.2

572ENMX39S7

1.0140.6

-100.9

-37.4

573ENMX38S7

1.0140.8

-94.2

6.7

574ENMX37S7

1.0140.6

-126.6

44.7

127BEDDING2

1.0142.9

132.6

67.4

6.4

0.1

-141.3-69.7

1 0.96

6

-140.7-69.5

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0140.7

177.7

-12.2

197.4

17.1

0.96

722

197.9

17.2

0.96

722

1.0142.9

38.3-11.9

295DRYCREEK

1.0141.2

34.232.2

177AIRDRIE

1.0140.1

4.5

-26.7

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.2

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.2

318W CROSSF

1.0140.3

312E CROSS7

1.0141.4

77.1

3.1

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.4

65.2-3.8-18.9

-8.9

-45.6

12.8

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.2

-6.8-1.3

44.9

-13.2

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.2

-37.9

14.0

38.1

1

-14.4

1.0139.5

81.9

72.3

1.0142.8

596ENMX7S7

1.0139.7

74.5

19.5

-74.3

-19.0

-45.2-13.4

45.213.2

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0140.0

-54.1-18.9

54.218.7

-84.9-41.6

84.941.7

139.2

61.1

-139.1

-60.4

1

-13.4

198BALZAC 7

0.8

1.0139.6

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0249.4

162E CALGAR

1.0247.6

-65.685.3

187BEDDING1

1.0245.5

160JANET 4

1.1254.2

166.1

129.5

772ENMX25S7

1.1254.2

-41.1

-6.6

-6.4

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

177.9-60.9

223.9

72.8

225.073.1

156E CROSS4

1.1252.9

988CROSSF T

1.1252.9

-77.1-3.1

-13.3

9.7

177.9

-60.9

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

140.6

-19.0141.0

-16.2 -41.6

203SARCEE C

1.114.6

29202SARCEE C

1.114.6

0.97

830.96

251

0.97

830.96

251

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.1

4596ENMX7S9

1.025.4

14.62.91

1.04

38-3

0.00

-14.5-2.02.0

14.5

14.5

2.0

14.6

2.91

1.01

63-3

0.00

-14.5

-2.0

1

AESO

-173.1

-8.6

* 0.0

0.0

* 173.3

17.7


CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 454.0 MW

-173.1

-8.6

* 0.0

0.0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -6.8 MW2019SP_PREPROJECT_FINAL138-2.83L ENMAXFIG A1-2THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 173.3

17.7

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 24.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 784.6 MW


MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.4

1.0139.9

123.

