Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTanakee Springs Hydroelectric Feasibility May 29 1993TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC FE AS ABILITY March 29, 1993 Prepared By POLARCONSULT A-LASKA, INC. polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS March 29, 1993 Honorable Mrs. Edna Paddock, Mayor The City of Tenakee Springs Tenakee, Alaska 99841 Subject: Final Report for Tenakee Springs Hydroelectric Project entitled Tenakee Springs Hydroelectric Feasibility Dear Mrs. Paddock: We are sending you 17 copies of the Tenakee Springs Hydroelectric Feasibility report. The analysis shows the project is viable, and the benefits to Tenakee Springs will exceed one million dollars. These benefits are without the inclusion of the earnings gained by local employmept during construction of the project. We think you will like the way we have planned rhe recommended project so it fits into the terrain and requires the minimum amount of excavation. The hydro system will also reduce noise and air pollution in the community. Polarconsult put extra effort into this project as it represents a real engineering and environmental challenge. We believe this report shows what can be done with small hydro if the resource is available. We are also inclosing information on the equipment that is proposed in the report. Also included are plots of the loads, and a chart record of past loads. We think this information will be useful to you in your planning on this project. Please note the specks on the paper are because it is recycled. Should vou have ouestions about this report, please do not hesitate to call us. ~ . Sincerely yours; Earle Ausman, P.E. President 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 Attachments: Report 17 copies Appendix Mise. Material Ten331R polarconsult alaska, inc. CONTENTS I FINDINGS 3 A. Description B. Conclusions C. Recommendations II CHARACTERISTICS OF RECOMMENDED PLANT· 5 III INTRODUCTION· 6 A. Authorization B. Tenakee Electrical Requirements 1. Past 2. Future IV VALUE OF POWER· 9 A. Fuel Cost B. Equipment Cost C. Labor Cost v HYDROLOGY AND POWER· 12 A. Distribution B. Amount of Power Generated C. Displaced Fuel D. Fuel Required VI ENVffiONMENTAL· 17 A. Fish Requirements B.FERC VII PERMITS· 19 VIII SYSTEMS COMPARED· 20 A. Similar to Corps of Engineer's Scheme B. Higher Head Scheme C. Recommended Scheme IX TYPICAL FEATURES· 22 A. Diversion B. Intake C. De-Sanding and Screens D. Water Conveyance 1. Pipe Page 1 polarconsult alaska, inc. 2. Flume a) Wood b) Metal E. Powerhouse F. Turbine G. Generator H. Governor I. Switch gear J. Transmission 1. Routes 2. Designs X COSTS· 32 A. Force Account B. Title 36 XI ECONOMICS· 38 XII CONCLUSIONS· 44 XIII RECOMMENDATIONS· 45 APPENDIX A APPEl'iDIX B Page 2 polarconsult alaska, inc. I. FINDINGS A. Description This report provides an analysis of the feasibility of hydroelectric power production from Indian River at Tenakee, Alaska. B. Conclusions The conclusions made from the analysis of the data and the facts are as follows: • A hydroelectric power system can be economically constructed on Indian river near Tenakee. • The first cost of the plant will be $612,171. • Tenakee's demand for power is low and relatively stable therefore the most feasible capacity will be approximately 125 kW. • The plant will generate an average of 1,002,674 kWh per year. • The community will use near 345,000 kWh per year. • The hydro energy will need to be augmented by 13,332 kWh of diesel energy during low water periods with a peak demand of 75 kW. • The excess power generated by the hydroplant may be used to heat buildings, green houses and etcetera. • The value of the excess power is 61,485 gallons of diesel fuel per year. • A FERC license will not be needed to build the recommended project. • Cooperation with the US. Forest Service may result in building fish passage facilities at no cost to Tenakee. • Sources of funds may be grants and/ or loans. • A hydroelectric power plant will insulate the city from fuel cost increases. • Hydroelectric energy is environmentally superior to burning diesel fuel. • Local labor can earn money during the construction of the plant. Currently expenditures for diesel fuel result in no community benefit. C. Recommendations A hydroelectric power plant constructed at Indian River is technically and economically feasible. The recommended power plant has reduced output and head as compared to the one recommended by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, the recommended plant will use a low height diversion, a de-sanding section, a flume, and a cross flow turbine. The system will be constructed mostly of local yellow cedar meaning the materials will be low in cost, and will be a smaller percentage of the total Page 3 polarconsult alaska, inc. project cost than is customary. Construction with local labor using force account is planned which will retain money in the community. The design and method of construction will result in a plant that is constructed with minimal interference to the natural environment. The previously proposed system required heavy road building equipment to blast a bench into the side of the river bank along the pipeline route. The recommended plant will cost 612,171 dollars as compared to 3,251,000 dollars as proposed by the Corps of Engineers in October 1983. A number of plant designs were compared to determine the least costly plant. Different materials and construction methods were studied. The most expensive part of these, hydroplants is the water conveyance system. Pipe, and flumes made of wood and aluminum were analyzed. Different conveyance types were compared for the project layout that was proposed by the Corps of Engineers. An alternative to the Corps of Engineers' system was studied that would have higher head and use less water. This system's power house was located just below the barrier #1 to fish on Indian River, and the water conveyance extended up river to just above barrier #5. The area extending between barrier #4 to below barrier #2 was traversed along the bank during the last field trip. On the basis of constructibility, and considering the fact that the City does not ov.'11 some of the land needed for the Corps of Engineers' project, a system whose intake is further down stream is superior. The recommended system is composed of a short flume from barrier #4 to a power house with the tailrace discharging just below barrier #2. The 125 kW capacity of the plant is predicated on data that shows the community to be stable, exhibiting little growth. The proposed plant capacity can accommodate a community population growth of near 50%, and will prove useful and rewarding even if Tenakee doubles or triples in population and electrical demand. Page 4 polarconsult alaska, inc. II. CHARACTERISTICS OF RECOMMENDED PLANT Basic characteristics of the recommended plant are provided below: General Data: Installed Capacity Number of Units Type of Turbine Average Annual Energy Estimated Usable Energy (Current) Dependable Capacity 100 Year Flood Design Flow Gross Head Design Head Flume Length Penstock Diameter Penstock Length Diversion Structure Height Economic Data: Annual Project Cost Project Cost Annual Fuel Displaced O&M diesel plant Savings per year, avg of pw Total Savings, present worth Excess Energy, present worth Salvage Value 20 yr., present worth Page 5 125 kW 1 Cross Flow 1,002,674 kWh 345,000 kWh 0 5,670 cfs 41 cfs 58 feet 50 feet 1,440 feet 30 inches 105 feet 3 feet $43,823 $612,171 30,165 gal 2.8c/kWh $11,600 $440,718 $509,529 $445,035 polarconsult alaska, inc. Ill. Introduction A hydroelectric plant for Tenakee Springs was studied by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The study, entitled "Small Hydropower and Related Purposes, Letter Report, Tenakee Springs" is dated April 1984. This report is quite detailed and explores the production of electricity from a hydroplant at Indian River and a supply of domestic water from the same source. The conclusion of the report was that "No further Corps of Engineers studies of Indian River hydroelectric development are planned at this time because cost of construction and operation are not shown to be recoverable, and a project would not be competitive with diesel generation." The City of Tenakee Springs in the spring of 1992 asked Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. to analyze the situation and recommend alternative means of developing a hydroelectric project. It is evident that a community that has a total expenditure of near 40,000 dollars per year for fuel can not expect to amortize a project costing over three million dollars. The only possible solution is to reduce the cost of the project while retaining to a large degree, the benefits. Polarconsult's analysis provides the data which shows how the costs can be decreased to make the project feasible. This report was not commissioned, or funded, to repeat the work completed by the Corps of Engineers in their report. Descriptions of the city, terrain and information appearing in the appendices which include "Technical Analysis, Cultural Resource Assessment, Section 404(b)(l) Summation, Indian River Flow Duration Curves, and USFWS Coordination Act Report" are mostly or entirely true today, and will not be repeated. Relevant changes in conditions will however be provided in this report. The significant changes in this report are as follows: • • • The project is entirely located on city and private land. As a result, a Federal Regulatory Commission license will. not be needed. The project size, and construction methods are different resulting in vastly decreased environmental alterations to the land. The above changes have resulted in a project that is less expensive and is now affordable. A. Authorization This study was authorized by the City of Tenakee Springs in March 1992. The source of the funding is a legislative grant administered through Community and Regional Affairs. Page 6 polarconsult alaska, inc. B. Tenakee Electrical Requirements Generally the amount of electricity used in a community is a function of population, cost of electricity, cost of alternative energy and earnings of the population. Tenakee Springs has had a historical population as is shown below: Year Population 1909 126 1920 174 1929 210 1939 188 1950 140 1960 109 1970 86 1980 138 1990 120 1992 123 The population data can not be used as an absolute measure to determine how population numbers