HomeMy WebLinkAboutTazimina River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study 1991Engineering
Services
Iliamna, Alaska
Tazimina River
Hydroelectric
Project
Feasibility
Study
Iliamna
Newhalen
Nondalton
Electric
Co-Op (INNEC)
May, 1991
IiR
HDR Engineering , Inc .
!
TAZIMIIIA R.IVD BYDR.OEI.ECTR.IC
PR.O.JECT I'EASIBILITY STUDY
BR.I
047
DATI! ISSUED TO
HIGHSIIIITH •2-222
,,
I
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Prepared for:
Diamna-Newhalen-Nondalton Electrical Co-Op (INNEC)
Box 206
IJiamna, Alaska 99606
Prepared by:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
4446 Business Park Boulevard
Building B
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
May 1991
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ........................................................... 1
1.0 INTRODUCTIO.N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 SCOPE OF THIS REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 PROJECT HISTORY AND PREVIOUS STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 PROJECT AREA ............ ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.0 PROJECT COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.0 LOAD FORECAST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1 EXISTING GENERATION CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2 LOAD FORECAST, MEDIUM GROWTH SCENARIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3 LOAD FORECAST, HIGH GROWTH SCENARIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.0 FUEL COST ESCALATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.0 PROJECT ENERGY PRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ................................................ 10
8.0 RATE IMPACT ANALYSIS .............................................. 14
9.0 POWER COST EQUALIZATION ANALYSIS ................................... 15
9.1 HISTORY AND RATE DETERMINATION ................................. 15
9.2 EFFECT OF HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON PCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
APPENDICES
APPENDICES
1. DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
2. RATE IMPACT SPREADSHEET
3. PRESENT WORTH OF AVOIDED PCE PAYMENTS SPREADSHEET
N:072S0.001:1:D8
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE Following Page
1. COMMUNITY LOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. PROJECT LOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF 30-YEAR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. COST PER kWh, DIESEL VS HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION .................. 14
N:07250.00l :l:D8
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1. CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. ELECTRICAL DEMAND, 1986 THROUGH 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. ADDITIONAL INNEC LOAD GROWTH FROM COMINCO MINE PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. PRICES PAID FOR DIESEL FUEL BY INNEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. 30-YEAR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . {following) 12
6. 30-YEAR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. PRESENT WORTH OF AVOIDED PCE PAYMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
N :07250.001:1 :D8
SUMl\fARY
INTRODUCTION
An economic analysis conducted in 1987 by Stone and Webster Engineering, Inc. concluded that
a 700 kW hydroelectric project on the Tazimina River was economically feasible, with a cost-to-
cost ratio of 1.12 when compared to diesel generation.
This report updates the economic analysis for the Tazimina Hydroelectric Project. The
construction cost was updated to reflect 1991 costs. Utility load growth was updated based upon
data collected since 1986 and fuel cost escalation was updated based upon recent forecasts. This
report analyzes the project's effect on the cost for power for Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton
Electrical Co-Op (INNEC) customers, and the project's effect on State of Alaska power cost
equalization payments to INNEC.
PROJECT COST
The cost to construct the Tazimina Hydroelectric Project is $9.4 million in 1991 dollars. This
includes a contingency of ten percent, design and construction management, interest during
construction, and the cost of a replacement transmission cable.
LOAD FORECAST
Based on data from 1986 to 1990, an average load growth for INNEC is 3.6 percent per year.
Additional load growth due to a future mine project could range up to 18 percent during the
three-year period when the mine is opened.
FUEL COST FORECAST
Diesel fuel is forecast to increase at two percent above inflation.
PROJECT ENERGY PRODUCTION
The project size designed by Stone and Webster Engineering has an estimated production
maximum of 5,200,000 kWh per year. This project size will accommodate the needs of the
utility through the year 2015, assuming a moderate growth scenario and the use of diesel
generation for peaking load capacity. The water needed for upsizing of the project to produce
a greater amount of kWh per year appears to be available but analysis of various installed
capacities was not within the scope of this report.
N:07250.00l:l:D8
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
The present value cost-to-cost ratio of the hydroelectric project when compared to diesel
generation over a 30-year economic analysis period is 1.32. Additional growth from the
Cominco project increases this ratio to 1.36.
RATE IMPACT ANALYSIS
In 1995, the year the project comes on-line, the predicted cost for hydroelectric generated power
is $0.51 per kWh (1900 dollars) while the cost for diesel generated power is $0.37 per kWh
(1990 dollars).
For the cost of hydropower to be comparable to the diesel alternative in the initial six years after
the project comes on-line, project costs would have to be reduced by $4 million. If a grant from
the State of Alaska or other sources was not used to eliminate this rate shock, it would be
substantially paid for by the PCE program. This rates shock would, however, affect the 38
percent of INNEC sales which are not eligible for PCE subsidy.
POWER COST EQUALIZATION ANALYSIS
If the State of Alaska were to provide a grant in the amount of $4 million, it could recoup these
initial grant monies through avoided PCE payments in 17 to 20 years.
N:07250.00l:l :08 2
TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY
SUMMARY
MEDIUM LOAD HIGH LOAD
GROWTH1 GROWTH2
Present value cost-to-cost ratio for 1.32 1.36
hydroelectric generation compared to
diesel generation over a 30-year analysis
period
Estimated project cost (1990 dollars) $9.4 million $9.4 million
Project cost for zero rate shock (1990 $5.4 million $5. 8 million
dollars)
Reduction in project cost needed for zero $4.0 million $3.6 million
rate shock (1990 dollars)
Year avoided PCE payments equal initial
project grant3 :
With 0.0% real discount rate4 2011 (17 years) 2008 (14 years)
With 3.0% real discount rate5 2014 (20 years) 2010 (16 years)
Avoided PCE payments at 30 years 3
With 0.0% real discount rate4 $13.6 million $14.9 million
With 3.0% real discount rate5 $ 7. 8 million $ 8. 7 million
NOTES:
1 3.6% grov..th rate
2 30% Cominco mine employees served by INNEC
3 Assumes PCE program continuing in its present form for entire pe.riod of analysis
4 Inflation = 5%, Interest 5%
5 Inflation = 5%, Interest = 8%
N :07250.001:1 :D8 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 SCOPE OF miS REPORT
The Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton Electrical Co-Op (INNEC) contracted HDR Engineering, Inc.
(HDR) to review the Tazimina River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Report completed by
Stone and Webster Engineering Inc. in 1987. The Stone and Webster project design was to be
used without changes and no additional data. collection was authorized.
HDR updated project costs and investigated the project feasibility using current and projected
electrical load information, current diesel fuel costs, and updated project costs. Further, an
analysis was prepared showing the ways in which a grant for the project would affect State of
Alaska Power Cost Equalization (PCE) payments to INNEC.
All analyses were completed for two scenarios: a medium growth scenario which assumes
continued growth of the area based upon past records; and a high growth scenario which
assumed the development of a major mine project in the area and a resulting growth in
population. Neither scenario includes the possibility of interconnection of the neighboring
villages of Port Alsworth, Pedro Bay, and Kokhanak to INNEC.
1.2 PROJECT HISTORY AND PREVIOUS STUDIES
A detailed feasibility study for a hydroelectric project on the Tazimina River was completed in
1987 by Stone and Webster Inc. for the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) (9). A site at Tazimina
Falls was identified and various project alternatives for this site were evaluated. A preferred
alternative was chosen as the most economical, with a present worth cost-to-cost ratio of 1.12
for a medium growth scenario and 1.36 for a high growth scenario. The high growth scenario
was based on the additional load growth from a proposed subdivision project at Keyes Point.
The economic analysis of this project was reviewed and updated in August, 1990, by AEA (1).
N:07250.00l:l:D8 1
2.0 PROJECT AREA
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
INNEC primarily serves the communities of Iliamna, Newhalen, and Nondalton. These
communities are located on or near the north shore of Lake Iliamna, approximately 175 miles
southwest of Anchorage (Figure 1). This area has approximately 560 residents, whom are
primarily employed in the fishing industry.
The area is served by barge from Naknek via the Kvichak: River on a regular basis and by
scheduled air carriers from Anchorage. The road system extends north from Iliamna towards
Nondalton, but fails to connect the two communities because no bridge exists across the
Newhalen River.
The proposed hydroelectric project is located on the Tazimina River about 12 miles northeast
of the community of Iliamna (Figure 2). The Tazimina River flows west from the Aleutian
Range. The location of the proposed hydroelectric project is eight miles downstream of lower
Tazimina Lake at a steep falls. Immediately below the falls a steep walled canyon extends for
about one mile. The Tazimina River joins the Newhalen River at Sixmile Lake approximately
9.5 miles downstream of the project site.
Cominco Alaska, Inc. recently announced the discovery of a copper-gold deposit, 17 miles west-
northwest of the community of Iliamna.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Stone and Webster feasibility study identified a preferred hydroelectric project at the
Tazimina Falls site. In this project, the intake structure is approximately 250 feet upstream of
the falls on the left bank at the 570 foot elevation. The penstock extends from the diversion
along the top of the canyon for 270 feet to a powerhouse. The turbine is located 100 feet below
the powerhouse at the bottom of a bored water columnllineshaft assembly. Flow returns to the
river channel by a tailrace tunnel. A nine-mile road would be constructed to access the project
site and a 24 kV distribution line is buried adjacent to this road to carry generated power from
the powerhouse to the existing INNEC distribution system.
N:07250.00l:I:D8 2
"11 -Ci)
c
:D m
PROPOSED COPPER/ GOLD MINE
PROJECT SITE
See Figure 2
\
-~ •· NAKNE~
KING NAIC.N[
(AL~ON LAKE
NORTH
SCALE
cr-To 2Mo .. no
..-.Es
FIGURE 1
.,
C5 c
::0 m
1\)
TAZIMINA RIVER
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
PROJECT AREA MAP
FIGURE 2
HR
3.0 PROJECT COST
The cost estimate prepared by Stone and Webster for their 1987 report was updated for the
preferred hydroelectric project to reflect 1991 costs. The basis of all quantities, with the
exception of the roads are taken from Stone and Webster's estimate. The access road was
relocated to a more southerly route that is longer than the Stone and Webster route but where
better soil conditions are assumed to exist. The character of the road was also downgraded to
the minimum required to provide co~struction and maintenance access. The following is a list
of the major assumptions and methods of costing used to compile the estimate. Complete cost
estimate spreadsheets are included in Appendix 1.
• The basis of all quantities with the exception of the roads are taken from Stone &
Webster's estimate. The roadway estimate is based on a criteria provided by INNEC.
These criteria were nine-mile length and a 16-foot-wide travel surface, to be constructed
by overlaying existing terraces with borrow. The road will require one ten-foot-long
bridge. Drainage culverts wlll be placed where required.
• The Stone and Webster estimate does not provide enough information for the pricing
of the major electrical equipment. These items have been estimated at Stone and
Webster's cost, increased by the inflation rate from 1986 to 1991 for construction in
Alaska.
• Costs are based on a competitively bid contract. It is assumed the contractor would
work a 60 hour work week. The wages are based on the Little Davis-Bacon wage
legislation. Equipment rates are based on Blue book without area adjustments.
• Turbine and generator prices are 1991 quotes from the manufacturer, Bryon Jackson of
Seattle.
• A contingency cost of ten percent is applied to all direct construction costs.
• Design and construction management costs do not include additional geotechnical
exploration. It is assumed that sufficient work was completed during the Stone and
Webster study.
• The construction period is assumed to be May 1993 through December 1994 with
project start-up in 1995.
• The expected life of buried cable is 20 years. The cost of a replacement cable is
included at the 20-year point in the life of the project.
N:072S0.001:l:D8 3
• INNEC has an agreement for the land and right-of-way acquisition for this site. They
have stated that this amount is minor compared the overall construction costs. This cost
is not included in this estimate.
• Environmental mitigation costs, if any, for this project are not included in this estimate .
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST
Powerplant $ 747,828
Waterways $ 1,796,852
Turbines and Generators $ 892,000
Accessory Electrical Equipment $ 358,400
Misc. Powerplant Equipment $ 127,600
Roads $ 1,417,725
Substation and Switching Equipment $ 59,700
Distribution Line $ 354,310
MOB/DEMOB $ 724,721
Other Direct Costs $ 1 ,268,106
TOTAL $ 7,747,242
Unassigned Contingency (10%) $ 774,724
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 8,521,966
Design and Construction Management ( 10%) $ 852,196
TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS $ 9,374,162
N:07250.00l:l:D8 4
4.0 LOAD FORECAST
4.1 EXISTING GENERATION CAPACITY
The utility currently produces electricity with diesel generators. The utility operates three 320
kW and one 600 kW diesel generators. The 320 kW generators are older and two have been
recently overhauled with the third scheduled for overhaul in April 1991. The 600 kW generator
is two years old. Together these provide a total of 1560 kW of capacity.
4.2 LOAD FORECAST, MEDIUM GROWTH SCENARIO
Power Cost Equalization Records from 1983 to 1990 were reviewed to assess the growth of
electric demand (Table 2). These records show that for the years 1986 to 1990 there was steady
growth at an average rate of 3.6 percent per year. The years of 1984 and 1985 show high load
growth because at these times the communities of Newhalen (1984) and Nondalton ( 1985) joined
the INNEC. These years are not included in the growth average. The 1986 to 1990 average
will be used for the medium growth scenario.
TABLE 2
ELECTRICAL DEMAND, 1983 TO 1990
YEAR SALES LOAD GRO\\'TH INCREASE FROM PREVIOUS
(CALEI\'DAR) (kWh) YEAR (PERCENT)
1983 $ 974,000 391,051
1984 $1,365,051 174,308 (a) 40.1
1985 $1,539,359 53,063 (b) 13.2
1986 $1;592,42 40,186 3.4
1987 $1,632,608 77,121 2.5
1988 $1,709,739 71,228 4.7
1989 $1,780,957 61,150 4.1
1990 $1,842,170 3.4
Average Load Growth 1986-1990 (five years) 3.6
a Newhalen joined Co-Op in 1984
b Nondalton joined Co-Op in 1985
N:072SO.OOl:l:D8 5
4.3 LOAD FORECAST, HIGH GROWTH SCENARIO
Field surveys and feasibly studies for a large copper-gold mine in the Iliamna area have been
on-going for several years. If this mine were to open, it is possible that an influx of workers
into the Iliamna area would increase the need for electrical generation. Estimated energy
requirements and their timing are not well defined at this time.
