Link to Decision Summarized

Electricity – Facilities

Application

ENMAX Power Corporation (“EPC”) applied for permission to rebuild, relocate and realign the existing 69-kilovolt Transmission Line 69-16.61L (the “Transmission Line”) from No. 16 Substation to No. 27 Substation in the northwest Calgary area.

Decision

The AUC approved the application to rebuild, relocate and realign the Transmission Line. The AUC determined that approval of the application, specifically the preferred route, is in the public interest regarding the proposed facilities’ social, economic, and other effects, including its effect on the environment.

Applicable Legislation

AUC Rule 007: Applications for Power Plants, Substations, Transmission Lines, Industrial System Designations, Hydro Developments and Gas Utility Pipelines.

Hydro and Electric Energy Act, RSA 2000, c H-16 – ss 14, 15, 19 and 21.

Pertinent Issues

EPC stated that 75 percent of the existing structures and components of the Transmission Line were deteriorated or damaged, resulting in an increased risk of failure. In addition, maintenance access had become increasingly difficult because of the development within the Brentwood and Dalhousie communities. The Transmission Line further did not meet the required clearance from infrastructure owned by the City of Calgary.

EPC proposed a preferred and alternate route for the Transmission Line. Both routes would replace the deteriorated or damaged assets and relocate structures currently located within residential fenced properties in the Brentwood community.

The AUC determined that the preferred route would have a lower potential residential impact because it would not cross new residential parcels, and the structure’s location in the rebuilt portion would remain in the existing right-of-way. The AUC found that, although the alternate route would impact fewer residences, the fact that new transmission infrastructure would be introduced in an area where a transmission line does not currently exist would result in more significant impacts for those residents. The AUC found that the overall incremental impacts on a larger number of residents associated with the preferred route would still be less than the overall new impacts on fewer residents on the alternate route.

The AUC found that approval of the application and the preferred route was in the public interest.