effect the consumption of electricity as some people are not connected to the electrical system. There was a recent connection to the boat harbor that will increase loads during the winter for lighting, dehumidification and bilge pumps. This new load will further modify the use of electricity in the summer when there are added transient boats. The harbor's use of electricity will be a welcome source of revenue for a hydro facility. Records are presented to show the changes in power production from Fiscal Year (FY) 1984 to FY 1992. After initial growth, generation has remained almost at a constant level for the past four years. Initial growth is likely caused by the normal expansion that occurred after PCE and the construction of a better distribution system. and Power Production Cost Page 7 polarconsult alaska, inc. It should be noted that the consumption level of electricity in Tenakee is low. This is partially explained by the fact that incomes are low, that there is conservation ethic. and some facilities are used on a part time basis. The number of electric meters installed per population is much higher for Tenakee than other Southeast Communities. Year l. Past The peak historical demand is based on a 15 minute reading from a meter at the diesel power plant. The actual short term peak requirements are somewhat above these values. A graph of uncertain origin was provide by Tenakee Springs that shows the average kW demand for the year of 1987. It ranged from a low of about 45 kW to a high of near 56 kW. The peak demand was listed as a low of near 49.5 kW to a high of near 72 kW. A recorder was installed for one month in 1990. Demand values for a week in early October are shown in separate informational appendix to this report. According to the graph produced by the recorder, the peak demand was 75 kW on Monday at 7:55 p.m. and the minimum for the day was 32.5 kW at 5:55 am. This month had a total kWh generated of 32,480 as compared with a yearly average monthly value of 30,700 kWh. The peak month for the 1991 fiscal year was in December when 32,800 kWh or an average of 44 kW of continuous power was generated. The indication is the instantaneous peak kW is somewhat less than two times the average kW. Past System Statistics FY84 FY85 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 k\Vh Generated 266,560 287,520 300,000 333,440 351,160 343,840 368.~ kWh Sold 165,024 223,773 235,365 251,627 295,456 315.749 308,834 338,427 311,094 Generator Fuel, Gallons 27,728 30,417 32,256 33,344 35,404 35,290 32,294 37,273 3!,042 Total Cost of Fuel $34,750 $39,060 $41,846 $32,717 $37,590 $37,170 $39,257 $49,305 $36,625 l Weighted Avg. Fuel Cost/Gal. $1.25 $1.28 $1.29 $1.02 $1.06 $1.04 $1.22 $1.32 $1.18 Non-Fuel Power Plant Costs $14,654 $17,211 $26,475 $13,456 $30,937 $24,567 $24,448 $52,588 $57,547 Total Power Production Cost $49,704 $56,271 $68,321 $46,173 $68,527 $61,121 $63,705 $101,893 $93,830 Power Production Cost/kWh $0.27 $0.21 $0.24 $0.15 $0.21 $0.17 $0.19 $0.28 $0.27 2. Future Demands may increase when the hydro unit comes on line if the price of power is lowered. However, the price is now subsidized by PCE and lowering the price is not probable. In fact the price may increase if PCE is cut, and thus discourage demand. Therefore, it is not possible to predict the future and it is likely that demand will remain the same or increase slowly with time. As of this time there is a proposal for a Btu tax. This tax would effect diesel generation 3 or more times greater than for a hydroelectric plant. Page 8 polarconsult alaska, inc. IV. VALUE OF POWER The value of hydropower is based on the alternative means of providing the same service. The only feasible alternative to hydro at Tenakee is diesel generation. Records derived from Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reporting have been used to arrive at alternative costs. A. Fuel Cost Fuel is the single most expensive component of generating power with diesels-electric units. Out of the total plant expenditures of approximately 107,000 dollars for FY 1992, 36,625 dollars was used to purchase the 31,042 gallons consumed. This resulted in a fuel cost of 1.18 dollars per gallon. Fiscal year 1991 had more expensive fuel and the plant used 6,000 additional gallons for a total cost of 49,305 dollars. The plant produced 11.1 kWh per gallon of fuel used. This resulted in a fuel cost of 11 cents for each kWh generated. Because the system is small, and the equipment relatively lightly loaded, it is not likely that the efficiency will improve. The average efficiency for all diesel plants on the PCE program was 12.2 kWh per gallon. The list includes a number of larger systems that are considerably more efficient than the smaller ones, such as Tenakee. The future cost of diesel fuel is uncertain because of the current international situation, and the possibility of special taxes introduced by the Federal Government. There is no physical shortage of oil in the world nor will there be. for some time. A conservative estimate of fuel costs for this analysis is that they will increase at 1% for the next 5 years and at 2% thereafter. Sources for such analysis include the "World Energy Outlook", dated 1990, produced by the Chevron Corporation. B. Equipment Cost The power plant was purchased in 1990 by the City from Snyder Mercantile. The City recently installed a new 3304T Caterpillar generator that is rated at 85 kW prime and 100 kW standby. This unit was purchased in 1991 and has been running since. The plant also has a D3304 acquired in 1970 and a D330 acquired in 1974. As of 1989 these units had in excess of 60,000 hours each. All of these units are 1,800 rpm 1-." macumes. The fact that the machines have been lightly loaded probably accounts for their longevity. NC Machinery states that a top end overhaul should be scheduled at 8 to 10 thousand hours, and a major at 20 to 25 thousand hours depending on loading. A major overhaul for this machine without replacing the crankshaft will cost $8,500. A Page 9 polarconsult alaska, inc. top end overhaul will cost $4,000. Typical operations costs in Alaskan communities are from 10 to 14 cents per kWh. The City paid about $31,000 for the new generator plus the cost of installation. For this study a replacement machine is assumed to cost $33,000 and will require an .overhaul at the times recommended by Caterpillar. The diesel-generator will be replaced after it has operated a total of 50,000 hours. This is equivalent to about 6 years of continuous operation. C. Labor Cost On the basis of information prepared by the City, labor costs for the system in FY 1992 were approximately as follows: General Maintenance Salary $16,160 Managers Salary $ 7,200 Bookkeepers Salary $ 1,688 ayor Salary $ 900 eter Reading Expense $ 5,253 Although a diesel electric power plant takes considerably more maintenance than a hydroelectric plant, the hydro is not maintenance free. This is especially true during the first year of operation when problems are most likely to occur. Examining the salaries above, based on maintenance operations alone, only the maintenance salary appears susceptible to reduction, and part of it is for maintenance and operation of the distribution system. This is true because meters will still need to be read, books kept, customers billed and there continues to be a management requirement. Even with the hydro, the diesel plant will require some maintenance as it will run during winter cold periods when flows are not sufficient to supply the entire demand. Over time, there will be a reduction in labor, and certainly repair and equipment costs, as a hydroplant is more reliable. Modern low cost electronic equipment can be installed to monitor the operation of a small hydroplant. For example there is an inexpensive device that connects to the telephone system that will call designated people if the temperature is too high or too low, or there is too much noise. This device also has contacts where a fire detector or other off/on devices may be connected. One can also call and listen in to the sound level at the plant which is useful for periodic monitoring. The cost for this device is about $300. In addition, transducers can be installed in the switch gear that will enable the operator to determine what is happening electrically. This type of system was installed at Larsen Bay. It may also be possible to install a pair of the new video phones which will provide an inexpensive way of looking at the power house, intake or other plant features. Since the operator will be living in town and the weather is not Page 10 polarconsult alaska, inc. always conducive to inspecting the plant, these remote devices will be able to avoid field inspections that will save considerable time and effort. After the operator gains experience operating the plant, less observation will be needed. For example, the operator may find from experience that after a heavy rain the screens require cleaning, so the operator will not bother investigating the screens on a daily basis if the rains have been moderate. This means that the amount of time spent at the plant will decrease with time. Page 11 polarconsult alaska, inc. V. HYDROLOGY AND POWER One of the critical factors for a hydroelectric power plant is the availability of water. Indian River is a stream with limited records. The stream was gauged from October 1975 until September 82, a period of 7 years. The average mean discharge for the period at the gauge was 83.3 cfs. This is corrected from the 12.9 square miles above the gauge, to the 20.7 square miles above the proposed diversion site which is downstream from the gauge station. These flow records show that flows varied from a low of 8 cfs on February 19 & 20, 1979 to a high of 1,900 cfs on September 15, 1976. Based on typical years it is likely that diesel power will have to augment the hydro power generation during the months of January, February and March. As demand grows, augmentation will likely be required during parts of December, April, August and perhaps July. This is because the system has no storage and can provide power only from available stream flows. Daily Flow, Utility Demand, & Power Production ~~~---~-----'~--~----!L-------------------------------- -·~ Utility De!!land II !6 21 26 13 18 23 28 February 1979 & March 1979 There are also 11 years of climate data which includes rainfall, which overlap the 7 years of flow records. One of the problems with correlating