HomeMy Public PortalAboutC A 2014-11-27
Page 1 of 1
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
CHESTER MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Following Public Hearing being held at 8:45 a.m.
AGENDA
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER.
2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
2.1 Council – Thursday, November 13, 2014
3. MATTERS ARISING:
3.1 Fiscal Review – Discussion/Direction regarding feedback to UNSM:
a. Request for Decision Report to Council from CAO dated November 19, 2014.
b. Draft letter of response to UNSM President.
c. Consultative Summary Report – The Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review.
d. Background Info – Draft Financial Impact to Municipalities
e. Background Info – Provincial/Municipal Fiscal Review (workshop displays)
4. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
4.1 Committee of the Whole – November 20, 2014
4.2 Any other Committee Reports.
5. CORRESPONDENCE:
5.1 November 18, 2014 Email from Donna Cross sending two votes for not moving the food bank
from Chester.
5.2 November 10 email from Cynthia Myers adding her name to those who feel the Municipality’s move
is a bad choice.
5.3 Copy of email from Cathy Ross with petition information signed by Jamie Moye and P. G. Booher.
5.4 Information from Chris Peters, Minas Basin, regarding Kaizer Meadow Wind Tower:
a. Kaizer Meadow Wind Project – Report on Turbine Performance – November 21, 2014.
b. Availability Calculation from Enercon (November 11, 2014)
c. Enercon Operating Report – January 1, 2014 to October 31, 2014
d. Enercon Operating Report – April 1, 2014 to October 31, 2014
6. NEW BUSINESS:
6.1 Memo dated November 20, 2014 from Senior Economic Development Officer regarding RFP Award
T-2014-015 Preparation of Industrial/Business Park Study.
7. ADJOURNMENT.
APPOINTMENTS ARRANGED
8:45 a.m. PUBLIC HEARING– Telecommunications Tower in Chester Village
9:15 a.m. Carol Nauss – Update on Heritage Society activities
9:40 a.m. Chris Peters, Minas Basin (refer to item 5.4)
In Camera following regular session under Section 22 of the MGA if required
Council (Continued) 519
Thursday, November 13, 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TAX EXEMPTION FOR CHARITABLE, NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS,
MUNICIPAL WATER UTILITIES AND LICENSED DAY CARES
BY-LAW # 74
1. The By-Law shall be known as the Tax Exemption By-Law.
2. The real property of the organizations or institutions named in Schedules "A", "B", "C", AD@, &
AE@ to this by-law that would otherwise be classified as commercial property shall be exempt
or taxed in accordance with the particular schedule as well as the business occupancy of
licensed day cares named in Schedule AE@.
3. The partial or total exemption provided in Section 2 shall apply only to that portion of the
real property specified in the schedule.
4. When a property, or part thereof, listed in a schedule ceases to be occupied by the association
or for the purposes set out in the schedule then the partial or total exemption from taxation
shall cease and the owner of the real property shall immediately be liable for the real property
tax on such real property or part thereof for the portion of the year unexpired.
5. This amended By-Law shall have the effect commencing in the Municipal taxation year
2014/15.
---------------
SCHEDULE "A"
Properties of a named registered Canadian Charitable organization that is used directly and solely
for a charitable purpose to be taxed under Section 71 (1) (a) of the Municipal Government Act in the
manner set out in the last two columns of this Schedule.
OWNER
PROPERTY
CHARITABLE
NUMBER
EXTENT OF
APPLICATION
EXTENT OF
TAX EXEMPTION
Chester Brass
Band
Chester Brass Band
Building
6381677
118851427RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Chester Municipal
Heritage Society
Old CNR Station
Chester, NS
Account #643793
118851468RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land, Parcel L
Prince, Regent,
Central Streets,
Chester, NS
Account #8179042
118851468RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land, Museum
133 Central Street
Chester, NS
Account #2950421
118851468RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land, Building
82 Union Street
Chester, NS
Account #00948845
118851468RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land, Building
Council (Continued) 520
Thursday, November 13, 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chester Theatre
Society
Chester, NS
Account #4752988
127727444RR0001 The Whole 100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Church Memorial
Park
Land & Complex
Eleanor Pew Morris
Memorial Rink,
Chester, NS
Account #1389424
118859305RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Church Memorial
Park
Sports Field
Account #758205
118859305RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land
Chester, Corner of
Union and Central
Streets
Account #8189250
118859305RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
East Chester
Recreation
Association
Land & Buildings
East Chester, NS
Account #1360698
118890441RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Forties Community
Centre
Land & Hall
Forties, NS
Account #1547763
137164265RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Land
Forties, NS
Account #1273795
137164265RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Shoreham Village
Senior Citizens
Apartments
Association
Blood Clinic
Account #4254694
107978702RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged
South Shore
Community
Services
Association
Land & School
Bonny Lea Farm
Windsor Road, NS
Land & Residence
Buildings
Bonny Lea Farm
Windsor Road, NS
Account #4373316
107997231RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
United Church of
Canada
Land & Buildings
Youth Camp
Forties, NS
Account #4718178
119293405RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Council (Continued) 521
Thursday, November 13, 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Western Shore &
Area Improvement
Association
(operating under
the name of DMD
Amusements)
Land & Building
Western Shore, NS
Account #1240757
899474456RR0001 The Whole 100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Wild Rose Park
Western Shore
8215596
899474456RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Old Trunk No. 3 Rd.
Land, Gold River
Account #9484817
899474456RR0001
The Whole
100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
Chester Art Centre 60 Queen Street,
Chester
Account #03477312
832872962RR0001
The Whole 100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
62 Queen Street,
Chester
Account #03477304
832872962RR0001
The Whole 100% of
commercial
property tax. Area
rates for other
municipal services
will be charged.
SCHEDULE "B"
Properties of incorporated non-profit organization which are either community-oriented, charitable,
fraternal, educational, recreational, religious, cultural, or sporting organizations and which in the
opinion of Council provide an active service, through programs or maintenance of the property, to
the Municipality that might otherwise be a responsibility of Council which are to be taxed under
Section 71 (1) (b) of the Municipal Government Act to the extent set out in the last two columns of
this Schedule.
OWNER
PROPERTY
EXTENT OF
APPLICATION
EXTENT OF
EXEMPTION
Aspotogan
Heritage Trust
Society
Land Lot 99-1-B Barn
Highway 329, Hubbards
Account #9184023
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Land Lot 99-1-A
Highway 329, Hubbards
Account #9317465
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Basin Recreation
Park Comm.
Land, Lower Grant Road
Account #5576768
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Canaan
Community Club
(Canaan District
Hall Association)
Land & Building
Canaan, NS
Account #637173
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
East River Village
Hall
Land & Building
East Chester, NS
Account #1361007
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Hubbards Area
Lions Club
Land & Building
Fox Point, NS
Account #2090538
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Municipality of
Chester/
103 No 329 Hwy
Lot A Hubbards
The Whole
Council (Continued) 522
Thursday, November 13, 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Aspotogan
Heritage Trust
Account #1076205
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Old No 3 Hwy
Lot G Hubbards
Account #9181687
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Old No 3 Hwy
Lot F Hubbards
Account #9181695
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Old No 3 Hwy
Lot E Hubbards
Account #9181709
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Old No 3 Hwy
Lot C Hubbards
Account #9181717
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Aspotogan
Heritage Trust
Land
Lot 05-1 The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Ocean Swells
Community
Association
Land, Hall
2726 Highway 329
Northwest Cove
Account #889377
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
New Ross District
Museum Society
4670 No. 12 Hwy
Lot B-A-D New Ross
Account #05266033
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
District 1 Fire
Commissioners
Land, Fire Hall Road
Account #02614367
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Helping Hands to
Enrich Learning &
Lifestyles
Programming
Society
Land & Building
419 Highway 329, Fox
Point
Account #3392104
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Hubbards Yacht
Club
Land and Building
215 Highway 329
10236975
The Whole 100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
SCHEDULE "C"
The Council may, by By-Law, to the extent and under the conditions set out in the by-law, provide
that the tax payable with respect to all or part of the taxable commercial property of any non-profit
community, charitable, fraternal, educational, recreational, religious, cultural or sporting
organization named in the by-law be reduced to the tax that would otherwise be payable if the
property were a residential property, inclusive of area rates as set out in 71(2) of the Municipal
Government Act as is determined by Council from year to year to the extent set out in column three.
OWNER
PROPERTY
EXTENT OF
APPLICATION
EXTENT OF
EXEMPTION
Captain Kidd Rod &
Gun Club
Land & Building
East Chester, NS
Account #663255
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Council (Continued) 523
Thursday, November 13, 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chester Yacht Club Land & Building
South Street, Chester,
NS
Account #730033
The Whole The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Clarke Lodge No. 61
A.F. & A.M.
Land & Building
Queen Street, Chester,
NS
Account #805645
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Norwood Lodge No.
135 A.F. & A.M.
Land & Building
New Ross, NS
Account #3542777
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
The Thunderbird
Recreation Association
Land
East River, NS
Account #5053692
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Land & Hall
East River
Account #359289
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
Chester Golf Club
Land & Buildings
120, 206, 212 Golf
Course Road
Chester
Account #00729779
The Whole
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
SCHEDULE "D"
Buildings, pump stations, deep well pumps, main transmission lines, distribution lines, meters and
associated plant and equipment of a municipal water utility under Section 71(1) (e) of the Municipal
Government Act to the extent set out in the last two columns of this Schedule.
OWNER
PROPERTY
EXTENT OF
APPLICATION
EXTENT OF APPLICATION
Municipality of the District
of Chester
Mill Cove Water
Utility
Account Number
9490450
The Whole
100% of commercial property tax.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
SCHEDULE AE@
The Council may, by By-Law, exempt any day care licensed under the Day Care Act from taxes payable
in respect of commercial and business occupancy assessment. Properties to be taxed under Section
71A and 71B of the Municipal Government Act in the manner set out in the last two columns of this
Schedule.
OWNER
PROPERTY
EXTENT OF
APPLICATION
EXTENT OF EXEMPTION
Brenda Cook-Forest
Ocean View Children=s Centre
1540564
Land, Dwellings, Day
Care Buildings
Commercial
The Residential Rate is applied
rather than the Commercial Rate.
Area rates for other municipal
services will be charged.
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
REQUEST FOR DECISION
REPORT TO Warden Webber
Municipal Council Members
SUBMITTED BY Tammy Wilson, MURP, MCIP, Chief Administrative Officer
DATE November 19, 2014
SUBJECT PROVINCIAL – MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW- FEEDBACK
ORIGIN Committee of the Whole – October 23, 2014
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:
The Municipal/Provincial Fiscal Review was a joint committee established by the Province and UNSM
to investigate how provincial support to municipalities could be best allocated. The Committee through
their review determined that there were economic and demographic challenges facing municipalities.
To confront these challenges the Committee made forty-one recommendations to better allocate
provincial / municipal resources and increase collaboration.
Municipalities have been asked to provide feedback to the UNSM on these recommendations by
December 15, 2014
RECOMMENDATION:
That Municipal Council forward to the UNSM their response to the Provincial / Municipal Fiscal Review,
as attached to this report as Appendix A
BACKGROUND:
The Provincial- Municipal Fiscal Review started, in 2010, as an Internal Provincial review of
equalization and Towns Foundation grant in 2010. It was quickly determined that this scope was too
narrow and a more holistic and comprehensive review was required, which involved looking at all
programs and services provided to municipalities and how provincial support could be best allocated.
A Steering Committee consisting of elected representatives from NS Municipalities and Deputy
Ministers was created to oversee this review. A working group was also created consisting of staff from
various municipalities, staff from UNSM and staff from the Department of Municipal Affairs.
The Review Committee released a Current State of Municipal Governments in Nova Scotia Report in the
fall of 2013. This report was the foundation upon which the forty one recommendations were created.
The recommendations address:
• Municipal Structure Options
• Road Options
• Grant Options
• Revenue Options
• Expenditure Options
• Non-Financial Supports
UNSM has asked for Municipal Feedback and provided questions to aid municipalities in providing this
feedback. The due date for submissions is December 15, 2014
Municipal Councillors have reviewed the report in recommendations in detail at the October 23, 2014
Committee of the Whole Meeting. A draft response to the UNSM feedback question was provided by
Councillors at that time. Subsequent to this, Municipal Councillors attended an information session on
October 31, 2014.
DISCUSSION:
Based upon the discussions held at the October 23, 2014 Committee of the Whole Meeting, the
information session and more recent UNSM discussions at Rural Caucus, the following a draft response
to the UNSM feedback questions:
UNSM Feedback Questions (see Appendix B for Executive Summary Report)
Structure
1. Do you think the proposed process is reasonable? Why or why not?
a) Recognizing the review does not necessarily lead to amalgamation, do you suggest the
use of the FCI as a method to trigger a constructive review? If not , please suggest another
alternative
Answer: The proposed process regarding improvements to government structures is
reasonable; however, municipalities should be afforded the ability to explain or provide
information regarding the FCI’s to justify a red flag. In cases where this can be done, the red-
flagged FCI should not trigger a review. FCI’s are not a one size fits all, and there may be suitable
justification for a red-flagged indicator.
2. Is there anything you would change with respects to the review process
Answer- No, except to ensure that justified red flagged FCI’s do not trigger an automatic review.
3. Do you support the recommendations regarding Village Commissions? Why or Why not?
a) What issues do you see arising if these recommendations are implemented? How
would you like to see these issues addressed?
Answer: The recommendations regarding Village Commissions are supported, with the
exception that there should be a threshold under which a Village cannot make application for
town status (i.e. Population / assessment).
The services provided by Villages can often be provided by the surrounding rural municipality
within either the general rate or by an area rate, increasing efficiencies and decreasing
duplication in governance and administration costs.
The One Nova Scotia Report (Recommendation 18) emphasized the principle of reducing
duplication and rationalizing government structures. The recommendation respecting Villages
supports this principle, however without some parameters around when a Village can make
application for town status, the concerns of the financial viability of municipalities could be
exacerbated, particularly if there is no regard for the impact on the rural municipality from
which a Village is making application to leave.
If the recommendations respecting Villages do not move forward it is recommended that the
“concurrent jurisdiction” matter between Villages and Municipalities be addressed so as to
bring clarity to who has the overall authority for a particular function/service and reduce the
potential for duplication. For example, if municipal unit already provides a service, such as fire
protection or garbage collection, a Village should not be able to provide the service to the same
area. This creates duplication, affects economies of scale and thus drives up costs.
Roads
1. Do you think the proposed recommendations create a more level playing field? If not,
please provide alternatives?
Answer- While there are negative financial impacts to the District of Chester ($42,001 to
$61,251 in increased costs), Council agrees with the overall philosophy. This recommendation
does level the playing field between Rural Municipalities and Towns with respects to costs.
However, it is still important to note that service levels between a town and a rural municipality
are different, which results in some of the cost differential.
Grants
1. The PCAP recommendation provides additional money for much needed capital projects.
Do you think an application based process is appropriate? If not, please explain what you
would recommend.
Answer: There is difficultly in fully answering this question, as the parameters around which
the PCAP funding will be made available is not known. The recommendation does not note if it
is 50 cent dollars, what the maximum grant amount will be, nor what the eligible projects will
be. Thus it is difficult to determine the implications of this recommendation on the District of
Chester or other municipalities
That being said, and without the benefit of the above noted information, the application based
approach appears to be appropriate. An application based process implies that there will be
criteria upon which to evaluate applications, which will provide more certainty to the program
than presently exists. That being said, the District of Chester feels that the PCAP funding should
be available for municipal priorities, as determined by municipalities, and thus criteria should
be broad enough to ensure the same. Council does have concern that the funds being used solely
for dissolution, which will deplete the fund quickly.
Lastly, funding under PCAP should be available at 50 cent dollars.
2. Using a provincial lens, do you believe these recommendations enhance fairness? Why
or why not?
Answer: There is concern that the province will be unable to fund an additional $21.1 Million.
It is important that all of the recommendations go as a package. As a package it makes sense and
will make municipal government in Nova Scotia sustainable. The Province may see the
additional funding requirement as unfair and unattainable: the result being the desire to move
forward with some, and not all of the recommendations. This approach would be unacceptable
to the District of Chester. If this occurs, it is the Districts position that consultation on the
recommendations accepted be completed again. Council’s view on a recommendation in
isolation of the entire package would be very different.
3. Using a municipal lens, specific to your municipality, what challenges or opportunities
do you see arising from the recommendations?
Answer: Same as for question #2. In addition, with the vagueness around what an expanded
PCAP program looks like, it is difficult to assess whether municipalities will benefit from the
program. There is concern that the criteria will be used to push forward provincial priorities
which might not align with municipal priorities.
If the PCAP program is broad in scope of eligible projects, opened to larger capital projects than
has traditionally been the case, and funds projects at 50 cent dollars, municipalities should see
a benefit.
4. The current NSPI grant-in-lieu to municipalities is through the operating grants formula,
however, a shift to a rate assessment formula places contributions from NSPI in line with
other property tax payers. Do you support this principle? Please explain why or why not.
Answer: Although the effect of this varies for Municipalities, it makes sense to tie the grant to a
rate assessment formula. As noted in the Consultation Document, this will enable municipalities
with NSPI asset to receive a grant that is elastic and predictable and reflective of the value of the
asset.
Revenue
1. What types of flexibility, or changes would you like to see with respect to
Recommendations 27 and 28?
Answer: Municipalities should be given the ability to consider alternatives to property taxes for
various capital and service costs, such a Development / Capital Charges beyond those provided
for in the MGA. An example is the recent expansion to the HRM Charter with respects to being
able to impose charges for libraries, fire dept.’s etc. These are enabling, thus giving
municipalities the option.
Consideration should be given to municipalities being able to provide incentives for economic
development purposes, such as tax breaks, reduced tax rates, sale of land at less than market
value and other incentives. This is will add to the value proposition municipalities and the
province offer investors. Presently, municipalities are limited in their ability to do this, outside
of infrastructure investments.
Lastly, consideration should be given to enabling Municipalities to partner with the private
sector in ways that beyond the normal leasing/contracting for service arrangements.
Opportunities exists for municipalities to invest in private infrastructure and private economic
development initiatives which are for the benefit of an entire region.
2. Until the province is in a fiscally sound position, municipalities will need to continue
contributing to mandatory contributions. Do you support Recommendation #29? If not,
explain why.
The general consensus was that Council supported separating the provincial property tax from
the Municipal property tax and that the preferred option would be to have separate bills. This
will make the taxing more apparent for residents. Unfortunately, this will also mean an increase
for some because the formula would now be assessment based rather than uniform assessment
based. The provincial rate will then be the same across the province, which is a positive.
The District of Chester will see an increase in mandatory contributions by $223,149. The result
will be a negative impact to the Residential Tax Effort / Tax Burden. Residential Tax Effort / Tax
Burden is a FCI, and one in which the District of Chester has a red flag. This is primarily due to
the high assessment values. The District of Chester will make efforts to reduce its costs,
however, these efforts can be comprised by the mandatory contribution rate, as the
Municipality has no control over the mandatory contribution rate. This rate can go up annual
and counteract the efforts of the District to reduce the residential tax burden. As such, it is the
Districts recommendation that the formula for calculating the residential tax burden be revised
to remove the expenses and corresponding tax revenue collected for mandatory contributions.
