2012-005 - Alberta Utilities Commission

Decision 2012-005 

Reasons to Decision 2011-439 (November 1, 2011) 

Alberta Electric System Operator 

Need for the Interconnection of 

Castle Rock Ridge Wind Farm 

AltaLink Management Ltd. 

240-kV Castle Rock Ridge Switching Station 205S and 

240-kV Double-circuit Transmission Line 1071L/1072L 

January 10, 2012

The Alberta Utilities Commission 

Decision 2012-005: Reasons to Decision 2011-439 (November 1, 2011) 


Need for the Connection of Castle Rock Ridge Wind Farm 

Application No. 1606460 

ATCO Electric Ltd. 



Application No. 1606668 

Proceeding ID No. 778 

January 10, 2012 

Published by 


Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor, 425 First Street S.W. 

Calgary, Alberta 

T2P 3L8 

Telephone: 403-592-8845 

Fax: 403-592-4406 

Website: www.auc.ab.ca


Calgary, Alberta 



Need for the Interconnection of 

Castle Rock Ridge Wind Farm 

Decision 2012-005 


Applications No. 1606460 and 

240-kV Castle Rock Ridge Switching Station 205S and No. 1606668 

240-kV Double-circuit Transmission Line 1071L/1072L Proceeding ID No. 778 

1 Introduction 

1. On November 1, 2011, Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC or the Commission) issued 

Decision 2011-439, 1 wherein: 

1. The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) application for the needs identification 

document (NID) for the Castle Rock 205S substation and the 240-kilovolt (kV) 

double-circuit transmission line, 1071L/1072L was approved with reasons to follow. 

2. The AltaLink Management Ltd. (AltaLink) application to construct and operate the 

Castle Rock Ridge 205S substation, to construct and operate the 240-kV transmission 

line 1071L to construct and operate the 240 kV transmission line 1072L, and to alter 

and operate the Goose Lake 103S substation was approved. 

This decision provides the reasons to Decision 2011-439. 

2. The AESO filed a NID with the AUC, pursuant to Section 34 of the Electric Utilities Act. 

This application was registered on August 13, 2010, as Application No. 1606460. An amendment 

to the NID was registered on August 4, 2011. 

3. The AESO’s NID application was prepared in response to a request by Enel Alberta Wind 

Inc. (Enel) for connection of its Castle Rock Ridge wind farm in the Pincher Creek area to the 

Alberta Interconnected Electrical System. The proposed connection would involve the 

construction of a switching station designated as Castle Rock Ridge 205S switching station, 

located near Enel’s generating facilities. The interconnection point with the Alberta 

Interconnected Electrical System was proposed to be at a point designated as Point A on the 

proposed double-circuit 240-kV transmission line 994L/1071L connecting proposed Fidler 312S 

substation with the existing Goose Lake 103S substation. 

4. The AESO requested AltaLink assist in conducting a participant involvement program to 

notify stakeholders regarding the need for transmission development in the Pincher Creek area. 

The AESO stated in its NID application that there were no outstanding concerns related to the 

AESO’s assessment of the need for this development. 

1 

Decision 2011-439: Alberta Electric System Operator and AltaLink Management Ltd. Castle Rock Ridge 205S 

and Transmission Line Development Needs Identification Document Application and Facility Application, 

Application Nos. 1606460 and 1606668, Proceeding ID No. 778, November 1, 2011. 

AUC Decision 2012-005 (January 10, 2012) • 1


Need for the Interconnection of Castle Rock Ridge Wind Farm 



Alberta Electric Utilities Operator and 


5. Pursuant to Section 35 of the Electric Utilities Act, the AESO directed AltaLink to submit 

a facility proposal to the Commission to meet the need identified in the NID application and in 

NID Approval No. U2011-115 2 for the Southern Alberta Transmission Reinforcement. 

6. AltaLink filed Application No. 1606668 (facility application) with the AUC on 

October 15, 2010, seeking approval to construct and operate the Castle Rock Ridge 205S 

substation and 240-kV double-circuit transmission line 1071L/1072L. 

7. Both the AESO and AltaLink amended their applications, on August 4 and 

August 8, 2011, respectively, to include the nine-kilometre route of the proposed 240-kV 

double-circuit transmission line 1071L/1072L from the proposed Castle Rock Ridge 205S 

switching station to the existing Goose Lake 103S substation. In its application, Altalink stated 

that the proposed Castle Rock Ridge 205S switching station would be located in LSD 7 of 

Section 14, Township 7, Range 30, west of the Fourth Meridian. AltaLink requested approval to 

expand Goose Lake 103S substation by the addition of five 240-kV circuit breakers. Goose Lake 

103S substation is located in LSD 5 of Section 36, Township 6, Range 30, west of the Fourth 

Meridian. 

