APPENDIX A CONNECTION ASSESSMENT
Page 1
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Executive Summary
Project Overview
EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (EDTI), in its capacity as the legal owner of the electric
distribution system (DFO) in the City of Edmonton, submitted a request for system access
service to the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) to reliably serve growing demand for
electricity in southwest (SW) Edmonton. The DFO informed the AESO that this growing demand in SW Edmonton is currently served by its 25 kV distribution system.
The DFO’s request includes a Rate DTS, Demand Transmission Service, contract capacity of 24 MW, and a request for transmission development in SW Edmonton (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested a new 240/25 kV point of delivery (POD) substation with two 240/25 kV transformers, four 240 kV breakers and associated equipment in SW Edmonton.
The scheduled in-service date for the Project is October 1, 2019.
This report details the engineering studies undertaken to assess the impact of the Project on the
performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system (AIES).
Existing System
Geographically, the Project is located in the AESO planning area of Edmonton (Area 60), which
is part of the AESO Edmonton Planning Region. Edmonton (Area 60) is surrounded by the
AESO planning areas of Athabasca/Lac La Biche (Area 27), Fort Saskatchewan (Area 33),
Wetaskiwin (Area 31), and Wabamun (Area 40).
From a transmission system perspective, Edmonton (Area 60) consists of 500 kV, 240 kV,
138/144 kV, and 69/72 kV transmission systems. The existing 25 kV distribution system in SW
Edmonton is currently served by the Summerside and Poundmaker POD substations, which
are supplied through the 240 kV transmission system in Edmonton (Area 60).
Existing constraints in the Edmonton Planning Region are managed in accordance with the
procedures set out in Section 302.1 of the ISO rules, Real Time Transmission
Constraint Management.
Study Summary
Study Area
The Study Area for the Project consists of all 240 kV transmission facilities in Edmonton (Area
60) and the tie lines connecting Edmonton (Area 60) to the rest of the AIES. All transmission facilities rated at 240 kV and above within the Study Area were 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 2.1.1).
Studies Performed
2018 winter peak (WP) and 2019 summer peak (SP) scenarios were studied.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 2
Power flow studies were performed for the 2018 WP and 2019 SP pre-Project and post-Project
study scenarios.
Voltage stability studies were performed for the 2018 WP post-Project study scenario.
Results of the Pre-Project Studies
Under the Category A and Category B conditions studied, no Reliability Criteria violations were
observed.
Connection Alternatives Examined for the Project
The DFO informed the AESO that it intends to request system access service to address
capacity and reliability concerns on its 25 kV distribution system in southeast (SE) Edmonton in
the near future. For the sake of ensuring transmission system planning efficiency, given the
proximity of the 25 kV distribution system in SW Edmonton to SE Edmonton, six transmission
alternatives were examined that address the current request for system access service (i.e.,
distribution system concerns in SW Edmonton), as well as the DFO’s capacity and reliability
concerns in SE Edmonton.
The AESO examined these six transmission alternatives in consultation with the DFO and the
legal owners of transmission facilities (TFOs) that own facilities in the area.
Alternative 1 – Upgrade the existing Petrolia substation and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Petrolia substation including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, two 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder breakers and
associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment; and connecting the new POD to the AIES.
Alternative 2 – Upgrade the existing Jasper substation and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Jasper substation including the addition of two 240/25 kV
transformers, two 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton including two 240/25 kV transformers,
four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated
equipment ;and connecting it to the AIES.
Alternative 3 – Upgrade the existing Summerside and Poundmaker substations and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 3
upgrading the existing Summerside substation including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment ;
upgrading the existing Poundmaker substation including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment ; and connecting it to the AIES.
Alternative 4 – Add a new POD substation in SW Edmonton, to be called the Riverview substation and upgrade the existing Summerside substation
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
adding a new POD substation in SW Edmonton, to be called the Riverview
substation, including two 240/25 kV transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and
eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated equipment;
connecting the proposed Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission
line 1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration, between the approved
Harry Smith 367S substation and the Petrolia substation, by adding two new 240 kV
transmission circuits, each approximately 70 metres in length; and
upgrading the existing Summerside substation, including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment.
Alternative 5 – Add the proposed Riverview substation and add a new POD to SE Edmonton
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
adding the proposed Riverview substation, including two 240/25 kV transformers, four
240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated
equipment;
connecting the proposed Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission
line 1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration, between the approved
Harry Smith 367S substation and the Petrolia substation, by adding two new 240 kV
transmission circuits, each approximately 70 metres in length; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment and connecting it to the AIES.
Alternative 6 – Upgrade the existing Summerside and Poundmaker substations
This alternative involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Summerside substation, including replacing the two existing
240/25 kV transformers with two 240/25 kV transformers of higher capacity and adding a
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 4
third 240/25 kV transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and eighteen 25 kV feeder
circuit breakers and associated equipment; and
upgrading the existing Poundmaker substation, including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment.
Alternatives Not Selected for Further Examination
Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 were not selected for further study because the TFO advised that
expanding the existing Petrolia and Jasper substations are not viable.
Alternative 3 and Alternative 6 were not selected for further study because the total costs are
estimated to be higher than the total costs of Alternative 4 and Alternative 5.1
Alternatives Selected for Further Examination
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 were selected for further study. Both Alternative 4 and Alternative
5 involve adding the proposed Riverview substation to meet the request for system access
service.
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 include different transmission facilities to address the capacity
and reliability concerns in SE Edmonton, which the DFO has indicated will be the subject of a
forthcoming request for system access service. Therefore, the selection of the preferred
transmission development to address the DFO’s capacity and reliability concerns in SE
Edmonton will be assessed as a part of a separate project, and is not within the scope of this
study.
For the purpose of responding to the DFO’s current request for system access service,
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 are equivalent in scope. Therefore, only the addition of the
proposed Riverview substation, connected to the existing 240 kV transmission line 1043L
(future 1139L) in an in-and-out configuration, and including two 240/25 kV transformers, four
240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated equipment, will
be examined further.
Results of the Post-Project Studies
The post-Project studies were performed for the proposed Riverview substation with a Rate
DTS request of 24 MW.
Under the Category A and Category B conditions studied, no Reliability Criteria violations were observed. The voltage stability margin was met for all studied conditions.
Conclusions and Recommendations
1 Cost estimates for Alternative 3, Alternative 4, Alternative 5, and Alternative 6 are provided under a
separate cover.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 5
The connection assessment did not identify any pre-Project or post-Project system performance
issues. The connection assessment indicates that the Project will not adversely impact the
performance of the AIES.
Based on the connection assessment, adding the proposed Riverview substation to address the
request for system access service is technically acceptable.
Based on the connection assessment, adding the proposed Riverview substation and the
associated DTS is technically acceptable. The connection assessment did not identify any pre-
Project or post-Project system performance issues. The connection assessment indicates that
the Project will not adversely impact the performance of the AIES. No mitigation measures are
required as no Reliability Criteria violations were observed.
It is recommended to proceed with the Project by adding a new POD substation in SW
Edmonton as the preferred option to respond to the DFO’s request for system access service.
This includes: adding a new POD substation, to be designated the Riverview substation,
including two 240/25 kV LTC transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder
circuit breakers and associated equipment; and adding two 240 kV circuits, approximately 70
metres in length, to connect the Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission line
1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration between the approved Harry Smith 367S
substation and the existing Petrolia substation.
A minimum rating equal or greater than the rating of the existing 240 kV transmission line 1043L
is recommended for the two new 70 metres 240 kV circuits.
The 240/25 kV LTC transformers at the Riverview substation are recommended to have a rating
of 75 MVA.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 6
Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 8
1.1. Project ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1.1.1. Overview ................................................................................................................................ 8 1.1.2. Load Component ................................................................................................................... 8 1.1.3. Generation Component ......................................................................................................... 8
1.2. Study Scope .................................................................................................................................. 8 1.2.1. Study Objectives .................................................................................................................... 8 1.2.2. Study Area ............................................................................................................................. 9 1.2.3. Studies Performed ............................................................................................................... 12
1.3. Report Overview .......................................................................................................................... 12 2. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions ............................................................................. 13
2.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements ....................................................................................... 13 2.1.1. Transmission Planning Standards and Reliability Criteria ................................................... 13 2.1.2. ISO Rules and Information Documents ............................................................................... 14
2.2. Study Scenarios .......................................................................................................................... 14 2.3. Load and Generation Assumptions ............................................................................................. 15
2.3.1. Load Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 15 2.3.2. Generation Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 15 *Unit Net Generation refers to Gross Generating unit MW output less Unit Service Load. ............. 15 2.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions and HVDC Assumptions ........................................................... 16
2.4. System Projects ........................................................................................................................... 16 2.5. Customer Connection Projects .................................................................................................... 16 2.6. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements ........................................................................................... 17 2.7. Voltage Profile Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 18
3. Study Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 19 3.1. Connection Studies Carried Out .................................................................................................. 19 3.2. Power Flow Analysis ................................................................................................................... 19
3.2.1. Contingencies Studied ......................................................................................................... 19 3.3. Voltage Stability Studies .............................................................................................................. 19
3.3.1. Contingencies Studied ......................................................................................................... 20 4. Results of Pre-Project Studies ......................................................................................................... 21
4.1. Pre-Project Power Flow Studies .................................................................................................. 21 4.1.1. Scenario 1 (2018 WP pre-Project) ....................................................................................... 21 4.1.2. Scenario 2 (2019 SP pre-Project) ........................................................................................ 21
5. Connection Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 22 5.1. Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 22 5.2. Transmission Alternatives Identified ............................................................................................ 22
5.2.1. Transmission Alternatives Selected for Further Examination.............................................. 24 5.2.2. Transmission Alternatives Not Selected for Further Examination ....................................... 24
6. Results of Post-Project Studies ....................................................................................................... 26 6.1. Post-Project Power Flow Studies ................................................................................................ 26 6.1.1. Scenario 3 (2018 WP post-Project) ............................................................................................. 26 6.1.2. Scenario 4 (2019 SP post-Project) .............................................................................................. 26 6.2. Post-Project Voltage Stability Studies ......................................................................................... 26
7. Project Dependencies ....................................................................................................................... 27 8. Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 28
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
Page 7
Attachments
Attachment A Power Flow Diagrams – 2018 WP Pre-Project
Attachment B Power Flow Diagrams – 2018 WP Post-Project and 2019 SP Post-Project
Attachment C Voltage Stability Diagrams - 2018 WP Post-Project
Figures
Figure 1-1: Transmission System in vicinity of the Project ........................................................................................... 10
Tables
Table 2-1: Post-Contingency Voltage Deviations Guidelines for Low Voltage POD Busses ........................................ 14
Table 2-2: List of the Connection Study Scenarios ...................................................................................................... 14
Table 2-3: Forecast Area Load (2016 LTO at Edmonton Region Peak) ....................................................................... 15
Table 2-4: Key System Generation Dispatch Conditions ............................................................................................. 15
Table 2-5: Summary of Included Customer Projects in Edmonton (Area 60) ............................................................... 16
Table 2-6: Key Transmission Circuits in the vicinity of the Study Area ......................................................................... 17
Table 2-7: Summary of Key Transformer Ratings in the Study Area ............................................................................ 17
Table 2-8: Summary of Shunt Elements in the Study Area .......................................................................................... 17
Table 2-9: Bus Voltages of Key Substations in the Study Area .................................................................................... 18
Table 3-1: Summary of Studies Performed .................................................................................................................. 19
Table 6-1: Voltage Stability Study Results for the 2018 WP post-Project Scenario ..................................................... 26
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
8
1. Introduction
This report details the engineering studies undertaken to assess the impact of the Project (as defined below) on the performance of the Alberta interconnected electric system (AIES).
1.1. Project
1.1.1. Overview
EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (EDTI), in its capacity as the legal owner of the electric distribution system (DFO) in the City of Edmonton, submitted a request for system access service to the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) to reliably serve growing demand for electricity in southwest (SW) Edmonton.
The DFO’s request includes a Rate DTS, Demand Transmission Service, contract capacity of 24 MW, and a request for transmission development in SW Edmonton (collectively, the Project). Specifically, the DFO requested a new point of delivery (POD) substation with two 240/25 kV transformers, four 240 kV breakers, two 25 kV busses with a total of eight 25 kV feeder breakers and associated equipment in SW Edmonton.
The scheduled in-service date for the Project is October 1, 2019.
1.1.2. Load Component
New Rate DTS contract capacity: 24 MW in SW Edmonton
Load type: Residential and Commercial
Power Factor (PF) assumed for studies: 0.9 pf (lagging)
Future expansion plans: EDTI has requested provisions to allow for future expansion.
1.1.3. Generation Component
There is no generation component associated with the Project.
1.2. Study Scope
1.2.1. Study Objectives
The objectives of the study are as follows:
Assess the impact of the Project on the performance of the AIES.
Identify any violations of the relevant AESO criteria, standards or requirements, bothpre-Project and post-Project.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
9
Recommend the preferred Project alternative and mitigation measures, if required, toreliably connect the Project to the AIES.
1.2.2. Study Area
1.2.2.1. Study Area Description
Geographically, the Project is located in the AESO planning area of Edmonton (Area 60), which is part of the AESO Edmonton Planning Region. Edmonton (Area 60) is surrounded by the AESO planning areas of Athabasca/Lac La Biche (Area 27), Fort Saskatchewan (Area 33), Wetaskiwin (Area 31), and Wabamun (Area 40).
From a transmission system perspective, Edmonton (Area 60) consists of 500 kV, 240 kV, 138/144 kV, and 69/72 kV transmission systems. The existing 25 kV distribution system in SW Edmonton is currently served by the Summerside and Poundmaker POD substations, which are supplied through the 240 kV transmission system in Edmonton (Area 60).
The Study Area for the Project consists of all 240 kV transmission facilities in Edmonton (Area 60) and the tie lines connecting Edmonton (Area 60) to the rest of the AIES.
Figure 1-1 shows the existing and approved transmission system in the vicinity of the Project.