A load forecast for this high growth scenario was developed based on the following assumptions:
•
•
•
•
YEAR
1995
1996
1997
The mine would employ approximately 350 people .
30 percent, or 105 of these people would live within the area served by INNEC .
Load growth from new residents would occur over a three year period beginning in
1995. After this time load growth would continue as in the medium growth scenario.
The average residential customer uses approximately 4,500 kWh per year .
TABLE 3
ESTIMATED INNEC LOAD GROWTH FROM COMINCO MINE
INCREASE IN LOAD (kWh)
NUMBER OF NEW kWh INCREASE CUMULATIVE PROJECTED PROJECTED
CUSTOMERS PER YEAR INCREASE LOAD WITHOUT LOAD WITH
INCREASE PER YEAR CO MINCO CO MINCO
35 158,000 158,000 2,528,000 2,686,000
35 158,000 316,000 2,618,000 2,934,000
35 158,000 474,000 2,713,000 3,187,000
There are two other possibilities for increased load growth in the Iliamna area. The sale of
excess electrical power to the Cominco mine in the initial years of the hydroelectric project and
sales to the communities of Port Alsworth, Pedro Bay, or Kakhonak. An intertie would need
to be constructed for any of these to occur. These interties were not in investigated in this
study, nor was this additional load growth assessed.
N :07250.001:1 :DS 6
5.0 FUEL COST ESCALATION
The INNEC utility purchases diesel fuel in bulk to power their electrical generation system. The
fuel is purchased on an annual basis and stored in tanks with a capacity of 200,000 gallons. The
most recent purchase of fuel was in January 1991, and was purchased at $1.20 per gallon.
Table 4 shows the prices paid for delivered fuel from 1987 through 1991. These prices differ
from those which are reported in the PCE reports. The PCB report's most recent fuel purchase
price is the price of the fuel used by the Alaska Public Utilities Commission (APUC) to
determine the PCE rate. This price is a combination of past costs for fuel remaining in storage
tanks and costs for fuel recently purchased.
TABLE 4
PRICES PAID FOR DIESEL FUEL BY INNEC
DATE NOMINAL PRICE $PER GALLON
1987 1.07
1988* 0.81
1989 0.95
1990 1.11
1991 1.20
* INNEC Joined Western Alaska Fuel Group in 1988
In 1988 INNEC joined the Western Alaska Fuel Group which is composed of the utilities of
Nome, Kotzebue, Naknek, and Nushagak. Membership in this group is seen as the major reason
for reduced fuel prices in 1988.
Table 4 shows that the price of fuel has increased in nominal terms for each of the four
purchases since 1987. The average fuel cost escalation above inflation for this period was eight
percent.
The mid-range forecast for world oil prices prior to the recent invasion of Kuwait, shows an
average 2.25 percent annual increase (above inflation) in crude oil prices over the next 20 years.
After the invasion, oil prices rose dramatically, but now following the cessation of the conflict
oil prices have returned to pre-invasion prices. The pre-invasion forecast is considered the best
N:07l50.001:1:D8 7
estimate of long-term price escalation. As was pointed out in the 1990 AEA memorandum (1)
on this project, oil escalation factors have been developed with crude oil, not diesel fuel, in
mind. Any given change in the crude oil price translates into a lower percentage change in the
diesel price. Because of the long-term economic analysis period of this report, the world oil
price forecast has been used as the basis for fuel escalation. The 2.25 percent real annual
increase in crude oil prices has been reduced to a 2.0 percent real annual increase to account for
the differences noted by AEA between crude oil and diesel fuel prices.
Increased environmental regulations of fuel shipments may have a pronounced effect on fuel
costs in the INNEC area. The impact of these regulations are unknown and are not included in
this assessment.
N:072S0.001 :l:D8 8
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Prepared for:
Diamna-Newbalen-Nondalton Electrical Co-Op (INNEC)
Box 206
Iliamna, Alaska 99606
Prepared by:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
4446 Business Park Boulevard
Building B
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
May 1991
6.0 PROJECT ENERGY PRODUCTION
Energy production is based upon the hydroelectric project sizing done by Stone and Webster.
This project has two 350 kW turbines at 100 feet of head and a four foot diameter penstock.
Each turbine has a peak capacity of 55 cubic feet per second (cfs) for a total of 110 cfs.
Analysis for this study of five years of streamflow records showed a range of flow of 140 to
4800 cfs (10). Thus the amount of water available from the river exceeds the amount necessary
to run both turbines in all seasons of the year. This turbine sizing will accommodate the needs
of the utility through the year 2015, assuming a moderate growth scenario and use of diesel
generation for peaking load capacity.
The expenditure for higher capacity turbine-generator equipment could increase the feasibility
of hydroelectric for the medium load growth scenario during the 30 year analysis period. For
a high load growth scenario or longer analysis periods, analysis suggests that upsizing the
turbines could increase the feasibility of the hydroelectric project.
Analysis of various installed capacities was not within the scope of this report. Resizing of the
project would involve analysis of the peak and minimum demands at start up and throughout the
project life. Project sizing would be limited by winter low flow.
N!072SO.OOl!l:D8 9
7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
The economic analysis presented in this section compares the net present value of diesel
generation with the net present value of hydroelectric generation. The analysis period begins
in 1991, assumes hydroelectric power is available beginning in 1995 and continues for the next
30 years until 2024.
An economic analysis spreadsheet was developed to analyze the present worth cost-to-cost ratio
of the project. The spreadsheet is presented in Table 5.
The net present value of each case, diesel generation only and hydroelectric with diesel
generation backup, is found by calculating the yearly capital, fuel, and operation and
maintenance costs for each, discounting these to current dollars and summing them for the
analysis period. The base case net present value is then divided by the hydroelectric net present
value to yield the present value cost-to-cost ratio. Cost-to-cost ratios greater than 1.0 indicate
that hydroelectric is less expensive over the project analysis period than diesel generation.
Ratios less then 1.0 indicate diesel generation would be the more economical option.
For this analysis, costs for all years are computed in inflation free 1990 dollars. The model
does not increase costs by inflation and calculates present value of future costs by using a real
discount rate approximately equal to the nominal interest minus inflation.
The economic analysis was based on the following assumptions:
• The INNEC load growth for the medium growth scenario will be at an annual rate of
3.6 percent based on PCE records from 1986 to 1990 (see Section 4.2). For the high
load growth scenario additional load growth is as detailed in Section 4.3. Load growth
is assumed constant through the entire analysis period.
• The annual interest rate will be eight percent and annual inflation will be five percent.
These values reflect recent trends in long-term rates and are the values presently used
by the AEA to evaluate projects. The eight percent interest rate assumes that the
project will qualify for tax-exempt bonding.
• The base year of economic analysis is 1990 as actual utility generation data was
available for that year.
• The economic evaluation period will be 30 years. The accepted life span of a
hydroelectric project is 50 years thus 30 years is a reasonable period of analysis.
N:072SO.OOI:l:D8 10
• Diesel fuel will be escalated at two percent above annual inflation (see Section 5.0).
Escalation is assumed constant throughout the entire analysis period.
• The 1990 fuel price of $1.20 per gallon is the price of the utility's most recent fuel
purchase in January 1991.
• The utility's diesel generation efficiency of 12 kWh per gallon is based on generation
records from 1986 to 1990.
• Replacement cost for diesel generators will be $700 per kW with a generation life of
ten years for full-time diesel generation and 20 years for backup diesel generation.
This cost is based on a recent price quote for a generator for the City of King Cove,
adjusted for increased freight costs to Iliamna.
• The INNEC diesel generation maintenance costs will be $0.17 per kWh. This value
is derived from 1986 to 1990 PCE records by dividing the total non-fuel expenses
exclusive of administration costs by the total power sold, and is the cost of maintaining
the generators and the distribution system, and depreciation and interest. Because
depreciation and interest are included in maintenance costs, it is assumed for the
economic analysis that the cost of replacing worn out generators is included in this
amount.
• The hydroelectric generation O&M costs will be $0.08 per kWh. This is based upon
reduced diesel maintenance and replacement costs, especially in the early years of the
project.
• The INNEC administration costs are taken from 1990 PCE records. These costs are
assumed to be fixed costs that do not vary with increased kWh sales. They are
assumed to be equal for the diesel and hydro cases.
• Construction costs were estimated in Section 4.0. This cost includes design,
administration, and construction of the project.
• The startup date for hydroelectric generation is 1995 based on the project schedule
developed by Stone and Webster with design beginning in 1991.
• The diesel analysis assumes maintaining the existing 1560 kW present firm capacity
until 1995. At this time it is assumed that the two oldest 320 kW generators will be
retired and replaced with a single 320 kW unit. Projections of peak annual loads
suggests that no more than that capacity will be required at that time. Load will equal
capacity in 2001 and from that time on capacity will be added at the same rate as the
growth of peak load (3.6 percent). Firm capacity represents the generation capacity
required to meet electric demand including generator down time for repairs. It is
assumed that the cost of capacity replacement is covered in O&M costs, but that
N :07250.001: I :D8 11
additional capacity requires capital expenditure beyond the basic O&M budget.
• If the hydroelectric project is built and is on line in 1995, then the 320 kW diesel unit
would not need to be bought in 1995, and the existing diesel generators would provide
sufficient peaking capacity until 2009. Other generation equipment replacements and
additions are shown. A minimum diesel generation of 5 percent annual system load
(line 15, Table 5) has been assigned to account for diesel generation required during
hydroelectric downtime and to meet daily peaks.
• Electricity generated in excess of the utility needs was assumed to have no value.
Table 5 shows the diesel net present value to be $32,218,000 and the hydroelectric net present
value to be $24,332,000 for the 30 year comparative analysis period. The present worth cost-to-
cost ratio for this analysis is 1. 32. The project is defined as feasible.
A sensitivity analysis was completed to determine the effect of varying six of the economic
parameters that affect the cost to cost ratio. Construction cost, initial fuel price, load growth,
fuel escalation rate, interest rate, and inflation rate were each varied one at a time within a
reasonable range and the present worth cost-to-cost ratio tabulated. This is shown in Figure 3.
None of the six assumptions, when varied independently by plus or minus 50 percent, caused
the cost-to-cost ratio to drop below 1.0. A combination of factors, however, such as a large cost
overrun accompanied by a drop in oil prices, could conceivably cause the project cost-to-cost
ratio to drop below 1.0, and therefore, define the project as not feasible.
Calculations using a variation of the economic analysis period were also performed. They
showed that the project has a cost-to-cost ratio of 1.08 for an analysis period of 20 years and
1.40 for an analysis period of 50 years.
The addition of 30 percent of the Cominco workforce to be served by INNEC increased the cost-
to-cost ratio to 1.36. The hydroelectric project is undersized even for the expected increases of
the community without the additional Cominco growth. With increased growth the turbine
capacity is exceeded sooner and increased fuel costs are incurred to provide for demand. If the
project were upsized (analysis of project size was not in the scope of this study), the cost-to-cost
ratio for a high load growth scenario could increase.
N:07250.00l:l:D8 12
Table 5 TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY Economic Analysis (30 yr)
SUMMARY
Diesel Net Present Value= $32,218,032.
Uydro Net Present Value= $24,332,668
Cost/Cost Ratio = 1.32
POWER GENERATlON REQUIREMENTS
1 Annual Sy>tem Load (kWh)
2 Peak Annual Load (kW)
DIESEL FUEL RATES
J Annual &c.alation Ratr
4 Fuel Pricc(l990$tgal)
DIF.SEL ANALYSIS
~ Firm Capacity (kW)
o Capa<:ity Additions (kW)
7 Diesel Fu<l u.., (gallom)
8 C.apita1Costs(l990$)
9 Fue1Costs(l990$)
10 Maintenance Cmts ( 1990 $)
11 Operations Cost. (1990 S)
12 Total D.,.., I Coots ( 1990 S)
HYDROI'ROJECf ANALYSIS
1.' Firm Capacity (kW)
14 Diescl C.apadty Additions (tW)
15 Hydroel«tricGeneration (tWb)
16 Dieoel Generation (tWb}
t7 D"""'l Fucl Use (S~~Ik>no}
18 Capital Casu (1990$)
19 C_onotrmtion cost (1990$)
2(l Fucl Cosll ( 1990 $}
21 Maintenance C:O.U (1990 $)
22 OpmltiomCosts(1990S)
19'11
2.118.000 2.19U~8
420 4.'~
1.!0
1,56!1
0
l7b5!0l
$0
$211.1100
$34'1,410
$24:!.0011
15..0
0
182.854
so
S21J,SD
$:16!,051
$242.000
$80).27ll $827.M4
1.56!1
0
2.118.000
176500
so
so
$211,800
$349,470
$242,000
1.~6!1
0
2.194.248
182.8.>4
so
$213,001
$223,813
$)62,051
$242.000
Load Fore<aot Alsumptions
C-Ommunity Load Growth
Economic Auumptiom
Nominal Interest Ratr
Annuat Jnrtation Rate
Real Discount Rate
Base year
Economic Anatysts Period
Load Growth Period
Fuel.r;;..,.lation Period
1992 19'13
8.00%
5.00%
2.86%
Diesel System Assumptions
Fuel r;;..,.1ation Rate
1990Avg, Fuel Pnc.
Fuel Efficiency
Eronomi< Life
Additional Capacity Cost
Maintenance Cos!
