Appendix a Connection Assessment

APPENDIX A CONNECTION ASSESSMENT

Note: The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on the results presented in Attachment A: Engineering Connection Assessment Results, which was prepared by a third party studies consultant in accordance with the AESO Connection Process. The AESO has reviewed Attachment A, and finds it acceptable for the purpose of assessing the potential impacts of the proposed connection on the performance of the AIES.

2 AESO Public

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1. Project...... 5 2. Assessment Scope ...... 6 2.1. Objectives ...... 6 2.2. Existing System ...... 6 2.3. AESO Long-term Transmission Plans ...... 6 2.4. Study Area ...... 7 3. Connection Alternatives ...... 9 3.1. Overview ...... 9 3.2. Connection Alternatives Examined ...... 9 3.2.1. Connection Alternatives Selected for Further Studies ...... 9 3.2.2. Connection Alternatives Not Selected for Further Studies ...... 9 4. Assessment Approach ...... 11 4.1. Standards, Criteria, and Assumptions ...... 11 4.2. Scenarios ...... 11 4.3. Engineering Studies ...... 11 4.3.1. Power flow studies ...... 11 4.3.2. Voltage Stability Studies ...... 12 4.4. Additional Engineering Studies ...... 12 4.4.1. Transient voltage recovery studies ...... 12 5. Interpretation of Results ...... 13 5.1. Pre-Project Studies ...... 13 5.2. Post-Project Studies ...... 13 5.3. Proposed Mitigation Measures ...... 14 5.3.1. Overview of Mitigation Measures ...... 14 5.3.2. Impact of Ksituan River RAS ...... 15 5.4. Impact of Rycroft System Developments ...... 16 5.4.1. Overview of Rycroft System Developments ...... 16 5.4.2. Study Results with Rycroft System Developments ...... 16 5.5. Results Summary and Mitigation Measures ...... 17 6. Project Dependencies ...... 20 7. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 21 7.1. Conclusions ...... 21 7.2. Recommendations ...... 21

3 AESO Public

Attachments Attachment A Engineering Connection Assessment Results Report

Figures Figure 2-1: Existing Study Area Transmission System ...... 8

Tables Table 2-1: 2017 LTP Developments in the Northwest Planning Region ...... 7 Table 4-1: List of Connection Study Scenarios ...... 11 Table 5-1: Project Impact and Mitigation Measures ...... 18

4 AESO Public

1. Introduction

This Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) Engineering Connection Assessment report describes the engineering studies that were completed to assess the impact of the Project (as defined below) on the performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system (AIES). This report also provides the AESO’s conclusions and recommendations based on the results of the engineering studies. Attached to this report are the results of the engineering studies (see Attachment A: Engineering Connection Assessment Results) and the scope and methodology used to perform the studies (see Attachment A1: AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope). These attachments provide details regarding technical criteria, assumptions, and methods for performing these engineering studies, and the results of the engineering studies.

1.1. Project

ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO), in its capacity as the legal owner of an electric distribution system (DFO), submitted a system access service request to the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) to serve load growth in the Spirit River area. The DFO’s request for system access service includes a request for a Rate DTS, Demand Transmission Service, contract capacity increase of approximately 11.71 MW (from 26.29 MW to 38 MW) at the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, and a request for transmission development (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested upgrades to the existing Ksituan River 754S substation. The scheduled in-service date (ISD) for the Project is February 1, 2019.

5 AESO Public

2. Assessment Scope

2.1. Objectives

The objectives of the AESO Engineering Connection Assessment are as follows: • Assess the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES • Evaluate Project connection alternatives and identify the AESO’s preferred alternative • Recommend mitigation measures, if required, to reliably connect the Project to the AIES • Identify Project dependencies, including any TFO projects or AESO plans to expand or enhance the transmission system that must be completed prior to connection

2.2. Existing System

The Project is located in the AESO planning area of Grande Prairie (Area 20), which is part of the AESO Northwest Planning Region. Grande Prairie (Area 20) is surrounded by the planning areas of Peace River (Area 19), Valleyview (Area 23), and Grand Cache (Area 22). From a transmission system perspective, Grande Prairie (Area 20) consists of a 144 kV transmission system. Grande Prairie is connected to the Little Smoky 813S substation by the three 144 kV transmission lines 7L32, 7L45, and 7L46. The 144 kV transmission line 7L20 connects Grande Prairie (Area 20) to Grande Cache (Area 22), and the 144 kV transmission line 7L73 connects Grande Prairie (Area 20) to Peace River (Area 19). Existing constraints in the Northwest Planning Region are managed in accordance with the procedures set out in Section 302.1 of the ISO rules, Real Time Transmission Constraint Management.

2.3. AESO Long-term Transmission Plans

The AESO 2017 Long-term Transmission Plan (2017 LTP) 1 includes system transmission developments in the vicinity of the Study Area.2 Table 2-1 summarizes the system transmission developments in the Northwest Planning Region in the near-term (five years).

1 The 2017 LTP document is available on the AESO website. 2 The 2017 LTP identifies the transmission developments in the Northwest Planning Region on page 48. The 2017 LTP also discusses the near-term developments in the Northwest Planning Region at page 54.

6 AESO Public

Table 2-1: 2017 LTP Developments in the Northwest Planning Region

Development Description • Fox Creek reinforcement Build a 240/144 kV substation near Fox Creek • Build a new single-circuit 240 kV line from Little Smoky substation to new Fox Creek substation to Bickerdike substation

• Little Smoky substation – Replace existing 240/144 kV transformers with higher capacity units (or increase transformer capacity add a third unit) at Little Smoky substation • Grande Prairie supply Build a new 240/144 kV substation on 9L11 between Wesley Creek and Little Smoky substations

• Build a new single-circuit 144 kV line from new substation on 9L11 to Rycroft substation

• Rycroft voltage support Add voltage support equipment in the Rycroft area • Grande Prairie loop Build a new 144 kV line from Clairmont Lake substation to Poplar Hill substation

2.4. Study Area

The Study Area for the Project consists of the 144 kV transmission facilities in Grande Prairie (Area 20), excluding the facilities that form the 144 kV transmission path between the Clairmont Lake 811S and Flyingshot Lake 749S substations including all radially-connected facilities along the 144 kV transmission path (herein collectively referred to as the Grande Prairie Loop or GP Loop). The Study Area also consists of the transmission lines connecting Grande Prairie to neighbouring planning areas. All transmission facilities within the Study Area will be studied and 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 3.1.1 of Attachment A1: AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope).

7 AESO Public

Figure 2-1: Existing Study Area Transmission System

8 AESO Public

3. Connection Alternatives

3.1. Overview

The AESO, in consultation with the legal owner of transmission facilities (TFO) in the Study Area and the DFO, examined three transmission alternatives to meet the DFO’s request for system access service, as detailed in Section 3.2, below.3

3.2. Connection Alternatives Examined

Below is a description of the developments associated with the transmission alternatives that were examined for the Project.

Alternative 1 – Upgrades at the Ksituan River 754S substation (transformer addition)

Alternative 1 involves upgrading the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, including adding one 144/25 kV transformer and one 144 kV circuit breaker.

Alternative 2 – Upgrades at the Ksituan River 754S substation (transformer replacement)

Alternative 2 involves upgrading the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, including replacing the existing 144/25 kV transformer with a transformer of a higher capacity. Alternative 2 also involves adding one 144 kV circuit breaker and associated equipment.

Alternative 3 – Modifications at the Mowat 2033S substation

Alternative 3 involves modifying the existing Mowat 2033S substation, including adding a 25 kV circuit breaker and associated equipment to accommodate the addition of a 25 kV distribution feeder.

3.2.1. Connection Alternatives Selected for Further Studies

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

3.2.2. Connection Alternatives Not Selected for Further Studies

Alternative 2: Alternative 2 is considered to be technically feasible, and the AESO examined two options to implement this alternative. However, Alternative 2 was not selected for further study for the reasons discussed below.

3 These alternatives reflect more up to date engineering design than the alternatives identified in ATCO’s Distribution Deficiency Report, Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade, which is filed under a separate cover.

9 AESO Public

The first option to implement Alternative 2 is to replace the existing 41.6 MVA, 144/25 kV transformer with a 50 MVA, 144/25 kV transformer. A 50 MVA transformer would provide sufficient transformation capacity to accommodate the DFO’s requested Rate DTS increase. However, the DFO’s forecast for the Ksituan River 754S substation includes 46.4 MW of load by 2026. Further, the DFO has advised that its distribution planning criteria requires that POD substation loading remain below 95% of the POD’s nameplate rating. Based on the DFO’s information, the minimum transformation capacity required for the Ksituan River 754S substation would be approximately 50.9 MVA by 2027. Taking into consideration the DFO’s forecast load growth at the Ksituan River 754S substation, the AESO has determined that adding a 50 MVA transformer would not be consistent with good electric industry practice.

A second option to implement Alternative 2 is to replace the existing 41.6 MVA, 144/25 kV transformer with a transformer having a capacity greater than 50 MVA. However, the TFO has advised the AESO that the existing TFO asset management and inventory practices do not support adding transformers in excess of 50 MVA at 144 kV POD substations.

For the reasons discussed above, the AESO has determined that Alternative 2 is not a viable alternative.

Alternative 3: Alternative 3 was not selected for further study as Alternative 3 was determined to be not technically acceptable by the DFO. The DFO advised that Alternative 3 would not meet its distribution planning criteria.

10 AESO Public

4. Assessment Approach

4.1. Standards, Criteria, and Assumptions

A detailed description of the standards, criteria, and assumptions that were used for the connection assessment can be found in Attachment A1: AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope

4.2. Scenarios

At the time of study, the scheduled ISD for the Project was May 1, 2018. Therefore the studies were performed using the 2018 summer peak (SP) and 2018 winter peak (WP) scenarios. The ISD was later changed to February 1, 2019. The revised scheduled ISD (February 1, 2019) will not materially alter the connection study results or affect the conclusions and recommendations in this report. Error! Reference source not found. provides a list of the study scenarios. The post-Project scenarios reflect the requested Rate DTS contract capacity increase of 11.71 MW at the Ksituan River 754S substation.

Table 4-1: List of Connection Study Scenarios

Scenario No. Year/Season Load Project Load (MW)

Pre-Project 1 2018 SP 26.29 2 2018 WP 26.29 Post-Project 3 2018 SP 38 4 2018 WP 38

4.3. Engineering Studies

4.3.1. Power flow studies

Power flow studies were performed for the 2018 SP and 2018 WP pre-Project and post-Project scenarios.

The purpose of the power flow analysis was to quantify any incremental violations of the Reliability Criteria in the Study Area after the Project is connected.

11 AESO Public

4.3.2. Voltage Stability Studies

Voltage stability studies were performed for the 2018 WP pre-Project and post-Project scenarios.

The objective of the voltage stability analysis was to determine the ability of the transmission system to maintain voltage stability at all the busses in the system under normal and abnormal system conditions. The power-voltage (PV) curve represents voltage change as a result of increased power transfer between two systems.

4.4. Additional Engineering Studies

As contemplated in Section 5 of Attachment A1, certain additional studies were required as a result of system performance issues that were identified in the post-Project scenarios. The additional engineering studies are briefly outlined below.

4.4.1. Transient voltage recovery studies

The purpose of the transient voltage recovery studies was to assist the AESO in determining the appropriate mitigation measures that would be required to ensure that voltage levels in the Study Area recover to acceptable levels, thus preventing cascading load loss. The AESO determined that transient voltage recovery studies were required, given both the system topology in the Study Area and that the Northwest Planning Region consists of a large proportion of motor loads.

The transient voltage recovery studies were performed for selected Category B contingencies. These Category B contingencies were selected on the basis that, following each Category B contingency, the Ksituan River 754S substation (with the Project load addition) and the surrounding substations, which supply a large proportion of motor loads, would remain connected to the AIES through long radial 144 kV transmission lines.

The transient voltage recovery studies are described in greater detail in Section 5, below.

12 AESO Public

5. Interpretation of Results

This section provides an overview of the study results, including an assessment of the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES and a description of mitigation measures to address observed Reliability Criteria violations.

The detailed study results are provided in Attachment A: Engineering Connection Assessment Results.

5.1. Pre-Project Studies

The following is a brief summary of the pre-Project study results. The pre-Project study results and applicable mitigation measures are shown in greater detail in Table 5.5-1 below.

Category A conditions (N-G-0) No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions for any of the pre- Project scenarios.

Category B conditions (N-G-1) The pre-Project power flow studies and voltage stability studies identified a number of system performance issues under Category B conditions, namely thermal criteria violations and voltage range criteria violations.

5.2. Post-Project Studies

The following is a brief summary of the post-Project studies. The post-Project study results, Project impact on the performance of the AIES, and applicable mitigation measures are shown in greater detail in Table 5.5-1 below.

Category A conditions (N-G-0) No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions for any of the post- Project scenarios.

Category B conditions (N-G-1) The post-Project power flow studies and voltage stability studies identified a number of system performance issues under Category B conditions, namely thermal criteria violations, voltage range criteria violations, voltage stability criteria violations, and voltage deviations at point of delivery (POD) low voltage busses beyond the limits listed in Table 3-1 of Attachment A1 (hereafter referred to as POD bus voltage deviations).4

4 The AESO’s desired post-contingency voltage deviations for low voltage busses represent guidelines rather than criteria. A POD bus voltage deviation that exceeds the desired limits shown in Table 3-1 of

13 AESO Public

5.3. Proposed Mitigation Measures

The AESO developed mitigation measures to address the system performance issues that were identified in the post-Project scenarios. This section discusses the AESO’s proposed mitigation measures and the studies that were performed to assess the impact of the mitigation measures.

5.3.1. Overview of Mitigation Measures

The mitigation measures consist of real-time operational practices, capacitor overvoltage protection schemes, and a proposed remedial action scheme (RAS).

5.3.1.1. Real-time operational practices and capacitor overvoltage protection schemes Real-time operational practices or capacitor overvoltage protection schemes can be used to manage a number of the identified pre-Project and post-Project system performance issues, including the thermal criteria violations and voltage range criteria violations.

However, the following post-Project system performance issues cannot be managed by using real-time operational practices or capacitor overvoltage protection schemes:

• Scenario 4 (2018 WP)

o Voltage stability criteria violation following the loss of each of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73

Accordingly, the AESO determined that a RAS is required to mitigate these remaining system performance issues (in other words, the identified system performance issues that cannot be managed by using real-time operational practices or capacitor overvoltage protection schemes).

5.3.1.2. Proposed Ksituan River RAS The AESO, in consultation with the TFO in the Study Area and the DFO, developed a RAS at the Ksituan River 754S substation to address the remaining system performance issues (hereafter referred to as the Ksituan River RAS).

In determining the design requirements of the Ksituan River RAS, the AESO took into account the results of the transient voltage recovery studies for the post-Project Scenario 4, including observed violations to the transient voltage recovery performance requirements, which are discussed in Attachment A at Section 3.3 and Section 4.2. This study identified an additional transient voltage recovery performance issue under Category B contingency (loss of 144 kV transmission line 7L68.

Attachment A1 does not represent a Reliability Criteria violation. Mitigation measures would not be developed to specifically address POD bus voltage deviations that exceed the desired values in Table 3-1 of Attachment A1.

14 AESO Public

The purpose of the Ksituan River RAS is to mitigate the observed post-Project voltage stability criteria violations and to ensure the recovery of voltage levels in the Study Area to acceptable levels following the Category B contingencies of each of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L75, 7L73, and 7L68.5

The proposed Ksituan River RAS has three components:

• 7L75 Under voltage load shed scheme (7L75 Scheme): With the loss of the transmission line 7L75, the 7L75 Scheme would trip the Project load (approximately 12 MW) at the Ksituan River 754S substation. • 7L73 Under voltage load shed scheme (7L73 Scheme): With the loss of the transmission line 7L73, the 7L73 Scheme would trip the Project load (approximately 12 MW) at the Ksituan River 754S substation.

• 7L68 Under voltage load shed scheme (7L68 Scheme): With the loss of the transmission line 7L68, the 7L68 Scheme would trip the Project load (approximately 12 MW) at the Ksituan River 754S substation.

During the AESO’s consultation with the DFO, the DFO requested that the proposed Ksituan River RAS be designed to avoid tripping any critical load6 on the DFO’s electric distribution system if tripping non-critical load would be sufficient to mitigate the observed voltage stability criteria violations in the Study Area. The DFO has advised that approximately 12 MW of non- critical load under peak conditions can be shed at the Ksituan River 754S substation.

In addition, it is recommended to accelerate the fault clearing speed for the Category B contingencies of each of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73. Therefore, it is also recommended to upgrade the line protection for the transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73 to teleprotection-grade.

5.3.2. Impact of Ksituan River RAS

Additional studies were performed to assess the impact of the Ksituan River RAS on the post- Project voltage criteria violations and transient voltage recovery performance violations. The additional studies consisted of transient voltage recovery studies and voltage stability studies for the post-Project Scenario 4.

The detailed results of these studies are shown in Attachment A: Engineering Connection Assessment Results at Section 4.

5 The details of the Ksituan River RAS are more specifically described in the AESO’s Functional Specification document, which is included in the TFO’s Facility Proposal to be filed with the Alberta Utilities Commission. 6 The DFO defined “critical loads” in its Distribution Deficiency Report, Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade report, filed under a separate cover.

15 AESO Public

With the Ksituan River RAS, no voltage stability criteria violations or transient voltage recovery performance requirement violations were observed following the loss of each of the transmission lines 7L75, 7L73 or 7L68.

5.4. Impact of Rycroft System Developments

As discussed in Section 5.2 and Section 5.3 of this report, the post-Project connection assessment identified system performance issues that require a RAS. Accordingly, as contemplated in Section 5.2 of Attachment A1, additional studies were required to demonstrate that one of the potential future transmission developments in the Study Area can address the remaining post-Project system performance issues.

This section discusses one of the potential future transmission developments in the Study Area and the studies that were performed to assess the impact of these transmission developments on the remaining post-Project system performance issues.

5.4.1. Overview of Rycroft System Developments

The AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document (Rycroft System NID) includes plans to add voltage support equipment in the Rycroft area (hereafter referred to as the Rycroft System Developments).7

For the purpose of the additional studies, and as contemplated in Section 5.2 of Attachment A1, the Rycroft System Developments were assumed to consist of the following:

• Adding a static VAr system (SVS), capable of providing approximately 50 MVAr of dynamic reactive power support, at the existing Rycroft 730S substation.

5.4.2. Study Results with Rycroft System Developments

Additional studies were performed to assess the impact of the Rycroft System Developments on the post-Project scenarios. The studies consisted of transient voltage recovery studies, power flow studies, and voltage stability studies, which were repeated for the post-Project Scenario 4 (2018 WP), with the Rycroft System Developments included in the transmission system topology.

The detailed results of these additional studies are shown in Section 5 of Attachment A: Engineering Connection Assessment Results.

The results of these additional studies indicate that the Rycroft System Developments can address the identified voltage stability violations and transient voltage recovery performance violations. However, for greater clarity, the Project is not dependent on the completion of the Rycroft System Developments in order for the Project to proceed.

7 See page 54 of the 2017 LTP. The AESO’s Rycroft System NID was filed with the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) on December 15, 2017. The Rycroft System NID is currently registered in AUC Proceeding 23105 and is designated as Application 23105-A001.

16 AESO Public

The remaining voltage range criteria violations can be managed by using real-time operational practices or capacitor overvoltage protection schemes.

5.5. Results Summary and Mitigation Measures

Table 5-1 provides analysis of, and conclusions about, the impact of the Project for selected contingencies, including mitigation measures for observed Reliability Criteria violations. The observed POD bus voltage deviations do not represent Reliability Criteria violations and are not included in Table 5-1.