This will enable an accurate measure of the Districts efforts to have sustainable municipal
service costs for its residents.
Collaboration
1. Recommendation 30 calls for a better process for municipalities to work with the
province in establishing regulations, how do you envision this process?
Answer: Being engaged earlier in discussions regarding regulation development would be
beneficial; if the province is considering changing regulations then discussions with
Municipalities prior to changes may be beneficial – Municipalities may have information from
a different point of view that is relevant or helpful in drafting proposed changes.
Providing “one year notice letters” with no detail whatsoever is not helpful to Municipalities.
2. Are there areas in your municipality where you could benefit from Municipal Affairs
assistance? If so, please explain.
Answer. The assistance regarding asset management is a good program.
Rather than have advisors for specific geographical areas, it may be more helpful to have
advisors who have expertise in certain topics than can be drawn upon.
Overall Questions on Recommendations
1. What recommendations do you think would be most beneficial to your municipality in the
long-term?
2. What recommendations do you think would be the most challenging for your municipality?
Answer: It is the position of the District of Chester that the recommendations are provided as
a package, and not individually. As a package the District supports the recommendations.
Council is hesitant to comment on what recommendations it supports in isolation of the other.
If the recommendations are separated and considered on their own, meaning some are
accepted and others not, the position of this Council and the opinions provided in this
response may change. It is the Districts position that if such were to occur, UNSM and the
province will need to undertake another round of consultation.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Not applicable
BUDGETARY
The following is a summary of the financial implications of the recommendations to MODC:
• Roads: Net increase in cost between $42,001 to $61,251
• NSPI Grant: Increase in grant revenue of $18,417
• Elimination of HST Offset: Decrease in revenue of $64,530
• Mandatory Contributions: Increase in Mandatory Expenses of $223,149
• Net Financial impact to MODC- ($330,513).
• $300,513 = approximately 2.5 cents on the Residential / Resource Rate
If Villages are Phased out, MODC will incur increased costs to provide services. This would be offset
by revenue that is presently collected by the Village Rate. Future analysis is required to determine
if the revenue collected is presently in excess of what would be required. The recommendation is to
phase out Villages over 5 years, thus enabling time for the transition and an analysis of the impact.
Uncertain as to the financial impact of an expanded PCAP program, due to lack of details
surrounding the program.
ENVIRONMENTAL- Not applicable
STRATEGIC PLAN- Not applicable
WORK PROGRAM IMPLICATIONS- Not applicable
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Letter- Appendix A; Fiscal Review Summary Document
OPTIONS:
1. Approve the submission as drafted
2. Make revisions to the submission prior to submission
Prepared BY Tammy Wilson Date November 20, 2014
Reviewed BY Date
Authorized BY Date
27 November 2014
Mr. Keith Hunter, UNSM President
Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities
Suite 1106, 1809 Barrington Street
HALIFAX NS B3J 3K8
Dear Mr. Hunter,
RE: MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW
The Municipality of the District of Chester has undertaken a thorough review of the Provincial-
Municipal Fiscal Review, through a review of the written materials and participation at the
information sessions hosted by DMA and UNSM. Municipal Council would like to congratulate the
Fiscal Review Committee on the work completed and recommendations put forward. The work
encompassed a significant period of time and required dedication by the members.
The following is feedback provided by Council of the Municipality of the District of Chester
respecting the fiscal review.
Structure
1. Do you think the proposed process is reasonable? Why or why not?
a) Recognizing the review does not necessarily lead to amalgamation, do you suggest
the use of the FCI as a method to trigger a constructive review? If not, please suggest
another alternative
Answer: The proposed process regarding improvements to government structures is
reasonable; however, Municipalities should be afforded the ability to explain or provide
information regarding the FCI’s to justify a red flag. In cases where this can be done, the red-
flagged FCI should not trigger a review. FCI’s are not a one size fits all, and there may be
suitable justification for a red-flagged indicator.
2. Is there anything you would change with respects to the review process?
Answer: No, except to ensure that justified red flagged FCI’s do not trigger an automatic
review.
3. Do you support the recommendations regarding Village Commissions? Why or Why
not?
a) What issues do you see arising if these recommendations are implemented? How
would you like to see these issues addressed?
Answer: The recommendations regarding Village Commissions are supported, with the
exception that there should be a threshold under which a Village cannot make application for
town status (i.e. population / assessment).
The services provided by Villages can often be provided by the surrounding rural
Municipality within either the general rate or by an area rate, increasing efficiencies and
decreasing duplication in governance and administration costs.
The One Nova Scotia Report (Recommendation 18) emphasized the principle of reducing
duplication and rationalizing government structures. The recommendation respecting
Villages supports this principle, however without some parameters around when a Village
can make application for town status, the concerns of the financial viability of Municipalities
could be exacerbated, particularly if there is no regard for the impact on the rural
Municipality from which a Village is making application to leave.
If the recommendations respecting Villages do not move forward it is recommended that the
“concurrent jurisdiction” matter between Villages and Municipalities be addressed so as to
bring clarity to who has the overall authority for a particular function/service and reduce the
potential for duplication. For example, if a Municipal unit already provides a service, such as
fire protection or garbage collection, a Village should not be able to provide the service to the
same area. This creates duplication, affects economies of scale and thus drives up costs.
Roads
1. Do you think the proposed recommendations create a more level playing field? If not,
please provide alternatives?
Answer: While there are negative financial impacts to the District of Chester ($42,001 to
$61,251 in increased costs), Council agrees with the overall philosophy. This
recommendation does level the playing field between Rural Municipalities and Towns with
respects to costs. However, it is still important to note that service levels between a town
and a rural Municipality are different, which results in some of the cost differential.
Grants
1. The PCAP recommendation provides additional money for much needed capital
projects. Do you think an application based process is appropriate? If not, please explain what
you would recommend.
Answer: There is difficultly in fully answering this question, as the parameters around which
the PCAP funding will be made available is not known. The recommendation does not note if
it is 50 cent dollars, what the maximum grant amount will be, nor what the eligible projects
will be. Thus it is difficult to determine the implications of this recommendation on the
District of Chester or other Municipalities
That being said, and without the benefit of the above noted information, the application based
approach appears to be appropriate. An application based process implies that there will be
criteria upon which to evaluate applications, which will provide more certainty to the
program than presently exists. That being said, the District of Chester feels that the PCAP
funding should be available for Municipal priorities, as determined by Municipalities, and
thus criteria should be broad enough to ensure the same. Council does have concern about
the funds being used solely for dissolution, which will deplete the fund quickly.
Lastly, funding under PCAP should be available at 50 cent dollars.
2. Using a provincial lens, do you believe these recommendations enhance fairness? Why
or why not?
Answer: There is concern that the province will be unable to fund an additional $21.1 Million.
It is important that all of the recommendations go as a package. As a package it makes sense
and will make Municipal government in Nova Scotia sustainable. The Province may see the
additional funding requirement as unfair and unattainable: the result being the desire to
move forward with some, and not all of the recommendations. This approach would be
unacceptable to the District of Chester. If this occurs, it is the Districts position that
consultation on the recommendations accepted be completed again. Council’s view on a
recommendation in isolation of the entire package would be very different.
3. Using a Municipal lens, specific to your Municipality, what challenges or opportunities
do you see arising from the recommendations?
Answer: Same as for question #2. In addition, with the vagueness around what an expanded
PCAP program looks like, it is difficult to assess whether Municipalities will benefit from the
program. There is concern that the criteria will be used to push forward provincial priorities
which might not align with Municipal priorities.
If the PCAP program is broad in scope of eligible projects, opened to larger capital projects
than has traditionally been the case, and funds projects at 50 cent dollars, Municipalities
should see a benefit.
4. The current NSPI grant-in-lieu to Municipalities is through the operating grants
formula, however, a shift to a rate assessment formula places contributions from NSPI in line
with other property tax payers. Do you support this principle? Please explain why or why not.
Answer: Although the effect of this varies for Municipalities, it makes sense to tie the grant
to a rate assessment formula. As noted in the Consultation Document, this will enable
Municipalities with NSPI assets to receive a grant that is elastic and predictable and reflective
of the value of the asset.
Revenue
1. What types of flexibility, or changes would you like to see with respect to
Recommendations 27 and 28?
Answer: Municipalities should be given the ability to consider alternatives to property taxes
for various capital and service costs, such Development / Capital Charges beyond those
provided for in the MGA. An example is the recent expansion to the HRM Charter with
respects to being able to impose charges for libraries, fire departments, etc. These are
enabling, thus giving Municipalities the option.
Consideration should be given to Municipalities being able to provide incentives for economic
development purposes, such as tax breaks, reduced tax rates, sale of land at less than market
value and other incentives. This is will add to the value proposition Municipalities and the
province offer investors. Presently, Municipalities are limited in their ability to do this,
outside of infrastructure investments.
Lastly, consideration should be given to enabling Municipalities to partner with the private
sector in ways beyond the normal leasing/contracting for service arrangements.
Opportunities exists for Municipalities to invest in private infrastructure and private
economic development initiatives which are for the benefit of an entire region.
2. Until the province is in a fiscally sound position, Municipalities will need to continue
contributing to mandatory contributions. Do you support Recommendation #29? If not,
explain why.
The general consensus was that Council supported separating the provincial property tax
from the Municipal property tax and that the preferred option would be to have separate bills.
This will make the taxing more apparent for residents. Unfortunately, this will also mean an
increase for some because the formula would now be assessment based rather than uniform
assessment based. The provincial rate will then be the same across the province, which is a
positive.
The District of Chester will see an increase in mandatory contributions by $223,149. The
result will be a negative impact to the Residential Tax Effort / Tax Burden. Residential Tax
Effort / Tax Burden is an FCI, and one in which the District of Chester has a red flag. This is
primarily due to the high assessment values. The District of Chester will make efforts to
reduce its costs, however, these efforts can be comprised by the mandatory contribution rate,
as the Municipality has no control over the mandatory contribution rate. This rate can go up
annually and counteract the efforts of the District to reduce the residential tax burden. As
such, it is the District’s recommendation that the formula for calculating the residential tax
burden be revised to remove the expenses and corresponding tax revenue collected for
mandatory contributions. This will enable an accurate measure of the District’s efforts to
have sustainable Municipal service costs for its residents.
Collaboration
1. Recommendation 30 calls for a better process for Municipalities to work with the
province in establishing regulations, how do you envision this process?
Answer: Being engaged earlier in discussions regarding regulation development would be
beneficial; if the province is considering changing regulations then discussions with
Municipalities prior to changes may be beneficial – Municipalities may have information
from a different point of view that is relevant or helpful in drafting proposed changes.
Providing “one year notice letters” with no detail whatsoever is not helpful to
Municipalities.
2. Are there areas in your Municipality where you could benefit from Municipal Affairs
assistance? If so, please explain.
Answer: The assistance regarding asset management is a good program.
Rather than have advisors for specific geographical areas, it may be more helpful to have
advisors who have expertise in certain topics than can be drawn upon.
Overall Questions on Recommendations
1. What recommendations do you think would be most beneficial to your Municipality
in the long-term?
2. What recommendations do you think would be the most challenging for your
Municipality?
Answer: It is the position of the District of Chester that the recommendations are provided
as a package, and not individually. As a package the District supports the recommendations.
Council is hesitant to comment on what recommendations it supports in isolation of the
other. If the recommendations are separated and considered on their own, meaning some
are accepted and others not, the position of this Council and the opinions provided in this
response may change. It is the District’s position that if such were to occur, UNSM and the
province will need to undertake another round of consultation
On behalf of Municipal Council, I would like to reiterate our Council’s appreciation of the hard work
and dedication that the Steering Committee and Working Group have put into this review and to
congratulate the Committee and Working Group on the same. This Review sets the stage for
significant change in Municipal government, change that will enable sustainable and viable local
government in Nova Scotia.
If, on review of this submission, there are questions or you require clarification on this matter
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Allen Webber
Warden
cc Municipal Council Members
Tammy Wilson, CAO
The Provincial-
Municipal Fiscal
Review
Consultative Report
Summary
Steering Committee of the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review
Fall 2014
October 14, 2014
Please find enclosed the draft report and recommendations of the Provincial Municipal
Fiscal Review. The report is now being circulated for consultation, with 4 dates set up
across the province as follows:
October 23 – Yarmouth – Rodd Grand
October 28 – Truro – Holiday Inn
October 29 – Port Hawkesbury – Civic Centre
October 31 – Wolfville – Old Orchard Inn
All municipalities and villages are encouraged to send representative(s) to one or more
of these venues. Municipal and Provincial staff who participated in the review will be on
hand to discuss the recommendations, answer questions, provide clarifications, etc. In
terms of process, the Working Group will only accept written submissions from
Municipal Councils and Village Commissions to the UNSM as official input on the
recommendations. The purpose of the 4 sessions is to provide information on the
recommendations to ensure municipalities and villages are well informed for the
purposes of providing input in writing.
To be clear on where these documents stand:
The recommendations included here are for consultation purposes only. As
such, they are not approved by Government and they may not reflect the
position of Government.
At this point, there are no financial commitments from either the Province or
Municipalities associated with these draft recommendations. Some of the
recommendations do have provincial or municipal cost estimates, but
Government has not approved any funding for them, and municipalities have not
agreed to them.
Once input from municipalities and villages has been submitted to UNSM, it will
then be shared with the Working Group will bring that information back to the
Government for consideration. December 15th is the targeted date to have all
written submissions back from municipalities and villages.
Please take the time to review this material and attend the consultation sessions.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
2
Executive Summary
The mandate of the Fiscal Review Committee was to determine how provincial support to
municipalities could best be allocated. The Committee found that demographic and
economic trends present major challenges for municipalities. In an effort to confront these
challenges, the Committee made fourty-one recommendations to better allocate resources
and increase collaboration. These recommendations were organized along five themes:
Opportunities to Improve Government Structures
The Fiscal Review committee explored a number of different approaches to reviewing the
viability of municipalities, and encouraging restructuring under appropriate circumstances.
The committee has developed a comprehensive approach to monitoring and evaluating the
existing government structures across the Province. Key recommendations include:
Launching comprehensive viability reviews of municipalities that demonstrate three
consecutive years of fiscal difficulties as measured by the Financial Condition Index.
Developing a suite of incentive programs to promote voluntary restructuring
initiatives.
For a fuller exploration of Structure, please see the Municipal Structure Options Review
Recommendations.
Opportunities to Improve Roads Equity
The committee examined the relationship between different municipal structures and the
maintenance and servicing of the local roads. It was acknowledged that rural municipalities
generally have lower costs compared to towns with respect to their responsibilities. In an
attempt to address this disparity, one recommendation is being advanced to:
Require rural municipalities to pay full cost-recovery to TIR for the roads that are
covered under the service exchange.
For a fuller exploration of Roads, please see the Local Roads Review Recommendations.
Opportunities to Reallocate Scarce Resources
The committee carefully examined existing grants to municipalities. In general, existing
grants target important objectives and are based on sound principles. However, some
changes would increase the sustainability of municipalities, and help target scarce funding
dollars to top municipal priorities. Key recommendations include:
Developing a new unconditional operating grant to replace the equalization
program.
Creating an arterial and collectors road grant.
Reallocating the NSPI PILT in a way that is reflective on the needs and priorities of
municipalities.
For a fuller exploration of Grants and Resources, please see the Operating Grants Review
Recommendations.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
3
Opportunities to Improve Revenue Systems
The committee also investigated revenue generating options for municipalities, evaluating
the current system against alternatives. While the shortcomings of the property tax regime
in Nova Scotia are acknowledged, none of the alternatives examined are suitable as a
wholesale replacement. The committee does provide suggestions for improving the current
property tax system, including:
Providing greater municipal autonomy over the taxation of forest and recreational
property.
Review municipal finance powers provided in legislation to provide broader
authority to establish fair and effective property taxation and revenue regimes.
Introduce a Provincial Property Tax Rate to replace the current system of municipal
contributions to education, corrections and housing.
For a fuller exploration of Grants and Resources, please see the Revenue Options Review
Recommendations.
Opportunities to Improve Collaboration
The committee found that there are significant opportunities for the province and its
municipal partners to work more collaboratively. A lack of municipal involvement in the
development of regulation has led to intense financial pressure in some municipalities. In
addition, greater collaboration in planning and delivering services can help municipalities
provide higher quality services at a lower cost. Key recommendations include:
Enhancing the consultation process with municipalities prior to regulatory change.
Developing an asset management program.
Generally improving the lines of communication between provincial and municipal
staff.
For a fuller exploration of Improving Collaboration, please see the External Expenditure
Pressures, and the Non-Financial Support Recommendations.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
4
Background
Municipal governments play an essential role in our lives, providing vital local services that
contribute to clean, safe, and productive communities. As the government closest to the
people, municipalities also act as an important voice for communities, representing local
interests to other orders of government. There are 54 municipal governments in Nova
Scotia: 30 towns, 21 rural municipalities, and 3 regional municipalities. Municipalities have
broad authorities under the Municipal Government Act and The Halifax Regional
Municipality Charter to generate revenue and provide a wide range of local services
including: policing, fire protection, transportation, water and wastewater services, land-use
planning, and recreation programs.
The relationship between local governments and the provincial and federal governments
can be complex, and changes over time. In 2010, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal
Relations (now the Department of Municipal Affairs) reviewed the municipal Equalization
and Town Foundation Grant program. One of the key findings from this review indicated
the program could not be reviewed in isolation from other grants and funding programs. It
was recommended that a more holistic look at programs and services was needed. In
2012, the province responded to this recommendation by establishing the Provincial-
Municipal Fiscal Review. This review was led by the Fiscal Review Steering Committee
composed of municipal elected officials and provincial Deputy Ministers. The committee’s
mandate was to review current programs and services to better meet municipal needs
within the context of a balanced budget. Supported by a working group and a set of
subcommittees, the Fiscal Review Committee examined:
the current state of Nova Scotia municipalities;
funding sources for municipalities;
municipal expenditures pressures;
non-financial supports for municipalities; and
municipal grants and contributions.
The Report
This document provides a brief summary of the major findings and recommendations of
the committee. This summary is accompanied by a more detailed report, providing
additional background information and research that contributed to the findings and
recommendations. The full report is divided into two parts: the Current State of
Municipalities outlines current trends and significant challenges influencing municipalities,
and the Consultative Report outlines opportunities for the province and its municipal
partners to address coming challenges and better serve Nova Scotia communities.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
5
Taken together the Committee’s recommendations represent an improved allocation of
provincial support which follows the guiding principles set out at the beginning of the
project:
Guiding Principles of the Fiscal Review
1. Effectiveness:
Recommendations from the review should improve the transparency and structure
of programs and services provided by the province and municipalities, to provide
optimal benefit for taxpayers.
2. Building Relationships:
Recommendations from the review should strengthen communication, consultation,
sharing of resources and cooperation amongst municipal governments and between
the province and municipal governments.