1<1'1fl Operations f'_ost
JO yr 19'11-2024
30 yr 19'1l-2!l24
JO yr 19'11-2024
11>95 1996 19'17
20%
$1.20 /gal
12 tWhlgal
12 yean
$700 lkW
$0.11 ltWb
SZ4l.OOO !vear
1999 2000
Hydroprnjec:t Assumptions
Construction Cost $9,375,000
Funding Life 0 yean
Aonual Debt Service SO
Maintenance Cost
Operations Cost
Startup Date
Hydroprojec:t Specifieatlona
Installed C.apa<:ity
Maximum Head
Efftdency
Maximum Capacity/year
2001
S0.08 lltWb
$242.000 /year
19'15
700 tW
100 ft
79%
5,200,000 tWb
1004
2.273.241 2.355,018 2.439,86!1 2.527,695 2,618,691 2. 712.%5 2.!1111.6-'2 2.911,815 3,016,640 J, 125,239 3,237,748 3,354,307 3,475,062
451 467 484 501 519 ~~ ~57 577 598 62!l 642 6M 689
151i0
II
J8'),4J7
so
$236,508
SJ75,085
$242.000
2..~
1.21
1.5611
0
1%.2.>6
so
$249,92.\
$388,5118
$242,000
$&5.',593 SR80.511
2,273,241
189,437
so
SM9.001
$236,508
SJ7S,085
$242.000
1,56!1
0
so
$5,972,171
$24'1.923
S388,5118
$242,000
2.0%
DO
so
$264,098
$402.571
$242.000
2.0%
l..l2
156!1
0
21(1,641
so
$219,1118
$417,010
$!42.(1(10
2.0%
us
m
J2!l
218.224
$224,000
$294.0117
$432.084
$242.000
$0
$.111,634
$447,1\39
$242.000
(12(1
ll
21·1,219
$0
$329,_1111
$44.\,754
$!42.000
92(l
0
242.651
so
$347,989
$480,449
$242.000
2.0%
1.46
92(}
0
251,387
so
$367,727
$497,746
$242,000
2.0%
1.4'1
953
33
260,437
$23,184
S.l88,584
$515,644
$242.000
2.0%
152
987
J4
269,812
$24,019
$410,62.~
$534.228
$242.000
2.0%
1.55
1,023
$24,883
$433,915
$553,461
$242,000
2.0%
158
1,0(,!1
J7
18'),588
$25,719
$458.521
$573,38$
$242.000
$<wl8.675 $'1~8,148 $1,192.992 $1,001.n4 Sl.OJ5,06S $1,070,4J8 $1,107,472 Sl.IM,4J3 $1,2!0,872 $1,2.54,159 $1,299.691
2,43'1,86!1
2!lJ.322
so
$2,519,886
$264,098
$402,571
$242.000
1.JOO
0
2.401,311
121\,..'l!S
1o.5n
so
$13,954
$200,952
$242.000
1,300
0
2.487,7S8
130,935
1o,911
$14,745
S:M&.U!6
$242.000
1,.\00
0
2.571.317
13S,648
11,304
SIS,582
$215,681
$242,000
000
0
2.670,100
140.532
11,711
so
$16,4611
$223,445
$242.000
1,3011
0
2, 764,224
145.591
12.133
$17,399
$231,489
$242.000
1,3011
0
2,865,808
150,&:12
12.569
$18.:!116
S239,82J
$242,000
1,3011
0
2,9;§11,971
156,262
13,022
$19,419
SZ48,4S7
$242.000
1.3011
0
3,075,86!1
161,887
13.491
S20.SJ1
$257,401
$242,000
DOO
0
3.1&1.591
167,715
13,976
so
521,696
$2ii6,661
$242,000
1,3011
0
3,301,30'1
173,753
14,479
so
$22,924
$216,267
$242,000
23 Total Hydro Costs (1990$) $803,270 $1,040,913 $1,512,642 $6,852,688 SHlS.S41 $456,906 $464,931 $413,262 $481,911
Table 5 TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY Economic Analysis (30 yr)
2005 2006 2007 lfl08 200'1 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
I Annu>l System Load (kWh) 3,600,144 ,.1,729.770 J.!l64.4142 4.003,147 4.147.Ziill 4.2%.562 4,451,238 4.61!,483 4,177,496 4.9~.486 1.127.667 Ut2.26J 5,503.505 5.701.631 5,906,8'l0
2 Peak Annual Load (kW) 714 740 7M 7'14 822 852 88..1 914 '147 <lSI 1.017 I.OSJ I.O'll 1.111 1.171
DIESEL FUEL RATES
3 Annual Escalation Rat~ 2.~ 2.~ :!.fY¥ !,fi"#, 2.11'!1' 2Jl% z.,.,.,., 2.0% 2.~ 2.0% 2.11% 2.11% 2.11% 2.0% 2.6%
4 l'ud !'ric. (I~ $/gal) 1.62 1.65 !.loll 1.71 L7~ 1.78 1.82 1.!\6 1.89 1.93 1.<>7 2.01 2.05 l.O'l 2.13
DIESEL ANALYSIS
·' f-irm Capacity (kW) 1.0<18 t.m 1.178 !.221 t,;!h5 UJO U58 1.406 1.457 1509 1.544 1.620 1.678 1,739 1.801
h \armdtv Additions (tW) 38 40 '" 42 ·H % 47 4'1 51 12 54 56 58 60 63
7 Diesel Foell!.., (gallons l 300.014 310,814 .:t22.t••-' 3.13.5"" 345.605 JS!l.0-17 370.937 384.2'l0 3'18.125 41!,457 427 .. 141!\ 442.6110 458.625 475.136 492.Z41
8 Capital Cosrs ( 1990 $) $26.707 $27.669 $28.665 $!'1.6117 $30.7<16 $31,87.1 $.13.021 $34,209 $35,441 $36,717 $38.0311 $39,408 $40,827 $42,2% $43,819
9 Fuel Coots (1990$) $484.535 $512.017 $541,059 $571.748 $1004.178 $638,446 $674AI9 $712.926 $753,36..1 $7%.094 $841.248 S888.%4 $939,386 $992,668 $1.048.<>7!
10 Maint<nan"" Cost• ( 1990 $) $5'14,027 $615,412 $h.17,S67 $Mil,S 19 $684,2'l!l $708.933 $734,454 $760,895 $788.287 $816,665 S<'146,065 $876.523 $908,076 $'140,769 $974,637
II ~rations O>sts (1990$) $242.0011 $242.0(10 $242.000 $242.0011 sz~z.noo $242.1100 $242.0011 $242.000 $242.0011 $242.000 $242.000 $242.0011 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000
12 TotaiDiC'S<ICooto(l990$) $1.347,269 $1...197.098 $1,449.291 $150.'.<164 $1561.241 $1,6!1.252 $1.684.1.14 $1.750,030 Sl.819,091 $1.891.476 $1.%7 .. 152 $2.046.891 $2.130.291 S2.217,n.1 $2.309.4211
HYDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
D Firm Capacity (tW) t,JOO 1,300 uoo 1..'00 1..147 1.395 1.446 1.49R 1.551 1.607 1,665 1.725 1.787 1,8.52 1,918
14 Dies<ol Capacity Additions (tW) I) I) 0 0 47 48 so 52 54 56 58 (10 62 44 67.
IS Hydnxlectric G•neration (tWh) 3,420.156 3,543,281 J,a70,MO ~.802.990 J,939.8'17 4.41111.7j4 4,228,676 4,380,908 4,538.621 4,702.012 4,871.284 5,200,000 5,200,000 5.200,000 5,200,000
16 Diesel G<n<rntion (kWh) 180.008 186,488 193,202 200,157 207,363 214.828 222.562 2.l0,574 238,875 247,474 256.38~ 112.263 303,505 SOI,6.ll 706,890
17 Die .. l Fu<l Use (galloml 15.001 IS.S41 16.100 16,680 17.Zl10 17,902 18.547 19,215 19,906 20,623 21,)(;_1 9,355 25.292 41,803 58.907
18 Capital Coot~ (1990$) so so so so $32.7(10 $33,939 $35,161 $36,427 $37,738 $39,097 $40,504 $41,963 $43,473 $45,038 $46,6(,0
19 ConstnJ<tion rosl( 1990 $) $354,310
20 l'ud Coots (141<10 $) $24,227 $25,(101 $27.053 $28.587 $.10,209 $31,922 $33,733 $35,646 SJ7,668 $J9,80S $42.062 St8, 786 S51,80S $87,335 $125,533
21 Maintenance Coots ( 1990 $) $2.86,213 $296,517 $307,191 $318.250 $329.707 $34!,517 $353,873 ~613 $379,811 $393,484 S407.6SO $408,523 $440,078 $472.769 SSCJ6.637
22 ~rations Coots (1990 S) $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000
23 TO!JII Hydro Coots ( 1990 $) $552,440 $564,118 $576,244 $588,838 $6..14,676 ~.438 $664,768 $680,686 $697,217 $1,06&696 $732.216 $711.272 sm.356 $847,143 $920,829
Table 5 TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY Economic Analysis (30 yr)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
POWER GENERATION REOUIREMENB
1 Annual System LoOO (kWh) II, 119.53!1 6,3.\9.1\41 651\8.07S 6.004526 7,049.48\1
2 Peak Annual Load (kW) 1,214 1.2.~1 1,:102 1,,!49 l.J91l
DIE.'iEL FUEL RATES
.3 Annual E.scalaHon Rate 2.6"; ~.ft% Vl% :!.0% :!.0"1>
4 Fuel Price ( 19'lll Sigal) !.11 ~.2:! 2.!6 2..1lJ !..\~
DIF..SEL ANALYSIS
Firm Capacity (tW) I.SM l.'l.l~ :!.003 2,07< 2.150
Cap:ldty Additions (kW) 6,< o7 70 12 7<
Diesel Fuel lise (~•lions) 511'> ..... 1 511\.'20 5-17,340 5~7.044 ~R7.457
8 C.apit.•l Cos!S (1990$) $45,397 $47,031 $41\.1!4 $5(),478 S52,29S
9 Fuel Costs ( 1990 S) $1.1~.470 $1,171,342 SL:!.\7,700 $1.307.987 $1,3!12,176
10 MaintenanceCosts(I990S) S1.0f.l'l,724 $1.046.074 S!Jl!l\,732 $1,122.747 St.I6J,IM
11 Operations Cos!S ( 1990 $) SNZ.C)(IO $2-1.!.000 $242.000 $242.1100 S242,C)(IO
12 Total Diesel CO$ts (1990 S) $2.4055911 $2.506.>147 $2,612.2.'7 $2. 72.'.212 $2,&19.6.\7
H YDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
\3 Firm Capacity (kW) 1,987 2.059 z.m 2.210 2.289
14 Diesel Capacity Additions (kW) 69 72 74 71 80
IS Hydroek'ctric G<'fleration (kWh) S,ZOQC)(IO S.200,C)(IO S.200,C)(IO 5,200,000 5,200,000
16 Diesel Generation (kWh) 919,538 1.139.841 1.36&075 1,604.526 1,849,48\1
11 Diesel Fuel Use (gallons) 76,628 94,987 11•1.006 133.711 154.124
18 Capital C.osts (1990 $) $48,}}9 SSO,OilO $51,882 $53,750 SSS,Ii!lS
19 Constnlction coot {1990 $)
20 Fuel Costs (1990 $) $166.562 $210.596 $2.<7,819 $308,427 $162,625
21 Maintenan.., Costs (I'I'JO $) $541,724 $518,074 $61~.732 $654,747 $695,166
22 Operations Coots (I'I'JOS) $242,000 $242,000 $242.000 S24Z.OOO $242,C)(IO
D TOUI Hydro Costs (1990$) S'I'J8,625 $1,080,749 $1,167,434 $1,258.924 St.3SS,476
TABLE 6
30 YEAR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
ECONOMIC PERCENT VARIATION
PARAMETER
-100 -50 -25 0 25 so 100
Construction Value 4.7 m 7.0 m 9.4 m 11.7 m 14.0m
Cost
Estimate C:C 1 1.62 1.46 1.32 1.21 1.12
Initial Value 0.90 1.20 1.50
Fuel
Price C:C 1.22 1.32 1.42
Community Value 0.0 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4
Load
Growth C:C 1.00 1.16 1.25 1.32 1.33 1.31 2
Fuel Value 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0
Escalation
Rate C:C 1.19 1.25 1.28 1.32 1.37 1.42 1.53
Nominal Value 6 8 10 12 16
Interest
Rate C:C 1.50 1.32 1.17 1.03 .083
Annual Value 2.5 3.75 5.0 6.25 7.5
Inflation
Rate C:C 1.12 1.22 1.32 1.43 1.54
1 C:C is the present worth cost-to-cost ratio of hydroelectric cost and diesel cost
2 Cost-to-cost ratio decreases because capacity of hydroelectric system exceeded sooner and increased fuel
cost are incurred to provide for demand
N :07250.001 :I :D8 13
Figure 3
Tazimina Hydroelectric
Sensitivity Analysis of 30 Year Economic Analysis
1.7~-------------------------------------------------------------------------,
1.5
1 . 4 ·-· .. ·····--·-··--.. ·---... --........ -............ _ .... _,_ .............. _ .. ~---······-· ..................................................... .
1.1
0.9 ··------"--·--·----
0.8~--~------r-------r-------~----~-------.-------.-------.-------.--~
-100 -75 -50
-11-Const. Cost Est.
-B-Fuel Escal. Rate
-25 0
%Variation
-+-Initial Fuel Price
25 50
""*'-Comm. Load Growth
~ Nom. Interest Rate • Annual lnfl. Rate
75 100
8.0 RATE IMPACT ANALYSIS
The cost per kWh for each year for both diesel and hydroelectric generation were computed
(Appendix 2) and plotted (Figure 4).
The cost per kWh of hydroelectric generation increases sharply in 1995, the year that the project
comes on line. In this first year the predicted cost for hydroelectric is $0.51/kWh while the cost for
diesel is $0.37/kWh. This difference in cost is known as rate shock and is caused by the beginning
of the annual debt service payments. With time these debt service payments are decreased in real
value and the cost per kWh for hydroelectric generation decreases. After 1995 diesel costs continue
to rise, while the cost of hydroelectric decreases. In 2001 six years after the hydroelectric project
comes on line, the cost of electricity generated per kWh is equal for both methods of generation.
After 2001 the cost of hydroelectric generation continues to decrease as diesel continues to increase.
The capacity of the hydro project is exceeded in 2016.
For no rate shock to occur the amount of money borrowed for the project must be reduced to the
point where the cost per kWh for hydroelectric is the same as the cost per kWh for diesel power
generation for the year the hydroelectric project comes on-line. This equality of rates occurs when
the amount financed is $5.4 million. Project costs would have to be reduced by $4 million.