Con
nect
ion
Engi
neer
ing
Stud
y R
epor
t for
AU
C A
pplic
atio
n: E
PC
OR
Riv
ervi
ew S
ubst
atio
n N
ew P
OD
10
Figu
re 1
-1: T
rans
mis
sion
Sys
tem
in v
icin
ity o
f the
Pro
ject
909L
908L
1056L
(Nor
mal
ly O
pen
Poi
ntw
ithin
Sub
stat
ion)
(Nor
mal
ly O
pen
Poi
ntw
ithin
Sub
stat
ion)
(Nor
mal
ly O
pen
Poi
ntw
ithin
Sub
stat
ion)
POU
ND
MA
KE
R
1045
L/90
9L(to
Sun
danc
e 31
0P)
739L
(to
Car
vel
432S
)
792L
898L (toClyde150S)
174L
(to
Bar
do19
7S)
746L
700L
(to
Wes
twoo
d
422S
)
1043
L (to
Kee
phills
320
P)
1139
L
BILB
Y10
5S
STO
NY
PLA
IN43
4S
739AL
LED
UC
325S
838L
632L
858L (toWetaskiwin
40S)
Saun
ders
Lake
289
S
780L
Har
rySm
ith36
7S
174L
(to
Bard
o19
7S)
Clo
verb
ar#1
-3 (E
NC
1-3)
Uni
vers
ity o
f Alb
erta
(UO
A1-U
AO
2)
DO
ME
YAS
A28
6SJA
SP
ER
805S
NAM
AO
BER
NE
SE
293S
VIC
TOR
IA51
1S
LAM
BTO
N
CLO
VE
RBA
R 9
87S
GA
RN
EA
U
BELL
AM
Y
NO
RTH
CAL
DE
R37
S
PETR
OLI
A
EA
ST
ED
MO
NTO
N38
S
HAR
DIS
TY
RO
SS
DA
LE
KEN
NE
DA
LE
WO
OD
CR
OFT
STEL
CO
EDM
ON
TON
133S
STR
ATH
CO
NA
ME
AD
OW
LAR
K
IMPE
RIA
L O
ILED
MO
NTO
N 9
5S
CAS
TLE
DO
WN
S
INLA
ND
CEM
EN
T
ATPL
AS
TIC
5RS
ATPL
AS
TIC
4RS
ARG
YLL
EA
ST
IND
US
TRIA
L
726L
(to
Lam
oure
ux 7
1S)
920L
761L
(to
Lam
oure
ux71
S)
72LH8
908L
72C
N10
1058L
215L
898L
72C
H9
930L
946L947L
1055
L240CV5
72C
K13
72C
K12
1056L
72RS5
72C
H11
905L
(to
Wab
amun
19S
)
72RW3
1059
L
72JM18
780L897L
72VN21
915L947L
711L
72JW19
240BA2
921L
1044
L90
9L
1098
L
72N
W15
72RV6
72RG1
915L
1044L
920L
/921
L(to
Lam
oure
ux71
S)
1045
L10
44L
908L909L
908L
908L
909L
1055L
1059
AL
822A
L
908A
L1059L908L
72N
K23
72M
G16
738A
L
72RG7
72RV2
72RV4
72LS
24
738L737L
240BA3
736L
947L
822L
1202
L (to
Keep
hills
320
P)
1209
L (to
Gen
esee
330
P)
1206L/1212L (toHeartland 12S)
910L914L (toBigstone
86S)
1057L10
57L
908L
SUM
ME
RSI
DE
657S
ELLE
RS
LIE
89S
DEV
ON
14S
NIS
KU
149S
BRE
TON
A45
S
ACH
ES
ON
305S
VIS
CO
UN
T92
S
BLA
CK
MU
D15
5S
BA
SELI
NE
317S
BRO
ADM
OO
R42
0S
BRE
TVIL
LE18
5S
SPR
UC
EG
RO
VE
595S
N.W
. CA
RD
IFF
191S
CO
OK
ING
LAK
E 5
22S
FIB
ER
GLA
SS
SH
ER
WO
OD
PAR
K74
6S
KN
IGH
TSB
RID
GE
216S
NO
RTH
ST.A
LBE
RT
99S
CA
NA
DA
LIQ
UID
AIR
337
S
PE
TRO
-CA
NA
DA
ED
MO
NTO
N 1
84S
739L
746L
700L
731L
897L
712L
605L
747L
677L
606L
632L(toBuford538S)
865L
874L
604L
746B
L
741L
739L
739L
838L
712L
667L
761L
636L
705L
746A
L
60 -
Edm
onto
n
40 -
Wab
amun
33 -
Fort
Sas
k.
31 -
Wet
aski
win
P169
5 - A
rea
Tran
smis
sion
Sys
tem
This
dia
gram
con
tain
s a
sim
plifi
ed v
ersi
onof
the
syst
em c
onfig
urat
ion.
Tec
hnic
alde
tail
has
been
sim
plifi
ed fo
r illu
stra
tion
purp
oses
. It
does
not
indi
cate
geo
grap
hica
llo
catio
ns o
f fac
ilitie
s.
Gas
Gen
erat
or
Futu
re 2
40 k
V Su
bsta
tion
69 o
r 72
kV S
ubst
atio
n13
8 or
144
kV
Sub
stat
ion
240
kV S
ubst
atio
n50
0 kV
Sub
stat
ion
Futu
re 1
38/1
44 k
VFu
ture
138
/144
kV
Dou
ble
Circ
uit
Futu
re 2
40 k
V D
oubl
e C
ircui
t
Nor
mal
ly O
pen
Line
69/7
2 kV
138/
144
kV13
8/14
4 kV
Dou
ble
Circ
uit
240
kV24
0 kV
Dou
ble
Circ
uit
500
kV50
0 kV
Dou
ble
Circ
uit
P16
95 P
roje
ct A
rea
AE
SO
Pla
nnin
g A
reas
Cur
renc
y D
ate:
201
7-01
-24
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
11
1.2.2.2. Existing Constraints
Existing constraints in the Edmonton 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).
1.2.2.3. AESO Long-Term Transmission Plans
The approved South and West Edmonton Area Transmission Development (SWEATD) will be in
the Study Area.2 The Harry Smith 367S substation, which was approved as a part of SWEATD,
is shown in Figure 1-1. The 240 kV transmission line between the Keephills 320P and the
Petrolia substations is currently designated the 1043L. As Figure 1-1 shows, once the approved
Harry Smith 367S substation is in service, the 240 kV transmission line between the Harry
Smith 367S and the Petrolia substations will be designated the 1139L. The Harry Smith 367S
substation is scheduled to be in-service December 5, 2017.
In addition to the approved SWEATD, the AESO 2015 Long-term Transmission Plan (2015
LTP)3 provides a plan for system developments in the City of Edmonton in the near-term,
medium-term, and long-term. According to the 2015 LTP, the following transmission system
enhancements were identified and were considered to be needed in the near-term (by 2020):
Convert Hardisty substation in east Edmonton to 240/15 kV from 72/15 kV
Add new 240 kV loop from Lambton substation in southeast Edmonton to Hardistysubstation and onto Bellamy substation at Rossdale
Discontinue use of 72 kV lines from Rossdale substation (Bellamy) to Strathconasubstation to Lambton substation
Replace existing 240/72 kV transformers at Clover Bar substation in northeastEdmonton with larger units
Add new 240/72 kV substation near Namao in northeast, cut into 240 kV line betweenCastle Downs substation and Victoria substation on north edge of downtown Edmonton
Add new 72 kV line from new substation to existing Namao substation
Add new 240/72 kV transformer at Castle Downs substation in northeast
Add new 72 kV transmission lines from Castle Downs substation to Kennedalesubstation, and onto Namao substation
Discontinue use of 72 kV lines between Clover Bar and Hardisty substations, andHardisty and Lambton substations
Discontinue use of existing 72 kV lines that connect Clover Bar, Victoria, Namao,Kennedale, and Woodcroft substations
Convert Victoria substation from 240/72/15 kV to 240/15 kV
Add new 240 kV line from Victoria substation to Bellamy substation
Discontinue use of 72 kV lines between Rossdale and Victoria substations
2 The South and West of Edmonton Area Transmission Development Needs Identification Document was
originally approved by the Alberta Utilities Commission on May 5, 2014 in Approval No. U2014-183 and Decision 2014-126. 3 The 2015 LTP document is available on the AESO website.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
12
1.2.3. Studies Performed
The following studies were performed for the pre-Project scenarios:
Power flow
The following studies were performed for the post-Project scenarios:
Power flow
Voltage stability
1.3. Report Overview
The Executive Summary provides a high-level summary of the assessment and its conclusions. Section 1 provides an introduction of the Project. Section 2 describes the criteria, system data,and other study assumptions used in this study. Section 3 presents the methodology used forthe studies. Section 4 presents the pre-Project study results. Section 5 presents the transmission alternatives examined. Section 6 provides the post-Project study results for the alternative that was selected for further study. Section 7 presents any dependencies the Project may have on other AESO plans to expand or enhance the transmission system, if any. Section 8 presents the conclusions and recommendations of this assessment.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
13
2. Criteria, System Data, and Study Assumptions
2.1. Criteria, Standards, and Requirements
2.1.1. Transmission Planning Standards and Reliability Criteria
The Transmission Planning (TPL) Standards, which are included in the Alberta Reliability Standards, and the AESO’s Transmission Planning Criteria – Basis and Assumptions 4 (collectively, the Reliability Criteria) were applied to evaluate system performance under Category A system conditions (i.e., all elements in-service) and following Category B contingencies (i.e., single element outage), prior to and following the studied alternatives. Below is a summary of Category A and Category B system conditions.
Category A, often referred to as the N-0 condition, represents a normal system with no contingencies and all facilities in service. Under this condition, the system must be able to supply all firm load and firm transfers to other areas. All equipment must operate within its applicable rating, voltages must be within their applicable range, and the system must be stable with no cascading outages.
Category B events, often referred to as an N-1 or N-G-1 with the most critical generator out of service, result in the loss of any single specified system element under specified fault conditions with normal clearing. These elements include 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.
For Category A conditions: Voltage range under normal operating condition follows the
AESO Information Document ID# 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 2-1.
4 Filed under a separate cover
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
14
Table 2-1: Post-Contingency Voltage Deviations Guidelines for Low Voltage POD Busses
Parameter and reference point
Time Period
Post-Transient (up to 30 sec)
Post-Auto Control (30 sec to 5 min)
Post-Manual Control (Steady State)
Voltage deviation from steady state at POD low voltage bus
±10% ±7% ±5%
2.1.2. ISO Rules and Information Documents
AESO ID# 2010-007RS was applied to establish pre-contingency voltage profiles in the Study Area. The TCM Rule was followed in setting up the study scenarios and assessing the study results. The Reliability Criteria is the basis for planning the AIES. In addition, due regard was given to the AESO’s Connection Study Requirements Document and the AESO’s Generation and Load Interconnection Standard.
2.2. Study Scenarios
At the time of study, the scheduled ISD for the Project was October 1, 2018. As a result, the studies were performed using 2018 winter peak (WP) and 2019 summer peak (SP) study scenarios. The scheduled ISD has since been revised from October 1, 2018 to October 1, 2019. The shift in the scheduled ISD does not materially impact the results of this connection assessment, and does not change the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report.
Table 2-2 provides a list of the study scenarios. The post-Project scenarios include the DFO-requested Rate DTS contract capacity of 24 MW. This connection assessment will assume a 0.9 lagging power factor for the load associated with the Project.
Table 2-2: List of the Connection Study Scenarios
Scenario Year/Season
Load pre-Project/ post-
Project Project Load
(MW)
Project Generation
(MW)
System Generation Dispatch
Conditions
1 2018 Winter Peak (WP)
pre-Project 0.0 0 Market Dispatch
2 2019
Summer Peak (SP)
pre-Project 0.0 0 Market Dispatch
3 2018 WP post-Project 24.0 0 Market Dispatch
4 2019 SP post-Project 24.0 0 Market Dispatch
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
15
2.3. Load and Generation Assumptions
2.3.1. Load Assumptions
The Study Area load forecast used for this connection study is shown in Table 2-3 and corresponds to the forecasted area load during the forecasted Edmonton Region seasonal peak load, which was based on the AESO 2016 Long-term Outlook (2016 LTO). As part of its planning responsibilities, the AESO updates its corporate forecasts routinely to ensure they reflect the latest economic projects, factors and timing. While the AESO has updated its regional forecasts since the connection studies were performed, the use of the current AESO forecast, the AESO 2017 Long-term Outlook, would not materially alter the connection study results or affect the conclusions and recommendations in this report.
For the studies, when loads are modified to align with the load forecast in the 2016 LTO, the active power to reactive power ratio in the base case scenarios were maintained.
Table 2-3: Forecast Area Load (2016 LTO at Edmonton Region Peak)
Area Name Year/Season Forecast Peak
Load (MW)
Edmonton (Area 60) 2018 WP 2024
2019 SP 2114
Edmonton Region 2018 WP 2367
2019 SP 2428
2.3.2. Generation Assumptions
The key generation dispatch conditions for the study scenarios are described in Table 2-4. The Cloverbar #3 generating unit was identified as the critical generating unit, and was considered to be out-of-service to represent the N-G condition for all studies.
Table 2-4: Key System Generation Dispatch Conditions
Unit Name Unit No.
Bus Number
AESO Planning
Area
Pmax (MW)
2018 WP
Unit Net Generation
* (MW)
2019 SP
Unit Net Generation (MW)
Clover Bar
G1 25516 60 44 0 0
G2 26516 60 100 0 0
G3 27516 60 101 N-G**
N-G
University of Alberta
Cogeneration
G1 25352 60 39 14 2
G2
*Unit Net Generation refers to Gross Generating unit MW output less Unit Service Load.
** “N-G” indicates the critical generating unit that is assumed by the AESO to be offline to test the N-G contingency
condition
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
16
2.3.3. Intertie Flow Assumptions and HVDC Assumptions
The Alberta-BC, 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 results of the studies. Therefore, the AESO planning base case intertie flow assumptions were used for the study scenarios.
The Western Alberta Transmission HVDC Line (WATL) and the Eastern Alberta Transmission HVDC Line (EATL) assumptions were expected to have minimal impact for the results of the studies. Therefore, the AESO planning base case HVDC assumptions were used for the study scenarios.
2.4. System Projects
The approved transmission developments that are a part of the SW Edmonton project are assumed to be in service for the studies. This includes the approved Harry Smith 367S substation and its connection to the existing 240 kV transmission line 1043L, which will be designated the 1139L (between the Harry Smith 367S and the Petrolia substations) after the Harry Smith 367S is connected.
The remaining of the AESO long term plans described in Section 1.2.2.3 were not included in the study scenarios.
2.5. Customer Connection Projects
Customer connection projects within the Study Area that have passed Gate 2 of the AESO
Connection Process as of October 2017 were modelled in the study scenarios based on their
positions in the AESO Connection Queue. Table 2-5 summarizes the customer connection
projects in Edmonton (Area 60) that were included in the studies.
Table 2-5: Summary of Included Customer Projects in Edmonton (Area 60)
Queue Position* Scheduled In-Service Date
AESO Project Name AESO
Project No. Gen (MW)
Load (MW)
32 Feb 1, 2019
Fortis New Anthony Henday Substation P1442 0.0 21.0
37 Feb 1, 2020
CP Genesee Generating Units 4 and 5 P1440 1010.0 50.0
51 Dec 12, 2017
Fortis Cooking Lake 522A Capacity Increase
P1674 0.0 3.7
53 Nov 30, 2019
EPCOR Garneau Area Upgrade – Phase 2
P1649 0.0 0.0
54 Feb 28, 2019
EPCOR Garneau Area Upgrade – Phase 1
P1649 0.0 20.9
56 Dec 21, 2018 EPCOR Strathcona Capacity Increase
P1659 0.0 14.2
*Per the AESO Connection Queue posted in October 2017. The projects in the Study Area, if any, that have queuepositions after the Project (AESO Project P1695) are not listed in this table and were not included in the studyscenarios.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
17
2.6. Facility Ratings and Shunt Elements
The legal owners of transmission facilities (TFOs) in the area provided the facility ratings for the existing transmission lines in the vicinity of the Study Area. The ratings of the key transmission lines are shown in Table 2-6 and the ratings of key transformers are shown in Table 2-7.