17 AESO Public

Table 5-1: Project Impact and Mitigation Measures

Identified Reliability Criteria Violations Occurrence Details of (Pre-Project Year/ Contingency Mitigation Violation Violation and/or Impact Level of Project Season (System Element Measures Type (Violation Post- Load Lost) Observed On) Project 7L75 (West Peace River 793S - Both 2018 SP Friedenstal 800S) 7L32 segment 7L46 (Little Thermal (South Smoky 813S - Big Both 2018 SP criteria Bezanson 862S tap Mountain 845S) (loading point - Little 7L45 (Little Real-time above operational Smoky 813S) Smoky 813S - Big Post-Project Thermal criteria violation 2018 SP seasonal practices Mountain 845S) materially worsened continuous 7L73 (Rycroft 730S rating) Post-Project 2018 SP – Friedenstal 800S) 7L27 (Wesley 7L32 (Little Smoky Creek 834S– West 813S – Clairmont Post-Project 2018 SP Peace River 793S) Lake 811S) Overvoltage at 2018 SP 7L73 (Rycroft 730S - Friedenstal 800S Both and 2018 Friedenstal 800S) 144 kV bus WP 7L39 (Clairmont Lake Pre-Project 2017 WP 811S – Crystal Lake 722S) Resolved Real-time 7L13 operational practices Voltage (Big Mountain 845S Pre-Project 2017 WP and range – Procter & Gamble capacitor criteria Overvoltage in the 808S) Voltage range criteria 2018 SP overvoltage Rycroft area Transformer 701T Both violation materially and 2018 protection (Ksituan River 754S) improved WP operations 2018 SP Transformer 703T Post-Project N/A and 2018 (Ksituan River 754S) WP Transformer 701T Pre-Project Resolved 2017 WP (Mowat 2033S) 7L75 (West Peace Voltage River 793S - Voltage stability criteria Voltage stability stability Friedenstal 800S) Post-Project violation materially 2017 WP margin not met criteria 7L73 (Rycroft 730S - worsened Friedenstal 800S) 7L68 (Clairmont Lake 811S – Rycroft Post-Project 2017 WP Ksituan 730S) River RAS Transient Transient voltage recovery Insufficient voltage voltage 7L75 (West Peace criteria violation materially recovery in the recovery River 793S - Post-Project worsened 2017 WP Rycroft area criteria Friedenstal 800S) 7L73 (Rycroft 730S - Post-Project 2017 WP Friedenstal 800S)

Notes: Thermal criteria violation materially worsened refers to a thermal criteria violation that existed only post- Project, or pre-Project and post-Project, and the percent loading difference (post-Project percent loading minus pre-Project percent loading) above or equal to 3% Thermal criteria violation marginally worsened refers to a thermal criteria violation that existed only post- Project, or pre-Project and post-Project, and the percent loading difference (post-Project percent loading minus pre-Project percent loading) is below 3%.

18 AESO Public

Resolved refers to a Reliability Criteria violation that was observed pre-Project does not occur post-Project. N/A refers to Ksituan River 754S transformer 703T is added as part of the Alternative 1, therefore, the voltage range criteria violation did not occur pre-Project. Voltage range criteria violation materially improved refers to a voltage range criteria violation that existed pre-Project and post-Project, and the voltage difference (post-Project voltage minus pre-Project voltage) is above or equal to 3 kV. Voltage stability criteria violation materially worsened refers to a voltage stability criteria violation that existed only post-Project. Transient voltage recovery criteria violation materially worsened refers to a transient voltage recovery criteria violation that existed only post-Project.

19 AESO Public

6. Project Dependencies

The Project does not require the completion of any other AESO plans to expand or enhance the transmission system prior to connection.

20 AESO Public

7. Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1. Conclusions

Based on the study results, Alternative 1 is technically viable. The connection assessment identified pre-Project and post-Project system performance issues. Real-time operational practices and capacitor overvoltage protection schemes can be used to manage the pre-Project system performance issues, and a number of the post-Project system performance issues. The remaining post-Project system performance issues can be mitigated by using the proposed Ksituan River RAS. With implementation of these proposed mitigation measures, the connection of the project with the proposed alternative does not adversely affect the performance of the AIES. The connection assessment also indicates that the use of the Ksituan River RAS would no longer be required following the completion of the Rycroft System Developments. However, for greater clarity, the Project is not dependent on the completion of the Rycroft System Developments in order for the Project to proceed.

7.2. Recommendations

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. Alternative 1 involves upgrading the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, including adding one 144/25 kV transformer, one 144 kV circuit breaker and associated equipment. It is also recommended to use real-time operational practices, capacitor overvoltage protection schemes, and the Ksituan River RAS to mitigate the identified system performance issues. A transformer rating of 41.6 MVA is recommended for the additional transformer in Alternative 1, based on good electric industry practice. In addition, it is recommended to accelerate the fault clearing speed for the Category B contingencies of each of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73. Therefore, it is also recommended to upgrade the line protection for the transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73 to teleprotection-grade.

21 AESO Public

Attachment A

Engineering Connection Assessment Results

22 AESO Public

Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCOElectricLtd.KsituanRiver754S CapacityUpgrade

Engineering Connection Assessment Results

Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

AESO Project Number: 1658

Date: May 17, 2018 Role Name Date Signature

Prepared: Rachel Liu, P. Eng. /4 ‘7, ,%2, Reviewed: Sharon Morganson, P. Eng. y Pr,7o 4._S Approved: Rachel Liu, P. Eng. f-

Version: Vi Engineering Stamp

‘7 ?-2/

APEGA Permit to Practice: P0850

Page 1

ATCO EIectrc Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 4 2. Pre-Project Study Results ...... 4 2.1. Power Flow Studies ...... 4 2.1.1. Scenario 1 (2018 SP pre-Project) ...... 4 2.1.2. Scenario 2 (2018 WP pre-Project) ...... 6 2.2. Voltage Stability Studies ...... 7 2.2.1. Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project) ...... 8 3. Post-Project Study Results ...... 8 3.1. Power Flow Studies ...... 8 3.1.1. Scenario 3 (2018 SP post-Project) ...... 8 3.1.2. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project) ...... 10 3.2. Voltage Stability Studies ...... 12 3.2.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project) ...... 12 3.3. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies ...... 13 3.3.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project) ...... 13 4. Impact of Mitigation Measures on Post-Project Scenarios ...... 13 4.1. Overview ...... 13 4.2. Power Flow Studies ...... 14 4.3. Voltage Stability Studies ...... 14 4.4. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies ...... 14 5. Impact of Rycroft System Developments on Post-Project Scenarios ...... 15 5.1. Overview ...... 15 5.2. Power Flow Studies ...... 15 5.2.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 15 5.3. Voltage Stability Studies ...... 16 5.3.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 16 5.4. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies ...... 16 5.4.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 17

Page 2

ATCO Electric Ltd. Public

Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Attachments

Attachment A1 AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope Attachment A2 Pre-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 1 to 2) Attachment A3 Post-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 3 to 4) Attachment A4 Pre-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 2) Attachment A5 Post-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 4) Attachment A6 Transient Voltage Recovery Study Results (Scenario 4)

Tables

Table 2.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for Scenario 1 (2018 SP Pre-Project) ...... 5 Table 2.1-2: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 1 (2018 SP Pre-Project) ...... 5 Table 2.1-3: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project) ...... 7 Table 2.2-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project) ...... 8 Table 3.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for Scenario 3 (2018 SP Post-Project) ...... 9 Table 3.1-2: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 3 (2018 SP Post-Project) ...... 10 Table 3.1-3: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project) ...... 11 Table 3.1-4: Voltage Deviations at POD Low Voltage Busses for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project) ...... 12 Table 3.2-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project) ...... 12 Table 4.3-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project with Ksituan River RAS) ...... 14 Table 5.2-1: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project Project with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 15 Table 5.3-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project with Rycroft System Developments) .... 16

Page 3

ATCO Electric Ltd. Public

Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

1. Introduction

This report presents the results of the engineering studies that were completed by ATCO Electric Ltd., (the in its capacity as a Studies Consultant)to assess the impact of the Project (as defined in Attachment A1: AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope) on the performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system. The studies were performed in accordance with Attachment A1, which was prepared by the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO). The following sections describe the results of the studies.

The power system network analysis tool that was used for the studies in this connection assessment was PSS/E version 33.

2. Pre-Project Study Results

This section describes the results of the pre-Project power flow studies and voltage stability studies.

2.1. Power Flow Studies

The pre-Project power flow diagrams are provided in Attachment A2.

2.1.1. Scenario 1 (2018 SP pre-Project)

Category A conditions (N-G-0)

No violations of the Reliability Criteria (as defined in Section 3.1.1 of Attachment A1) were observed under Category A conditions.

Category B conditions (N-G-1)

A number of thermal and voltage range criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.

The thermal criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 2.1-1.

• Loading below the short-term emergency rating on a segment of the 144 kV transmission line 7L32 (between the South Bezanson 862S substation tap point and Little Smoky 813S substation) was observed following the loss of each of the following 144 kV transmission lines:

4 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

o 7L75 (between the West Peace River 793S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o 7L46 (between the Little Smoky 813S and Big Mountain 845S substations)

Table 2.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for Scenario 1 (2018 SP Pre-Project)

a Details of Reliability Criteria Thermal Ratings (MVA) Details of Violation Violations Contingency (Violation Observed Observed (System Element Lost) % On) Seasonal Short-term b Power Flow c Continuous Emergency Loading (MVA) 7L32 7L75 (Little Smoky 813S – (Friedenstal 800S – West 109.2 123.6 115 105.3 South Bezanson 862S Peace River 793S) tap) 7L32 7L46 (Little Smoky 813S – (Little Smoky 813S – Big 109.2 123.6 110.6 101.3 South Bezanson 862S Mountain 845S) tap)

Notes: aThe facility ratings shown in Table 3.6-1 of Attachment A1 have been adjusted from a 144 kV voltage base to a 138 kV voltage base, as is used by the power system network analysis tool. b Reported as current expressed in MVA (i.e., S =√3 x Vbase x Iactual) cReported as a percentage of the observed power flow (in MVA) relative to the transmission line’s seasonal continuous rating (also in MVA, as shown in Table 3.6-1 of Attachment A1, and then adjusted from a 144 kV voltage base to a 138 kV voltage base).

The voltage range criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 2.1-2.

• Voltage levels above the extreme maximum limit were observed following the loss of each of the following transmission facilities:

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L73 (between the Rycroft 730S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o The 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

o The 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Saddle Hills 865S substation

Table 2.1-2: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 1 (2018 SP Pre-Project)

Facility Description Voltage (kV) Contingency (System Element Lost) Substation Bus Extreme Extreme Steady (Name and Nominal Initial No. Minimum Maximum State Number) 7L73 Friedenstal (Rycroft 730S – 1105 144 130 155 151.1 156.8 800S Friedenstal 800S) Transformer 701T Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 146.2 158.6 (Ksituan River 754S) 754S

5 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Facility Description Voltage (kV) Contingency (System Element Lost) Substation Bus Extreme Extreme Steady (Name and Nominal Initial No. Minimum Maximum State Number)

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 147.1 157

Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 148.3 155.8

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 150.3 155.9 Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 151.1 156.1 800S

2.1.2. Scenario 2 (2018 WP pre-Project)

Category A conditions (N-G-0)

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions.

Category B conditions (N-G-1)

No thermal critiera violations were observed under Category B conditions.

Voltage range criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions. The voltage range criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 2.1-3.

• Voltage levels above the extreme maximum limit were observed following the loss of each of the following transmission facilities:

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L73 (between the Rycroft 730S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L68 (between the Clairmont Lake 811S and Rycroft 730S substations)

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L39 (between the Clairmont Lake 811S and Crystal Lake 722S substations)

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L13 (between the Big Mountain 845S and Procter & Gamble 808S substations)

o The 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

o The 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Mowat 2033S substation

6 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Table 2.1-3: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project)

Facility Description Voltage (kV) Contingency (System Element Lost) Substation Extreme Extreme Steady (Name and Bus No. Nominal Initial Minimum Maximum State Number) 7L73 Friedenstal (Rycroft 730S – 1105 144 130 155 153 158 800S Friedenstal 800S) Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 153 156.9 800S

Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 150.8 156.6

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 152.3 156.7 7L39 Creek 829S (Clairmont Lake 811S – Ksituan River Crystal Lake 722S) 1104 144 130 155 150.3 156.5 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 151.1 157.2

Clairmont 1117 144 130 155 148.9 155.5 Lake 811S 7L13 Friedenstal (Big Mountain 845S – 1105 144 130 155 153 155.2 800S Procter & Gamble 808S) Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 150.3 162.8 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 151.1 161.2

Transformer 701T (Ksituan River 754S) Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 150.8 158.6

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 152.3 158.2 Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 153 158.2 800S Ksituan River 144 130 155 144 150.3 156.3 754S

Mowat 2033S 144 130 155 144 151.1 157

Transformer 701T Rycroft 730S 144 130 155 144 150.8 155.4 (Mowat 2033S) Boucher 144 130 155 144 152.3 155.8 Creek 829S Friedenstal 144 130 155 144 153 156.1 800S

2.2. Voltage Stability Studies

The pre-Project voltage stability diagrams are provided in Attachment A4.

7 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

2.2.1. Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project)

For the pre-Project Scenario 2, the reference load level for the Study Area is 362 MW. For Category B contingencies, the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 5% of the reference load, or 18.1 MW (0.05 x 362 MW = 18.1 MW). Table 2.2-1 provides the voltage stability study results under Category A conditions and for the four worst contingencies under Category B conditions. The voltage stability margin was met for all studied conditions.

Table 2.2-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 2 (2018 WP Pre-Project) Maximum Contingency Incremental Meets 105% Description (System Element Lost) Transfer Transfer Criteria? (MW) N-G-0 System Normal 65.6 Yes

7L75 Friedenstal 800S – West Peace 793S 22.5 Yes

7L46 Little Smoky 813S - Big Mountain 845S 25.6 Yes

7L73 Friedenstal 800S – Rycroft 730S 29.4 Yes

7L32 Little Smoky 813S – Clairmont Lake 811S 34.4 Yes

3. Post-Project Study Results

This section describes the results of the post-Project power flow studies, voltage stability studies, and transient voltage recovery studies.

As described in Section 2 of Attachment A1, the post-Project studies were performed using Alternative 1.

3.1. Power Flow Studies

The post-Project power flow diagrams are provided in Attachment A3.

3.1.1. Scenario 3 (2018 SP post-Project)

Category A conditions (N-G-0)

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions.

Category B conditions (N-G-1)

8 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

A number of thermal and voltage range criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.

The thermal criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 3.1-1.

• Loading below the short-term emergency rating on a segment of the 144 kV transmission line 7L32 (between the South Bezanson 862S substation tap point and the Little Smoky 813S substation) was observed following the loss of each of the following 144 kV transmission lines:

o 7L75 (between the West Peace River 793S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o 7L45 (between the Little Smoky 813S and Big Mountain 845S substations)

o 7L46 (between the Little Smoky 813S and Big Mountain 845S substations)

o 7L73 (between the Friedenstal 800S and Rycroft 730S substations) • Loading below the short-term emergency rating on the 144 kV transmission line 7L27 (between the Wesley Creek 834S and West Peace River 793S substations) was observed following the loss of the 144 kV transmission line 7L32 (between the Little Smoky 813S and Clairmont Lake 811S substations). Table 3.1-1: Thermal Criteria Violations for Scenario 3 (2018 SP Post-Project) Details of Reliability Details of Reliability % Thermal Ratings (MVA) Criteria Violations Criteria Violations Loading Details of Violation (Pre-Project) (Post-Project) Difference Contingency (Violation Observed Observed (System Element Lost) Observed On) Seasonal Short-term Power % % Loading Power Flow Post-Pre Continuous Emergency Flow Loading (MVA) (MVA) 7L75 7L32 (Friedenstal 800S – (Little Smoky 813S – 109.2 123.6 115 105.3 120.8 110.6 5.3 West Peace River South Bezanson 793S) 862S tap) 7L32 7L46 (Little Smoky 813S – (Little Smoky 813S – 109.2 123.6 110.6 101.3 114 104.3 3 South Bezanson Big Mountain 845S) 862S tap) 7L32 7L45 (Little Smoky 813S – (Little Smoky 813S – 109.2 123.6 108.1 99 111.6 102.1 3.1 South Bezanson Big Mountain 845S) 862S tap) 7L32 7L73 (Little Smoky 813S – (Friedenstal 800S – 109.2 123.6 106.4 97.4 112.1 102.6 5.2 South Bezanson Rycroft 730S) 862S tap) 7L27 7L32 (Wesley Creek 834S– (Little Smoky 813S – 109.2 123.6 104.6 95.8 111.8 102.4 6.6 West Peace River Clairmont Lake 811S) 793S)

The voltage range criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 3.1-2.

9 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

• Voltage levels above the extreme maximum limit were observed following the loss of each of the following transmission facilities:

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L73 (between the Rycroft 730S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o The existing 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

o The proposed 144/25 kV transformer 703T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

o The 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Saddle Hills 865S substation

Table 3.1-2: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 3 (2018 SP Post-Project)

Facility Description Voltage (kV)

Contingency Pre- Post- Substation Pre- Post- (System Element Lost) Bus Extreme Extreme Project Project (Name and Nominal Project Project No. Minimum Maximum Steady Steady Number) Initial Initial State State 7L73 Friedenstal (Rycroft 730S – 1105 144 130 155 151.1 156.8 151.9 158.1 800S Friedenstal 800S) Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 146.2 158.6 - - 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 147.1 157 - -

Transformer 701T (Ksituan River 754S) Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 148.3 155.8 - -

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 150.3 155.9 - - Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 151.1 156.1 151.9 155.3 800S Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 146.2 157.6 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 148.2 157.3

Transformer 703T Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 N/A in Pre-Project 149 155.9 (Ksituan River 754S) Boucher 1102 144 130 155 151 156.3 Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 151.9 156.5 800S

3.1.2. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project)

Category A conditions (N-G-0)

No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions.

10 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Category B conditions (N-G-1)

No thermal critiera violations were observed under Category B conditions.

Voltage range criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions, as described below, and shown in Table 3.1-3.

• Voltage levels above the extreme maximum limit were observed following the loss of each of the following transmission facilities:

o The 144 kV transmission line 7L73 (between the Rycroft 730S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

o The existing 144/25 kV transformer 701T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

o The proposed 144/25 kV transformer 703T at the Ksituan River 754S substation

Table 3.1-3: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project)

Facility Description Voltage (kV)

Contingency Pre- Post- Substation Pre- Post- (System Element Lost) Bus Extreme Extreme Project Project (Name and Nominal Project Project No. Minimum Maximum Steady Steady Number) Initial Initial State State 7L73 Friedenstal (Rycroft 730S – 1105 144 130 155 153 158 151.6 158.8 800S Friedenstal 800S) Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 150.3 162.8 - - 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 151.1 161.2 - -

Transformer 701T (Ksituan River 754S) Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 150.8 158.6 - -

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 152.3 158.2 - - Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 153 158.2 151.6 155.1 800S Ksituan River 1104 144 130 155 - - 145.5 157.1 754S

Mowat 2033S 1116 144 130 155 - - 147.5 156.8

Transformer 703T (Ksituan River 754S) Rycroft 730S 1100 144 130 155 - - 148.3 155.5

Boucher 1102 144 130 155 - - 150.6 156 Creek 829S Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 - - 151.6 156.4 800S

11 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

The voltage deviations beyond the desired limits at POD low voltage busses are also shown in Table 3.1-4.

Table 3.1-4: Voltage Deviations at POD Low Voltage Busses for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project)

Voltage Deviations for POD Busses Only Contingency Substation Nominal Initial Bus (System Element (Name and Voltage Voltage Post Post Post No. % % % Lost) Number) (kV) (kV) Transient Auto Manual Change Change Change (kV) (kV) (kV)

18104 25 25.9 23.1 11.4 - - - - Ksituan 7L73 River 754S (Rycroft 730S – 19104 25 26 23.1 11.2 - - - - Friedenstal 800S) Mowat 19116 25 26 23.4 10.3 - - - - 2033S

3.2. Voltage Stability Studies

The post-Project voltage stability diagrams are provided in Attachment A5.

3.2.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project)

For the post-Project Scenario 4, the reference load level for the Study Area is 362 MW. For Category B contingencies, the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 5% of the reference load, or 18.1 MW (0.05 x 362 MW = 18.1 MW). Table 3.2-1 provides the voltage stability study results under Category A conditions and for the five worst contingencies under Category B conditions.

As can be seen in Table 3.2-1, voltage stability criteria violations were observed following the loss of each of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L75 and 7L73. These violations were not observed in the pre-Project Scenario 2.

Table 3.2-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project)

Pre-Project Post-Project Post-Project Contingency Maximum Maximum Meets 105% (System Description Incremental Incremental Transfer Element Lost) Transfer (MW) Transfer (MW) Criteria?

N-G-0 System Normal 65.6 58.8 Yes 7L75 Friedenstal 800S – West Peace 793S 22.5 5.6 No 7L73 Friedenstal 800S - Rycroft 730S 29.4 13.8 No 7L46 Little Smoky 813S - Big Mountain 845S 25.6 18.1 Yes 7L32 Little Smoky 813S – Clairmont Lake 811S 34.4 25.6 Yes 7L68 Rycroft 730S - Clairmont Lake 811S 53.1 27.5 Yes

12 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

3.3. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies

Detailed study results, including diagrams, for the post-Project transient voltage recovery studies are provided in Attachment A6.