Estimated construction costs ( 1991 dollars)
Construction cost which gives zero rate shock (1991 dollars)
Cost reduction needed to give zero rate shock ( 1991 dollars)
14
$ 9,400,000
- $ 5.400.000
$ 4,000,000
·.
0.7.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
Figure 4
Tazimina Hydroelectric Project
0.
Rate Analysis
1990-2024
0.5 ~ 1995 Start of Hydro Debt Service -.f;/}
0
0> 0.4 0> Diesel Case
or--I
~
..::s::: 0.3 :;:::;-
2014 Replacement of Transmission Cable
I
C/)
0
(.)
2009 Begin to add additional Diesel Capacity for Peaking
0.2
2016 Hydro Capacity Exceeded I
0.1
2024 End of Hydro Debt Service
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year
9.0 POWER COST EQUALIZATION ANALYSIS
9.1 HISTORY AND RATE DETERMINATION
The State of Alaska Power Cost Equalization program has been in existence since 1985. Prior to that
time, two similar programs were in effect that extend the record of this type of program back to
1980.
The purpose of the PCE program is to provide economic assistance to customers in rural Alaska
where the cost for electricity is often higher than the cost in the more urban areas of the state.
Assistance is provided to equalize electricity cost per kWh for rural utilities statewide at a price close
to the mean of the cost per kWh in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau.
State funds are appropriated by the Legislature for the PCE program each year and are paid to
utilities on behalf of eligible customers. The utility is required to reduce its customers bills by the
amount that the State pays for PCE.
The amount of PCE subsidy per kWh that a utility receives is determined by the amount that it costs
the utility to generate power. The program pays 95 percent of a utility's costs between $0.085 per
kWh and $0.525 per kWh. All customers must pay at least $0.085 for every kWh eligible for PCE
assistance. If costs are more than $0.525 per kWh, the maximum PCE subsidy is $0.418 per kWh
($0.525 -$0.085 = $0.44 X 95% = $0.418).
Costs NOT
covered by PCE
Costs NOT
covered by PCE
Costs Above
52.5¢/kWh
Costs between
8.5¢/kWh and
52.5¢/kWh
Costs up to
8.5¢/kWh
PCE pays 95% of the
verifiable and reasonable
costs in this bracket
Taken from: AEA Power Cost Equalization Manual, January, 1990
There are limits on the amount of subsidy that a customer can receive. Residential and commercial
customers can individually receive PCE credit for up to 750 kWh per month. Community facilities
as a group can receive PCE credit for 70 kWh per month multiplied by the number of residents in
15
the community. An average of 62 percent of the INNBC power sold between 1986 and 1990 was
subsidized by PCB.
The utilities margin is not included when determining the PCE Rate. Thus the consumer must pay
the utility at least 8.5C for every kWh eligible for PCE assistance, plus any difference between the
PCE rate per kWh and the rate charged by the utility. Customers must also pay to the utility the full
rate for all kWh used in excess of those eligible for PCE subsidy.
For example, a recent formulation of PCB subsidy for INNEC showed a total fuel and non fuel cost
of 37.5C/kWh. The PCE subsidy was 27.6C/kWh ([37.5C-8.5C] x 0.95). The utility rate charged
was 45.5C/kWh and the rate paid by the consumer was 17.9C/kWh (45.5C-27.6C) for the first 750
kWh and 45.5C for use greater than ·750 kWh.
9.2 EFFECT OF HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON PCE
If a hydroproject were to be built by the INNEC utility without state grant assistance, and the PCE
program were to continue in its present form, the amount of PCE subsidy received by the INNEC
utility would be increased for the first six years when the hydroelectric generated power was more
expensive than diesel generated power. After these initial six years hydroelectric power would
become less expensive than diesel produced power (Figure 4). The PCE subsidy will cover the
consumer rate shock for the first 750 kWh of usage per eligible customer. Rate shock, therefore,
will affect 38 percent of INNEC sales; sales not subsidized by PCE.
If a hydroelectric project were built by INNEC with state assistance in the form of a grant to negate
the rate shock, this grant would also decrease the cost per kWh and thus reduce the PCE subsidy.
Table 6 shows the present worth of avoided PCE payments that would result from such a state grant.
Two state grant amounts were analyzed: a grant for the full construction cost of $9.4 million; and
a grant for the amount which results in no rate shock or $4 million. A no grant option was also
analyzed. The return to state for its investment is shown for 20 and 30 years periods and the year
is shown when the return to the state equals its investment.
The present worth of avoided PCE payments was found by calculating the yearly costs difference
between diesel generated power and hydroelectric generated power for each grant scenario. These
yearly cost difference are discounted to current collars, summed for the analysis period, and
multiplied by the typical percentage of power sold by INNEC which is subsidized by PCE. Two real
discount rates were chosen to demonstrate a range of the avoided PCE payments by the State. These
real discount rates were 0 percent and 3 percent. They are based upon an inflation rate of 5 percent
and nominal interest rates of 5 percent and 8 percent. These nominal interest rates are the range that
is recommended for loans for power projects by State Statute 44.83.170. The year the State of
Alaska recoups its investment is the year in which the present worth of avoided PCE payments equals
the initial state contribution.
These analyses assume that the PCE program in its present form will continue for the entire analysis
period. A detailed spreadsheet of this analysis is included as Appendix 3.
16
TABLE 7
REAL PRESENT WORTH OF A VOIDED PCE PAYMENTS
REAL DISCOUNT RATE= 0.0 PERCENT
MODERATE GROWTH CASE
STATE CONTRIBUTION 20 YEAR 30 YEAR YEAR STATE RECOUPS CONTRIBUTION
ANALYSIS ANALYSIS
$0.00 (no State funding) $2,952,000 $10,123,000 N/A
$4,100,000 (zero rate shock funding) $4,043,000 $13,544,000 2011 (17 years)
$9,375,000 (full Stale funding) $9,708,000 $18,331,000 2013 (19 years)
HIGH GROWTH CASE
(30% OF COMJNCO WORK FORCE LOCATES IN INNEC AREA)
STATE CONTRIBUTION 20 YEAR 30 YEAR YEAR STATE RECOUPS CONTRIBUTION
ANALYSIS ANALYSIS
$3,600,000 (zero rate shock funding) $7,140,000 $14,900,000 2008 (14 years)
REAL DISCOUNT RATE= 3.0 PERCENT
MODERATE GROWTH CASE
STATE CONTRIBUTION 20 YEAR 30 YEAR YEAR STATE RECOUPS CONTRIBUTION
ANALYSIS ANALYSIS
$0.00 (no State funding) $1,753,000 $5,208,000 NIA
$4,100,000 (zero rate shock funding) $5,805,772 $7,804,000 2014 (20 years)
$9,375,000 (full State funding) $7,175,000 $11,353,000 2019 (25 years)
HIGH GROWTH CASE
(30% OF COMINCO WORK FORCE LOCATES IN INNEC AREA)
STATE CONTRIBUTIONS 20 YEAR 30 YEAR YEAR STATE RECOUPS CONTRIBUTION
ANALYSIS ANALYSIS
$3,600,000 (zero rates shock funding) $4,900,000 $8,750,000 2010 (16 years)
17
10.0 CONCLUSIONS
• When analyzed over a 30 year period, and based on the assumptions detailed in this report,
generation of electricity by construction of a hydroelectric project has a lower cost than generation
by diesel generators.
• Based on the assumptions in this study, a grant of $4 million would eliminate rate shock in the
initial six years of the project.
• The State of Alaska could recoup their initial grant monies through avoided PCE payments in 17
to 20 years.
• Additional load due to the Cominco project would slightly increase economic viability and
decrease the PCE payback period for the existing project. If the hydroelectric project were
upsized there would also be some additional. benefits. Resizing of the project was not within the
scope of this report.
18
11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Alaska Energy Authority, First Annual Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization
Program, December, 15 1988.
2. Alaska Energy Authority, Second Annual Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization
Program, December, 15 1988.
3. Alaska Energy Authority, Alaska Electric Power Statistics, 1980-1989, October 1990.
4. Alaska Energy Authority, Power Cost Equalization Program Manual, January, 1990.
5. Alaska Energy Authority, Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Study, Memo Report, August 30,
1990.
6. HDR Engineering, Inc, King Cove Hydroelectric Feasibility Study, February 1991.
7. Olsen, Trig, INNEC Manager, Personal Communication, 1991.
8. Ott Water Engineers, Inc., Hydropower Design Manual, January 1983.
9. Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation, Inc., Feasibility Report Tazimina River
Hydroelectric Project, March 1987. Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.
10. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resource Data for Alaska, Water Years 1981-1985.
19
APPENDICES
20
1. DETAILED COST ESTil\1ATE
================================·===·=====================================================·================================
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE: SUMMARY OF COSTS
03-May-91
================================================================;==========================================================
DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION
==============================•=================================•============================•:===•========================
1: POVERPLANT $747,828
2: VATERVAYS $1,796,852
3: TURBINES & GENERATORS $892,400
4: ACCESSORY ELECTRICAL EOUIRMENT $358,400
5: MISC POVERPLANT EQUIPMENT $127,600
6: ROADS $1,443,940
7: SUBSTATION & SVITCBING STATION $59,700
8: TRANSMISSION $354,310
9: MOB/DEHOB $717,877
10: OTHER DIRECT COSTS $1,263,905
=======·===========·======================·====================================================·==========·=·=======•==·===
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $7 t 762,813
========·========================·====·=====================================·==============·=====·==•============·=========
UNASSIGNED CONTINGENCY: 10.0% $776,281
============================================·========:=•=====·=·==============·===================·==================·=====
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $8,539,094
==a========•=================================•===========•===============================•=================================
Summary
~AZIMIRA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGIRIERIRG, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
tiNE
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
WORK DESCRIPTION
POWEll. PLANT
EXCAVATION -COMMON
Above Item is Priced
Load ' Haul
Foreman
DJB
Doser 09
Loader 988
Motor Grader
EXCAVATION • ROCK
Above Item is Priced
Drill ' Shoot
Powder ' Access.
Drilling
Load ' Haul
Foreman
DJB
Dozer D9
Loader 988
Motor Grader
QUANTITY
765 CY
Below:
4 HRS
32 HRS
8 Hli.S
8 HRS
4 HRS
765 CY
Below:
765 CY
20 HRS
4 HRS
32 HRS
8 HRS
8 BRS
4 BRS
UNITS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+-----------------···+ +---------------+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$7.00 $28 1.000 4.0
$65.00 $2,080 1.000 32.0
$107.00 $856 1.000 8.0
$107 .oo $856 1.000 8.0
$58.00 $232 1.000 4.0
$2.50 $1,913
$68.00 $1,380 2.000 40.6
$7.00 $28 1.000 4.0
$65.00 $2,080 1.000 32.0
$107.00 $856 1.000 a.o
$107.00 $856 1.000 8.o
$58.00 $232 1.000 4.0
Page 1
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$164
$1,312
$328
$328
$164
$1,665
$164
$1,312
$328
$328
$164
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$192
$3,392
$1,184
$1,184
$396
$1,913
$3,045
$192
$3,392
$11184
$1,184
$396
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
*
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
WORK DESCRIPTION
BACKFILL
Pro<luction Rate
haul units
Total Production Rate
Above Item is Priced Below:
Foreman
DJB Haul Units
Loa<ler
Compactor
Gra<le Check
UNDERGROUND ROCK EXCAVATION @ HEAD 0
ROCK DRILLING 2 HOLES, 53•DIA
CONCRETE (UPPERSHELL, FLOOR SLAB)
CONCRETE (BOTTOM OF HOLE)
RIINFORCIRG
FORMS • STRAIGHT
FORMS -CURVED
CASING (IN DRILLED HoLES) 47•DIA
Above Item is Priced Below:
Pipe
Crane
Labor
GROUTING OF CASING
QUANTITY UNITS
1,000 CY
43 CY/HR/URT
2 EA
86 CY/HR
12 HRS
23 HRS
12 HRS
12 BRS
12 HRS
100 CY
125 CY
210 CY
60 CY
28,700 LBS
7,100 SF
840 SF
186 Ll"
186 LF
60 HRS
60 CRW·HRS
22 CY
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNIT
$1.25
$7.00
$65.00
$107.00
$30.00
$1,100.00
$1,100.00
$350.00
$350.00
$0.35
$1.25
$2.00
$87.85
$89.13
$375.00
Paqe 2
TOTAL
$1,250
$81
$1,508
$1,241
$348
$110,000
$137,500
$73,500
$21,000
$10,045
$8,875
$1,680
$16,341
$5,348
$8,250
LABOR HOURS
+----------·----+
UNITS
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2.000
2.000
0.014
0.133
0.173
2.000
6.000
4.000
TOTALS
11.6
23.2
11.6
11.6
11.6
420.0
120.0
410.0
946.7
145.6
120.0
360.0
88.0
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$476
$951
$476
$476
$476
$17,220
$4,920
$16,810
$38,813
$5,970
$4,920
$14,760
$3,608
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$1,250
$557
$2,459
$1,717
$824
$C76
$110,000
$137,500
$90,720
$25,920
$26,855
$47,688
$7,650
$16,341
$10,268
$14,760
$11,858
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
I
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
WORK DESCRIPTION
STRUCTRAL STEEL (HOIST PRAME •
RAILS)
VENTILATION • HEATING
LADDER • LANDING
PREFAB POWERHOUSE BUILDING
MISC METAL WORK, GRATING
QUANTITY
13,000 LBS
540 SP
11,000 LBS
540 SP
1 LS
MATERIAL COST
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
$0.75 $9,750
$10.00 $5,400
$1.50 $16,500
$55.00 $29,700
$30,000.00 $30,000
LABOR HOURS
UNITS TOTALS
0.009 111.4
0.429 231.4
0.017 188.6
0.571 308.6
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$4,569
$9,489
$7,731
$12,651
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE: 03-May-91
TOTAL COST TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT AND PROFIT
$14,319
$14,889
$24,231
$42,351
$30,000
84
85
86
........................................................................................................ "' ......................................... .