rainfall with flows is it turns to snow at higher altitudes where the temperatures are lower than at the rain gauge. As a result, runoff during colder periods is not accurately reflected by readings at the precipitation gauge. Correlation coefficients were run between rain and stream flow for those periods of time when they were both recorded. Very good correlation's were achieved in September and October after ail the snow had meh:ed on the mountains. For some months, such as February, correlation's were very poor. The average correlation was 0.618 which is not good. Changing timing of the rain versus stream flow did not seem to have much of an effect. What this means is that extension of the water flow records using rainfall will not yield results that help in the power Page 12 polarconsult alaska, inc. analysis. However, the gross prec1p1tation per year and its distribution aids in adjusting the model to determine if the flow records are typical. The determination of flows by the generation of synthetic flows on a daily basis will not yield useful results. Generally, synthetic flows are generated on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, streams fluctuate. Flow can change during a day because of rain, and in the spring there are changes in flow that may exceed 10 percent caused by snow melt. As an example; the peak flows in Palmer during snow melt period in the spring begin about 1 p.m. and decline at about 12 a.m. that evening, when the snow refreezes. Gauges are generally not set up to record these fluctuations because there would be too much data. As a result, values typically used in a smaller run of river hydroplant over report production. Variation in flows over time are shown in the Corps of Engineers report in Figure 7. The water records show the rate of increase in flow is much greater than is the rate of decline. That is, when there is a rain storm, the flow rises more rapidly then it declines after the rain. Average Daily Flow, & Precipititation 350,-----------------H----------j~-------~----~----------, --+-Streamflow 2 300 +------·------·-----IH------11 .£. ~ .g 250 +---------; ~ .;; 200 ii--------H-------It---t-+-----11 ~ " !50 +t--1-+---.d 0 s 100~~~-~~-~--+--~~-4--~--+-~-+~-H~~V---~--+-+ ci. ·~ ~ ~+------~~~~----~~-+,~~~~~----~~-----~~~~-4rl-~ Adjustment factors were computed to account for the difference in daily flow fluctuations as compared to monthly flows of Indian River. These factors were used to calculate the expected power production from the proposed hydro plant. The use of this factor removes to the possibility of over reporting production from the hydro plant. Kadashan River, which is 9 miles south of Tenakee, was gauged from October 1964 through the present time, a period of 27 years. A correlation coefficient of 0.89 was calculated between the monthly flow gauged at Kadashan, and the monthly flow gauged at Indian River. Based on this good correlation between the drainage basins, the 27 years of stream flow records from Kadashan were adjusted to simulate flow from Indian River. Page 13 polarconsult alaska, inc. Correlation of Factored Kadashin River To Measured Indian River Flows 600 .,-----------------------------1 --+-Jndian River ~ ~r-------------~­ ~ ij: ~ 300L-1rl-----tr----H------*-----A---E I ~----+--- " "' .. ~ ~r-~r+.~-.T--~--~-,~-~-1~-~--~+.~--+~--~~~ "' "'"'' r-r-r-- 6. > C:: 0 0 ~ Vi z ...... This 27 years of data was then utilized to synthesize 50 years of monthly stream flow data using the Department of Interior (LAST) program "Applied Stochastic Techniques." These monthly values were again adjusted for the difference in monthly versus daily flow rates to arrive at an expected power production from the hydro plant. A. Amount of power generated The amount of power generated is controlled by available water and bounded by unit capacity, the minimum allowable flow through the turbine, and by user demand. Using the monthly flows as a basis, a program devised by Polarconsult called HydVar was used to correlate the overlapping data and generate synthetic daily variations. These variations were then used to provide power, from which was subtracted a synthetic representation of Tenakee's load shape. The sum of these kWh's is the amount of electricity the hydro will generate. When the demand was greater then could be provided by the hydroplant, these kWh's that must be provided by diesel generation were summed. Where there was excess power from the hydroplant these values were summed to arrive at a surplus that could be used for heat. The tabular sums are also presented in the appendix. The average yearly values are as follows: • Energy generated by the hydro • Energy generated by the diesel • Surplus Energy 1,002,674 kWh/yr. 13,322 kWh/yr. 657,674 kWh/yr. Page 14 ~ ..!:~: -'"" ~ ~ =i: -o!l (,J -~ 0 c E 1:':1 ~ '"" -r:n 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 polarconsult alaska, inc. Factored Kadashan & Measured Indian River Streamflow & Power Production Illustrations of some of the considerations that are required to successfully operate a run of river plant are provided in the discussion that follows. Currently, the peak power requirement for Tenakee is about 80 kW which is about 64 percent of 125 kW. So the peak amount of water needed is 64 percent of 40 cfs or 26 cfs for that output. However, if there is available only 15 cfs of water only 45 kW can be generated, and if the load was 60 kW, a diesel-generator must be added to the system during the day and early evening to make up this deficit. Annual Die'ld C.eneratioo :Baclwp for 125kW Hydroelectric Plant This addition of diesel back-up can be done manually or automatically. An advantage of a load governor is the plant is always producing all of the power possible, up to 125 kW. Reading the gauges will tell if there is sufficient water to produce 125 kW. It will then be obvious early in the morning, given the traditional use patterns for the time of year, day of the week, weather conditions (rain, snow, cold, cloud cover) whether a Page 15 polarconsult alaska, inc. diesel generator will need to be added during the day. There will be times while the engine is operating when a rain increases the flow rapidly, and the hydro generates sufficient power so the diesel is no longer needed. Unless the condition is observed or there are automatic controls to shut off the diesel, there will be an occasional waste of diesel fuel. This condition is a more likely event than is the one where a diesel must be added because of a reduction in flow. This is because flow reductions occur more gradually than flow increases. B. Displaced Fuel Energy in excess of the community's traditional needs will be produced by the hydro plant. This energy can be wasted but it also can be used. An inexpensive computer equipped module can be used which will determine by the frequency whether there is surplus energy. If there is, a relay is closed which sends the excess to an electric heater. Such a heater can be used to heat hot water for the school, community center, and provide heat to the buildings as well. It can also be used for greenhouses and adsorption refrigeration. The equivalent amount of fuel will be dependent on water flows, and the use of electricity by Tenakee. It is estimated, based on a 30 year period, that the equivalent of 1,831,456 gallons of oil is available if all of the energy is usable .. A realistic assumption is that one quarter of the energy can be put to useful purpose that represents a significant savings in fossil fuel. C. Fuel required There will be times when there is not sufficient water to supply the demand or when the plant is down for maintenance reasons. During these times generation will be done by the diesel plant. As a result an average of 1,198 gallons of diesel fuel will need to be purchased each year. As can be seen by the calculations some years will require no generation and others greater amounts than this average. Page 16 polarconsult alaska, inc. VI. ENVIRONMENTAl A. Fish Requirements King Salmon fry were planted in the upper long flat area of Indian River by the USFS. According to the Forest Service biologists this is an excellent spawning and rearing area for salmon. The Forest Service would like to continue this program if it is feasible. Their biologist states that King Salmon do not spawn on the islands in Southeastern Alaska. The reason there are no salmon using the upper reaches of Indian River is because of the barriers, in particular barrier #4 prevents their passage. Barrier #1 blocks most of the pink salmon. If a fish ladder is constructed to overcome barrier #4, then Kings and perhaps Silvers will be able to ascend the river. To prevent interception of the juveniles as they migrate down stream, the intake will have to have specialized screens. In addition the hydroplant might be restricted in output during certain times of the year to provide water between the intake and the power house. Such a restriction will add to the costs for the hydroplant and may impact power production. If carried to extremes the net effect will make the plant economically infeasible. The Forest Service states that they would like to construct a fish ladder at barrier #4. What they will need from the city is a grant of rights-of-way. To assure that as many of the migrants survived the downstream journey as possible, the hydroplant intake will require modification. The Forest Service indicates they will pay for this. In addition to plant modifications, the Forest Service should support the community to prevent the restriction in flows caused by the community's cooperation in enhancing the fishery. Generally, the community indicates they support an improvement that enhances the environment in a manner such as this. They also stated that they look forward to establishment of a permanent run of Kings on Indian River. B. FERC The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has jurisdiction over most of the hydro in the US. PERC's jurisdiction is when a hydroplant is on Federal land, is involved with Interstate Commerce, is on a Navigable River, or uses water from a Federal dam or Project. The proposed project is not on Federal land, it is on Tenakee land. The project does not send power beyond State boundaries therefore, it is not involved in interstate commerce. Indian River is clearly not navigable where the project is located, and there is no federal dam or project on the river. As a result the commission can be petitioned for a waiver from FERC licensing. The petition when granted, will save money, and Page 17 polarconsult alaska, inc. time, and makes the project much easier to permit as the Federal agencies will not have jurisdiction. Page 18 polarconsult alaska, inc. VII. PERMITS Permits will be required as follows: 1. A water use permit will be required from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR). DNR will ask for comments by the Alaska State Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), and Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) in the review of these permits. ADF&G may ask for special conditions, such as minimum stream flows. 