3.3.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project)

A number of transient voltage recovery performance violations were observed under Category B conditions.

The transient voltage recovery performance violations, which are described below, are also shown in Attachment A6.

• Voltage levels at substations in the Study Area did not recover sufficiently to meet the AESO’s performance requirements following the loss of each of the following transmission lines:

• 7L68

• 7L73

• 7L75

4. Impact of Mitigation Measures on Post-Project Scenarios

4.1. Overview

This section describes the results of additional studies that were performed to assess the impact of the Ksituan River RAS (described in the AESO Engineering Connection Assessment) on the post-Project voltage stability criteria violations and transient voltage recovery performance violations.

Transient voltage recovery studies and voltage stability studies were completed for the post- Project Scenario 4.

13 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

4.2. Power Flow Studies

The AESO, in consultation with the Studies Consultant, determined that additional power flow studies were not required to assess the impact of the Ksituan River RAS on the post-Project thermal critiera violations.

4.3. Voltage Stability Studies

The post-Project voltage stability diagrams, with the Ksituan River RAS, are provided in Attachment A5.

4.3.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Ksituan River RAS)

As described in Section 3.2.1, for the post-Project Scenario 4, the reference load level for the Study Area is 362 MW, and the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 18.1 MW. Table 4.3-1 provides the voltage stability study results for the Category B contingencies of 7L68, 7L73 and 7L75 with the Ksituan River RAS. With the Ksituan River RAS, the voltage stability margin was met for all studied conditions.

Table 4.3-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project with Ksituan River RAS)

Post-Project Post-Project Maximum (with Ksituan RAS) Contingency Description Incremental Meets 105% Transfer (MW) Transfer Criteria?

7L68 Rycroft 730S - Clairmont Lake 58.8 Yes

7L75 Friedenstal 800S – West Peace 26.3 Yes

7L73 Friedenstal 800S - Rycroft 730S 33.1 Yes

4.4. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies

Detailed study results, including diagrams, for the post-Project transient voltage recovery studies, with the Ksituan River RAS, are provided in Attachment A6.

4.4.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Ksituan River RAS)

With the Ksituan River RAS, no transient voltage recovery performance violations were observed under Category B conditions.

14 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5. Impact of Rycroft System Developments on Post- Project Scenarios

5.1. Overview

This section describes the results of additional studies that were performed to assess the impact of the Rycroft System Developments (described in reportSection 5.2 of Attachment A1) on the post-Project scenarios.

The additional studies consisted of power flow studies, voltage stability studies, and transient voltage recovery studies. The studies were performed for the post-Project Scenario 4 with the Rycroft System Developments included in the transmission system topology.

5.2. Power Flow Studies

The post-Project power flow diagrams, with the Rycroft System Developments, are provided in Attachment A3.

5.2.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments)

Category A conditions (N-G-0)

With the Rycroft System Developments, no Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category A conditions.

Category B conditions (N-G-1)

No thermal critiera violations were observed under Category B conditions.

Voltage range criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions. The voltage range criteria violations, which are also described below, are shown in Table 5.2-1:

• Voltage levels above the extreme maximum limit were observed following the loss of each of the following 144 kV transmission lines:

o 7L73 (between the Rycroft 730S and Friedenstal 800S substations)

Table 5.2-1: Voltage Range Criteria Violations for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project Project with Rycroft System Developments)

Contingency Facility Description Voltage (kV) (System

ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Element Lost) Post-Project Post-Project Substation (with Rycroft (with Rycroft Bus Extreme Extreme (Name and Nominal System System No. Minimum Maximum Number) Developments) Developments) Initial Steady State 7L73 (Rycroft 730S – Friedenstal 1105 144 130 155 151.5 159.7 Friedenstal 800S 800S)

5.3. Voltage Stability Studies

The post-Project voltage stability diagrams, with the Rycroft System Developments, are provided in Attachment A5.

5.3.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments)

As described in Section 3.2.1, for the post-Project Scenario 4, the reference load level for the Study Area is 362 MW, and the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 18.1 MW. Table 5.3-1 provides the voltage stability study results under Category A conditions and for the four worst contingencies under Category B conditions. With the Rycroft System Developments, the voltage stability margin was met for all studied conditions.

Table 5.3-1: Voltage Stability Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP Post-Project with Rycroft System Developments) Post-Project Maximum Incremental (with Rycroft System Contingency Description Transfer Developments) (System Element Lost) (MW) Meets 105% Transfer Criteria? N-G-0 System Normal 82.5 Yes

7L75 Friedenstal 800S – West Peace 793S 31.9 Yes

7L46 Little Smoky 813S - Big Mountain 845S 41.9 Yes

7L73 Friedenstal 800S - Rycroft 730S 44.4 Yes

7L32 Little Smoky 813S – Clairmont Lake 811S 51.3 Yes

5.4. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies

Detailed study results, including diagrams, for the post-Project transient voltage recovery studies, with the Rycroft System Developments, are provided in Attachment A6.

16 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5.4.1. Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Rycroft System Developments)

With the Rycroft System Developments, no transient voltage recovery criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.

17 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public Engineering Connection Assessment Results: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Attachment A1

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope

18 ATCO Electric Ltd. Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 4 1.1. Project...... 4 1.1.1. Overview ...... 4 1.1.2. Load Component ...... 4 1.1.3. Generation Component ...... 4 1.2. Study Scope ...... 5 1.2.1. Study Objectives ...... 5 1.2.2. Study Area Description ...... 5 1.2.3. Engineering Studies Required ...... 7 2. Alternatives to be Studied ...... 9 3. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions ...... 10 3.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements ...... 10 3.1.1. AESO Reliability Criteria ...... 10 3.1.2. ISO Rules and IDs ...... 11 3.2. Study Scenarios ...... 11 3.3. Load and Generation Assumptions ...... 12 3.3.1. Load Assumptions ...... 12 3.3.2. Generation Assumptions ...... 12 3.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions ...... 14 3.3.4. HVDC Power Order ...... 14 3.4. Project Assumptions ...... 14 3.4.1. System Projects ...... 14 3.4.2. Connection Projects...... 14 3.5. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements ...... 14 3.6. Voltage Profile Assumption ...... 16 4. Study Methodology ...... 16 4.1. Engineering Studies ...... 16 4.2. Power Flow Studies ...... 17 4.2.1. Contingencies to be Studied ...... 17 4.3. Voltage Stability (PV) Studies ...... 17 4.3.1. Contingencies to be Studied ...... 18 5. Additional Engineering Studies for Identified System Performance Issues ...... 19 5.1. Studies to Determine and Assess Mitigation Measures ...... 19 5.1.1. Transient voltage recovery studies ...... 19 5.1.1.1. Performance Requirements ...... 19 5.1.1.2. Assumptions ...... 19 5.1.1.2.1 Motor Loads ...... 19 5.1.1.2.2 Protection Fault Clearing Times ...... 21 5.1.1.3. Methodology ...... 21 5.1.1.3.1 Contingencies to be Studied ...... 22 5.1.2. Additional Power Flow Studies (with proposed RAS) ...... 22 5.1.3. Additional Voltage Stability Studies (with proposed RAS)...... 22 5.2. Studies to Assess the Impact of Potential AESO Transmission Developments Plans ...... 22 5.2.1. Additional Power Flow Studies (with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 23

AESO 2 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5.2.2. Additional Voltage Stability Studies (with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 23 5.2.3. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies (with Rycroft System Developments) ...... 23

Tables

Table 1-1: 2017 LTP Development in the Northwest Planning Region ...... 7 Table 3-1: Post Contingency Voltage Deviation Guidelines for Low Voltage Busses ...... 11 Table 3-2: List of Connection Study Scenarios ...... 12 Table 3-3: Forecast Area Load (2017 LTO at Northwest Planning Region Peak) ...... 12 Table 3-4: Local Generation in the Study Cases ...... 13 Table 3-5: Connection Projects in the Study Areaa ...... 14 Table 3-6: Thermal Ratings Assumptions for Transmission Lines in the Study Area (MVA on 144 kV Base) ...... 15 Table 3-7: Summary of Key Transformers in the Study Area ...... 15 Table 3-8: Summary of Key Shunt Elements in the Study Area ...... 16 Table 4-1: Summary of Engineering Studies to be Performed ...... 17 Table 5-1: Motor Load Assumptions for CLOD Model ...... 20 Table 5-2: Fault Clearing Time Assumptions ...... 21

AESO 3 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

1. Introduction

This AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope provides an overview of the engineering studies to be completed by ATCO Electric Ltd. (the Studies Consultant) to assess the impact of the Project (as defined in Section 1.1 below) on the performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system (AIES). Technical criteria, assumptions, and methods for performing these engineering studies are provided in this document.

1.1. Project

1.1.1. Overview

The DFO’s request for system access service includes a request for a Rate DTS, Demand Transmission Service, contract capacity increase of approximately 11.71 MW (from 26.29 MW to 38 MW) at the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, and a request for transmission development (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested upgrades to the existing Ksituan River 754S substation.

The scheduled in-service date (ISD) for the Project is February 1, 2019.

1.1.2. Load Component

• The existing Rate DTS contract capacity for the system access service provided at the existing Ksituan River 754S substation is 26.29 MW.

• The DFO requested a Rate DTS contract capacity increase of 11.71 MW, for a total of 38 MW

• Load type: industrial

• The load will be studied using a power factor (PF) of 0.90 lagging.

1.1.3. Generation Component

There is no generation component associated with the Project.

AESO 4 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

1.2. Study Scope

1.2.1. Study Objectives

The objectives of the studies are as follows:

• Study the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES.

• 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 Description

The Study Area also consists of the transmission lines connecting Grande Prairie to neighbouring planning areas. These transmission lines are: • The 144 kV transmission path between the Rycroft 730S and Wesley Creek 834S substations, which consists of the 144 kV transmission lines 7L73, 7L75 and 7L27 • The 144 kV transmission line 7L32 (between the Little Smoky 813S and Clairmont Lake 811S substations) • The 144 kV double-circuit transmission lines 7L45 and 7L46 (between the Little Smokey 813S and Big Mountain 845S substations) • The 144 kV transmission line 7L20 (between the H.R. Milner 740S and Big Mountain 845S substations)

All transmission facilities within the Study Area will be studied and 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 3.1.1).

The existing transmission sytem in the Study Area is shown in Figure 1-1.

AESO 5 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

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

AESO 6 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

1.2.2.1. Existing Constraints

Existing constraints in the Northwest Planning Region are managed in accordance with the procedures set out in Section 302.1 of the ISO rules, Real Time Transmission Constraint Management (TCM Rule).

1.2.2.2. AESO Long-Term Transmission Plans

The AESO 2017 Long-term Transmission Plan (2017 LTP) 1 includes system transmission developments in the vicinity of the Study Area.2 Table 1-1 summarizes the system transmission developments in the Northwest Planning Region in the near-term (five years).

Table 1-1: 2017 LTP Development in the Northwest Planning Region

• Build a new single-circuit 144 kV line from new substation on 9L11 to Rycroft substation

• Rycroft voltage support Add voltage support equipment in the Rycroft area • Grande Prairie loop Build a new 144 kV line from Clairmont Lake substation to Poplar Hill substation

The 2017 LTP system transmission developments in the Northwest Planning Region will not be 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 Project ISD.

1.2.3. Engineering Studies Required

The following engineering studies are required for the pre-Project scenarios:

AESO 7 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

• Power flow studies

• Voltage stability studies

The following engineering studies are required for the post-Project scenarios:

• Power flow studies

• Voltage stability studies

AESO 8 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

2. Alternatives to be Studied

The following alternative will be studied.

Alternative 1 – Upgrades at the existing Ksituan River 754S substation

This alternative involves upgrading the existing Ksituan River 754S substation, including the following:

• Add one 144/25 kV transformer.

• Add one144 kV circuit breaker.

• Add or modify associated equipment as required for the above transmission developments.

AESO 9 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

3. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions

3.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements

3.1.1. AESO 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 3 (collectively, the Reliability Criteria) will be 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 TPL standards, TPL-001-AB-0 and TPL-002-AB-0, have referenced Applicable Ratings when specifying the required system performance under Category A and Category B events. For the purpose of applying the TPL standards to the studies documented in this report, Applicable Ratings are defined as follows:

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

• Highest specified loading limits for transformers.

3 Filed under a separate cover

AESO 10 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

• For Category A conditions: Voltage range under normal operating conditions per AESO Information Document #2010-007RS, 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.

• Desired post-contingency voltage change limits for three defined post event timeframes as provided in Table 3-1, below.

Table 3-1: Post Contingency Voltage Deviation Guidelines for Low Voltage Busses Time Period Parameter and reference point Post Transient Post Auto Control Post Manual Control (up to 30 sec) (30 sec to 5 min) (Steady State) Voltage deviation from steady state at ±10% ±7% ±5% POD low voltage bus.

3.1.2. ISO Rules and IDs

ID #2010-007RS will be used to establish system normal (i.e., pre- contingency) voltage profiles for the Study Area.

The TCM Rule will be followed to set up the study scenarios and assess the impact of the Project. In addition, due regard will be given to the AESO’s Connection Study Requirements and the AESO’s Generation and Load Interconnection Standard.

3.2. Study Scenarios

The ISD for the Project was May 1, 2018; therefore 2018 SP and 2018 WP scenarios were studied using the 2017 LTO load forecast. The ISD was later changed to February 1, 2019. The power flow analysis, voltage stability analysis and voltage transient recovery analysis performed for 2018 SP and 2018 WP scenarios are valid to evaluate the impact of the Project connection on the AIES for the updated ISD of February 1, 2019.

Table 3-2 provides a list of the study scenarios. The post-Project scenarios reflect the requested Rate DTS contract capacity increase of 11.71 MW at the Ksituan River 754S substation. A 0.9 PF lagging will be used for the new project load at Ksituan River 754S.

AESO 11 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Table 3-2: List of Connection Study Scenarios

Scenario No. Year/Season Load Project Load (MW)

Pre-Project 1 2018 SP 26.29 2 2018 WP 26.29 Post-Project 3 2018 SP 38 4 2018 WP 38

3.3. Load and Generation Assumptions

3.3.1. Load Assumptions

The load forecast to be used for the studies is shown in Table 3-3 and is based on the AESO 2017 Long-term Outlook4 (2017 LTO) at the Northwest Planning Region peak. For the studies, when loads for the Alberta Internal Load (AIL) are modified to align with the load forecast in the 2017 LTO, the active power to reactive power ratio in the base case scenarios will be maintained.

Table 3-3: Forecast Area Load (2017 LTO at Northwest Planning Region Peak)

Forecast Peak Load (MW) AESO Planning Area or Region Name 2018 SP 2018 WP

Peace River 161 183 (Area 19)

Grande Prairie 322 362 (Area 20)

Northwest Planning Region 1,206 1,328

3.3.2. Generation Assumptions

The generation assumptions for the studies, described in

Table 3-4, reflect both reasonable stressed conditions and anticipated in-merit energy. These generation assumptions are assumed to the same under the various N-G conditions described below.

4 The 2017 LTO document is available on the AESO website.

AESO 12 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

The Northern Prairie Power (NPP1) generating unit, located at the Lowe Lake 944S substation, is considered the critical generator and will be considered to be offline to represent the N-G system condition for all studies, except for studies where the 144 kV transmission line 7L68 represents the Category B contingency. For study conditions where the loss of transmission line 7L68 represents the Category B contingency, the 40 MW Daishowa generating unit is considered the critical generator and will be considered to be offline to represent the N-G system condition. The 40 MW Daishowa generating unit is considered the critical generator for the 7L68 contingency because, due to the local system configuration in the Project area, the Ksituan River 754S substation would remain radially supplied from Peace River (Area 19) through the West Peace River 793S substation. The West Peace River 793S substation is the substation to which the Daishowa 40 MW unit is connected. Under the 7L68 contingency condition, considering the 40 MW Daishowa generating unit to be the critical generator would result in a more reasonable stressed system condition than if the Northern Prairie Power (NPP1) generating unit were considered the critical generator.

Table 3-4: Local Generation in the Study Cases

AESO Dispatch Level in the Study Scenarios Bus Pmax (MW) Facility Name Unit No. Planning Number (MW)

Area No. 2019 SP 2019 WP

Daishowa 2 1087 19 25.1 15.3 16.6

Daishowa 1 1089 19 40 25 b 27.1 b

Bear Creek 2 19142_2 20 36 15.8 14.1

Bear Creek 3 18142_1 20 64 0 0

Gold Creek 1 19145_1 20 5 0 0

Grande Prairie 2 17101_2 20 27 5.7 6.6 EcoPower

HR Milner 1 1148_1 22 144 0 0 a

5, 6 17134

Northstone Power 7, 8 18134 20 20 0 0

10 21134

Northern Prairie 1 17120_1 20 93 0 0 Power

Poplar Hill 1 16118_1 20 48 0 0

Weyhaeuser Power 1 1146_1A 20 48 34.5 24.8

Notes:

a The HR Milner unit is assumed to be retired by the end of 2019. Therefore the HR Milner unit is considered off-line to account for the most technically stressed case condition.

AESO 13 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

3.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions

The Alberta-British Columbia, Alberta-Montana, and Alberta-Saskatchewan intertie points are deemed to be too far away from the Study Area to have any material impact on the assessment of the Project’s impact on the performance of the AIES. Therefore, intertie flows are assumed to be the same as in the AESO planning base cases and will not be adjusted for the studies.

3.3.4. HVDC Power Order

The Western Alberta Transmission Line (WATL) and the Eastern Alberta Transmission Line (EATL) are high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission lines. WATL and EATL are expected to have minimal effects on the assessment of the Project’s impact on the performance of the AIES. Therefore, the HVDC assumptions are assumed to be the same as in the AESO planning base cases and will not be adjusted for the studies.

3.4. Project Assumptions

3.4.1. System Projects

The pre-Project and post-Project connection assessment will not include any system transmission projects in the study scenarios. Therefore, the near-term system transmission projects identified in the 2017 LTP (see Section 1.2.2.2) will not be modelled in the pre-Project and post-Project study scenarios.

3.4.2. Connection Projects

Table 3-5 summarizes the connection project assumptions that will be used in the studies.

Table 3-5: Connection Projects in the Study Area

Project Planning Generation Load Project Description Scheduled ISD Number Area (MW) (MW) ATCO City of Grande 1505 20 0.0 15.5 Q2 - 2020 Prairie New POD

3.5. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements

The legal owner of transmission facilities (TFO) provided the thermal ratings for the existing transmission lines in the Study Area. Table 3-6 shows the seasonal continuous ratings and

AESO 14 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade short-term emergency ratings for the key transmission lines in the Study Area, which will be included in the assumptions used to perform the engineering studies.

Table 3-6: Thermal Ratings Assumptions for Transmission Lines in the Study Area (MVA on 144 kV Base)

Thermal Rating (MVA) Voltage Line Description Seasonal Short-term Line ID Class (Substations) Continuous Emergency (kV) Summer Winter Summer Winter

7L10 Ksituan 754S – Mowat 2033S tap point 144 49 49 49 49 7L10 Mowat 2033S tap point Rycroft 730 144 85 134 85 134

7L20 HR Milner 740S - Big Mountain 845S 144 150 150 150 150

7L32 Little Smoky 813S - Clairmont Lake 811S 144 114 146 129 149

7L33 Flyingshot Lake 749S - Big Mountain 845S 144 147 187 167 199

7L39 Clairmont Lake 811S - Crystal Lake 722S 144 114 146 129 149

7L44 Flyingshot Lake 749S - Big Mountain 845S 144 146 187 167 199

7L45 Little Smoky 813S - Big Mountain 845S 144 146 187 167 202

7L46 Little Smoky 813S - Big Mountain 845S 144 147 187 167 203

7L68 Rycroft 730S - Clairmont Lake 811S 144 114 132 132 132

7L73 Friedenstal 800S - Rycroft 730S 144 99 99 99 99

7L75 Friedenstal 800S – West Peace River 793S 144 146 149 146 149

7L84 Crystal Lake 722S - Flyingshot Lake 749S 144 165 199 188 199

The TFO provided the details of the substation transformer elements in the Study Area. The key transformers in the Study Area are shown in Table 3-7.