3. Municipal viability:
Recommendations from this review should strengthen municipalities’ abilities to
provide the basic level of service at an acceptable tax burden.
4. Financial constraint:
Recommendations from the review must consider the financial limitations of both
the province and municipalities individually and collectively.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
6
Part II - Findings and Recommendations
Opportunities to Improve Government Structures
Given the demographic, economic, and financial pressure experienced by some
municipalities, some consideration of current municipal structures was warranted. The
2012 Towns Task Force report made several recommendations relating to structure. Most
significantly, the Task Force recommended that any municipality scoring poorly on a set of
financial indicators should undertake a viability review, including financial analysis and
community consultation to assess viability. The Fiscal Review Committee endorses the
findings of the Towns Task Force and is eager for the implementation of these
recommendations and several others which are likely to provide a benefit to municipalities
as a whole.
Recommendation 1 - The Province will formalize FCI tracking as the tool that will be
used to monitor the financial health of municipalities.
Recommendation 2 – The Province, with UNSM and AMA, will develop materials to
help ensure that municipalities understand the FCI and have access to best practices
to improve their financial health.
Recommendation 3 – The Province will develop a suite of programs designed to
assist any municipality that chooses, or is required, to initiate a consolidation
process.
Recommendation 4 - After three consecutive years of red-flagged FCI indicators
exceeding the threshold, municipalities will be subject to a comprehensive review.
Recommendation 5 – Beginning on March 31, 2015, the FCI tracker will be applied as
a trigger for reviews for any municipality that has exceeded the red-flag trigger
threshold for three consecutive years.
Recommendation 6 –Municipalities will be encouraged to voluntarily request a
review at any time, for any reason.
Recommendation 7 - In extraordinary circumstances, where it is jointly agreed upon
by the UNSM and DMA that there is a need, a municipality could be targeted for a
review process.
Recommendation 8- The review will provide all parties with binding outcomes that
will identify the conditions necessary for municipal viability.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
7
Recommendation 9 - The reviewed municipality, other affected municipalities and
provincial officials will have 90 days to develop an Action Plan to achieve the
outcomes identified in the review.
Recommendation 10 - The Province, upon receipt of the Action Plan, will issue a
Ministerial Order within 30 days. If the Province does not receive an Action Plan
within 90 days, the Province will issue a Ministerial Order.
Recommendation 11 - Municipalities will submit progress reports to the Province
periodically once a transition process has begun. FCI tracking will continue.
Recommendation 12 – In the event that a review reveals that the challenges facing a
municipality are such that they cannot be addressed through structural changes or a
realignment of service standards, OR a municipality implements their Action Plan
and improvements are not realized, then a tailored public policy process will be
launched.
Recommendation 13 – No new villages will be created and no new powers will be
given to villages beyond those that currently exist.
Recommendation 14 – All incorporated villages in Nova Scotia should be phased out.
Existing villages should be given the opportunity to apply for town status, merge
with an adjacent town, or dissolve into their encompassing rural municipality as
they see fit.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
8
Opportunities to Improve Roads Equity
Currently, rural municipalities in Nova Scotia are responsible for the maintenance of local roads
constructed after April 1, 1995, while all local roads constructed before that date are
administered and controlled by The Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal
(NSTIR). Meanwhile, towns are responsible for maintaining all roads within their
boundaries. As well, in many instances, provincial routes pass through towns and are
considered to fall under the administration and control of the town in which they are
located. While the majority of towns in Nova Scotia possess the equipment and resources
necessary to maintain roads within their jurisdictions, they are unable to achieve the same
economies of scale as NSTIR. As a result, road maintenance costs are significantly higher for
towns than for rural municipalities. To address this disparity, the committee is putting
forward the following recommendation:
Recommendation 15 - Rural municipalities will now be required to pay TIR the full
maintenance recovery cost (approx. $6700 per kilometer plus annual CPI increase)
for maintenance of the 745 km of local roads maintained under the Service Exchange
agreement. If rural municipalities so choose, TIR will also service (at cost + capital –
approx. $13,500 per kilometer plus CPI) the 138 km of roads that rural
municipalities are currently fully responsible for. In addition, the Province will
engage in an education campaign to ensure that all municipalities understand the
policies and practices that TIR has in place to trade-off roads maintenance
responsibilities or ownership where possible so as to ensure that maximum
efficiency.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
9
Opportunities to Reallocate Scarce Resources
The Operating Grant
Every year, the Province, through the Department of Municipal Affairs, distributes tens of
millions of dollars in grants to municipalities. Despite this money, Nova Scotia’s
municipalities are facing significant financial and demographic headwinds, which are
increasingly raising questions about the long term viability of some communities. At the
same time, the Provincial Government is facing similar pressures, with respect to an aging
population and slow economic growth. Accordingly, this report seeks to explore the
current grants structure that the Province maintains for municipalities, to ensure that it
supports and promotes the long term viability of Nova Scotia’s municipalities in an efficient
and sustainable way. The Working Group feels that it is vital for all of the regions of Nova
Scotia to be successful, and thrive in their own way.
Through this comprehensive review, it has become clear that there is no simple way to
address the needs of Nova Scotia’s municipalities while respecting the Province’s fiscal
reality. At the same time, it is the consensus of the Working Group that Nova Scotia’s
current grants framework – the equalization program in particular – is failing to ensure the
long term viability of Nova Scotian municipalities. To address these concerns, the Working
Group is advancing the following recommendations:
Recommendation 16 – The group recognizes that the fundamental purpose of
equalization still stands. However, there are identified issues with the equalization
grant in its current form. Specifically, it discourages restructuring and does not
always allocate funds to municipalities with the greatest need, as identified by other
financial measures. As such, it is recommended that the equalization program be
frozen at the 2014 levels to allow time for an alternative equalization grant to be
developed based on improved data (such as reliable density measure to address the
restructuring issue and household income figures to support an ability-to-pay-
measure in the program). As well, consideration should be given to the standard
service levels used to determine the municipal need. The improved operating grant,
to start in 2018, will better addresses the needs of municipalities, and encourages
the outcomes necessary for ensuring Nova Scotia’s municipalities remain viable.
Similarly, the Towns Foundation Grant would be frozen at its current distribution,
regardless of structural change, and then be re-examined as part of the improved
operating grant structure.
Recommendation 17 – Noting concerns over CBRM's viability, and noting that many
options for improved viability available to most of the other municipalities in Nova
Scotia (such as shared servicing, structural changes, etc.) are not realistic options for
CBRM, it is recommended that the municipality and the Province conduct an
immediate joint review to assess the viability issues facing CBRM. This review will
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
10
make recommendations on how to best address the specific issues facing CBRM,
including recommendations on appropriate provincial grants for the municipality.
Recommendation 18 – During the freeze period, the $30 million funded through
equalization will be funded by the province.
Recommendation 19 – The NSPI Grant should be calculated based on rate times
assessment for host municipalities, where one standard rate is determined for the
entire Province. This recommendation will not impact the payment that NSPI makes
to the Province. Indeed, NSPI will continue to make payments as per existing
legislation, this recommendation only impacts how those monies are allocated
among municipalities. Additionally, at no time will the value of this grant exceed the
value of the PILT that NSPI makes to the Province.
Recommendation 20 – The Province will eliminate the HST offset program, as there
is no sound policy rational for the program.
Recommendation 21 – The Province will create a program/suite of programs
dedicated to promoting innovation and capacity building activities for
municipalities, including the comprehensive municipal reviews recommended by
this committee. To fund these activities, the Province should allocate $1.5 million
from the NSPI PILT to the $250,000 that is currently budgeted for municipal capacity
building programs.
Recommendation 22 – PCAP should be expanded by $14.2 Million – the remaining
NSPI PILT monies – and the PCAP program should be broadened to include roads and
other capital projects deemed critical by municipalities. It is intended that in the
initial years of this program expansion, some monies should be used to develop an
Asset Management Program for all municipalities outside the HRM1.
Recommendation 23 – The Province will provide a provincial grant for arterial and
collector roads (once a comprehensive inventory is developed). The grant will be
allocated at a rate of $9,000 per kilometer of arterial and collector roads within a
municipality’s boundaries (this is approximately the difference between the average
maintenance costs that towns pay for roads and TIR’s cost).
1 HRM is exempt because they have already invested in developing their own.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
11
Opportunities to Improve Revenue Systems
Early on in the Fiscal Review process it became apparent that a comprehensive review of
the finance powers available to municipalities was necessary. Nova Scotia municipalities
rely heavily on the property tax, which provides a stable revenue source, and has some
measure of elasticity that have allowed municipalities to fund increasing costs of providing
local services. However, the relationship between tax burden and ability to pay has been
questioned, and there is some concern that the population decline in rural Nova Scotia
could have a long term impact on property tax revenue in the province.
The Working Group identified several different potential sources of tax revenue, which are
explored for the purposes of this exercise, including a municipal income tax, a municipal
sales tax, a municipal corporate income tax, and others. All options, including property tax,
are then assessed according to 6 criteria: vertical and horizontal equity, economic
efficiency, accountability, elasticity & stability and administrative burden. Each option is
evaluated in the municipal context of collecting revenue sufficient to fund local services and
balance budgets on a yearly basis.
There are no easy solutions for increasing funding for municipal services, however, there
are some measurable improvements that could be made, and further areas that could be
explored which may improve municipal funding and address equity concerns. For example,
given the degree to which municipalities rely on property taxes to fund their operations,
they should be given greater freedom over how and how much they tax properties. Should
the legislature decide that certain sectors of the economy are best subsidized through the
property tax system, then it should be incumbent upon the Province to provide a realistic
and predictable offsetting grant to the affected municipalities.
The Working Group is providing the following six recommendations intended to help
address the financial and demographic pressures facing many municipalities across the
country, while respecting the existing tax burden of Nova Scotia residents.
Recommendation 24 – Although the shortcomings of the current system must be
acknowledged, property taxes should continue to be the primary source of revenue
for municipalities.
Recommendation 25 – The Province should amend legislation to provide greater
municipal autonomy over property taxation of forest and recreational property.
Recommendation 26- A full review of the exempt agricultural properties should be
conducted to determine if the benefit of the tax reduction is going to those who are
actively farming.
Recommendation 27 – The province and its municipal partners review the finance
powers provided in the Municipal Government Act and the Halifax Regional
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
12
Municipality Charter to provide municipalities with broader authority to establish
fair and effective property taxation and revenue regimes.
Recommendation 28 – Special tax legislation that restricts property taxation or
revenue will be reviewed to determine appropriateness.
Recommendation 29: The Province should introduce a Provincial Property Tax Rate,
which will be applied to all taxable property in Nova Scotia. The intended goal of this
tax is to replace the current system of municipal contributions to education,
corrections and housing, while increasing the transparency of the current tax
system.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
13
Opportunities to Improve through Collaboration
Impact of Regulation
Provincial decisions can have a have a major impact on municipal finances. The pressure
can come as a result of budget decisions to reduce municipal grants, or increase municipal
contributions. Financial pressures are also created by the province through changes in
municipal regulations. During the Fiscal Review, several regulations were identified as
directly impacting municipal expenditures.
Based on the information gathered, the
cost to achieve compliance with the
quantified regulatory pressures will
exceed $1 billion. This figure does not
include the unquantified regulatory
pressures, and the majority of the
estimates address only the new capital
spending required by regulation, without
factoring increased operating costs.
If municipalities borrowed to pay for
these additional capital expenditures it
would increase municipal debt by 313%.
Even if the cost was shared equally
among federal, provincial and municipal
governments, total municipal debt would
still increase by 70%. This will be a major financial pressure for some municipalities, who
will struggle to meet all of the targets set out in regulation, let alone make regular
investments in existing aging infrastructure or invest in other priorities.
Shared Services & Partnerships
Municipal expenditures have been growing steadily at just above 5% per year. In the
context of the current economic climate, characterized by slow economic growth and very
little population growth outside of the Halifax Region, the current rate of expenditure
growth is not sustainable for either the provincial or municipal governments.
During the review, the committee heard about more than two hundred examples of
municipalities providing services in new ways through partnerships with other
municipalities and agencies. The committee strongly urges the province and its municipal
partners to continue these efforts.
Asset Management
Over the past decade, the federal infrastructure programs delivered by the Canada-Nova
Scotia Infrastructure Secretariat have helped fund municipal infrastructure projects.
However, there is no systematic approach for making decisions regarding municipal
Regulatory Pressures Estimate
($Millions)
CCME Waste Water Standards
(Including Collection Systems)
$1,066
2002 Drinking Water Standards $17
2012 Drinking Water Standards Unavailable
LED Streetlights
(Stranded Assets Cost)
$23
Solid Waste Management Targets Unavailable
Climate Change Adaptation Unavailable
ESTIMATED TOTAL $1,106
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
14
infrastructure assets across the spectrum of infrastructure activities, including building,
operating, maintaining, replacing, and decommissioning these types of assets. By
incorporating community, municipal, and regulatory priorities together in these plans,
provincial and municipal officials will be far better positioned to prioritize infrastructure
investments, and will better position Nova Scotia to leverage federal infrastructure dollars.
There also may be potential to jointly develop the asset management program with other
agencies such as school boards, to reduce administrative costs, and further integrate
provincial and municipal capital investments for maximum effectiveness.
The Working Group is advancing the following 13 recommendations to help improve
intergovernmental communications, address the issues of regulatory impacts, the need for
improved shared services and partnerships, and the need for an asset management system,
as well as several other related issues:
Recommendation 30 – Stakeholder involvement must occur early in the process of
regulations development and must involve both economic and fiscal analyses2 of the
proposed changes so that the regulatory decisions are made with a full
understanding of implementation issues; a fully informed process that engages
municipalities will likely result in greater compliance with, and more cost effective
regulations.
Recommendation 31 – New regulations should always have clear and measurable
outcomes, they should include sun-setting provisions, and they should be regularly
reviewed for efficiency and effectiveness.
Recommendation 32 – Departments working on new regulations for municipalities
must engage with the Department of Municipal Affairs to determine the total
cumulative impact of all provincially and federally imposed municipal regulations.
To support this work, the Department of Municipa l Affairs will collect, on an annual
basis, the economic and fiscal analyses conducted for all proposed and existing
major regulations imposed on municipalities.
Recommendation 33 – Several existing regulations, specifically, the solid waste
diversion and CCME wastewater regulations should be set aside until a full economic
and fiscal analysis can be completed.
Recommendation 34 – Subsequently, and going forward, any new regulations should
not move forward unless municipal/provincial/federal governments have
agreement on how they will be funded.3
2 Economic analysis assesses the costs and benefits of implementing the regulations, fiscal analysis assesses the
affordability of the regulations.
3 Recommendations 33 and 34 were put forward by the Working Group, but have been removed by the Steering
Committee. They will not be included in the package for consultation.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
15
Recommendation 35 – Alternative service delivery mechanisms, including shared
service models, must be considered by municipalities and the province as a means to
improve efficiencies wherever possible.
Recommendation 36 – The Province, the AMANS and the UNSM should work together
to developing a Provincial/ Municipal Strategic plan to determine the priority areas
for cooperative initiatives (i.e. Towns Task Force implementation, MGA Review,
Elections Act Review, etc…).
Recommendation 37 – The Province and municipalities should establish a staff level
roundtable to discuss municipal issues and to provide an ongoing venue for
continuous dialogue and collaboration. This roundtable should encourage two way
communication around issues that impact the province and municipalities
Recommendation 38 – The Province, the AMANS and the UNSM should develop a
provincial wide strategy for addressing Asset Management in Nova Scotia. A key part
of this strategy would include an inventory of assets throughout the province to
identify the highest priorities for investment. This should be identified as a priority
in the Provincial/Municipal Strategic Plan and should build on the Asset
Management Program currently being developed by HRM.
Recommendation 39 – The AMA, UNSM and Municipal Affairs staff should continue to
collaborate on education and training through the AMANS Education Committee.
This committee should complete, implement, and continuously evaluate the
recommendations in the current Education and Training Strategy for Municipal
Employees and Elected Officials and should also continue to publish a joint training
calendar.
Recommendation 40 – The Province should explore opportunities for staff
secondments to help with municipal resource issues and succession planning.
Recommendation 41 – Municipal Affairs should undertake an organizational review
to determine if the existing structure best meets the needs of both the department
and municipal partners. In particular, the role, area of expertise and structure of the
Municipal Advisors service should be reviewed.
Recommendation 42 – Municipal Affairs should provide an organizational chart,
including roles and contact information, for all DMA staff for use by municipalities.
Recommendation 43 – Municipal Affairs should develop new processes for
developing and sharing information with municipalities. Based on priority areas
identified through the provincial/municipal strategic plan, the department should
work with municipalities to produce and share best practices materials, policies,
data analysis, etc. Municipal Affairs should identify methods for sharing the analysis
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
16
and findings from the data municipalities provides to the division through a system,
such as a data portal. Municipal Affairs should also develop a more user friendly
financial reporting system to improve and expedite the financial reporting process.
Consultation Plan
The work presented in this report is the fruit of extensive collaboration between
municipalities and the province. In spirit of enhanced consultation recommended here, the
Fiscal Review Committee is planning a consultation process with municipalities before
finalizing the report. We envision four parts to the consultation process:
1. Discussions:
A series of regional meetings will be held around the Province. At these meetings,
presentations will be held on the report and attending elected officials and
municipal staff will be given the opportunity to discuss - in detail - the information
and recommendations.
2. Review:
This consultative report will be sent directly to each municipality for council and
staff to review and consider. During this period councils will also be encouraged to
forward official council positions to the Fiscal Review Committee.
3. Revise:
The Fiscal Review Committee will take the feedback received from councils and
during the discussions under consideration and revise the consultative report
where appropriate.
Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Part II: Consultative Report
Fall 2014 Findings and Recommendations
17
4. Release: The final revised report will be released publicly and for government
consideration.
Conclusions
Municipalities are facing significant challenges in the coming years. Broad societal trends
including declining population and slow economic growth are impacting many Nova Scotia
communities. Municipalities’ expenditures have been growing faster than the economy in
recent years, driven in part by mandatory contributions and new costs as a result of
provincial and federal regulation. Municipalities struggle to maintain existing service levels
in the face of rising costs and other external pressures. These trends represent serious
issues that municipalities must tackle head on if they are to remain viable.
Key recommendations include: a more thorough consultation process prior to enacting
regulations, a Provincial Property Tax to improve the transparency of municipal
contributions, a freeze of the provincial Equalization Program, and more concerted
collaborative efforts to tackle common issues. These changes should lead to significant
improvements for municipalities.
This project has demonstrated the ability of the province and municipalities to work
closely together. Provincial and municipal representatives have engaged in and benefitted
from extensive information sharing and collaboration throughout the process. The Fiscal
Review Committee members sincerely hope that this project represents the beginning of a
much closer relationship between the province and its municipal partners to the benefit of
citizens, communities and governments across Nova Scotia.