2. Alaska Coastal Zone Management Consistency Review Compliance. 3. DEC Clean Water Certification (401) which is done in conjunction with DNR's review. This permit is required only if a Federal permit is needed. A typical Federal permit which will require a (401) is a (404) permit for action involving a wet land or fill in a stream. Without fill a (404) permit will not be needed therefore a (401) permit will not be required either. 4. FERC confirmation of no jurisdiction. With the possible exception of dealing with ADF&G none of these permits will be difficult nor expensive to acquire. DNR is behind in permit processing so their permit will take the most time, the agency can not say how long, but perhaps 6 months. Page 19 polarconsult alaska, inc. VIII. SYSTEMS COMPARED A. Similar to the selected Corps scheme The Corps of Engineers selected a logical configuration for a small plant. See Drawing T -2 which show a plant along the same route. Their scheme picked up the water above barrier #5 and conveyed it to the powerhouse location at barrier # 2. The Corps of Engineers configuration was analyzed to see how costs and impacts could be reduced by changing the capacity and design of the project as well as who builds it. The Corps of Engineers alignment requires modification as there is no favorable location for a powerhouse on the right bank as they have shown. Further, steep cliffs preclude reasonable pipe support or even their benching on that side. As a result, the pipe will be carried across the stream on a suspension bridge. It is estimated a system with 125 kW capacity can be constructed for about $825,399 dollars using the same alignment, simplifying the system, eliminating the rock work and roads, and using local materials and labor. The gross head on the project is about 72 feet and the design flow, Q, is about 32 cfs. Confusion was expressed over land ownership in the upper area of the project. After much searching, it is concluded that the upper part of the Corps of Engineers scheme would be on Federal land, and thus would require a PERC permit. This adds cost, and uncertainty, to the project. A PERC permit will also consume considerable time. B. Higher head scheme Another option that was investigated was one resulting in more head thereby decreasing the unit cost of pipe, and the cost of the turbine-generator. This scheme carried the water from above barrier #5 to just below barrier #1. This scheme resulted in a gross head of 116 feet and required about 20 cfs at full output. This scheme would cost 933,000 dollars and would be constructed using all polyethylene (PE) pipe. This scheme would have the advantage in that its reduced use of water would make it capable of greater output during the winter when flows are low. The scheme, as estimated was assumed to start on the right bank and cross using a suspension bridge, hence continuing to a powerhouse just below the first barrier. On the basis of the second field trip, it appears that it is feasible to construct the system in the entirety on the left bank which will likely reduce the costs. The major disadvantages are PERC will have jurisdiction on this scheme, and it will partially de-water the area from barrier #2 to barrier #1 where a few fish are present. Page 20 polarconsult alaska, inc. C. Recommended scheme The recommended project will pick up water above barrier #4 and, after passing through the turbine, discharge it below barrier #2. The layout of this system is shown on drawing T-1. Additional details of the proposed plant are shown on drawings H-1, through H-5. These drawings pertain to all of the systems that were analyzed. Page 21 polarconsult alaska, inc. IX. TYPICAL FEATURES A. Diversion The water will be diverted from the river using a steel framed, wood faced diversion structure that will only be of sufficient height to guide the water into a flume that is constructed transverse to the river flow. See details 2. and 3 on sheet H-4. The diversion structures will be composed of steel "A" frames that will be rock bolted to the bed of the river. The upstream members of the "A" frames will be composed of steel "I" beams. Cedar or other wood planks will be set into the "I" beams to raise the height of the water so it will run into the flume. Over time the area behind the flume and the diversion structure will fill in with rocks and gravel. Should it be desirable to remove the rocks and gravel, the planks can be removed and the river will wash the material downstream. The diversion structure will be located sufficiently far upstream so that the headward erosion of the falls will not endanger the intake. The construction of the diversion will be completed during low flows in mid summer. These construction methods and materials will not cause pollution of the stream and likely will not need a Corps of Engineers (404) permit. B. Intake The intake will be composed of a long metal box or flume, which will have a grate with bars longitudinal to the stream flow as its cover. This box will be rock bolted to the bed of the stream. The diversion structure described earlier, will channel the stream flows over the grates. The water will flow through the grates into the box hence to the de-sander~ These grates are similar to those found in the bottom of a gutter on a road. The grates will be designed so that large and small rocks along with many leaves will be carried over the flume on down the stream. As the large bed loads, rocks are carried only during flood stage, there will be more than sufficient water during this time to force the material over the screens. Occasionally, the screens will require raking to remove rocks or sticks that become stuck between the bars. A flume similar to that proposed is a part of Alaska Light & Power's hydroplant on Gold Creek in Juneau. This type of water intake is extensively used for small hydro in the Tyrolean Alps. See "Water Power and Dam Construction", November 1992. C. De-Sanding and Screens Downstream of the grated flume, there will be a slide gate to cut off the flow. Below this gate will be an overflow section that will dispose of excess water back to the stream. In this section there will be a deeper settling section that will remove the Page 22 polarconsult alaska, inc. material that goes through the grate. This section will have a bypass gate to discharge the sand and gravel back to the stream from whence it came. See H-4 for some typical details of such a structure. A decision will have to be made on whether the grate at the intake should be sufficiently fine so screens in the de-sander can be eliminated, or if it is better to use a courser grate that will pass more gravel, leaves and needles. A courser grate can be built heavier and is less likely to suffer damage from trees and large boulders. A finer grate will screen out all but sand sized particles and will not allow most leaves to enter the system. The ability to pass fish will influence the spacing and operations of the screens. If a fish ladder is constructed over barrier #4 then it is logical to design the flume system so that downstream passage of smolt is assured. D. Water conveyance 1. Pipe Pipe was considered as a means of carrying water. It has the advantage of fully containing the water. This allows the full head of the water from the diversion to the turbine to be used. It is also simpler to operate than a flume as no overflows are needed. But a pipe is costly and is heavy. If the work is to be done without heavy machinery, and there is no heavy machinery at Tenakee, then a pipe of 30 plus inches in diameter will be difficult to handle. High density polyethylene, HDPE, pipe weighs about 40 pounds per foot. A single forty foot section weighs about 1,600 pounds. The fusion machine for such a pipe weighs about 3,000 pounds. Working a pipe such as this along the bank will be a considerable task. The pipe, due to its flexibility and the fact it will be above ground, requires supports at close intervals. Steei pipe weighs nearly the same as the HDPE, and its hydraulic characteristics are not as good. Over time steel pipe will corrode. If a tree falls across it, it will buckle and can be difficult to repair. Steel pipe will also have to be constructed using supports but their spacing can be larger then for HDPE. Fiberglass pipe can be used. It is lighter than the other materials and is very corrosion resistant. It is also expensive and is not a ductile as steel or HDPE. If a tree falls across it, it will break. The number of supports needed will be between those required for HDPE and steel. Polyvinyl Chloride, PVC, pipe also can be used. It comes in 20 foot lengths and has a bell and spigot joint. The weight would range from 32 to 40 pounds Page 23 polarconsult alaska, inc. per foot depending on the wall thickness selected. PVC pipe is less expensive and the material is stronger than HDPE. However, when cold it is brittle and if shot with a bullet it will crack. Exposed pipe of substantial diameter does not freeze in Southeastern Alaska. Pelican, a community a short distance from Tenakee, has an exposed flume and penstock and has had no problems with freezing. With elevated support systems, the pipe will have to be moved into position on the trestles, so a conveyance system will be needed to haul the pipe from trestle to trestle. This will likely mean that timbers will need to be used between the trestles so a cart can be used to haul the pipe. Normally during construction with HDPE pipe, the heavy fusion machine is left in one place and the pipe is pulled through it. It is possible to pull over a 1,000 feet using this method. To pull through the trestle system requires some type of rollers or slides to keep the pipe from pulling down the structures. This will increase construction costs. Pipe other then HDPE will have to be hauled in sections and connected in together in the field. Rubber "0" ringed joint pipe, if used, will need to be restrained so the joints can not pull apart. 