Table 3-7: Summary of Key Transformers in the Study Area Transformer Substation Transformer Voltages Transformer ID Rating (Name and Number) (kV) (MVA) Wesley Creek 834S 901T 240/144 300

Wesley Creek 834S 902T 240/144 300

Little Smoky 813S 901T 240/144 200

Little Smoky 813S 902T 240/144 200

Ksituan River 754S 701T 144/25 25/33.3/41.6

The TFO provided the details of the shunt elements in the Study Area. The key shunt elements in the Study Area are shown in Table 3-8.

AESO 15 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Table 3-8: Summary of Key Shunt Elements in the Study Area Shunt Element (Type) Capacitors Reactors Voltage Substation (Name and Number Status Number Status Class Total at Total at Number) of in of in (kV) Nominal Nominal Switched Studies Switched Studies Voltage Voltage Shunt (On or Shunt (On or (MVAr) (MVAr) Blocks Off) Blocks Off) Big Mountain 845S 144 1x 30 30 - - Clairmont Lake 811S 144 1x 25 25 - - Crystal Lake 722S 144 1x 29.6 29.6 - - H.R. Milner 740S 25 1x 5.4 5.4 - - Ksituan River 754S 144 1x 15 15 - - 144 3x 30 30 Switched - - Switched Little Smoky 813S as as 25 - - required 2x 20 40 required West Peace River A793S 144 2x 15 30 - - 144 1x 15 15 - - Friedenstal 800S 25 1x 4.8 4.8 - - 1x 10 Mowat 2033S 144 25 - - 1x 15

3.6. Voltage Profile Assumption

ID #2010-007RS will be 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 ID #2010-007RS. These voltages will be used to set the voltage profile for the study base cases prior to power flow studies.

4. Study Methodology

4.1. Engineering Studies

The engineering studies to be performed for this connection assessment are identified in Table 4-1.

AESO 16 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

Table 4-1: Summary of Engineering Studies to be Performed

Scenario No. Scenario Name Power Flow Voltage Stability

1 2018 SP Pre-Project ×

2 2018 WP Pre-Project × ×

3 2018 SP Post-Project ×

4 2018 WP Post-Project × ×

4.2. Power Flow Studies

Power flow studies will be performed to identify thermal and voltage criteria violations as per the Reliability Criteria and to identify any deviations from the limits listed in Table 3-1.

For the Category B power flow studies, the transformer taps and switched shunt reactive compensating devices such as shunt capacitors and reactors will be locked and continuous shunt devices will be enabled.

Voltage deviations at point-of-delivery (POD) low voltage busses will also be 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 will be allowed to move while shunt reactive compensating devices remain locked to determine if any voltage deviations above 7% would occur in the area. Third, all the taps and shunt reactive compensating devices will be allowed to adjust, and voltage deviations above 5% will be reported.

4.2.1. Contingencies to be Studied

Power flow studies will be performed for all Category B contingencies in the Study Area.

All transmission facilities in the Study Area will be monitored for Reliability Criteria violations.

4.3. Voltage Stability Studies

Voltage stability studies will be performed for the post-Project scenarios. For load connection projects, the load level modelled in post-Project scenarios is the same as, or higher than, in pre- Project scenarios. Therefore, voltage stability studies for pre-Project scenarios will only be performed if post-Project scenarios show voltage stability criteria violations.

Voltage stability studies will be performed according to the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Voltage Stability Assessment Methodology. WECC voltage stability criteria states, for load areas, post-transient voltage stability is required for the area modelled at a

AESO 17 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

minimum of 105% of the reference load level for system normal conditions (i.e., Category A) and for single contingencies (i.e., Category B). For this standard, the reference load level is the maximum established planned load.

Typically, voltage stability studies are carried out assuming the worst case scenarios in terms of loading. In this connection assessment, the voltage stability studies will be performed by increasing load in Grande Prairie (Area 20) and increasing generation in Fort Macleod (Area 53), Lethbridge (Area 54), and Greenwood (Area 55), which are located in the South Planning Region.

4.3.1. Contingencies to be Studied

Voltage stability studies will be performed for all Category B contingencies in the Study Area to determine the system voltage stability margin in the area.

All transmission facilities in the Study Area will be monitored for Reliability Criteria violations.

AESO 18 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5. Additional Engineering Studies for Identified System Performance Issues

Additional studies will be required if the post-Project connection assessment identifies system performance issues that require a remedial action scheme (RAS).

The additional studies, if required, will be peformed in accordance with the technical criteria, assumptions, and methods provided in this AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope and in accordance with further instructions from the AESO.

5.1. Studies to Determine and Assess Mitigation Measures

If a RAS is required, studies will be performed, as needed, to assist the AESO in determining the design requirements of the proposed RAS so that the Project can be reliably connected to the AIES. The studies would also assist the AESO in assessing the impact of the proposed RAS on the system performance issues that require a RAS.

5.1.1. Transient voltage recovery studies

Transient voltage recovery studies will be performed using the methodology and assumptions described below.

5.1.1.1. Performance Requirements

For the transient voltage recovery studies, the AESO requires that voltage levels at substation busses in the Study Area must be at or above 130 kV within 1.5 seconds after a fault on a transmission line occurs. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent miscoordination between protection systems, as contemplated in Section 502.3 of the ISO rules, Interconnected Electric System Protection Requirements

5.1.1.2. Assumptions

5.1.1.2.1 Motor Loads

The motor loads will be modelled using the complex load (CLOD) model. Unless otherwise specified in Table 5-1, the motor load assumptions for each substation are as follows: • Northwest Planning Region and Northeast Planning Region: 40% large motor load and 30% small motor load.

AESO 19 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

• All other AESO planning regions: 10% large motor load and 10% small motor load.

Table 5-1: Motor Load Assumptions for CLOD Model

AESO % Load Type Large Small Substation Substation Planning Motor Motor No. Name Area Residential Commercial Industrial Others % used % used

754S Ksituan River 20 0.8 2.8 81.4 15 32.6 25.3 730S Rycroft 20 9.2 21.4 45.9 23.5 18.4 20.2 731S Elmworth 20 0.6 1 89.3 9.1 35.7 27.1 790S Poplar Hill 20 2.6 1 78.7 17.7 31.5 23.9 865S Saddle Hills 20 1.1 1.3 95.5 2.2 38.2 29.0 886S Updike 20 0.5 0.6 95.8 3.1 38.3 28.9 815S Goodfare 20 17.3 16.9 53 12.8 21.2 21.0 798S Bridge Creek 20 1 34 31 34 12.4 19.5 823S Wapiti 20 24 6 42 28 16.8 14.4 862S South Bezanson 20 7.83 5.86 61.5 24.81 24.6 20.2 728S Mercer Hill 20 27.5 56.36 4.7 11.4 1.9 18.3 722S Crystal Lake 20 61.4 36.5 1 1 0.4 11.3 749S Flyingshot Lake 20 37.1 57.1 1.6 4.1 0.6 17.6 752S Albright Wilson 20 0 0 100 0 40.0 30.0 679S Bear Creek 20 0 0 100 0 40.0 30.0 808S P&G 20 0 0 100 0 40.0 30.0 927S Buchanan Creek 19 60 18 20 2 8.0 11.4 724S Hines Creek 19 10 14.8 41.5 33.7 16.6 16.9 784S Donnelly 19 16.4 29.3 29.4 25 11.8 17.6 793S West Peace River 19 22.4 30.2 37.9 9.5 15.2 20.4 829S Boucher Creek 19 0 0.2 99.7 0.2 39.9 30.0 861S Eureka River 19 2.8 10.2 47.7 39.3 19.1 17.4 800S Friedenstal 19 19.13 27.59 31.81 21.47 12.7 17.8 788S Hotchkiss 19 15.4 23.8 35.1 25.7 14.0 17.7 830S Carmon 19 0.1 1.3 97.9 0.6 39.2 29.8 855S Hamburg 19 0 5.2 94.7 0.1 37.9 30.0 869S Seal Lake 19 2.95 3.2 88.24 5.6 35.3 27.4 878S Kidney Lake 19 16.3 13.43 69.69 0.58 27.9 24.9 812S Norcen 19 8.35 4.05 87.53 0.07 35.0 27.5 827S Cranberry Lake 19 10.79 19.91 69.19 0.1 27.7 26.7 796S Nipisi 19 3.59 1.74 94.6 0.07 37.8 28.9 789S High Level 18 21.21 31.35 41.08 6.36 16.4 21.7 832S Blumenort 18 29.65 23.53 25.23 21.58 10.1 14.6 740S HRMilner 22 16 17.8 65.7 0.4 26.3 25.1 810S Dome Cutbank 22 0 26 50 24 20.0 22.8

AESO 20 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5.1.1.2.2 Protection Fault Clearing Times

The TFO provided the fault clearing time assumptions for selected contingencies in the Study Area, shown in Table 5.1.-2. The selected contingencies are based on the contingencies for which transient voltage recovery studies will be performed.

The fault clearing time assumptions contained in Table 5-2 will be used to perform the post- Project transient voltage recovery studies. To determine the design requirements of the RAS, the AESO may require additional studies with modified fault clearing assumptions.

Table 5-2: Fault Clearing Time Assumptions

Clearing Time Fault Location Contingency (Cycles) (First Substation is the Near End; (System Element Lost) Second Substation is the Far End) Near End Far End

7L68 Rycroft 730S 5 – (Rycroft 730S Clairmont Lake 811S) Clairmont Lake 811S – 7 7L68 Clairmont Lake 811S 5 – (Rycroft 730S Clairmont Lake 811S) Rycroft 730S – 7 7L75 Friedenstal 800S 6 – (West Peace River 793S Friedenstal 800S) West Peace River 793S – 24 7L75 West Peace River 793S 6 – (West Peace River 793S Friedenstal 800S) Friedenstal 800S – 18 7L73 Rycroft 730S 6 – (Rycroft 730S Friedenstal 800S) Friedenstal 800S – 42 7L73 Friedenstal 800S 6 – (Rycroft 730S Friedenstal 800S) Rycroft 730S – 18

5.1.1.3. Methodology

Transient voltage recovery studies will be performed using the post-Project 2018 WP scenario (Scenario 4) for the Category B contingencies identified in Section 5.1.1.3.1.

Transient voltage recovery studies will also be performed using the post-Project 2018 WP scenario, with the addition of the AESO’s proposed RAS, for the Category B contingencies identified in Section 5.1.1.3.1.

The transient voltage recovery studies will be performed by applying a three-phase-to-ground fault on the studied transmission lines.

AESO 21 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5.1.1.3.1 Contingencies to be Studied

The transient voltage recovery studies will be performed for the following contingencies:

• The loss of the 144 kV transmission line 7L75;

• The loss of the 144 kV transmission line 7L73; and

• The loss of the 144 kV transmission line 7L68

5.1.2. Additional Power Flow Studies (with proposed RAS)

The power flow studies described in Section 4.2 will, if required, be repeated for the post-Project study scenarios, with the addition of the AESO’s proposed RAS. Power flow studies will be required for those contingencies where a RAS is required to mitigate observed voltage range criteria violations or thermal criteria violations.

5.1.3. Additional Voltage Stability Studies (with proposed RAS)

The voltage stability studies described in Section 4.3 will, if required, be repeated for the post- Project 2018 WP scenario (Scenario 4), with the addition of the AESO’s proposed RAS. Voltage stability studies will be required for those contingencies where a RAS is required to mitigate observed voltage stability criteria violations.

5.2. Studies to Assess the Impact of Potential AESO Transmission Developments Plans

In addition to the studies described in Section 5.1, further studies will be required if the post- Project connection assessment identifies system performance issues that require a RAS. The purpose of these additional studies is to demonstrate that one of the AESO’s potential future transmission developments in the Study Area can address the system performance issues that require a RAS, thereby removing the requirement for a RAS.

For the purpose of performing these additional studies, it may be assumed that a static VAr system (SVS), capable of providing approximately 50 MVAr of dynamic reactive power support, will be added at the existing Rycroft 730S substation (Rycroft System Developments), consistent with the proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document.5

5 See page page 54 of the 2017 LTP. The AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document application was filed with the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) on December 15, 2017. The Rycroft System NID is currently registered in AUC Proceeding 23105 and is designated as Application 23104-A001.

AESO 22 Public

AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope: ATCO Electric Ltd. Ksituan River 754S Capacity Upgrade

5.2.1. Additional Power Flow Studies (with Rycroft System Developments)

The power flow studies described in Section 4.2 will be repeated, if required, for the post-Project study scenarios, with the addition of Rycroft System Developments. Power flow studies will be required for those contingencies where a RAS is required to mitigate observed voltage range criteria violations or thermal criteria violations.

5.2.2. Additional Voltage Stability Studies (with Rycroft System Developments)

The voltage stability studies described in Section 4.3 will be repeated, if required, for the post- Project 2018 WP scenario (Scenario 4) , with the addition of Rycroft System Developments. Voltage stability studies will be required for those contingencies where a RAS is required to mitigate observed voltage stability criteria violations.

5.2.3. Transient Voltage Recovery Studies (with Rycroft System Developments)

Transient voltage recovery studies will also be performed using the post-Project 2018 WP scenario (Scenario 4), with the addition of Rycroft System Developments, for the Category B contingencies identified in Section 5.1.1.3.1.

AESO 23 Public

Attachment A2

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

ATCO Electric A2-1 R0 Load Flow Diagrams

The pre-project load flow diagrams for Category A, and the Category B contingencies following which the thermal criteria violations were observed, are provided in this section.

Table A2-1: List of Pre-Project Load Flow Diagrams

Page Scenario Power flow diagram number N-G-0, System Normal Condition A2-3 2018 SP N-G-1, Loss of 7L75 A2-4 N-G-1, Loss of 7L46 A2-5 2018 WP N-G-0, System Normal Condition A2-6

ATCO Electric A2-2 R0 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 SW 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -0.0 -16.3 1.0 -16.5 -89.8 92.3 269.6 7.7 -68.4 71.3 7L27 26.2 7L75 7L73 55.4 42.6 -39.4 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 27.7 -25.0 WESLY C8 99 -9.8 1.1 19080 SW 1.1 150.0 WESLY C9 31.6

-54.8 9.6 1.1 151.1 150.2 19118 1102 1.1 22.1

1118 -0.0

33 * 0.0 51.3 26.6 POPLAR 1 -11.4 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 -74.4 26.3 * 15.4 26.0 26.0 Peace River -15.7 SW 22.4 * 74.5 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 17118 7L73 Area 1.1 -20.3 6.5 -26.5 -3.8 SADDLE 7 3.8 POPLAR 3 150.0 16118 1.1 1115 1116 POPLAR-4 10.2 147.8 MOWATTAP MOWAT1 1 2

99 SW -8.5 19116 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 19.3 -19.3 1171 1173 -13.6 MOWAT2 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 7LA10 5.3 -5.3 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 0.0 0.0 1100 -50.0 -3.7 3.7 19.3 -19.2 19.2 Valley View 10.4 1.1 1.0 -8.0 8.5 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -45.9 99 0.5 -0.6 1.0 1.0 7L10 6.8 -5.8 5.8 150.0 14.3 26.0 1123 1.1 -16.1 14.5 14.5 5.3 1.0 17163 9L11 Area SADHL TP 1.1 147.1 18155 7L48 1155 1172 -22.9 23.0 -0.7 -5.4 26.2 1.6 LSMOKR17 1164 7L22 148.3 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 STURG_1 1120 1.1 16.3 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 30.1 -30.5 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 148.6 1104 150.1 STURGEO7 1180

23.0 -7.1 1.1 SW -17.3 0.0 -41.5 KSIT RV7 3.4 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 19104 151.0 1.1 45.3 1.1 7L10 SW 99 17.3 -17.0 7L56 MERCER 7 26.6 -26.4 26.4 KSIT RV9 0.7 -0.7 0.8 0.0 151.0 1163 149.1 7L68 1.1 -6.8 1.1 7L22 1.0 -25.3 L. SMOKY

-1.6 0.0 -15.5 6.8 -2.4 -2.8 36.8 7L57 148.6 -26.3 26.1 1.0 17120 1.1 2.4 1.1 -3.5 -3.0 26.0 19155

-19.6 147.1 150.3 LOWE2 1117 1.1 15.4 -12.8 VALLEYV9 -25.1 7L54 25.1 -44.1 -0.0 0.0 1.1 15.9 1086 0.8 1 149.1 CLAIR L 146.2 3.8 22.5 99 5.1 -5.8 24.1 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -59.0 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.1 -55.8 7L197 56.9 0.7 1.8 10.9 4.5 -140.7 14.1 7L07 -11.9 1.1 148.0 32 -1.1 1.2 Pre-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 140.9 7L34 148.7 16.6 -16.5 1.0 1.1 SW 33.2 -6.2 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.8 -1.6 19.6 2.6 17.6 -65.9 MERC TAP -17.5 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 -2.8 2.5 BEZANSON 25.7 LSMOKR29 2.8 0.9 12.0 4.1

1119 0.3

148.8 -2.1 19163 8 GOODFAR7 SW -75.1 7L32 76.8 -83.0 7L32 90.6 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -26.8 39.8 -37.8 36.4 19145 -26.8 1.1 SW

21.8 149.5 BRDGE C9 262.8 -28.8 ELMWORT8 -32.3 1131 1.1 17101 1.1 1.0 7L45 87.3 1175 1.0 12 -0.9 2.1 1121 MUIR_TAP FOX CREE 7 148.9 GPEP39 148.6 32 1 -22.2 24.7 -50.0 50.3 SW FOX CRK7 25.8 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -12.2 1.0 1101 7.0 1.1 37 0.7 1145 87.1 56.2 -55.6 41.5 -41.4 -38.3 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 1.0 148.3 1134 27.2 3.4 1143 33 BRDGE C7 140.9 -35.3 -31.6 1.8 148.8 1.1 5.7 0.2 -12.4 53.6 141.2 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -82.0 7L40

17134 147.9 1.2 2 1.1

1126 -1.1 SW 21.6 4.7R -73.2 -9.3 1.0 ELMWORT6 -35.6 26.6 21.2 FLYINGS7 1.0 -31.6 140.5 23.6 1.1 1.1 6 35.5 825 14.4 7L84 66.8 -81.7 147.8 7L46 151.0 1.0 -65.3 CGETAP -66.6 7L33 1132 -28.2 -21.6 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.1 21.3 36.3 20.3 21.4 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 54.9 147.9 -20.7 7L228 -23.1 -57.4 7L44 57.8 13.6 -13.5 -3.7 7L20 -18.4 20.8 13.4 -20.8 11.3 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 147.5 1149 -51.2 147.9 1137 144.8 7.9 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -12.5

BCTAP 147.6 1.1 1144 3.7 14.7 146.7 147.8 DOME CU7 4.5 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -36.0 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

3.0 36.0 -8.2 -1.2 1.1 -15.0 144.6 9.1 -12.5 24.7 -22.3 -9.1 -4.1 8.2 1.1 1135 13.9 1.1 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 147.6 WAPITI 7 1142 145.0 99 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 2.0 2.2 -9.4 14.1 -4.0 -4.2 1.1 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 146.5 HR MILN7 -8.1 147.6 147.5 22.4 SIMONET9 -35.7 8.2 -13.9 -4.0 9.4

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 1 147.6 144.5 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.2 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 * -0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 26.2 * 13.3 1 19147 -0.0 14.9 -2.1 -2.0 4.3 4.0 MILNER/9 34.5 10.0R 1146 2 19139 0.0 32 33 -0.0 P&G 8 0.0 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 -0.0 SW

38.6 19.3 1.0 1.0 -17.7 1.0 1148 14.1 26.1 19142 24.6 12.2 15.1 HR MILN9

15.8 -4.1R 15.0 -4.5 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 37 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.8 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 -0.0 14.2 14.3 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.7 1 25.7 1.0 13.3 25.8 37 Area 14.8 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY A, N-0 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S PRE-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:12 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 SW 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -0.0 -16.4 1.0 -15.1 -42.5 43.1 269.5 7.7 7L27 25.9 7L75 7L73 -13.0 25.6 -26.7 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 WESLY C8 99 15.8 1.1 19080 SW 1.0 150.3 WESLY C9 31.5

13.1 -16.9 1.0 144.6 144.0 19118 1102 22.1 1118 1.10.0

33 * 0.0 15.2 26.6 POPLAR 1 -16.6 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 -48.0 26.3 * 15.4 25.9 25.9 Peace River 25.3 SW 17.1 * 48.0 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 17118 7L73 Area 1.1 -16.2 2.5 -25.0 -3.8 SADDLE 7 3.8 POPLAR 3 149.7 16118 1.0 1115 1116 POPLAR-4 10.2 143.6 MOWATTAP MOWAT1 1 2

