System Impact Study Report

GIP-IR597-SIS-R0

Generator Interconnection Request 597

36 MW Wind Facility
Queens County, NS

2022-10-21

Control Centre Operations

Nova Scotia Power Inc.
 System Impact Study Report

Executive Summary
This System Impact Study report (SIS) presents the results for a 36 MW wind turbine
generation facility interconnected to the NSPI system as Network Resource
Interconnection Service (NRIS). The study performed analyses on the impact of the
proposed development on the NS Power grid.

System studies including short circuit, power factor, voltage flicker, steady state, stability,
NPCC Bulk Power System (BPS), NERC Bulk Electric System (BES), under-frequency
operation, low voltage ridethrough, and loss factor calculation were performed applying
NSPI and NPCC planning criteria.

This project is designated as Interconnection Request #597 in the NSPI Interconnection

Request Queue and will be referred to as IR597 throughout this report. The proposed
Commercial Operation Date is 2023/08/31.

The Interconnection Customer (IC) identified a 138 kV bus at 50W-Milton as the Point Of
Interconnection (POI). This wind generation facility will be interconnected to the POI via
an approximately 5.3km long 138 kV transmission line from the Point of Change of
Ownership (PCO).

There is one relevant long-term firm Transmission Service Reservations (TSR) in the
Facilities Study stage in the Transmission Service Queue, with requested in-service date of
2025/01/01. This is TSR411 (550 MW from NB to NS) and is expected to alter the
configuration of the Transmission System in Nova Scotia. The configuration changes
associated with this TSR are not expected to negatively impact the IR597 site, however,
the decreased short circuit levels associated with the TSR411 modifications may require
further EMT (Electromagnetic Transient) level analysis to ensure the IR597 site is able to
operate effectively.

There are no concerns regarding increased short circuit levels as a result of IR#597. The
increase in short circuit level is still within the capability of associated breakers. The
minimum short circuit level at the Interconnection Facility's (IF) high side bus is 580 MVA.
The Short Circuit Ratio (SCR) in minimal generation conditions is approaching the Vestas
V150's minimum levels. As a result, this information should be provided to Vestas for
design specification consideration as the collector circuit and generator step-up
transformers further reduce the SCR measured at the wind turbines' HV terminals.

IR597 currently meets the lagging power factor requirement based on the supplied
transformer information and assumed collector circuit impedance. It is just on the
threshold, however, and should be re-evaluated when final transformer impedances and
collector circuit design are determined.

IR597 meets NS Power's required short term and long-term voltage flicker requirements
based on the supplied calculated data based on Vestas V150-4.2 MW machines at 50 Hz,

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

i
 System Impact Study Report

with the assumption that the Vestas V150-4.5 MW model does not differ significantly in
terms of voltage flicker performance.

This study's steady state power flow analysis did not identify any transmission
contingencies inside Nova Scotia which would violate thermal loading criteria or voltage
criteria. This study determined there are no necessary Network Upgrades for NRIS
operation. It is concluded that the incorporation of the proposed facility into the NS Power
Transmission System at the specified location has no negative impacts on the reliability of
the NS Power grid, provided the recommendations provided in this report are implemented.

IR597 was not found to cause issues with the stability of the interconnected system. IR597
is neither classified as part of the Bulk Power System according to NPCC, nor the Bulk
Electric System according to NERC. IR597 was found to comply with Low Voltage
Ridethrough requirements and remained online through simulated under frequency
islanding events.

The loss factor is calculated as 0.52% with IR597 modelled in the winter peak case.

The total high-level cost estimate for interconnecting IR597 to the 50W-Milton 138 kV bus
as NRIS is $4,565,000. The entirety is TPIF costs, which includes a 10% contingency. This
estimate will be further refined in the Facility (FAC) study.

The estimated time to construct the TPIF for NRIS operation is 18-24 months after the
receipt of funds.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

ii
 System Impact Study Report

Table of Contents
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................i
List of Appendices.......................................................................................................iv
List of Tables & Figures...............................................................................................iv
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................1
1.1 Scope ............................................................................................................1
1.2 Assumptions..................................................................................................2
1.3 Project Queue Position ...................................................................................3
2.0 Technical Model................................................................................................4
2.1 System Data ..................................................................................................4
2.2 Generating Facility ........................................................................................5
2.3 System Model & Methodology.......................................................................5
2.3.1 Short Circuit ..............................................................................................5
2.3.2 Power Factor.............................................................................................6
2.3.3 Voltage Flicker ..........................................................................................6
2.3.4 Generation Facility Model .........................................................................7
2.3.5 Steady State ...............................................................................................7
2.3.6 Stability .....................................................................................................7
2.3.7 NPCC-BPS / NERC-BES ............................................................................7
2.3.8 Underfrequency Operation .........................................................................9
2.3.9 Voltage Ridethrough ................................................................................10
2.3.10 Loss Factor..........................................................................................11
3.0 Technical Analysis ..........................................................................................12
3.1 Short Circuit................................................................................................12
3.2 Power Factor ...............................................................................................13
3.3 Voltage Flicker............................................................................................14
3.4 Steady State Analysis...................................................................................15
3.4.1 Base Cases ..............................................................................................15
3.4.2 Contingencies ..........................................................................................16
3.4.3 Evaluation ...............................................................................................19
3.5 Stability Analysis.........................................................................................19
3.5.1 Base Cases ..............................................................................................20
3.5.2 Contingencies ..........................................................................................20
3.5.3 Evaluation ...............................................................................................23
3.6 NPCC-BPS / NERC-BES.............................................................................24
3.6.1 NPCC-BPS ..............................................................................................24
3.6.2 NERC-BES ..............................................................................................24
3.7 Underfrequency Operation ...........................................................................24
3.8 Voltage Ridethrough ....................................................................................26
3.9 Loss Factor..................................................................................................27
4.0 Requirements ..................................................................................................28
4.1 Upgrades & Modifications ...........................................................................28
4.2 Cost Estimate ..............................................................................................29
5.0 Conclusions & Recommendations....................................................................29
5.1 Summary of Technical Analysis...................................................................29
5.2 Summary of Expected Facilities ...................................................................30

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

iii
 System Impact Study Report

List of Tables & Figures

Table 1: Load forecast for Study Period .........................................................................4
Table 2: Vestas V150-4.5 MW operational characteristics............................................12
Table 3: Short circuit levels, 3-ph, in MVA .................................................................12
Table 4: Power factor analysis results ..........................................................................14
Table 5: Calculated voltage flicker ..............................................................................14
Table 6: Base Case Dispatch .......................................................................................15
Table 7: Steady State Contingencies ............................................................................16
Table 8: Steady State Violations..................................................................................19
Table 9: Stability Base Cases ......................................................................................20
Table 10: Stability Contingency List...........................................................................20
Table 11: IR597 loss factor data ..................................................................................27
Table 12: NRIS cost estimate ......................................................................................29

Figure 1: IR597 approximate geographic location ..........................................................1

Figure 2: Proposed Interconnection of IR597 .................................................................4
Figure 3: Off-nominal frequency curve (PRC-024-2 and PRC-006-NPCC-2 combined) 10
Figure 4: PRC-024-2 Attachment 2: Voltage ridethrough requirements.........................11
Figure 5: Vestas V150 4.5 MW reactive power capability ............................................13
Figure 6: Underfrequency Performance (freq. at 103H-Lakeside) .................................25
Figure 7: Underfrequency Performance (IR597 machine output) ..................................25
Figure 8: IR597 LVRT Performance (HV fault, 9 cycles).............................................26
Figure 9: IR597 LVRT Performance (LV fault, 9 cycles) .............................................27

List of Appendices
Appendix A: Transmission line ratings
Appendix B: Generating facility data
Appendix C: Base case one-line diagrams
Appendix D: Steady-state analysis results
Appendix E: NPCC-BPS determination results
Appendix F: Underfrequency operation
Appendix G: Low voltage ridethrough
Appendix H: WIN_01-1 stability results
Appendix I: WIN_01-2 stability results
Appendix J: FAL_01-1 stability results
Appendix K: FAL_01-2 stability results
Appendix L: FAL_02-1 stability results
Appendix M: FAL_02-2 stability results
Appendix N: SLL_01-1 stability results
Appendix O: SLL_01-2 stability results
Appendix P: SUM_01-1 stability results
Appendix Q: SUM_01-2 stability results
Appendix R: SUM_02-1 stability results
Appendix S: SUM_02-2 stability results

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

iv
 System Impact Study Report

1.0 Introduction
This System Impact Study report (SIS) presents the results of a System Impact Study
Agreement for the connection of a 36 MW (originally 33.6 MW) wind generation facility
interconnected to the NSPI system as Network Resource Interconnection Service (NRIS).