8. Both the AESO and AltaLink requested that the Commission consider the NID 

application and the facility application jointly, pursuant to Section 15.4 of the Hydro and Electric 

Energy Act. 

2 Relevant legislation 

9. In making its decision, the Commission considered the following provisions: 

With respect to the NID application, Section 34 of the Electric Utilities Act states: 

34(1) When the Independent System Operator determines that an expansion or 

enhancement of the capability of the transmission system is or may be required to 

meet the needs of Alberta and is in the public interest, the Independent System 

Operator must prepare and submit to the Commission for approval a needs 

identification document that 

(a) describes the constraint or condition affecting the operation or performance 

of the transmission system and indicates the means by which or the manner 

in which the constraint or condition could be alleviated, 

(b) describes a need for improved efficiency of the transmission system, 

including means to reduce losses on the interconnected electric system, or 

(c) describes a need to respond to requests for system access service. 

2 

Needs Identification Document Approval No. U2011-115, Applications No. 1606564 and No. 1606526, 

Proceeding ID No. 748, June 7, 2011. 

2 • AUC Decision 2012-005 (January 10, 2012)







10. Section 38 of the Transmission Regulation states: 

When considering whether to approve a needs identification document under section 

34(3) of the Act, the Commission must: 

(e) consider the ISO’s assessment of the need to be correct unless an interested 

person satisfies the Commission that 

(i) the ISO’s assessment of the need is technically deficient, or 

(ii) to approve the needs identification document would not be in the public 

interest. 

11. In relation to the facilities application, sections 14, 15, 15.4 and 19 of the Hydro and 

Electric Energy Act state: 

14(1) No person shall construct a transmission line or any part of a transmission line 

unless the person is the holder of a permit issued by the Commission. 

(2) No person shall make a significant extension or alteration of a transmission line 

unless the Commission has amended the person’s permit or issued a new permit to cover 

the extension or alteration. 

… 

15 No person shall operate a transmission line unless the person is the holder of a 

subsisting licence to operate the transmission line, issued by the Commission. 

… 

15.4 If a person makes an application under this Part and the Independent System 

Operator has submitted a needs identification document to the Alberta Utilities 

Commission under section 34 of the Electric Utilities Act in respect of the same 

transmission line or part of a transmission line, the application and submission may be 

combined and considered by the Commission. 

… 

19(1) On an application for an approval, permit or licence under this Part, or for an 

amendment of an approval, permit or licence, the Commission may grant the approval, 

permit, licence or amendment subject to any terms and conditions that it prescribes or 

may deny the application. 

(1.1) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Commission shall not refuse an approval of a 

transmission line or part of a transmission line designated as critical transmission 

infrastructure as defined in the Electric Utilities Act on the basis that, in its opinion, it 

does not meet the needs of Alberta. 

(2) Without restricting the generality of subsection (1), the Commission may do one or 

more of the following: 

(a) require changes in the plans and specifications of a hydro development, 

power plant or transmission line; 

(b) require changes in the location of a hydro development, power plant or 

transmission line; 

(c) prescribe a date before which the construction of, or operation of, the hydro 

development, power plant or transmission line must commence; 








(d) prescribe the location and route of the transmission line as precisely as it 

considers suitable; 

(e) prescribe the location of the right of way of the transmission line and the 

relationship of its boundaries to the transmission line or any part of the 

transmission line. 

12. Section 17 of the Alberta Utilities Commission Act states: 

17(1) Where the Commission conducts a hearing or other proceeding on an application 

to construct or operate a hydro development, power plant or transmission line under the 

Hydro and Electric Energy Act or a gas utility pipeline under the Gas Utilities Act, it 

shall, in addition to any other matters it may or must consider in conducting the hearing 

or other proceeding, give consideration to whether construction or operation of the 

proposed hydro development, power plant, transmission line or gas utility pipeline is in 

the public interest, having regard to the social and economic effects of the development, 

plant, line or pipeline and the effects of the development, plant, line or pipeline on the 

environment. 

(2) The Commission shall not under subsection (1) give consideration to whether 

critical transmission infrastructure as defined in the Electric Utilities Act is required to 

meet the needs of Alberta. 