99 SW -8.6 19116 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 19.3 -19.3 1171 1173 -13.7 MOWAT2 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 0.0 0.0 1100 16.9 -2.8 7LA10 2.8 19.3 -19.2 19.2 Valley View

-18.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 99 1.0 1.0 -8.0 8.6 7L10 -45.9 0.5 -0.6 150.1 13.9 26.0 1.0 6.8 -5.8 5.8 14.5 14.5 1123 1.0 -1.6 17163 Area 1.0 2.7 141.1 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 25.9 -4.9 7L48 LSMOKR17 1164 1172 -18.1 7L22 18.1 20.2 142.5 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 -67.6 STURG_1 1120 1.0 1.6 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 27.2 -27.6 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 144.5 1104 150.2 STURGEO7 1180

20.0 -1.0 1.1 SW -73.0 0.2 -36.7 KSIT RV7 3.4 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 19104 151.0 1.1 51.6 1.1 7L10 SW 99 72.9 -68.4 7L56 MERCER 7 26.6 -26.4 26.4 KSIT RV9 0.7 -0.7 0.8 0.0 151.0 1163 145.0 7L68 1.1 -6.8 1.0 7L22 1.0 -29.1 L. SMOKY

0.1 -1.5 -14.2 6.8 -2.4 -7.6 38.6 7L57 144.8 -26.3 25.8 1.0 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -2.1 -3.0 26.0 19155

-19.6 141.1 150.1 LOWE2 1117 1.0 15.7 -12.8 VALLEYV9 -10.3 7L54 10.3 -49.9 -0.0 0.0 1.1 -25.1 1086 0.8 1 145.0 CLAIR L 139.9 3.8 22.5 99 -1.0 0.1 28.8 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -54.7 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.0 -50.8 7L197 51.7 70.8 1.8 10.9 4.5 -170.5 13.7 7L07 -11.9 1.0 143.9 32 -1.1 1.2 Pre-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 170.8 7L34 144.6 13.8 -13.9 -17.4 1.1 SW 41.8 -6.3 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.8 -5.4 19.6 2.6 -21.5 -65.9 MERC TAP 21.6 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 -5.8 5.5 BEZANSON 25.8 LSMOKR29 -0.4 7.7 12.0 4.3

1119 3.2 145.0 SW -101.0 7L32 104.2 -110.4 7L32 124.1 19163 8 GOODFAR7 -41.1 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -25.3 51.2 -45.9 44.5 19145 -21.3 1.1 SW

21.2 145.5 BRDGE C9 262.1 -33.6 ELMWORT8 -30.6 1131 1.1 17101 1.0 1.0 7L45 109.5 1175 1.0 12 -3.4 41.3 1121 MUIR_TAP FOX CREE 7 144.9 GPEP39 144.8 32 1 -28.3 31.4 -56.7 57.0 SW FOX CRK7 25.8 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -6.7 1.0 1101 7.0 1.0 37 0.7 1145 109.3 61.0 -59.1 45.1 -44.8 -38.1 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 1.0 144.6 1134 28.3 3.4 1143 33 BRDGE C7 140.6 -74.6 -30.2 1.8 145.5 1.1 5.7 0.2 -6.9 62.6 140.9 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -101.3 7L40

17134 145.3 2.9 2 1.0

1126 -1.1 SW 20.5 6.4R -92.4 -6.9 1.0 ELMWORT6 -40.5 26.2 25.6 FLYINGS7 1.0 -30.6 140.2 28.2 1.1 1.1 6 75.1 825 14.4 7L84 91.1 -100.9 145.4 7L46 151.0 1.1 -89.2 CGETAP -90.6 7L33 1132 -27.8 -19.7 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.1 25.9 41.5 18.0 20.3 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 60.2 145.3 -19.3 7L228 -21.5 -78.5 7L44 79.2 6.3 -6.2 -10.9 7L20 -16.3 20.4 15.8 -23.0 13.4 1.0 1.1 1.0 1170 144.3 1149 -59.3 145.1 1137 142.2 7.5 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -14.6

BCTAP 145.4 1.1 1144 10.9 -1.3 145.1 145.4 DOME CU7 4.5 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -43.5 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

5.0 43.5 -16.0 14.8 -14.9 1.0 142.0 10.1 -12.0 24.7 -29.6 -10.1 -4.1 15.9 1.1 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 145.3 WAPITI 7 1142 142.6 99 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 1.9 2.2 -1.2 14.1 -7.7 -8.3 1.0 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 143.3 HR MILN7 -9.5 145.4 145.3 29.7 SIMONET9 -43.1 9.6 -13.9 -4.0 1.2

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 1 145.4 141.9 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.1 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 * -0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.9 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.8 -2.2 -1.9 8.6 7.9 MILNER/9 34.5 18.1R 1146 2 19139 0.0 32 33 -0.0 P&G 8 0.0 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 0.0 SW

38.6 19.3 1.0 1.0 -17.7 1.0 1148 14.1 26.0 19142 24.6 12.2 14.8 HR MILN9

15.8 4.1R 15.0 3.7 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 37 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.8 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 -0.0 14.2 14.1 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.7 1 25.5 1.0 13.3 25.7 37 Area 14.7 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L75 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S PRE-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:13 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 SW 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -0.0 -16.1 1.0 -15.9 -98.8 101.8 268.8 7.7 -80.5 84.5 7L27 25.8 7L75 7L73 67.5 41.1 -36.9 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 27.1 -20.8 WESLY C8 99 -10.0 1.1 19080 SW 1.1 149.0 WESLY C9 31.4

-66.7 10.5 1.1 148.5 147.3 19118 1102 1.1 22.0

1118 -0.0

33 * 0.0 63.2 26.5 POPLAR 1 -12.2 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 7 1.0 1.0 1.0 -79.3 26.2 * 15.4 25.9 25.9 Peace River -21.4 SW 22.0 * 79.4 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 17118 7L73 Area 1.1 -19.7 4.9 -25.1 -3.8 SADDLE 7 3.8 POPLAR 3 149.5 16118 1.0 1115 1116 POPLAR-4 10.2 143.8 MOWATTAP MOWAT1 1 2

99 SW -8.6 19116 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 19.3 -19.3 1171 1173 -13.4 MOWAT2 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 7LA10 5.3 -5.3 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 0.0 0.0 1100 -61.1 -3.1 3.1 19.3 -19.2 19.2 Valley View 13.0 1.1 1.0 -7.8 8.3 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -45.9 99 0.5 -0.6 1.0 1.0 7L10 6.8 -5.8 5.8 149.6 13.9 25.8 1123 1.0 -18.5 14.5 14.5 3.7 1.0 17163 9L11 Area SADHL TP 1.0 143.4 18155 7L48 1155 1172

-9.8 25.8 1.4 LSMOKR17 1164

-26.1 26.2 10.4 7L22 144.7 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 STURG_1 1120 1.0 18.7 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 30.8 -31.1 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 144.6 1104 149.6 STURGEO7 1180

23.4 -6.7 1.1 SW -51.9 0.1 -44.7 KSIT RV7 3.4 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 19104 151.0 1.1 45.9 1.1 7L10 SW 99 51.9 -49.5 7L56 MERCER 7 26.6 -26.4 26.4 KSIT RV9 0.7 -0.7 0.8 0.0 151.0 1163 145.1 7L68 1.1 -6.8 1.1 7L22 1.0 -25.9 L. SMOKY

-0.6 -0.9 -14.7 6.8 -2.4 0.4 37.9 7L57 144.9 -26.3 25.8 1.0 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -5.8 -3.0 26.0 19155

-19.6 143.4 150.3 LOWE2 1117 1.0 15.6 -12.8 VALLEYV9 -27.5 7L54 27.6 -44.6 -0.0 0.0 1.1 21.6 1086 0.8 1 145.1 CLAIR L 142.3 3.8 22.5 99 4.7 -5.4 24.8 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -57.0 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.0 -59.2 7L197 60.5 -10.3 1.8 10.9 4.5 -140.8 13.7 7L07 -11.9 1.0 144.1 32 -1.1 1.2 Pre-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 141.0 7L34 144.7 16.5 -15.8 5.9 1.1 SW 35.1 -6.2 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.7 -3.5 19.6 2.6 47.1 -65.9 MERC TAP -47.0 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 13.0 -13.2 BEZANSON 25.8 LSMOKR29 -0.4 3.4 12.0 4.2 1119 145.2 19163 27.4 SW -97.2 7L32 100.2 -106.4 7L32 119.1 8 GOODFAR7 -15.7 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -25.5 48.7 -43.9 42.5 19145 -21.7 1.1 SW

17.6 145.6 BRDGE C9 262.6 -25.6 ELMWORT8 -30.7 1131 1.1 17101 1.1 1.0 7L45 128.8 1175 1.0 12 -27.3 15.2 1121 MUIR_TAP 7 145.3 GPEP39 145.2 32 1 FOX CRK7 25.8 FOX CREE 7L69 CRYST L7 -23.3 25.9 -51.2 51.4 SW 1.0 1101 6.8 0.2 -5.8 1.0 37 7.0 1145 57.1 -56.3 42.2 -42.0 -38.3 1.0 9.6 0.7 SW

7.2 -5.9 1.1 GPEP7 99 144.7 1134 3.4 1143 33 BRDGE C7 1.0 140.8 -30.1 1.8 145.3 1.1 5.7 0.2 70.1 141.1 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -117.4 7L40

17134 145.0 3.0 2 1.0

1126 -1.1 SW 17.4 6.6R -108.4 -6.5 1.0 ELMWORT6 -32.2 26.1 FLYINGS7 1.0 35.0 -30.4 1.1 1.1 140.4 6 825 14.4 37.8 7L84 6.0 48.9 145.0 7L46 151.0 1.1 -47.5 CGETAP -48.8 7L33 1132 -11.1 -12.6 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.1 32.8 8.8 12.0 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 51.3 145.0 -11.6 7L228 -19.1 -42.1 7L44 42.3 0.5 -0.4 -16.7 7L20 -14.5 11.1 19.6 -26.5 17.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1170 144.2 1149 -66.0 144.9 1137 141.5 8.9 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.0 -18.1

BCTAP 145.0 1.1 1144 16.8 -3.7 144.3 145.0 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -49.6 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

8.5 49.6 -17.1 17.3 -17.3 3.4 141.1 12.9 -13.4 24.7 -35.4 -12.9 -4.1 17.1 1.1 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 145.0 WAPITI 7 1142 141.5 99 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 1.9 2.2 14.1 0.1 -8.3 -8.9 1.0 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 143.2 HR MILN7 -12.6 145.0 144.9 35.6 SIMONET9 -49.0 12.8 -13.9 -4.0

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 1 -0.1 145.0 140.9 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.2 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 * -0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.8 * 13.3 1 19147 -0.0 14.9 -2.2 -1.9 9.2 8.5 MILNER/9 34.5 19.4R 1146 2 19139 0.0 32 33 -0.0 P&G 8 0.0 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 -0.0 SW

38.6 19.3 1.0 1.0 -17.7 1.0 1148 14.1 25.9 19142 24.6 12.2 14.7 HR MILN9

15.8 5.3R 15.0 4.9 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 37 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.9 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.2 14.1 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.8 1 25.7 1.0 13.3 25.9 37 Area 14.8 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L46 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S PRE-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:13 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -5.2 -16.3 1.0 -16.9 -97.8 100.9 268.3 7.4 -72.1 75.6 7L27 26.0 7L75 7L73 57.4 47.2 -42.9 18080

-7.4 3.3-3.3 37.5 -33.1 WESLY C8 99 -13.8 19080 SW 1.1 WESLY C9 -0.0

-56.8 13.6 1.1 153.0 152.3 1.1 19118 1102 150.0 1.1 22.4 1118 -0.0 * 0.0 53.2 26.8 POPLAR 1 -15.3 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 -97.1 26.4 * 15.0 26.1 26.1 Peace River -38.7 SW 23.2 * 97.1 7.0 * -7.6 7.6 1124 33 17118 7L73 Area 1.1 -19.8 9.3 -26.6 -3.4 SADDLE 7 3.4 POPLAR 3 149.9 16118 1.1 1115 1116 POPLAR-4 9.9 148.6 MOWATTAP MOWAT1 1 2

99 SW -5.6 19116 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 4.4 -15.4 18.8 -18.8 1171 1173 -13.8 MOWAT2 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 9.9 -9.9 7LA10 5.7 -5.7 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 -0.0 0.0 1100 -51.8 -21.1 21.1 18.8 -18.7 18.7 Valley View 14.4 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 99 1.0 1.0 -8.8 9.4 7L10 -45.3 2.2 -2.3 149.8 14.3 26.1 1.1 6.4 -5.5 5.5 14.5 14.5 1123 1.0 -20.5 17163 Area 1.1 24.1 151.1 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 8.7 7L48 1172

-1.0 26.1 LSMOKR17 1164 -25.8 7L22 25.9 150.8 VALLEYV8 3.0 VALLEYV7 1120 1.1 L.SMOKY7 STURG_1 -29.4 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 20.8 1165 7L101 29.0 SW -2.9 0.0 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 149.2 1104 3.9 149.8 STURGEO7 1180

24.8 -8.2 1.1 -41.4 7L10 KSIT RV7 99 -3.9 3.9 2.9 -2.9 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7

0.1 0.0 1109 19104 151.0 1.1 1.1 -0.0 -0.0 SW 0.9 7L56 52.2 MERCER 7 26.6 -26.4 26.4 KSIT RV9 -0.9 1.0 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 149.6 7L68 1.0 -9.1 1.1 7L22 1.0 0.0 36.3 -31.7 L. SMOKY

-3.0 1.3 -16.3 9.1 -3.1 0.8 25.9 7L57 148.4 -26.3 26.1 0.0 17120 1.1 3.0 1.1 -0.4 -4.0 19155

-23.8 151.1 149.7 LOWE2 1117 1.1 15.1 -12.8 VALLEYV9 -30.9 7L54 31.0 -50.5 -0.0 -0.0 1.1 39.1 1086 0.9 1 149.6 CLAIR L 150.3 3.8 22.5 99 5.6 -6.3 31.7 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -6.2 6.2 -60.1 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.1 -54.5 7L197 55.6 1.0 1.8 10.9 5.3 -155.9 14.1 7L07 -11.4 1.1 148.3 32 -1.4 1.6 Pre-Project_2018 WP 1.2 * 156.1 7L34 148.7 19.1 -19.1 -13.0 1.1 SW 32.0 -5.7 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.7 -19.3 23.8 3.6 24.9 -98.9 MERC TAP -24.8 7L39 1160 26.0 1.1 -0.0 0.0 18163 1.1 -12.1 11.8 BEZANSON 26.3 LSMOKR29 -0.8 -2.2 11.4 3.6

1119 1.0 8.6 148.6 19163 8 GOODFAR7 SW -81.5 7L32 83.6 -92.0 7L32 101.6 LSMOKR19 -0.0 18134 1.1 -26.8 47.1 -44.3 42.1 19145 -28.2 1.1 SW 1131 24.4 149.5 BRDGE C9 261.9 -26.8 ELMWORT8 -32.3 1.1 17101 1.1 1.3 7L45 98.2 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.1 -1.0 -9.2 1121 7 148.9 GPEP39 148.3 32 1 -32.4 36.1 -60.4 60.7 FOX CRK7 26.3 7L69 CRYST L7 6.1 0.6 -10.5 1.0 1101 9.9 66.0 -62.9 49.5 -49.1 1.0 1.1 37 1.0 1145 98.0 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.0 147.8 1134 33.7 3.0 1143 33 BRDGE C7 140.4 -37.2 -31.4 4.1 148.3 1.1 6.6 0.4 -10.7 59.9 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -91.6 7L40

17134 147.1 0.5 2 1.0

1126 -1.1 SW 23.3 1.9R -79.2 -7.8 ELMWORT6 -37.7 25.4 24.0 FLYINGS7 1.0 -31.2 29.7 1.1 1.1 6 37.4 825 13.9 7L84 68.0 -91.2 146.9 7L46 151.0 1.1 -68.0 CGETAP -67.7 7L33 1132 -34.5 -24.0 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.1 24.4 38.5 25.2 23.9 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 55.1 147.1 -23.7 7L228 -24.6 -58.9 7L44 59.3 11.8 -11.7 -4.9 7L20 -20.6 23.8 14.9 -22.2 13.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 146.9 1149 -56.9 147.2 1137 143.8 7.7 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 31.3 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -14.2

BCTAP 146.7 1.1 1144 4.9 10.0 145.6 146.9 DOME CU7 5.3 7L1316.4 -3.0 7L13 3.0 -31.3 7L13 -39.3 7L80 16.1 1.0 7L80

4.9 39.3 -6.7 6.1 -6.1 -10.2 143.5 10.3 -13.0 28.3 -23.8 -10.3 1.1 1135 16.3 1.0 -15.8 1140 -5.4 7LA13 1139 146.7 143.8 99 -16.4 6.7 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 -0.7 1.1 13.4 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -28.3 -16.3 19170 146.1 HR MILN7 7.9 8.6 -9.9 23.9 -3.3 146.7 -3.5 146.7 SIMONET9 -39.0 9.7 -16.0 -4.6 0.7

1.1 1.0 9.9 2.8 146.7 143.3 17147 28.3 16.3 * -13.4 0.0 0.2 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * -0.0 1.0 4.8 1.4 1.3 0.4 26.0 * 15.1 1 19147 0.0 14.9 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -8.5 -7.9 -0.0 0.0 3.8 3.6

24.8 10.2R P&G 8 37 -28.2 -14.1 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.1 26.1 28.2 14.1 41.2 20.6 19142 14.9 HR MILN9 -17.7 14.1 4.2R 13.8 4.0 * -0.3 -0.2 0.3 0.2 18142 -15.0 0.7 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36 18147 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 5.1 0.3 0.2 33 * 0.0 0.0

37 SW

MILNERC9 -5.8 14.4 14.2 15.0 Grande Prairie 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 1 25.8 1.0 25.9 37 Area 14.9 33 Area

CATEGORY A, N-0 Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) P1658 - Ksituan River 754S KSITUAN RIVER 754S PRE-PROJECT 2018 WP Branch - MW/Mvar WED, DEC 06 2017 11:23 Equipment - MW/Mvar 100.0%Rate B Capacity Upgrade 1.123OV 0.942UV kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000

Attachment A3

Post-Project Power Flow Diagrams (Scenarios 3 to 4) and the Rycroft System Developments (Scenario 4)

ATCO Electric A3-1 R0

Load Flow Diagrams

The post-project load flow diagrams for Category A, and the Category B contingencies following which the thermal criteria violations were observed, are provided in this section.