Draft - For Discussion Purposes Only
Recommendation
Change in
Funds to
Municipalities
Change in Funds
from
Municipalities
Net Financial
Impact to
Municipalities
NSPI Host Grant $10.42 M -
Equalization $. M -
HST Offset -$6. M -
PCAP $14.2 M -
Innovation & Capacity Building $1.5 M -
Mandatory Contributions --
Roads $2.26 M $1.27 M
Total $22.37 M $1.27 M $21.11 M
Notes:
Once municipalities and villages have had the opportunity to provide input, that information will be brought back to
the UNSM and Government for consideration. December 15th is the target date to have all written submissions
back from municipalities and villages.
ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACTS FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.
These recommendations are being put forward for consultation only. All proposed values are
estimates and subject to change.
PROVINCIAL MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW
These recommendations were jointly developed by a Working Group of staff from the AMANS, UNSM and
Department of Municipal Affairs.
The recommendations you have received are for consultation purposes only. As such, they are not approved by
Government and they may not reflect the position of Government.
At this point, there are no financial commitments from either the Province or Municipalities associated with these
draft recommendations. Some of the recommendations do have provincial or municipal cost estimates, but
Government has not approved any funding for them, and municipalities have not agreed to them.
PROVINCIAL / MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Operating Grants
CURRENT NSPI
Host Grant
(13/14)
PROPOSED Rate
times
assessment NSPI
Host Grant
CHANGE in
NSPI Host Grant
CHANGE in HST
Offset (Eliminated)
CURRENT Equalization
and Towns Foundation
Grant (13/14) - Frozen for
3 Years
Regionals
CBRM 2,481,241$ 4,702,176$ 2,220,935$ (595,361)$ 15,653,202$
HRM 3,020,746$ 5,724,586$ 2,703,840$ (3,239,625)$ -$
ROQ 724,071$ 1,372,180$ 648,109$ (47,514)$ 1,126,156$
Regionals Total 6,226,058$ 11,798,941$ 5,572,883$ (3,882,500)$ 16,779,358$
Towns
Amherst 8,762$ 16,604$ 7,842$ (108,647)$ 1,238,943$
Annapolis Royal 290,255$ 550,060$ 259,805$ (8,769)$ 67,942$
Antigonish - Town 3,468$ 6,572$ 3,104$ (27,022)$ 166,196$
Berwick -$ -$ -$ (20,882)$ 252,572$
Bridgetown 48$ 91$ 43$ (6,473)$ 204,081$
Bridgewater 13,752$ 26,062$ 12,310$ (87,906)$ 434,985$
Clark's Harbour -$ -$ -$ (5,079)$ 185,305$
Digby - Town -$ -$ -$ (16,725)$ 351,047$
Hantsport 212$ 402$ 190$ (16,574)$ 88,540$
Kentville 8,218$ 15,574$ 7,356$ (56,059)$ 128,711$
Lockeport 642$ 1,216$ 574$ (4,440)$ 160,182$
Lunenburg - Town -$ -$ -$ (28,297)$ 50,000$
Mahone Bay 854$ 1,619$ 765$ (11,005)$ 50,000$
Middleton 492$ 933$ 441$ (23,722)$ 336,546$
Mulgrave 751$ 1,423$ 672$ (3,659)$ 129,151$
New Glasgow 1,016$ 1,926$ 910$ (100,295)$ 1,037,198$
Oxford -$ -$ -$ (11,789)$ 181,229$
Parrsboro 2,396$ 4,541$ 2,145$ (9,122)$ 368,912$
Pictou - Town 916$ 1,737$ 821$ (28,431)$ 562,675$
Port Hawkesbury 9,054$ 17,158$ 8,104$ (41,057)$ 276,019$
Shelburne - Town -$ -$ -$ (10,814)$ 356,451$
Springhill 1,045$ 1,980$ 935$ (38,661)$ 652,641$
Stellarton 17,229$ 32,651$ 15,422$ (58,531)$ 506,636$
Stewiacke -$ -$ -$ (8,933)$ 195,986$
Trenton 968,314$ 1,835,042$ 866,728$ (22,404)$ 415,383$
Truro 17,579$ 33,313$ 15,734$ (87,536)$ 1,305,504$
Westville 89$ 169$ 80$ (23,915)$ 681,807$
Windsor 3,976$ 7,535$ 3,559$ (33,400)$ 407,670$
Wolfville 3,623$ 6,866$ 3,243$ (41,963)$ 71,137$
Yarmouth - Town 14,153$ 26,822$ 12,669$ (80,794)$ 655,608$
Towns Total 1,366,844$ 2,590,296$ 1,223,451$ (1,022,904)$ 11,519,057$
Rural Municipalities
Annapolis 223,346$ 423,261$ 199,915$ (52,304)$ 637,006$
Antigonish - Mun 4,691$ 8,890$ 4,199$ (58,820)$ 4,962$
Argyle 10,220$ 19,368$ 9,148$ (16,472)$ 147,426$
Barrington 2,584$ 4,896$ 2,312$ (19,407)$ 138,926$
Chester 20,576$ 38,993$ 18,417$ (64,530)$ -$
Clare 5,993$ 11,357$ 5,364$ (31,829)$ 223,704$
Colchester 18,110$ 34,320$ 16,210$ (173,163)$ 299,086$
Cumberland 30,373$ 57,560$ 27,187$ (38,418)$ 583,977$
Digby - Mun 347,766$ 659,048$ 311,282$ (20,812)$ 358,474$
Guysborough 122,870$ 232,850$ 109,980$ (101,020)$ 266,000$
Hants East 3,044$ 5,768$ 2,724$ (103,091)$ -$
Hants West 192,101$ 364,048$ 171,947$ (32,131)$ 34,983$
Inverness 25,517$ 48,356$ 22,839$ (36,061)$ 397,160$
Kings 504,399$ 955,882$ 451,483$ (121,293)$ -$
Lunenburg - Mun 3,910$ 7,410$ 3,500$ (61,757)$ -$
Pictou - Mun 10,598$ 20,085$ 9,487$ (39,276)$ 303,464$
Richmond 1,303,489$ 2,470,228$ 1,166,739$ (45,458)$ -$
Shelburne - Mun 28,901$ 54,769$ 25,868$ (16,880)$ 58,258$
St. Mary's 3,261$ 6,180$ 2,919$ (9,600)$ 180,638$
Victoria 1,044,502$ 1,979,425$ 934,923$ (25,882)$ -$
Yarmouth - Mun 137,591$ 260,747$ 123,156$ (26,390)$ 117,522$
Rurals Total 4,043,842$ 7,663,443$ 3,619,601$ (1,094,594)$ 3,751,586$
Province Total 11,636,744$ 22,052,681$ 10,415,936$ (5,999,998)$ 32,050,001$
Note : Positive values
indicate increased grants
to municipalities or
decreased costs for
municipalities.
NSPI
The recommendation is calculate the grant by NSPI assets * average
commercial rate (weighted by Municipalities with NSPI assets)
The equalization
recommendation would
maintain the 2014
distribution, and total value
of the grant for three
years, beginning in fiscal
2015.
DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY ALL VALUES ARE ESTIMATES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE
PROVINCIAL / MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Regionals
CBRM
HRM
ROQ
Regionals Total
Towns
Amherst
Annapolis Royal
Antigonish - Town
Berwick
Bridgetown
Bridgewater
Clark's Harbour
Digby - Town
Hantsport
Kentville
Lockeport
Lunenburg - Town
Mahone Bay
Middleton
Mulgrave
New Glasgow
Oxford
Parrsboro
Pictou - Town
Port Hawkesbury
Shelburne - Town
Springhill
Stellarton
Stewiacke
Trenton
Truro
Westville
Windsor
Wolfville
Yarmouth - Town
Towns Total
Rural Municipalities
Annapolis
Antigonish - Mun
Argyle
Barrington
Chester
Clare
Colchester
Cumberland
Digby - Mun
Guysborough
Hants East
Hants West
Inverness
Kings
Lunenburg - Mun
Pictou - Mun
Richmond
Shelburne - Mun
St. Mary's
Victoria
Yarmouth - Mun
Rurals Total
Province Total
Note : Positive values
indicate increased grants
to municipalities or
decreased costs for
municipalities.
CURRENT Total
Contributions
PROPOSED Provincial
Property Tax
CHANGE in
Contributions
(15,102,671)$ (13,366,229)$ 1,736,442$
(122,624,282)$ (127,249,695)$ (4,625,414)$
(2,889,202)$ (2,726,416)$ 162,785$
(140,616,154)$ (143,342,341)$ (2,726,187)$
(1,868,795)$ (1,615,295)$ 253,499$
(135,856)$ (144,290)$ (8,434)$
(1,433,267)$ (1,199,613)$ 233,654$
(477,097)$ (476,663)$ 434$
(214,554)$ (152,016)$ 62,538$
(2,030,610)$ (2,004,029)$ 26,581$
(143,385)$ (115,961)$ 27,424$
(433,312)$ (347,820)$ 85,492$
(258,032)$ (245,044)$ 12,988$
(1,470,470)$ (1,517,435)$ (46,965)$
(99,747)$ (94,084)$ 5,663$
(795,805)$ (795,472)$ 333$
(392,405)$ (415,421)$ (23,016)$
(384,960)$ (340,017)$ 44,943$
(151,054)$ (154,283)$ (3,229)$
(1,941,810)$ (1,803,588)$ 138,222$
(236,422)$ (235,967)$ 455$
(250,236)$ (203,049)$ 47,187$
(602,840)$ (508,693)$ 94,147$
(720,595)$ (660,126)$ 60,469$
(323,208)$ (278,844)$ 44,364$
(601,931)$ (354,628)$ 247,303$
(840,874)$ (822,763)$ 18,111$
(255,967)$ (245,437)$ 10,530$
(403,759)$ (303,686)$ 100,073$
(2,638,620)$ (2,628,709)$ 9,911$
(486,791)$ (441,869)$ 44,922$
(712,517)$ (699,719)$ 12,798$
(753,914)$ (1,256,564)$ (502,650)$
(1,589,544)$ (1,351,239)$ 238,305$
(22,648,377)$ (21,412,325)$ 1,236,052$
(3,412,589)$ (3,316,871)$ 95,718$
(3,107,145)$ (3,168,274)$ (61,129)$
(1,590,033)$ (1,557,521)$ 32,512$
(1,361,840)$ (1,354,051)$ 7,789$
(4,477,173)$ (4,700,322)$ (223,149)$
(1,745,701)$ (1,721,503)$ 24,198$
(7,108,631)$ (6,997,278)$ 111,353$
(3,804,835)$ (3,763,605)$ 41,230$
(1,417,680)$ (1,281,651)$ 136,029$
(1,509,395)$ (1,423,595)$ 85,800$
(4,582,640)$ (4,870,886)$ (288,246)$
(2,877,277)$ (2,926,122)$ (48,845)$
(3,151,151)$ (3,027,818)$ 123,333$
(11,313,141)$ (10,310,355)$ 1,002,786$
(7,604,060)$ (7,913,539)$ (309,479)$
(4,590,739)$ (4,518,043)$ 72,696$
(2,875,286)$ (2,429,699)$ 445,588$
(1,192,361)$ (1,180,522)$ 11,839$
(575,010)$ (534,411)$ 40,599$
(2,223,123)$ (2,049,317)$ 173,807$
(2,148,282)$ (2,132,574)$ 15,708$
(72,668,092)$ (71,177,957)$ 1,490,135$
-$
(235,932,623)$ (235,932,623)$ -$
Mandatory Contributions
Some municipalities have special agreements with their neighbouring
municipalities that see them make education contributiuons to the Province
differently than most. For example, the municipalities in Kings County make
their mandatory contributions based on student enrollment levels. As such,
a switch to funding edcuation costs based on taxible assessment - for those
municipalities - could result in a signifiicant adjustment to their expected
contributions (e.g. Wolfville and Kings). Nothing in this recommendation
precludes a similar agrteement from being struck in the future between
neighbouring units, but for the purposes of this work, it was not modeled.
Mandatory Contributiouns would be replaced by a single provincial rate
would be applied to taxable assessment in order to raise the revenue
necessary for educations, corrections and housing. Note that this does not
consider any type of reallocation of education contributions between units
(as is currently done in Kings County)
DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY ALL VALUES ARE ESTIMATES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE
PROVINCIAL / MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Regionals
CBRM
HRM
ROQ
Regionals Total
Towns
Amherst
Annapolis Royal
Antigonish - Town
Berwick
Bridgetown
Bridgewater
Clark's Harbour
Digby - Town
Hantsport
Kentville
Lockeport
Lunenburg - Town
Mahone Bay
Middleton
Mulgrave
New Glasgow
Oxford
Parrsboro
Pictou - Town
Port Hawkesbury
Shelburne - Town
Springhill
Stellarton
Stewiacke
Trenton
Truro
Westville
Windsor
Wolfville
Yarmouth - Town
Towns Total
Rural Municipalities
Annapolis
Antigonish - Mun
Argyle
Barrington
Chester
Clare
Colchester
Cumberland
Digby - Mun
Guysborough
Hants East
Hants West
Inverness
Kings
Lunenburg - Mun
Pictou - Mun
Richmond
Shelburne - Mun
St. Mary's
Victoria
Yarmouth - Mun
Rurals Total
Province Total
Note : Positive values
indicate increased grants
to municipalities or
decreased costs for
municipalities.
PROPOSED -
Additional Costs
of Local Roads
Maintenance
PROPOSED - Arterials and
Collectors Grant
CHANGE in Roads Grants
and Costs
-$ -$ -$
-$ -$ -$
-$ -$ -$
-$ -$ -$
-$ 110,160$ 110,160$
-$ 28,440$ 28,440$
-$ 64,260$ 64,260$
-$ 44,190$ 44,190$
-$ 38,070$ 38,070$
-$ 142,020$ 142,020$
-$ 31,860$ 31,860$
-$ 63,360$ 63,360$
-$ 23,220$ 23,220$
-$ 131,130$ 131,130$
-$ 34,920$ 34,920$
-$ 57,240$ 57,240$
-$ 59,400$ 59,400$
-$ 55,890$ 55,890$
-$ 91,170$ 91,170$
-$ 149,400$ 149,400$
-$ 76,050$ 76,050$
-$ 148,140$ 148,140$
-$ 65,250$ 65,250$
-$ 19,170$ 19,170$
-$ 57,870$ 57,870$
-$ 85,500$ 85,500$
-$ 103,140$ 103,140$
-$ 49,770$ 49,770$
-$ 44,640$ 44,640$
-$ 160,290$ 160,290$
-$ 119,160$ 119,160$
-$ 59,760$ 59,760$
-$ 49,860$ 49,860$
-$ 93,420$ 93,420$
-$ 2,256,750$ 2,256,750$
(48,263)$ -$ (48,263)$
(25,432)$ -$ (25,432)$
(40,477)$ -$ (40,477)$
(28,594)$ -$ (28,594)$
(61,251)$ -$ (61,251)$
-$ -$ -$
(180,608)$ -$ (180,608)$
(70,652)$ -$ (70,652)$
(17,595)$ -$ (17,595)$
(25,687)$ -$ (25,687)$
(109,293)$ -$ (109,293)$
(57,341)$ -$ (57,341)$
(49,096)$ -$ (49,096)$
(229,755)$ -$ (229,755)$
(134,470)$ -$ (134,470)$
(51,544)$ -$ (51,544)$
(50,796)$ -$ (50,796)$
(10,540)$ -$ (10,540)$
(8,398)$ -$ (8,398)$
(41,820)$ -$ (41,820)$
(24,956)$ -$ (24,956)$
(1,266,568)$ -$ (1,266,568)$
(1,266,568)$ 2,256,750$ 990,182$
Roads
Rural municipalities will now be required to pay TIR the full maintenance recovery
cost (approx. $6700 per kilometer plus annual CPI increases) for maintenance of
the 745 km of local roads maintained under the Service Exchange agreement. If
rural municipalities so choose, TIR will also service (at cost + capital – approx.
$13,500 per kilometer plus CPI) the 138 km of roads that rural municipalities are
currently fully responsible for. An arterials and collectors grant will be
allocated at a rate of $9,000 per kilometer of arterial and collector roads within a
municipality’s boundaries (this is approximately the difference between the
average maintenance costs that towns pay for roads and TIR’s cost)
DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY ALL VALUES ARE ESTIMATES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE
PROVINCIAL / MUNICIPAL FISCAL REVIEW ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Regionals
CBRM
HRM
ROQ
Regionals Total
Towns
Amherst
Annapolis Royal
Antigonish - Town
Berwick
Bridgetown
Bridgewater
Clark's Harbour
Digby - Town
Hantsport
Kentville
Lockeport
Lunenburg - Town
Mahone Bay
Middleton
Mulgrave
New Glasgow
Oxford
Parrsboro
Pictou - Town
Port Hawkesbury
Shelburne - Town
Springhill
Stellarton
Stewiacke
Trenton
Truro
Westville
Windsor
Wolfville
Yarmouth - Town
Towns Total
Rural Municipalities
Annapolis
Antigonish - Mun
Argyle
Barrington
Chester
Clare
Colchester
Cumberland
Digby - Mun
Guysborough
Hants East
Hants West
Inverness
Kings
Lunenburg - Mun
Pictou - Mun
Richmond
Shelburne - Mun
St. Mary's
Victoria
Yarmouth - Mun
Rurals Total
Province Total
Note : Positive values
indicate increased grants
to municipalities or
decreased costs for
municipalities.
CHANGE - Net of NSPI, HST Offset,
Mandatory Contributions and Road
Grants/Costs
CHANGE - EXCLUDING
MANDATORY CONTRIBUTIONS. Net
of NSPI, HST Offset and Road
Grants/Costs
3,362,015$ 1,625,574$
(5,161,198)$ (535,785)$
763,380$ 600,595$
(1,035,803)$ 1,690,383$
262,855$ 9,355$
271,042$ 279,476$
273,996$ 40,342$
23,742$ 23,308$
94,179$ 31,640$
93,005$ 66,424$
54,205$ 26,781$
132,127$ 46,635$
19,824$ 6,836$
35,461$ 82,427$
36,718$ 31,054$
29,276$ 28,943$
26,143$ 49,160$
77,551$ 32,609$
84,954$ 88,183$
188,237$ 50,015$
64,716$ 64,261$
188,350$ 141,163$
131,786$ 37,640$
46,686$ (13,783)$
91,420$ 47,056$
295,077$ 47,774$
78,142$ 60,031$
51,367$ 40,837$
989,038$ 888,964$
98,399$ 88,488$
140,246$ 95,325$
42,717$ 29,919$
(491,510)$ 11,140$
263,599$ 25,295$
3,693,349$ 2,457,297$
195,066$ 99,348$
(141,182)$ (80,053)$
(15,289)$ (47,801)$
(37,900)$ (45,689)$
(330,513)$ (107,364)$
(2,268)$ (26,465)$
(226,208)$ (337,561)$
(40,653)$ (81,883)$
408,904$ 272,875$
69,074$ (16,727)$
(497,906)$ (209,660)$
33,630$ 82,475$
61,015$ (62,318)$
1,103,221$ 100,435$
(502,206)$ (192,727)$
(8,637)$ (81,334)$
1,516,073$ 1,070,485$
10,288$ (1,552)$
25,520$ (15,079)$
1,041,028$ 867,221$
87,518$ 71,810$
2,748,575$ 1,258,439$
5,406,120$ 5,406,120$
In addition to the changes outlined here, it has been recommended that $15.7M
be invested in application based programs - PCAP and Capacity Building
specifically. Given that they are application based, they were not modeled and
don’t appear in this analysis.