2

12.0

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.2

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.3

95.5

24.8

566ENMX20S7

1.0139.4

43.5

26.2

555ENMX14S7

1.0139.3

-20.810.9

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0139.7

-35.2-2.2

569ENMX3S 7

1.0139.2

-47.4-20.4

1.0139.3

80.7

27.9

80.7

27.9

65.9

13.2

-5.3

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.8

190.2

111.0

0.97

83

1

180.6

105.8

0.97

8271

568ENMX5S 7

1.0139.4

-341.2

-133.8

-96.1-34.3

-96.1

-34.3

559ENMX13S7

1.0139.2

-33.9

-38.4

-6.81.6

16.6

572ENMX39S7

1.0140.4

-112.4

-42.1

573ENMX38S7

1.0140.6

-106.2

1.7

574ENMX37S7

1.0140.5

-138.7

39.4

127BEDDING2

1.0142.7

140.5

71.5

6.4

0.1

-144.5-71.2

1 0.96

6

-143.9-70.9

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0140.7

189.8

-6.5

197.0

17.3

0.96

722

197.6

17.3

0.96

722

1.0142.7

37.2-13.3

295DRYCREEK

1.0140.9

33.131.8

177AIRDRIE

1.0139.9

5.6

-26.3

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.1

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.0

318W CROSSF

1.0140.1

312E CROSS7

1.0141.3

78.2

3.6

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.3

66.3-3.3-18.9

-8.9

-46.7

12.4

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.1

-6.8-1.3

46.0

-12.8

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.0

-38.9

13.7

39.2

1

-14.0

1.0139.2

81.4

72.5

1.0142.6

596ENMX7S7

1.0139.5

78.7

21.6

-78.6

-21.0

-49.5-15.3

49.515.2

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0139.9

1

-8.7

198BALZAC 7

3.9

1.0139.3

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0249.3

162E CALGAR

1.0247.7

-71.681.4

187BEDDING1

1.0245.2

160JANET 4

1.1254.1

171.5

133.0

772ENMX25S7

1.1254.2

-42.2

-7.5

-7.3

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

179.9-59.7

222.0

71.9

223.172.2

156E CROSS4

1.1252.9

988CROSSF T

1.1252.9

-78.2-3.6

-12.4

10.0

179.9

-59.7

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

140.2

-18.9140.6

-16.1 -42.7

203SARCEE C

1.114.6

29202SARCEE C

1.114.6

0.97

830.96

251

0.97

830.96

251

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.1

4596ENMX7S9

1.025.4

14.62.91

1.04

38-3

0.00

-14.5-2.02.0

14.5

14.5

2.0

14.6

2.91

1.01

63-3

0.00

-14.5

-2.0

1

AESO

-175.0

21.9

* 0.0

0.0

* 175.3

-12.7


CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 444.0 MW

-175.0

21.9

* 0.0

0.0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -25.7 MW2019WP_PREPROJECT_FINALSYSTEM NORMALFIG A1-3THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 175.3

-12.7

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 28.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 880.5 MW


MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.5

1.0140.4

111.

2

-9.1

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.9

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.5

81.2

6.4

566ENMX20S7

1.0140.1

21.5

14.5

555ENMX14S7

1.0140.1

-15.218.0

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0140.7

-50.7-5.2

569ENMX3S 7

1.0140.2

-25.2-1.0

1.0140.2

60.4

8.8

60.4

8.8

49.5

-1.3

-26.9

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.7

188.3

35.5

1.01

22

1

178.9

34.0

1.01

22

1

568ENMX5S 7

1.0140.2

-231.2

-46.6

-86.2-15.9

-86.2

-15.9

559ENMX13S7

1.0140.3

-2.4

-34.8

13.615.1

11.4

572ENMX39S7

1.0141.5

-95.1

-39.3

573ENMX38S7

1.0141.8

-100.2

-3.9

574ENMX37S7

1.0141.7

-133.9

37.0

127BEDDING2

1.0143.4

131.9

65.4

6.3

-0.6

-142.1-60.2

1 0.96

6

-141.5-60.0

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0141.9

182.9

-10.5

196.0

2.1

0.97

444

196.6

2.1

0.97

444

1.0143.4

45.1-13.6

295DRYCREEK

1.0141.4

46.432.4

177AIRDRIE

1.0140.2

0.2

-27.5

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.2

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.1

318W CROSSF

1.0140.2

312E CROSS7

1.0141.3

83.7

0.4

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.4

69.7-7.4-19.8

-5.3

-49.1

13.1

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.1

-14.0-4.5

48.3

-13.4

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.2

-34.1

17.4

34.3

1

-17.8

1.0140.4

75.1

56.0

1.0143.3

596ENMX7S7

1.0140.0

83.1

10.2

-83.0

-9.5

-49.2-5.1

49.24.9

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0140.4

-58.21.7

58.3-2.0

-74.5-26.8

74.626.8

132.9

25.3

-132.8

-24.8

1

4.2

198BALZAC 7

-0.5

1.0140.1

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0250.6

162E CALGAR

1.0250.3

-77.023.7

187BEDDING1

1.0245.6

160JANET 4

1.1253.1

168.9

108.9

772ENMX25S7

1.1253.2

-39.1

-10.5

-10.3

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

181.5-21.9

222.8

25.8

223.925.9

156E CROSS4

1.1252.4

988CROSSF T

1.1252.4

-83.7-0.4

-10.3

3.7

181.5

-21.9

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

139.4

-24.1139.9

-21.4 -39.6

203SARCEE C

1.114.8

29202SARCEE C

1.114.8

0.97

830.95

1

0.97

830.95

1

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.1

4596ENMX7S9

1.025.4

16.92.31

1.03

75-3

0.00

-16.8-1.11.1

16.8

16.8

1.1

16.9

2.31

1.01

01-3

0.00

-16.8

-1.1

1

AESO

-171.1

-6.8

* 0.0

0.0

* 171.3

15.7


CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 454.0 MW

-171.1

-6.8

* 0.0

0.0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -7.5 MW2019SP_POSTPROJECT_FINALSYSTEM NORMALFIG B1-1THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 171.3

15.7

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 24.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 784.6 MW


MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.5

1.0140.1

114.