This project is listed as Interconnection Request #597 in the NSPI Interconnection Request
Queue and will be referred to as IR597 throughout this report. The proposed Commercial
Operation Date is 2023/08/31.

The Interconnection Customer (IC) identified a 138 kV bus at 50W-Milton as the Point of
Interconnection (POI). This wind generation facility will be interconnected to the POI via
a 5.3 km long 138 kV transmission line from the Point of Change of Ownership (PCO).
Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the proposed IR597 site.

Figure 1: IR597 approximate geographic location

1.1 Scope
This report’s objective is to presents the results of the SIS with the objective of assessing
the impact of the proposed generation facility on the NS Power Transmission System. The
scope of the SIS is limited to determining the impact of the IR597 generating facility on
the NS Power transmission for the following:

• Short circuit analysis and its impact on circuit breaker ratings.

• Power factor requirement at the high side of the ICIF transformer.
• Voltage flicker.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

1
 System Impact Study Report

• Steady state analysis to determine any thermal overload of transmission elements

or voltage criteria violation.
• Stability analysis to demonstrate that the interconnected power system is stable for
various single-fault contingencies.
• NPCC Bulk Power System (BPS) and NERC Bulk Electric System (BES)
determination for the substation.
• Underfrequency operation.
• Low voltage ridethrough.
• Incremental system Loss Factor.
• Impact on any existing Remedial Action Schemes (RASs).
This report provides a high-level non-binding cost estimate of requirements for the
connection of the generation facility to ensure there will be no adverse effect on the
reliability of the NS Power Transmission System. An Interconnection Facilities Study
(FAC) follows the SIS in order to ascertain the final cost estimate to the interconnect the
generating facility.

1.2 Assumptions
The study is based on technical information provided by the IC in addition to the following
assumptions:

1. Network Resource Interconnection Service (NRIS) per section 3.2 of the Generation
Interconnection Procedures (GIP).
2. Commercial Operation date: 2023/08/31.
3. The Interconnection Facility consists of eight (8) Vestas V150-4.5 MW wind energy
converters, totalling 36 MW. These are modelled as Type 4 inverter based generators,
evenly split between two collector circuits.
4. The IC identified the POI at one of the 50W-Milton substation's 138 kV buses.
5. The proposed 138 kV transmission line from the POI (50W) to the PCO is 5.3 km of
556 ACSR Dove conductor with OHGW.
6. Data was provided by the IC for the substation step-up transformer and generator step-
up transformers.
6.1. The substation step-up transformer was modelled as one (1) 138 kV (wye) - 34.5
kV (wye) transformer rated at 30/40/50 MVA, with a positive sequence impedance
of 8.5% and 20.0 X/R ratio.
6.2. The generator step-up transformers were modelled as an equivalent transformer
based off eight (8) 34.5 kV (delta) - 0.720 kV (grounded wye) 5.3 MVA
transformers, with a 9.9% positive sequence impedance and 12.375 X/R ratio.
7. A generic collector circuit layout is assumed since a collector circuit design was not
provided. Note the plant's net real and reactive power will be impacted by losses
through the transformers and collector circuits.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

2
 System Impact Study Report

8. The SIS analysis is based on the assumption that IRs higher in the Generation
Interconnection Queue and OATT Transmission Service Queue that have a completed
System Impact Study, or have a System Impact Study in progress, will proceed as listed
in Section 4.0: Project queue position.
9. It is assumed that IR597 generation meets IEEE Standard 519, limiting total harmonic
distortion (all frequencies), to a maximum of 5% with no individual harmonic
exceeding 1%.
10. Transmission line ratings used in this study are listed in Appendix A: Transmission line
ratings.
1.3 Project Queue Position
All in-service generation is included in this FEAS.

As of 2022/07/22, the following projects are higher queued in the Advanced Stage
Interconnection Request Queue and are included in this study's base cases:
• IR426: GIA executed
• IR516: GIA executed
• IR540: GIA executed
• IR542: GIA executed
• IR557: SIS complete
• IR569: GIA executed
• IR566: GIA executed
• IR574: GIA executed
• IR598: GIA executed
• IR604: GIA executed
• IR603: GIA executed
• IR600: GIA executed
The following projects have been submitted to the Transmission Service Request (TSR)
Queue:
• TSR 411: Facilities Study in Progress
• TSR 412: Withdrawn
• TSR 413: Withdrawn
TSR 411 has an expected 01/01/2025 in service date and a Facilities Study (FAC) to
determine required upgrades to the NS transmission system is currently in progress.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

3
 System Impact Study Report

2.0 Technical Model

To facilitate the power flow analysis, a windfarm equivalent was created for the 8
machines, their step-up transformers, and collector circuits. This was based on the 720V
machine terminal voltage that was stepped up to 34.5kV for transmission along the
collector circuits to the IR597 substation. The IR597 substation is modelled where voltage
is stepped up to 138kV to the spur line, approximately 5.3km in length, to the POI at the
50W-Milton substation.

The PSSE model for power flow is shown in Figure 2 . Data for the individual 34.5/0.72 kV
transformers is based on 9.9% impedance on 5.3MVA with a 12.375 X/R ratio. The ICIF
transformer is based on 8.5% impedance on 30 MVA ONAN rating with a 20 X/R ratio.

Figure 2: Proposed Interconnection of IR597

2.1 System Data

The data source used to develop the base cases for this study was the "2022 10-Year System
Outlook" report, dated 2022/06/30. The winter peak demand, including Demand Side
Management (DSM) effects is shown in Table 1: Load forecast for study period.

The other forecasts are derived from the winter peak load forecast using historic load
patterns that resulted in the following scaling factors:
• Summer: 70%
• Light load: 39%
Table 1: Load forecast for Study Period
Interruptible Demand Response Firm Contribution
Contribution to Peak (reduction in Firm to Peak System Peak Growth
Year (MW) Peak only, MW) (MW) (MW) (%)
2022 144 - 2021 2165 -
2023 146 -4 2035 2185 0.9
2024 146 -12 2057 2215 1.4
2025 152 -24 2076 2253 1.7
2026 154 -36 2101 2291 1.7

The load forecast is projecting a slight increase in forecasted non-firm (interruptible) and
moderate increase in firm peak demand (0.9% - 1.7%). DSM, AMI-enabled peak reduction

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

4
 System Impact Study Report

strategies, and efficiency improvements are accounted for in the Demand Response column
and are expected to offset a portion of the residential and industrial growth for the near
future. Steady overall load growth (~1.5-2%) between 2024 and 2032 is forecasted.

Load conditions for 2023 were used in this study because the lower peak load demand is
more critical to the analysis in the region around IR597. Based on its location (West of
Metro), Transmission System impacts are likely to be seen in Spring and Fall conditions,
rather than winter.

Base cases for this SIS were selected to stress overall system and local conditions, with
most of them at or below 1,500 MW, approximately 70% of winter peak. This is derived
from Spring conditions, where Western and Valley hydro resources are dispatched at their
highest values.

2.2 Generating Facility

IR597 will have 8 Vestas V150-4.5 MW wind turbine generators, each rated at 4.5MW.
Each unit will generate at 720V and be transformed to 34.5kV on two collector circuits,
which will be further transformed to 138kV to connect to the NS Power Transmission
System.

The 138/34.5 kV ICIF (Interconnection Customers Interconnection Facilities) transformer

is rated 30/40/50 MVA, Y/Y with Δ tertiary, OLTC with +/- 10% taps (32 equal steps),
and 8.5% impedance based on 30 MVA. The results of this SIS will be reviewed if a change
is made to the rating or impedance of the ICIF transformer.

The proposed generator is classified as Type 4, with fully rated AC-DC-AC converter. It
is assumed to be equipped with a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
based central regulator which controls the individual generator reactive power output to
maintain constant voltage at the ICIF substation. The Vestas V150-4.5 MW wind turbines
are each capable of a reactive power range of +1530 to -1440 kVAR within 90% to 110%
of 720V nominal (+2550 to -1600 kVAR at 100% of 720V nominal).