SUBTOTAL: POWERPLANT $499,714 3,672.5 $150,571 $650,285
87 --------------------------------------------------·----·--------------------------------------------··------·······················-··
88 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AHD PROFIT: $574,671 $173,157 $747,828
89 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISIOR: $41.00 PER HOUR
90 ---------------·····-·····-···-····------------------·-···········································--------------------------------·-··
Paqe 3
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
•
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
WOR~ DESCRIPTION
WATERWAYS
WATERWAYS •
COFFERDAM (50'Sqx25'D
Sheetin9
Steel Fra11in9
Pullin9 Sheetin9
DEWATERING
Pumpin9
EXCAVATION -COMMON
Production Rate
Load • Haul
Foreaan
DJB
Doser D9
Hydraulic Excavator
BACKFILL
Above It•• is Priced
production Rate
Load ' Haul
Foreaan
DJB
Dozer D9
Loader 988
Motor Grader
Coapactor
Grade Check
QUANTITY UNITS
INTAKE
38PSF)
95 TONS
30,000 LBS
95 TONS
3 MTHS
1,100 CY
30 CY/HR
20 HRS
80 HRS
40 HRS
40 HRS
360 CY
Below:
so CY/HR
7 HRS
42 HRS
7 HRS
7 HRS
7 HRS
7 ·HRS
7 HRS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+--------------------+ +---------------+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$759.06 $72,111 4.000 380.0
$0.75 $22,500 0.009 257.1
$19.69 $1,870 1.333 126.7
$7,000.00 $21,000 520.000 1,560.0
$7.00 $140 1.000 20.0
$65.00 $5,200 1.000 80.0
$107.00 $4,280 1.000 40.0
$141.00 $5,640 2.000 80.0
$1.25 $450
$7.00 $49 1.000 7.0
$65.00 $2,730 1.000 42.0
$107.00 $749 1.000 7.0
$107.00 $749 1.000 7.0
$58.00 $406 1.000 7.0
$30.00 $210 1.000 7.0
1.000 7.0
Pa9e 4
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$15,580
$10,543
$5,193
$63,960
$820
$3,280
$1,640
$3,280
$287
$1,722
$287
$287
$287
.$287
$287
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$87,691
$33,043
$7,064
$84,960
$960
$81480
$5,920
$8,920
$450
$336
$4,452
$1,036
$1,036
$693
$497
$287
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Ine.
Lil'IB
•
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
us
146
147
148
149
150
WORK DESCRIPTION
CONCRBTE
REINFORCING
FORMS • STRAIGHT
TRASHRACK & EMBEDMENTS
INTAKE GATE & EMBEDMENTS
GATE HOIST (3 TON) & FRAME
PREFAB HOUSING ON INTAKE DECK
MISC METAL WORK (HANDRAIL,GRATIRG,ET
LIGHTING & HEATING
STATIONARY SCREENS & GUIDES
WORK IN RIVER : CUT
Production Rate
Load r. Haul
roreaan
DJB
crane • Claa
WORK IN RIVER : FILL
.Production Rate
Load • Haul
Foreaan
DJB
Crane • Claa
FIBERGLASS PIPE 24•
QUAl'ITITY UNITS
135 CY
5 TONS
3,600 SF
1.5 TONS
1.5 TONS
1 BA
169 SF
1 LS
169 SF
1 LS
180 CY
5 CY/HR
20 HRS
80 HRS
40 HRS
120 CY
5 CY/HR
10 HRS
40 HRS
20 HRS
200 LF
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNIT
$350.00
$0.35
$1.25
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$10,000.00
$60.00
$1,000.00
$18.92
$27,000.00
$7.00
$65.00
$98.13
$1.25
$7.00
$65.00
$89.13
$54.85
Page 5
TOTAL
$47,250
$2
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$10,000
$10,125
$1,000
$3,197
$27,000
$140
$5,200
$3,925
$150
$70
$2,600
$1,783
$10, 971·
LABOR HOURS
+·--·-----------+
UNITS
2.000
0.014
0.133
34.286
34.286
u.ooo
0.571
24.000
0.288
1.000
1.000
2.257
1.000
1.000
2.000
1.000
TOTALS
270.0
0.1
480.0
51.4
51.4
48.0
96.4
24.0
48.6
20.0
80.0
90.3
10.0
40.0
40.0
200.0
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$11,070
$3
$19,680
$2,109
$2,109
$1,968
$3,954
$984
$1,994
$820
$3,280
$3,702
$410
$1,UO
$1,640
$8,200
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE: 03-May-91
TOTAL COST TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT AND PROFIT
$58,320
$5
$24,180
$6,609
$6,609
$11,968
$14,079
$1,984
$5,191
$27,000
$960
$8,480
$7,627
$150
$480
$4,240
$3,423
$19,171
TAZIMIRA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
•
151
152
WORK DESCRIPTION
MASS CONCRETE
QUANTITY UNITS
35 CY
153 COFFERDAM CONTIRGERCY @ CONTROL SILL 70x10x20'
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
Sheetinq 61 TORS
steel Framing
Pulling Sheeting
WATERWAY • PENSTOCK
FJI.P PIPE 48•
EXCAVATION • ROCK
161 Above Itea is Priced Below:
162 Drill • Shoot
163
164
Powder • Access.
Drilling
165 Load • Haul
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
Foreman
DJB
Dozer D9
Hydraulic Excavator
Motor Grader
EXCAVATION · COMMOR
173 Above Itea is Priced Below:
174 production Rate
175 Load • Haul
176
177
178
179
180
Foreman
DJB
Dozer D9
Hydraulic Excavator
Motor Grader
27,600 LBS
61 TONS
270 LF
4,150 CY
4,150 CY
83 HJI.S
21 HJI.S
168 HJI.S
42 HRS
42 HRS
21 HRS
9,850 CY
100 CY/HR
50 HRS
400 HRS
100 HRS
100 HJI.S
50 HRS
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNIT TOTAL
$350.00
$759.06
$0.75
$19.69
$114 .as
$2.50
$68.00
$7.00
$65.00
$107.00
$141.00
$58.00
$7.00
$65.00
$107.00
$141.00
$58.00
Paqe 6
$12,250
$46,151
$20,700
$1,197
$31,011
$10.375
$51644
$147
$10,920
$41494
$5,922
$1,218
$350
$261000
$10,700
$141100
$2,900
LABOR HOURS
+---------------+
UNITS TOTALS
2.000
4.000
0.009
1.333
1.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2.000
1.000
70.0
243.2
236.6
81.,1
270.0
166.0
21.0
168.0
42.0
84.0
21.0
50.0
400.0
100.0
200.0
50.0
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$2,870
$91971
$91699
$3,324
$11,070
$6,806
$861
$6,888
$11722
$3,444
$861
$21050
$16,400
$41100
$81200
$21050
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$15,120
$56,122
$301399
$41521
$42,081
$10,375
$12,450
$1,008
$17,808
$6,216
$91366
$2,079
$2,400
$42,400
$14,800
$22,300
$4,950
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, IRC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
I
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
WORK DESCRIPTION
BACKFILL • RANDOM
Above Itea is Priced Below:
production Rate
Load " Haul
Po reman
DJB
Dozer D9
Loader 988
Motor Grader
coapactor
Grade check
BACKFILL • SELECT (COMPAC'l'BD)
(Sort Pro• Borrow)
Above Itea is Priced Below:
production Rate
Load " Haul
Po reman
DJB
Dozer D9
Loader 988
Motor Grader
Compactor
Grade Check
QUANTITY UNITS
10,100 CY
100 CY/HR
100 HRS
600 HRS
100 HRS
100 HRS
100 HRS
100 HRS
100 HRS
175 CY
50 CY/HR
4 HRS
24 HRS
4 HRS
4 HRS
4 HRS
4 HRS
4 HRS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+---·················+ +·············-·+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$1.25 $12,625
$7.00 $700 1.000 100.0
$65.00 $39,000 1.000 600.0
$107.00 $10,700 1.000 100.0
$107.00 $101700 1.000 100.0
$58.00 $5,800 1.000 100.0
$30.00 $3,000 1.000 100.0
1.000 100.0
$1.25 $219
$7.00 $28 1.000 4.0
$65.00 $1,560 1.000 24.0
$107.00 $428 1.000 4.0
$107.00 $428 1.000 4.0
$58.00 $232 1.000 4.0
$30.00 $120 1.000 4.0
1.000 4.0
Page 7
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$4,100
$24,600
$4,100
$4,100
$4' 100
$4,100
$4,100
$164
$!184
$164
$164
$164
$164
$164
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$12,625
$4,800
$63,600
$14,800
$14 '800
$9,900
$7,100
$4,100
$219
$192
$21544
$592
$592
$396
$284
$164
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
• WORK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
MATERIAL COST
+------------------··+
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
LABOR HOURS
+·--------------+
UNITS TOTALS
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
=z•a=====••=••===••===•=••z=•a•••===m==•==~========================•=======•==~===•====•========•====•=•=••===••=•=======•==s====•============
211 CRUSHED ROCK BEDDING 90 CY $45.00 $4,050 $4,050
212 (Import for Dillingham)
213 Above Itea is Priced Below:
214 production Rate 25 CY/HR
215 Load • Haul
216 Foreman 4 HRS $7.00 $28 1.000 4.0 $164 $192
217 DJB 12 HRS $65.00 $780 1.000 12.0 $492 $1,272
218 Loader 988 4 HRS $107.00 $428 1.000 4.0 $164 $592
219 Motor Grader 4 HRS $58.00 $232 1.000 4.0 $164 $396
220 Compactor 4 HRS $30.00 $120 1.000 4.0 $164 $284
221 Grade Check 4 HRS 1.000 4.0 $164 $164
222
223
224 WATERWAYS -TAILRACE
225 EXCAVATION . TALUS OPER CU'l' 1,900 CY
226 Above Item is Priced Below:
227 production Rate 25 CY/HR
228 Foreman 40 HRS $7.00 $280 1.000 40.0 $1,640 $1 '920
229 Sm.Hydraulic: Ezcavator 80 HRS $60.00 $4,800 2.000 160.0 $6,560 $11,360
230 Laborer 40 CRW·HRS 6.000 240.0 $91840 $9,840
231 Craning 40 HRS $89.13 $3,565 2.000 80.0 $3,280 $6,845
232
233 ROCK EXCAVATION, TUNNELS 275 CY $1,100.00 $302,500 $302,500
234 CONCRETE, TUNNEL LINING 200 CY $425.00 $85,000 6.000 1,200.0 $49,200 $1341200
235 STRUCTURAL STEEL, TUNNEL SUPPORT 18,400 LBS $0.75 $13,800 0.009 157.7 $6,466 $20,266
236 FORMS -CURVED 1,325 SF $2.00 $2,650 0.173 229.7 $9,416 $12,066
237 FORMS -S'l'RAIGH'l' 725 SF $1.25 $906 0.133 96.7 $3,963 $4,870
238 REINFORCING, 'l'URNEL LINING 20,500 LBS $0.35 $7,175 0.014 292.9 $12,007 $19,182
239 FIBERGLASS PIPE 48" 68 LF $114.85 $7,810 1.000 68.0 $2,788 $10,598
240
Paqe 8
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
* WORK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
MATERIAL COST
+·-------------------+
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
LABOR HOURS
+---------------+
UNITS TOTALS
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
c===============•======•=•=================•===========================•========•===========•=======•========•=•========••====================
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
.257
258
259
260
261
262
263
COFFERDAM (50'Sqx25'D
Sheeting
Steel Framing
Pulling Sheeting
Laborer
craning
38PSF)
95 TONS
30,000 LBS
95 TONS
40 CRW-HRS
40 HRS
$759.06 $72,111 4.000 380.0 $15,580 $87,691
$0.75 $22,500 0.009 257.1 $10,543 $33,043
$19.69 $1,870 1.333 126.7 $5,193 $1,064
6.000 240.0 $9,840 $9,840
$89.13 $3,565 2.000 80.0 $3,280 $6,845
264 .................................................................... ,. ...................................................................... .
265
266
SUBTOTAL: WATERWAYS $1,098,785 11,309.6 $463,695 $1,562,480
261 ----------------------··------·················-----------------············------------·····-----------------------------------------
268 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $1,263,603 $533,249 $1,796,852
269 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISION: $41.00 PER HOUR
210 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·-·····-·······----------·-·········
Page 9
rAZIMIBA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared tor HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
L:INE
*
271
WORK DESCRIPTION
272 TURBINES • GENERATORS
273
274 2 UNITS INSTALLED INCLUDING
QUANTITY
275 LINESHAFT, WATER COLUMN, • INLET VALVES
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
1 LS
UNITS
MATER:IAL COST LABOR HOURS
+--------------------+ +---------------+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$776,000.00 $776,000
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$776,000
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
294
295
.................................................................................................................................................
296
297
298
299
300
SUBTOTAL: TURBINES • GENERATORS $776,000 $776,000
DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $892,400 $892,400
LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISIOB: $41.00 PER HOUR·
---------·-···---------------------·-----------------·-----------------------------·-----------------·--·-----·--------------------·--
Page 10
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, IBC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
tl
301
WORK DESCRIPTION
302 ACCESSORY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMEST
303
304 SWEC COST CORVB HTG-124.0
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321 ...... ......
323
PANELS
Inflation 1986 to 1991 19.45\
QUANTITY
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
UNITS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+--------------------+ +·--------------+
UBIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$160,000.00 $160,000
$140,000,00 $140,000
$58,400.00 $58,400
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$160,000
$140,000
$58,400
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
324 ••••••.••..•••••••••••.•••••••••••.•••.••••..••..•••••••••.••••..••••••••.•••••••.•••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••.•••••.•••••••.••••••
325
326
SUBTOTAL: ACCESSORY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMEBT $358,400 $358,400
327 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
328 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $358,400 $358,400
329 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISION: $41.00 PER HOUR
330 ------------------------------------------------------------······--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 11
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
I
331
WORX DESCRIPTION
332 MISC POWERPLANT EQUIPMERT
333
334 SWEC COST CORVE HTG-124.0
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
353
Inflation 1986 to 1991 19.45'
OVERHEAD CRANE (4 TON)
QUANTITY
1 LS
1 LS
1 EA
UNITS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+-·-----···-·-··-----+ +------·········+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$65,000.00 $65,000
$12,600.00 $12,600
$50,000.00 $50,000
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE: 03-May-91
TOTAL COST TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD WITH O'BEAD
AND PROFIT AND PROFIT
$65,000
$12,600
$50,000
3 54 .......................................................................................................................... ,. ....... '"' ......... ..