Table 2-6: Key Transmission Circuits in the vicinity of the Study Area
Line ID Line Description Voltage Class (kV)
Seasonal Continuous Rating
(MVA)
Short-term Emergency Rating
(MVA)
Summer Winter Summer Winter
1055L Petrolia-Argyll 240 419 517 503 620
1056L Ellerslie 89S-Argyll 240 419 517 503 620
1058L Summerside-Lambton 240 578 711 694 853
1139L* Petrolia-Approved Harry Smith 367S 240 831 831 831 831
1043L Approved Harry Smith 367S-Keephills
320P 240 989 1225 1187 1470
1044L Petrolia-Jasper 240 481 581 577 697
1045L Jasper-Sundance 310P 240 481 581 577 697
930L Poundmaker-Jasper 240 481 581 577 697
1098L Jasper-Poundmaker 240 481 581 577 697
*1139L is currently named the 1043L. It will be named the 1139L after the approved Harry Smith 367S substation isin service.
Table 2-7: Summary of Key Transformer Ratings in the Study Area
Substation Name and Number Transformer ID Transformer Voltages (kV)
Rating (MVA)
Heartland 12S T1 500/240 1200
Ellerslie 89S T1 500/240 1200
Ellerslie 89S T2 500/240 1200
Table 2-8 below provides summary of shunt elements in the Study Area.
Table 2-8: Summary of Shunt Elements in the Study Area
Substation Name and Number*
Voltage Class (kV)
Number of Switched Shunt
Blocks
Total at Nominal
Voltage (MVAr)
East Edmonton 38S 138 2 x 48.91 MVAr 97.82
Leduc 325S 138 1 x 30 MVAr 30.0
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
18
Substation Name and Number*
Voltage Class (kV)
Number of Switched Shunt
Blocks
Total at Nominal
Voltage (MVAr)
Nisku 149S 138 1 x 30 MVAr 30.0
Acheson 305S 138 1 x 24.46 MVAr 24.46
Jasper 240 1 x 105.31 MVAr 105.31
Rossdale 69 2 x 47.76 95.51
Cloverbar 69 1 x 31.57 31.57
Stelco Edmonton 133S
34.5 1 x 16.8 + 1 x 30
MVAr 46.8
2.7. Voltage Profile Assumptions
The AESO ID# 2010-007RS is used to establish the pre-contingency voltage profiles for key area busses prior to commencing any studies. Table 2-1 of the Transmission Planning Criteria – Basis and Assumptions applies for all the busses not included in the ID# 2010-007RS. These voltages will be utilized to set the voltage profile for the study base cases prior to power flow analysis. A list of operating voltages for the key busses in the Study Area is shown in Table 2-9.
Table 2-9: Bus Voltages of Key Substations in the Study Area
Substation Nominal Voltage (kV) Minimum Operating
Limit (kV)
Desired Range
(kV)
Maximum Operating Limit
(kV)
Genesee 330P 500 518 525 – 540 550
138 124 124 – 152 152
Lambton 240 240 245 – 254 255
East Edmonton 38S 240 240 240 – 253 255
138 139 139 – 144 145
Jasper 240 240 245 – 254 255
Petrolia 240 240 245 – 254 255
Clover Bar 240 240 245 – 254 255
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
19
3. Study Methodology
The studies performed in this connection assessment were completed using PTI PSS/E version 33.
3.1. Connection Studies Carried Out
The studies to be carried out for this connection study are identified in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: Summary of Studies Performed
Study Scenario System Conditions Power Flow
Voltage Stability
1 2018 WP pre-Project Category A and Category B X -
2 2019 SP pre-Project Category A and Category B X
3 2018 WP post-Project Category A and Category B X X
4 2019 SP post-Project Category A and Category B X -
3.2. Power Flow Analysis
Pre-Project and post-Project power flow studies were conducted to identify and compare study scenario thermal and voltage criteria violations as per the Reliability Criteria, and to identify any POD low voltage bus deviations that are outside the guidelines, shown in Table 2-1. The purpose of the power flow analysis is to quantify any violations in the Study Area, for both pre-Project and post-Project study scenarios. For the Category B power flow studies, the transformer taps and switched shunt reactive compensation devices such as shunt capacitors and reactors were locked and continuous shunt devices were enabled.
POD low voltage bus deviations were assessed by both the pre-Project and post-Project networks by first locking all tap changers and area capacitors to identify any post-transient voltage deviations above 10%. Second, tap changers were then allowed to adjust, while shunt reactive compensating devices capacitors remained locked; to determine if any voltage deviations above 7% would occur in the area. Third, all taps and shunt reactive compensating devices were adjusted and voltage deviations above 5% would be reported.
3.2.1. Contingencies Studied
The power flow studies included the Category A and all Category B contingencies (240 kV facilities only) within the Study Area.
3.3. Voltage Stability Studies
The objective of the voltage stability studies is to determine the ability of the transmission system to maintain voltage stability at all busses in the system under Category A and B
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
20
conditions. The power-voltage (PV) curve is a representation of voltage change as a result of increased power transfer between two systems. The incremental transfers are reported to the collapse point.
For load connection projects, the load level modelled in post-Project scenarios are the same or higher than in pre-connection scenarios. Therefore, voltage stability studies for pre-Project scenarios would only be performed if the post-Project scenarios show voltage stability criteria violations.
The voltage stability analysis was 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 minimum of 105% of the reference load level for Category A and Category B conditions. For this standard, the reference load level is the maximum established planned load.
Typically, voltage stability analysis is carried out assuming worst case loading scenarios. For the Project’s worst case scenario, load was increased in Edmonton (Area 60) and the corresponding generation was increased in Fort McMurray (Area 25).
3.3.1. Contingencies Studied
The voltage stability studies were performed for the Category A condition and all Category B contingencies (240 kV facilities only) in the Study Area for the 2018 WP post-Project scenario.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
21
4. Results of Pre-Project Studies
4.1. Pre-Project Power Flow Studies
This section provides the results of the pre-Project power flow studies. The pre-Project power
flow diagrams are provided in Attachment A.
4.1.1. Scenario 1 (2018 WP pre-Project)
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.
4.1.2. Scenario 2 (2019 SP pre-Project)
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
22
5. Connection Alternatives
5.1. Overview
The DFO informed the AESO that it intends to request system access service to address
capacity and reliability concerns on its 25 kV distribution system in southeast (SE) Edmonton in
the near future.5 For the sake of transmission system planning efficiency, given the proximity of
the 25 kV distribution system in SW Edmonton to SE Edmonton, six transmission alternatives
were examined that address the current request for system access service, as well as the
DFO’s SE Edmonton capacity and reliability concerns.
The AESO examined these six transmission alternatives in consultation with the DFO and the
legal owners of transmission facilities (TFOs) that own facilities in the area.
5.2. Transmission Alternatives Identified
Alternative 1: Upgrade the existing Petrolia substation and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
Alternative 1 involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Petrolia substation including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, two 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment and connection the new POD to the AIES
The DFO has advised that Alternative 1 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 97 km.
Alternative 2: Upgrade the existing Jasper substation and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
Alternative 2 involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Jasper substation including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, two 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including adding two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment and connecting the new POD to the AIES.
The DFO has advised that Alternative 2 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV
distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 162 km.
5 See the EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. Distribution Deficiency Report (DDR) for Riverview
Service Area, which is attached under a separate cover.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
23
Alternative 3: Upgrade the existing Summerside and Poundmaker substations and a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
Alternative 3 involves the following transmission development:
upgrading the existing Summerside substation including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment;
upgrading the existing Poundmaker substation including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment and connecting it to the AIES.
The DFO has advised that Alternative 3 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 97 km.
Alternative 4: Add a new POD substation in SW Edmonton, to be called the Riverview substation, and upgrades to the existing Summerside substation
Alternative 4 involves the following transmission developments:
adding a new POD substation in SW Edmonton, to be called the Riverview
substation, including two 240/25 kV transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and
eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated equipment;
connecting the proposed Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission
line 1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration, between the approved
Harry Smith 367S substation and the Petrolia substation, by adding two new 240 kV
transmission circuits, each approximately 70 metres in length; and
upgrading the existing Summerside substation, including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment.
The DFO has advised that Alternative 4 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV
distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 72 km.
Alternative 5: Add the proposed Riverview substation and add a new POD substation in SE Edmonton
Alternative 5 involves the following transmission development:
adding the proposed Riverview substation, including two 240/25 kV transformers,
four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and associated
equipment;
connecting the proposed Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission
line 1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration, between the approved
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
24
Harry Smith 367S substation and the Petrolia substation, by adding two new 240 kV
transmission circuits, each approximately 70 metres in length; and
adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton, including two 240/25 kV
transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers and eight 25 kV feeder circuit breakers
and associated equipment and connecting it to the AIES.
The DFO has advised that Alternative 5 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 59 km.
Alternative 6: Upgrade the existing Summerside and the Poundmaker substations
Alternative 6 involves the following transmission developments:
upgrading the existing Summerside substation, including replacing the two existing
240/25 kV transformers with two 240/25 kV transformers of higher capacity and adding a
third 240/25 kV transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and eighteen 25 kV feeder
circuit breakers and associated equipment; and
upgrading the existing Poundmaker substation, including adding one 240/25 kV
transformer, one 240 kV circuit breaker, and four 25 kV feeder circuit breakers and
associated equipment.
The DFO has advised that Alternative 6 would also require the addition of ten new 25 kV distribution circuits, with a total length of approximately 110 km.
5.2.1. Transmission Alternatives Not Selected for Further Examination
Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 were not selected for further study because the TFO advised that
expansion of the Petrolia and Jasper substations is not viable, as explained further below.
The TFO has advised that Alternative 1 is not acceptable from an environmental and a
stakeholder impact perspective. From an environmental perspective, the TFO advised that there
was a spill on the Petrolia substation site in the early 1980s, which the TFO may not be able to
manage if transmission facilities are added to the substation. The TFO has also advised that
expanding the Petrolia substation would have an adverse impact to local residents, specifically
because the expanded substation site would encroach on an existing community park and
baseball diamond. As a result, Alternative 1 was not selected for further study.
Alternative 2 was not selected for further studies because the TFO has advised that there is
insufficient space within and around the Jasper substation to accommodate the addition of the
required transmission facilities. As a result, Alternative 2 was not selected for further study.
Alternative 3 and Alternative 6 were not selected for further study because the total combined
costs of the distribution and transmission developments were estimated to be higher than the
total combined costs of the distribution and transmission developments associated with
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5.6
6 Cost estimates for Alternative 3, Alternative 4, Alternative 5, and Alternative 6 are provided under a
separate cover.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
25
5.2.2. Transmission Alternatives Selected for Further Examination
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 were both considered technically feasible and were selected for
further study. Both Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 involve adding the proposed Riverview
substation to address the DFO’s request for system access service.
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 include different transmission facilities7 to address the capacity
and reliability concerns in SE Edmonton, which the DFO has indicated will be the subject of a
forthcoming request for system access service. Therefore, the selection of the preferred
transmission development to address the DFO’s capacity and reliability concerns in SE
Edmonton will be assessed as a part of a separate project, and is not within the scope of this
study.
For the purpose of responding to the DFO’s current request for system access service,
Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 are equivalent in scope; both alternatives address the current
request for system access service by adding a proposed Riverview substation in SW Edmonton
and connecting it to the existing 240 kV transmission line 1043L (future 1139L) in an in-and-out
configuration. Therefore, only this scope will be examined further in this report.
7 Alternative 4 includes adding a new POD substation in SE Edmonton and Alternative 5 includes
upgrading the existing Summerside substation.
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
26
6. Results of Post-Project Studies
This section provides the results of the post-Project power flow and voltage stability, which includes the proposed Riverview substation with a Rate DTS request of 24 MW.
6.1. Post-Project Power Flow Studies
This section provides the results of the post-Project power flow studies. The post-Project power flow diagrams are provided in Attachment B.
6.1.1. Scenario 3 (2018 WP post-Project)
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.
6.1.2. Scenario 4 (2019 SP post-Project)
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under the Category A condition.
No Reliability Criteria violations were observed under Category B conditions.
6.2. Post-Project Voltage Stability Studies
Voltage stability analysis was performed for the 2018 WP post-Project scenario. The minimum incremental load transfer for the Category B conditions is 5.0% of the reference load or 105.7 MW to meet the voltage stability criteria. The table below summarizes the voltage stability study results for Category A and Category B conditions. The voltage stability diagrams are provided in Attachment C.
The voltage stability margin is met for all studied conditions.
Table 6-1: Voltage Stability Study Results for the 2018 WP post-Project Scenario
Contingency From To Maximum
incremental transfer (MW)
Meets 105% transfer criteria?
Category A 1153 Yes
908L Ellerslie 89S Petrolia 1152 Yes
1164L Riverview Petrolia 1148 Yes
1139L Riverview Harry Smith 367S 1147 Yes
1044L Jasper Petrolia 1152 Yes
1098L Poundmaker Jasper 1148 Yes
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
27
7. Project Dependencies
The Project does not require the completion of any other AESO plans to expand or enhance the
transmission system prior to connection.
28
Connection Engineering Study Report for AUC Application: EPCOR Riverview Substation New POD
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
The connection assessment did not identify any pre-Project or post-Project system performance
issues. The connection assessment indicates that the Project will not adversely impact the
performance of the AIES. No mitigation measures are required as no Reliability Criteria
violations were observed.
It is recommended to proceed with the Project by adding a new POD substation in SW
Edmonton as the preferred option to respond to the DFO’s request for system access service.
This includes: adding a new substation, to be designated the Riverview substation, including
two 240/25 kV LTC transformers, four 240 kV circuit breakers, and eight 25 kV feeder circuit
breakers and associated equipment; and adding two 240 kV circuits, each approximately 70
metres in length, to connect the Riverview substation to the existing 240 kV transmission line
1043L (future 1139L) using an in-and-out configuration between the approved Harry Smith 367S
substation and the existing Petrolia substation.
A minimum rating equal or greater than the rating of the existing 240 kV transmission line 1043L
is recommended for the two new 240 kV circuits.
Transformer Sizing Recommendation
EDTI DFO has advised that it foresees a need for 6 feeders in SW Edmonton in the near term
(within 10 years). EDTI DFO has also advised that provisions need to be made to eventually
enable the connection of 8 feeders in the medium term at the Riverview substation. EDTI TFO
has also advised that because it plans to install a 25 kV switchgear that will be gas-
insulated (GIS), it is not practical to install 6 feeder breakers now and 2 additional feeder
breakers in the future.
Since EDTI’s transformers have an average life of 50 years, EDTI DFO has requested that,
should the Riverview substation be chosen as the preferred alternative to address the Project
need, provisions be made to enable the connection of 8 feeders in the medium term at the
Riverview substation. EDTI DFO foresees that these feeders will eventually be loaded to their
design load rating of 12 MVA each.