These estimates DO NOT include the proposed $15.7M in application based
programs (PCAP and Innovation & Capacity Building). The column furthest to the
right excludes mandatory contributions, as these will become a flow through with
no impact on municipal budgets. Note that these provincial contributions would
still be collected through the property tax base, but shown on the property tax bill
as a provincial property tax.
Net Financial Impact - Excluding Application Based Programs
DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY ALL VALUES ARE ESTIMATES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE
Provincial / Municipal
Fiscal Review
Supporting Material
Regional Consultations
Fiscal Review Structure and Work Completed to Date
•Steering Committee
•Deputy Ministers and Municipal Elected Officials
•Joint Working Committee and subcommittees
•Expenditure Pressures, Roads Costs
•Revenue Opportunities
•Structure / Governance
•Grants
•Non-Financial Supports
•Current state of municipalities document released
•Steering Committee approved recommendations for
municipal consultation
For Discussion Purposes Only
Fiscal Review Process Overview
Review of CurrentState of MunicipalitiesReview of CurrentState of Municipalities
Review of SupportsProvided toMunicipalities
Review of SupportsProvided toMunicipalities
Working GroupDevelopsRecommendations
Working GroupDevelopsRecommendations
Steering CommitteeApprovesRecommendations forConsultation
Steering CommitteeApprovesRecommendations forConsultation
CURRENTLY
Conduct Consultationswith Municipalities andUNSM to GatherFeedback
CURRENTLY
Conduct Consultationswith Municipalities andUNSM to GatherFeedback
Recommendationsand Feedback sent toGovernment forConsideration
Recommendationsand Feedback sent toGovernment forConsideration
Confidential Draft –For Discussion
Purposes Only 3
Fiscal Review Consultation Phase
•The recommendations you have received are for consultationpurposes only. As such, they are not approved by governmentand they may not reflect the position of government.
•At this point, there are no financial commitments from eitherthe province or municipalities associated with these draftrecommendations. Some of the recommendations do haveprovincial or municipal cost estimates, but government has notapproved any funding for them, and municipalities have notagreed to them.
•Once all input is received from municipalities and villages, wewill bring that information back to the UNSM and governmentfor consideration. We ask that municipalities and villagesprovide written submissions by December 15.
For Discussion Purposes Only
Municipal Structure Recommendations
Proposed Structural Review Process Map
Time (years)0
3
•Review explores primary issue: viability/structure etc.
•Public consultations
•Establishes binding outcomes
•Affected MUs have 90 days to submit Action Plan to
Province to address review recommendations
•Province will issue Ministerial Order
•FCI Indicators
monitored
•Static/declining
performance (over
three-year period
triggers review
•CAO’s sign off on
Tracking, MUs with
red flags present to
Council, submit
explanation/ plan to
DMA
•After two years of not
meeting thresholds,
Minister writes letter(s)
to affected
municipalities’
councils, noting that a
review will be
triggered if no
improvement
•Municipal Advisors
target municipal units
with red flags
•FCI monitoring continues
•MU implements Action Plan
•MU periodically reports to DMA on
progress
Review identifies unique
circumstances beyond the
reach of reasonable
recommendations –MU
leaves cycle for custom public
policy process
F
C
I
T
r
a
c
k
i
n
g
Province offers suite of assistance / incentive measures to
municipal restructuring (voluntary or otherwise)
DMA continues monitoring FCI for all municipalities (MUs)
For Discussion Purposes Only
Recommendations
R1 -The Province will formalize FCI tracking as the tool that will be used to monitor
the financial health of municipalities.
R2 –The Province, with UNSM and AMA, will develop materials to help ensure that
municipalities understand the FCI and have access to best practices to improve
their financial health.
R3 –The Province will develop a suite of programs designed to assist any
municipality that chooses, or is required, to initiate a consolidation process.
R4 -After three consecutive years of 6 or more red-flagged FCI indicators,
municipalities will be subject to a comprehensive review.
R5 –Beginning on March 31, 2015, the FCI tracker will be applied as a trigger for
reviews for any municipality that has exceeded 6 or more red-flag trigger threshold
for three consecutive years.
R6 –Municipalities will be encouraged to voluntarily request a review at any time,
for any reason.
R7 -In extraordinary circumstances, where it is jointly agreed upon by the UNSM
and SNSRM that there is a need, a municipality could be targeted for a review
process.
R8 -The review will provide all parties with binding outcomes that will identify the
conditions necessary for municipal viability.
R9 -The reviewed municipality, other affected municipalities and provincial officials
will have 90 days to develop an Action Plan to achieve the outcomes identified in
the review.
R10 -The Province, upon receipt of the Action Plan, will issue a Ministerial Order
within 30 days. If the Province does not receive an Action Plan within 90 days, the
Province will issue a Ministerial Order.
R11 -Municipalities will submit progress reports to the Province periodically once a
transition process has begun. FCI tracking will continue.
R12 –In the event that a review reveals that the challenges facing a municipality
are such that they cannot be addressed through structural changes or a realignment
of service standards, OR a municipality implements their Action Plan and
improvements are not realized, then a tailored public policy process will be
launched.
R13 –No new villages will be created and no new powers will be given to villages
beyond those that currently exist.
R14 –All incorporated villages in Nova Scotia should be phased out. Existing
villages should be given the opportunity to apply for town status, merge with an
adjacent town, or dissolve into their encompassing rural municipality as they see fit.
Municipal Structure Background Information
Villages
Villages vary significantly in terms of population,capacity,and level of service
delivery in Nova Scotia.
Historically,village status was a necessary precondition for communities within a
rural municipality to raise tax revenue and provide services that rural municipalities
were legally unable to provide (e.g.,water and wastewater services).
Under the current Municipal Government Act (MGA),rural municipalities now have
the same authority to provide services as towns.They can also levy area rates to
provide additional services that local residents may request from their council.
Villages are not currently required to submit financial reports to the Province with the
same level of detail as municipalities.Therefore,it is impossible to apply standards
consistent with the structural review process for municipalities,including generating
FCI for villages.However,the Committee tried to use the same guiding principles to
analyze their circumstances.
Democracy
-5 villages have not filed financial reports with DMA in 5 years (two of which are
officially inactive);2 have not filed in 2 years,and 1 did not file in the previous
fiscal year.
-Alternatives exist for the local representation some residents may desire
without the challenges and costs associated with the current system.
•Community Councils (e.g.HRM)
•Ratepayer Associations
Equity &Fairness;Viability &Capacity
-Village residents currently pay for two levels of government:their village
government and their municipal government.
-On average,village residents pay an additional $78 per household to support
the second tier of public administration.
-Average portion of a village budget dedicated to public administration is apx.
20%,roughly the same as the average for towns.
-By phasing out incorporated villages,the Province should be able to:
•Improve service efficiencies by eliminating a second tier of government;
•Increase the value for money that village taxpayers receive;and
•Trim the property tax burden for village residents.
Efficiency &Effectiveness
-The jurisdiction afforded to villages is a subset of the jurisdiction that their
encompassing municipality occupies.
-As a result,village residents have two levels of elected municipal
representation,which may have different mandates and priorities.
-Can lead to confusing or even degraded lines of accountability (e.g.in
situations where different representatives of the same electorate find
themselves in contention with one another).
If implemented,it is likely that many villages would be drawn into the municipal
viability reviews that will result from the other recommendations contained in this
report.
Municipalities
Overall literature review findings:
-Research conducted on cohesion,capacity,efficiency,and representation.
-No clear consensus on the optimal size of a municipality.
-Difficult to isolate structural effects from other variables such as fiscal,socio-
economic,and political variables.
-Impact of amalgamation on cost savings (at least in the short term)mixed due to
effects of harmonization,transition costs,etc.May see savings materialize in long
term.
-Economies of scale can be achieved for some services,but not necessarily all.
•Evidence for capital-intensive services (i.e.water,sewage,transportation,
financial services like billing and payables).
•Less so for labour-intensive services (i.e.policing).
•Population density and level of service are also important factors.
•Diseconomies of scale are possible when municipalities become too large.
-Several non-financial benefits to structure reform
•Reduced duplication
•Improved administrative capacity
•Reduced inter-municipal competition for scarce resources
-Concerns about potential loss of identity,less accessibility of political officials,and
less voice for communities are voiced by some scholars.
•However,many factors influence how much citizens participate in their local
government.
Overall jurisdiction scan findings:
-Looked at amalgamation in Canada since 1990.
-Emphasis on structural reform in Ontario and Quebec and to a lesser extent in
Nova Scotia,New Brunswick and PEI during this period.
-More regional cooperation approaches in Western Canada and British Columbia.
•Leads to focus on governance over government,process (strategic planning,
resolving conflict,building consensus)over structure.
•Manitoba’s Municipal Modernization Act (2013)is a major new development.
-Overall,many two-tiered systems eliminated in Canada.
Guiding Principles
Democracy
Recommendations should uphold
transparent,accountable,accessible,
and representative municipal
government.
Equity &Fairness
Recommendations should support a
reasonably comparable standard of
public services across Nova Scotia
municipalities at reasonably
comparable levels of taxation,and
support a system where citizens
receive best value and are taxed
according to the services they have
access to.
Viability &Capacity
Recommendations should ensure
that municipalities have sustainable
resources to support their long-term
viability.This includes,but is not
limited to,access to revenue,an
appropriate level of tax burden,the
ability to provide core services and
the ability to maintain sufficient
human resources.
Efficiency &Effectiveness
Recommendations from this review
should encourage efficient and
effective decision-making.
Non-Financial Support Recommendations
Approved Recommendations
R36 -The Province,the AMANS and the UNSM should work together to develop a Provincial/Municipal Strategic plan to determine
the priority areas for cooperative initiatives (i.e.Towns Task Force implementation,MGA Review,Elections Act Review,etc…).
R37 -The Province and municipalities should establish a staff level roundtable to discuss municipal issues and to provide an ongoing
venue for continuous dialogue and collaboration.This roundtable should encourage two way communication around issues that
impact the province and municipalities
R38 -The Province,the AMANS and the UNSM should develop a province-wide strategy for addressing Asset Management in Nova
Scotia.A key part of this strategy would include an inventory of assets throughout the province to identify the highest priorities for
investment.This should be identified as a priority in the Provincial/Municipal Strategic Plan and should build on the Asset
Management Program currently being developed by HRM.
R39 -The AMA,UNSM and Municipal Affairs staff should continue to collaborate on education and training through the AMANS
Education Committee.This committee should complete,implement,and continuously evaluate the recommendations in the current
Education and Training Strategy for Municipal Employees and Elected Officials and should also continue to publish a joint training
calendar.
R40 -The Province should explore opportunities for staff secondments to help with municipal resource issues and succession
planning.
R41 -Municipal Affairs should undertake an organizational review to determine if the existing structure best meets the needs of both
the department and municipal partners.In particular,the role,area of expertise and structure of the Municipal Advisors service should
be reviewed.
R42 -Municipal Affairs should provide an organizational chart,including roles and contact information,for all DMA staff for use by
municipalities.
R43 -Municipal Affairs should develop new processes for developing and sharing information with municipalities.Based on priority
areas identified through the provincial/municipal strategic plan,the department should work with municipalities to produce and share
best practices materials,policies,data analysis,etc.Municipal Affairs should identify methods for sharing the analysis and findings
from the data municipalities provide to the division through a system,such as a data portal.Municipal Affairs should also develop a
more user friendly financial reporting system to improve and expedite the financial reporting process.
Confidential Draft –For Discussion Purposes Only
Estimated Debt Servicing Costs to Finance 1/3 of Wastewater Requirements
Even at 1/3 cost sharing, some Towns will have debt loads in excess of 15% of revenue. This
threshold is used by the Municipal Finance Corporation when considering new borrowing requests.
Even at 1/3 cost sharing, some Towns will have debt loads in excess of 15% of revenue. This
threshold is used by the Municipal Finance Corporation when considering new borrowing requests.
Cost Pressures From Wastewater Regulations
0%
15%
30%
Regionals and Towns debt service for WW 11/12 debt service11/12 debt service (regionals)debt service for WW (regionals)
0.0%
15.0%
30.0%Rural Municipalities debt service for WW 11/12 debt service
For Discussion Purposes Only
Recommendations
R30 -Stakeholder involvement must occur early in the
process of regulations development and must involve both
economic and fiscal analyses of the proposed changes so
that the regulatory decisions are made with a full
understanding of implementation issues; a fully informed
process that engages municipalities will likely result in
greater compliance with, and more cost effective
regulations.
R31 -New regulations should always have clear and
measurable outcomes,they should include sun-setting
provisions, and they should be regularly reviewed for
efficiency and effectiveness.
R32 -Departments working on new regulations for
municipalities must engage with the Department of
Municipal Affairs to determine the total cumulative impact of
all provincially and federally imposed municipal regulations.
To support this work, the Department of Municipal Affairs
will collect, on an annual basis, the economic and fiscal
analyses conducted for all proposed and existing major
regulations imposed on municipalities.
R33 -Several existing regulations, specifically, the solid
waste diversion and CCME wastewater regulations should
be set aside until a full economic and fiscal analysis can be
completed.
R34 -Subsequently, and going forward, any new
regulations should not move forward unless
municipal/provincial/federal governments have agreement
on how they will be funded.
R35 -Alternative service delivery mechanisms, including
shared service models,must be considered by
municipalities and the province as a means to improve
efficiencies wherever possible.
Regulatory Pressures Estimate
($Millions)
CCME Waste Water
Standards $601
Waste Water Collection
Systems (resulting from
CCME)
$265
Drinking Water $17
LED Street Lighting $90
TOTAL COSTS $973 Million
Expenditure Recommendations
Quantified regulatory expenditure pressures could increase existing municipal
debt loads between 59% and 177% depending on cost-sharing arrangements
Quantified regulatory expenditure pressures could increase existing municipal
debt loads between 59% and 177% depending on cost-sharing arrangements
Un-quantified Regulatory
Pressures
Estimated
Cost
2012 Drinking water
standards $ ??
Solid Waste Management $ ??
Disposal of Surplus Schools $ ??
Climate Change Adaptation $ ??
Fire Services Review $ ??
Work within Highway Right-of-
Way permit and deposit $ ??
TOTAL COSTS UNKNOWN
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
Debt
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Quantified Regulatory Expenditure Pressures
and Current Municipal Debt, 2013
Additional new debt
with no identified
cost-sharing
New Debt with 1/3
cost-sharing
Current Debt
Confidential Draft –For Discussion Purposes Only
Roads Recommendations
251 Km
23%
827 Km
77%
Arterial & Collectors
Roads
Local Roads
Breakdown of Road Classification in Towns
Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal
(NSTIR) maintains the bulk of roads, but Regionals and
Towns are responsible for more than Rurals
Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal
(NSTIR) maintains the bulk of roads, but Regionals and
Towns are responsible for more than Rurals
In addition, towns are responsible for maintaining 251 km of
provincial arterial and collector roads within their boundaries
In addition, towns are responsible for maintaining 251 km of
provincial arterial and collector roads within their boundaries
Regionals and Towns spend much more than
Rurals on maintaining roads
Regionals and Towns spend much more than
Rurals on maintaining roads
14,291 ,77%
745 ,4%
138 ,1%2624,14%
827,4%
Breakdown of responsibility for local roads in NS
TIR Local Roads
Rural roads - service
exchange (subsidized cost)
Rural roads - full cost
maintenance
Regionals
Towns
Region Kilometers of Local
Road
Total Service &
Maintenance Cost per km
NSTIR 14,291 $6,700
HRM and CBRM 2,623 $13,450
Towns 827 $15,913
Rurals 138 $18,910
Rurals –Service
Exchange 745 $4,930
For Discussion Purposes Only
Recommendation
R15 -Rural municipalities will now be required to pay TIR the full maintenance
recovery cost (approx. $6700 per kilometer plus annual CPI increase) for
maintenance of the 745 km of local roads maintained under the Service
Exchange agreement. If rural municipalities so choose, TIR will also service (at
cost + capital –approx. $13,500 per kilometer plus CPI) the 138 km of roads that
rural municipalities are currently fully responsible for. In addition, the Province
will engage in an education campaign to ensure that all municipalities
understand the policies and practices that TIR has in place to trade-off roads
maintenance responsibilities or ownership where possible so as to ensure that
maximum efficiency.
R23 -The Province will provide a provincial grant for arterial and collector roads
(once a comprehensive inventory is developed).The grant will be allocated at a
rate of $9,000 per kilometer of arterial and collector roads within a municipality’s
boundaries (this is approximately the difference between the average
maintenance costs that towns pay for roads and TIR’s cost).
50 %
111 %$290,000
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Equ's Approx. Tax
Bill
Household Income Equ Grant
Average Tax Bill, Median Household
Income, and Equalization Grants
Town B
Town A
Grant Recommendations –Equalization
Explanation: Town A and Town B are of similar of size.
1. Based on the Program’s inputs, Equalization assumes that Town
B should have half the tax bill of Town A.
2. This, in spite of the fact that Town B residents earn 11% more
than Town A residents.
3. The Equalization formula awards Town B a $290,000 grant, and
Town A gets nothing.
Conclusion:The current program may not necessarily be directing
funds to municipalities with the greatest need.
Explanation: Town A and Town B are of similar of size.
1. Based on the Program’s inputs, Equalization assumes that Town
B should have half the tax bill of Town A.
2. This, in spite of the fact that Town B residents earn 11% more
than Town A residents.
3. The Equalization formula awards Town B a $290,000 grant, and
Town A gets nothing.
Conclusion:The current program may not necessarily be directing
funds to municipalities with the greatest need.
1 2 3
For Discussion Purposes Only
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Equalization Funding Ratio -Grant Value
as a % of Calculated Need
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Breakdown of Equalization Source
Funding
NSPI Contribution NS Government Contribution
Approximately 2/3 of the equalization grant is funded
through the Nova Scotia Power (NSPI) payment
Approximately 2/3 of the equalization grant is funded
through the Nova Scotia Power (NSPI) payment
The proportion of the calculated need being funded
by equalization is diminishing
The proportion of the calculated need being funded
by equalization is diminishing
$1,236,618
$781,945
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
Separate Units Single Unit
Equalization Scenario for a Town and Rural Municipality (2013/14 )
Springhill's
Equalization
Town
Foundation
Grant
Cumberland's
Equalization
Loss of -$454,670
Recommendations
R16 -The group recognizes that the fundamental purpose of equalization still stands.However,there are identified
issues with the equalization grant in its current form.Specifically,it discourages restructuring and does not always
allocate funds to municipalities with the greatest need,as identified by other financial measures.
As such,it is recommended that the equalization program be frozen at the 2014 levels to allow time for an
alternative equalization grant to be developed based on improved data (such as reliable density measures to
address the restructuring issue and household income figures to support an ability-to-pay-measure in the program).