Table A3-1: List of Post-Project Load Flow Diagrams

Page Scenario Power flow diagram number N-G-0, System Normal Condition A3-3 N-G-1, Loss of 7L75 A3-4 N-G-1, Loss of 7L46 A3-5 2018 SP N-G-1, Loss of 7L45 A3-6 N-G-1, Loss of 7L73 A3-7 N-G-1, Loss of 7L32 A3-8

2018 WP N-G-0, System Normal Condition A3-9

Table A3-2: List of Post-Project Load Flow Diagrams with the Rycroft System Developments Page Scenario Power flow diagram number

2018 WP N-G-0, System Normal Condition A3-10

ATCO Electric A3-2 R0 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -33.0 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -16.7 -93.6 96.6 269.7 7.7 -74.8 78.2 7L27 26.0 7L75 7L73 61.8 53.5 -49.3 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 29.9 -25.6 WESLY C8 99 -11.7 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -61.1 11.8 Peace River 151.0 151.9 151.0 31.6 1102 19118 22.2 Area 1.10.0 1118 57.6

33 -13.5 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.7 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -72.2 26.4 * 15.4 26.0 26.0 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -11.7 SW MOWATTAP 1.1 26.4 * 72.2 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 148.2 1.1 -24.4 13.6 -26.5 -3.8 SADDLE 7 25.8 3.8 POPLAR 3 150.3 16118 1.1 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 147.8 99

SW -8.5 99 -19.7 19.7 6.8 -5.8 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 -13.6 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 1100 -55.9 Valley View 13.2 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -8.0 8.5 7L10 -57.8 0.5 -0.6 150.4 14.3 26.0 1104 1123 -15.7 17163 Area 1.1 15.3 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 1.0 18104 7L48 1172 -22.5 22.6 -7.0 2.7 LSMOKR17 1164 7L22 149.0 KSIT RV8 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 STURG_1 1120 1.1 15.9 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 29.6 -30.0 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 148.6 22.0 3.4 150.4 STURGEO7 1180

22.5 1.1 0.9809 1.0000 -8.2 SW -2.8 0.0 -41.1 12.4 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 45.6 1.1 7L10 1.0 2.8 -2.8 7L56 MERCER 7 38.5 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 149.1 7L68 26.1 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.1 7L22 0.0 1T 36.3 -26.4 L. SMOKY

4.4 -5.6 6.8 -2.4 -3.2 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 148.6 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -3.0 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 26.0 150.2 LOWE2 1117 1.1 -15.5 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -24.6 7L54 24.7 -44.3 0.0 -0.0 1.1 12.0 1086 0.8 1 149.1 CLAIR L 148.2 3.8 12.2 99 6.2 -7.0 25.3 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -65.4 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.1 -55.4 7L197 56.5 7.0 1.1 1.8 5.9 4.5 -143.9 14.1 7L07 -11.9 1.1 148.0 146.2 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 144.1 7L34 148.6 16.1 -16.0 -5.3 1.1 SW 25.9 -6.3 1110 SW * -0.0 1.0 150.8 6.1 19.6 2.6 14.0 -65.9 MERC TAP -14.0 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 -6.6 6.2 BEZANSON 25.7 LSMOKR29 3.2 0.4 12.0 4.1

1119 4.0

148.8 -5.6 19163 8 GOODFAR7 SW -77.5 7L32 79.4 -85.5 7L32 93.7 0.0 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -26.8 41.9 1T -39.7 38.3 19145 -27.5 1.1 SW 0.0 1131 22.3 149.5 BRDGE C9 261.2 -29.2 ELMWORT8 -32.3 1.1 17101 1.1 1.0 7L45 89.2 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 -4.7 5.6 1121 7 149.0 GPEP39 148.6 32 1 -22.7 25.3 -50.7 50.9 FOX CRK7 25.7 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -11.9 1.0 1101 7.0 56.9 -56.1 42.1 -41.9 1.0 1.1 37 0.7 1145 89.0 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.8

31.0 3.4 -8.7 0 141.1 148.2 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -38.8 -31.6 8.7 1.8 0 148.8 1.1 0 0 5.7 0.2 0 -12.1 54.4 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -2 0 7L40 .2 . 0 . -83.7 17134 147.7 2 1.1 1 2.4 1 1126 -1.1 -2.2 SW 22.1 1.3R -74.9 -9.2 ELMWORT6 -35.9 26.6 21.6 FLYINGS7 1.0 -31.5 24.1 1.1 1.1 6 39.0 825 13.8 7L84 68.9 -83.4 147.7 7L46 151.0 1.0 -67.4 CGETAP -68.7 7L33 1132 -31.9 -21.1 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.1 21.8 36.7 23.4 21.0 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 55.3 147.7 -21.5 1.9 7L228 -23.5 -59.3 7L44 1 59.7 13.0 -12.9 -4.3 7L20 -18.8 0.9 21.7 13.7 -21.0 11.5 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 147.3 1149 -51.9 147.8 1137 144.6 7.9 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -12.7

BCTAP 147.4 1.1 1144 4.3 13.7 146.5 147.6 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -36.6 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

3.2 36.6 -3.5 -0.1 0.1 -14.0 144.4 9.2 -12.5 24.7 -22.9 -9.2 1.1 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 147.4 144.8 99 -4.1 3.5 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 -3.6 1.1 14.1 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 146.4 HR MILN7 2.0 2.2 -8.3 23.0 -1.7 147.4 -1.8 147.4 SIMONET9 -36.4 8.4 -13.9 -4.0 3.6

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 147.4 144.3 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.1 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.9 1 * 13.3 1 19147 -0.0 14.8 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.1 -2.0 0.0 1.8 1.7

34.5 4.8R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 25.8 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 15.0 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 1.7R 15.0 1.3 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.8 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.3 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.7 1 25.6 1.0 13.3 25.7 37 Area 14.8 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY A, N-0 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:27 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -33.2 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -14.7 -41.9 42.7 269.7 7.7 7L27 25.8 7L75 7L73 -13.0 36.0 -36.8 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 WESLY C8 99 15.3 19080 SW 1.0 1.0 1.1 WESLY C9 13.1 -16.3 Peace River 142.1 142.7 151.5 31.6 1102 19118 Area 1.1 22.2 14.6 1118 -0.0

33 -16.6 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.6 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -43.2 26.3 * 15.4 25.9 26.0 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 33.5 SW MOWATTAP 1.0 21.1 * 43.3 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 139.4 1.1 -20.3 9.9 -24.5 -3.8 SADDLE 7 25.9 3.8 POPLAR 3 150.0 16118 1.0 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 142.2 99

SW -8.6 99 -16.6 16.6 6.8 -5.8 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 -13.7 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 1100 16.9 Ksituan River 754S Valley View -17.4 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -8.0 8.6 7L10 -57.9 0.5 -0.6 150.6 13.8 26.0 1104 1123 0.5 17163 Area 1.0 9.8 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 18104 -4.3 7L48 LSMOKR17 1164 1172 -17.1 7L22 17.2 25.8 140.7 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 -79.9 KSIT RV8 STURG_1 1120 1.0 -0.5 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 26.5 -26.9 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 143.0 22.0 3.4 150.6 STURGEO7 1180

19.2 1.1 0.9287 1.0000 -1.6 SW -71.4 0.2 -35.7 12.5 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 52.6 1.0 7L10 1.0 71.3 -67.0 7L56 MERCER 7 38.6 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 143.5 7L68 25.8 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.0 7L22 0.0 1T 38.5 -30.7 L. SMOKY

6.8 -7.6 6.8 -2.4 -8.6 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 143.4 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -1.8 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 25.8 149.9 LOWE2 1117 1.0 -13.6 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -8.3 7L54 8.3 -50.8 0.0 -0.0 1.0 -33.1 1086 0.8 1 143.5 CLAIR L 139.4 3.8 12.2 99 -0.4 -0.5 30.6 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -61.0 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.0 -49.8 7L197 50.7 84.5 1.0 1.8 5.9 4.5 -177.1 13.5 7L07 -11.9 1.0 142.5 137.1 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 177.5 7L34 143.2 13.0 -13.1 -19.9 1.1 SW 35.6 -6.3 1110 SW * -0.0 1.0 150.9 1.8 19.6 2.6 -29.2 -65.9 MERC TAP 29.2 7L39 1160 26.1 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.0 -5.7 5.4 BEZANSON 25.8 LSMOKR29 -0.5 8.6 12.0 4.3

1119 3.1 143.7 SW -106.1 7L32 109.7 -115.8 7L32 131.0 19163 8 GOODFAR7 -48.8 0.0 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.0 -24.9 52.4 1T -46.2 44.8 19145 -18.4 1.1 SW 0.0 1131 20.7 144.0 BRDGE C9 260.4 -34.6 ELMWORT8 -30.0 1.0 17101 1.0 1.0 7L45 114.0 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 -3.2 49.1 1121 7 143.6 GPEP39 143.6 32 1 -29.7 32.9 -58.3 58.6 FOX CRK7 25.8 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -4.4 1.0 1101 7.0 62.3 -60.1 46.1 -45.8 1.0 1.0 37 0.7 1145 113.8 1.0 7.2 SW 1.0 GPEP7 99 140.5

27.6 3.4 -8.7 0 140.8 143.3 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -82.3 -29.7 8.7 1.8 0 144.3 1.0 0 0 5.7 0.2 0 -4.6 64.4 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -2 0 7L40 .2 . 0 . -105.1 17134 144.2 2 1.0 1 2.4 1 1126 -1.1 -0.0 SW 19.9 3.4R -96.1 -6.0 ELMWORT6 -41.5 26.0 25.5 FLYINGS7 1.0 -30.2 28.2 1.0 1.1 6 82.9 825 13.8 7L84 95.8 -104.7 144.5 7L46 151.0 1.1 -93.8 CGETAP -95.3 7L33 1132 -26.6 -16.1 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.0 26.0 42.5 17.7 16.9 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 61.3 144.2 -17.3 1.9 7L228 -20.7 -82.7 7L44 1 83.6 4.8 -4.7 -12.4 7L20 -15.4 0.9 18.7 15.9 -23.0 13.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1170 143.1 1149 -61.0 144.0 1137 141.4 7.0 SIMONET7 1138 1.0 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.0 -14.6

BCTAP 144.6 1.0 1144 12.4 -7.3 144.7 144.5 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -45.0 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

5.0 45.0 -14.0 20.9 -21.0 7.1 141.1 10.0 -11.5 24.7 -31.0 -10.0 1.0 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 144.5 141.8 99 -4.1 14.0 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 14.1 1.0 6.9 BEARCK1 1147

1.0 1.0 -24.7 -13.9 19170 142.1 HR MILN7 1.9 2.2 -9.4 31.2 -6.7 144.6 -7.2 144.5 SIMONET9 -44.6 9.6 -13.9 -4.0

1.0 1.0 8.6 2.5 -6.9 144.6 141.1 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.2 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.8 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.9 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.2 -1.9 0.0 7.4 6.9

34.5 15.6R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 25.9 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 14.7 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 12.3R 15.0 11.9 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.9 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.0 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.8 1 25.8 1.0 13.3 25.9 37 Area 14.8 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L75 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:27 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -32.5 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -16.1 -102.9 106.4 268.8 7.7 -87.3 91.8 7L27 25.8 7L75 7L73 74.3 51.4 -46.2 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 28.9 -20.8 WESLY C8 99 -11.7 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -73.3 12.5 Peace River 147.8 149.0 149.9 31.4 1102 19118 22.1 Area 1.10.0 1118 69.8

33 -14.2 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.6 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -77.2 26.3 * 15.4 25.9 25.9 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -17.5 SW MOWATTAP 1.0 25.8 * 77.2 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 144.1 1.1 -23.5 11.7 -25.0 -3.8 SADDLE 7 25.9 3.8 POPLAR 3 149.7 16118 1.0 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 143.7 99

SW -8.6 99 -18.3 18.2 6.8 -5.8 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 -13.7 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 1100 -67.3 Valley View 16.0 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -8.1 8.6 7L10 -57.8 0.5 -0.6 150.0 13.9 26.0 1104 1123 -18.1 17163 Area 1.1 12.7 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 4.3 18104 7L48 1172 -25.8 25.9 -4.5 2.4 LSMOKR17 1164 7L22 145.1 KSIT RV8 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 STURG_1 1120 1.0 18.4 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 30.5 -30.8 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 144.5 22.0 3.4 150.0 STURGEO7 1180

23.1 1.1 0.9600 1.0000 -7.7 SW -38.1 0.1 -44.4 12.4 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 46.2 1.1 7L10 1.0 38.0 -36.7 7L56 MERCER 7 38.6 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 145.0 7L68 25.8 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.0 7L22 0.0 1T 37.5 -27.1 L. SMOKY

5.6 -6.5 6.8 -2.4 0.1 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 144.8 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -5.3 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 25.8 150.1 LOWE2 1117 1.0 -14.6 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -27.1 7L54 27.2 -44.8 0.0 -0.0 1.1 17.7 1086 0.8 1 145.0 CLAIR L 144.1 3.8 12.2 99 5.7 -6.4 26.1 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -63.3 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.0 -58.9 7L197 60.2 -4.3 1.0 1.8 5.9 4.5 -144.0 13.7 7L07 -11.9 1.0 144.1 142.0 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 144.3 7L34 144.6 16.2 -15.6 0.4 1.1 SW 27.9 -6.3 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.8 4.1 19.6 2.6 44.2 -65.9 MERC TAP -44.1 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 10.2 -10.4 BEZANSON 25.7 LSMOKR29 -0.1 2.8 12.0 4.3 1119 145.1 19163 24.5 SW -100.0 7L32 103.2 -109.3 7L32 122.9 8 GOODFAR7 -12.8 0.0 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -25.4 51.1 1T -45.9 44.5 19145 -21.9 1.1 SW 0.0 1131 18.0 145.4 BRDGE C9 260.9 -25.9 ELMWORT8 -30.6 1.1 17101 1.1 1.0 7L45 131.7 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 -24.4 12.3 1121 7 145.2 GPEP39 145.1 32 1 -23.9 26.5 -51.9 52.1 FOX CRK7 25.8 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -5.1 1.0 1101 7.0 57.8 -56.8 42.8 -42.6 1.0 1.0 37 0.7 1145 1.0 SW

7.2 -8.8 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.7

12.4 3.4 -8.7 0 141.0 144.5 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -30.1 8.7 1.8 0 145.1 1.0 0 0 5.7 0.2 0 71.2 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -2 0 7L40 .2 . 0 . -119.8 17134 144.7 2 1.0 1 2.4 1 1126 -1.1 -0.3 SW 17.9 3.1R -110.7 -6.2

ELMWORT6 -32.5 26.1 FLYINGS7 1.0 36.0 -30.3 1.0 1.1 6 825 13.8 38.9 7L84 8.9 50.6 144.8 7L46 151.0 1.1 -49.2 CGETAP -50.5 7L33 1132 -13.9 -11.8 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.0 33.2 11.5 11.3 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 51.7 144.7 -12.1 1.9 7L228 -19.5 -43.6 7L44 1 43.9 -0.3 0.5 -17.6 7L20 -14.8 0.9 11.6 20.0 -27.0 17.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1170 144.0 1149 -67.0 144.6 1137 141.2 8.9 SIMONET7 1138 1.0 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.0 -18.5

BCTAP 144.8 1.0 1144 17.7 -5.6 144.1 144.7 DOME CU7 4.5 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -50.5 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

8.9 50.5 -13.1 19.2 -19.2 5.3 140.9 13.2 -13.4 24.7 -36.3 -13.2 1.0 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 144.7 141.2 99 -4.1 13.1 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 14.1 1.0 6.1 BEARCK1 1147

1.0 1.0 -24.7 -13.9 19170 143.0 HR MILN7 1.9 2.2 -12.9 36.5 -6.3 144.8 -6.8 144.7 SIMONET9 -49.9 13.1 -13.9 -4.0

1.0 1.0 8.6 2.5 -6.1 144.8 140.6 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.2 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 26.0 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.9 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.2 -1.9 0.0 7.0 6.5

34.5 14.7R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 25.9 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 14.6 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 11.4R 15.0 11.0 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.8 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.1 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.7 1 25.7 1.0 13.3 25.8 37 Area 14.8 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L46 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:27 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -32.6 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -16.2 -101.5 104.8 269.1 7.7 -85.7 90.1 7L27 25.9 7L75 7L73 72.7 51.7 -46.7 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 29.5 -21.9 WESLY C8 99 -12.1 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -71.7 12.8 Peace River 148.5 149.6 150.1 31.4 1102 19118 Area 1.1 22.1 68.2 1118 -0.0

33 -14.5 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.6 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -76.5 26.3 * 15.4 25.9 25.9 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -17.9 SW MOWATTAP 1.1 25.8 * 76.5 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 145.0 1.1 -23.5 12.2 -25.3 -3.8 SADDLE 7 25.8 3.8 POPLAR 3 149.9 16118 1.0 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 144.6 99

SW -8.5 99 -18.5 18.5 6.8 -5.8 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 -13.5 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 1100 -65.8 Valley View 16.0 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -7.9 8.4 7L10 -57.8 0.5 -0.6 150.1 14.0 25.9 1104 1123 -18.1 17163 Area 1.1 13.2 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 2.9 18104 7L48 1172 -25.4 25.6 -3.9 2.7 LSMOKR17 1164 7L22 145.9 KSIT RV8 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 STURG_1 1120 1.1 18.4 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 30.6 -30.9 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 145.4 22.0 3.4 150.1 STURGEO7 1180

23.3 1.1 0.9600 1.0000 -8.0 SW -26.6 0.0 -44.1 12.4 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 45.1 1.1 7L10 1.0 26.5 -25.9 7L56 MERCER 7 38.5 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 145.9 7L68 26.0 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.1 7L22 0.0 1T 37.1 -26.2 L. SMOKY

5.3 -6.3 6.8 -2.4 -0.3 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 145.6 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -5.2 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 25.8 150.2 LOWE2 1117 1.1 -14.8 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -27.1 7L54 27.2 -43.8 0.0 -0.0 1.1 18.2 1086 0.8 1 145.9 CLAIR L 145.0 3.8 12.2 99 6.0 -6.7 25.1 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -63.8 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.1 -58.5 7L197 59.7 -2.9 1.0 1.8 5.9 4.5 -140.7 13.8 7L07 -11.9 1.1 144.9 142.9 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 140.9 7L34 145.5 16.5 -15.9 -0.3 1.1 SW 26.2 -6.3 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.8 5.4 19.6 2.6 40.9 -65.9 MERC TAP -40.8 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 8.9 -9.2 BEZANSON 25.7 LSMOKR29

0.3 2.7 12.0 4.2 1119 145.9 19163 21.2 SW -97.7 7L32 100.8 -106.9 7L32 119.8 8 GOODFAR7 -11.5 0.0 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -25.7 51.1 1T -46.3 44.9 19145 -23.6 1.1 SW 0.0 1131 18.5 146.3 BRDGE C9 261.1 -26.3 ELMWORT8 -31.0 1.1 17101 1.1 7L45 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 -21.2 11.0 1121 7 146.0 GPEP39 145.8 32 1 -22.4 25.0 -50.3 50.5 FOX CRK7 25.7 7L69 CRYST L7 1.0 1101 6.8 56.7 -56.0 41.9 -41.8 1.0 1.1 37 1145 127.2 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.8

14.1 3.4 0 141.1 145.4 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -12.1 -30.4

0 145.9 1.1 0 0 5.7 0 -7.4 69.5 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 0 7L40 . 0

. 17134 145.5 2 1.1 1 1 1126 -1.1 -0.8 SW 18.4 2.7R -7.0

ELMWORT6 -32.9 26.6 FLYINGS7 1.0 -30.6 1.1 1.1 6 12.1 825 13.8 7L84 52.6 -115.8 147.7 7L46 151.0 1.0 -51.2 CGETAP -52.4 7L33 1132 -15.5 -12.6 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.1 36.2 33.5 12.7 12.0 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 52.1 145.5 -13.0 1.9 7L228 -20.0 -45.3 7L44 1 45.6 1.0 -0.9 -16.3 7L20 -15.4 0.9 12.5 19.8 -26.8 17.3 1.0 1.1 1.0 1170 144.8 1149 -65.4 145.4 1137 142.0 9.3 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.0 -18.4

BCTAP 145.5 1.1 1144 16.3 -0.7 144.5 145.5 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -49.1 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

8.8 49.1 -10.7 14.3 -14.3 0.5 141.6 13.2 -13.8 24.7 -34.9 -13.2 1.1 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 145.4 141.9 99 -4.1 10.7 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 14.1 1.0 3.6 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 143.8 HR MILN7 1.9 2.2 -13.0 35.2 -5.1 145.5 -5.5 145.4 SIMONET9 -48.5 13.0 -13.9 -4.0

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 -3.6 145.5 141.3 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.8 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.7 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.2 -1.9 0.0 5.7 5.3

34.5 12.2R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 -0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 26.0 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 14.7 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 8.9R 15.0 8.5 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.7 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.1 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.6 1 25.8 1.0 13.3 25.5 37 Area 14.9 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L45 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:28 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -34.1 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -18.1 -51.0 52.3 271.3 7.7 -13.0 13.4 7L27 26.2 7L75 7L73 51.9 -51.5 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 20.2 -26.0 WESLY C8 99 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 Peace River1.1 WESLY C9 151.0 158.1 153.6 31.9 1102 19118 Area 1.1 22.5 1118 33 BOUCH C7 -0.0 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.8 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -48.6 26.5 * 15.4 25.9 26.0 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 24.4 SW MOWATTAP 1.0 26.1 * 48.6 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 137.5 1.1 -25.1 15.8 -24.5 -3.8 SADDLE 7 25.8 3.8 POPLAR 3 151.2 16118 1.0 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 142.1 99

SW -8.6 99 -16.0 16.0 6.8 -5.8 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 -13.6 10.2 -10.2 1100 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 Valley View 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -8.0 8.5 7L10 -57.9 0.5 -0.6 151.4 13.7 26.0 1104 1123 -2.1 17163 Area 1.0 8.6 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 7.1 18104 7L48 LSMOKR17 1164 1172 -18.3 7L22 18.4 138.9 VALLEYV8 -0.3 VALLEYV7 -63.1 KSIT RV8 STURG_1 1120 1.0 2.1 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 27.5 -27.9 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 142.9 22.0 3.4 151.4 STURGEO7 1180