2.3 System Model & Methodology

Testing and analysis were conducted using the following criteria, software, and/or
modelling data.

2.3.1 Short Circuit

PSSE 34.8, classical fault study, flat voltage profile at 1 PU voltage, and 3LG fault was
used to assess before and after short circuit conditions. The 2023 system configuration with
IR597 in service and out of service was studied, with comparison between the two.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

5
 System Impact Study Report

2.3.2 Power Factor

The Standard Generator Interconnection Procedures (GIP) requires a net power factor of
±0.95 measured at the high voltage bus of the ICIF transformer. PSSE was used to simulate
high and low system voltage conditions to determine the machine capability in
delivery/absorption of reactive power (VAR).

2.3.3 Voltage Flicker

Voltage flicker contribution is calculated in accordance with the methodology described in
CEATI Report No. T044700-5123 "Power Quality Impact Assessment of Distributed Wind
Generation".

Short-term flicker severity (Pst) and long-term flicker severity (Plt) calculations are at the
WTG terminals. For multiple wind turbines at a single plant, the estimated flicker
contribution is calculated as follows:

Continuous:

Switching Operation:

Where:
• Sk = short-circuit apparent power at the high voltage side of the ICIF transformer.
As calculations are for the flicker contribution for the addition of IR597 to the
existing system, short-circuit values are for the existing system - before the addition
of IR597.
• m = 2 in accordance with IEC 61400-21 for WTGs.
• Nwt = number of WTGs at IR597.
• N10,i and N120,i = number of switching operations of the individual wind turbine
within a 10 and 120 minute period, respectively.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

6
 System Impact Study Report

• ci(ψk,v a) = flicker coefficient of the wind turbine for the given network impedance
angle, ψk, at the PCC, for the given annual average wind speed, v a, at the hub-height
of the wind turbine site. It is to be provided by the wind turbine supplier. NS
network impedance angle is typically 80º-85º.
• kf,i(ψk) = flicker step factor of the individual wind turbine.
• Sn,i = rated apparent power of the individual wind turbine.

NS Power's requirement is Pst ≤ 0.25 and Plt ≤ 0.35.

2.3.4 Generation Facility Model

Modelling data provided was provided by the IC for PSSE steady state and stability
analysis in this SIS. The 8 wind turbines and 2 collector circuits were grouped as a single
equivalent generator with an equivalent impedance line.

2.3.5 Steady State

Analysis was performed in PSSE using Python scripts to simulate a wide range of single
contingencies, with the output reports summarizing bus voltages and branch flows that
exceeded established limits.

System modifications and additions up to 2023 were modelled to develop base cases to
best test system reliability in accordance with NS Power and NPCC design criteria:

• Light load; low Western Valley generation.

• Medium load; high and low Western Valley generation.
• Peak load.
Power flow was run with the contingencies on each of the base cases listed in Section 3.4;
with IR597 in and out of service to determine the impact of the proposed facility on the
performance criteria and reliability of the NS Power grid.

2.3.6 Stability
Positive sequence RMS dynamic analysis was performed using PSSE for the 2023 study
year and system configuration. Spring light load, Fall, Summer peak, and Winter peak were
studied for contingencies that provide the best measure of system reliability. Details on the
contingencies studied are provided in Section 3.5. The system was examined before and
after the addition of IR597 to determine its impact.

Note all plots are performed on 100 MVA system base.

2.3.7 NPCC-BPS / NERC-BES

NS Power is required to meet reliability standards developed by the Northeast Power
Coordinating Council (NPCC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
(NERC). Both NPCC and NERC have more stringent requirements for system elements

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

7
 System Impact Study Report

that can have impacts beyond the local area. These elements are classified as "Bulk Power
System" (BPS) for NPCC, and "Bulk Electric System" (BES) for NERC.

2.3.7.1 NPCC-BPS

NPCC’s BPS substations are subject to stringent requirements like redundant and
physically separated protective relay and teleprotection systems. Determination of BPS
status was in accordance with NPCC criteria document A-10: Classification of Bulk Power
System Elements, 2020/03/27. The A-10 test requires steady state and stability testing.

The stability test involves simulation of a permanent 3PH fault at the bus under test with
all local protection out of service (such as station battery failure), including high speed
teleprotection to the remote terminals. The fault is maintained on the bus for enough time
to allow remote zone 2 protection to trip the faulted bus, and the post-fault simulation is
extended to 20 seconds.

The steady state test involves opening all elements connected to the bus under test in
constant MVA power flow, as well as disconnecting all units which tripped during the
stability test.

A bus will be classified as part of the BPS if any of the following is observed during the
steady state and/or stability tests:
• System instability that cannot be demonstrably contained with in the Area.
• Cascading that cannot be demonstrably contained within the Area.
• Net loss of source/load greater than the Area's threshold.

The NPCC A-10 Criteria document does not require rigorous testing of all buses. Section
3.4, item 2 states:

"...For buses operated at voltage levels between 50 kV and 200 kV, all buses
adjacent to a bulk power system bus shall be tested. Testing shall continue into
the 50-200 kV system until a non-bulk power system result is obtained, as detailed
in Section 3.5. Once a non-bulk power system result is obtained, it is permitted to
forgo testing of connected buses unless one of the following considerations shows
a need to test these buses:
- Slower remote clearing times.
- Higher short-circuit levels..."

The 138 kV bus at 50W-Milton substation identified as the POI for IR597 is not adjacent
to a BPS bus.

2.3.7.2 NERC-BES

NERC uses Bulk Electric System (BES) classification criteria based on a "bright-line"
approach rather than performance based like the NPCC BPS classification. The NERC

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

8
 System Impact Study Report

Glossary of Terms as well as the methodology described in the NERC Bulk Electric System
Definition Reference was used to determine if IR597 should be designated BES or not.

2.3.8 Underfrequency Operation

Underfrequency dynamic simulation is performed to demonstrate that NS Power's
automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding (UFLS) program sheds enough load to assist
stabilizing system frequency, without tripping IR597's generators.

This test is accomplished by triggering a sudden loss of generation by placing a fault on L-

8001 under high import conditions.

Nova Scotia is connected to the rest of the North American power grid by the following
three AC transmission lines:
• L-8001 (345kV)
• L-6535 (138kV)
• L-6536 (138kV)
Under high import conditions, if L-8001, or, either of L-3025 and L-3006 in New
Brunswick trips, an "Import Power Monitor" RAS (SPS) will cross-trip L-6613 at 67N-
Onslow to avoid thermal overloads on the in-service 138kV transmission lines. This
controlled separation will island Nova Scotia from the rest of the North American power
grid. System frequency will be stabilized from the resulting generation deficiency through
Under-Frequency Load Shedding (UFLS) schemes to shed load across Nova Scotia. IR597
is required to remain online and not trip under this scenario.

Other contingencies in New Brunswick and New England can also result in under-
frequency islanded situation in Nova Scotia.

In addition to the test, IR597 must be capable of operating reliably for frequency variations
in accordance with NERC Standards PRC-024-2 and PRC-006-NPCC-2 as shown in
Figure 2. It should also have the capability of riding through a rate of change of frequency
of 4 Hz/s.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

9
 System Impact Study Report

Figure 3: Off-nominal frequency curve (PRC-024-2 and PRC-006-NPCC-2 combined)

2.3.9 Voltage Ridethrough

IR597 must remain operational under the following voltage conditions:
• Under normal operating conditions: 0.95 PU to 1.05 PU
• Under stressed (contingency) conditions: 0.90 PU to 1.10 PU
• Under the voltage ridethrough requirements in NERC Standard PRC-024-2, see
Figure 3.
This test is performed by applying a 3-phase fault to the HV and LV buses of the ICIF for
9 cycles. IR597 should not trip for faults on the Transmission System or its collector
circuits.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

10
 System Impact Study Report

Figure 4: PRC-024-2 Attachment 2: Voltage ridethrough requirements

2.3.10 Loss Factor

Loss factor was calculated by running the power flow using a standardized winter peak
base case with and without IR597, while keeping 91H-Tufts Cove generation as the NS
area interchange bus. The loss factor for IR597 is the differential MW displaced or
increased at 91H-Tufts Cove generation calculated as a percentage of IR597's nameplate
MW rating. Although the IR under study is tested at maximum rated output, all other
(existing or committed) wind generation facilities are dispatched at an average 30%
capacity factor.