As well,consideration should be given to the standard service levels used to determine the municipal need.The
improved operating grant,to start in 2018,will better addresses the needs of municipalities,and encourages the
outcomes necessary for ensuring Nova Scotia’s municipalities remain viable.Similarly,the Towns Foundation Grant
would be frozen at its current distribution,regardless of structural change,and then be re-examined as part of the
improved operating grant structure.
Grant Recommendations –Equalization
Current equalization grant creates a disincentive to structural changeCurrent equalization grant creates a disincentive to structural change
R17 -Noting concerns over CBRM's viability,and noting that
many options for improved viability available to most of the
other municipalities in Nova Scotia (such as shared servicing,
structural changes,etc.)are not realistic options for CBRM,it is
recommended that the municipality and the Province conduct
an immediate joint review to assess the viability issues facing
CBRM.This review will make recommendations on how to best
address the specific issues facing CBRM,including
recommendations on appropriate provincial grants for the
municipality.
R18 -During the freeze period,the $30 million funded through
equalization will be funded by the province.
For Discussion Purposes Only
R19 recommends removing the $20.1 M of Nova Scotia Power
(NSPI)payments currently going to Equalization (shown in
green),and replacing those funds with new Provincial revenue
R19 recommends removing the $20.1 M of Nova Scotia Power
(NSPI)payments currently going to Equalization (shown in
green),and replacing those funds with new Provincial revenue
$6.0
$11.6$20.1
Current allocation of $37.7 M
NSPI Payment (figures in Millions)
HST Offset
NSPI GIL
Contribution to Equalization
$22.0
$14.2
$1.5
Proposed allocation of $37.7 M
NSPI Payment (figures in Millions)
NSPI GIL
Invest in PCAP/Other Capital
ProgramInnovation/ Capacity Grant
Recommendations
R19 -The NSPI Grant should be calculated based on rate times
assessment for host municipalities, where one standard rate is
determined for the entire Province. This recommendation will not impact
the payment that NSPI makes to the Province. Indeed, NSPI will continue
to make payments as per existing legislation, this recommendation only
impacts how those monies are allocated among municipalities.
Additionally, at no time will the value of this grant exceed the value of the
Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) that NSPI makes to the Province.
R20 -The Province will eliminate the HST offset program,as there is no
sound policy rational for the program.
R21 -The Province will create a program/suite of programs dedicated to
promoting innovation and capacity building activities for municipalities,
including the comprehensive municipal reviews recommended by this
committee.To fund these activities,the Province should allocate $1.5
million from the NSPI PILT to the $250,000 that is currently budgeted for
municipal capacity building programs.
R22 -PCAP should be expanded by $14.2 Million –the remaining NSPI
PILT monies –and the PCAP program should be broadened to include
roads and other capital projects deemed critical by municipalities.It is
intended that in the initial years of this program expansion,some monies
should be used to develop an Asset Management Program for all
municipalities outside the HRM.
(HRM is exempt because they have already invested in developing their own)
Grant Recommendations
For Discussion Purposes Only
Changes in Grants Summary -All figures are in millions
Grant/Program 2013/14 Value Proposed Value Change
Nova Scotia Power (NSPI)
Grant In Lieu (GIL)$11.6 $22 $10.4
NSPI Payment -
Contribution to
Equalization
$20.1 $0 -$20.1
HST Offset $6 $0 -$6
Arterials and Collectors
Grant $0 $1 $1
Provincial Capital
Assistance Program $3.75 $17.95 $14.2
Innovation/Capacity Grant $0.25 $1.75 $1.5
Provincial Funding for
Equalization $10.4 $30.5 $20.1
SUM $52.1 $73.2 $21.1
Grant Recommendations
$3.7 $2.3
-$0.6
$5.4
$14.2
$1.5
-$5
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
Regionals Towns Rurals Total
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Proposed Net Change in Grants to Municipalities
(Excluding Proposed Capital Program)
Innovation/ Capacity Grant
Provincial Capital Assistance Program (PCAP)
Net Change to NSPI GIL, HST Offset, Arterials & Collectors Grant
Proposed capital program and innovation
fund would be application based.
Proposed capital program and innovation
fund would be application based.
Proposed New Spending From Provincial
Government (Budget Ask)-$21.1 Million
Proposed New Spending From Provincial
Government (Budget Ask)-$21.1 Million
For Discussion Purposes Only
Revenue Recommendations
1.77
2.34
2.02 2.02
2.86
3.26
2.61 2.47
2.02
2.67 2.81
$1,503
$1,821 $1,725 $1,621
$2,611
$3,479
$2,331 $2,412 $2,462 $2,531
$2,833
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
0.0 %
0.5 %
1.0 %
1.5 %
2.0 %
2.5 %
3.0 %
3.5 %
NL PE NS NB PQ ON MB SK AB BC CA
Per dwelling property taxes (right hand axis) and property taxes relative to household total income (left hand axis),2012.
Property taxes relative to household income
Property taxes per dwelling
0.6%2.4%4.2%5.4%6.3%6.8%7.1%7.3%8.1%8.7%9.6%10.6%
13.4%
8.2%6.0%
5.8%4.7%4.5%4.2%4.1%4.2%4.0%3.7%3.4%3.4%2.8%
2.4%
3.30%
2.70%2.20%2.10%1.70%2.10%1.60%1.80%1.40%1.20%1.00%0.90%0.70%
0.40%
2.6%
2.9%3.2%2.2%2.0%1.9%2.1%2.0%1.7%1.8%1.6%1.9%1.5%
1.7%
0%
3%
6%
9%
12%
15%
18%
Ta
x
e
s
a
s
a
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
o
f
to
t
a
l
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
i
n
c
o
m
e
Provincial and Municipal Taxes Relative to Household Income.Nova Scotia,2012
Fees Property (Muni.)Excise Sales Income
Both in relative and absolute terms, residential property taxes in Nova Scotia are below the national
average
Both in relative and absolute terms, residential property taxes in Nova Scotia are below the national
average
Source:Social Policy Simulation database Model,
Nova Scotia Department of Finance calculations
Total Provincial and Municipal taxes are distributed equally by household incomeTotal Provincial and Municipal taxes are distributed equally by household income
For Discussion Purposes Only
Percentage change in both residential property taxes paid
and municipal budgets, under complete replacement of
residential property tax with income surtax, 2013.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Ma
r
g
i
n
a
l
t
a
x
r
a
t
e
Taxable income
Provincial Income Tax Rates. Canada, 2013.
NFLD PEI NB QC ON MB SK AB BC NS
Revenue Recommendations
Provincial income tax rates would need to increase by
28.7% to completely replace residential property tax
Provincial income tax rates would need to increase by
28.7% to completely replace residential property tax
A province-wide set of municipal income tax rates would
cause a significant redistribution among municipalities
A province-wide set of municipal income tax rates would
cause a significant redistribution among municipalities
NS with a
28.7% rate
increase
For Discussion Purposes Only
Recommendations
R24 -Although the shortcomings of the current system must be acknowledged,property taxes should continue to be the primary source of revenue for municipalities.
R25 -The Province should amend legislation to provide greater municipal autonomy over property taxation of forest and recreational property.
R26 -A full review of the exempt agricultural properties should be conducted to determine if the benefit of the tax reduction is going to those who are actively farming.
R27 -The province and its municipal partners review the finance powers provided in the Municipal Government Act and the Halifax Regional Municipality Charter to
provide municipalities with broader authority to establish fair and effective property taxation and revenue regimes.
R28 -Special tax legislation that restricts property taxation or revenue will be reviewed to determine appropriateness.
Evaluation Grid of Primary Revenue Options
Property Tax Income Tax Corporate
Income Tax Sales Tax
Vertical Equity
Horizontal Equity
Economic Efficiency
Accountability
Adequacy & Elasticity
Stability
Administrative Burden
-meets criteria -fails to meet criteria -meets criteria in some ways, but fails in others
Recommendations
R24 -Although the shortcomings of the current system must be acknowledged,property taxes should continue to be the primary
source of revenue for municipalities.
R25 -The Province should amend legislation to provide greater municipal autonomy over property taxation of forest and
recreational property.
R26 -A full review of the exempt agricultural properties should be conducted to determine if the benefit of the tax reduction is
going to those who are actively farming.
R27 -The province and its municipal partners review the finance powers provided in the Municipal Government Act and the
Halifax Regional Municipality Charter to provide municipalities with broader authority to establish fair and effective property
taxation and revenue regimes.
R28 -Special tax legislation that restricts property taxation or revenue will be reviewed to determine appropriateness.
Revenue Recommendations
Property taxes offer greater accountability, autonomy,
elasticity, stability and less economic distortion than
other potential sources of revenue
Property taxes offer greater accountability, autonomy,
elasticity, stability and less economic distortion than
other potential sources of revenue
Forest property tax rates have remained
unchanged since the 1970s, at 25¢ per acre for
resource and 40¢ per acre for commercial
properties
Forest property tax rates have remained
unchanged since the 1970s, at 25¢ per acre for
resource and 40¢ per acre for commercial
properties
$3.1M
$3.5M $5.5M
$22.9M
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
Current rates 25% of the
residential rate
If current rates
had been
adjusted for CPI
from 1980
If forests were
treated like farm
land ($2.90 per
acre grant in
lieu)
Revenue from Forest Property
Scenarios
Forest Property Revenue
Additional Revenue
For Discussion Purposes Only
Estimated Change in Municipal Contributions under
Proposed Provincial Property Tax Rate for
Education, Corrections and Housing ,2014.
CBRM -$1.7M
HRM +$4.6M
Towns -$1.2 M
Rurals (inc.Queens)-$1.7M
Total 0
Recommendation
R29 -The Province should introduce a Provincial Property
Tax Rate,which will be applied to all taxable property in
Nova Scotia.The intended goal of this tax is to replace the
current system of municipal contributions to education,
corrections and housing,while increasing the transparency
of the current tax system.
Revenue Recommendations
The proposed Provincial Property Tax Rate would increase
transparency and result in changes to mandatory
contributions
The proposed Provincial Property Tax Rate would increase
transparency and result in changes to mandatory
contributions
Halifax currently displays a separate
provincial rate on their tax bills
Halifax currently displays a separate
provincial rate on their tax bills
Net Flow of Transfers Between Provincial and Municipal Governments, 2012/13
Confidential Draft –For Discussion Purposes Only
Kaizer Meadow Wind
Project
Report on Turbine Performance
Minas Energy
11/21/2014
Executive Summary
The Kaizer Meadow Wind Project was officially commissioned on March 1st, 2014 but has been
producing energy since January, 2014. This report discusses the performance of the project using data
collected from the turbine. Two operations reports are included as appendices for reference. One of
the reports is from January 12th – October 31st, 2014 which has logged the turbine’s performance since
the date it was handed over to Chester. The second report is from April 1st, 2014 to October 31st which
represents the turbine’s performance in this fiscal year. This report discusses each section in the
operations reports and helps to explain the underlying factors which attribute to the turbine’s
performance.
As of October 31st the turbine has produced 2,824,118 kWh, 2,349,449 kWh of which within this fiscal
year. In any given calendar year the turbine is expected to produce 5,500,000 kWh. The turbine has 5
more months to meet its expected annual production target before the end of the fiscal year. Wind
production is predicted to be highest between October and April.
Chester has received a total of $304,536 for power produced from April 1st, 2014 to October 31st, 2014.
The predicted revenue for this period is $367,816 meaning that Chester is short $63,280 from what was
predicted. This revenue does not yet include compensation from Enercon which will likely be in the
order of $20,000-$50,000 depending on the availability achieved for the rest of the fiscal year.
Enercon’s power curve is in compliance with its contract. How this is determined is further explained in
this report.
The report also highlights the main sources of downtime during the operations period. Enercon’s
availability is currently below its 95% guarantee. Depending on the technical availability achieved from
now until March 31st, it is expected that some compensation will be due to Chester. It is recommended
that a call-out box is installed at the turbine so that notifications of power outages can be received by
text message. It is also recommended that further discussions be held with NSPI to ensure that voltages
remain within acceptable limits.
Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
Wind and Yield .............................................................................................................................................. 4
Power Curve .................................................................................................................................................. 6
Availability ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Introduction
The Kaizer Meadow Wind Project is a single 2 MW wind turbine project located proximate to the Kaizer
Meadow Landfill in the Municipality of the District of Chester. Chester took ownership of the project on
January 12th, 2014 and the project achieved commercial operation on March 1st, 2014. This report will
help explain the turbine’s performance to date, including Enercon’s contractual obligations with relation
to turbine performance. Two operations reports are included in appendix A and B; one of these is the
turbine’s operations since January, 2014 and the other is the performance since April, 2014 to match the
fiscal year of the Municipality. This paper is intended to lead the reader through the operating reports
to help interpret the data presented.
Overview
Operations reports can be produced at any time through Enercon’s Service Information Portal (SIP). The
SIP can be accessed through Enercon’s website. Chester has its own username and password for the
SIP. The turbine’s SCADA system can be accessed at any time from the Kaizer Meadow landfill office to
view live information from the turbine.
The project has produced at total of 2,824,118 kWh as of October 31st, 2014. Figure 1 gives the
turbine’s performance overview since April 1st, 2014 which is the beginning of Chester’s fiscal year. The
turbine’s total yield between April 1st and October 31st, 2014 is 2,349,449 kWh. This production has a
total estimated value of $307,777 given the power purchase rate of 13.1 cents per kWh. The value does
not include grid related losses which are typically in the order of 1%. The target annual production for
the project is 5,500,000 kWh per annum which the project has 5 more months to achieve in this
financial year.
Figure 1: Overview of Turbine Performance
Operating hours in figure 1 above is simply the number of operating hours since April 1st, 2014. Average
wind speed is measured by the anemometer on top of the turbine. Wind measurements are only
recorded when the turbine is operational. Power output varies according to the wind speed therefore
average power output is the average output over the time period in consideration. Kaizer Meadow’s
average power output has been 483kW. As figure 1 suggests there have been 36 maintenance actions
since April 1st only 2 of which are considered to be scheduled maintenance.
Wind and Yield
Figure 2 is an overview of the monthly average and maximum wind speeds (m/s) and power output. It is
important to note that each month has its own story which helps explain the results. This table is a good
starting point in viewing the patterns between average wind speed, operating hours and energy yield. It
is important to note that although the data is useful it is not perfect. For instance, there was a
prolonged period of downtime in July due to a power outage caused by Post-Tropical Storm Arthur. As a
result the wind speed during the storm was not recorded due to the power failure. Regardless, the table
demonstrates the drop in production during summer months due to the change in the wind resource.
Figure 2: Energy Yield
Figure 3 shows the expected turbine output by month along with the amount of power actually
produced at Kaizer Meadow. Overall, the turbine has produced 82.5% of the power it was expected to
produce as of October 31st, 2014.
Figure 3: Predicted Versus Actual Production (kWh)
Figure 4 shows predicted revenue by month compared with what has actually been received by Chester.
Chester has received a total of $304,536 for power produced from April 1st, 2014 to October 31st, 2014.
The predicted revenue for the same period is $367,816 meaning that Chester is short $63,280 from
what was predicted. Revenue does not yet include compensation from Enercon which will likely be in
the order of $20,000-$50,000 depending on availability for the rest of the year.
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
Predicted Production (kWh)
Actual Production (kWh)
Figure 4: Predicted Revenue Versus Actual Revenue
Power Curve
The power curve is the manufacturer specified power production for a given wind speed. Enercon has
provided a warranty for the power curve for a 2 year period. The power curve is calculated on a
monthly basis. All monthly power curves are provided in Appendix A. Overall the power curve has been
in compliance with what Enercon has specified. Figure 5 shows the most recent power curve for
October, 2014. Note that the majority of the data points are to the left of the curve which indicates that
the turbine produces more power per given wind speed than what was warranted.
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
Predicted Revenue
Actual Revenue
Figure 5: October, 2014 Power Curve
In May, 2014 there was an instance where the turbine had an incorrect setting and was capped at 50 kW
for a period of time. Enercon have been asked to include this lost production into their annual
availability calculation. Figure 6 shows the associated power curve for May, 2014.
Figure 6: May, 2014 Power Curve
Most Data Points to Left
of Curve (In
Compliance)
Production Unnecessarily
Capped at 50 kW in May,
2014
Availability
In simple terms availability is the amount of time that the turbine is available to produce electricity. The
definition of availability in the contract with Enercon is more complex because Enercon does not want to
be liable for downtime that is beyond their control (e.g. NSP power outage). The full definition of
availability is located in appendix C for reference.
Enercon divides time into 6 categories of time codes. Table 2 gives a brief explanation of each category.
Table 1: Explanation of Time Codes
Category Explanation
T1 Turbine in operation or ready for operation
T2 Total Time Counted (Time Since Data Acquisition)
T3 Grid not available (NSP Downtime)
T4 Turbine not available at the instigation of the customer
T5 SCADA not available (NSP and Eastlink related downtime)
T6 Not ready for operation (Enercon related downtime)
It should be noted that time attributed to a power outage is calculated as time under T3 and T5. This is
time where there is a power outage or the recloser has tripped at the site. Figure 5 shows how grid
related downtime has changed over time (T3 and T5). For the most part grid related downtime has
been reducing. In January and February NSPI and Enercon were troubleshooting the system and
extensive downtime was experienced. From April to June grid related downtime was greatly reduced.
In July post-tropical storm Arthur created a long stretch of NSP related downtime. August saw limited
grid downtime however September and October both had temporary grid failures which totaled
approximately 48 hours per month. Note that time is expressed in the table below in seconds.
Figure 5: Availability and Associated Time Categories
Enercon related downtime (T6) has varied throughout the time period. Warranted availability for the
first 2 years of operations is 95% and 97% from years 3-15. Figure 5 shows that the turbine is below the
warranted availability at 87.39%. The reasons for Enercon related downtime are numerous, however
most significantly the overvoltage protection parameters were adjusted recently been which has led to
the drastic increase in Enercon’s technical availability for October (99.10%). Table 2 below highlights
the significant causes of downtime per month starting in April.
Table 2: Primary Sources of Downtime by Month
Month Downtime
Incident
Production
Lost
Party
Responsible
Action Taken
April Maintenance 18:43:14 Enercon N/A
May Feeding Fault 28:50:00 Enercon Fixed
May Lack of Wind 18:49:14 NSPI/Chester N/A
May Maintenance 15:08:44 Enercon N/A
May Feeding Fault 28:00:00+ Enercon Fixed
June Maintenance 12:19:41 Enercon N/A
June Inverter Bus Error 29:00:00+ Enercon Fixed
July Pitch Control Error 22:06:44 Enercon Fixed
July Lost Grid 154:07:52 NSPI/Chester Power restored
July Monitoring Switch 84:17:27 Enercon Fixed
August Maintenance 35:49:16 Enercon N/A
September Maintenance 40:39:18 Enercon N/A
September Pitch Control Error 53:43:24 Enercon Fixed
September Mains Failure 48:00:00+ NSPI/Chester Working with NSPI to
improve voltage
October Lost Grid 49:41:10 NSPI/Chester Power Restored
It is important to note that the voltage at the site has presented challenges to both Enercon and NSPI.