20.2 1.1 0.9183 1.0000 -5.7 SW -51.1 0.1 -36.9 12.5 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 50.5 1.0 7L10 1.0 51.1 -48.8 7L56 MERCER 7 38.6 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 143.5 7L68 25.7 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.0 7L22 0.0 1T 37.9 -29.1 L. SMOKY

7.4 -8.0 6.8 -2.4 -7.4 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 143.3 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 -2.9 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 25.9 150.0 LOWE2 1117 1.0 -13.2 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -10.8 7L54 10.8 -48.9 -0.0 0.0 1.0 -24.1 1086 0.8 1 143.5 CLAIR L 137.5 3.8 12.2 99 3.6 -4.5 28.6 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -67.4 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.0 -51.0 7L197 52.0 65.7 1.0 1.8 5.9 4.5 -168.4 13.5 7L07 -11.9 1.0 142.4 135.1 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 168.7 7L34 143.2 13.9 -13.9 -5.3 1.1 SW 30.3 -6.3 1110 SW * -0.0 1.0 151.0 5.6 19.6 2.6 -18.5 -65.9 MERC TAP 18.5 7L39 1160 26.1 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.0 1.1 -1.4 BEZANSON 25.8 LSMOKR29

7.5 0.5 12.0 4.3 1119 143.5 -3.7 SW -99.2 7L32 102.3 -108.4 7L32 121.5 19163 8 GOODFAR7 -38.1 0.0 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.0 -24.8 45.4 1T -40.4 39.0 19145 -17.2 1.1 SW 0.0 1131 19.7 144.0 BRDGE C9 260.9 -33.4 ELMWORT8 -30.0 1.0 17101 1.0 1.0 7L45 107.7 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 38.3 3.4 1121 7 143.4 GPEP39 143.7 32 1 -27.3 30.3 -55.7 55.9 FOX CRK7 25.8 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -4.7 1.0 1101 7.0 60.3 -58.7 44.6 -44.4 1.0 1.0 37 0.7 1145 107.5 1.0 7.2 SW 1.0 GPEP7 99 140.6

20.9 3.4 -8.7 0 140.9 143.4 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -71.5 -29.7 8.7 1.8 0 144.2 1.0 0 0 5.7 0.2 0 -4.9 62.0 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -2 0 7L40 .2 . 0 . -99.8 17134 144.4 2 1.0 1 2.4 1 1126 -1.1 -0.1 SW 19.1 3.3R -90.9 -6.1 ELMWORT6 -40.3 26.0 22.7 FLYINGS7 1.0 -30.3 25.3 1.0 1.1 6 72.0 825 13.8 7L84 89.1 -99.4 144.7 7L46 151.0 1.0 -87.3 CGETAP -88.7 7L33 1132 -20.6 -13.1 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.0 23.0 41.2 14.3 13.6 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 60.0 144.4 -14.5 1.9 7L228 -20.0 -77.0 7L44 1 77.8 6.8 -6.7 -10.5 7L20 -14.8 0.9 15.5 14.8 -22.0 12.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1170 143.2 1149 -58.8 144.1 1137 141.6 6.5 SIMONET7 1138 1.0 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -13.6

BCTAP 144.7 1.0 1144 10.5 -6.2 144.9 144.6 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -43.0 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

4.0 43.0 -13.4 19.8 -19.9 6.0 141.4 9.1 -11.1 24.7 -29.1 -9.1 1.0 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 144.7 142.1 99 -4.1 13.4 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 14.1 1.0 6.4 BEARCK1 1147

1.0 1.0 -24.7 -13.9 19170 142.2 HR MILN7 1.9 2.2 -8.5 29.3 -6.5 144.7 -6.9 144.6 SIMONET9 -42.6 8.6 -13.9 -4.0

1.0 1.0 8.6 2.5 -6.4 144.7 141.4 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.1 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * -0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.9 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.7 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.2 -1.9 0.0 7.2 6.6

34.5 15.1R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 -0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 25.9 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 14.7 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 11.8R 15.0 11.4 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.7 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.1 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.6 1 25.8 1.0 13.3 25.6 37 Area 14.9 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L73 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:28 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV SW WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW POPLAR 2 SW -32.6 1.1 -0.0 1.0 -16.3 -107.8 111.6 269.0 7.7 -94.2 99.6 7L27 25.8 7L75 7L73 81.2 53.9 -48.0 18080

-7.7 3.8-3.8 35.8 -25.0 WESLY C8 99 -18.3 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -80.0 19.5 Peace River 149.0 150.0 150.0 31.4 1102 19118 22.1 Area 1.10.0 1118 76.5

33 -21.3 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.6 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -80.1 26.3 * 15.4 25.9 25.9 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -23.2 SW MOWATTAP 1.1 26.4 * 80.1 7.9 * -7.7 7.7 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 146.2 1.1 -24.0 12.6 -25.9 -3.8 SADDLE 7 26.0 3.8 POPLAR 3 149.8 16118 1.1 19.3 7LA10 -19.3 19.3 -19.2 19.2 POPLAR-4 10.2 146.4 99

SW -8.5 99 -19.0 19.0 6.7 -5.7 5.8 1151 1153 -0.0 -0.0 5.1 -18.4 -13.6 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 10.2 -10.2 5.3 -5.3 0.0 0.0 1100 -73.4 Valley View 24.2 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 -8.0 8.5 7L10 -57.8 0.5 -0.6 150.0 14.1 26.0 1104 1123 -20.1 17163 Area 1.1 14.1 KSIT RV7 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 18104 3.4 7L48 LSMOKR17 1164 1172 -16.4 7L22 16.5 10.5 147.1 VALLEYV8 VALLEYV7 -11.3 KSIT RV8 STURG_1 1120 1.1 20.4 L.SMOKY7 1165 7L101 24.9 -25.3 22.1 -22.0 1.1 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 147.2 22.0 3.4 150.0 STURGEO7 1180

17.8 1.1 0.9704 1.0000 -8.6 SW -36.9 0.0 -35.0 12.4 -10.7 99 99 -3.4 3.4 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7 0.1 -0.00.0 -0.0 1109 10.7 0.7 151.0 1.1 44.5 1.1 7L10 1.0 36.9 -35.7 7L56 MERCER 7 38.5 -38.1 -0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 147.6 7L68 26.0 19104 1.0 -6.8 1.1 7L22 0.0 1T 37.4 -25.9 L. SMOKY

5.0 -6.0 6.8 -2.4 -9.3 KSIT RV9 26.0 0.0 7L57 147.6 SW -16.0 0.0 1T 17120 1.0 2.4 1.1 1.2 -3.0 19155 0.0

-19.6 25.9 150.2 LOWE2 1117 1.1 -15.0 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -29.1 7L54 29.2 -43.3 0.0 -0.0 1.1 23.5 1086 0.8 1 147.6 CLAIR L 146.2 3.8 12.2 99 6.6 -7.3 24.7 1114 7LA39 HUGHES7 -5.3 5.3 -64.0 1.0 32 99 0.2 UPDIKE1 1.1 -49.0 7L197 49.9 -10.4 1.0 1.8 5.9 4.5 -137.5 13.9 7L07 -11.9 1.1 146.8 144.1 32 -1.1 1.2 Post-Project_2018 SP 0.9 * 137.7 7L34 147.0 11.9 -12.3 7.2 1.1 SW 25.6 -6.3 1110 SW * 0.0 1.0 150.8 5.5 19.6 2.6 -39.5 -65.9 MERC TAP 39.6 7L39 1160 26.0 1.0 21.2 -21.2 18163 1.1 -31.7 31.5 BEZANSON 25.7 LSMOKR29 -3.7 9.3 12.0 4.2 1119 147.8 19163 29.1 SW 7L32 7L32 8 GOODFAR7 -59.2 LSMOKR19 21.2 18134 1.1 -26.4 1T 19145 1.1 SW 1131 25.6 147.8 BRDGE C9 261.1 -35.3 ELMWORT8 -31.6 1.1 17101 1.1 1.0 7L45 120.3 MUIR_TAP 1175 1.0 -28.8 59.7 1121 7 147.9 GPEP39 148.6 32 1 -21.9 24.4 -49.8 50.0 FOX CRK7 25.7 7L69 CRYST L7 6.8 0.2 -8.9 1.0 1101 7.0 56.3 -55.7 41.7 -41.5 1.0 1.1 37 0.7 1145 120.1 1.0 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.8

54.6 3.4 -8.7 0 141.1 146.5 1134 1143 33 0 BRDGE C7 -92.9 -31.1 8.7 1.8 0 147.7 1.1 0 0 5.7 0.2 0 -9.1 66.6 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -2 0 7L40 .2 . 0 . -110.3 17134 146.3 2 1.1 1 2.4 1 1126 -1.1 -1.3 SW 24.8 2.2R -101.4 -7.8 ELMWORT6 -42.3 26.3 33.3 FLYINGS7 1.0 -30.9 36.1 1.1 1.1 6 93.9 825 13.8 7L84 102.5 -109.9 146.1 7L46 151.0 1.0 -100.4 CGETAP -101.9 7L33 1132 -52.5 -31.0 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.1 33.8 43.3 34.3 32.1 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 62.2 146.3 -31.0 1.9 7L228 -25.5 -88.0 7L44 1 89.0 3.2 -3.1 -14.1 7L20 -20.3 0.9 32.9 18.7 -25.9 16.3 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 145.8 1149 -62.9 146.3 1137 142.7 9.3 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 14.7 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -17.5

BCTAP 146.0 1.1 1144 14.1 3.3 145.0 146.1 DOME CU7 4.6 7L134.1 10.0 7L13 -10.0 -14.7 7L13 -46.8 7L80 13.9 1.0 7L80

7.9 46.8 -8.6 10.2 -10.3 -3.6 142.3 12.7 -13.9 24.7 -32.7 -12.7 1.1 1135 13.9 1.0 -17.8 1140 -6.2 7LA13 1139 146.0 142.6 99 -4.1 8.6 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 14.1 1.0 1.6 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -24.7 -13.9 19170 144.8 HR MILN7 2.0 2.2 -12.2 32.9 -4.2 146.0 -4.5 146.0 SIMONET9 -46.3 12.4 -13.9 -4.0

1.1 1.0 8.6 2.5 -1.6 146.0 142.0 17147 24.7 13.9 * -14.1 0.0 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.1 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.2 1.2 1.1 0.3 25.9 * 13.3 1 19147 0.0 14.8 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -2.2 -1.9 0.0 4.6 4.2

34.5 10.1R P&G 8 37 -24.6 -12.2 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148

SW 14.2 25.8 24.6 12.2 38.6 19.3 19142 14.8 HR MILN9 -18.0

15.8 6.9R 15.0 6.5 * -0.8 -0.4 0.8 0.4 18142 BEARCK3 16147 BEARCK2 36

18147 -13.3 0.8 MILNERA9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 37 33 MILNERC9 * -0.0 0.0 14.4 14.2 1.0 1.0 Grande Cache 4.9 SW

Grande Prairie -5.7 1 25.6 1.0 13.3 25.7 37 Area 14.7 Area 33

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) CATEGORY B, LOSS OF 7L32 Branch - MW/Mvar KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 SP Equipment - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S MON, DEC 04 2017 15:28 100.0%Rate A 1.125OV 0.942UV Capacity Upgrade kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -5.2 -32.7 1.0 -16.7 -101.0 104.2 268.7 7.4 -77.8 81.6 7L27 26.0 7L75 7L73 63.0 49.4 -44.6 18080

-7.4 3.3-3.3 33.8 -28.2 WESLY C8 99 -10.4 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -62.3 10.5 Peace River 150.8 151.8 -0.0 1102 1.1 19118 Area 1.1 22.4 58.7 150.3 1118 -0.0

-12.2 BOUCH C7 POPLAR 1 * -0.0 26.8 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 1115 -94.3 26.5 * 15.0 26.1 26.1 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -34.3 SW MOWATTAP 1.1 23.6 * 94.4 7.0 * -7.6 7.6 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 147.7 1.1 -20.5 10.3 -26.6 -3.4 33 SADDLE 7 26.0 3.4 POPLAR 3 150.2 16118 1.1 18.8 7LA10 -18.8 18.8 -18.7 18.7 POPLAR-4 9.9 148.3 99 1 2

SW -5.6 99 -19.9 19.9 6.4 -5.5 5.5 1151 1153 0.0 -0.0 4.4 -15.4 1171 1173 -13.7 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1 9.9 -9.9 5.7 -5.7 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 0.0 0.0 1100 -57.0 Valley View 12.0 Ksituan River 754S 1.1 1.0 1.0 7L88 RYCROFT7 1.0 1.0 -8.8 9.3 7L10 -57.3 2.2 -2.3 149.9 14.3 26.1 1104 14.5 14.5 1123 -19.6 17163 Area 1.1 15.3 KSIT RV7 18104 18155 1155 9L11 SADHL TP 1.7 7L48 1172

-7.9 LSMOKR17 1164 -25.1 7L22 25.2 148.4 KSIT RV8 VALLEYV8 3.1 VALLEYV7 1120 1.1 L.SMOKY7 STURG_1 -30.0 1.1 20.0 1165 7L101 29.7 22.1 -22.0 22.0 SW -1.7 0.0 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 148.9 99 3.9 149.9 STURGEO7 1180

25.4 1.1 0.9809 1.0000 -8.3 -40.7 12.4 -10.7 10.7 99 -3.9 3.9 1.7 -1.7 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7

0.1 0.0 1109 151.0 1.1 1.1 -0.0 -0.0 7L10 1.0 0.9 7L56 52.9 MERCER 7 38.5 -38.1 26.0 -0.9 1.0 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 149.4 7L68 19104 1.0 -9.1 1.1 7L22 36.2 -32.0 L. SMOKY

4.6 -5.7 9.1 -3.1 0.1 KSIT RV9 25.9 7L57 147.9 SW -16.0 17120 1.0 3.0 1.1 -1.3 -3.9 19155

-23.8 26.0 149.7 LOWE2 1117 1.1 -15.4 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -30.1 7L54 30.2 -51.1 0.0 -0.0 1.1 1086 34.6 1 CLAIR L 147.7 0.9 149.4 7LA39 HUGHES7 3.8 12.2 99 5.7 -6.4 32.1 1114 1.1 32 99 0.2 -6.2 6.2 -61.4 1.0 1.1 UPDIKE1 -53.8 7L197 54.9 7.9 145.7 1.8 5.9 5.3 -159.0 14.1 7L07 -11.4 1.1 147.9 32 -1.4 1.6 Post-Project_2018 WP 1.2 * 159.3 7L34 148.6 19.8 -19.7 -6.0 1.1 SW 32.2 -5.7 1110 SW * -0.0 1.0 150.7 -19.0 23.8 3.6 20.9 -98.9 MERC TAP -20.9 7L39 1160 26.0 1.1 -0.0 -0.0 18163 1.1 -5.1 4.8 BEZANSON 26.3 LSMOKR29 -0.1 -1.3 11.4 3.6

1119 1.6

148.2 -3.0 19163 8 GOODFAR7 SW -83.7 7L32 85.9 -94.4 7L32 104.4 LSMOKR19 -0.0 18134 1.1 -26.6 47.5 -44.4 42.3 19145 -27.4 1131 1.1 SW

23.6 149.3 BRDGE C9 MUIR_TAP 261.9 -27.5 ELMWORT8 -32.3 1.1 17101 1.1 1.3 7L45 100.6 -33.0 36.7 -61.0 61.4 1175 1.1 -2.2 3.0 1121 7 148.4 GPEP39 147.9 32 1 FOX CRK7 26.3 7L69 CRYST L7 6.1 0.6 -11.8 66.5 -63.2 49.8 -49.4 1.0 1101 9.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 37 1.0 1145 100.3 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.3 140.0 147.8 1134 26.7 3.0 1143 33 BRDGE C7 -41.1 -31.3 4.1 148.2 1.1 6.6 0.4 -12.1 60.8 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -93.6 7L40

17134 147.5 0.5 1.4 2 1.0 1126 SW 22.5 4.4R -81.2 -8.3 ELMWORT6 -38.3 25.5 26.4 FLYINGS7 1.0 -31.4 32.1 1.1 1.1 6 41.3 825 14.4 7L84 70.4 -93.2 147.4 7L46 151.0 1.1 -70.4 CGETAP -70.1 7L33 1132 -27.5 -21.5 1103 7.3 WAP JCT7 1.1 26.8 39.2 20.2 21.4 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 55.8 147.5 -20.7 7L228 -23.7 -61.1 7L44 61.5 11.1 -11.0 -5.6 7L20 -19.8 20.9 15.7 -23.0 13.9 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 147.1 1149 -57.7 147.4 1137 144.1 8.5 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 31.4 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -15.1

BCTAP 147.3 1.1 1144 5.6 -1.0 145.7 147.4 DOME CU7 5.3 7L1316.5 -3.0 7L13 3.0 -31.3 7L13 -40.0 7L80 16.1 1.0 7L80

5.8 40.0 -20.0 17.0 -17.1 0.8 143.8 11.2 -13.8 28.3 -24.5 -11.2 1.1 1135 16.3 1.0 -15.8 1140 -5.4 7LA13 1139 147.3 144.0 99 -16.5 19.9 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 -2.9 1.1 13.4 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -28.3 -16.3 19170 146.2 HR MILN7 8.6 7.9 -10.7 24.6

147.3 -9.6 147.2 SIMONET9 -39.7 10.6 -16.0 -4.6 2.9

1.1 1.0 9.9 2.8 -10.3 147.3 143.5 17147 28.3 16.3 * -13.4 0.0 0.2 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.8 1.4 1.3 0.4 26.0 * 15.1 1 19147 -0.0 14.9 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 -0.0 32 33 -0.0 -8.6 -7.8 11.0 10.2 0.0

24.8 23.4R P&G 8 37 -28.2 -14.1 ALBRIGH9 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148 SW

14.4 26.0 -15.0 0.7 16147 28.2 14.1 41.2 20.6 19142 14.9 HR MILN9 -18.4

14.1 1.9R 13.8 1.7 * -0.3 -0.2 0.3 0.2 18142 MILNERA9 BEARCK3 BEARCK2 36 5.1 SW

18147 -5.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 15.0 0.3 0.2 37 33 MILNERC9 * 0.0 -0.0 25.9 14.4 14.3 Grande Prairie 1.0 Grande Cache 1 25.8 1.0 33 37 Area 14.9 Area

CATEGORY A, N-0 Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) KSITUAN RIVER 754S POST-PROJECT 2018 WP Branch - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S WED, DEC 06 2017 13:37 Equipment - MW/Mvar 100.0%Rate B Capacity Upgrade 1.123OV 0.942UV kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000 1085 1082 1080 19105 1105 PEACE RV WESLY C7 WESLY C4 FRIEDEN9 FRIEDEN7 18118 SW SW POPLAR 2 SW 1.1 -5.2 -32.9 1.0 -16.6 -101.5 104.7 267.5 7.4 -78.0 81.8 7L27 26.0 7L75 7L73 63.3 46.3 -41.7 18080

-7.4 3.3-3.3 31.3 -26.0 WESLY C8 99 -8.0 19080 SW 1.1 1.1 WESLY C9 -62.6 8.1 Peace River 150.4 151.5 -0.0 1.1 1102 22.6

19118 -9.8 Area 1.10.0 1118 59.0 150.7

BOUCH C7 * 0.0 POPLAR 1 26.9 POPLAR 7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1116 19116 -94.7 26.6 * 15.0 26.0 26.0 MOWAT1 MOWAT2 -35.1 SW 1115 1.1 20.3 * 94.7 7.0 * -7.6 7.6 1124 1.0 17118 7L73 MOWATTAP 146.8 1.1 -17.1 6.1 -26.4 -3.4 33 SADDLE 7 25.9 3.4 POPLAR 3 991100 150.9 16118 1.1 ALT1SVC 18.8 7LA10 -18.8 18.8 -18.7 18.7 POPLAR-4 9.9 147.9 SW 99 1 2

SW -5.6 99 -19.6 19.6 6.4 -5.5 5.5 1151 1153 -15.4 4.2 0.0 -0.0 4.4 -0.0 -4.2 7L48TAP TRIANGL7 1171 1173 1 -13.6 1.1 9.9 -9.9 9.7 147.7 5.7 -5.7 VALLEYG1 VALLEYG2 -0.0 0.0 1100 -57.3 Valley View 7L88 Ksituan River 754S 1.1

1.0 1.0 RYCROFT7 0.0 4.2 1.0 1.0 -8.7 9.2 -57.3 2.2 -2.3 150.1 14.3 26.0 1123 7L10 1104 -19.3 14.5 14.5 14.7 18104 17163 9L11 Area SADHL TP KSIT RV7 18155 7L48 1155 1172