EDTI TFO has advised that it sizes transformers based on their ability to serve all substation
load under an N-1 contingency of a transformer. For the proposed Riverview substation, that
would mean that two transformers would be needed. Each transformer should be capable of
serving all 8 feeders, given a diversity factor of 0.78 as per the EDTI DFO input; therefore based on the above information provided by EDTI, the AESO recommends that each transformer at the proposed Riverview substation have a rating of 75 MVA.
Attachment A
Power Flow Diagrams 2018 WP-2019SP Pre-Project
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
TBA
SE C
ASE
FIG
A-1
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W25
0.6
-18.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
-76.2-31.8
-172.838.7
172.8
250.
5-1
8.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
250.
1-1
8.4
512
DO
ME
4
250.
5-1
8.4
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.2
-74.9
76.2
250.
4-1
8.7
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
8-1
9.3
764
1058
JOIN
249.
0-1
9.2
891
904A
L TP
248.
9-1
9.4
250.
1-1
8.5
136
E E
DM
ON
424
9.0
-19.
5
186.3-185.7-13.0
514
CLO
VER
B4
249.
1-1
9.8
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
9.1
-19.
3
89.7-18.817.9
-48.729.2
48.7-30.1
-157.9-4.1
158.03.7
156.1-155.5
-79.818.5
14.5-189.1-15.3
-89.6
248.
9-1
9.5
2.6
519
CAS
TLE
DN
250.
1-2
0.6
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.9
-20.
7
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
7-2
0.1
75.6-9.2
-75.6-38.6
143.222.7
-143.0-23.1
-61.
89.
7
61.8-14.2
249.
4-2
0.4
521
PE
TRO
LIA
250.
6-1
8.6
92H
S_2
40
250.
9-1
6.7
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
7-1
9.5
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.4
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.5
-19.
6
-110.1-28.9 27.7
110.2
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
0-1
6.5
138.338.3
-136.9-42.0
79.8-18.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
11.7
-4.1
185.024.8
-184.5-25.7
-184.4-25.8 25.7
79.8-19.4
-79.818.9
184.5 263.635.5
-263.6-35.4
-143
.467
.0
143.
9-6
9.4
-76.24.1
76.2
-5.0
-56.3-40.8
56.3
39.7
-75.1-172.8
74.9
-374.2-27.3 1 1.
025
374.650.6
-374.2-27.3 1 1.
025
374.650.6
189.6
173.0
39.5-42.5
-39.
540
.1
149.
935
.1
-149.8-35.2
186.
941
.4-1
84.0
-48.
3
143.
457
.8
-141
.4-6
9.5
-451
.9-1
6.0
456.
454
.1
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
7-1
1.5
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.5
122.
7-2
7.3
1
1
-122
.629
.9
-1.9
-24.
81.
9-1
5.3
-1.9
-24.
91.
9-1
5.3
-88.
125
.2
89.6
-59.
7
-88.
025
.5
89.6
-60.
1
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
0-2
0.4
443
BANN
_240
249.
4-2
0.1
9.7
17.5
-9.7
-19.
5
-51.
751
.8-5
.2
13.4
-17.
8
-13.412.1
-5.2
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
1-1
8.4
143.
940
.3-1
43.6
-44.
21.
7
T10.
00.
0
SW -115
.9
259.
6-1
0.8
-258
.913
.2
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
8-1
4.9
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
TEL
LER
SLIE
T1
FIG
A-2
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.6
-19.
351
8AR
GY
LL E
-95.6-34.4
-147.442.0
147.4
249.
5-1
9.3
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
1-1
9.0
512
DO
ME
4
249.
5-1
8.9
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.4
-78.0
95.6
249.
4-1
9.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
247.
9-1
9.8
764
1058
JOIN
248.
0-1
9.7
891
904A
L TP
247.
9-1
9.9
249.
1-1
9.0
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.0
-20.
0
173.3-172.8-11.7
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
2-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.2
-19.
8
66.6-20.919.8
-38.630.3
38.6-31.2
-145.2-2.7
145.32.2
140.0-139.6
-69.719.6
12.7-176.4-13.9
-66.6
247.
9-1
9.9
0.8
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
4-2
0.8
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.2
-21.
0
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
1-2
0.4
81.5-6.9
-81.5-40.6
131.625.7
-131.4-26.2
-22.
912
.9
22.9-18.0
248.
8-2
0.4
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
7-1
9.0
92H
S_2
40
250.
2-1
6.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
1-1
9.8
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.0
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
0.8
-20.
0
-95.4-28.1 26.7
95.5
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
9-1
6.8
138.342.0
-136.8-45.6
69.7-20.0
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.9
-1.3
174.823.5
-174.3-24.6
-174.3-24.8 24.6
69.7-20.5
-69.720.0
174.3 253.534.3
-253.5-34.2
-125
.972
.2
126.
3-7
5.0
-95.61.3
95.7
-2.0
-66.7-46.5
66.7
45.5
-78.4-147.4
78.0
1 1.02
5
-606.9-31.9 1 1.
025
607.693.2
176.8
147.6
6.0-46.6
-6.0
44.1
135.
234
.1
-135.1-34.3
189.
847
.2-1
86.8
-53.
3
154.
165
.5
-151
.8-7
5.3
-490
.7-1
9.0
496.
166
.5
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
7-1
0.5
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
4-1
0.5
59.6
-28.
5
1
1
-59.
529
.4
-12.
1-2
3.7
12.1
-16.
3
-12.
1-2
3.7
12.2
-16.
3
-91.
926
.9
93.5
-60.
6
-91.
927
.2
93.5
-61.
0
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
5-2
0.4
443
BANN
_240
248.
8-1
9.8
-12.
814
.712
.8-1
6.6
-90.
991
.0-6
.3
30.9
-18.
4
-30.912.9
-4.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
8-1
7.7
183.
442
.0-1
82.8
-43.
23.
5
T10.
00.
0
SW -115
.2
295.
2-6
.7-2
94.2
11.7
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
9-1
3.3
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
T90
8L (E
LLER
SLIE
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
A-3
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W25
0.6
-18.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
-48.6-60.3
-200.667.4
200.7
250.
5-1
8.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
250.
0-1
8.4
512
DO
ME
4
250.
3-1
8.3
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.2
-103.5
48.6
250.
4-1
8.7
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
7-1
9.3
764
1058
JOIN
248.
9-1
9.2
891
904A
L TP
248.
7-1
9.4
249.
9-1
8.4
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.8
-19.
5
187.1-186.4-12.2
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
9-1
9.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
9.0
-19.
3
91.1-20.319.4
-49.329.9
49.3-30.8
-158.7-3.3
158.82.9
157.0-156.5
-80.419.1
13.7-189.8-14.5
-91.0
248.
7-1
9.4
1.6
519
CAS
TLE
DN
250.
1-2
0.6
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.9
-20.
8
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
8-2
0.2
75.4-9.0
-75.4-38.8
139.925.6
-139.7-26.0
-64.
112
.4
64.2-16.8
249.
3-2
0.4
521
PE
TRO
LIA
251.
0-1
8.7
92H
S_2
40
251.
1-1
6.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
9-1
9.6
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.5
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.7
-19.
7
-105.6-33.3 32.1
105.7
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
1-1
6.5
139.037.4
-137.5-41.1
80.4-19.6
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
10.9
24.3
185.524.2
-185.1-25.1
-185.0-25.2 25.1
80.4-20.1
-80.419.6
185.1 264.234.9
-264.2-34.8
-137
.060
.5
137.
4-6
3.3
-48.6-24.3
48.6
23.3
-54.2-42.7
54.2
41.6
-103.3-200.7103.5
-372.3-30.3 1 1.
025
372.753.4
-372.3-30.3 1 1.
025
372.753.4
190.4
200.9
145.
439
.5
-145.3-39.6
188.
839
.3-1
85.9
-45.
9
141.
259
.6
-139
.3-7
1.4
-455
.7-1
2.3
460.
351
.1
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
6-1
1.5
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.5
119.
8-2
7.2
1
1
-119
.729
.7
-1.4
-25.
01.
4-1
5.2
-1.4
-25.
01.
5-1
5.2
-88.
325
.4
89.9
-59.
8
-88.
325
.7
89.8
-60.
2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
0-2
0.4
443
BANN
_240
249.
3-2
0.1
9.4
17.5
-9.4
-19.
4
-52.
252
.2-5
.4
16.5
-20.
4
-16.514.8
-4.2
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
1-1
8.4
144.
440
.2-1
44.1
-44.
11.
9
T10.
00.
0
SW -116
.1
265.
0-1
6.1
-264
.318
.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
7-1
4.9
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
T11
39L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H T
O P
ETR
OLI
A)FI
G A
-4TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.9
-20.
251
8AR
GY
LL E
4.0-35.4
-246.442.7
246.5
249.
9-2
0.2
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
6-1
9.6
512
DO
ME
4
250.
0-1
9.5
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.9
-78.4
-4.0
249.
9-2
0.0
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
4-2
0.5
764
1058
JOIN
248.
6-2
0.4
891
904A
L TP
248.
4-2
0.6
249.
6-1
9.6
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.5
-20.
7
181.5-180.9-12.8
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
6-2
0.9
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.7
-20.
5
82.0-19.218.3
-44.929.5
44.9-30.3
-153.2-3.8
153.23.4
150.4-149.8
-76.018.7
14.1-184.3-15.0
-82.0
248.
4-2
0.6
2.2
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
6-2
1.6
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.4
-21.
8
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
3-2
1.1
82.2-8.0
-82.1-39.6
147.123.1
-146.9-23.4
-48.
510
.3
48.5-15.1
249.
0-2
1.4
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
9-2
0.2
92H
S_2
40
252.
1-1
3.5
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
2-2
0.7
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.0
-20.
8
-70.9-30.4 28.8
70.9
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
0-1
7.1
152.639.9
-150.9-41.6
76.0-19.1
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
11.3
-0.4
181.124.6
-180.7-25.5
-180.6-25.7 25.5
76.0-19.6
-76.019.1
180.7 259.835.3
-259.8-35.2
-83.
264
.1
83.4
-68.
0
4.00.4
-4.0
-1.5
-74.4-40.2
74.5
39.2
-77.8-246.5
78.4
-416.2-29.5 1 1.
025
416.658.4
-416.2-29.5 1 1.
025
416.658.4
184.8
246.8
157.9-49.3
-157
.748
.3
110.
636
.0
-110.6-36.3
208.
543
.7-2
05.0
-46.
9
162.
059
.9
-159
.6-6
9.0
-303
.0-2
5.3
305.
135
.5
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.2
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
4-1
0.6
216.
0-2
2.5
1
1
-215
.829
.9
-27.
6-2
1.0
27.7
-18.
5
-27.
7-2
1.0
27.8
-18.
6
-99.
328
.9
101.
2-6
1.3
-99.
329
.2
101.
2-6
1.7
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
7-2
1.4
443
BANN
_240
249.
0-2
1.0
3.6
16.3
-3.6
-18.
2
-57.
557
.5-5
.2
16.1
-16.
8
-16.111.1
-5.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
8-1
9.3
149.
740
.7-1
49.4
-44.
21.
8
T10.
00.
0
SW -115
.4
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
2-1
5.7
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
T10
44L
(JAS
PER
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
A-5
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.9
-18.
551
8AR
GY
LL E
-128.4-9.1
-142.420.6
142.5
249.
9-1
8.6
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
6-1
8.2
512
DO
ME
4
250.
0-1
8.2
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.7
-56.8
128.5
249.
8-1
8.5
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
4-1
9.2
764
1058
JOIN
248.
6-1
9.1
891
904A
L TP
248.
4-1
9.3
249.
6-1
8.3
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.5
-19.
4
196.3-195.6-9.3
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
7-1
9.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.7
-19.
2
107.5-25.524.8
-56.432.2
56.4-33.1
-167.7-0.4
167.80.1
168.4-167.7
-87.521.4
11.2-198.9-11.7
-107.4
248.
4-1
9.3
-1.7
519
CAS
TLE
DN
250.
8-2
1.4
520
VIC
TOR
IA25
0.6
-21.
5
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
251.
7-2
1.2
53.7-2.3
-53.7-45.8
75.447.7
-75.4-48.8
-91.
722
.7
91.8-26.3
249.
4-2
0.7
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
8-1
8.2
92H
S_2
40
250.
5-1
6.4
505
JAS
PE
R 4
253.
4-2
1.1
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
3.1
-21.
2
-7.0-72.8 71.1
7.0
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
2-1
7.1
153.430.1
-151.7-32.1
87.5-21.8
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
8.3
-26.5
192.722.2
-192.2-22.9
-192.1-23.0 22.9
87.5-22.3
-87.521.8
192.2 271.432.9
-271.4-32.9
-128.526.5
128.
6-2
7.0
-29.4-51.2
29.5
50.0
-57.2-142.5
56.8
-365.4-36.1 1 1.
025
365.858.5
-365.4-36.1 1 1.
025
365.858.5
199.5
142.6
-26.2-9.8
26.2
7.2
46.7
78.2
-46.7-78.6
228.
321
.6-2
24.2
-22.
2
116.
165
.8
-114
.6-7
9.8
-442
.0-2
4.6
446.
360
.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
6-1
1.4
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.6
121.
8-2
6.9
1
1
-121
.629
.5
-6.3
-24.
46.
3-1
5.7
-6.3
-24.
46.
3-1
5.7
-96.
927
.9
98.6
-60.
8
-96.
828
.2
98.6
-61.
2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
1-2
0.7
443
BANN
_240
249.
4-2
0.2
3.8
19.4
-3.8
-21.
4
-60.
160
.2-7
.4
59.2
-35.
9
-59.131.0
-0.3
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
1-1
8.5
152.
438
.7-1
52.0
-42.
14.
0
T10.
00.
0
SW -117
.4
233.
72.
3-2
33.1
-1.5
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
5-1
4.8
2018
WP-
PREP
RO
JEC
T10
43L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H K
EEPH
ILLS
)FI
G A
-6TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
8.8
-21.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
44.4-28.6
-290.634.9
290.8
248.
7-2
1.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
6-2
1.2
512
DO
ME
4
249.
1-2
1.1
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
7.4
-70.1
-44.4
248.
8-2
1.6
513
LAM
BTO
N4
247.
4-2
2.1
764
1058
JOIN
247.
6-2
1.9
891
904A
L TP
247.
4-2
2.1
248.
6-2
1.2
136
E E
DM
ON
424
7.5
-22.
2
183.4-182.8-11.2
514
CLO
VER
B4
247.
7-2
2.5
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
7.7
-22.
1
84.0-21.320.4
-46.430.8
46.4-31.7
-155.1-2.2
155.11.8
152.3-151.8
-77.520.0
12.7-186.2-13.5
-84.0
247.
4-2
2.2
0.6
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
7-2
3.5
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.4
-23.
6
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
249.
3-2
3.0
78.3-6.3
-78.3-40.9
124.722.1
-124.6-22.7
-52.
415
.1
52.4-19.7
248.
2-2
3.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
6-2
1.9
92H
S_2
40
247.
4-2
2.7
505
JAS
PE
R 4
250.
1-2
2.5
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-6
.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
9.9
-22.