355
356
SUBTOTAL: MISC POWERPLANT EQUIPMERT $127,600 $127,600
357 -···------------··············-----------·------------·····--··········-·········--------··-----------------------------------·--·--·-
358
359
DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD ARD PROFIT:
LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISIOR: $41.00 PER HOUR
$127,600 $127,600
360 --------------------·-----------··---------·---···--·········-------------------·········--·--··············-······--········-·····-··
Page 12
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT CORCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, IRC. by Clark-Graves, Inc. DATE: 03-May-91
=====•=============•=====•=•========••===•=•===========~==================================•==========•••=====m===•=•=••=======================
LIRE
•
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
WORK DESCRIPTION
ROADS
ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION
TOP WIDTH
ASSUME A 3' AVG LIFT
CLEARING
EXCAVATIOR
Haul to Waste
Production Rate
haul units
Total Production Rate
Above Item is Priced
roreaan
DJB Haul Units
Dozer D9
Loader
Coapac:tor
Grade Check
FILL -BORROW
HAUL
Production Rate
haul units
Total Production Rate
Above Ite• is Priced
roreaan
DJB Haul Units
Loader
QUANTITY UNITS
9 MILES
16 LF
ABOVE AN EXISTING TERRACE
52 AC
24,640 CY
43 CY/HR/URT
5 EA
216 CY/HR
Below:
114 HRS
572 HRS
229 RRS
114 HRS
114 HRS
114 HRS
116,160 CY
87,120 CY·MI
43 CY/HR/URT
5 EA
216 CY/HR
Below:
539 HRS
2,695 HRS
539 HRS
MATERIAL COST LABOR HOURS
+--------------------+ +---------------+
UNIT TOTAL UNITS TOTALS
$1,500.00 $78,545
$7.00 $800 1.000 114.3
$65.00 $37,157 1.000 571.6
$107.00 $24,467 1.000 228.7
$107.00 $12,233 1.000 114.3
$30.00 $3,430 1.000 114.3
1.000 114.3
$1.25 $145,200
$7.00 $3,773 1.000 539.0
$65.00 $175,169 1.000 2,694.9
$107.00 $57,671 1;000 539.0
Page 13
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$4,688
$23,438
$9,375
$4,688
$4,688
$4,688
$22,098
$110,491
$22,098
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$78,545
$5,488
$60,595
$331842
$16,921
$8,117
$4,688
$145,200
$25,871
$285,661
$79,769
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
~--~·-===•===~---··········-~-----------·-·==·====··=·=-====·-·==··==·=====··===··=·=·=-··=========·············-·-·=··--·--·-····====•====·=-
TAZIMIRA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, IRC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
• WORK DESCRIPTION
Co•pactor
Grade Check
GRADING • MAIRTERANCE
Pore•an
aotor grader
Water Truck
PIT DEVELOPMENT
Above It•• is Priced
fore•an
Dozer d9
Loader
DJB Haul Units
seeding
ROAD DRAINAGE ' 300'
Above Ite• ia Priced
2t• C•p
Thaw Pipes
SMALL BRIDGE 10' SPAR
Below:
SPACING
Below:
QUANTITY
539 HRS
53.9 HRS
50 BRS
200 HRS
200 HRS
3 EA
90 HRS
180 HRS
30 HRS
60 HRS
15 AC
f,f2f LP
f,f2f LP
158 EA
1 EA
UNITS
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNIT TOTAL
$30.00
$7.00
$58.00
$35.00
$7.00
$107.00
$107.00
$65.00
$5,000.00
$U.80
$115.00
$50,000.00
$16,169
$350
$11,600
$7,000
$630
$19,260
$3,210
$3,900
$75,000
$65,f75
$18,170
$50,000
LABOR HOURS
+---------------+
URITS TOTALS
1.000 539.0
1.000 539.0
1.000 50.0
1.000 200.0
1.000 200.0
' 1. 000 90.0
1.000 180.0
1.000 30.0
1. 000 60.0
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$22,098
$22,098
$2,050
$8,200
$8,200
$3,690
$7,380
$1,230
$2.460
0.593 2,622.8 $107,535
f.OOO 632.0 $25,912
7U. 286 7U.3 $29,286
CORCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$38,268
$22,098
$2,f00
$19,800
$15,200
$«,320
$26,640
$f,UO
$6,360
$75,000
$173,010
$U,082
$79,286
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
391
392
393
39f
395
396
397
398
399
tOO
Ul
f02
f03
Uf
f05
f06
f07
fOB
f09
uo
H1
412
413
Uf
us
U6
U7
UB
419
uo
......................................................................................................................................
SUBTOTAL: ROADS BASED OR 10 MILES $809,211 10,887.6 $ff6,390 $1,255,600
AVERAGE URIT PRICE POR THIS DIVISION IS: $1ff39f.02 PER MILES
DIVISIOR SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERBIAD AND PROFIT: $930,592 $513,H8 $1,U3,9f0
LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISIOR: $f1.00 PER HOUR
·-------------------------·-·--------------------------------------------------------------·-----·-··------------------------·--------
Paqe 1f
TAZIMXNA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
• WORK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
LABOR HOURS
+---------------+
UNITS TOTALS
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
=~·-=·=====·=====·======····==========·==================·=========================================··=·=====·=·===••========-=================
421
422 SUBSTATION • SWITCHING STATION
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
.437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
SWITCH YAR~ EQUIPMENT •
TRANSFORMER
Inflation 1986 to 1991 19.45'
SUBTOTAL: SUBSTATION • SWITCHING STATION
1 LS
1 LS
$50,000.00 $50,000 $50,000
$9,700.00 $9,700 $9,700
$59,700 $59,700
447 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
448 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $59,700 $59,700
449 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISION: $41.00 PER HOUR
450 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 15
TAZIKINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
•
451
WORK DESCRIPTION
452 TRARSMISSION
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
BURIED TRANSMISSION LINE
TELEPHONE CABLE 6 PR
TRENCHING
QUANTITY UNITS
9 MILES
9 MILES
9 MILES
MATERIAL COST
+--------------------+
UNIT TOTAL
$16,000.00
$3,542.88
$3,210.00
$144,000
$31,886
$28,890
LABOR. HOURS
+·--------------+
UNITS TOTALS
65.000
35.000
585.0
315.0
180.000 1,620.0
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
$23,985
$12,915
$66,420
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
$167,985
$44,801
$95,310
03-Kay-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
4 7 4 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
475
476
SUBTOTAL: TRARSMISSION $204,776 2,520.0 $103,320 $308,096
477 ----------·--·-------------------------------···------------··---······---··----------------------------------------------------------
478 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $235,492 $118,818 $354,310
479 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISION: $41.00 PER HOUR.
480 -------··---------------------------------------------------------------------------------···-----------------------------------------
Page 16
TAZIMIRA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LIRE
• WOR~ DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
MATERIAL COST
+--------··--------··+
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
LABOR HOURS
+·-····------···+
UNITS TOTALS
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE: 03-May-91
TOTAL COST TOTAL COST
W/0 O'HEAD WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT AND PROFIT
==~•===z==========~===•===========•=====••===e•===s===••======================================================================================
481
482 MOB/DEMOB
483
484
485
FREIGHT
EQUIPMENT MOB
486 Equipment Requireaents
487 Dozers 49
488 Crane 80T
489 DJBS
490 Loader 988
491 Coapactor
492 Motor Grader 14G
493 Dozer D6
494 Lowboy
495 Office Trailers
496 Maintenance Shop Units
497 Caap Units
498 Pile Haaaer
499
500
501
502
503
LABOR MOB ~ ROTATIONS
SETUP MAINTENANCE SHOP
613 TONS
434 TONS
2 EA
1 EA
4 EA
1 EA
1 EA
1 EA
1 EA
1 EA
2 EA
3 EA
9 EA
1 EA
168 TRIPS
1 JOB
$240.00 $147,120 2.286 1,401.1 $57,447 $204,567
$480.00 $208,320 0.857 372.0 $15,252 $223,572
$800.00 $134,654 8.000 1,346.5 $55,208 $189,862
$2,140.00 $2,140 100.000 100.0 $4,100 $6,240
50 4 •••••.•••••.•••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••.••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••.•••••••.••••••.•
505
506
507
508
509
510
SUBTOTAL: MOB/DEMOB $492,234 3,219.7 $132,007 $624,241
---------------------------------------------------------------------·······----·*·----·4·•···-------------------~--------------------
DIVISION SUB·TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $566,069 $151,808 $717,877
LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISIOR: $41.00 PER HOUR
-----------·-···--------·-----·------------------------------------·-----··--------·--------------------·-----·--·----------·---------
TAZIMINA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Prepared for HDR ENGINEERING, INC. by Clark-Graves, Inc.
LINE
I WORK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
MATERIAL COST
+--------··--------··+
UNITS UNIT TOTAL
LABOR HOURS
+---------------+
UNITS TOTALS
TOTAL
LABOR
COST
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
TOTAL COST
W/0 O'READ
AND PROFIT
03-May-91
TOTAL COST
WITH O'HEAD
AND PROFIT
===•====••=•=•======••====•===••===•a========m==========•====~======•===================================•=•==================•================
511
512 OTHER DIRECT COSTS
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
533
SUPERVISION
EXPEDITING
SPECIAL FREIGHT
ROOM I< BOARD
Setup/Disaantle
Caap Operations
Meals
SUBMITTALS
SCHEDULING
SURVEYING
BOND ' INSURANCE
12
12
24,000
Caap 1
12
5,106
100
12
1
1
MTRS $700.00
MTHS $1,200.00
LBS $1.00
LS $25,000.00
MTHS $12,000.00
MDAYS $25.00
HRS $10.00
MTRS $916.67
LS $150,000.00
LS $200,000.00
$8,400 252.000 3,024.0 $123 ,9U $132,384
$14,400 176.000 2,112.~ $86,592 $100,992
$24,000 0.006 137.1 $5,623 $29,623
$25,000 540.000 540.0 $22,140 $47,140
$144 ,ooo 520.000 6,240.0 $255,UO $399,840
$127,641 $127,641
$1,000 1.000 100.0 $4,100 $5,100
$11,000 $11 ,ooo
$150,000 $150,000
$200,000 $200,000
53 4 ....................................................................................................................................................... ..