7

7.5

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.4

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.5

87.2

20.4

566ENMX20S7

1.0139.7

36.2

22.4

555ENMX14S7

1.0139.6

-12.313.8

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0140.1

-43.4-4.9

569ENMX3S 7

1.0139.6

-20.0-12.6

1.0139.7

66.6

23.7

66.6

23.7

57.7

8.9

-12.3

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.7

195.0

113.3

0.97

83

1

185.2

108.0

0.97

8271

568ENMX5S 7

1.0139.7

-241.7

-90.4

-89.3-33.7

-89.3

-33.7

559ENMX13S7

1.0139.7

-19.1

-32.6

20.49.3

6.2

572ENMX39S7

1.0140.7

-101.3

-37.3

573ENMX38S7

1.0140.8

-94.4

6.8

574ENMX37S7

1.0140.6

-126.6

44.9

127BEDDING2

1.0142.9

133.4

67.5

6.3

0.1

-141.2-69.6

1 0.96

6

-140.7-69.3

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0140.7

177.3

-12.6

197.2

16.8

0.96

722

197.8

16.8

0.96

722

1.0142.9

37.7-12.0

295DRYCREEK

1.0141.2

33.832.1

177AIRDRIE

1.0140.1

4.7

-26.6

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.2

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.2

318W CROSSF

1.0140.3

312E CROSS7

1.0141.4

76.8

2.9

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.4

65.0-3.9-18.8

-8.9

-45.5

12.9

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.2

-6.8-1.3

44.9

-13.3

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.2

-37.9

14.1

38.1

1

-14.5

1.0139.6

81.7

72.1

1.0142.9

596ENMX7S7

1.0139.6

80.0

21.5

-79.8

-20.8

-39.7-12.0

39.711.8

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0140.1

-54.2-18.9

54.218.6

-85.0-41.5

85.141.6

139.5

61.0

-139.3

-60.3

1

-13.1

198BALZAC 7

0.4

1.0139.6

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0249.4

162E CALGAR

1.0247.6

-66.685.0

187BEDDING1

1.0245.5

160JANET 4

1.1254.2

166.1

129.2

772ENMX25S7

1.1254.2

-41.3

-6.6

-6.4

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

177.7-61.5

224.2

72.6

225.472.9

156E CROSS4

1.1253.0

988CROSSF T

1.1253.0

-76.8-2.9

-13.4

9.6

177.7

-61.5

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

140.7

-19.0141.1

-16.2 -41.8

203SARCEE C

1.114.6

29202SARCEE C

1.114.6

0.97

830.96

251

0.97

830.96

251

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.1

4596ENMX7S9

1.026.1

20.14.51

1.05

-30.

00

-20.0-2.82.8

20.0

20.0

2.8

20.1

4.51

1.05

-30.

00

-20.0

-2.8

1

AESO

-173.7

-8.6

* 0.0

0.0

* 173.9

17.8


CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 454.0 MW

-173.7

-8.6

* 0.0

0.0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -6.7 MW2019SP_POSTPROJECT_FINAL138-2.83L ENMAXFIG B1-2THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 173.9

17.8

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 24.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 784.6 MW


MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.4

1.0139.9

122.