7
-88.1-25.4 24.0
88.2
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
6-1
9.0
155.444.8
-153.6-45.8
77.5-20.4
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.8
-6.8
182.623.5
-182.2-24.3
-182.1-24.5 24.3
77.5-20.9
-77.520.4
182.2 261.334.2
-261.3-34.2
-90.
074
.0
90.2
-77.
5
44.46.8
-44.
4-7
.9
-74.6-48.2
74.7
47.2
-68.8-290.8
70.1
-483.7-34.4 1 1.
025
484.273.6
-483.7-34.4 1 1.
025
484.273.6
186.7
291.2
222.3-38.6
-221
.739
.0
127.
931
.4
-127.9-31.6
219.
452
.7-2
15.4
-53.
4
162.
368
.5
-159
.8-7
7.0
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
1-1
0.2
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.8
385.
4-6
.4
1
1
-385
.029
.3
-84.
3-1
1.1
85.2
-23.
2
-84.
5-1
1.0
85.5
-23.
3
-126
.138
.5
129.
1-6
5.0
-126
.139
.0
129.
1-6
5.5
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
0-2
3.0
443
BANN
_240
248.
3-2
2.5
-4.3
11.9
4.3
-13.
9
-74.
174
.2-5
.6
34.6
-14.
2
-34.68.8
-3.2
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
2-2
0.6
166.
541
.5-1
66.0
-43.
92.
5
T10.
00.
0
SW -114
.4
-97.
4-2
9.9
97.6
25.1
258
ELLE
RSLI
536.
0-1
6.6
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
TBA
SE C
ASE
FIG
A-7
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:30
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.9
-19.
251
8AR
GY
LL E
-97.7-54.5
-198.2-41.4
198.2
247.
7-1
9.3
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
2-1
8.9
512
DO
ME
4
248.
5-1
8.7
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.3
6.0
97.7
247.
9-1
9.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
3-1
9.8
764
1058
JOIN
246.
5-1
9.7
891
904A
L TP
246.
2-1
9.9
248.
1-1
8.9
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.3
-20.
0
200.6-199.8-37.4
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
6-2
0.3
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.5
-19.
8
84.0-36.235.4
-55.222.9
55.2-23.7
-170.5-24.9
170.624.6
163.9-163.3
-87.98.1
40.2-203.3-40.2
-84.0
246.
2-2
0.0
14.9
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
2-2
1.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.2
-21.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
5-2
0.4
93.0-35.6
-93.0-11.4
168.9-2.4
-168.72.6
-67.
332
.0
67.4-36.1
247.
9-2
1.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
2-1
9.0
92H
S_2
40
249.
0-1
7.0
505
JAS
PE
R 4
249.
1-1
9.8
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.9
-19.
9
-110.5-8.7 7.6
110.6
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
5-1
5.9
170.949.4
-168.7-47.7
87.9-8.5
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
36.9
19.4
198.249.9
-197.7-50.1
-197.6-50.1 50.1
87.9-9.0
-87.98.5
197.7 271.666.6
-271.6-66.5
-123
.554
.7
123.
8-5
7.7
-97.7-19.4
97.7
18.7
-95.1-29.2
95.1
28.3
5.9-198.2
-6.0
-368.3-118.3 1 1.
01
368.7143.5
-368.3-118.3 1 1.
01
368.7143.5
203.9
198.4
35.5-12.7
-35.
510
.2
155.
721
.0
-155.6-21.0
232.
860
.9-2
28.3
-58.
6
192.
070
.6
-188
.7-7
4.5
-450
.7-4
6.6
455.
385
.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.9
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.0
130.
0-2
2.0
1
1
-129
.924
.9
15.2
-29.
9-1
5.1
-10.
0
15.2
-29.
9-1
5.2
-9.9
-80.
725
.7
82.0
-61.
1
-80.
726
.0
82.0
-61.
5
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
1-2
1.0
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.7
-5.8
-17.
45.
815
.5
-48.
148
.1-4
.5
0.2
-9.6
-0.23.9
-16.9
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
6-1
9.1
138.
740
.0-1
38.3
-44.
01.
0
T10.
00.
0
SW -113
.5
262.
43.
6-2
61.7
-0.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
7-1
5.4
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
TEL
LER
SLIE
T1
FIG
A-8
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
5.8
-19.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
-116.6-64.0
-173.2-29.9
173.3
245.
7-1
9.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
246.
0-1
9.4
512
DO
ME
4
246.
4-1
9.3
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.7
-5.0
116.6
245.
8-1
9.7
513
LAM
BTO
N4
244.
2-2
0.4
764
1058
JOIN
244.
4-2
0.2
891
904A
L TP
244.
2-2
0.4
245.
9-1
9.5
136
E E
DM
ON
424
4.3
-20.
6
187.6-186.9-32.5
514
CLO
VER
B4
244.
7-2
0.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
4.5
-20.
4
61.6-43.742.8
-45.026.9
45.0-27.7
-157.8-20.0
157.919.7
148.0-147.5
-77.712.1
34.9-190.5-35.4
-61.6
244.
2-2
0.5
9.0
519
CAS
TLE
DN
246.
9-2
1.3
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
6.9
-21.
5
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
247.
3-2
0.8
99.1-29.6
-99.1-16.9
157.71.4
-157.5-1.4
-29.
246
.0
29.2-50.4
246.
7-2
1.1
521
PE
TRO
LIA
246.
3-1
9.5
92H
S_2
40
247.
7-1
7.2
505
JAS
PE
R 4
247.
7-2
0.2
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.4
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
7.5
-20.
3
-95.9-4.1 2.7
95.9
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
2-1
6.3
171.057.3
-168.7-55.1
77.7-12.5
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
31.6
29.5
188.045.9
-187.5-46.3
-187.4-46.4 46.3
77.7-13.0
-77.712.5
187.5 261.362.8
-261.3-62.7
-105
.969
.0
106.
2-7
2.1
-116.6-29.5
116.
729
.1
-105.1-43.8
105.
143
.0
-5.2-173.3
5.0
1 1.01
-596.5-161.5 1 1.
01
597.2226.5
191.1
173.4
2.6-28.3
-2.6
25.8
141.
016
.0
-141.0-16.2
236.
073
.7-2
31.2
-69.
8
202.
688
.6
-198
.7-8
9.4
-488
.5-5
9.9
494.
010
8.9
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.0
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
8-1
0.1
68.1
-24.
5
1
1
-68.
025
.5
5.1
-29.
4-5
.0-1
0.6
5.1
-29.
4-5
.1-1
0.6
-84.
927
.9
86.4
-62.
5
-84.
928
.2
86.3
-62.
8
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
247.
2-2
1.0
443
BANN
_240
247.
0-2
0.5
-27.
8-2
7.1
27.8
25.2
-87.
087
.1-0
.0
17.5
-7.3
-17.51.7
-11.6
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
2-1
8.4
177.
847
.3-1
77.3
-48.
6-2
.8
T10.
00.
0
SW -112
.2
296.
918
.1-2
96.0
-12.
5
258
ELLE
RSLI
534.
7-1
3.8
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
T90
8L (E
LLER
SLIE
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
A-9
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.8
-19.
351
8AR
GY
LL E
-72.6-62.3
-223.4-33.5
223.5
247.
7-1
9.3
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
1-1
8.8
512
DO
ME
4
248.
4-1
8.7
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.4
-1.8
72.6
247.
8-1
9.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
2-1
9.8
764
1058
JOIN
246.
5-1
9.7
891
904A
L TP
246.
2-1
9.9
248.
1-1
8.8
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.2
-20.
0
201.3-200.5-37.1
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
5-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.5
-19.
8
85.3-36.635.8
-55.823.1
55.8-23.9
-171.2-24.7
171.324.4
164.8-164.2
-88.48.3
39.9-204.0-40.0
-85.2
246.
2-1
9.9
14.7
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
2-2
1.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.2
-21.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
5-2
0.5
92.9-35.5
-92.8-11.5
165.9-1.7
-165.71.8
-69.
532
.9
69.6-36.9
247.
8-2
1.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
2-1
9.1
92H
S_2
40
249.
0-1
7.1
505
JAS
PE
R 4
249.
1-1
9.8
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
9.0
-20.
0
-106.3-9.8 8.6
106.4
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
5-1
6.0
171.549.3
-169.2-47.6
88.4-8.7
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
36.6
27.2
198.849.7
-198.2-49.9
-198.1-49.9 49.9
88.5-9.2
-88.48.7
198.2 272.166.4
-272.1-66.4
-117
.653
.2
117.
9-5
6.4
-72.6-27.2
72.7
26.3
-93.2-30.2
93.2
29.3
-1.5-223.5
1.8
-366.8-119.4 1 1.
01
367.2144.4
-366.8-119.4 1 1.
01
367.2144.4
204.6
223.7
151.
521
.9
-151.5-22.0
234.
660
.7-2
30.0
-58.
0
190.
071
.3
-186
.7-7
5.5
-453
.7-4
6.1
458.
485
.8
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.9
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.0
127.
7-2
2.1
1
1
-127
.624
.8
15.6
-29.
9-1
5.5
-9.9
15.6
-30.
0-1
5.6
-9.9
-81.
025
.8
82.3
-61.
1
-80.
926
.1
82.3
-61.
5
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
1-2
1.0
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.7
-6.0
-17.
66.
015
.6
-48.
548
.5-4
.5
3.0
-10.
2
-3.04.5
-16.6
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
6-1
9.0
139.
140
.0-1
38.7
-44.
01.
0
T10.
00.
0
SW -113
.5
267.
02.
7-2
66.2 0.5
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
7-1
5.4
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
T11
39L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H T
O P
ETR
OLI
A)FI
G A
-10
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.0
-20.
751
8AR
GY
LL E
-16.7-53.7
-272.3-41.4
272.5
246.
9-2
0.7
128
ELL
ER
SLI
247.
5-2
0.1
512
DO
ME
4
247.
8-1
9.9
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.1
6.6
16.7
247.
1-2
0.5
513
LAM
BTO
N4
245.
6-2
1.1
764
1058
JOIN
245.
9-2
0.9
891
904A
L TP
245.
6-2
1.1
247.
4-2
0.1
136
E E
DM
ON
424
5.6
-21.
2
195.6-194.9-36.6
514
CLO
VER
B4
245.
9-2
1.5
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
5.9
-21.
1
76.4-37.236.4
-51.323.5
51.3-24.3
-165.7-24.2
165.823.9
158.1-157.5
-84.08.7
39.3-198.4-39.5
-76.4
245.
6-2
1.2
14.0
519
CAS
TLE
DN
247.
6-2
2.1
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
7.6
-22.
3
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
0-2
1.5
99.9-33.4
-99.9-13.3
173.1-1.8
-172.92.1
-54.
034
.0
54.1-38.4
247.
4-2
2.1
521
PE
TRO
LIA
247.
2-2
0.6
92H
S_2
40
250.
8-1
3.9
505
JAS
PE
R 4
248.
4-2
1.1
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.7
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.3
-21.
2
-70.9-8.0 6.4
70.9
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
4-1
6.6
185.452.5
-182.8-48.2
84.0-9.1
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
36.0
18.8
194.349.2
-193.8-49.5
-193.7-49.6 49.5
84.0-9.6
-84.09.1
193.8 267.766.0
-267.7-65.9
-62.
755
.0
62.8
-59.
2
-16.7-18.8
16.7
17.7
-113.3-29.7
113.
428
.9
7.5-272.5
-6.6
-410.4-123.2 1 1.
01
410.9154.2
-410.4-123.2 1 1.
01
410.9154.2
199.0
272.8
155.4-13.0
-155
.111
.8
116.
019
.6
-116.0-19.8
254.
865
.6-2
49.4
-58.
4
210.
974
.7
-206
.9-7
5.2
-301
.8-4
5.9
303.
856
.5
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
3-1
1.7
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
9-1
0.2
223.
6-1
6.8
1
1
-223
.424
.7
-10.
5-2
6.4
10.5
-13.
5
-10.
6-2
6.5
10.6
-13.
5
-92.
129
.4
93.8
-62.
8
-92.
129
.7
93.8
-63.
2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
247.
7-2
2.0
443
BANN
_240
247.
4-2
1.7
-11.
9-2
0.0
11.9
18.1
-53.
953
.9-4
.2
2.9
-7.8
-2.92.1
-16.2
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
2-2
0.0
144.
540
.7-1
44.1
-44.
40.
8
T10.
00.
0
SW -112
.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
0-1
6.3
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
T10
44L
(JAS
PER
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
A-1
1TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.3
-19.
051
8AR
GY
LL E
-142.6-35.6
-172.3-56.3
172.4
247.
2-1
9.0
128
ELL
ER
SLI
247.
7-1
8.7
512
DO
ME
4
248.
1-1
8.6
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.8
21.0
142.7
247.
4-1
8.9
513
LAM
BTO
N4
245.
9-1
9.7
764
1058
JOIN
246.
1-1
9.5
891
904A
L TP
245.
8-1
9.8
247.
7-1
8.7
136
E E
DM
ON
424
5.9
-19.
9
209.1-208.3-34.3
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
2-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.2
-19.
7
99.1-41.640.9
-61.825.4
61.8-26.2
-178.9-21.9
179.021.7
174.4-173.7
-94.510.5
37.5-211.6-37.3
-99.0
245.
8-1
9.8
11.4
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
8-2
1.7
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.8
-21.
8
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
249.
3-2
1.3
74.0-30.2
-73.9-17.1
110.817.4
-110.7-18.2
-92.
742
.8
92.9-46.0
247.
9-2
1.2
521
PE
TRO
LIA
247.
6-1
8.6
92H
S_2
40
248.
7-1
6.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
250.
5-2
1.2
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.7
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
0.2
-21.
2
-21.8-44.4 42.5
21.8
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
6-1
6.5
183.842.9
-181.3-39.5
94.5-10.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
34.1
0.7
204.947.7
-204.3-47.8
-204.2-47.8 47.8
94.5-11.4
-94.510.9
204.3 278.264.5
-278.2-64.5
-142.7-0.7
142.
80.
5
-72.0-38.5
72.0
37.5
20.7-172.4-21.0
-360.7-125.3 1 1.
01
361.1149.9
-360.7-125.3 1 1.
01
361.1149.9
212.3
172.5
-21.014.6
21.0
-17.
1
66.9
55.5
-66.9-55.9
268.
745
.5-2
63.0
-36.
6
168.
476
.7
-165
.6-8
3.7
-442
.2-5
3.6
446.
791
.1
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
4-1
1.8
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.1
129.
1-2
1.7
1
1
-129
.024
.6
11.4
-29.
5-1
1.4
-10.
4
11.4
-29.
6-1
1.4
-10.
4
-88.
328
.0
89.9
-62.
1
-88.
328
.2
89.8
-62.
4
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
2-2
1.2
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.8
-10.
8-1
5.9
10.8
13.9
-55.
255
.3-6
.3
39.2
-24.
6
-39.119.3
-12.9
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
6-1
9.1
145.
938
.6-1
45.5
-42.
32.
9
T10.
00.
0
SW -114
.7
240.
014
.4-2
39.4
-13.
0
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
4-1
5.3
2019
SP-P
REP
RO
JEC
T10
43L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H K
EEPH
ILLS
)FI
G A
-12
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
5.5
-22.