3 Discussion 

13. In its assessment of routing and siting options for the Castle Rock Ridge wind farm 

connection, AltaLink stated that it considered the proximity of existing residences and agricultural 

operations, potential environmental impacts, existing linear disturbances and the potential to 

consolidate the proposed 240-kV double-circuit transmission line with new, and future 

transmission facilities. AltaLink submitted that through its siting process, it was only able to 

identify one proposed site adjacent to Castle Rock Ridge wind farm in consideration of the 

AESO’s direction in its functional specification. 

14. In relation to proposed 240-kV double-circuit transmission line 1071L/1072L, AltaLink 

considered two potential routes, Route A being 5.5 kilometres in length and Route B being 

4.1 kilometres in length. The routes were developed based on the lowest overall impact to 

landowners and residents and to meet the requirements of AUC Rule 007: Rules Respecting 

Applications for Power Plants, Substations, Transmission Lines, and Industrial System 

Designations (AUC Rule 007). However, Route A was rejected after further evaluation and 

consideration of landowner and resident input because AltaLink considered that Route A may 

have a higher potential impact. Another consideration that favoured Route B was the concern 

identified by Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation that a portion of Route A would cross 

through the Oldman Dam protected area. 

15. Route B was further evaluated and modified taking into consideration input from 

landowners and residents. 








16. AltaLink conducted a participant involvement program between June 2009 and June 2010. 

AltaLink notified all landowners within 800 metres of the proposed station site and the potential 

routes for the transmission line and conducted personal consultation with persons where facilities 

were proposed either on or adjacent to their land. As part of the participant involvement program, 

AltaLink held an open house in Pincher Creek where representatives of both AltaLink and the 

AESO attended including an expert on electric and magnetic fields to address any electric and 

magnetic fields questions. 

17. AltaLink addressed concerns with the landowners regarding visual impact, reclamation of 

native prairie, weeds, agricultural issues, compensation, liability and future planned development. 

No outstanding concerns remained. 

18. Additional landowner consultations were held in July 2011 prior to the amendment to the 

route for the proposed transmission line. Signed letters indicating that they had no objection were 

obtained from all landowners within 800 metres of the proposed transmission line route. 

19. In addition, AltaLink contacted various government agencies from all levels as well as 

non-government organizations. 

20. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development’s (ASRD) expressed concerns that the 

proposed transmission line route would cross a critical ungulate wintering range. Also, the 

proposed transmission line would be in close proximity to prairie falcon nests reported in the area. 

In addition, some coulees or river breaks may have potential for garter snake hibernacula. ASRD 

recommended that AltaLink conduct pre‐construction field surveys to determine if any wildlife 

species and unique habitat features (e.g., dens or nests) were present in the vicinity of the 

proposed project. In response, AltaLink stated that it had conducted pre-construction field surveys 

and in collaboration with ASRD would establish species specific mitigative measures prior to 

construction. 

21. Alberta Culture and Community Spirit notified AltaLink in a letter dated August 12, 2009, 

that a historic resources impact assessment was required since known archeological sites were in 

the immediate vicinity of the project. AltaLink committed to obtaining a clearance under the 

Historical Resources Act, prior to initiating construction of the project and to comply with all 

terms and conditions of such approval. 

22. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) had concerns with radio interference from 

the proposed 240-kV transmission line being in close proximity to one of its communications 

towers. AltaLink committed to working with the RCMP to mitigate any effects of the project on 

its radio communications. 

23. Information requests were sent to both the AESO and AltaLink on September 19, 2011. 

AESO responded on September 26, 2011. AltaLink responded on September 27 and 

September 29, 2011. Information requests dealt with a number of issues, including updated cost 

breakdowns, updated information on environmental issues and the public information process, 

and alternate routing options for the transmission line from Point A to Goose Lake 103S 

substation. 








24. The Commission deemed both applications complete on October 3, 2011, and issued a 

joint notice of applications for both applications on October 12, 2011. No interventions were 

received in response to the notice. Conversely, a number of local landowners and the Town of 

Pincher Creek submitted letters of support for the project. 

4 Commission findings 

4.1 NID application 

25. The Commission reviewed the NID application and determined that it contains the 

information required by the Electric Utilities Act, the Transmission Regulation, and 

AUC Rule 007. There were no outstanding objections or concerns to the AESO’s assessment 

of the need for the proposed development. Considering Section 38(e) of the Transmission 

Regulation, which provides that the Commission must consider AESO’s assessment of the 

need to be correct if there are no objections to the NID. In Decision 2011-439, issued on 

November 1, 2011, the Commission approved the AESO’s NID application. 