This methodology reflects the load centre in and around 91H-Tufts Cove and has been
accepted and used in the calculation of system losses for the Open Access Transmission

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

11
 System Impact Study Report

Tariff (OATT). It is calculated on the hour of system peak as a means for comparing
multiple projects but not used for any other purpose.

Because of the uncertainty of the collector circuit design and transformer equipment
specification, loss factors are provided at the high side of the ICIF transformer.

3.0 Technical Analysis

The results of the technical analysis are reported in the following sections.

3.1 Short Circuit

IR597 will not impact 50W-Milton and neighbouring breaker's interrupting capability
based on this study's short circuit analysis. Analysis was performed using PSS/e 34.8,
classical fault study, flat voltage profile at 1.0 PU voltage, and 3LG faults.

The maximum (design) interrupting capability of the neighbouring 138 kV circuit breakers
are at least 5,000 MVA. The Vestas V150-4.5 MW technical bulletin supplied the short
circuit characteristics in Table 2: Vestas V150-4.5 MW operational characteristics. The
short circuit levels in the area before and after this development are provided in Table 3:
Short circuit levels, 3-ph, in MVA.

Table 2: Vestas V150-4.5 MW operational characteristics

Characteristic Value
Minimum Required Short Circuit Ratio at Turbine 5.0 (contact Vestas for lower SCR levels)
HV Connection
Maximum Short Circuit Contribution* 1.05 PU (continuous)
1.45 PU (peak)
*Assumed the same as the Vestas V150-4.2 MW model. No information was provided for the V150-4.5 MW
model.
Table 3: Short circuit levels, 3-ph, in MVA
Location IR597 not in service IR597 in service Post % increase
2023, max generation, all facilities in service
50W-Milton POI:138kV 1309 1340 2%
IR597-IC tap PCO:138kV 1114 1146 3%
IR597-LV:34.5kV 268 303 12%
2023, min generation, all facilities in service
50W-Milton POI:138kV 700 731 4%
IR597-IC tap PCO:138kV 640 672 5%
IR597-LV:34.5kV 228 262 13%
2023, min generation, L6025 OOS
50W-Milton POI:138kV 629 660 5%
IR597-IC tap PCO:138kV 580 611 5%
IR597-LV:34.5kV 220 254 13%

The minimum Short Circuit Ratio (SCR) specified in the IR documentations for IR597 is
5.0 at the turbine's HV terminals. Minimum fault levels occur when L-6025 (138 kV line
from 50W-Milton to 99W-Bridgewater) is out of service. In this scenario, the SCR at the

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

12
 System Impact Study Report

low side of IR597's substation step down transformer is calculated as 6.1 (220 MVA / 36
MW) at IR597’s 34.5 kV bus. This information should be provided to Vestas for design
specification as the collector circuit length and generator step-up transformers may further
reduce the SCR measured at the wind turbines' HV terminals.

3.2 Power Factor

At all production levels up to the full rated load, the IR597 facility must be capable of
operating between 0.95pu lagging to 0.95pu leading net power factor at the high side of
the ICIF transformer.

Information provided by the IC, the 138/34.5 kV transformer has an on-load tap changer
with ±10% taps and 32 equal steps. The 34.5/0.72 kV generator step-up transformers were
noted to be supplied with off-load de-energized tap changers with ±2.5% taps.

Figure 5: Vestas V150 4.5 MW reactive power capability 1

1
Vestas General Description 4MW platform (4.5MW), document no: 0067-7050 V05, 2022-02-23.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

13
 System Impact Study Report

Using the Vestas reactive power capability, shown in Figure 5: Vestas V150 4.5 MW
reactive power capability, various levels were calculated and are displayed below in Table
4: Power factor analysis results.

Table 4: Power factor analysis results

Breakpoints on reactive IR597 rated output Measurements at the HV terminals Meets net
capability curve (8 x 4.5 MW WTG units) of the ICIF substation 0.95 pf
(V = 1.0pu) MW MVAR MVA pf MW MVAR MVA pf requirement?
Ma xi mum Rea cti ve
36.00 20.40 41.38 0.870 35.40 11.90 37.35 0.948 Yes
Injecti on (Poi nt B)
Ma xi umum Rea cti ve
36.00 -12.80 38.21 0.942 35.40 -20.60 40.96 0.864 Yes
Abs orpti on (Poi nt C)

The Vestas technical bulletin's reactive power capability, shown in Figure 2, shows that
the reactive power injection capability is not reduced at full output at nominal voltage
(regions A-B). When the wind farm is operating at its max active power nameplate
capacity, power factor measured at the ICIF HV terminals is just within limits. If the actual
collector circuit differs significantly from the assumed generic collector circuit parameters
used, this analysis should be re-evaluated.

IR597 therefore meets NS Power's ±0.95 net power factor requirement at the HV terminals
of the ICIF substation based on PSSE simulations using parameters provided by the IC and
assumptions as provided in Section 1.2. IR597 is also required to produce/ absorb reactive
power at all production levels up to its full rated output.

3.3 Voltage Flicker

NS Power's voltage flicker requirements are:
• Pst ≤ 0.25
• Plt ≤ 0.35

The voltage flicker calculations use IEC Standard 61300-21 based on test data provided by
the IC for the Vestas V150-4.2 MW machines at 50 Hz. A flicker coefficient was selected
from the test data measured for an 70º system angle (most conservative values) and
maximum active power output (4.2 MW). The voltage flicker Pst and Plt levels are
calculated at the POI for various system conditions listed in Table 5.

Table 5: Calculated voltage flicker

System Conditions Continuous (Pst=Plt)
Maximum Generation
All transmission facilities in service 0.058
Minimum Generation
All transmission facilities in service 0.068
L-6025 out of service 0.071

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

14
 System Impact Study Report

IR597 therefore meets NS Power's required short term and long-term voltage flicker
requirements based on the supplied calculated data, with the assumption that the Vestas
V150-4.5 MW model does not differ significantly in terms of voltage flicker performance.

The generator must also meet IEEE Standard 519-2014 limiting Total Harmonic Distortion
(all frequencies) to no higher than 2.5% with no individual harmonic exceeding 1.5% for
the 138 kV voltage level. It is the generating facility's responsibility to ensure that this
requirement is met as this SIS cannot make this assessment.

3.4 Steady State Analysis

3.4.1 Base Cases
Base cases used in this study are listed in Table 6: Base Case Dispatch. They were selected
to reflect conditions under varying amounts of low/high area load vs historic area
generation. This approach was chosen because portions of the Western/Valley transmission
system would presently experience overloads if the entire area hydro and wind plants were
simultaneously operated at maximum capacity under system light load.

Area transmission line ratings are listed in Appendix A: Transmission line ratings. One-
line diagrams of each base case, in sets of three, are presented in Appendix C: Base case
one-line diagrams.

Table 6: Base Case Dispatch

West/ West/ West/
NS IR597 NS/ Valley West Valley
Case Wind valley ML CBX ONI ONS Valley valley
load status NB imp imp exp
hydro imp load
WIN_01-1 2198 - 486 126 150 -320 825 1029 764 103 114 7 59 504
WIN_01-2 2198 36 522 126 150 -320 789 1018 754 101 83 7 59 504
FAL_01-1 1370 - 486 104 331 -475 584 713 345 -4 36 41 1 312
FAL_01-2 1370 36 522 104 334 -475 584 713 343 -6 5 41 1 312
FAL_02-1 1370 - 466 23 331 -475 609 737 369 61 70 -30 72 312
FAL_02-2 1370 36 502 23 334 -475 609 737 367 59 39 -30 72 312
SLL_01-1 710 - 367 6 332 -475 413 415 82 0 21 9 17 164
SLL_01-2 710 36 403 6 334 -475 413 415 79 -3 -10 9 17 164
SUM_01-1 1570 - 486 126 331 -475 704 819 431 21 59 32 16 353
SUM_01-2 1570 36 522 126 334 -475 669 785 395 19 23 32 16 353
SUM_02-1 1570 - 486 126 -296 -330 228 218 459 21 59 33 16 353
SUM_02-2 1570 36 522 126 -297 -330 228 218 461 19 23 33 16 353
Note 1: All values are in MW.
Note 2: CBX (Cape Breton Export) and ONI (Onslow Import) are Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL) defined interfaces.
Note 3: Wind refers to only transmission connected wind.