451
8AR
GY
LL E
21.7-43.6
-314.8-52.7
315.0
245.
4-2
2.4
128
ELL
ER
SLI
246.
2-2
1.7
512
DO
ME
4
246.
6-2
1.6
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
6.8
18.6
-21.7
245.
7-2
2.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
244.
3-2
2.7
764
1058
JOIN
244.
6-2
2.6
891
904A
L TP
244.
3-2
2.8
246.
1-2
1.8
136
E E
DM
ON
424
4.4
-22.
9
197.7-196.9-34.6
514
CLO
VER
B4
244.
7-2
3.1
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
4.6
-22.
7
78.6-39.939.0
-52.925.3
52.9-26.1
-167.7-22.1
167.821.8
160.3-159.6
-85.610.4
37.4-200.4-37.5
-78.6
244.
3-2
2.8
11.9
519
CAS
TLE
DN
246.
3-2
4.1
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
6.3
-24.
3
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
246.
6-2
3.5
95.8-30.7
-95.8-15.5
150.6-3.8
-150.43.7
-58.
340
.2
58.4-44.3
246.
4-2
3.8
521
PE
TRO
LIA
245.
5-2
2.5
92H
S_2
40
244.
0-2
3.2
505
JAS
PE
R 4
247.
0-2
3.0
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-7
.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
6.9
-23.
1
-89.0-3.3 1.8
89.0
133
WAB
AMU
N4
256.
9-1
8.6
187.958.8
-185.2-53.5
85.6-10.8
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
34.1
9.1
195.947.8
-195.4-48.0
-195.3-48.1 48.0
85.6-11.3
-85.610.8
195.4 269.364.7
-269.3-64.6
-70.
866
.5
71.0
-70.
4
21.7-9.1
-21.
78.
0
-113.2-39.9
113.
339
.1
20.2-315.0-18.6
-477.5-131.7 1 1.
01
478.0173.4
-477.5-131.7 1 1.
01
478.0173.4
201.1
315.4
217.03.0
-216
.4-2
.7
134.
115
.1
-134.1-15.3
265.
477
.8-2
59.5
-67.
4
210.
985
.9
-206
.8-8
5.5
421
KEEP
HIL5
255.
9-1
0.7
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
5-1
0.4
392.
4-0
.1
1
1
-392
.023
.8
-67.
1-1
7.4
67.7
-19.
0
-67.
4-1
7.4
68.0
-19.
0
-119
.339
.0
121.
9-6
6.7
-119
.239
.4
121.
9-6
7.2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
246.
9-2
3.7
443
BANN
_240
246.
5-2
3.3
-19.
6-2
6.8
19.6
24.9
-70.
470
.5-3
.9
21.3
-3.3
-21.3-2.2
-14.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
249.
4-2
1.4
161.
242
.2-1
60.7
-44.
70.
7
T10.
00.
0
SW -111
.5
-91.
4-3
9.9
91.6
35.3
258
ELLE
RSLI
531.
5-1
7.2
Attachment B
Power Flow Diagrams 2018 WP-2019SP Post-Project
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
TBA
SE C
ASE
FIG
B-1
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W25
0.4
-18.
751
8AR
GY
LL E
-72.1-31.6
-181.130.1
181.1
250.
3-1
8.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
250.
0-1
8.4
512
DO
ME
4
250.
4-1
8.3
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.1
-66.2
72.2
250.
3-1
8.6
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
8-1
9.2
764
1058
JOIN
249.
0-1
9.1
891
904A
L TP
248.
8-1
9.3
250.
0-1
8.4
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.9
-19.
4
183.0-182.4-11.2
514
CLO
VER
B4
249.
0-1
9.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
9.1
-19.
2
88.5-19.018.2
-48.229.2
48.2-30.0
-155.1-2.5
155.22.1
153.4-152.9
-78.718.7
12.5-185.7-13.4
-88.5
248.
8-1
9.4
1.2
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
9-2
0.5
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.7
-20.
7
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
6-2
0.0
78.8-4.7
-78.8-43.0
143.525.0
-143.3-25.3
-61.
69.
3
61.6-13.9
249.
3-2
0.3
521
PE
TRO
LIA
250.
4-1
8.5
92H
S_2
40
250.
8-1
6.6
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
6-1
9.4
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.4
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.4
-19.
6
-108.8-29.1 27.9
108.9
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
0-1
6.4
138.038.9
-136.5-42.7
78.7-19.1
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.7
-4.2
181.522.7
-181.0-23.6
-180.9-23.8 23.6
78.7-19.7
-78.719.1
181.0 258.632.9
-258.6-32.9
-138
.069
.6
138.
4-7
2.2
-72.24.2
72.2
-5.2
-57.9-42.2
57.9
41.1
-66.4-181.1
66.2
-374.2-28.7 1 1.
025
374.652.1
-374.2-28.7 1 1.
025
374.652.1
186.2
181.3
48.3-37.1
-48.
334
.6
147.
835
.2
-147.8-35.3
186.
842
.4-1
83.9
-49.
1
143.
358
.5
-141
.3-7
0.2
-453
.2-1
8.7
457.
757
.1
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
7-1
1.4
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.4
121.
6-2
7.2
1
1
-121
.529
.8
-1.8
-24.
91.
8-1
5.3
-1.8
-24.
91.
8-1
5.3
-87.
825
.2
89.3
-59.
7
-87.
825
.5
89.3
-60.
1
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
0-2
0.3
443
BANN
_240
249.
3-2
0.0
9.4
17.1
-9.4
-19.
1
-51.
351
.3-5
.1
14.7
-16.
0
-14.710.3
-3.9
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
1-1
8.3
143.
540
.4-1
43.1
-44.
31.
6
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
250.
4-1
8.1
-239
.122
.123
9.3
-21.
826
3.9
-6.7
-263
.4 8.6
SW -115
.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
7-1
4.9
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.1
-20.
239
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.1
-20.
1
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
TEL
LER
SLIE
T1
FIG
B-2
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.4
-19.
251
8AR
GY
LL E
-91.7-34.3
-156.133.4
156.2
249.
3-1
9.2
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
0-1
8.9
512
DO
ME
4
249.
4-1
8.8
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.4
-69.3
91.7
249.
3-1
9.1
513
LAM
BTO
N4
247.
8-1
9.7
764
1058
JOIN
248.
0-1
9.6
891
904A
L TP
247.
9-1
9.8
249.
0-1
8.9
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.0
-19.
9
169.8-169.3-9.8
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
1-2
0.1
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.1
-19.
7
65.6-21.120.1
-38.430.2
38.4-31.1
-142.3-1.1
142.40.6
137.3-136.9
-68.919.7
10.7-172.8-11.9
-65.6
247.
9-1
9.8
-0.7
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
3-2
0.7
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.0
-20.
9
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
0-2
0.3
85.0-2.3
-84.9-45.1
132.128.0
-131.9-28.4
-22.
712
.7
22.7-17.8
248.
7-2
0.3
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
5-1
9.0
92H
S_2
40
250.
0-1
6.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
0-1
9.7
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.0
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
0.7
-19.
9
-94.1-28.3 26.9
94.2
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
9-1
6.7
138.042.8
-136.5-46.3
68.9-20.2
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
7.9
-1.3
170.921.2
-170.5-22.4
-170.5-22.6 22.4
68.9-20.7
-68.920.2
170.5 248.131.6
-248.1-31.5
-120
.575
.0
120.
9-7
7.9
-91.71.3
91.8
-2.1
-68.2-48.0
68.2
47.0
-69.7-156.2
69.3
1 1.02
5
-606.8-34.0 1 1.
025
607.695.3
173.3
156.3
15.0-41.3
-15.
038
.7
133.
234
.1
-133.1-34.3
189.
848
.2-1
86.8
-54.
2
154.
066
.4
-151
.7-7
6.1
-492
.0-2
1.8
497.
469
.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
7-1
0.5
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
4-1
0.5
58.5
-28.
5
1
1
-58.
429
.3
-12.
0-2
3.8
12.0
-16.
3
-12.
1-2
3.8
12.1
-16.
3
-91.
726
.8
93.3
-60.
6
-91.
627
.1
93.3
-61.
0
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
5-2
0.3
443
BANN
_240
248.
8-1
9.7
-13.
214
.213
.2-1
6.1
-90.
590
.5-6
.1
32.3
-16.
5
-32.311.0
-2.6
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
7-1
7.6
182.
942
.2-1
82.3
-43.
43.
2
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
249.
6-1
8.4
-274
.520
.527
4.7
-19.
529
9.5
-2.4
-298
.7 6.4
SW -115
.1
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
8-1
3.2
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.0
-20.
639
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.0
-20.
5
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
T90
8L (E
LLER
SLIE
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
B-3
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W25
0.4
-18.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
-38.2-56.4
-214.954.8
215.0
250.
3-1
8.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
9-1
8.3
512
DO
ME
4
250.
3-1
8.2
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.1
-90.8
38.2
250.
2-1
8.7
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
7-1
9.2
764
1058
JOIN
248.
9-1
9.1
891
904A
L TP
248.
7-1
9.3
249.
9-1
8.3
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.8
-19.
4
184.0-183.4-10.5
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
9-1
9.6
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
9.0
-19.
2
90.2-20.219.4
-48.629.6
48.6-30.4
-156.2-1.8
156.21.4
154.7-154.1
-79.119.1
11.8-186.7-12.7
-90.1
248.
7-1
9.3
0.3
519
CAS
TLE
DN
250.
0-2
0.5
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.7
-20.
7
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
7-2
0.1
78.4-4.4
-78.4-43.4
139.427.5
-139.2-27.9
-64.
411
.6
64.5-16.1
249.
3-2
0.3
521
PE
TRO
LIA
250.
7-1
8.7
92H
S_2
40
250.
9-1
6.7
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
8-1
9.5
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.4
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.5
-19.
6
-103.2-32.9 31.7
103.3
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
0-1
6.5
138.838.2
-137.3-41.9
79.1-19.5
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.0
20.4
182.422.0
-182.0-22.9
-181.9-23.1 22.9
79.1-20.0
-79.119.5
182.0 259.632.3
-259.6-32.2
-130
.164
.0
130.
4-6
6.9
-38.2-20.4
38.2
19.4
-55.3-44.0
55.3
42.9
-90.5-215.0
90.8
-372.0-31.3 1 1.
025
372.454.4
-372.0-31.3 1 1.
025
372.454.4
187.2
215.3
142.
238
.9
-142.2-39.0
189.
240
.6-1
86.3
-47.
1
140.
660
.2
-138
.7-7
2.0
-457
.5-1
5.6
462.
255
.0
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
6-1
1.4
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.4
118.
3-2
7.2
1
1
-118
.229
.7
-1.3
-25.
01.
3-1
5.2
-1.3
-25.
01.
3-1
5.2
-88.
125
.3
89.6
-59.
8
-88.
125
.6
89.6
-60.
1
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
0-2
0.3
443
BANN
_240
249.
3-1
9.9
9.1
17.0
-9.0
-19.
0
-51.
851
.8-5
.2
18.5
-18.
2
-18.412.6
-3.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
1-1
8.3
144.
040
.3-1
43.7
-44.
21.
7
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
250.
6-1
8.2
-245
.526
.924
5.7
-26.
527
0.3
-11.
1-2
69.7
13.4
SW -115
.9
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
6-1
4.8
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.1
-20.
339
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.1
-20.
2
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
T11
39L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H T
O R
IVER
VIEW
)FI
G B
-4TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.7
-20.
151
8AR
GY
LL E
9.4-34.3
-255.633.3
255.8
249.
7-2
0.1
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
5-1
9.6
512
DO
ME
4
249.
9-1
9.4
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.8
-69.0
-9.4
249.
7-2
0.0
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
3-2
0.4
764
1058
JOIN
248.
5-2
0.3
891
904A
L TP
248.
3-2
0.5
249.
5-1
9.6
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.4
-20.
6
178.1-177.5-10.9
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
5-2
0.8
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.6
-20.
4
80.7-19.618.7
-44.029.5
44.0-30.4
-150.4-2.2
150.41.8
147.7-147.1
-74.519.0
12.1-180.9-13.1
-80.6
248.
3-2
0.5
0.7
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
5-2
1.5
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.2
-21.
7
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
2-2
1.1
85.3-3.3
-85.3-44.1
147.425.4
-147.2-25.6
-48.
010
.2
48.0-15.0
248.
9-2
1.3
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
7-2
0.1
92H
S_2
40
252.
1-1
3.4
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
1-2
0.7
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.2
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
0.9
-20.
8
-68.9-30.2 28.5
68.9
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
9-1
7.1
152.540.8
-150.8-42.4
74.5-19.5
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.3
-1.4
177.822.4
-177.4-23.4
-177.3-23.6 23.4
74.5-20.0
-74.519.5
177.4 255.032.7
-255.0-32.6
-76.
767
.4
76.9
-71.
4
9.41.4
-9.4
-2.5
-76.3-41.9
76.4
40.9
-68.2-255.8
69.0
-416.8-31.5 1 1.
025
417.360.5
-416.8-31.5 1 1.
025
417.360.5
181.4
256.1
168.6-42.6
-168
.341
.7
107.
835
.6
-107.8-35.9
208.
845
.0-2
05.3
-48.
0
162.
260
.9
-159
.8-7
0.0
-302
.1-2
5.0
304.
135
.0
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.1
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
4-1
0.5
216.
3-2
2.3
1
1
-216
.129
.8
-27.
9-2
1.0
28.0
-18.
5
-28.
0-2
1.0
28.1
-18.
6
-99.
228
.9
101.
1-6
1.3
-99.
229
.2
101.
1-6
1.7
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
6-2
1.3
443
BANN
_240
249.
0-2
0.9
3.2
15.7
-3.2
-17.
7
-57.
157
.1-5
.0
17.3
-14.
9
-17.39.3
-3.6
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
8-1
9.2
149.
340
.9-1
49.0
-44.
41.
6
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
249.
5-2
0.2
24.1
11.5
-24.
1-1
3.2
SW -115
.3
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
1-1
5.7
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.0
-22.
339
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.0
-22.
3
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
T10
44L
(JAS
PER
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
B-5
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
9.7
-18.
451
8AR
GY
LL E
-122.1-8.0
-151.011.2
151.0
249.
7-1
8.5
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
5-1
8.2
512
DO
ME
4
249.
9-1
8.1
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.6
-47.2
122.2
249.
7-1
8.4
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
3-1
9.1
764
1058
JOIN
248.
5-1
9.0
891
904A
L TP
248.
4-1
9.2
249.
5-1
8.2
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.5
-19.
3
192.8-192.1-7.2
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
6-1
9.6
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.6
-19.
1
105.4-25.925.2
-54.732.0
54.7-32.8
-164.81.4
164.9-1.8
165.4-164.7
-85.221.4
9.0-195.3
-9.6
-105.3
248.
4-1
9.2
-3.4
519
CAS
TLE
DN
250.
7-2
1.3
520
VIC
TOR
IA25
0.4
-21.
4
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
251.
7-2
1.0
57.32.8
-57.3-50.9
78.251.2
-78.1-52.3
-90.