4.2 Facility application 

26. The Commission considered the facility application pursuant to sections 14, 15 and 21 of 

the Hydro and Electric Energy Act and finds that it is technically complete and complies with the 

requirements prescribed under sections 14, 15 and 21 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act and 

AUC Rule 007, as explained below. The Commission further finds that the facility application 

satisfies the need as identified by the AESO. 

27. AltaLink’s assessment of routing and siting options for the Castle Rock Ridge wind farm 

connection considered the proximity of existing residences, existing agricultural operations, 

potential environmental impacts, existing linear disturbances, and the potential to consolidate the 

proposed 240-kV double-circuit transmission line with new and future transmission facilities. The 

Commission accepts AltaLink’s submissions that, through its siting process, it was only able to 

identify one site for the proposed Castle Rock Ridge 205S switching station located adjacent to 

Castle Rock Ridge wind farm considering the AESO’s direction in its functional specifications. 

28. In relation to the proposed 240-kV transmission line 1071L/1072L, consultation was 

conducted on two routes, Route A and Route B. The routes were developed based on the lowest 

overall impact to landowners and residents, and to meet the requirements of AUC Rule 007. 

29. The Commission finds that AltaLink’s participant involvement program met the 

requirements set out in AUC Rule 007. The Commission takes note that an open house was held 

in Pincher Creek with representatives of both AltaLink and the AESO in attendance. 

30. The Commission considers it important that concerns regarding visual impact, reclamation 

of native prairie, weeds, agricultural issues, compensation, liability and future planned 

development were addressed by AltaLink. The Commission recognizes that no outstanding 

concerns remained. 

31. Regarding environmental impacts, the Commission recognizes that AltaLink has 

conducted a pre-construction field survey and will establish species specific mitigative measures 

working in collaboration with ASRD staff. The Commission considers that this approach will 

mitigate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed transmission line. 








32. Also, the Commission is cognizant that Alberta Culture and Community Spirit notified 

AltaLink in a letter dated August 12, 2009, that a historic resources impact assessment was 

required since known archeological sites were in the immediate vicinity of the project. AltaLink 

has committed to obtaining a clearance under the Historical Resources Act, prior to initiating 

construction of the project and has committed to comply with all terms and conditions of such 

approval. 

33. The Commission is aware that AltaLink has committed to working with the RCMP to 

mitigate any effects on its radio communications from the project. 

34. The Commission is cognizant of AltaLink’s commitment to the Municipal District of 

Pincher Creek No. 9 regarding the potential to spread weeds during construction of the project 

and during its annual right-of-way inspection for up to three years following the completion of 

construction 

35. The Commission agrees that a noise impact assessment was not needed for the new 

switching station as no transformer would be included in the switching station equipment. The 

Commission finds that noise impact assessment for the proposed transmission line complies with 

AUC Rule 012: Noise Control. 

36. As a result, the Commission finds the proposed facilities are in the public interest pursuant 

to Section 17 of the Alberta Utilities Commission Act. The Commission issued Decision 2011-439 

on November 1, 2011, that approved both applications and granted a NID approval to the AESO 

and facility permits and licences to AltaLink. 

5 Decision 

37. Pursuant to Section 34 of the Electric Utilities Act, the Commission approved the 

NID for the project in Decision 2011-439, issued November 1, 2011, and issued Approval 

No. U2011-385. 3 

38. Pursuant to sections 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act the 

Commission approved the facility application in Decision 2011-439 and issued Permits and 

Licences No. U2011-386, 4 No. U2011-387, 5 No. U2011-388, 6 and No. U2011-389. 7 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Needs Identification Document Approval No. U2011-385, Application No. 1606460, Proceeding ID No. 778, 

November 1, 2011. 

Substation Permit and Licence No. U2011-386, Application No. 1606668, Proceeding ID No. 778, 


Transmission Line Permit and Licence No. U2011-387, Application No. 1606668, Proceeding ID No. 778, 


Transmission Line Permit and Licence No. U2011-388, Application No. 1606668, Proceeding ID No. 778, 


Substation Permit and Licence No. U2011-389, Application No. 1606668, Proceeding ID No. 778, 









Dated on January 10, 2012. 


(original signed by) 

Mark Kolesar 

Commission Member

2012-005 - Alberta Utilities Commission

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?