535 SUBTOTAL: OTHER DIRECT COSTS $705,441 12,153.1 $498,279 $1,203,719
536
537 ---------------------------------------------------·----------·-·············------------------------------------------·--------------
538 DIVISION SUB-TOTAL WITH OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: $740,713 $523,193 $1,263,905
539 LABOR RATE FOR THIS DIVISION: $41.00 PER HOUR
540 -----······························---------····---------···---·-··········-------------------··········-·····················--------
Paqe 18
2. RATEIMPACTSPREADSHEET
TAZIMINA HYDROELECfRIC FEASIBILITY Rate Impact Analysis
Load Forecast Am..lm!!!;ion• Die!otl S~em Assume!ions Hid~ AssumetJono
Community Load Growth 3.6% Fuel E~alation Rate Z.O% Construction Co$t $9,375,000
1')90 Avg. Fuel Pric. $1.20 /gal Funding Life 30 yean
Economic Assumptions Fuel Efficiency 12 ltWblgal Annual Debt Service $832.757
Nominal Jnten::st Rate 8.0% Economtc Ufe 10 yean Maintenance Cost $0.08 /kWh
AnnuallnOation Rate 5.0% Additional Capacity C~<r $700 /leW Openations Co$t $242.000
Rull>iscount Rate Z.9% Maintenana Cost $0.17 /kWh Startup Date 1995
Base ~ar 1990 Operatioos Cm:t $242.000 H~~·oe s~ificationo
F.<eonomic Analysis Period 30 yr 1991-2024 Installed Capacity 700 tW
Load Growth Period 30 yr 1991-2024 MOJtimumHead 100 ft
Fuel Escalation Period 30 yr 1991-2024 Effociency 79%
MOJtimom Capacity/year 5,200.000 tWh
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 19'15 IU96 19'17 1'198 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
POWER GENERA110N REOlliREME!IITS
Annual System Load (tWh) Z.ll8,000 2.194,248 2.273,241 2.355,078 2.43'l.!!li0 2.527,69'5 2.618.1t'12 2. 712.965 2.810.6.12 2.911.81S 3,016,640 3.125,2.:19 3.237,748 3,354.307 3,475.0012
2 Peat Annua, Load (leW) 420 4JS 451 467 484 501 519 5.1$ 551 sn 598 620 642 66S f.R,Q
DIESEL FUEL RATES
J Annual Escalation Rate 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Z.O% 2.0% 2.11% Z.il'll-Z.O% Z.O% Z.O% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% !0%
4 Fuel Price (1m $/pi) 1.20 1.2.2 I.ZS 1.27 DO 1.32 1.35 1.38 1.41 1.43 1.46 1.49 1.52 !55 !58
DIF.SEL ANALYSIS
5 Finn Capacity (kW) 1.~60 1560 1560 1.560 1.560 1.560 420 9211 020 920 920 9'53 987 1.023 1.060
I> Capacity Additim< (kW) f) 0 f) 0 0 0 .'20 0 0 0 0 JJ 34 36 n
7 Di""'l Fud Use (gallon• I 17*'.500 182,854 IS'l.4J7 196,256 203.322 210.641 .!tS.2.!4 !26.1180 2..'4.21'1 242,651 2St.387 260.437 269.812 279.526 28Q,.I88
8 Capital Casu (1990$) so so $0 $0 so so $224,000 so $0 so so $2.3,184 $24,019 $24.88_1 $2,.1,77'l
9 Fue1Co$U(I990$) $211.!100 $223,813 $2.36.508 $249.9Z.' $264.098 $279.078 $2'14.<>07 $311.6.14 $329,310 $347,989 $361,721 $388,584 $410,625 $4JJ,91S $453,~27
10 M•intena,.,. Casu ( 1990 $) $J49.470 $362.051 SJ75.085 S388.588 $402.577 $417,070 $4.'2.084 $447.63'1 $463.7~4 $480,449 $497,146 $515,664 $534,228 $553.461 S57D85
II Operations C.,u (1990 $) $242.000 5242.000 $242.000 $242.000 SZ4Z.OOO $24Z.OOO $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000 S24Z.OOO $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242.000
12 Total Diesel C.,u (1990$) $803.270 $827.864 $853,593 $880,511 S908,67S S938, 148 $1.192.992 $1.001,274 $1.035,065 Sl, 000.438 $1,107,472 $1,169,433 $1,210,872 $1.254,259 $1,299.691
13 Diese!Cost/tWh(l990$) 11.38 0,38 0 .. 18 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 o.n 0.37 •. 37 0.31 0.37 O.J7 0.37 0.37
HYDROPROJECf ANALYSIS
14 Finn Capacity (tW) 1.560 1.560 1,560 1.560 1.560 t,JOO 1.300 l.JOO 1.:100 1,300 1,300 1,300 l,JOO 1,300 1..'100
IS Oi ... l Capacity Additiono (tW) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f)
16 Hydroelectriic Genm~tion (kWh) 2,401,311 2,487.758 Z.571.317 2,670,100 2.1116.U4 2,~.808 2,968.977 3,cm,!!li0 3.186,591 3,3411,309
17 Di~el G""'""tion (tWh) 2.118.000 2.194,248 Z.213,W 2.355.078 2,439,&60 126,385 130,935 135.648 140,532 145,591 J5e,832 156,262 161.887 161,115 l73,7S3
18 Die!otl Fuel lise (pllons) 176,500 18Z.854 189.437 196,2,.16 203,322 10,532 lo.'lll 11,304 11.711 12.133 12,569 13,02.2 13,491 13,976 14,479
19 Capital Casu (1990 $) $0 $0 $0 so so so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 so $0 so
20 Annual Debt Servioe (1990$) $0 so $0 $0 so $832.757 $793,102 $755.335 $719.367 UIIS,tll S6S2,487 $621.416 $591,825 $56).643 $536,803
21 Fue1Cosb(1990$) $2!1,!100 $22.3,813 $2.36,508 $249,92.3 $264,098 $13,9'54 $14,745 $15,582 $16,466 $17,399 S18,3e6 SIM!9 $20,531 $21,696 $22.926
2.2 Mainteno,.,. Cosu (1990$) $349,470 $36Z.051 $375,085 $388,588 $402,577 $200,9'52 $208,186 $215,6111 $223,445 $2.31,489 $2.:19,82.3 $148,457 $:!57,401 $266.667 $27(267
2.3 Operations C.,u (1990 $) $242,000 $242.000 $242,000 $24Z.OOO $242,000 $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242.000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000
24 Total Hydro <Mil (1990 $) $803,270 $821,864 $853,593 $880,Slt $908,675 $1,289,663 $1,2SS.OJJ $1,228,598 $1.201,278 $1,176,000 $1.152,696 $1,131,302 SLIII,7S7 $1,094,006 $1,077,996
25 Hydro Cent/kWh (1990$) 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.37 0.37 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.4) uo 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.33 0.31
TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY Rate Impact Analysis
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMEIIITS
1 Annual Sy.t~m Load (kWh) ).600,164 3.1:!9,770 3.864.04! 4.003,147 4,147.260 4.:!96.562 4,451,2.38 4,611,483 4,777.496 4,<149,486 5,127,1;67 5,312.263 S,SOJ.50S 5,701.631 5,'l06.890
2 Peak Annual Load (kW) 714 740 7~ '/Q4 822 852 88) 914 947 981 1.017 1,0S3 1.091 1.131 l, 171
DIF-SEL FUEL RATES
;\ Annual Escalation Ral~t 2.0% 2.~ !O'l· 2,0% 2.0% 2,0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.6% 2.6% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
4 Fuel Pric. (1<IQO}$/gal) 1.62 l.h5 l.t.R 1.71 1.75 1.78 1.82 1.86 1.89 1.9~ 1.'17 2.01 2.0S 2.09 2.1.1
DIF~'iEL ANALYSIS
S Finn Capacity (kW) 1.098 1.1.17 l.l7R 1.221 1,265 1.310 1}58 1.406 1.~51 1.509 1564 1.620 1,678 1,7)9 1.801
n Capacity Additi<>n< (kWJ 38 40 ~I H ~4 46 47 4'1 51 52 54 56 58 M 63
7 Diesel Fuel u,., (~lion<) ~.Ill~ ~10.814 3.22J.IIt~ )_1,1,596 ~45,M5 ~58,047 .170.9.17 384.290 .198.12.~ 412.457 427,.106 442.689 458,625 475,136 492.241
8 Capital Cost! ( 1'190$) $26,707 $27.6ft9 $28,M5 $19,1197 S30.7M $.11,873 $33,021 $34,209 $)5.441 $36.717 $38,039 SJ9,.Q $40,827 $42.296 $43,819
9 Fue1Cost<(l'190$) S484.m $512.017 $541.05'1 S571.748 $60-l.l78 $638,446 $1\74,659 $712.926 $753.363 $7<1i\,094 5841.248 $888,964 $939.386 $992,668 $1.0>1&972
I 0 Maintenane< ("'IS ( 1990 $) $$94,027 $615,412 $1\,17,5(>7 5660.51'1 Sl\84.298 $108,9)) $734,454 $760.8'15 $788287 1'11111.665 S846.fJ6.5 $876.52.1 $908,078 $<)40,769 $974.637
11 ()p<Tations Cosu (1990 $) $242,000 $242.0!10 $242.0!'•• $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.0!'10 $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242,000
12 Total Diese1Cosu(I990S! $1,347,269 $Ufl7,098 $1.44'1.2'11 $1,5113.'164 $1,561.241 $1,621.252 $1,684.Ll4 $1,7.50,030 $1.819,091 Sl.891.476 $1,967.352 $2,046,895 S2.1J0.291 SUI7,133 $2.309,428
13 Diesel f""UkWh (1990 $) 0.37 O.H 11..18 0 . .18 0.38 0.38 O.JS 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39
HYDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
14 Finn Capacity (kW) 1.300 1.300 l,)()tl uoo 1.347 1.395 1,446 1,498 t.m 1,607 1,665 1,725 1,181 1.852 1,918
IS Diesel <"-'<padty Additions (tW) 0 0 II 0 41 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 67
16 Hydroele<:~ric Generntioo (tWh) 3,4101$6 3.543.281 3.670.1141) 3,1l02.990 ),939,897 4.08l.734 4,W!,676 4,380.908 4.538.621 4.1112.012 4,871.284 5,200,000 5,200,000 5,200,000 5,200.000
17 DieselGeneration(tWh) 180,008 180.488 193.20! 200,157 207.363 214,828 222.562 2.10,574 2.18,87$ 247.474 256,383 112.263 JOO.SOS 501,631 706.890
18 Diesel Fuel Usc (gallon•) 15.001 15541 16.100 16,680 17,280 17,902 111.547 19.215 19,906 20,623 21,365 9,355 25,292 41,803 511.907
19 Capitol Costs (1990$) $0 $0 so $0 $32.760 $)),939 $35.161 $36.427 $37,738 $393,097 $40,504 $41,963 $43,47) S4S,038 $46,660
20 Annual Debt Sen-ice (1990 $) $511.241 $486,896 $46.1,710 $441.629 $420.599 $400,510 $381.496 . $36),329 $346.028 $329,550 $313,857 Sl'JII,912 $284,678 $271,122 $2511.211
21 Fuel Cos!J ( 1990 $) $24,227 $25,601 $27.053 $28,587 $30,209 $31,922 $33,733 $35,646 $37,668 $39,805 $42,062 $18.786 SS1,80S S87,JJS $125,533
22 M>inlenanc:e Cosu ( 1990 $) $2&1.213 $296,517 $307,191 $318,250 $329,707 S341,m $353,87) $366,613 $379,811 $393,484 $407.650 $406.523 $440,078 $472.769 $506,6)7
23 Op<ratiom Costs (1990 $) $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 Sl42.000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000 $242.000
24 Total Hydro C'.oou (1990 $) $1,063,680 SI,OS1,013 $1,039,955 $1,030,467 SI,OS5,27S Sl,OS0,009 SI,046,:ul $1,044,015 $1,1)43,245 $1.397,936 $1,046,074 $1,010.184 $1,062.034 $1,118,264 $1.179,040
25 Hydro CostJkWh (1990 S) 0.30 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.24 0,2) 0.22 0.28 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20
TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY Rate Impact Analysis
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
Annual SY't<m Lood (kWh) ~.ll'l5J8 6.H9.841 6,5<\8,075 6.004526 7.049.489 7.J4J~.27l
2 Peak Annual Load (kW) 1.l14 l,l$7 U02 1.349 1,39!\ 1.448
DIESEL FIJEL RATES
3 Annual Escalation Rate :!.~ !.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
4 Fuel Price (1"911 Sigal) 2.17 .!.!! 2.26 !31 2.35 2.40
DIESEL ANALYSIS
5 Finn Capacity (kW) I.SM 1.93.1 2.1103 2.1175 !.ISO 2.227
li Capacity Additions (kW) ~s 67 70 n 75 77
7 Di..,.el Fuel Use (gallon•) SIN ..... ! 52RJ20 547 . .140 567.<•14 587.457 ~.<Ilk\
8 Capital Costs ( 1990 $) $4\.1<11 $47.1!31 $48,724 $56.478 $52,295 $54,178
9 Fuel Cmts (1990 $) $1.1118.470 S1.17U42 SL!.17,180 $1,.107.91<7 $1.382.176 $1.46057.\
10 Maintenanco C:osu (1990 $) $Ul09.7Z4 $1.1141>.1174 $1,(18.1.7}2 $1,122.747 $1.163,166 $1..?05.040
11 OJ"'rntions emu ( 1"911$) SZ42.000 $242.000 $242.000 S242,000 $242.000 SNZ.OOO
12 Total Diesel Costs (1990 $) $2.405.590 $2.506.447 S2.~12.2J7 $2.723.212 S2.8..l9.6.l7 $2,961.791
D Di...el CostikWI! (1990 $) tD9 0.40 0.40 0.'10 0.411 0.41
HYDROPROJE.CT ANALYSIS
14 Finn Capacity (kW) l.ll87 2.059 2,1JJ 2,210 2,289 2.372
IS Diesel Capacity Additions (kW) (.,Q n 74 77 110 82
16 Hydroefectri<: Generation (kWh) 5.200.000 \200,000 uoo.ooo 5,200.000 5.200.000 5,200,000
17 Diesel Generation (kWh) 919.5J8 1.1.'9.841 1,J<\8,075 1,604,526 1,849,489 2,103,271
18 Diesel Fuell.l,. (gallons) 76.628 94.ll87 114.001\ 133,711 154,1l4 175,273
19 Capital emu {1990 S) $48,339 $50,0110 $51,1182 $53,750 $55,685 $57,690
20 Annual Debt SerW:e ( 1990 $) $245,916 $234.205 $223,0~3 $212,431 so $0
21 Fuel Costs (1990 Sl $166,562 $210.596 sz_~7.st9 S3118.4l7 $362,62.~ $420.6)1
22 Maintenaneef'.osts (1990$) $541,724 $578,074 $615,732 $654,747 5695,166 $737,040
23 C¥rations emu { 1990 $) $242.000 $242.000 5242.000 $242,000 $242.000 $242.000
24 Total Hydro Costs (1990 $) $1,244.5411 $1,314,954 $1,390,487 $1,471,355 $1,355,476 $1,457,360
25 Hydro CostikWI! (1990 $) 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.19 0.20
3. PRESENT WORTH OF AVOIDED PCE PAYMENTS S:PREADSHEET
TAZIMINA HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY PCE Analysis
Construction cost reduced by State
of Alaska grant of $4 million to
eliminate rate shock in the initial
years of the hydro projecl
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
I Annual System Load (~Wh)
2 Pea~ Annual Load (~W)
DIESEL FUEL RATES
J Annual Escalation Rate (%}
4 Fuel Price (1990 $/gal)
DIESEL ANALYSIS
5 Firm Capacity (~W)