Regarding the case dispatches:

• WIN_01-x represents peak load, with relatively high East-West transfers.
Generation dispatched is assumed to be typical for peak load, with high load in the
Valley area.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

15
 System Impact Study Report

• FAL_01/02-x represent a shoulder season load (with summer ratings in effect) with
high wind and varying west/valley hydro dispatch. This represents typical spring
hydro run-off conditions.
• SUM_01-x represents summer peak load and maximum generation in the Valley
area. Local generation is managed to ensure transmission limits are maintained.
• SUM_02-x represents the NS/NB import limit, presently 27% of net in-province
load, to a maximum 300 MW. This case has three equivalent thermal units online,
running near minimum load, plus 330 MW import from NL. It represents a low
inertia scenario on the NS system and is used to test the performance of the
Underfrequency Load Shedding (UFLS) system during contingencies which isolate
NS from the interconnected power system (e.g. loss of L-8001).
• SLL_01-x represents spring light load, which is typically the lightest loading period
experienced by the NS system. Summer ratings are in effect, and small hydro units
are dispatched at a minimum.

3.4.2 Contingencies
The steady state power flow analysis includes the contingencies listed in Table 7.

Table 7: Steady State Contingencies

ID Element Type Location ID Element Type Location
1 101S_L-7011 Line fault 101S-Woodbine 111 50W_L-6020 Line fault 50W-Milton

2 101S_L-7012 Line fault 101S-Woodbine 112 50W_L-6024 Line fault 50W-Milton

3 101S_L-7015 Line fault 101S-Woodbine 113 51V_51V-B51 Bus fault 51V-Tremont
4 101S_L-8004_G0 Line fault 101S-Woodbine 114 51V_51V-B52 Bus fault 51V-Tremont

5 101S_ML-BIPOLE HVDC line fault 101S-Woodbine 115 51V_51V-B61 Bus fault 51V-Tremont
Transformer
6 101S_ML-POLE1 HVDC line fault 101S-Woodbine 116 51V_51V-T61 51V-Tremont
fault
7 101S_ML-POLE2 HVDC line fault 101S-Woodbine 117 51V_L-5025 Line fault 51V-Tremont

8 101S-701 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 118 5S_L-6516 Line fault 5S-Glen Tosh
9 101S-702 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 119 5S_L-6537 Line fault 5S-Glen Tosh
10 101S-703 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 120 5S_L-6538 Line fault 5S-Glen Tosh

11 101S-704 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 121 5S-606 Breaker fail 5S-Glen Tosh
12 101S-705 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 122 5S-607 Breaker fail 5S-Glen Tosh
13 101S-706 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 123 67N_L-7001 Line fault 67N-Onslow

14 101S-711 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 124 67N_L-7002 Line fault 67N-Onslow

15 101S-712 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 125 67N_L-7019 Line fault 67N-Onslow

16 101S-713 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 126 67N_L-8001_G0 Line fault 67N-Onslow

17 101S-811 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 127 67N_L-8002 Line fault 67N-Onslow
18 101S-812_G0 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 128 67N-701 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

19 101S-813_G0 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 129 67N-702 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

20 101S-814 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 130 67N-703 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow
21 101S-816 Breaker fail 101S-Woodbine 131 67N-704 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

16
 System Impact Study Report

22 101S-T81 Transformer fault 101S-Woodbine 132 67N-705 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

23 101S-T82 Transformer fault 101S-Woodbine 133 67N-706 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

24 103H_L-6008 Line fault 103H-Lakeside 134 67N-710 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

25 103H_L-6033 Line fault 103H-Lakeside 135 67N-711_G0 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow
26 103H_L-6038 Line fault 103H-Lakeside 136 67N-712 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

27 103H-600 Breaker fail 103H-Lakeside 137 67N-713 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

28 103H-608 Breaker fail 103H-Lakeside 138 67N-811_G0 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

29 103H-681 Breaker fail 103H-Lakeside 139 67N-813 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow

30 103H-881 Breaker fail 103H-Lakeside 140 67N-814_G0 Breaker fail 67N-Onslow
Transformer
31 103H-B61 Bus fault 103H-Lakeside 141 67N-T71 67N-Onslow
fault
Transformer
32 103H-B62 Bus fault 103H-Lakeside 142 67N-T81 67N-Onslow
fault
Transformer
33 103H-T61 Transformer fault 103H-Lakeside 143 67N-T82 67N-Onslow
fault
34 103H-T63 Transformer fault 103H-Lakeside 144 79N_L-6507 Line fault 79N-Hopewell

35 103H-T81 Transformer fault 103H-Lakeside 145 79N_L-6508 Line fault 79N-Hopewell

36 104H-600 Breaker fail 104H-Kempt Road 146 79N_L-8003_G0 Line fault 79N-Hopewell
Transformer
37 104W-G1 Generator trip 104W-Brooklyn 147 79N-T81_G0 79N-Hopewell
fault
38 110W-B61 Bus fault 110W-South Canoe 148 85S_L-6545 Line fault 85S-Wreck Cove
39 110W-T62 Transformer fault 110W-South Canoe 149 88S_L-7014 Line fault 88S-Lingan
40 11V_11V-B51 Bus fault 11V-Paradise 150 88S_L-7021 Line fault 88S-Lingan

41 120H_L-6005 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 151 88S_L-7022 Line fault 88S-Lingan
42 120H_L-6010 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 152 88S-710 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
43 120H_L-6011 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 153 88S-711 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan

44 120H_L-6016 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 154 88S-713 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
45 120H_L-6051 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 155 88S-714 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan

46 120H_L-7008 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 156 88S-715 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
47 120H_L-7009 Line fault 120H-Brushy Hill 157 88S-720 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
48 120H-621 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 158 88S-721 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan

49 120H-622 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 159 88S-722 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
50 120H-623 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 160 88S-723_G0 Breaker fail 88S-Lingan
51 120H-624 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 161 88S-G2 Generator trip 88S-Lingan

52 120H-626 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 162 88S-G3 Generator trip 88S-Lingan
53 120H-627 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 163 88S-G4 Generator trip 88S-Lingan
Transformer
54 120H-628 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 164 88S-T71 88S-Lingan
fault
Transformer
55 120H-629 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 165 88S-T72 88S-Lingan
fault
56 120H-710 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 166 89S-G1 Generator trip 89S-Point Aconi
57 120H-711 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 167 90H_L-6002 Line fault 90H-Sackville
58 120H-712 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 168 90H_L-6003 Line fault 90H-Sackville

59 120H-713 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 169 90H_L-6004 Line fault 90H-Sackville
60 120H-714 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 170 90H_L-6009 Line fault 90H-Sackville

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

17
 System Impact Study Report

61 120H-715 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 171 90H-605 Breaker fail 90H-Sackville
62 120H-716 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 172 90H-611 Breaker fail 90H-Sackville

63 120H-720 Breaker fail 120H-Brushy Hill 173 91H_L-5012 Line fault 91H-Tufts Cove
64 120H-SVC Reactive device trip 120H-Brushy Hill 174 91H_L-5041 Line fault 91H-Tufts Cove
65 120H-T71 Transformer fault 120H-Brushy Hill 175 91H_L-5049 Line fault 91H-Tufts Cove

66 120H-T72 Transformer fault 120H-Brushy Hill 176 91H-511 Breaker fail 91H-Tufts Cove
67 13V_13V-B51 Bus fault 13V-Gulch Hydro 177 91H-516 Breaker fail 91H-Tufts Cove

68 13V_L-5026 Line fault 13V-Gulch Hydro 178 91H-521 Breaker fail 91H-Tufts Cove
69 13V_L-5531 Line fault 13V-Gulch Hydro 179 91H-523 Breaker fail 91H-Tufts Cove
70 13V_L-5532 Line fault 13V-Gulch Hydro 180 91H-G3 Generator trip 91H-Tufts Cove