122
.8
90.3-26.4
249.
4-2
0.5
521
PE
TRO
LIA
249.
6-1
8.1
92H
S_2
40
250.
3-1
6.4
505
JAS
PE
R 4
253.
5-2
1.0
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
3.1
-21.
0
-9.6-75.1 73.3
9.6
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
2-1
7.0
152.430.2
-150.8-32.5
85.2-21.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
6.1
-27.6
189.719.6
-189.2-20.3
-189.1-20.5 20.3
85.2-22.4
-85.221.9
189.2 266.829.9
-266.8-29.9
-122.227.6
122.
3-2
8.1
-32.1-52.5
32.1
51.3
-47.7-151.0
47.2
-365.7-37.9 1 1.
025
366.160.4
-365.7-37.9 1 1.
025
366.160.4
195.9
151.1
-15.2-3.0
15.2
0.4
48.5
80.3
-48.5-80.6
226.
621
.5-2
22.6
-22.
4
117.
166
.6
-115
.5-8
0.4
-443
.6-2
7.6
448.
064
.2
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
6-1
1.3
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
5-1
0.5
120.
8-2
6.9
1
1
-120
.629
.4
-6.1
-24.
56.
1-1
5.7
-6.1
-24.
56.
1-1
5.7
-96.
327
.8
98.0
-60.
8
-96.
228
.1
98.0
-61.
2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
249.
0-2
0.5
443
BANN
_240
249.
4-2
0.1
3.7
19.1
-3.7
-21.
1
-59.
359
.4-7
.3
58.5
-34.
7
-58.529.9
1.3
341
HEAR
TLAN
252.
0-1
8.4
151.
638
.7-1
51.2
-42.
23.
9
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
249.
7-1
7.7
-214
.3 7.0
214.
4-7
.023
8.9
7.0
-238
.5-6
.2
SW -117
.5
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
4-1
4.7
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.0
-19.
839
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.0
-19.
8
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
T10
43L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H K
EEPH
ILLS
)FI
G B
-6TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
8.5
-21.
851
8AR
GY
LL E
48.9-27.5
-298.425.6
298.5
248.
5-2
1.7
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
5-2
1.1
512
DO
ME
4
248.
9-2
1.0
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
7.4
-60.7
-48.9
248.
5-2
1.6
513
LAM
BTO
N4
247.
3-2
2.0
764
1058
JOIN
247.
5-2
1.9
891
904A
L TP
247.
3-2
2.1
248.
5-2
1.1
136
E E
DM
ON
424
7.5
-22.
2
180.3-179.7-9.4
514
CLO
VER
B4
247.
6-2
2.4
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
7.6
-22.
0
82.6-21.720.8
-45.031.0
45.0-31.8
-152.5-0.6
152.60.2
149.8-149.2
-75.520.4
10.6-183.1-11.6
-82.6
247.
3-2
2.1
-0.9
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
5-2
3.4
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.2
-23.
5
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
249.
1-2
3.0
81.0-1.8
-81.0-45.3
124.724.2
-124.6-24.8
-52.
015
.0
52.0-19.7
248.
2-2
2.9
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
3-2
1.9
92H
S_2
40
247.
1-2
2.6
505
JAS
PE
R 4
250.
0-2
2.5
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-6
.7
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
9.8
-22.
6
-86.6-25.4 24.0
86.7
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
5-1
8.9
155.145.7
-153.3-46.6
75.5-20.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
7.9
-7.8
179.921.4
-179.4-22.3
-179.3-22.4 22.3
75.5-21.4
-75.520.9
179.4 257.031.7
-257.0-31.7
-84.
377
.3
84.5
-80.
8
48.97.8
-48.
9-8
.9
-76.3-49.9
76.3
48.9
-59.3-298.5
60.7
-484.0-36.5 1 1.
025
484.575.9
-484.0-36.5 1 1.
025
484.575.9
183.6
299.0
231.3-31.8
-230
.732
.4
125.
631
.1
-125.6-31.3
219.
454
.1-2
15.4
-54.
7
162.
369
.7
-159
.8-7
8.1
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
1-1
0.1
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.7
385.
1-6
.3
1
1
-384
.729
.1
-84.
4-1
1.1
85.3
-23.
2
-84.
7-1
1.0
85.6
-23.
2
-126
.038
.5
128.
9-6
5.0
-126
.039
.0
129.
0-6
5.5
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
0-2
2.9
443
BANN
_240
248.
2-2
2.4
-4.7
11.2
4.7
-13.
2
-73.
773
.7-5
.4
35.7
-12.
3
-35.76.9
-1.8
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
1-2
0.5
166.
041
.7-1
65.6
-44.
12.
2
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
247.
9-2
2.1
118.
236
.5-1
18.2
-37.
6-9
4.0
-28.
094
.124
.5
SW -114
.3
258
ELLE
RSLI
535.
9-1
6.5
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
24.8
-24.
339
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.8
-24.
2
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2018
WP-
POST
PRO
JEC
T11
64L
(PET
RO
LIA
TO R
IVER
VIE
W)
FIG
B-7
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e B
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W25
0.0
-20.
051
8AR
GY
LL E
2.0-38.0
-248.936.8
249.0
249.
9-2
0.0
128
ELL
ER
SLI
249.
7-1
9.4
512
DO
ME
4
250.
1-1
9.3
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.7
-72.6
-2.0
249.
9-1
9.8
513
LAM
BTO
N4
248.
5-2
0.3
764
1058
JOIN
248.
7-2
0.2
891
904A
L TP
248.
5-2
0.4
249.
7-1
9.4
136
E E
DM
ON
424
8.6
-20.
5
178.6-178.0-11.3
514
CLO
VER
B4
248.
7-2
0.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
8.8
-20.
3
81.4-19.018.1
-44.429.2
44.4-30.0
-150.8-2.6
150.92.1
148.2-147.7
-74.918.7
12.4-181.4-13.4
-81.4
248.
5-2
0.4
1.1
519
CAS
TLE
DN
249.
6-2
1.4
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
9.4
-21.
6
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
250.
3-2
0.9
84.7-3.9
-84.7-43.6
147.125.4
-146.9-25.6
-49.
39.
1
49.3-13.9
249.
1-2
1.2
521
PE
TRO
LIA
250.
0-2
0.0
92H
S_2
40
251.
6-1
3.7
505
JAS
PE
R 4
251.
3-2
0.5
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
1.1
-20.
6
-72.6-31.9 30.2
72.6
133
WAB
AMU
N4
258.
0-1
7.0
151.239.7
-149.5-41.6
74.9-19.1
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
9.6
2.2
178.222.6
-177.7-23.7
-177.7-23.8 23.7
74.9-19.7
-74.919.1
177.7 255.332.9
-255.3-32.9
-82.
464
.7
82.6
-68.
5
2.0-2.2
-2.0 1.0
-74.6-40.6
74.6
39.6
-71.9-249.0
72.6
-413.2-28.8 1 1.
025
413.657.2
-413.2-28.8 1 1.
025
413.657.2
181.9
249.3
157.7-47.9
-157
.446
.8
111.
637
.3
-111.5-37.6
206.
743
.2-2
03.3
-46.
7
160.
559
.3
-158
.1-6
8.7
-315
.3-3
0.5
317.
542
.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.1
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
4-1
0.5
208.
1-2
3.0
1
1
-207
.929
.9
-25.
6-2
1.3
25.7
-18.
4
-25.
7-2
1.3
25.8
-18.
4
-98.
228
.5
100.
0-6
1.1
-98.
128
.8
100.
0-6
1.5
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
8-2
1.2
443
BANN
_240
249.
1-2
0.8
3.8
16.5
-3.7
-18.
5
-56.
556
.6-5
.3
17.1
-15.
5
-17.19.9
-4.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
251.
9-1
9.1
148.
840
.5-1
48.4
-44.
11.
9
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
251.
3-1
3.8
24.1
8.6
-24.
1-1
3.2
SW -115
.5
258
ELLE
RSLI
537.
3-1
5.6
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.2
-15.
939
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.2
-15.
8
12.0 6.6
1
0.9816
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
TBA
SE C
ASE
FIG
B-8
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.8
-19.
251
8AR
GY
LL E
-92.7-54.8
-204.9-55.6
205.0
247.
6-1
9.3
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
2-1
8.8
512
DO
ME
4
248.
5-1
8.7
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.3
20.2
92.7
247.
8-1
9.1
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
6-1
9.8
764
1058
JOIN
246.
8-1
9.7
891
904A
L TP
246.
5-1
9.9
248.
2-1
8.9
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.5
-20.
0
197.6-196.9-32.5
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
8-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.7
-19.
8
83.3-34.733.9
-55.714.2
55.7-15.0
-168.0-20.3
168.120.0
161.7-161.0
-87.9-0.3
35.1-200.3-35.3
-83.3
246.
5-1
9.9
11.8
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
1-2
1.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.1
-21.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
5-2
0.4
95.0-28.7
-95.0-18.3
168.80.9
-168.5-0.7
-67.
129
.2
67.2-33.3
247.
9-2
1.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
1-1
9.0
92H
S_2
40
248.
9-1
7.0
505
JAS
PE
R 4
249.
1-1
9.8
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.9
-19.
9
-109.1-10.1 9.0
109.2
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
5-1
5.9
170.649.7
-168.4-48.1
87.9-0.1
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
31.8
19.8
194.739.6
-194.2-40.0
-194.1-40.1 40.0
87.9-0.6
-87.90.1
194.2 266.955.9
-266.9-55.9
-118
.556
.0
118.
8-5
9.1
-92.7-19.8
92.7
19.0
-96.5-29.5
96.5
28.6
20.3-205.0-20.2
-368.4-117.5 1 1.
01
368.8142.6
-368.4-117.5 1 1.
01
368.8142.6
200.9
205.2
44.3-4.2
-44.
31.
7
153.
622
.1
-153.6-22.1
232.
861
.2-2
28.3
-58.
8
192.
070
.0
-188
.6-7
4.0
-452
.1-4
8.1
456.
887
.6
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.9
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.0
129.
1-2
2.1
1
1
-129
.024
.9
15.4
-29.
9-1
5.4
-10.
0
15.5
-29.
9-1
5.4
-9.9
-80.
625
.7
81.9
-61.
0
-80.
525
.9
81.8
-61.
4
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
2-2
0.9
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.6
-6.1
-17.
26.
115
.2
-47.
647
.7-4
.7
1.2
-6.5
-1.20.8
-14.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
7-1
9.0
138.
239
.8-1
37.9
-43.
91.
2
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
248.
2-1
8.5
-241
.8 9.3
242.
0-8
.926
6.6
6.6
-266
.0-4
.3
SW -113
.4
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
7-1
5.4
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.1
-20.
739
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.8
-20.
6
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
TEL
LER
SLIE
T1
FIG
B-9
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
5.8
-19.
751
8AR
GY
LL E
-111.7-64.4
-180.4-44.3
180.5
245.
6-1
9.8
128
ELL
ER
SLI
246.
0-1
9.4
512
DO
ME
4
246.
5-1
9.3
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.7
9.5
111.7
245.
8-1
9.7
513
LAM
BTO
N4
244.
5-2
0.3
764
1058
JOIN
244.
7-2
0.2
891
904A
L TP
244.
5-2
0.4
246.
0-1
9.4
136
E E
DM
ON
424
4.5
-20.
5
184.4-183.8-27.6
514
CLO
VER
B4
244.
9-2
0.7
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
4.7
-20.
3
61.0-42.241.2
-45.918.1
45.9-18.9
-155.1-15.4
155.215.0
145.7-145.2
-78.13.5
29.8-187.4-30.4
-61.0
244.
4-2
0.5
5.9
519
CAS
TLE
DN
246.
8-2
1.3
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
6.7
-21.
5
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
247.
2-2
0.7
101.3-22.5
-101.2-23.8
157.74.7
-157.4-4.7
-29.
043
.0
29.0-47.5
246.
8-2
1.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
246.
3-1
9.5
92H
S_2
40
247.
5-1
7.2
505
JAS
PE
R 4
247.
7-2
0.2
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.4
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
7.5
-20.
3
-94.6-5.5 4.2
94.7
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
2-1
6.2
170.757.7
-168.4-55.5
78.1-3.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
26.5
29.9
184.135.5
-183.6-36.2
-183.5-36.3 36.2
78.1-4.4
-78.13.9
183.6 256.352.0
-256.3-52.0
-101
.070
.2
101.
3-7
3.4
-111.7-29.9
111.
829
.4
-106.4-44.0
106.
543
.2
9.3-180.5
-9.5
1 1.01
-596.6-160.2 1 1.
01
597.4225.1
187.9
180.6
11.5-19.7
-11.
517
.1
139.
017
.2
-139.0-17.4
236.
073
.9-2
31.2
-70.
0
202.
687
.9
-198
.6-8
8.7
-489
.9-6
1.3
495.
411
0.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.0
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
8-1
0.1
67.3
-24.
6
1
1
-67.
125
.6
5.3
-29.
4-5
.3-1
0.6
5.3
-29.
4-5
.3-1
0.6
-84.
827
.8
86.2
-62.
4
-84.
728
.1
86.2
-62.
8
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
247.
3-2
0.9
443
BANN
_240
247.
0-2
0.4
-28.
1-2
6.8
28.1
24.9
-86.
686
.6-0
.2
18.6
-4.2
-18.6-1.4
-8.7
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
2-1
8.4
177.
447
.0-1
76.8
-48.
4-2
.6
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
246.
5-1
8.9
-276
.1-2
.327
6.3
3.4
301.
121
.0-3
00.4
-16.
6
SW -112
.2
258
ELLE
RSLI
534.
8-1
3.8
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
24.9
-21.
139
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.6
-21.
0
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
T90
8L (E
LLER
SLIE
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
B-1
0TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.7
-19.
351
8AR
GY
LL E
-61.3-56.9
-236.2-53.5
236.3
247.
6-1
9.3
128
ELL
ER
SLI
248.
2-1
8.8
512
DO
ME
4
248.
5-1
8.7
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.3
18.3
61.3
247.
8-1
9.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
5-1
9.8
764
1058
JOIN
246.
8-1
9.6
891
904A
L TP
246.
5-1
9.8
248.
2-1
8.8
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.5
-20.
0
198.6-197.8-32.4
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
7-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.7
-19.
8
84.8-34.834.0
-56.214.2
56.2-15.1
-169.0-20.3
169.120.0
162.8-162.2
-88.3-0.2
35.1-201.2-35.3
-84.7
246.
4-1
9.9
11.8
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
1-2
1.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.0
-21.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
4-2
0.4
94.6-28.5
-94.6-18.4
165.01.0
-164.7-0.9
-69.
729
.5
69.8-33.6
247.
9-2
0.9
521
PE
TRO
LIA
248.
0-1
9.1
92H
S_2
40
248.
8-1
7.1
505
JAS
PE
R 4
249.
0-1
9.8
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.9
-20.
0
-103.9-10.2 8.9
104.0
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
5-1
5.9
171.349.9
-169.0-48.2
88.3-0.2
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
31.8
21.8
195.639.6
-195.1-40.0
-195.0-40.0 40.0
88.4-0.7
-88.30.2
195.1 267.955.9
-267.9-55.9
-111
.255
.9
111.