8

11.6

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.2

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.3

94.1

24.1

566ENMX20S7

1.0139.4

41.7

25.6

555ENMX14S7

1.0139.3

-18.111.6

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0139.7

-37.6-2.9

569ENMX3S 7

1.0139.2

-47.2-20.3

1.0139.4

80.2

27.7

80.2

27.7

64.6

12.7

-6.9

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.8

190.0

110.6

0.97

83

1

180.4

105.4

0.97

8271

568ENMX5S 7

1.0139.4

-341.7

-133.4

-96.8-34.4

-96.8

-34.4

559ENMX13S7

1.0139.2

-32.8

-38.0

-6.91.6

17.6

572ENMX39S7

1.0140.4

-112.7

-42.0

573ENMX38S7

1.0140.6

-106.4

1.8

574ENMX37S7

1.0140.5

-138.6

39.6

127BEDDING2

1.0142.7

141.3

71.5

6.3

0.1

-144.4-71.1

1 0.96

6

-143.8-70.8

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0140.7

189.4

-6.9

196.9

16.9

0.96

722

197.5

16.9

0.96

722

1.0142.7

36.6-13.3

295DRYCREEK

1.0141.0

32.731.7

177AIRDRIE

1.0140.0

5.8

-26.3

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.1

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.1

318W CROSSF

1.0140.2

312E CROSS7

1.0141.3

78.0

3.4

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.3

66.1-3.5-18.8

-8.9

-46.6

12.5

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.1

-6.8-1.3

45.9

-12.9

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.1

-38.9

13.8

39.2

1

-14.1

1.0139.2

81.2

72.3

1.0142.6

596ENMX7S7

1.0139.4

84.3

23.6

-84.1

-22.8

-44.0-13.9

44.013.8

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0139.9

1

-8.5

198BALZAC 7

3.5

1.0139.3

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0249.3

162E CALGAR

1.0247.7

-72.781.2

187BEDDING1

1.0245.3

160JANET 4

1.1254.2

171.5

132.8

772ENMX25S7

1.1254.2

-42.3

-7.5

-7.3

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

179.7-60.3

222.4

71.6

223.571.9

156E CROSS4

1.1252.9

988CROSSF T

1.1252.9

-78.0-3.4

-12.4

9.9

179.7

-60.3

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

140.3

-18.9140.6

-16.1 -42.8

203SARCEE C

1.114.6

29202SARCEE C

1.114.6

0.97

830.96

251

0.97

830.96

251

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.1

4596ENMX7S9

1.026.1

20.14.51

1.05

-30.

00

-20.0-2.82.8

20.0

20.0

2.8

20.1

4.51

1.05

-30.

00

-20.0

-2.8

1

AESO

-175.4

21.8

* -0.

00.

0

* 175.6

-12.5


CEC #2: 0.0 MW

CEC #1: 0.0 MW

SEC: 444.0 MW

-175.4

21.8

* -0.

00.

0

P1787

kV: <=4.160 <=13.800 <=25.000 <=69.000 <=138.000 <=240.000 <=500.000 >500.000

BC-AB: -26.5 MW2019WP_POSTPROJECT_FINALSYSTEM NORMALFIG B1-3THU, JUN 29 2017 14:13

* 175.6

-12.5

906L

916L

936L

937L

1064L

928L

1065L

1003L

985L

37.82L

37.83L

22.81L13.82L

37.81L

932L

901L

901L

752L752AL

688AL

752L 688L

688L 688L

631L

611L162.81L

771L

39.82L

11.83L

11.82L14.83L

11.81L

3.82L

Balzac: 28.0 MW

EATL: -0.1 MW

WATL: 880.5 MW


MATL import: 0.0 MW

3.84L 2.83L

2.83L

2.83L

2.82L1.84L

1.82L

1.83L

1.85L

1.81L

21.80

L

20.82L

1.80L28.80L7.82L

7.84L

1.0140.5

1.0140.4

110.