6 Capacity Additions (kW)
Diesel Fuel Use (gallons)
8 CapiU!I Costs (1990 $)
9 Fuel Costs (1990 $)
10 Maintenance Costs (1990 $)
II Operations Costs (1990 $)
12 ToU!I Diesel Costs (1990 $)
13 Diesel Cosl/kWh (1990 $)
HYDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
14 Finn Capacity (tW)
15 Diesel Capacity Additions (tW)
16 Hydroelectric Generation (kWh)
17 Diesel Generation (~Wh)
18 Diesel Fuel Use (gallons)
19 CapiUII Costs (1990 $)
20 Annual Debt Service (1990$)
21 Fuel Costs (1990 $)
22 Maintenance Costs (1990 $)
23 Operations Costs (1990 $)
24 Total Hydro Costs (1990 $)
25 Hydro Cosl/kWh (1990 $)
26 Cost Difference/tWh (1990 $)
27 Total Cost Difference/year (1990 $)
1990
2,118,000
420
1.20
1.560
0
176.500
$0
$211.800
$349.470
$242.000
$803,270
0.38
1,560
0
2,118,000
176,500
$0
$0
$211,800
$349,470
$242,000
$803,270
0.38
1991
2,194,248
435
2.0%
1.22
1.560
0
182.854
$0
$223,813
$362,051
$242,000
$827,864
0.38
1,560
0
2,194,248
182,854
$0
$0
$223,813
$362,051
$242,000
$827,864
0.38
Load Forecast Assumptions
Community Load Growth
F..conomic Assumptions
Nominal Interest Rate
Annual Inflation Rate
Real Discount Rate
Base year
F..conomic Analysis Period
Load Growth Period
Fuel Escalation Period
1992
2,273,241
451
2.0%
1.25
1,560
0
!89,437
$0
$2.36,508
$375,085
$242,000
$853,593
0.38
1,560
0
2,273,241
189,437
$0
$0
$236,508
$375,085
$242,000
$853,593
0.38
1993
2,355,078
467
2.0%
1.27
1.560
0
196,256
$0
$249,923
$388,588
$242,000
$880,511
0.37
1,560
0
2,355,078
196,256
$0
$0
$249,923
$388,588
$242,000
$880,511
0.37
28 Cummulative Present Value of avoided PCE payments @ 0.0% diseount rate
29 Cummulative Present Value of avoided PCE payments@ 3.0% diseount rate
3.6%
8.0%
5.0%
2.9o/o
1990
30 yr 1991-2024
30 yr 1991-2024
30 yr 1991·2024
1994
2,439,860
484
2.0%
1.30
1,560
0
203,322
$0
$264,098
$402,577
$242,000
$908,675
0.37
1,560
0
2,439,860
203,322
$0
$264,098
$402,577
$242,000
$908,675
0.37
1995
2,527,695
501
2.0o/c
1.32
1,560
0
210,641
$0
$279,078
$417,070
$242,000
$938,148
0.37
1,300
0
2,401,311
126,385
10,532
$0
$481,001
$13,9S4
$200,952
$242,000
$937,906
0.37
0.00
$241
$150
$150
Diesel System Assumptions
Fuel Escalation Rate
1990 A vg. Fuel Pri""
Fuel Efficiency
F..conomic Life
Additional Capacity Cost
Maintenance Cost
Operations Cost
1996
2.618.692
519
2.0o/c
1.35
920
320
218,224
$224,000
$294,907
$432,084
$242,000
$1,192,992
0.46
1,300
0
2,487,758
130,935
10,911
$0
$458,096
$14,745
$208,186
$242,000
$923,027
0.35
0.10
$269,964
$167,528
$162,653
1997
2. 712,965
538
2.0%
1.38
920
0
226,080
$0
$311,634
$447,639
$242,000
$1,001,274
0.37
1,300
0
2,577,317
135,648
11,304
$0
$436,282
$15,582
$215,681
$242,000
$909,544
0.34
0.03
$91,730
$224,400
$216,260
2.0%
$1.20 /gal
12 ~Wh/gal
12 years
$700 /kW
$0.17 /kWh
$242.000
1998
2,810,632
557
2.0%
1.41
920
0
234,219
$0
$329.310
$463.754
$242,000
$1,035,065
0.37
1.300
0
2,670,100
140.532
11,711
$0
$415,506
$16,466
$223,445
$242,000
$897,417
0.32
0.05
$137,648
$309,741
$294,360
1999
2,911,815
571
2.0%
1.43
920
0
242,651
$0
$347,989
$480,449
$242,000
$1,070,438
0.37
1,300
0
2, 766,224
145,591
12,133
$0
$39S,720
$17,399
$231,489
$242,000
$886,609
0.30
0.06
$183,829
$423,716
$395,624
2000
3,016,640
598
2.0%
1.46
920
0
251,387
$0
$367,727
$497,746
$242,000
$1,107,472
0.37
1,300
0
2,865,808
150,832
12,569
$0
$376,877
$18,386
$239,823
$242,000
$877,086
0.29
0.08
$230,387
$566,555
$518,839
Hydroproject Assumptions
Construction Cost
Funding Life
Annual Debt Service
Maintenance Cost
Operations Cost
Startup Date
$5,415,000
30 years
$481,001
$0.08 /~Wh
$242,000
1995
Hydroproject Specifications
Installed Capacity
Maximum Head
Efficiency
Maximum Capacity/year
2001
3,125,239
620
2.0%
1.49
953
33
260,437
$23,184
$388,584
$515,664
$242,000
$1,169,433
0.37
1,300
0
2,968,977
156,262
13,022
$0
$358,930
$19,429
$248,457
$242,000
$868,816
0.28
0.10
$300,617
$752,938
$674,931
2002
3,237,748
642
2.0%
1.52
987
34
269,812
$24,019
$410,625
$534,228
$242,000
$1,210,872
0.37
1,300
0
3,075,860
161,887
13,491
$0
$341,838
$20,531
$257,401
$242,000
$861,770
0.27
0.11
$349,101
$969,381
$850,919
700 kW
100 ft
79%
5,200,000 kWh
2003
3,354,307
665
2.0o/c
1.55
1,023
36
279,526
$24,883
$433,915
$553,461
$242,000
$1,254,259
0.37
1,300
0
3,186,591
167,715
13,976
$0
$325,560
$21,696
$266,667
$242,000
$855,923
0.26
0.12
$398,336
$1,216,349
$1,045,878
2004
3,475,062
689
2.0o/c
!58
1,060
37
289,588
$25,779
$458,527
$573,385
$242,000
$1,299,691
0.37
1,300
0
3,301,309
173,753
14,479
$0
$310,057
$22,926
$276,267
$242,000
$851,251
0.24
0.13
$448,440
$1,494,382
$1,258,968
Construction cost reduced by State
of Alaska grant of $4 million to
eliminate rate shock in .the inilial
years of the hydro project
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
I Annual SY"tem Load (~Wh)
2 Peak Annual Load (kW)
DIESEL FUEL RATES
3 Annual Escalation Rate (%)
4 Fuel Price (1990$/gal)
DIESEL ANALYSIS
Firm Capacity (kW)
6 Capacity Additions (~W)
7 Diesel Fuel Use (gallons)
8 C..apital Cost> (1990 $)
9 Fuel Costs (1990 $)
10 Maintenance CO\Its ( 1990 $)
11 Operations Cost> (1990 $)
12 Total Diesel Cost> (1990 $)
13 Diesel Cosvt:Wh (1990$)
HYDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
14 Firm Capacity (kW)
15 Diesel Capacity Additions (kW)
16 Hydroelectric Generation (kWh)
17 Diesel Generation (kWh)
18 Diesel Fuel Use (gallon•)
19 Capital Cosio (1990 $)
20 Annual Debt Service (1990$)
21 Fuel Cost> (1990 $)
22 Maintenance Cost> (I 990 $)
23 Operations CosLI (I 990 $)
24 TotAl Hydro CosLI (1990 $)
25 Hydro Cosvt:Wh (1990 $)
26 Cost DifferenoelkWh (1990$)
27 Total Cost Difference/year (1990 $)
28 C'.ummulative Present Value of avoided PCE
29 Cummulative Present Value of avoided PCE
2005
3,600,11>4
714
2.0%
1.62
1,098
38
300,014
$26,707
$484.535
$594,027
$242,000
$1,347,269
0.37
1,300
0
3,420,156
180,008
15,001
$0
$295,293
$24,227
$2.86,213
$242,000
$847,732
0.24
0.14
$499,536
$1,804,095
$1,489,423
2006 2007 2008
:1,729.770 3,864,042 4,003,147
740 766 794
2.0% 2.0% 2.()%
1.65 1.68 1.71
1.137 1.178 1.221
40 41 42
310.814 322,003 333.596
$27,669 $2.8,665 $29,697
$512,017 $541.059 $571,748
$615.412 $637567 $660,519
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$1,397,098 $1,449,291 $!,503,964
0.37 0.38 0.38
1,300 !,300 1,300
Q 0 0
3,543.281 3,670,1!40 3,802,990
186,488 193,202 200.157
15,541 16,100 16,680
$0 so $0
$281,231 $267,839 $255,085
$25,601 $27,053 $28,587
$296,517 $307,191 $318,250
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$845,349 $844,083 $843,922
0.23 0.2.2 0.21
0.15 0.16 0.16
$551,749 $605,207 $660,041
$2,146,179 $2,521,408 $2,930,633
$1,736,552 $1,999,730 $2,278,393
2009 20!0 2011 2012
4.147,260 4,296,562 4,451,238 4,611,483
822 852 883 914
2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
1.75 1.78 1.82 1.86
1,265 1,310 1,358 1,406
44 46 47 49
345,605 358,047 370,937 384,290
$30,766 $31,873 $33,021 $34,209
$604,178 $638,446 $674,659 $712.926
$684,298 $708,933 $734,454 $760,895
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$1,561,241 $1,621,252 $1,684,134 $1,750,030
0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38
1,347 1,395 1,446 1,498
47 48 50 52
3,939,897 4,081,734 4,l28,676 4,380,908
207,363 214,828 2.22,562 23(),574
17,280 17,902 18,547 19,215
$32.760 $33,939 $35,161 $36,427
$242,938 $231,369 $2.20,352 $209,859
$30,209 $31,922 $33,733 $35,646
$329,707 $341,517 $353,813 $366,613
$242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$817,614 $880,808 $885,119 $890,545
0.21 0.21 0.20 0.19
0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
$683,627 $740,+15 $799,015 $859,485
$3,354,482 $3,813,558 $4,308,947 $4,841,8211
$2,558,601 $2,853,2'10 $3,161,980 $3,484,381
20l3 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
4,777,496 4,949,486 5,127,667 5,312,263 5,503,505 5,701,631 5,906,890
947 981 1,017 1,053 1,091 1,131 1,171
2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
1.89 1.93 1.97 2.01 2.05 2.09 2.13
1.457 1,509 1,564 1,620 1,678 1,739 1,801
51 52 54 56 58 60 63
398,12.1 412.457 427,306 442,689 458,625 475,136 492,241
S35,441 $36,717 $38,039 $39,408 $40,827 $42,296 $43,819
$753,363 $796,094 $841,248 $888,964 $939,386 $992,668 $1,048,972
$788,287 $816,665 $846,065 $816,523 $908,078 $940,769 $974,637
$242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000 $242,000 $142,000
$1,819,091 $1,891,476 $1,967,352 $2,046,895 $2,130,291 $2.217,733 $2,309,428
0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39
1.551 1,607 1,665 1,725 1,787 1,852 1,918
54 56 58 60 62 64 67
4,538,621 4,702.012 4,871,284 5,200,000 5,200,000 5,200,000 5,200,000
238,875 247,474 256,383 112,263 303,505 501,631 706,890
19,906 20,623 21,365 9,355 25,292 41,803 58,907
$37,738 $393,097 $40,504 $41,963 $43,473 $45,038 $46,660
$199,866 $190,348 $181,284 $172,651 $164,430 $156,600 $149,143
$37,668 $39,805 $42,062 SIS. 786 $51,805 $87,335 $125,533
$379,811 $393,484 $407,650 $408,523 $440,078 $472,769 $506,637
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000 $242.000 $242,000 $242,000 $242.000
$897,083 $1,258,734 $913,500 $883,924 $941,786 $1,003,743 $1,069,972
0.19 0.25 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18
0.19. 0.13 0.21 0.2.2 0.2.2 0.21 0.21
$922,008 $632.742 $1,053,851 $1,162,971 $1,188,504 $1,213,991 $1,239,456
ss.4u,4n S5,805,m $6,459,160 $7,180,202 $7,917,075 $8,669,749 $9,438,212
$3,820,162 $4,043,886 $4,405,651 $4, ?9'3,246 $5,117,815 $5,559,189 $5,937,2.21
Construction cost reduced by State
of Alaska grant of $4 million to
eliminate rate shock In the Initial
years of the hydro project.
POWER GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
l Annual System Load (kWh)
2 Peak Annual Load (tW)
DIESEL FllEL RATES
3 Annual Eacalation Rate(%)
4 Fuel Price (1')9()$/gal)
DIESEL ANALYSIS
Firm Capacity (kW)
Capacity Additions (tW)
7 Diesel Fuel Use (gallons)
Capital Costs ( 1990 $)
9 Fuel C.osts (1990$)
10 Maintenance Costs (1990 $)
11 Operations Costs (1990$)
12 Total Diesel Costs ( 1990 $)
13 Die.el C.osrii:Wh (1990$)
HYDROPROJECT ANALYSIS
14 Finn Capacity (tW)
15 Diesel Capacity Additions (tW)
16 Hydroelectric Generation (t Wh)
17 Diesel Generation (kWh)
18 Diesel Fuel Use (gallons)
19 Capital Costs (1990 $)
20 Annual Debt Service (1990$)
21 Fuel Costs (1990 $)
22 Maintenance Costs (1990 $)
23 Operations Costs (1990$)
24 Total Hydro C.osts (1990 $)
25 Hydro Costii:Wh (1990$)
26 Cost DiffereneelkWh (1990 $)
27 Total Cost Difference/year (1990 $)
28 Cummulative Present Value or avoided PCE
29 Cummulative Pres.ent Value or avoided PCE
2020 2021
6.119,538 6,339,841
Ul4 1.257
2.0% 2.0%
217 2.22
1,866 1,933
65 67
509,961 528,320
$45,397 $47,031
$].]08,470 $1,171,342
$1,009,724 $1,00i,074
$242,000 $242.000
$2,405,590 $2.506,447
0.39 0.40
1,987 2.059
69 n
5,200,000 5,200,000
919,538 1,139,841
76,628 94,987
$48,339 $50,080
$142,041 $135,277
$166,562 $210,596
$541,724 $578,074
$24Z.OOO $242.000
$1,140,665 $1,216,026
0.19 0.19
0.21 0.20
$1,264,924 $1,2:90,421
$10,222,465 $11,022,526
$6,311,785 $6,682,769
2022 2023 2024
6.568,07~ 6.804526 7,049,489
1,302 1,349 1,398
2fY1<, 2.0% 2.0%
2.26 2.31 2.3.1
2.003 2.075 2.150
70 72 75
547,340 567,044 587,457
$48,724 $50.478 $52,295
$1,2.17.780 $1,307.987 $1.382.176
$1,083,732 $1,122.747 $1.163,166
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$2,612.237 $2,723,212 $2,839,637
0.40 0.40 0.40
2,133 2.210 2,289
74 77 80
5,200,000 5,200,000 5,200,000
1,368,075 1,604,526 1,849,489
114,006 133,711 154,124
$51,882 $53,750 $55,68.1
$128,835 $122,700 $0
$257,819 $308,427 $362,625
$615,732 $654,747 $695.166
$242,000 $242,000 $242,000
$1,296,269 $1,381,624 $1,355,476
0.20 0.20 0.19
0.20 0.20 0.21
$1,315,967 $1,341,588 $1,484,162
$11,838,426 $12,670,210 $13,590,391
$7,050,078 $7,413,632 $7,804,107