71 1C-G2 Generator trip 1C-Point Tupper 181 91H-G4 Generator trip 91H-Tufts Cove
72 1N_L-6001 Line fault 1N-Onslow 182 91H-G5 Generator trip 91H-Tufts Cove
73 1N_L-6503 Line fault 1N-Onslow 183 91H-G6 Generator trip 91H-Tufts Cove
Transformer
74 1N_L-6513 Line fault 1N-Onslow 184 91H-T11 91H-Tufts Cove
fault
Transformer
75 1N-600 Breaker fail 1N-Onslow 185 91H-T62 91H-Tufts Cove
fault
91N-Dalhousie
76 1N-601 Breaker fail 1N-Onslow 186 91N-701 Breaker fail
Wind
91N-Dalhousie
77 1N-613 Breaker fail 1N-Onslow 187 91N-702 Breaker fail
Wind
91N-Dalhousie
78 1N-B61 Bus fault 1N-Onslow 188 91N-703 Breaker fail
Wind
91N-Dalhousie
79 1N-B62 Bus fault 1N-Onslow 189 91N-B71 Bus fault
Wind
80 1N-C61 Reactive device trip 1N-Onslow 190 99W_99W-B61 Bus fault 99W-Bridgewater
81 1N-T1 Transformer fault 1N-Onslow 191 99W_99W-B62 Bus fault 99W-Bridgewater
Transformer
82 1N-T4 Transformer fault 1N-Onslow 192 99W_99W-T71 99W-Bridgewater
fault
Transformer
83 1N-T65 Transformer fault 1N-Onslow 193 99W_99W-T72 99W-Bridgewater
fault
84 30W_30W-B51 Bus fault 30W-Souriquois 194 99W_L-6025 Line fault 99W-Bridgewater
85 30W_30W-T62 Bus fault 30W-Souriquois 195 99W-708 Breaker fail 99W-Bridgewater

86 3C_L-7003 Line fault 3C-Port Hastings 196 99W-709 Breaker fail 99W-Bridgewater
Transformer
87 3C_L-7004 Line fault 3C-Port Hastings 197 99W-T71 99W-Bridgewater
fault
Transformer
88 3C_L-7005_G0 Line fault 3C-Port Hastings 198 99W-T72 99W-Bridgewater
fault
89 3C-710_G0 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 199 9W_9W-B53 Bus fault 9W-Tusket Hydro
Transformer
90 3C-711 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 200 9W_9W-T2 9W-Tusket Hydro
fault
91 3C-712 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 201 9W_L-5535 Line fault 9W-Tusket Hydro

92 3C-713 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 202 DCT_L-5039][L-6033 Double cct tower Bayers Lake
93 3C-714 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 203 DCT_L-6005][L-6016 Double cct tower Sackville

94 3C-715 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 204 DCT_L-6010][L-6005 Double cct tower Sackville
95 3C-716 Breaker fail 3C-Port Hastings 205 DCT_L-6011][L-6010 Double cct tower Sackville
96 3C-T71 Transformer fault 3C-Port Hastings 206 DCT_L-6033][L-6035 Double cct tower Halifax

97 3C-T72 Transformer fault 3C-Port Hastings 207 DCT_L-6507][L-6508 Double cct tower Trenton

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

18
 System Impact Study Report

DCT_L-7003][L-
98 3S_L-6539 Line fault 3S-Gannon Rd 208 Double cct tower Canso Causeway
7004_G0
99 43V_43V-B61 Bus fault 43V-Canaan Rd 209 DCT_L-7008][L-7009 Double cct tower Bridgewater
100 43V_43V-B62 Bus fault 43V-Canaan Rd 210 DCT_L-7009][L-8002 Double cct tower Sackville

101 43V_L-6012 Line fault 43V-Canaan Rd 211 DCT_L-7021][L-6534 Double cct tower Lingan / VJ
102 43V_L-6013 Line fault 43V-Canaan Rd 212 IR597 Generator trip 50W-Milton
103 43V_L-6054 Line fault 43V-Canaan Rd 213 MEMRAMCOOK_L1159 Line fault New Brunswick

104 48C-G1 Generator trip 48C-PHP 214 MEMRAMCOOK_L1160 Line fault New Brunswick
105 50N-G5 Generator trip 50N-Trenton 215 MEMRAMCOOK_ME3-1 Breaker fail New Brunswick

106 50N-G6 Generator trip 50N-Trenton 216 SALISBURY_L3004 Line fault New Brunswick
107 50W_50W-B2 Bus fault 50W-Milton 217 SALISBURY_L3006 Line fault New Brunswick
108 50W_50W-B3 Bus fault 50W-Milton 218 SALISBURY_L3013 Line fault New Brunswick

109 50W_50W-B4 Bus fault 50W-Milton 219 SALISBURY_SA3-2 Breaker fail New Brunswick
110 50W_L-5541 Line fault 50W-Milton

3.4.3 Evaluation
The steady state contingencies evaluated in this study demonstrate IR597 does not require
Network Upgrades beyond the POI to operate at its full capacity of 36 MW under NRIS.

IR597 has little impact on transmission in the Western region due to its connection into the
138 kV bus at 50W-Milton. Single line diagrams showing the load flows of each of the
bases cases are presented in Appendix C: Base case one-line diagrams. Results of the
steady state analysis are presented in Appendix D: Steady-state analysis results. Notes are
provided to explain observed issues, which are also summarized below, in Table 8. These
contingencies around the 50W-Milton substation resulted in pre-existing undervoltage
conditions in the 69 kV system between 9W-Tusket and 30W-Souriquois, however, the
presence of IR597 did not worsen their severity.

Table 8: Steady State Violations

ID Contingency Case Post- Violation
Contingency Magnitude
108 50W_50W-B3 FAL_01, SUM_01, 30W-Souriquous V(pu)=0.8960
WIN_01 UV
109 50W_50W-B4 FAL_01, WIN_01 9W-Tusket: UV V(pu)=0.8885
112 50W_L-6024 FAL_01, SUM_01, 22W-Barrington V(pu)=0.8781
WIN_01 UV
199 9W_9W-B53 WIN_01 10W-Tusket GT V(pu)=1.1243
HV
3.5 Stability Analysis
System design criteria requires the system to be stable and well damped in all modes of
oscillations. No cascade tripping shall occur apart from designed breaker back-up
protection operation.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

19
 System Impact Study Report

3.5.1 Base Cases

All steady-state cases were studied for contingencies that provide the best measure of
system reliability. The parameters of these base cases are repeated below in Table 9.

Table 9: Stability Base Cases

IR597 West/ Valley
Case NS load Wind NS/ NB ML CBX ONI ONS
status Hydro
WIN_01-1 2198 - 486 126 150 -320 825 1029 764
WIN_01-2 2198 36 522 126 150 -320 789 1018 754
FAL_01-1 1370 - 486 104 331 -475 584 713 345
FAL_01-2 1370 36 522 104 334 -475 584 713 343
FAL_02-1 1370 - 466 23 331 -475 609 737 369
FAL_02-2 1370 36 502 23 334 -475 609 737 367
SLL_01-1 710 - 367 6 332 -475 413 415 82
SLL_01-2 710 36 403 6 334 -475 413 415 79
SUM_01-1 1570 - 486 126 331 -475 704 819 431
SUM_01-2 1570 36 522 126 334 -475 669 785 395
SUM_02-1 1570 - 486 126 -296 -330 228 218 459
SUM_02-2 1570 36 522 126 -297 -330 228 218 461

3.5.2 Contingencies
The contingencies tested for this study are listed in Table 10.

Table 10: Stability Contingency List

ID Contingency Fault Tripped Elements Notes
L8004: 101S/79N
1 101S BBU 101S-812 breaker fail @ 101S G5/G6 SPS
ML Pole 2
2 101S L8004 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 101S 101S/79N G5/G6 SPS
3 101S MLBIPOLE 1LG Fault DC line fault @ 101S ML Pole 1 & 2
L6008:103H/90H
L6016:103H/137H
4 103H BBU 103H-608 breaker fail @ 103H
L6038:103H/129H
67N-T61
L8002:103H/67N
103H-T81
5 103H BBU 103H-681 breaker fail @ 103H
103H-T63
L6033:103H/2H/1H
L8002:103H/67N
6 103H BBU 103H-881 breaker fail @ 103H
103H-T81
L6008:103H/90H
L6016:103H/137H/120H
7 103H BKR 103H-600 1P breaker fail @ 103H
L6038:103H/129H
L5039:103H/34H/20H
8 103H L6008 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 103H L6008:103H/90H
9 103H L6016 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 103H L6016:103H/137H/120H
10 103H L6033 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 103H L6033:103H/2H/1H
11 103H L8002 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 103H L8002:103H/67N