2. Flume Flumes were extensively used on hydroelectric projects in the past. The reason for this is they can be constructed of local materials with local labor. Wood was a material well understood in earlier times and is usually available in the Northwest. Flumes are not as readily regulated as is a pipe. As an example when a turbine is shut off by the wicket gates or a valve in a pipe the water pressure builds up and the flow ceases. With a flume the flow continues, and the excess has to be spilled at the headwork's. Additionally a flume, if made of wood, can rot over time, but so can a steel pipe corrode. If a steel pipe is supported on wood, as will be a flume then, the question can be asked; will the pipe supports last longer for the pipe than for the flume? One great advantage of a flume is it can act as a conveyance for transporting its own construction material. In the past when flumes were used to carry logs, the construction materials were floated to the end of the flume. For Tenakee, it is proposed to utilize several special carts with flanged wheels that will ride on the flume as it is constructed. In the general case, the material will be brought to the intake and wheeled down the shallow grade of the flume on a cart. The empty cart will be pushed back to the beginning. A disadvantage of a flume is a tree falling across it will destroy it, requiring that it be repaired. As outlined earlier though, this is a danger for each of the Page 24 polarconsult alaska, inc. water conveyance systems studied. Flume material and hardware should be kept on reserve for repair purposes. a) Wood A wooden flume can be constructed or Tenakee as is shown on drawing H~2. The drawing for illustrative purposes, shows the flume some height above the ground. Some portions of the flume will be at ground level and some portions, where the flume crosses a gully, will be higher. The flume shown is constructed with a deck that will keep leaves and branches out of the water and will also provide a walkway for use during construction and operation of the project. The flume shown is planned to be constructed of locally s.aJ1!l1 yellow cedar, and will use t.&g or a SJl]iJ:J.£. system to reduce leakage from the cracks where the planks join. Moderate leakage is not of great economic importance except that it produces ice which can increase the load on the structure. b) ~ A metal flume is shown in drawing H~3. This flume has a support system of yellow cedar and uses sheet aluminum to convey the water. This flume system supports the water in a manner similar to a hammock supporting a person. The aluminum comes in large rolls. A roll will be set up at the end of the flume on stands with a pipe between. Sheets of aluminum will be cut off and carted to where they are to be used. The aluminum is light, a 40 foot sheet of 0.05 inch thick material weighs about 250 pounds. The aluminum sheet will be forced down and fastened to the preceding sheet with blind rivets or small bolts. The aluminum will be fastened to the wood with stainless steel nails or by other means. The advantages of the aluminum flume are it has excellent hydraulic characteristics, and will have a long life, as aluminum is resistant to corrosion. An aluminum flume can readily be repaired by lining inside or by patching, and it will be less expensive as it is light. E. Powerhouse The powerhouse will house the turbine, generator, load governor and switch gear. A transformer will be located outside the powerhouse. The powerhouse will be located so the generator floor is above flood stage that is estimated at 10 feet. The base of the powerhouse will likely be concrete although money can be saved if it is constructed of Page 25 polarconsult alaska, inc. rock-filled timber cribs. During final design, depending on the terrain, creative approaches may be taken to save money. The walls of the powerhouse will be made of 6 inch rough SilJfl1 yellow cedar timbers that are drift pinned together like alog cabin. The roof will be composed of beams topped with baked enameled galvanized metal roofing. The roof will overhang the walls to protect them from the weather. See drawing H-5 for the layout of a typical powerhouse. The reason for a wooden powerhouse is that timber is very resistant to fire, has good insulating characteristics and is easy to erect. Further, all materials will have to be hauled to the powerhouse over a trail through the trees on a small vehicle such as a trailer drawn by a 4-wheeler. Concrete is very heavy weighting about 4,000 pounds per cubic yard. Hauling and handling any more concrete than is necessary will increase the costs of construction. Wood also is aesthetically pleasing and will blend in with the surroundings. F. Turbine The turbine required for this project will be a low head machine that must handle a considerable volume of water. Low head machines are quite expensive because they must have large water passages, and are usually large and heavy. The first consideration for Tenakee was a reaction turbine which is commonly known as a Francis turbine after its inventor. The only reasonably priced source for such a turbine is China. China has over 60,000 micro hydroplants in operation and is the largest producer of small hydroelectric machinery in the world. A turbine is needed which uses a draft tube. This is because when the river floods, the water level can rise near 10 feet and the electrical apparatus must be located above this level. A reaction turbine has the advantage of using a draft tube that permits it to be mounted 10 above the water, and it also rotates at a high enough speed that it can be directly coupled to a generator. The direct coupling can save money, energy, and will improve reliability. The following illustrates the effects of setting a turbine and its associated generator above flood stage. For the recommended installation, the maximum net head is 50 feet so if 10 feet of this were lost, there would only be 40 feet of head. To get the same power would require 25 percent more water and the power output would be reduced during low flows. A reaction turbine draft tube, reaches below the turbine and recovers through suction, the head lost by siting the turbine above the water. So a reaction turbine can acquire all of the available energy. Page 26 polarconsult alaska, inc. The reaction turbines made in China are heavy and require the construction of substantial supports and will require detailed concrete work. Please see the views of such a turbine installation in Figures 1. 0 and 1.1. Figure 1.0 Side view, Hydraulic Turbine, Francis Type Figure 1.1 End view, Hydraulic Turbine, Francis Type Page 27 polarconsult alaska, inc. A cross flow turbine is another possibility. There is one turbine manufacturer, Ossberger, who has built these turbines for years and claims that they will function with a draft tube. Osberger's turbine will be similar to the views shown below. This turbine has the advantage of good efficiency over a very wide range of flows. Further, it is quite light, and will be much easier to install than a Francis turbine. It has an additional advantage of not being easily clogged by leaves. The Ossberger turbine is less efficient than the Francis turbine at full output. Also it turns at a lower rpm and requires some form of speed increaser, so a reasonably priced generator can be used. The Francis turbine is more rugged and is less likely to require repairs, but repairs are more complicated and costly. Further, quality control is probably better with Ossberger. G. Generator The proposed generator will produce a minimum of 125 kW at 0.8 power factor. Electrically it will be a three phase, 480 volt unit. It will have static excitation and will use a Basler or equivalent voltage regulator. A generator for the Francis turbine will be a directly connected unit turning at 900 or perhaps 720 rpm. The generator will have to come from China. The voltage regulator will be purchased from the US., as will the rest ofthe electrical gear. The generator for the Ossberger turbine will come from the U.S., and will operate at 1,200 rpm. It will have ball bearings and the shaft will be designed to carry loads from the belt drive. Because of the low head, the Ossberger turbine turns slowly, so a belt drive will be required to increase the rpm to 1,200. A large pulley will be on the turbine shaft and a smaller one on the generator. The belt will be of a special flat type and the pulleys will be crowned. This type of belt drive is very efficient, more so than geared speed increasers, and the belt is extremely reliable with life in excess of several years of operation. H. Governor The generator rpm must be controlled to produce sixty cycles. In earlier hydroplants the speed of the turbine was controlled with a governor that controlled the amount of water the machine received, which in tum controlled the speed. There is another way to control the speed of the machine, and that is to add and subtract electrical loads so the output remains at 60 cycles. This can now be done electronically by a device called a "load governor". There are a number of load governors operating in Alaska, one is at Burnett Inlet on Alaska Aquaculture's project. An electronic load governor can be Page 28 polarconsult alaska, inc. located anywhere on the system. It takes excess power and shunts it to resistance heaters. For example, water heaters, hydronic heating systems, electric air heaters, can be located where ever heat is required. Loads can be prioritized by the load governor. As an example, the governor can be programmed to supply excess electricity first to the school heating system, secondly to the school hot water, and then to the green house or the city hall. If the school is sufficiently hot, then the next use of electricity will be by the hot water heater. For a run of river plant that has no storage, the amount of water that can be used at any moment can not exceed the amount in the stream. If there is added water that the plant can generate with and it is not used, then the energy is lost. A stream fluctuates as does the demand for electricity. A 125 kW machine will rarely be used near peak capacity at Tenakee. Much of the time, there will be excess water that can be used to operate the hydroplant at an output