Upon commissioning, Enercon had an overvoltage protection setting that was not correct. The setting
was responsible for much of the Enercon related downtime and extended periods of troubleshooting.
On September 12th the setting was corrected. The correction meant that when voltage is too high for
the turbine to deal with it shuts itself down. This resulted in the” Mains Failure” status messages that
occurred in September resulting in 48 hours of downtime. In October voltage conditions improved and
related downtime from this issue were improved. Discussions have been ongoing with NSPI and
Enercon to ensure voltage conditions are improved at the site permanently. If NSPI are unable to
provide a lasting solution, Enercon can provide a voltage control option at a cost yet to be determined.
As Chester is responsible for any downtime related to NSPI’s grid, it is recommended that a call-out box
be installed at the site. The call-out box could send a text message when the turbine loses power.
Compensation for Enercon related downtime will be due in April, 2015 for the 15 previous months.
Chester signed an agreement extending the first operational year so that every subsequent year would
match the Municipality’s financial year. Estimated compensation in April depends on the availability
figures for the remainder of the operational year. Compensation will be expressed as a credit on the
next year’s operations and maintenance invoice from Enercon. As an example, Enercon has supplied a
sample availability calculation (Appendix D) assuming that the turbine’s availability has improved to 93%
by the end of the operational period. Under such a scenario Chester would be owed $26,944 in April.
This value could be more or less depending on the actual results as of March 31st, 2015.
Recommendations
In order to limit downtime for the Kaizer Meadow Wind turbine there are 2 recommendations that
should be implemented.
1) Reduce downtime from power outages
The problem with fixing power outages is that Enercon often do not notify Chester when an
outage has occurred and unfortunately it is not their responsibility to do so. If the power is out
at the turbine the SCADA system no longer works. If municipal staff want to check if there is a
power failure then logging into SCADA is one way to find out. Another option is to have a call
out box located at the turbine that sends a text message when the turbine loses power. The
estimated cost of a call-out box is $625 plus delivery and installation
2) Improve grid voltage
Discussions on grid voltage with NSPI are ongoing. Grid voltage was an issue in September but
the grid since then has been stable. This could be because there is more load that has come
onto the grid as electricity demand increases in the cooler months.
Operating report
WEC 825722
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
Table of contents
1 Overview
2 Yield & wind
3 WEC performance & wind
4 Availability analysis
5 Operating states
6 Service & Maintenance
Table of contents
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:57 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Category Value
Total yield 2,824,118 kWh
Operating hours 5,013 h
Average wind speed 6.2 m/s
Average power output 425 kW
Number of maintenance actions 2
Number of other Service actions 48
Overview
Serial number
Plant type
Nominal power:
Commissioning
Analysis time period:
Diagram: Total yield in reporting period compared to previous year
825722
E-82 E2
2000 kW
12/01/2014
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
Overview
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:57 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 1 of 19
Analysis of monthly yield, wind and power based on ENERCON SCADA data
Yield & wind
Diagram: Monthly yield compared to previous year
Diagram: Monthly average wind speed in reporting period compared to previous year
Plant 825722 Wind [m/s]Power [kW]Operating
hours [h]energy yield [kWh]
Ø max.Ø max.Previous year
January 2014 5.8 31.6 93 804 134 45,518 0
February 2014 5.8 20.8 182 2,052 116 62,000 0
March 2014 7.0 36.3 598 2,176 505 367,151 0
April 2014 7.5 28.9 643 2,153 643 462,230 0
May 2014 5.4 20.8 302 2,140 655 219,954 0
June 2014 5.9 25.1 470 2,310 641 333,359 0
July 2014 5.9 37.5 411 2,150 465 239,458 0
August 2014 5.6 23.0 408 2,125 659 298,631 0
September 2014 6.3 30.2 399 2,119 517 281,464 0
October 2014 7.2 32.3 745 2,180 678 514,353 0
6,2 28.7 425 2,021 5,013 2,824,118 0
Yield & wind
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:57 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
Page 2 of 19
WEC performance & wind
Power curve:
Actual data compared to calculated power curve on
standard air density
Wind distribution:
Analysis of nacelle position based on 10-minute
values
January 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
1
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
Not enough
data
Not enough
data
February 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
1
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
Not enough
data
Not enough
data
March 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:58 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 3 of 19
April 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
May 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
June 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:58 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 4 of 19
July 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
August 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
September 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:58 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 5 of 19
October 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:07:58 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 6 of 19
Plant 825722 Time category [hh:mm:ss]Availability
Time T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Prev. year
January 2014 348437 1508605 821 0 610039 549308 38.81 %0.00 %
February 2014 462866 2419102 102571 0 1172978 680687 40.48 %0.00 %
March 2014 2117504 2674577 997 0 442050 114026 94.89 %0.00 %
April 2014 2504031 2591906 2373 0 3711 81791 96.84 %0.00 %
May 2014 2513373 2678338 1848 0 0 163117 93.91 %0.00 %
June 2014 2436323 2591896 1094 0 2184 152295 94.12 %0.00 %
July 2014 1715823 2678326 508 0 554861 407134 80.82 %0.00 %
August 2014 2510848 2678228 612 0 3333 163435 93.89 %0.00 %
September 2014 1981637 2591775 177697 0 14844 417597 82.59 %0.00 %
October 2014 2475530 2678257 1304 0 178857 22566 99.10 %0.00 %
5296:12:52 6969:43:30 80:30:25 00:00:00 828:34:17 764:25:56 87.39 %NaN
Availability analysis
Monthly technical availability (without maintenance factor into account) as well as time category key based on
SCADA data.
Diagram: Display of technical availability compared to previous year
Availability analysis
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
Page 7 of 19
Operating states
Display of status messages generated by the wind energy converter including time category, number and
total duration of the respective operating status
Number and duration of status messages - total:
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
January 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 13 83:12:37
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 21 00:29:30
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 20 00:23:54
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 1 00:00:38
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 1 01:00:00
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 9 06:08:23
8 0 T6 Maintenance 6 07:44:59
9 4 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat rectifier 1 00:05:27
15 111 T1 Turbine moist Rectifier 2 00:00:03
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 9 00:11:39
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:02:41
60 28 T3 Mains failure Overfrequency (restart)2 00:00:00
80 20 T6 Excitation error Charging error 18 17:01:32
80 30 T6 Excitation error Undervoltage DC-link 1 00:00:20
90 10 T6 Prot. circuit-breaker-
tripped Power supply excitation 2 127:56:25
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 3 00:00:00
222 2 T6 Turbine reset Quit button 1 00:00:02
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 1 00:00:01
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 11 00:16:08
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 10 167:22:41
240 246 T5 Remote control PC Timeout receivebuffer 2 02:00:51
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 8 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
February 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 137 115:32:43
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 144 02:29:34
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 135 05:02:15
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 8 00:12:34
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 10 01:50:16
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 1 00:03:34
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 2 01:22:31
8 0 T6 Maintenance 12 12:01:29
9 3 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat inverter 1 00:44:23
9 4 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat rectifier 1 01:17:20
48 22 T6 Speed sensor error Double speed pulses 4 00:03:49
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 93 07:27:15
60 15 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L2 85 20:58:11
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:02:41
60 40 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage (hardware)1 00:02:39
60 120 T 1 00:02:39
62 101 T6 Feeding fault To low power inverter 1 1 00:00:30
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 9 00:04:49
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 3 00:01:49
64 502 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 2 1 00:00:10
64 504 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 4 1 00:00:10
64 507 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 7 1 00:00:10
64 702 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 2 1 00:00:11
64 704 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 4 1 00:00:16
64 706 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 6 3 00:00:35
64 707 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 7 1 00:00:16
70 14 T6 Generator
overtemperature Stator (winding overhang rear)32 43:37:50
90 10 T6 Prot. circuit-breaker-
tripped Power supply excitation 1 133:11:09
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 14 00:00:19
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 4 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 4 325:47:52
March 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 41 530:00:44
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 48 00:54:33
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 42 01:09:59
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 3 00:00:30
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 10 00:15:37
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 4 00:27:35
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)3 00:01:39
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 8 03:14:59
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 2 00:53:13
8 0 T6 Maintenance 8 19:15:14
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 9 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
9 3 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat inverter 1 00:44:31
9 4 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat rectifier 1 01:09:21
14 11 T1 Ice detection Rotor (power measurement)3 49:39:09
15 19 T1 Turbine moist Several inverters 1 00:00:00
15 111 T1 Turbine moist Rectifier 1 00:00:01
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:41:00
22 226 T6 Yaw control fault TWK NOCN: error cam switch 1 00:00:27
42 207 T6 Pitch control error Angle error blade B 8 00:01:18
42 238 T6 Pitch control error Motor current to high blade B 5 11:48:42
42 307 T6 Pitch control error Angle error blade C 1 00:00:12
48 22 T6 Speed sensor error Double speed pulses 12 00:11:44
49 204 T6 Fault blade load control Error old calibration blade B 1 00:04:41
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 12 00:12:33
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 2 00:05:24
60 28 T3 Mains failure Overfrequency (restart)1 00:00:00
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 8 00:04:06
62 704 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 4 1 00:00:36
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 4 00:02:23
64 506 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 6 1 00:00:10
64 706 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 6 1 00:00:10
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 1 00:00:00
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 2 00:00:00
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 5 00:00:06
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 6 00:00:05
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 6 122:48:08
300 17 T6 Turbine control bus error
(Bus-Off)Blade A 1 00:00:22
300 18 T6 Turbine control bus error
(Bus-Off)Blade B 2 00:00:02
300 19 T6 Turbine control bus error
(Bus-Off)Blade C 2 00:10:17
304 17 T6 Data bus error (Timeout)Blade A 1 00:00:28
305 17 T6 No data from I/O-Board
control cabinet Blade A 1 00:00:01
305 18 T6 No data from I/O-Board
control cabinet Blade B 1 00:00:00
305 19 T6 No data from I/O-Board
control cabinet Blade C 1 00:00:00
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 10 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
April 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 77 644:43:53
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 92 01:51:49
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 110 03:10:32
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:37
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 7 00:18:11
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 8 02:21:46
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 4 00:14:06
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)2 00:00:11
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 13 11:12:42
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 3 00:01:11
8 0 T6 Maintenance 9 18:43:14
14 11 T1 Ice detection Rotor (power measurement)1 30:58:46
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:20
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:41:01
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:37:21
60 9 T3 Mains failure Undervoltage L1+L2+L3 1 00:02:34
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:10
62 101 T6 Feeding fault To low power inverter 1 1 00:00:31
62 507 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 7 1 00:00:00
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 44 01:15:48
62 702 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 2 5 00:12:51
62 703 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 3 15 00:10:33
62 704 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 4 12 00:05:40
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 27 00:29:48
62 719 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper several inv.11 01:43:24
64 504 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 4 1 00:00:10
64 507 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 7 1 00:00:10
64 704 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 4 1 00:00:16
64 707 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 7 1 00:00:15
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 1 00:00:00
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 1 00:00:00
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 7 00:00:11
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 1 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 1 01:01:58
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 11 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
May 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 65 670:57:35
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 71 01:58:23
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 88 02:08:47
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 9 00:52:10
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 6 00:28:50
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 2 00:09:23
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 26 18:49:14
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 9 00:02:50
8 0 T6 Maintenance 5 15:08:44
21 1 T1 Cable twisted Left (2-3 turns)1 00:41:05
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)3 02:02:19
49 12 T6 Fault blade load control Timeout matching 1 00:00:23
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:30:48
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 28 14:41:51
62 702 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 2 4 00:01:16
62 703 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 3 17 00:54:47
62 704 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 4 3 00:01:05
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 24 00:21:09
62 719 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper several inv.20 14:08:15
64 501 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 1 1 00:00:10
64 506 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 6 1 00:00:10
64 701 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 1 1 00:00:16
64 706 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 6 1 00:00:16
66 12 T6 Fault rectifier Overvoltage rectifier 2 1 00:00:05
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 8 00:00:09
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 12 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
June 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 28 656:37:10
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 27 00:43:22
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 20 00:10:37
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 7 00:16:47
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 9 00:54:59
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 3 01:06:32
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)1 00:00:30
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 12 15:19:45
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 2 00:13:46
8 0 T6 Maintenance 6 12:19:41
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)2 01:21:48
42 222 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade B 1 00:00:00
42 322 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade C 1 00:00:00
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:16:12
60 18 T3 Mains failure Overfrequency 1 00:02:43
62 505 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 5 1 00:00:01
202 101 T6 Inverter bus error Inverter control 1 CPU 1 6 08:53:03
202 103 T6 Inverter bus error Inverter control 3 CPU 1 8 20:47:22
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 1 00:00:00
220 203 T6 Processor reset Inverter control 3 CPU 1 1 00:00:10
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 4 00:00:04
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 4 00:00:02
228 95 T6 Timeout warnmessage Error temperature-measurement 1 00:18:55
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 1 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 1 00:36:30
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 13 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
July 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 16 471:04:17
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 13 00:28:34
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 11 00:02:48
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:31
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 3 00:10:10
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 5 00:29:58
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 2 00:04:31
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 6 03:57:06
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 2 00:19:59
8 0 T6 Maintenance 10 06:41:10
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:21
42 302 T6 Pitch control error Limit switch 90° blade C 4 22:06:44
50 14 T6 Monitoring switch Noises in spinner 3 84:17:27
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 4 00:08:17
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 3 00:00:03
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 2 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 2 154:07:52
August 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 40 672:57:39
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 33 01:24:30
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 30 00:06:02
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 4 00:11:36
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 18 02:18:55
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 1 00:00:10
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 23 19:53:59
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 4 00:47:23
8 0 T6 Maintenance 12 35:49:16
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:55
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 2 00:10:01
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 1 00:00:01
228 100 T6 Timeout warnmessage Malfunction aircooling 1 08:43:29
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 3 00:00:03
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 3 00:55:50
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 14 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
September 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 91 521:51:24
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 95 01:51:03
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 89 03:06:46
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:08
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 6 00:20:36
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 13 00:15:39
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 5 00:00:22
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)4 14:08:07
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 7 03:05:27
8 0 T6 Maintenance 22 40:39:18
9 1 T1 Generator heating Isometer 1 03:56:18
9 3 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat inverter 1 00:28:53
9 4 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat rectifier 2 00:42:14
15 4 T1 Turbine moist Inverter 4 1 00:00:07
15 111 T1 Turbine moist Rectifier 2 00:00:23
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:20
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:45
22 226 T6 Yaw control fault TWK NOCN: error cam switch 2 00:01:00
42 308 T6 Pitch control error 56° -mark blade C not programmed 4 53:43:24
42 322 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade C 1 00:01:21
49 105 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade A 2 00:00:04
49 204 T6 Fault blade load control Error old calibration blade B 6 17:49:25
49 221 T6 Fault blade load control Overflow measurement blade B 3 03:20:24
49 305 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade C 1 00:00:03
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 77 12:37:54
60 15 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L2 61 36:43:11
60 16 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L3 2 00:00:22
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
62 502 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 2 1 00:01:01
64 701 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 1 1 00:00:11
64 703 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 3 1 00:00:11
66 21 T6 Fault rectifier Isometer system 1 1 00:00:06
70 11 T6 Generator
overtemperature Stator (slot)11 00:32:57
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 3 00:00:03
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 9 00:00:06
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 7 00:06:24
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 7 03:50:51
240 246 T5 Remote control PC Timeout receivebuffer 1 00:03:01
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 15 of 19
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
October 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 18 647:15:02
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 18 00:24:58
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 23 00:34:50
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 3 00:04:56
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 1 00:17:25
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 5 04:46:43
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 1 00:21:10
8 0 T6 Maintenance 1 00:32:25
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:41
22 226 T6 Yaw control fault TWK NOCN: error cam switch 2 00:01:01
49 105 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade A 6 00:24:34
49 205 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade B 3 00:09:23
49 305 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade C 1 00:00:04
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 7 00:17:29
60 16 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L3 1 00:02:44
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 2 00:02:53
62 30 T6 Feeding fault Feeding security circuit faulty 1 00:00:25
67 602 T6 Overtemperature Power choke inverter 2 4 00:01:42
69 19 T6 Acoustic sensor Several Inverters 1 05:06:29
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 2 00:00:01
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 2 00:00:00
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 2 00:00:02
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 2 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 2 49:41:10
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 16 of 19
Status overview per month:
Main
status Status text 01
.
2
0
1
4
02
.
2
0
1
4
03
.
2
0
1
4
04
.
2
0
1
4
05
.
2
0
1
4
06
.
2
0
1
4
07
.
2
0
1
4
08
.
2
0
1
4
09
.
2
0
1
4
10
.
2
0
1
4
total Duration
(h)
0 Turbine in operation 56 434 148 295 239 91 49 125 295 63 1795 5055:56:14
1 Turbine stopped 1 3 6 2 4 2 1 9 28 15:49:05
2 Lack of wind 9 2 10 13 26 14 8 27 7 5 121 90:05:10
5 Blade defrosting 3 9 1 13 00:25:11
8 Maintenance 6 12 8 9 5 6 10 12 22 1 91 168:55:30
9 Generator heating 1 2 2 4 9 09:08:27
14 Ice detection 3 1 4 80:37:55
15 Turbine moist 2 2 3 7 00:00:34
17 Test security system 1 1 1 3 00:01:01
21 Cable twisted 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 11 07:29:34
22 Yaw control fault 1 2 2 5 00:02:28
42 Pitch control error 14 2 4 5 25 87:41:41
48 Speed sensor error 4 12 16 00:15:33
49 Fault blade load control 1 1 12 10 24 21:49:01
50 Monitoring switch 3 3 84:17:27
60 Mains failure 12 181 15 10 8 9 5 3 141 10 394 80:38:54
62 Feeding fault 13 13 116 96 1 1 1 241 34:22:38
64 Overcurrent inverter 9 2 4 4 2 21 00:04:13
66 Fault rectifier 1 1 2 00:00:11
67 Overtemperature 4 4 00:01:42
69 Acoustic sensor 1 1 05:06:29
70 Generator
overtemperature 32 11 43 44:10:47
80 Excitation error 19 19 17:01:52
90 Prot. circuit-breaker-
tripped 2 1 3 261:07:34
202 Inverter bus error 14 14 29:40:25
220 Processor reset 1 1 2 2 6 00:00:11
222 Turbine reset 5 14 7 8 8 8 3 1 12 4 70 00:01:09
228 Timeout warnmessage 1 1 2 09:02:24
240 Remote control PC 23 8 12 2 2 4 6 15 4 76 828:39:29
300 Turbine control bus
error (Bus-Off)5 5 00:10:41
304 Data bus error
(Timeout)1 1 00:00:28
305 No data from I/O-Board
control cabinet 3 3 00:00:01
Operating states
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:55 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 17 of 19
Service & Maintenance
Order number Date Short description
000092675819 January-22-14 TROUBLESHOOT SCADA CONNECTION
000092679517 January-25-14 SUPPORT FOR Customer Walkdown
000092683047 February-07-14 SCADA S:90/10 W:233/62
000092722550 February-21-14 CHECK SCADA CONNECTION AFTER NSPI WORK
000092706036 February-21-14 CHECK SWITCHGEAR
000092679494 February-21-14 REPLACE IGBT IN POWER CABINET
000092726472 February-25-14 SCADA S:70/14 W:0/0
000092728019 February-27-14 SCADA S:70/14 W:55/301
000092733689 March-05-14 SCADA S:42/238 W:0/10
000092739034 March-08-14 REPAIR POWER CABINET #8
000092752445 March-25-14 RT - INSTALL QTA-4574-T200
000092762483 March-26-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000092745543 March-26-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000092745544 March-26-14 TROUBLESHOOT POWER CABINET FAILURES
000092808299 April-24-14 REMAINING TASKS
000092825603 May-09-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:230/102
000092855107 May-30-14 CHECK BEACON OPERATION
000092855112 June-05-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:230/102
000092764702 June-10-14 INSTALL LAD TURNOUTS 511559
000092879261 June-10-14 INSTALL FAN COVERS
000092878271 June-10-14 REMOVE STRAP FOR VENTILLATION TARP
000092879252 June-10-14 SCADA S:202/101 W:0/10
000092888169 June-18-14 SCADA S:202/103 W:0/10
000092888302 June-18-14 RT - INSTALL ERROR RESET BUTTON
000092924939 July-14-14 SCADA S:50/14 W:0/10
000092888298 July-29-14 RT - INSTALL U-CLAMPS SYS 1
000092979147 July-29-14 SCADA S:50/14 W:0/10
000092976037 July-29-14 SCADA S:42/302 W:0/10
000092987846 August-07-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:100/1
000092939931 August-22-14 INSTALL RT - U-CLAMPS GEN SYS 1
000092825746 August-28-14 INSTALL BLADE HEATING CABLES
Overview of service and maintenance actions performed on the WEC by ENERCON Service.