4-5
9.2
-61.3-21.8
61.3
20.8
-94.1-30.3
94.2
29.4
18.7-236.3-18.3
-366.6-117.9 1 1.
01
367.0142.8
-366.6-117.9 1 1.
01
367.0142.8
201.9
236.6
148.
422
.0
-148.3-22.1
235.
061
.6-2
30.4
-58.
7
189.
670
.4
-186
.3-7
4.8
-455
.6-4
8.5
460.
488
.8
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
5-1
1.9
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.0
126.
4-2
2.2
1
1
-126
.324
.9
15.9
-29.
9-1
5.8
-9.9
15.9
-30.
0-1
5.9
-9.8
-80.
925
.7
82.2
-61.
1
-80.
826
.0
82.2
-61.
4
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
2-2
0.9
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.6
-6.4
-17.
36.
415
.4
-48.
148
.1-4
.7
4.6
-6.5
-4.60.8
-13.9
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
6-1
9.0
138.
739
.8-1
38.3
-43.
91.
2
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
248.
2-1
8.6
-247
.2 9.3
247.
4-8
.827
2.1
7.0
-271
.5-4
.4
SW -113
.4
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
7-1
5.4
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.0
-20.
839
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.8
-20.
7
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
T11
39L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H T
O R
IVER
VIEW
)FI
G B
-11
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
6.9
-20.
751
8AR
GY
LL E
-10.3-53.5
-280.0-55.9
280.1
246.
8-2
0.7
128
ELL
ER
SLI
247.
5-2
0.1
512
DO
ME
4
247.
8-1
9.9
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.1
21.2
10.3
247.
0-2
0.5
513
LAM
BTO
N4
245.
9-2
1.0
764
1058
JOIN
246.
1-2
0.9
891
904A
L TP
245.
8-2
1.1
247.
5-2
0.1
136
E E
DM
ON
424
5.8
-21.
2
192.6-191.9-31.7
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
1-2
1.4
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.0
-21.
0
75.5-35.935.0
-51.515.0
51.5-15.8
-163.1-19.5
163.219.2
155.8-155.2
-83.60.5
34.2-195.4-34.5
-75.4
245.
8-2
1.2
10.8
519
CAS
TLE
DN
247.
5-2
2.1
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
7.4
-22.
3
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
247.
9-2
1.5
101.8-26.4
-101.8-20.3
173.01.5
-172.7-1.2
-53.
531
.4
53.5-35.8
247.
4-2
2.0
521
PE
TRO
LIA
247.
1-2
0.7
92H
S_2
40
250.
8-1
3.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
248.
4-2
1.1
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.7
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.2
-21.
2
-68.8-9.1 7.4
68.8
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
4-1
6.6
185.353.0
-182.7-48.7
83.6-0.9
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
30.9
18.6
191.039.0
-190.5-39.5
-190.4-39.6 39.5
83.7-1.4
-83.60.9
190.5 263.255.4
-263.2-55.3
-56.
756
.8
56.8
-61.
0
-10.3-18.6
10.3
17.5
-115.0-30.2
115.
129
.4
22.3-280.1-21.2
-411.2-122.7 1 1.
01
411.6153.8
-411.2-122.7 1 1.
01
411.6153.8
196.0
280.5
166.0-3.8
-165
.72.
8
113.
220
.3
-113.2-20.6
255.
166
.1-2
49.7
-58.
8
211.
274
.4
-207
.2-7
4.8
-301
.0-4
5.2
303.
155
.7
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
3-1
1.7
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
9-1
0.1
224.
2-1
6.8
1
1
-224
.024
.7
-10.
6-2
6.4
10.7
-13.
6
-10.
7-2
6.4
10.7
-13.
5
-92.
129
.4
93.8
-62.
8
-92.
129
.7
93.8
-63.
2
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
247.
8-2
2.0
443
BANN
_240
247.
5-2
1.7
-12.
3-1
9.9
12.3
18.0
-53.
553
.5-4
.3
3.8
-4.6
-3.8-1.1
-13.2
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
2-2
0.0
144.
140
.6-1
43.7
-44.
30.
9
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
247.
0-2
0.7
24.1
11.6
-24.
1-1
3.2
SW -112
.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
0-1
6.3
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
24.9
-22.
939
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.7
-22.
8
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
T10
44L
(JAS
PER
TO
PET
RO
LIA)
FIG
B-1
2TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.2
-19.
051
8AR
GY
LL E
-135.5-35.5
-179.4-70.9
179.4
247.
1-1
9.0
128
ELL
ER
SLI
247.
8-1
8.7
512
DO
ME
4
248.
2-1
8.6
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
4.8
35.7
135.6
247.
3-1
8.9
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
2-1
9.7
764
1058
JOIN
246.
4-1
9.5
891
904A
L TP
246.
1-1
9.7
247.
8-1
8.7
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.1
-19.
9
206.0-205.2-29.2
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
4-2
0.2
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.3
-19.
7
97.5-40.239.5
-61.316.5
61.3-17.3
-176.2-17.1
176.316.9
171.8-171.1
-93.52.0
32.3-208.5-32.2
-97.4
246.
1-1
9.8
8.2
519
CAS
TLE
DN
248.
7-2
1.6
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
8.7
-21.
8
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
249.
3-2
1.2
76.4-22.8
-76.4-24.5
112.921.4
-112.8-22.2
-91.
340
.2
91.5-43.5
248.
0-2
1.1
521
PE
TRO
LIA
247.
5-1
8.6
92H
S_2
40
248.
5-1
6.8
505
JAS
PE
R 4
250.
5-2
1.1
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-1
0.7
955
PD
MAK
ER
125
0.3
-21.
2
-24.0-46.9 45.0
24.1
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
6-1
6.4
183.043.0
-180.5-39.7
93.5-2.3
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
28.9
0.6
201.737.2
-201.1-37.4
-201.0-37.4 37.4
93.5-2.8
-93.52.3
201.1 273.953.5
-273.9-53.5
-135.6-0.6
135.
70.
3
-74.4-38.6
74.4
37.6
35.5-179.4-35.7
-361.1-124.7 1 1.
01
361.5149.3
-361.1-124.7 1 1.
01
361.5149.3
209.2
179.6
-10.223.7
10.2
-26.
2
68.4
57.7
-68.4-58.1
267.
345
.1-2
61.6
-36.
6
169.
376
.1
-166
.5-8
3.1
-443
.9-5
5.3
448.
493
.3
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
4-1
1.8
155
BENA
LTO
4
254.
0-1
0.1
128.
3-2
1.8
1
1
-128
.224
.6
11.8
-29.
5-1
1.8
-10.
4
11.8
-29.
6-1
1.8
-10.
3
-87.
927
.8
89.4
-62.
0
-87.
828
.1
89.4
-62.
4
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
248.
2-2
1.1
443
BANN
_240
247.
9-2
0.8
-10.
9-1
5.5
10.9
13.6
-54.
554
.5-6
.5
38.3
-21.
8
-38.316.5
-9.8
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
6-1
9.1
145.
138
.4-1
44.7
-42.
13.
1
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
247.
6-1
8.2
-220
.4-3
.222
0.5
3.3
245.
117
.8-2
44.6
-16.
5
SW -114
.8
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
5-1
5.3
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.0
-20.
439
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.8
-20.
3
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
T10
43L
(HAR
RY
SMIT
H K
EEPH
ILLS
)FI
G B
-13
TUE,
OC
T 31
201
7 1
0:31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
5.4
-22.
451
8AR
GY
LL E
27.3-43.3
-321.0-67.0
321.2
245.
3-2
2.4
128
ELL
ER
SLI
246.
2-2
1.7
512
DO
ME
4
246.
6-2
1.6
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
6.8
33.0
-27.2
245.
6-2
2.2
513
LAM
BTO
N4
244.
6-2
2.7
764
1058
JOIN
244.
8-2
2.6
891
904A
L TP
244.
5-2
2.8
246.
2-2
1.8
136
E E
DM
ON
424
4.5
-22.
9
194.9-194.2-29.7
514
CLO
VER
B4
244.
9-2
3.1
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
4.8
-22.
7
77.6-38.637.7
-52.517.0
52.5-17.8
-165.4-17.5
165.517.2
158.1-157.5
-84.72.4
32.4-197.7-32.6
-77.6
244.
5-2
2.8
8.8
519
CAS
TLE
DN
246.
2-2
4.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
6.1
-24.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
246.
5-2
3.5
97.3-23.8
-97.3-22.4
150.2-0.7
-150.00.5
-57.
937
.6
57.9-41.8
246.
4-2
3.8
521
PE
TRO
LIA
245.
4-2
2.5
92H
S_2
40
243.
8-2
3.2
505
JAS
PE
R 4
246.
9-2
3.0
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-7
.3
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
6.8
-23.
1
-87.4-4.4 3.0
87.4
133
WAB
AMU
N4
256.
8-1
8.5
187.659.3
-184.9-54.1
84.7-2.8
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
29.0
8.8
193.237.8
-192.6-38.2
-192.5-38.2 38.2
84.7-3.3
-84.72.8
192.6 265.454.3
-265.4-54.2
-65.
568
.3
65.7
-72.
2
27.2-8.8
-27.
27.
8
-114.7-40.4
114.
739
.7
34.8-321.2-33.0
-477.9-131.3 1 1.
01
478.5173.1
-477.9-131.3 1 1.
01
478.5173.1
198.3
321.7
226.012.2
-225
.4-1
1.7
131.
816
.0
-131.8-16.2
265.
578
.4-2
59.5
-67.
9
211.
085
.6
-206
.9-8
5.2
421
KEEP
HIL5
255.
9-1
0.7
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
5-1
0.4
392.
3-0
.2
1
1
-392
.023
.8
-67.
1-1
7.4
67.7
-19.
0
-67.
4-1
7.3
68.0
-19.
0
-119
.238
.9
121.
9-6
6.7
-119
.239
.3
121.
9-6
7.1
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
246.
9-2
3.7
443
BANN
_240
246.
5-2
3.3
-19.
9-2
6.7
19.9
24.8
-70.
170
.1-4
.0
22.1
-0.1
-22.1-5.4
-11.0
341
HEAR
TLAN
249.
4-2
1.4
160.
842
.1-1
60.3
-44.
60.
8
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
244.
9-2
2.7
112.
546
.9-1
12.4
-48.
0-8
8.3
-38.
288
.434
.8
SW -111
.5
258
ELLE
RSLI
531.
6-1
7.2
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
24.7
-25.
039
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
25.5
-24.
9
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
2019
SP-P
OST
PRO
JEC
T11
64L
(PET
RO
LIA
TO R
IVER
VIE
W)
FIG
B-1
4TU
E, O
CT
31 2
017
10:
31
Bus
- Bas
e vo
ltage
(kV)
Bran
ch -
MW
/Mva
rEq
uipm
ent -
MW
/Mva
r10
0.0%
Rat
e A
kV: <
=25.
000
<=69
.000
<=13
8.00
0<=
240.
000
<=50
0.00
0>5
00.0
00
506
BE
LLAM
Y4
509
ARG
YLL
W24
7.2
-20.
551
8AR
GY
LL E
-17.7-57.2
-273.2-52.5
273.4
247.
0-2
0.5
128
ELL
ER
SLI
247.
7-2
0.0
512
DO
ME
4
248.
1-1
9.8
135
SU
ND
ANC
4
260.
4-1
5.0
17.7
17.7
247.
3-2
0.4
513
LAM
BTO
N4
246.
1-2
0.9
764
1058
JOIN
246.
3-2
0.8
891
904A
L TP
246.
0-2
1.0
247.
7-2
0.0
136
E E
DM
ON
424
6.0
-21.
1
193.1-192.4-32.1
514
CLO
VER
B4
246.
3-2
1.3
785
1059
A_TP
893
908
TP24
6.2
-20.
9
76.2-35.334.4
-51.914.6
51.9-15.4
-163.6-19.9
163.719.6
156.4-155.8
-84.00.1
34.5-195.9-34.9
-76.1
246.
0-2
1.0
11.3
519
CAS
TLE
DN
247.
7-2
2.0
520
VIC
TOR
IA24
7.6
-22.
2
57LA
MO
UR
E4
137
N C
ALD
E4
248.
1-2
1.4
101.2-27.1
-101.1-19.6
172.61.4
-172.3-1.2
-54.
830
.2
54.8-34.6
247.
6-2
1.9
521
PE
TRO
LIA
247.
4-2
0.5
92H
S_2
40
250.
4-1
4.1
505
JAS
PE
R 4
248.
6-2
0.9
420
KE
EP
HIL
4
255.
6-9
.8
955
PD
MAK
ER
124
8.4
-21.
0
-72.5-10.8 9.2
72.6
133
WAB
AMU
N4
257.
4-1
6.5
184.051.8
-181.4-47.9
84.1-0.5
511
SU
MM
ER
S1
31.3
22.2
191.439.3
-190.8-39.8
-190.7-39.8 39.8
84.1-1.0
-84.10.5
190.8 263.655.6
-263.6-55.6
-62.
454
.0
62.5
-58.
2
-17.7-22.2
17.7
21.1
-113.3-28.9
113.
428
.1
18.6-273.4-17.7
-407.5-120.0 1 1.
01
407.9150.4
-407.5-120.0 1 1.
01
407.9150.4
196.5
273.7
154.9-9.2
-154
.78.
0
116.
922
.1
-116.9-22.3
253.
164
.2-2
47.8
-57.
5
209.
472
.6
-205
.5-7
3.6
-314
.1-5
0.7
316.
463
.4
421
KEEP
HIL5
256.
3-1
1.7
155
BENA
LTO
4
253.
9-1
0.1
215.
9-1
7.5
1
1
-215
.724
.9
-8.4
-26.
78.
4-1
3.3
-8.4
-26.
78.
4-1
3.3
-91.
129
.0
92.7
-62.
6
-91.
029
.2
92.7
-63.
0
SW -0.0
313
JOSE
PH1
247.
9-2
1.9
443
BANN
_240
247.
6-2
1.5
-11.
7-1
8.9
11.7
17.0
-52.
953
.0-4
.6
3.6
-5.3
-3.6-0.4
-13.6
341
HEAR
TLAN
250.
4-1
9.9
143.
540
.2-1
43.2
-43.
91.
2
979
RIVE
RVIE
W1
250.
0-1
4.2
24.1
8.7
-24.
1-1
3.2
SW -113
.0
258
ELLE
RSLI
533.
2-1
6.2
2979
RIVE
RVIE
WS2
25.2
-16.
439
79RI
VERV
IEW
S3
26.0
-16.
3
12.0 6.6
1
0.98927
-12.
0-6
.012
.06.
6
0.9816
1-12
.0-6
.099
12.0 6.0
9912
.06.
0
Attachment C
Voltage Stability Diagrams 2018 WP Post-Project
0 200 400 600 800 1000 12000.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.1
Pincremental (MW)
Vol
tage
(p.u
.)
Voltage at Bus # 979
N−0: Base CaseN−1: 908LN−1: 1164LN−1: 1139LN−1: 1044LN−1: 1098L