above the community's needs. The surplus electricity can produce heat that has value as it can be used to displace fuel and its associated costs. This provides added value to the plant and also is environmentally superior to burning carbon based fuels. In addition to the load governor there is an electronic head level controller that opens or shuts the turbine gates based on the quantity of water available at the beginning of the penstock. It does this by reading the water pressure (depth) which in tum is converted to an electrical signal that is provided to a computer which directs the operation of a hydraulic pump that drives a cylinder controlling the flow of water to the turbine. If water is being used at a rate greater than its supply then the gate will close down, if the rate is less than the supply the gates will open until they reach their set limits. I. Switch gear The switch gear will consist of several elements. One item will be the circuit breaker that will shut off the plant if there is over-current. This is a protective device that is already used in Tenakee's current system to protect the diesel generators. The electronic equipment can also be used to perform relaying to shut the plant off if there is over or under voltage or frequency. In addition transducers can be provided, as was done at Larsen Bay, so the status of the plant may be monitored from town. In a small plant such as this, the switch gear and the electronic controls for a load governor can be incorporated within a single enclosure thus saving space and costs. J. Transmission 1. Routes Page 29 polarconsult alaska, inc. Several routes were investigated for the transmission line. One would go along the left bank of the creek to the beach, hence by underwater cable to the boat harbor where it would tie in to the city's existing power grid. A second route would cross the ridge as is shown on drawing T-1. For final design the two routes should be re-analyzed and a determination made on the best alternative. The beach route has the advantage that the least distance is required within the trees than the other schemes. Further, the line is in a location were a tap can be provided at the small park at the bridge if desired, or the tap could be extended along the coast to provide service to others to the Southeast. There is an existing overhead single phase power line connecting the harbor to the town. The length is about 950 feet. This line will have to be upgraded to three phase. This can be accomplished by adding cross arms to each pole, one single pole guy and an intermediate structure. In addition, two conductors will need to be added. One problem with a pole line is the community has no equipment to lift poles. Gin poles, tripods or jeers may have to be rigged to set the poles in place. 2. Designs Different power line designs are possible. The most desirable one, considering aesthetics and damages, is buried cable. A second design would be bare overhead wire as proposed by the Corps of Engineers, and currently used for distribution in town. A third method is an overhead design using msulated cable that is hung from trees and the occasional pole. The problem with buried cable is cost. It is more costly than an overhead design with the cost of just the cable near $4.50 per foot. Further, it is reported that rock is near the surface and unprotected buried cable must be buried a minimum of 32 inches below the ground surface. Burial will entail digging a trench through roots and logs into the ground and rock which will be very expensive. A second means will be to pull the cable into a heavy walled PVC conduit and then build a wooden walkway over it to protect the cable and to provide an easy route to the power plant. Crossing Indian River will still require overhead lines of some type because it is not practical to cross in the bed of the river. An added disadvantage of buried cable is locating a fault in the cable will be difficult. Overhead lines, such as the Corps of Engineers proposed, are practical if a mea...11s of setting the poles inexpensively is achieved. Overhead systems are generally less expensive then any other type of construction. However, they are subject to damage during wind and ice storms when the surrounding trees fall. An additional impediment occurs when making repairs as the poles must be climbed. On the positive side, repairs are easy and finding the failure is simple Page 30 polarconsult alaska, inc. compared to a failure in an underground cable. Further, materials and system knowledge is already available as power is distributed locally with an overhead system. There is a hybrid system that combines insulated cable with o-verhead lines. The product is cal~ed tree cable and it uses insulated cable hung from a wire messenger trolley . The messenger trolley is supported with special brackets from poles or trees. Such a system is used by Homer Electric Association, HEA · , in the wooded area south of Homer across Kachamak Bay. HEA built their own system and hung it from trees and have been quite pleased with it. The current version of the National Electric Safety Code does not allow trees to be used as power poles. However, for a special case such as this, a waiver can be acquired. Trees are more reliable then poles, the reason being that a sound tree can live for hundreds of years. Further, if a nearby tree falls across the line, the line is out of service in any event. With a tree cable system, the messenger trolley is hung from a breakaway support that drops the cable and messenger to the ground. The fallen tree can be removed and the messenger re hung. In Figure ·2.0 can be found an example of a wire messenger trolley assembly supported with a bracket hung from a tree. Figure 2.0 Cable Messenger Trolley Assembly In summary all or" the methods of getting the power from the power house to the community have some problems. During the design phase the community can best decide, based on costs and operational considerations, which route and system is best. Page 31 polarconsult alaska, inc. X. Costs Project costs are one of the most important derivatives of an analysis such as this. Their accuracy along with the demand, estimate of future alternative power generation costs, costs of money, and quantity of production are the important values that provide the information to make sound economic judgments. It is important to assign values to each of these items that will result in a conservative realistic result. Too many contingencies have a multiplying effect and can result in unrealistically high costs. Many construction and operations costs can be predicted in a manner that will be conservative. These include demand, alternative power generation costs, and costs of money. The quantity of production is dependent on water flow and is not as easily predicted. Project costs have received extra attention in the analysis. The extra attention has included more detail than is typical in a study of this type in the sizing of equipment. Such detail includes engineering analysis of the sizes of beams and other items that go toward arriving at good quantities. In addition costs were analyzed on an item by item basis instead of a unit basis, such as dollars per square foot. This attention to detail increases the estimate's accuracy but it takes more time and as a result is more costly for the consultant. Costs for this project were estimated based on several different methods of providing generation using the Corps of Engineers layout, which seemed reasonable. Spread sheets for these schemes are presented in the appendix. The recommended site was selected as a result of the second field trip. Its cost estimate was derived from the information generated by the earlier estimates for the Corps of Engineers layout but fit to quantities and conditions found at the site. Project costs are composed of two major elements. One element is material costs. These costs, if based on good quantities, can be fairly accurate. The second element is labor cost. This is the variable cost, and is hard to estimate accurately. As an example, heavy rain can reduce productivity to as low as 36% of dry conditions. Reference Table 9.4.2.1 of Construction in Cold Regions, by Terry T. McFadden et. al. However, if the work is mostly done during the months of June, July, and August and the weather is not unusually wet, productivity can be good. Local labor costs are also based on local skills and motivation. If the skill level is high but motivation is low, the productivity will be low. A considerable portion of production efficiency depends on the quality of management and the authority granted to the management to remove unproductive workers. Labor costs are based on an estimate of the time to do the work, assuming a crew and supervision such as was used on the McRobert's Creek project that we constructed for ourselves. Wages are based on information garnered from the City of Tenakee, force account work in other communities, and our construction of McRobert's Creek Hydro. For wages the following assumptions are made. The wage scale used at Tenakee on recent bridge construction is as follows: Page 32 polarconsult alaska, inc. 2 Skilled laborers @ $12.50 per 2 laborers 1 Foreman @ $13.50 per hour Average @ $11.70 per hour Use @ $12.00 per hour Fringes estimated as follows: orkers Compensation 8.5% loyer Social Security Average rate per hour calculated is $14.31, $15.00 per houris used in the estimates. This is more than rates paid on McRobert's Creek which averaged $10 per hour plus fringes. The project cost estimate is arranged to present the costs of material and labor in a detailed format so the City will be able to review costs and provide any bias or input to the figures based on local knowledge. Risk factors are presented. It should be noted that the higher values are for those items were definition is not as accurate or where considerable variation in labor may occur. Itemized material costs are not as variable as their costs are fixed by quotation. Frequently quoted prices can be bettered when an order is placed. As a general rule these quotations are rounded to higher values. One of the impoqant quotations is for lumber from a local source. The estimate is increased substantially to $700 MBF. For the turbine, generator and other materials either exact quotations are used or the prices were obtained from catalogs such as McMaster-Carr. Such sources such as these are higher