Service and repair
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
Service & Maintenance
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:56 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 18 of 19
Order number Date Short description
000092925381 August-28-14 INVESTIGATE INSIDE TOWER LIGHT ISSUES
000093013518 August-29-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000093014909 August-30-14 REPLACE TEMP SENSOR BL HEAT ELEMENT
000092827786 August-30-14 replacing axial fans in rectifier units
000093018889 September-03-14 SCADA S:49/204 W:0/10
000093022941 September-06-14 SCADA S:42/308 W:0/10
000093024264 September-06-14 SCADA S:70/11 W:0/10
000093020309 September-09-14 SCADA S:42/308 W:26/122
000093037903 September-12-14 Troubleshoot air cooling warnings
000093047705 September-23-14 60:15
000093047685 September-23-14 REBUILD POWER CABINETS
000092917582 September-24-14 CHECK NO SCADA CONNECTION
000093019598 September-24-14 42:322 FAULT TROUBLESHOOTING
000093012393 September-24-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000093050408 September-25-14 OP: difference in operating parameters
000093080703 October-21-14 SCADA S:69/19 W:0/0
000093091482 October-28-14 BOOK MATERIAL
Order number Date Short description
000092850533 June-10-14 Mechan. Wartung / Mechanical mainten.
000092912369 August-30-14 Elektr. Wartung / Electrical maintenance
Maintenance
01/01/2014 - 31/10/2014
Service & Maintenance
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:08:56 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 19 of 19
Operating report
WEC 825722
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
Table of contents
1 Overview
2 Yield & wind
3 WEC performance & wind
4 Availability analysis
5 Operating states
6 Service & Maintenance
Table of contents
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:35 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Category Value
Total yield 2,349,449 kWh
Operating hours 4,258 h
Average wind speed 6.3 m/s
Average power output 483 kW
Number of maintenance actions 2
Number of other Service actions 34
Overview
Serial number
Plant type
Nominal power:
Commissioning
Analysis time period:
Diagram: Total yield in reporting period compared to previous year
825722
E-82 E2
2000 kW
12/01/2014
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
Overview
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:35 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 1 of 15
Analysis of monthly yield, wind and power based on ENERCON SCADA data
Yield & wind
Diagram: Monthly yield compared to previous year
Diagram: Monthly average wind speed in reporting period compared to previous year
Plant 825722 Wind [m/s]Power [kW]Operating
hours [h]energy yield [kWh]
Ø max.Ø max.Previous year
April 2014 7.5 28.9 643 2,153 643 462,230 0
May 2014 5.4 20.8 302 2,140 655 219,954 0
June 2014 5.9 25.1 470 2,310 641 333,359 0
July 2014 5.9 37.5 411 2,150 465 239,458 0
August 2014 5.6 23.0 408 2,125 659 298,631 0
September 2014 6.3 30.2 399 2,119 517 281,464 0
October 2014 7.2 32.3 745 2,180 678 514,353 0
6,3 28.3 483 2,168 4,258 2,349,449 0
Yield & wind
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:36 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
Page 2 of 15
WEC performance & wind
Power curve:
Actual data compared to calculated power curve on
standard air density
Wind distribution:
Analysis of nacelle position based on 10-minute
values
April 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
May 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
June 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:36 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 3 of 15
July 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
August 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
September 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
80
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:36 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 4 of 15
October 2014
0 5 10 15 20 25
m/s
0
281
562
843
1124
1405
1686
1967
2248
kW
0°
30°
60°
90°
120°
150°
180°
210°
240°
270°
300°
330°
0
20
40
60
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
WEC performance & wind
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:43:36 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 5 of 15
Plant 825722 Time category [hh:mm:ss]Availability
Time T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Prev. year
April 2014 2504031 2591906 2373 0 3711 81791 96.84 %0.00 %
May 2014 2513373 2678338 1848 0 0 163117 93.91 %0.00 %
June 2014 2436323 2591896 1094 0 2184 152295 94.12 %0.00 %
July 2014 1715823 2678326 508 0 554861 407134 80.82 %0.00 %
August 2014 2510848 2678228 612 0 3333 163435 93.89 %0.00 %
September 2014 1981637 2591775 177697 0 14844 417597 82.59 %0.00 %
October 2014 2475530 2678257 1304 0 178857 22566 99.10 %0.00 %
4482:39:25 5135:45:26 51:30:36 00:00:00 210:29:50 391:05:35 91.98 %NaN
Availability analysis
Monthly technical availability (without maintenance factor into account) as well as time category key based on
SCADA data.
Diagram: Display of technical availability compared to previous year
Availability analysis
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
Page 6 of 15
Operating states
Display of status messages generated by the wind energy converter including time category, number and
total duration of the respective operating status
Number and duration of status messages - total:
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
April 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 77 644:43:53
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 92 01:51:49
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 110 03:10:32
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:37
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 7 00:18:11
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 8 02:21:46
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 4 00:14:06
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)2 00:00:11
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 13 11:12:42
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 3 00:01:11
8 0 T6 Maintenance 9 18:43:14
14 11 T1 Ice detection Rotor (power measurement)1 30:58:46
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:20
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:41:01
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:37:21
60 9 T3 Mains failure Undervoltage L1+L2+L3 1 00:02:34
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:10
62 101 T6 Feeding fault To low power inverter 1 1 00:00:31
62 507 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 7 1 00:00:00
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 44 01:15:48
62 702 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 2 5 00:12:51
62 703 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 3 15 00:10:33
62 704 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 4 12 00:05:40
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 27 00:29:48
62 719 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper several inv.11 01:43:24
64 504 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 4 1 00:00:10
64 507 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 7 1 00:00:10
64 704 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 4 1 00:00:16
64 707 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 7 1 00:00:15
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 1 00:00:00
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 1 00:00:00
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 7 00:00:11
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 1 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 1 01:01:58
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 7 of 15
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
May 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 65 670:57:35
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 71 01:58:23
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 88 02:08:47
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 9 00:52:10
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 6 00:28:50
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 2 00:09:23
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 26 18:49:14
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 9 00:02:50
8 0 T6 Maintenance 5 15:08:44
21 1 T1 Cable twisted Left (2-3 turns)1 00:41:05
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)3 02:02:19
49 12 T6 Fault blade load control Timeout matching 1 00:00:23
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:30:48
62 701 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 1 28 14:41:51
62 702 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 2 4 00:01:16
62 703 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 3 17 00:54:47
62 704 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 4 3 00:01:05
62 705 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper inverter 5 24 00:21:09
62 719 T6 Feeding fault Overload chopper several inv.20 14:08:15
64 501 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 1 1 00:00:10
64 506 T6 Overcurrent inverter I-Rectifier inverter 6 1 00:00:10
64 701 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 1 1 00:00:16
64 706 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 6 1 00:00:16
66 12 T6 Fault rectifier Overvoltage rectifier 2 1 00:00:05
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 8 00:00:09
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 8 of 15
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
June 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 28 656:37:10
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 27 00:43:22
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 20 00:10:37
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 7 00:16:47
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 9 00:54:59
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 3 01:06:32
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)1 00:00:30
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 12 15:19:45
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 2 00:13:46
8 0 T6 Maintenance 6 12:19:41
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)2 01:21:48
42 222 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade B 1 00:00:00
42 322 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade C 1 00:00:00
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 8 00:16:12
60 18 T3 Mains failure Overfrequency 1 00:02:43
62 505 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 5 1 00:00:01
202 101 T6 Inverter bus error Inverter control 1 CPU 1 6 08:53:03
202 103 T6 Inverter bus error Inverter control 3 CPU 1 8 20:47:22
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 1 00:00:00
220 203 T6 Processor reset Inverter control 3 CPU 1 1 00:00:10
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 4 00:00:04
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 4 00:00:02
228 95 T6 Timeout warnmessage Error temperature-measurement 1 00:18:55
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 1 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 1 00:36:30
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 9 of 15
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
July 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 16 471:04:17
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 13 00:28:34
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 11 00:02:48
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:31
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 3 00:10:10
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 5 00:29:58
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 2 00:04:31
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 6 03:57:06
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 2 00:19:59
8 0 T6 Maintenance 10 06:41:10
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:21
42 302 T6 Pitch control error Limit switch 90° blade C 4 22:06:44
50 14 T6 Monitoring switch Noises in spinner 3 84:17:27
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 4 00:08:17
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 3 00:00:03
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 2 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 2 154:07:52
August 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 40 672:57:39
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 33 01:24:30
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 30 00:06:02
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 4 00:11:36
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 18 02:18:55
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 1 00:00:10
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 23 19:53:59
2 2 T1 Lack of wind Rotor speed to low 4 00:47:23
8 0 T6 Maintenance 12 35:49:16
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:55
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 2 00:10:01
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 1 00:00:01
228 100 T6 Timeout warnmessage Malfunction aircooling 1 08:43:29
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 3 00:00:03
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 3 00:55:50
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 10 of 15
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
September 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 91 521:51:24
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 95 01:51:03
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 89 03:06:46
0 3 T1 Start lead-up Start lead-up 1 00:00:08
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 6 00:20:36
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 13 00:15:39
1 1 T1 Turbine stopped Control cabinet 5 00:00:22
1 3 T1 Turbine stopped Scada System (ENERCON)4 14:08:07
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 7 03:05:27
8 0 T6 Maintenance 22 40:39:18
9 1 T1 Generator heating Isometer 1 03:56:18
9 3 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat inverter 1 00:28:53
9 4 T1 Generator heating Hygrostat rectifier 2 00:42:14
15 4 T1 Turbine moist Inverter 4 1 00:00:07
15 111 T1 Turbine moist Rectifier 2 00:00:23
17 0 T6 Test security system 1 00:00:20
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:45
22 226 T6 Yaw control fault TWK NOCN: error cam switch 2 00:01:00
42 308 T6 Pitch control error 56° -mark blade C not programmed 4 53:43:24
42 322 T6 Pitch control error Supply power stage blade C 1 00:01:21
49 105 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade A 2 00:00:04
49 204 T6 Fault blade load control Error old calibration blade B 6 17:49:25
49 221 T6 Fault blade load control Overflow measurement blade B 3 03:20:24
49 305 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade C 1 00:00:03
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 77 12:37:54
60 15 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L2 61 36:43:11
60 16 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L3 2 00:00:22
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 1 00:00:11
62 502 T6 Feeding fault No zero crossing inverter 2 1 00:01:01
64 701 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 1 1 00:00:11
64 703 T6 Overcurrent inverter Collective fault message inv. 3 1 00:00:11
66 21 T6 Fault rectifier Isometer system 1 1 00:00:06
70 11 T6 Generator
overtemperature Stator (slot)11 00:32:57
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 3 00:00:03
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 9 00:00:06
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 7 00:06:24
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 7 03:50:51
240 246 T5 Remote control PC Timeout receivebuffer 1 00:03:01
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 11 of 15
Main
status
Sub
status
Time
catego
ry
Status text Num
ber Duration
October 2014
0 0 T1 Turbine in operation Turbine in operation 18 647:15:02
0 1 T1 Turbine starting Turbine starting 18 00:24:58
0 2 T1 Turbine operational Turbine operational 23 00:34:50
0 5 T1 Calibration of load control Calibration of load control 3 00:04:56
0 8 T1 Turbine in operation
during maintenance Turbine in operation during maintenance 1 00:17:25
2 1 T1 Lack of wind Wind speed to low 5 04:46:43
5 2 T1 Blade defrosting Manual 1 00:21:10
8 0 T6 Maintenance 1 00:32:25
21 2 T1 Cable twisted Right (2-3 turns)1 00:40:41
22 226 T6 Yaw control fault TWK NOCN: error cam switch 2 00:01:01
49 105 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade A 6 00:24:34
49 205 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade B 3 00:09:23
49 305 T6 Fault blade load control Error load sensor blade C 1 00:00:04
60 2 T3 Mains failure Start delay 7 00:17:29
60 16 T3 Mains failure Overrvoltage L3 1 00:02:44
60 17 T3 Mains failure Underfrequency 2 00:02:53
62 30 T6 Feeding fault Feeding security circuit faulty 1 00:00:25
67 602 T6 Overtemperature Power choke inverter 2 4 00:01:42
69 19 T6 Acoustic sensor Several Inverters 1 05:06:29
220 33 T6 Processor reset Power Control 2 00:00:01
222 1 T6 Turbine reset Power failure 2 00:00:00
222 3 T6 Turbine reset Scada system 2 00:00:02
240 0 T5 Remote control PC switched on 2 00:00:01
240 1 T5 Remote control PC switched off 2 49:41:10
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 12 of 15
Status overview per month:
Main
status Status text 04
.
2
0
1
4
05
.
2
0
1
4
06
.
2
0
1
4
07
.
2
0
1
4
08
.
2
0
1
4
09
.
2
0
1
4
10
.
2
0
1
4
total Duration
(h)
0 Turbine in operation 295 239 91 49 125 295 63 1157 4312:53:15
1 Turbine stopped 6 2 4 2 1 9 24 15:43:52
2 Lack of wind 13 26 14 8 27 7 5 100 78:26:04
5 Blade defrosting 3 9 1 13 00:25:11
8 Maintenance 9 5 6 10 12 22 1 65 129:53:48
9 Generator heating 4 4 05:07:25
14 Ice detection 1 1 30:58:46
15 Turbine moist 3 3 00:00:30
17 Test security system 1 1 1 3 00:01:01
21 Cable twisted 1 4 2 1 1 1 10 06:48:34
22 Yaw control fault 2 2 4 00:02:01
42 Pitch control error 2 4 5 11 75:51:29
49 Fault blade load control 1 12 10 23 21:44:20
50 Monitoring switch 3 3 84:17:27
60 Mains failure 10 8 9 5 3 141 10 186 51:33:12
62 Feeding fault 116 96 1 1 1 215 34:08:25
64 Overcurrent inverter 4 4 2 10 00:02:05
66 Fault rectifier 1 1 2 00:00:11
67 Overtemperature 4 4 00:01:42
69 Acoustic sensor 1 1 05:06:29
70 Generator
overtemperature 11 11 00:32:57
202 Inverter bus error 14 14 29:40:25
220 Processor reset 1 2 2 5 00:00:11
222 Turbine reset 8 8 8 3 1 12 4 44 00:00:41
228 Timeout warnmessage 1 1 2 09:02:24
240 Remote control PC 2 2 4 6 15 4 33 210:23:43
Operating states
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:12 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 13 of 15
Service & Maintenance
Order number Date Short description
000092808299 April-24-14 REMAINING TASKS
000092825603 May-09-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:230/102
000092855107 May-30-14 CHECK BEACON OPERATION
000092855112 June-05-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:230/102
000092879252 June-10-14 SCADA S:202/101 W:0/10
000092764702 June-10-14 INSTALL LAD TURNOUTS 511559
000092879261 June-10-14 INSTALL FAN COVERS
000092878271 June-10-14 REMOVE STRAP FOR VENTILLATION TARP
000092888169 June-18-14 SCADA S:202/103 W:0/10
000092888302 June-18-14 RT - INSTALL ERROR RESET BUTTON
000092924939 July-14-14 SCADA S:50/14 W:0/10
000092979147 July-29-14 SCADA S:50/14 W:0/10
000092976037 July-29-14 SCADA S:42/302 W:0/10
000092888298 July-29-14 RT - INSTALL U-CLAMPS SYS 1
000092987846 August-07-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:100/1
000092939931 August-22-14 INSTALL RT - U-CLAMPS GEN SYS 1
000092925381 August-28-14 INVESTIGATE INSIDE TOWER LIGHT ISSUES
000092825746 August-28-14 INSTALL BLADE HEATING CABLES
000093013518 August-29-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000093014909 August-30-14 REPLACE TEMP SENSOR BL HEAT ELEMENT
000092827786 August-30-14 replacing axial fans in rectifier units
000093018889 September-03-14 SCADA S:49/204 W:0/10
000093024264 September-06-14 SCADA S:70/11 W:0/10
000093022941 September-06-14 SCADA S:42/308 W:0/10
000093020309 September-09-14 SCADA S:42/308 W:26/122
000093037903 September-12-14 Troubleshoot air cooling warnings
000093047705 September-23-14 60:15
000093047685 September-23-14 REBUILD POWER CABINETS
000093012393 September-24-14 SCADA S:0/0 W:55/301
000092917582 September-24-14 CHECK NO SCADA CONNECTION
000093019598 September-24-14 42:322 FAULT TROUBLESHOOTING
Overview of service and maintenance actions performed on the WEC by ENERCON Service.
Service and repair
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
Service & Maintenance
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:13 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 14 of 15
Order number Date Short description
000093050408 September-25-14 OP: difference in operating parameters
000093080703 October-21-14 SCADA S:69/19 W:0/0
000093091482 October-28-14 BOOK MATERIAL
Order number Date Short description
000092850533 June-10-14 Mechan. Wartung / Mechanical mainten.
000092912369 August-30-14 Elektr. Wartung / Electrical maintenance
Maintenance
01/04/2014 - 31/10/2014
Service & Maintenance
825722
Generated on 07/11/2014 3:44:13 PM by the user S00000000430 from ENERCON Service Info Portal
All rights reserved - This information is not exhaustive and there is no guarantee as to its correctness.
Copyright @ ENERCON GmbH, 2014
Page 15 of 15