9

-9.3

564ENMX36S7

1.0139.8

551ENMX28S7

1.0140.5

80.3

6.1

566ENMX20S7

1.0140.1

20.4

14.3

555ENMX14S7

1.0140.1

-13.518.3

576ENMX47S7

561ENMX11S7

1.0140.7

-52.1-5.4

569ENMX3S 7

1.0140.1

-25.0-1.0

1.0140.2

60.1

8.7

60.1

8.7

48.8

-1.6

-27.8

600ENMAXGIS

1.0140.7

188.2

35.5

1.01

22

1

178.7

33.9

1.01

22

1

568ENMX5S 7

1.0140.2

-231.2

-46.4

-86.5-15.9

-86.5

-15.9

559ENMX13S7

1.0140.3

-1.8

-34.6

13.615.0

11.9

572ENMX39S7

1.0141.5

-95.3

-39.2

573ENMX38S7

1.0141.8

-100.2

-3.7

574ENMX37S7

1.0141.7

-133.7

37.1

127BEDDING2

1.0143.4

132.4

65.4

6.2

-0.6

-142.0-60.1

1 0.96

6

-141.4-59.9

1 0.96

6

207JANET 7

1.0141.8

182.5

-10.8

195.8

1.9

0.97

444

196.4

1.9

0.97

444

1.0143.4

44.6-13.7

295DRYCREEK

1.0141.4

46.132.4

177AIRDRIE

1.0140.2

0.4

-27.5

503SUMMIT_7

1.0140.2

425NOSE CR7

1.0140.1

318W CROSSF

1.0140.3

312E CROSS7

1.0141.3

83.5

0.3

1.02

72

1

933AIRD TAP

1.0140.4

69.6-7.5-19.7

-5.3

-49.0

13.1

729SUMMITTP

1.0140.2

-13.9-4.5

48.2

-13.5

810AMOCOTAP

1.0140.2

-34.1

17.5

34.3

1

-17.9

1.0140.4

75.0

55.9

1.0143.3

596ENMX7S7

1.0140.0

86.3

11.1

-86.1

-10.3

-46.0-4.5

46.04.3

588ENMX8S 7

552ENMX21S7

550ENMX22S7

6012.83 TAP

1.0140.4

-58.21.8

58.2-2.0

-74.6-26.8

74.626.7

133.0

25.3

-132.9

-24.7

1

4.3

198BALZAC 7

-0.6

1.0140.1

567ENMX1S 7

202SARCEE 7

161SARCEE 4

1.0250.6

162E CALGAR

1.0250.3

-77.323.4

187BEDDING1

1.0245.6

160JANET 4

1.1253.1

168.7

108.6

772ENMX25S7

1.1253.2

-39.0

-8.9

-8.7

159LANGDON4

1.1253.0

181.0-20.7

222.8

26.0

223.826.0

156E CROSS4

1.1252.4

988CROSSF T

1.1252.4

-83.5-0.3

-10.6

3.6

181.0

-20.7

155BENALTO4

1.1253.1

139.6

-24.1140.1

-21.3 -39.4

203SARCEE C

1.114.8

29202SARCEE C

1.114.8

0.97

830.95

1

0.97

830.95

1

3596ENMX7S8

1.026.0

4596ENMX7S9

1.026.0

20.13.01

1.03

75-3

0.00

-20.0-1.31.3

20.0

20.0

1.3

20.1

3.01

1.03

75-3

0.00

-20.0

-1.3

1

0.860

0.880

0.900

0.920

0.940

0.960

0.980

1.000

1.020

1.040

1.060

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Bu

s V

olt

age

(p

u)

Incremental Power Transfer (MW)

System Normal

SS-162 Bus 127 (BEDDING2)138 kV

Sarcee 42S Bus 161 (SARCEE 4)240 kV



SS-14 Bus 555 (ENMX14S7)138 kV





0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Bu

s V

olt

age

(p

u)


42ST1 Contigency










0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Bu

s V

olt

age

(p

u)


42ST2 Contigency










0.860

0.880

0.900

0.920

0.940

0.960

0.980

1.000

1.020

1.040

1.060

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Bu

s vo

ltag

e (

pu

)


928L Contigency










0.860

0.880

0.900

0.920

0.940

0.960

0.980

1.000

1.020

1.040

1.060

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Bu

s V

olt

age

(p

u)


918L Contigency










0.860

0.880

0.900

0.920

0.940

0.960

0.980

1.000

1.020

1.040

1.060

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Bu

s V

olt

age

(p

u)


936L Contigency