priced than alternative suppliers. An extensive tool and equipment list was developed. A crew size somewhat less then 9 people is assumed. A tent camp near the project was also planned. The camp had the advantage of assuring that workers are at the site when work starts. Use of a camp reduces the nonproductive transportation costs from other housing locations to the site. It provides shelter if weather conditions are poor. It enables the community to bring in outside help if there is insufficient local labor, and provides them with a place to stay. The disadvantages are that it costs money, requires a cook and permitting, and represents increased compensation for non residents. An added disadvantage is it reduces the opportunity for local business to sell to the workers. However, if local housing is fully utilized by tourists during the summer, having the non local portion of the crew out of town may be an advantage. Care should be taken not to use borrow money to pay unnecessary costs of room and board as this can represent a burden on the project. And it may result in a payment by the many for a gain of the few. Page 33 polarconsult alaska, inc. An estimate was made to meet a request by the City to base construction costs on a crew living locally. This has been done and is presented as the base cost estimate. If outside help is needed it is likely that added wages will be required to offset the cost of living in town. Regardless of where the crew is based, some form of shelter will be required for tools and other supplies, and as a place where the workers can get out of the weather. As a result a portion of the camp is retained in the estimate for use as a shelter. Freight costs are based on a single barge hauling in the majority of the material during one trip from Seattle. Because of scheduling, the turbine and generator are assumed to be shipped separately. A brief discussion of the salient points of each of the FERC cost categories follows: + Land & Land Rights: For the recommended project these costs are zero as a FERC license is not needed. A brief letter must to be written to acquire a declaration of non jurisdiction by FERC. + Mobilization and Logistics: In addition to the camp mobilization, this item includes the barge freight, a used flat bed truck, and a 4-wheeler with trailer that will be used to haul construction material from the road to the project. The flat bed truck will be left on site at the end of the project. There are no hauling facilities in Tenakee and vehicles will be required to haul materials from the log landing up the logging road to the trails leading to the site. The equipment mix can be changed to two 4-wheelers if the community desires .. + Structures and Improvements: The most costly structure is the powerhouse which must be constructed to withstand floods. The most uncertain and difficult part of the powerhouse construction is the excavation. The quantity of excavation is very dependent on the design of the structure and the topography. The excavation quantity assumed in this estimate is generous. Excavation will be done with a hand air or gasoline powered rock drill, and will use explosives to break out the rock. The rubble will be excavated by hand because a machine can not be brought to the site in a practical manner, nor is there the proper machinery in the community. The quantity of concrete required for the foundation is not massive. The reason is the materials will be brought in by barge and hauled to the site on 4-wheelers so transportation costs per cubic yard are high. To keep power house quantities and costs down, creative engineering and construction will be needed. • Reservoirs, Dams and Waterways: This is the most expensive single category. It includes the diversion, de-sanding box, flume, forebay box, and the penstock. The· assumption is that the project will be· constructed utilizing a composite Page 34 polarconsult alaska, inc. yellow cedar support, aluminum lined flume system. The cost analysis is based on an average support height of 10 feet. It is very likely it will be less as the left bank is fairly uniform and does not curve in and out often or ·deeply. Building the diversion structure is the greatest unknown as the bottom condition of the river has not been determined. If there are not adequate supports for the "A" frames, extra work may be required. Final design will likely show the de- sanding box can be reduced in size and cost. If fish passage is a requirement, supplemental funding for finer screens will likely be provided by the Forest Service. • Turbines and Generators: This item includes a cross flow turbine with pulleys and belts to increase the speed. It also includes a synchronous generator capable of withstanding over speed. For controls, the system utilizes a load governor and a head level control that opens the turbine gates to accommodate the available water. These costs are quotations. A cross flow turbine is easy to install as it will be bolted to the floor. The generator will be mounted on adjustable skids so the belt can be readily tightened. Local labor can easily assemble the powerhouse equipment and have it checked by a certified electrician and the engineer. Spare parts required include bearings, governor parts, fuses, and etcetera. • Misc. Mechanical Equipment: A generous allowance has been made for tools. Good functional tools are important in assuring productivity, safety, and moral. This list is not all inclusive and will likely need alteration but it is illustrative of the tools used to construct the McRoberts Creek project. After completion of the construction a complete set of tools will be left at the powerhouse. The balance can be kept by the city or sold. + Roads, Railroads, And Bridges: This item is mostly labor to construct the trails to get persons and materials to the work. The skidway to the powerhouse assumed that a Francis Turbine would be used and its weight, about 7, 000 pounds for the largest piece, would require special handling. An easy method of getting materials down the banks will be important as this item can increase costs. A two wheel trailer, if lowered and raised by winch or pulling line, is difficult to control without some type of guidance system. A 4-wheel trailer is more stable. One trail could be eliminated by using a helicopter to stage materials to the power house site, or if a crossflow turbine is used, it can be hauled down on the flume. • Land and Land Rights(Transmission): It is assumed that there will be some costs associated with obtaining rights-of-way, ROW, for the transmission line. Some private land is located uphill between the boat harbor and the city. Page 35 polarconsult alaska, inc. + Substation Equipment: This includes the 150 kVA step up transformer to raise generator voltage from 480 volts to 7,200/12,470 which is the community voltage. This also includes a dry transformer that will step down the 480 volt supply to 120/240 volts for use in the station. Also included in this item is a fused 3 phase switch that will be located at the junction of the hydroplant transmission and the connection to the community overhead system. This switch will allow the transmission system to the power plant to be isolated. + Poles and Fixtures: The system was priced using the tree cable system. Some intermediate poles will likely be required and the assumption is based on using local yellow cedar poles. + Overhead Conductors and Devices: Tree cable with hardware from Hendix was priced. Construction was assumed to be completed by pulling in 2,000 foot sections of cable with pulling blocks. It is likely that surface cable in PVC duct covered by a wooden walkway would be somewhat equal in cost. + Demobilization: The camp must be removed, and the construction areas police up. This sum is for that labor. Salvage value for leftovers is considered to be zero. + Other items: It will cost the city money to administrate this work. Materials must be purchased and a fax machine will be required. The assumption is it will take one person one half a man year to do this work. Engineering is estimated to be about 8 % and construction management about 5 % . Construction management is based on no more than 2 months on site. If full time management is needed then this figure will have to be increased. A. Force Account Force account is the only practical and cost effective way to construct a project such as t..his. Wage rates for Title 36, Little Davis Bacon, are high enough to make the project uneconomical. Force account optimizes the situation for local employment and avoids all of the added costs that contracting brings. Some of the added costs for contracting are the cost to bid, bonding costs, tighter plans and specifications resulting in more expensive engineering, better record keeping, greater overhead, more detailed inspection as the contractor must be prevented from cheating. Additionally, higher worker's compensation insurance rates and higher wages are required, since Little Davis Bacon rules are less flexible as they require overtime pay for worki11g more than 8 hours per day. There is also greater contractor risk and added legal fees, resulting in increased costs and bids. Page 36 polarconsult alaska, inc. The major problem with community force account is management. The manager generally should not be from the community for the best interest of the project, as tough personnel decisions need to be made. It is better to be stern and bring the project in under budget and return the money to the workers with a bonus or to the rate payer then it is to compromise during the execution of the project. A good manager with experience in force account can strike the balance between sensitivity for local feelings and needs, and the absolute need to complete the project on or under budget. To build a quality plant with low cost, the philosophy of construction must be different for small hydro plants as compared to large ones. More of the decisions on routing and layout must be made in the field during construction. The project must be compatible with the terrain and not be required to move more rock and earth than is absolutely necessary, or pour added concrete to match lines drawn on paper as is done on larger scale projects. This requires a flexible mind and the ability to innovate in order to solve problems on the spot. B. Title 36 Title 36 is enforced when a contractor or subcontractor performs work on public construction in