-7.7 -0.8 1.1 LSMOKR17 1164 -25.1 7L22 25.2 KSIT RV8 VALLEYV8 3.4 VALLEYV7 1120 1.1 147.7 L.SMOKY7 STURG_1 -30.0 1.1 19.6 1165 7L101 29.7 22.1 -22.0 22.0 SW -6.8 0.0 LOWE1-0.1 0.1 148.5 99 3.9 150.1 STURGEO7 1180

25.4 1.1 0.9809 1.0000 -8.7 -40.7 12.5 -10.7 10.7 99 -3.9 3.9 6.8 -6.7 0.0 7L01 GOOSE R7

0.1 0.0 1109 151.0 1.1 1.1 -0.0 -0.0 7L10 1.0 0.9 7L56 52.8 MERCER 7 38.5 -38.1 25.8 -0.9 1.0 1.1 0.0 151.0 1163 149.0 7L68 19104 1.0 -9.1 1.1 7L22 36.4 -32.2 L. SMOKY

4.8 -5.9 9.1 -3.1 0.1 KSIT RV9 25.9 7L57 147.6 SW -16.0 17120 1.0 3.0 1.1 -1.4 -3.9 19155

-23.8 25.9 149.7 LOWE2 1117 1.1 -15.2 -7.7 VALLEYV9 -29.8 7L54 29.9 -51.0 0.0 -0.0 1.1 1086 35.4 1 CLAIR L 146.8 0.9 149.0 7LA39 HUGHES7 3.8 12.2 99 6.1 -6.8 32.2 1114 1.0 32 99 0.2 -6.2 6.2 -57.1 1.0 1.1 UPDIKE1 -53.8 7L197 54.9 7.7 144.8 1.8 5.9 5.3 -158.7 14.1 7L07 -11.4 1.1 147.6 32 -1.4 1.6 Post-Project_2018 WP 1.2 * 158.9 7L34 148.2 19.8 -19.7 -3.5 1.1 SW 33.9 -5.7 1110 SW * -0.0 1.0 150.7 -20.7 23.8 3.6 21.1 -98.9 MERC TAP -21.0 7L39 1160 26.0 1.1 -0.0 0.0 18163 1.1 -3.5 29 3.2 BEZANSON 26.3 LSMOKR29 -0.1 -1.1 11.4 3.6 1119

147.9 -2.8 -0.1 19163 8 GOODFAR7 SW -83.6 7L3285.8 -94.3 7L32 104.3 LSMOKR19 -0.0 18134 1.1 -26.5 46.5 -43.4 41.2 19145 -26.5 1131 1.1 SW

23.2 149.0 BRDGE C9 MUIR_TAP 261.7 -27.5 ELMWORT8 -32.1 1.1 17101 1.1 1.3 7L45 100.5 -33.0 36.7 -61.0 61.4 1175 1.1 -0.6 2.8 1121 7 148.1 GPEP39 147.6 32 1 FOX CRK7 26.3 7L69 CRYST L7 6.1 0.6 -11.4 66.5 -63.3 49.8 -49.4 1.0 1101 9.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 37 1.0 1145 100.2 7.2 SW 1.1 GPEP7 99 140.3 140.0 147.5 1134 24.9 3.0 1143 33 BRDGE C7 -41.0 -31.2 4.1 147.9 1.1 6.6 0.4 -11.7 60.7 ELMWORT7 BIG MTN7 -93.5 7L40

17134 147.3 0.5 1.5 2 1.0 1126 SW 22.1 4.5R -81.1 -8.1 ELMWORT6 -38.3 25.4 26.0 FLYINGS7 1.0 -31.3 31.7 1.1 1.1 6 41.1 825 14.4 7L84 70.3 -93.1 147.2 7L46 151.0 1.0 -70.3 CGETAP -70.0 7L33 1132 -25.8 -20.5 1103 7.2 WAP JCT7 1.1 26.3 39.2 19.1 20.4 THORN_144 5 7L03 7L03 55.8 147.3 -19.8 7L228 -23.3 -61.0 7L44 61.5 11.1 -11.0 -5.6 7L20 -19.4 19.9 15.6 -22.9 13.7 1.1 1.1 1.0 1170 146.8 1149 -57.6 147.2 1137 144.0 8.3 SIMONET7 1138 1.1 31.4 AWTAP KAKWA1 1.1 -14.9

BCTAP 147.2 1.1 1144 5.6 -2.0 145.7 147.2 DOME CU7 5.3 7L1316.5 -3.0 7L13 3.0 -31.3 7L13 -40.0 7L80 16.1 1.0 7L80

5.7 40.0 -20.4 18.0 -18.1 1.7 143.7 11.0 -13.6 28.3 -24.5 -11.0 1.1 1135 16.3 1.0 -15.8 1140 -5.4 7LA13 1139 147.1 143.9 99 -16.5 20.4 WAPITI 7 1142 P&G 7 ALBRIGHT 7L20 -2.4 1.1 13.4 BEARCK1 1147

1.1 1.1 -28.3 -16.3 19170 146.0 HR MILN7 8.6 7.9 -10.5 24.6

147.2 -9.9 147.1 SIMONET9 -39.7 10.4 -16.0 -4.6 2.4

1.1 1.0 9.9 2.8 -10.6 147.2 143.4 17147 28.3 16.3 * -13.4 0.0 0.2 MILNERB9 1.0 -0.0 -0.0 * 0.0 1 * 0.0 1.0 4.8 1.4 1.3 0.4 26.0 * 15.1 1 19147 -0.0 14.9 MILNER/9 1146 2 19139 0.0 32 33 -0.0 -8.6 -7.8 11.2 10.5 0.0

24.8 23.9R P&G 8 37 -28.2 -14.1 ALBRIGH9 -0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1148 SW

14.4 25.9 -15.0 0.7 16147 28.2 14.1 41.2 20.6 19142 14.9 HR MILN9 -18.4

14.1 2.4R 13.8 2.2 * -0.3 -0.2 0.3 0.2 18142 MILNERA9 BEARCK3 BEARCK2 36 5.1 SW

18147 -5.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 15.0 0.3 0.2 37 33 MILNERC9 * 0.0 -0.0 25.9 14.4 14.3 Grande Prairie 1.0 Grande Cache 1 25.8 1.0 33 37 Area 14.9 Area

CATEGORY A, N-0 Bus - Voltage (kV/pu) POST-PROJECT 2018 WP WITH THE RYCROFT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENTS Branch - MW/Mvar P1658 - Ksituan River 754S THU, MAY 17 2018 17:00 Equipment - MW/Mvar 100.0%Rate B Capacity Upgrade 1.123OV 0.942UV kV: <=34.500 <=72.000 <=144.000 <=240.000 >240.000

Attachment A4

Pre-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 2)

ATCO Electric A4-1 R0 Pre-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams

The voltage stability analysis was completed for the pre-Project winter peak scenario (2018 WP). The P-V graphs for the worst contingencies are provided below.

Figure A4-1 shows the P-V curves at Ksituan River 754S for 7L75, 7L46, 7L73 and 7L32 in the pre-Project for scenario 2 in 2018 WP.

For Category B contingencies, the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 5% of the reference load, or 18.1MW (0.05 x 362 MW = 18.1 MW).

Figure A4-1: P-V Curves for Scenario 2 – 2018 WP Pre-Project

ATCO Electric A4-2 R0

Attachment A5

Post-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams (Scenario 4) Including Ksituan River RAS and the Rycroft System Developments

ATCO Electric A5-1 R0

Post-Project Voltage Stability Diagrams

The voltage stability analysis was completed for the Post-Project winter peak scenario (2018 WP). The P-V graphs for the worst contingencies are provided below.

Figure A5-1 shows the P-V curves at Ksituan River 754S for 7L75, 7L46, 7L73, 7L32 and 7L68 in the Post-Project for scenario 4 in 2018 WP.

Figure A5-2 shows the P-V curves at Ksituan River 754S for 7L75, 7L73 and 7L68 with RAS in the Post-Project for scenario 4 in 2018 WP.

Figure A5-3 shows the P-V curves at Ksituan River 754S for 7L75, 7L46, 7L73 and 7L32 with LTP in the Post-Project for scenario 4 in 2018 WP.

For Category B contingencies, the minimum incremental load transfer to meet the 105% load criterion is 5% of the reference load, or 18.1MW (0.05 x 362 MW = 18.1 MW).

Figure A5-1: P-V Curves for Scenario 4 – 2018 WP Post-Project

ATCO Electric A5-2 R0

Figure A5-2: P-V Curves for Scenario 2 – 2018 WP Post-Project with RAS

Figure A5-3: P-V Curves for Scenario 4 – 2018 WP Post-Project with the Rycroft System Developments (LTP)

ATCO Electric A5-3 R0

ATTACHMENT A6 2018 WP Post-Connection

Transient Voltage Recovery Studies Results

ATCO Electric A6-1

1. Introduction

This report provides detailed results of the transient voltage recovery studies that were performed in accordance with Attachment A1: AESO Engineering Connection Assessment Scope and in accordance with further instructions provided by the AESO.

2. Studies Results

Transient voltage recovery studies were performed for the post-Project 2018 WP scenario (Scenario 4); for the post-Project 2018 WP scenario with the Ksituan River RAS; and for the post-Project 2018 WP scenario with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document.

2.1 Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project)

This section provides the results of the transient voltage recovery studies for the post- Project Scenario 4 for selected Category B contingencies.

2.1.1 7L68 contingency Figure A6-1a and Figure A6-2a show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68 using standard teleprotection-based fault clearing times per Table 5-2 in Attachment A1.

Figure A6-1a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Clairmont Lake 811S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure A6-1a shows that the voltage levels did not recover within 1.5 seconds after fault to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

ATCO Electric A6-2

Figure A6-1a: Fault on 7L68 near Clairmont Lake 811S (Clairmont Lake breaker opens in 5 cycles and Rycroft in 7 cycles after fault) 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 138 kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 1.6 sec. after fault - 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 7L68 Fault near Clairmont Lake Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

Figure A6-2a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Rycroft 730S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure A6-2a shows that the voltage recovery was achieved.

Figure A6-2a: Fault on 7L68 near Rycroft 730S (Rycroft breaker opens in 5 cycles and Clairmont Lake in 7 cycles after fault) 1.2 1.1

1.0 0.9 All voltages recover to above 138 kV 0.8 All voltages above 130 kV 0.77 sec. after fault 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L68 Fault near Rycroft 730S

Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-3

2.1.2 7L75 contingency Figure A6-3a and Figure A6-4a show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75 using non-teleprotection-grade line protection fault clearing times per Table 5-2 in Attachment A1.

Figure A6-3a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the West Peace River 793S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75. Figure A6-3a shows that the voltage levels did not recover.

Figure A6-3a: Fault on 7L75 near West Peace River 793S (West Peace River breaker opens in 6 cycles and Friedenstal in 18 cycles after fault) 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Voltages do not recover above 130 kV (0.942 pu) at all buses 0.2 7L75 Fault near West Peace River 793S - no RAS Bus Voltages (on (on Bus kV 138 Voltages base)pu 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S

Figure A6-4a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Friedenstal 800S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75. Figure A6-4a shows that the voltage levels did not recover.

Figure A6-4a: Fault on 7L75 near Friedenstal 800S (Friedenstal breaker opens in 6 cycles and West Peace River in 24 cycles after fault) 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Voltages do not recover to above 130 kV (0.942 pu) at all buses 0.2 Bus Voltages (on (on Bus kV 138 Voltages base)pu 0.1 7L75 Fault near Friedenstal 800S - no RAS 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-4

2.1.3 7L73 contingency Figure A6-5a and Figure A6-6a show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73 using non-teleprotection-grade fault clearing times per Table 5-2 in Attachment A1.

Figure A6-5a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Friedenstal 800S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73. Figure A6-5a shows that the voltage levels did not recover.

Figure A6-5a: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L73 near Friedenstal 800S (Friedenstal beaker opens in 6 cycles and Rycroft in 18 cycles after fault) 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Voltages do not recover above 130 kV (0.942 pu) at all buses 0.2 Bus Voltages (on (on Bus kV 138 Voltages base)pu 0.1 7L73 Fault near Friedenstal 800S - no RAS 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S

Figure A6-6a shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Rycroft 730S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73. Figure A6-6a shows that the voltage levels did not recover.

Figure A6-6a: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L73 near Rycroft 730S (Rycroft breaker opens in 6 cycles and Friedenstal in 42 cycles after fault) 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 Voltages do not recover above 130 kV (0.942 pu) at all buses 0.3 0.2 Bus Voltages (on (on Bus kV 138 Voltages base)pu 0.1 7L73 Fault near Rycroft 730S - no RAS 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-5

2.2 Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Ksituan River RAS)

This section provides the results of the transient voltage recovery studies for the post- Project Scenario 4, with the Ksituan River RAS1, for selected Category B contingencies.

To achieve the load shed RAS at Ksituan, the owner of the distribution facilities was contacted. Due to critical load on adjacent feeders and feeder loadings, only one 25 kV feeder breaker has been selected for tripping for the load shed RAS identified at Ksituan 734S at this time. This feeder breaker number is breaker 505 for 5L368. The load connected to this feeder is equivalent to the new DTS of 11.71 MW.

2.2.1 7L68 contingency Figure A6-1b and Figure A6-2b show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68 using standard teleprotection-based fault clearing times per Table 5-2 in Attachment A1, with the Ksituan River RAS.

Figure A6-1b show the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Clairmont Lake 811S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure A6-1b shows that, with the load shed by the Ksituan River RAS, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

Figure A6-1b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Ksituan River RAS) - Fault on 7L68 near Clairmont Lake 811S 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 All voltages recover to above 147 kV 0.8 0.7 All voltages above 130 kV 0.4 sec. after fault 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L68 Fault near Clairmont Lake - with RAS 11.71 MW

1 Simulation of Ksituan River RAS tripped the load 9 cycles after point of fault (9 cycles = 3 cycles of 144kV bkr time + 2 cycles of protection initiating time + 1 cycle of telecommunications DTT time + 3 cycles of 25kV bkr time)

ATCO Electric A6-6

Figure A6-2b shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Rycroft 730S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure A6-2b shows that, with the load shed by the Ksituan River RAS, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

Figure A6-2b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with Ksituan River RAS) - Fault on 7L68 near Rycroft 730S 1.2 1.1

1.0 0.9 All voltages recover to above 147 kV 0.8 0.7 All voltages above 130 kV 0.3 sec. after fault 0.6 0.5 0.4 7L68 Fault near Rycroft 730S - with RAS 11.71 MW 0.3

2.2.2 7L75 contingency Figure A6-3b and Figure A6-4b show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75 with Ksituan RAS using teleprotection-grade fault clearing times. The voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements as well as reduced duration of suppressed voltages with the area motor load recovery after fault by approximately 0.3 seconds.

ATCO Electric A6-7

Figure A6-3b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L75 near West Peace River 793S (West Peace River breaker opens in 6 cycles and Friedenstal in 8 cycles with 11.71 MW RAS)

1.3 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 142 kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 0.67 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L75 Fault near West Peace River 793S - with RAS 11.71 MW Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S

Figure A6-4b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L75 near Friedenstal 800S (Friedenstal breaker opens in 6 cycles and West Peace River in 8 cycles with 11.71 MW RAS)

1.2 1.1

1.0 0.9 All voltages recover to above 142 kV 0.8 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 0.6 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 7L75 Fault near Friedenstal 800S 0.3 - with RAS 11.71 MW 0.2 Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

2.2.3 7L73 contingency Figure A6-5b and Figure A6-6b show the transient voltage recovery study results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73 with Ksituan RAS using teleprotection-grade fault clearing times. The voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance

ATCO Electric A6-8 requirements as well as reduced duration of suppressed voltages with the area motor load recovery after fault by approximately 0.7 seconds.

Figure A6-5b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L73 near Friedenstal 800S (Friedenstal beaker opens in 6 cycles and Rycroft in 8 cycles with 11.71 RAS)

1.3 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 142 kV 0.7 All voltages above 130 kV 0.45 sec. after fault 0.6 0.5 0.4 7L73 Fault near Friedenstal 800S 0.3 - with RAS 11.71 MW

Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV

Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

Figure A6-6b: Transient Voltage Recovery Results - Fault on 7L73 near Rycroft 730S (Rycroft breaker opens in 6 cycles and Friedenstal in 8 cycles with 11.71 RAS)

1.2 1.1

1.0 0.9 Voltages recover to above 140 kV at all busses 0.8 0.7 Voltages above 130 kV in 0.42 sec. after fault 0.6 0.5 0.4 7L73 Fault near Rycroft 730S 0.3 - with RAS 11.71 MW 0.2 Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-9

2.3 Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document)

This section provides the results of the transient voltage recovery studies for the post- Project Scenario 4, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document (a static VAr system (SVS), capable of providing approximately 50 MVAr of dynamic reactive power support, will be added at the existing Rycroft 730S substation), for selected Category B contingencies.

2.3.1 7L68 contingency Figure A6-1c and Figure A6-2c show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68 using standard teleprotection-based fault clearing times per Table 5-2 in Attachment A1.

Figure A6-1c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Clairmont Lake 811S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure F1c shows that, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements. Figure A6-1c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document) - Fault on 7L68 near Clairmont Lake 811S 1.3 1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 137 kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 1.0 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L68 Fault near Clairmont Lake - with Rycroft SVC

Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-10

Figure A6-2c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Rycroft 730S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L68. Figure A6-2b shows that, with with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

Figure A6-2c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results for Scenario 4 (2018 WP post-Project with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document) - Fault on 7L68 near Rycroft 1.2 1.1

1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 137 kV 0.7 All voltages above 130 kV 0.8 sec. after fault 0.6 0.5 0.4 7L68 Fault near Rycroft 730S - with Rycroft SVC 0.3

Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

2.3.2 7L75 contingency Figure A6-3c and Figure A6-4c show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75 using modified fault clearing times assumptions. The modified fault clearing times assumptions for transmission line 7L75 were based on the standard teleprotection fault clearing times of 6 cycles for the near end and 8 cycles for the far end.

Figure A6-3c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the West Peace River 793S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75. Figure A6-3c shows that, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

ATCO Electric A6-11

Figure A6-3c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document - Fault on 7L75 near West Peace River 793S

1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 141 kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 1.02 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L75 Fault near West Peace River 793S 0.2 with Rycroft SVC Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S

Figure A6-4c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Friedenstal 800S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L75. Figure A6-4c shows that, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

Figure A6-4c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document - Fault on 7L75 near Friedenstal 800S

1.2

1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 141 kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 0.5 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 0.3 7L75 Fault near Friedenstal 800S 0.2

Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus with Rycroft SVC 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S

ATCO Electric A6-12

2.3.3 7L73 contingency Figure A6-5c and Figure A6-6c show the transient voltage recovery studies results for faults on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73 using modified fault clearing times assumptions. The modified fault clearing times assumptions for transmission line 7L73 were based on the standard teleprotection fault clearing times of 6 cycles for the near end and 8 cycles for the far end.

Figure A6-5c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Friedenstal 800S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73. Figure A6-5c shows that, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

Figure A6-5c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document - Fault on 7L73 near Friedenstal 800S

1.3

1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 All voltages recover to above 142kV 0.7 0.6 All voltages above 130 kV 0.41 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 7L73 Fault near Friedenstal 800S with Rycroft SVC 0.3 0.2 Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0

Clairmont Lake 811S TimeRycroft (seconds) 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

Figure A6-6c shows the voltage levels at 144 kV busses at substations in the Study Area before and after a fault near the Rycroft 730S substation on the 144 kV transmission line 7L73. Figure A6-6c shows that, with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document, voltage levels recovered sufficiently to meet the TFO’s performance requirements.

ATCO Electric A6-13

Figure A6-6c: Transient Voltage Recovery Results for Scenario 3 (2017 WP post-Project with proposed system transmission development in the AESO’s Addition of Voltage Support at Rycroft 730S Substation Needs Identification Document) - Fault on 7L73 near Rycroft 730S

1.3

1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 Voltages recover to above 141 kV at all busses 0.7 0.6 Voltages above 130 kV in 0.44 sec. after fault 0.5 0.4 7L73 Fault near Rycroft 730S with Rycroft SVC 0.3 0.2 Bus Voltages (on 138 kV (on base) Voltages pu Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 5.0 Time (seconds) Clairmont Lake 811S Rycroft 730S Ksituan 754S Wesley Creek 834S-144 kV Friedenstal 800S West Peace 793S Mowat

ATCO Electric A6-14