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

20
 System Impact Study Report

L5025:11V/10V/51V
12 11V-B51 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 11V L5026:11V/70V/13V 98V AAS
11V-G1
13 11V L5025 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 11V L5025:11V/10V/51V 98V AAS
14 11V L5026 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 11V L5026:11V/70V/13V 98V AAS
L6005: 120H/131H
15 120H BBU 120H-622 breaker fail @ 120H
L6016: 120H/137H
120H-T71
16 120H BBU 120H-710 breaker fail @ 120H
L7018: 120H/67N
L7001:120H/67N
17 120H BBU 120H-715 breaker fail @ 120H
L7008:120H/99W
18 120H L6005 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L6005: 120H/131H
19 120H L6010 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L6010: 120H/90H
20 120H L6011 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L6011: 120H/17V
21 120H L6016 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L6016: 120H/137H
22 120H L7008 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L7008: 120H/99W
23 120H L7018 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 120H L7018: 120H/67N
L5531:13V/15V
L5533:13V/77V
24 13V-B51 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 13V L5532:13V/14V/3W
L5026:13V/74V/11V
13V-G1
25 13V L5026 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 13V L5026:13V/74V/11V
26 13V L5531 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 13V L5531:13V/15V
27 13V L5532 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 13V L5532:13V/14V/3W
L5538:15V/16V
L5531:15V/13V
28 15V-B51 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 15V L5050:15V/91V
L5535:15V/34W/9W
15V-G1/2
29 15V L5535 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 15V L5535:15V/34W/9W
L6012:17V/43V
30 17V BBU 17V-612 breaker fail @ 17V L6051:17V/120H
17V-T2
L6001:1N/82V/132H
67N-T71
31 1N BBU 1N-601 breaker fail @ 1N
1N-T4
1N-C61
L6613:1N/81N/74N
32 1N BBU 1N-613 breaker fail @ 1N L6503:1N/49N/51N
1N-T65
L6527:1N/67N
L6613:1N/81N/74N
L6503:1N/49N/51N/50N
33 1N BKR 1N-600 1P breaker fail @ 1N L6001:1N/82V/132H Isolates 1N
1N-T65
1N-T1
1N-T4
34 1N L6001 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 1N L6001:1N/82V/132H
35 1N L6503 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 1N L6503:1N/49N/51N/50N
36 1N L6613 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 1N L6613:1N/81N/74N

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

21
 System Impact Study Report

37 3C L7005 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 3C L7005: 67N/3C G3 SPS

Export SPS
38 410N L3006 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 410N 410N/4592-Salisbury
Import SPS
L6012:43V/17V
L6013:43V/51V
39 43V BBU 43V-612 breaker fail @ 43V
43V-T61
43V-C61
L6012:43V/17V
40 43V-B61 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 43V L6013:43V/51V
43V-T61
L6015:43V/51V
L6051:43V/99V
41 43V-B62 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 43V
L6054:43V/101V
43V-T62
42 43V L6012 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 43V L6012:43V/17V
L5549:50W/48W
L5530:50W/46W/30W
L5540A:50W/6W
43 50W-B2 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 50W
L5540B:50W/5W
L5541:50W/4W/3W
50W-T1
50W-T1
L6020: 50W/30W/9W
44 50W-B3 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 50W
L6531: 50W/99W
L6047: 60W/101W
L6024:50W/9W
L6006:50W/99W
45 50W-B4 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 50W
L6048:50W/104W/101W
L6025:50W/99W
L5025:51V/10V/11V
46 51V-B51 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 51V 51V-T61 98V AAS
51V-T51
47 51V L5025 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 51V L5025:51V/10V/11V 98V AAS
48 51V L5025 3PH Fault SPS 3ph line fault @ 51V L5025:51V/10V/11V 98V AAS
L7005:67N/3C
49 67N BBU 67N-711 breaker fail @ 67N
67N-T82
L7018:67N/120H
50 67N BBU 67N-712 breaker fail @ 67N
L7005:67N/3C
L7018:67N/120H
51 67N BBU 67N-713 breaker fail @ 67N
67N-T81
L8003:67N/79N
52 67N BBU 67N-811 breaker fail @ 67N G5/G6 SPS
67N-T82
67N-T82
53 67N BBU 67N-811 T82 breaker fail @ 67N G5/G6 SPS
L8003:67N/79N
L8002:67N/103H
54 67N BBU 67N-813 breaker fail @ 67N
67N-T81
L8001:67N/410N
55 67N BBU 67N-814 breaker fail @ 67N Export SPS: G5/G6
67N-T81
L8001:67N/410N
56 67N BKR 67N-814 No Fault breaker fail @ 67N Import SPS
67N-T81
57 67N L7018 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 67N L7018:67N/120H
Export SPS: G5/G6
58 67N L8001 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 67N L8001:67N/410N
Import SPS
59 67N L8002 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 67N L8002:67N/103H

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

22
 System Impact Study Report

60 67N L8003 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 67N L8003:67N/79N G5/G6 SPS
61 79N L8003 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 79N L8003:79N/67N G5/G6 SPS
62 79N L8004 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 79N L8004:79N/101S G5/G6 SPS
L8003:79N/67N
L8004:79N/101S
63 79N T81 HV Fault 3ph xfmr fault @ 79N G5/G6 SPS
L6508:79N/50N
L6507:79N/50N
64 90H L6008 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 90H L6008:90H/103H
L7004: 3C/91N
65 91N BBU 91N-701 breaker fail @ 91N L7019: 91N/67N
91N WTG
L6024:9W/50W
L5534:9W/16W
66 9W-B53 3PH Fault 3ph bus fault @ 9W
L5535:9W/92W
9W-T63
67 9W L5535 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 9W L5535:9W/92W
68 9W L6021 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 9W L6021:50W/9W
69 9W L6024 3PH Fault 3ph line fault @ 9W L6024:9W/50W
L6005: 120H/131H
70 DCT 6005][6010 DCT fault
L6010:120H/90H
L6005: 120H/131H
71 DCT 6005][6016 DCT fault
L6016:120H/137H
L6010: 120H/90H
72 DCT 6010][6011 DCT fault
L6011: 120H/17V
L6033: 103H/2H/1H
73 DCT 6033][6035 DCT fault
L6035: 1H/2H/104H
L7003: 3C/67N
74 DCT 7003][7004 DCT fault G3 SPS
L7004: 3C/91N
L7008: 120H/99W
75 DCT 7008][7009 DCT fault
L7009: 120H/99W
L7009: 120H/99W
76 DCT 7009][8002 DCT fault
L8002: 103H/67N

3.5.3 Evaluation
PSSE generated output plots for each contingency, with IR597 out of service and in service,
are presented in Appendices H through S. All relevant contingencies were found to be
stable and well-damped. Notes are provided in the Appendices where further explanation
is necessary.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

23
 System Impact Study Report

3.6 NPCC-BPS / NERC-BES

At the time of this study, the proposed POI at 50W-Milton is neither categorized as NPCC 2
BPS (Bulk Power System) or NERC 3 BES (Bulk Electric System).

3.6.1 NPCC-BPS
The BPS testing for the POI bus of IR597 was performed in accordance with the A-10
methodology described in Section 2.3.7.1.

The stability test was performed by placing a 3-phase fault at the high voltage terminals at
the POI, with all local protection out of service. Appendix E: NPCC-BPS determination
results demonstrates IR597 does not have adverse impact outside the local area. The
stability test was performed using both the WIN_01-2 and the SLL_01-2 cases,
representing maximum and minimum expected load levels.

The steady state test was conducted by dispatching the new facility at full output, then
disconnecting it, along with all elements which tripped during the stability test. Post-
contingency results reveal no voltage violations or thermal overloads outside the local area,
confirming the transmission facilities associated with IR597 are not classified as NPCC
BPS.

Note that NPCC's A-10 Classification of Bulk Power System Elements requires NS Power
to perform a periodic comprehensive re-assessment at least once every five years. It is
possible for this site's BPS status to change, depending on future system configuration
changes, requiring the IC to adapt to NPCC reliability requirements accordingly.

3.6.2 NERC-BES
IR597 is not categorized as NERC BES, since it does not meet any of the four inclusion
criteria:
• I1: The ICIF transformer's secondary terminal is <100kV.
• I2: The gross plant/facility aggregate nameplate rating is <75MVA.
• I3: The POI, 50W-Milton substation, is not on a Black Start path.
• I4: It is a radial system that emanates from a single point of connection of ≥100kV
and only includes generation resources <75MVA.
3.7 Underfrequency Operation
IR597's low frequency ridethrough performance was tested by simulating a fault on L-8001
under high import conditions. The case selected for dynamic simulation was based on
Summer Peak, with 300 MW import into Nova Scotia (SUM_02-2).

2
Northeastern Power Coordination Council.
3
North American Electric Reliability Corporation.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

24
 System Impact Study Report

IR597 remains stable and online as required. Simulation indicates that NS Power's UFLS
does not activate to stabilize system frequency. The simulation results are shown in Figure
6 and Figure 7, as well as Appendix F: Underfrequency operation.

Note that values are plotted on 100 MVA system base, so IR597 at 0.36 pu power
represents full output of the generators (rather than 36% output).

Figure 6: Underfrequency Performance (freq. at 103H-Lakeside)

Figure 7: Underfrequency Performance (IR597 machine output)

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

25
 System Impact Study Report

3.8 Voltage Ridethrough

A 3-phase fault for 9 cycles, simulating a Transmission System fault, was applied to
IR597's 138kV and 34.5kV buses to test the WTG facility’s Low Voltage Ridethrough
(LVRT) capability.

The stability plot in Figure 8 and Figure 9 demonstrate IR597 rides through the fault and
stays online in both cases, as required. Results are shown in Appendix G: Low voltage
ridethrough.

Note that values are plotted on 100 MVA system base, so IR597 at 0.36 pu power
represents full output of the generators (rather than 36% output).

Figure 8: IR597 LVRT Performance (HV fault, 9 cycles)

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

26
 System Impact Study Report

Figure 9: IR597 LVRT Performance (LV fault, 9 cycles)

3.9 Loss Factor

With IR597 in service, the loss factor is calculated as 0.52%. The data and calculation is
detailed in Table 6: IR597 loss factor data and Equation 1: IR597 loss factor calculation,
respectively.

Loss factor is calculated by running the winter peak load flow case, with and without the
new facility in service, while keeping 91H-Tufts Cove as the NS Area Interchange bus.
This methodology reflects the load centre in and around 91H-Tufts Cove. A negative loss
factor reflects a reduction in system losses.

Table 11: IR597 loss factor data

Value
IR597
nameplate 36.0
TC3 w/ IR597 107.49
TC3 w/o IR597 143.30
Delta 0.19
2023 loss factor 0.52%

Equation 1: IR597 loss factor calculation

(𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼597𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 + 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇3𝑤𝑤/ 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼597 ) − 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇3𝑤𝑤/𝑜𝑜 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼597

𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = = 0.52%
𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼597𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

27
 System Impact Study Report

4.0 Requirements
4.1 Upgrades & Modifications
The cost estimate includes the additions/modifications to the NS Power system only. The
cost of the IC's substation and Generating Facility are not included. All costs of the
associated facilities required at the IC's substation and Generating Facility are in addition
to the estimate provided in Table 12.

The following facilities are required to interconnect IR597 to the NSPI system via the 138
kV bus at 50W-Milton as NRIS:

1) Network upgrades:
a) No required network upgrades.
2) Transmission Provider's Interconnection Facilities (TPIF):
a) A 138 kV breaker and associated switches, substation modifications, and P&C
modifications for the 50W-Milton 138 kV bus.
b) Construct a 138 kV transmission line, with OHGW (Overhead Ground Wire) &
OPGW (Optical Ground Wire), approximately 5.3 km long, built to NSPI standards
from the 50W-Milton 138 kV bus to the IR597 substation.
c) Control and communications between the ICIF and the NSPI SCADA and
protection system. Communication protocols must be compatible with existing
SCADA equipment and any other existing monitoring systems. Requirements for
real time control, communication, and tele-protection will be defined in the Facility
Study.
3) Interconnection Customer's Interconnection Facilities (ICIF):
a) Centralized controls for voltage setpoint control for the low side of the ICIF
transformer. Fast acting control is required and will include a curtailment scheme,
which will limit/reduce total output from the facility, upon receipt of a telemetered
signal from NSPI's SCADA system.
b) NSPI to have supervisory and control of this facility, via the centralized controller.
This will permit the NSPI System Operator to raise/lower the voltage setpoint,
change the status of reactive power controls, change the real/reactive power
remotely.
c) When curtailed, the facility shall offer over-frequency and under-frequency control
with ±0.2 Hz deadband and 4% droop characteristic. The active power controls
shall also react to continuous control signals from the NSPI SCADA system's
Automatic Generation Control (AGC) system to control tie-line fluctuations as
required.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

28
 System Impact Study Report

d) The facility shall support short-duration frequency deviations by providing inertia

response equivalent to a Synchronous Generator with an inertia factor (H) of at
least 3.0 MW-s/MVA for a period of at least 10 seconds.
e) Voltage ridethrough capability as described in the NS Power TSIR.
f) Frequency ridethrough capability in accordance with the NS Power TSIR. The
facility shall have the capability of riding through a rate of change of frequency of
4 Hz/s.
g) Operation at ambient temperatures as low as -30ºC. The IC shall also provide icing
models and conduct icing studies for their facility.
4.2 Cost Estimate
The high level, non-binding, present day cost estimate, excluding HST, for the IR597's
Network Resource Interconnection Service is shown in Table 12: NRIS cost estimate. This
estimate assumes there is adequate space for new equipment and modifications.

Table 12: NRIS cost estimate

Item Network Upgrades Estimate
I None $ -
Sub-total $ -

Item Transmission Provider’s Interconnection Facilities Estimate

I Substation primary equipment, P&C, at 50W- $ 1,000,000
Milton (including breaker, 2 switches).
II Transmission line, with OHGW & OPGW, from $ 2,650,000
50W-Milton to the PCO (route and right-of-way
TBD).
III Teleprotection and SCADA communications via $ 500,000
OPGW from 50W-Milton.
Sub-total $ 4,150,000

Determined costs
Subtotal $ 4,150,000
Contingency (10%) $ 415,000
Total of determined cost items $ 4,565,000

The estimated time to construct the Network Upgrades and Transmission Provider's
Interconnection Facilities is 18-24 months after receipt of funds. The Interconnection
Facilities Study will provide a more detailed cost estimate.

5.0 Conclusions & Recommendations

5.1 Summary of Technical Analysis
Technical analysis, including short circuit, power factor, voltage flicker, steady state,
stability, and protection and control analysis was performed. Both NS Power and NPCC
planning criteria were applied.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

29
 System Impact Study Report

IR597 currently meets the lagging power factor requirement based on the supplied
transformer information and assumed collector circuit impedance. It is just on the
threshold, however, and should be re-evaluated when final transformer impedances and
collector circuit design are determined.

The facilities associated with IR597 are not designated as NPCC BPS as IR597 does not
affect the BPS status of existing facilities. IR597 also does not qualify as NERC BES based
on the BES inclusion criteria.

The addition of IR597 was not found to adversely impact the thermal capacity of the NS
Power Transmission System. No issues were identified in the steady state or stability
analysis that are attributed to the operation of IR597.

It is concluded that the incorporation of the proposed facility into the NS Power
transmission at the specified location has no negative impacts on the reliability of the NS
Power grid, provided the recommendations outlined in this report are implemented.

5.2 Summary of Expected Facilities

To accommodate the full output of IR597, a new 138 kV node is required at the 50W-
Milton substation, plus approximately 5.3 km of new 138kV transmission line between the
POI and IC substation. In addition, control and communications infrastructure between the
IC substation and the NSPI SCADA and protection system is required.

The total high level estimated cost for Interconnection Costs is $4,565,000. The
Interconnection Facilities Study will provide a more detailed cost estimate. The costs of all
associated facilities required at the IC's substation and Generating Facility are in addition
to this estimate.

Interconnection Request 597 (36 MW wind generation facility)

30