Alaska. Title 36 requires that contractors be paid the prevailing wage in the locality. This prevailing wage is set by the Labor Department's Labor Standards and Safety Division. For Tenakee the wage plus the fringes will average near 30 dollars per hour. Given an increase of about $15 per hour the cost increase for wages alone would exceed $120,000. Additionally contractors have other costs that will further raise this amount. Page 37 polarconsult alaska, inc. XI. Economics The economics of the system are very favorable, and are shown in detail for the base case, and as sensitivity variations for other conditions. A synopsis of the results is presented in the tables and graphs that follow. The base case in the table is based on a basic interest rate of 3%, power growth of 0%, fuel cost increase of 1% for 5 years, and 2% thereafter. The cost of diesel equipment and maintenance remains the same in 1993 dollars. Loan period and analysis period is for 30 years. The initial cost of the plant is $612,171. Also incorporated in the analysis are the potential amounts of increased electricity, and a present worth value of the period from 30 years to 50 years of the plant's life. Although the plant will last longer than 50 years this gives an illustration of its true value. Other assumptions are that current labor costs will remain constant. Although it is likely these costs can be reduced, after the debugging period, this is a conservative approach that will retain the needed skills within the community. An explanation of some of the selected values follows: • Interest rates: A system was selected that does not use standard interest rates which include assumed factors for inflation. Everything is reduced to the opportunity cost of interest which traditionally has been near 3%. This results in costs and effects in today' s dollars throughout the analysis period. This helps in achieving a more accurate understanding of the project costs. • Power demand: A conservative figure is 0% growth. More growth favors the hydro over the diesel. The effects of added growth can be seen in the graph which shows the sensitivity to demand. The diesel alternative costs continue to rise because of the fuel component whereas the hydro costs rises at an almost imperceptible rate. • Cost of Hydro & Diesel over 30 Years vs Demand Growth s2.00 T ;;-$1.90 t f-- T . ~ $170 ~ $1.60 0 $1,80 ~ $1.50 ~ s, "o Tt ~ SL30 l-----to------•~----------11 Ill $1.20 • e -----Hydro ~o,.,,, ll.. $1.10 St.OO 0.0'!1> 0.5% 1.0'!1> 1.5 .. 2.0'11. Oem;~nd Growth R11te Fuel Cost: The sensitivity to increases in fuel costs are presented graphically. Fuel costs have not been compounded, but rather have had a simple percentage added to Page 38 polarconsult alaska, inc. the. base price of $1.18 per gallon. It is anticipated that over the 30 year loan penod of the selected base case there will likely be an under estimate of the actual costs of fuel. ; $1.60 0 . ~ $1.50 i i $140 - 8 ~ .$1,30 -i "20 ~ $1.10 .;... i $1.00 O.O'lb Hydro & Diesel over 30 Years vs Fuel Increase Rate I -------Hyd" i ----D--Diesel 0.5% 1.0% 1.5'11. 2.0'liL • Loan 'Period: The loan period is typical for a small hydroplant and again 1s conservative as compared to 50 year periods used for governmental projects. • Cost Sensitivity: A graph has been prepared which shows the sensitivity of the project to the cost of construction. Even with a 33% or so construction cost overrun, the hydro case betters the diesel case by $150,000 or more. This is without taking into consideration the $500,000 of excess value of electricity or about $400,000 value for the 20 year period after the loan is over. • • ; SUiO 0 . ~ $1.50 i -$140 ~ u ~ SL30 i "20 £ $110 - .$1.00 $612 Hydro & Diesel over 30 Years vs Hydro Construction Cost ' I -e---Hydro 1-::r-----Oiu.el 1 1700 $750 $800 $850 Hydro Conatruction Cod (Thouund' ofS) In addition there are other economic values for the project that have not been quantified. Some of these values are as follows: Retaining money within the community. When oil is purchased most of the money leaves the community and goes to the transporters, refiners, producers, and resource owners who increasingly are middle eastern foreigners. The labor will result in employment for people in the community. Income from their wages will add new money to the community. The savings from lower costs for electricity will conserve dollars within the community for other uses. Page 39 polarconsult alaska, inc. • People will receive training in construction by doing. This training is valuable as it makes for salable skills, and fosters independence. • Environmental values are important in Tenakee. Given two competing methods of providing the same service even near the same cost; the environmental choice should be selected. • Freedom from rate shock created by increasing oil prices is obtained. Should there be large excursions in oil prices then the communities electric costs will not be significantly affected In addition to benefits there are also potential negative aspects of the project which follow: • The primary risk is from cost overruns during construction. If there is a $100,000 cost overrun the benefits will be reduced. Such a cost overrun can purchase over 6,000 hours of added labor. Labor cost overruns are the most likely risk. • The second risk is that a flood or mechanical events will result in reduced revenues. This risk can persist until the causes of the problems are corrected. Even if the plant is not generating for the entire first year it would cost, including the payment to the lending institution, and any repairs. • Another disadvantage is that a project such as this could be conceived as increasing stress within the community because of the requirement to complete it on time and on budget. Further, if the community is divided on the project there is always a possibility of increased political disagreements between the anti's and the progressives. Page 40 TENAKEE ECONOMIC SUMMARY TENAKEE ECONOMICS Base Case Interest (%) 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% Power demand growth (%) 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Fuel cost per kwh $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 $0.106 Fuel cost increase in I st X years (%) 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% X years 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Fuel cost increase thereafter 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.5% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Lenl!th of study (yrs) 30 30 -~ 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Price of Fuel ($/gal) $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 $1.180 illESEL Yearly Maintenance cost $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6 000 $6,000 $6,000 Overhaul cost $8,500 $8,500 $8 500 $8 500 $8 500 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 Replacement cost $33,000 $33,000 $33,000 $33 000 $33,000 $33,000 $33 000 $33,000 $33,000 Diesel parts cost per kwh $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 $0.028 Current Diesel to be replaced in 2 yrs lliYDR.Q Initial hYdro cost (loan amount) $612 171 $612 171 $612 171 $612,171 $612 171 $612 171 $750 000 $850 000 $800,000 Hydro loan payback: time (vrSl 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Hydro loan interest rate (%} 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% Hydro yearly payments $31 233 $31 233 $31 233 $31,233 $31 233 $31 233 $38 264 $43 366 $46,264 HydroO& M $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 ISv!;tem Salary $16 000 $16 000 $16 000 $16 ()()() $16 ()()() $16 ()()() $16 ()()() $16 ()()() $16,000 Salary Rate of Increase 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% IRESffi.TS ln 1993mnn;v\ Hydro + diesel cost $1,216,848 $1,222,740 $1 228 632 $1 212 540 $1 214 360 $1 218 001 $1 357 490 $1 459 530 $1 517 486 Diesel onlv cost $1,657,565 $1,804,829 $1,952 092 $1,550 032 $1 596 359 $1 689 013 $1,657 565 $1 657 565 $1 657 565 Difference (diesel -hydro) $440,718 $582 089 $723,460 $337 492 $381 999 $471 011 $300,076 $198,035 $140,080 Extra hvdro power return $509,529 $475,696 $441,862 $509 529 $509 529 $509,529 $509,529 $509 529 $509,529 Cost difference after 30 yrs through 50 yrs (diesel -hydro) $445,075 $625,047 $811,973 $331,061 $372,568 $455,581 $445,075 $445,075 $445,075 .... ~ WORKSHEET FOR CAIL'ULATION OF COSI'S BASED ON A COMBINATION OF HYDRO POWER AND BACKUP DIESEl-. PRESENT VALUE OF ALL COSTS INCURRED: $1,216,848 PRESENT VALUE OF ALL EXCESS fUEL FROM EXCESS HYDRO POWER $509,529 IENAKEE ECOI'jQMH,;S I!mSE1 Interest (%) Power demand growth (%) fuel cost per kwh Fuel cost increase in 1st X y X yean Fuel cost iJl(!rease thereaner Length of study (yrs) Price of Fuel ($/gal) 3.0% 0.0% $0.106 1.0% s 2.0% 30 Sl.lB !DATI!: !Demand !Generate !Excess Yearly Maintenance COS! Overhaul cost Overhaul frequency (kwh) Replacement cost Replacement frequency (kwh) Diesel parts cost per kwh Current Die:sel must be replaced in 2 years $6,000 $8,500 1,000,000 $33.000 2,000,000 $0.028 System Maintenance Salary Salary Rate of Increase $16,000 0.0% HIIlli.Q Initial hydro cost (loan amount) Hydro loan payback time (yrs) Hydro loan interest rate (%) Hydro yearly payments Hydro 0 &: M $612,171 30 3.0% $31,233 $4.000 ITotal ).000 1995 3~ i,OOO 931.75; 586,752 1,4· 4 ,79 41,79 $4.474 5.000 $ !I9 $33,0 M5 W,m o35.233 __}95_,~~· 199~ 3' i,OOO I,Q~()42 ~99_.042 1,4 SO J00 _SO 1.100 li,lli >35.233 $5'!.233 1991 3< i,OOC . ],()1)2.(;! iS7.M 1,6 I§JJE 16.36 $ .786 i.OOO H~~ 244 li,lli >35.233 ~59A77 >55.566 373 376 3• OOC 949.J75 i04,37l .,]~ ~~~ $3.68 i.OOO $935 616 li,lli S35.233 .,848 --~34S~.ooc~-T'·~0455,~89lr-~r~~~ •• B~9l __ ~~t-----~----~t-~~t----~~--iti.~OOOt----t~--~~--~~~t-~1~,233~~~~~~~35i.2~33Jfr-f~~~~··2gB.~3~~~31~ 345 00( 1,035,~2 i90.04 $21.717 13 i.OOO 1.100 ..,n: 1.000 m 33 UJOI ',2. ;46 .535 20011 345 000 1.03' .24' )92,24 $2 15 116 i.OOO ,,000 ~ I.<X i35.233 6,00 r.233 ;45, 80 20021 345. ,o; ,24• 592,24 _$2{),~36 SO.ll8 >6.000 '..()()() $3 H ;4, 135.2' i,OO .233 >4J,S 64 345,000 . 92> ,88! 582.88 16,788 49,083 49.08: 00.120 $5. i.OOO $1 ,254 _E 14. m 16.00 ,486 $47.984 345.000 9W.94: 635,94 ,783 .lJ!...~ 16.36 10.122 $1 >6,00 $4 An l3 14. :35.2' 16.00 .685 H 3, 18 345,ooo :.Ms.m_ 703. 19.090 &o.l24 >§.~ ooo rl.. 100 :3s.2: S16.oo n. s 40 .142 345.000 :.009.666 654,666 ',519 _!~ 16.36 W.126 $2. ;6,00 S• ,522 !1 & &4. JOO m. s1 6,000 ss 9. ·~~ s40 ,690 2001 345.000 1,048,195 1~J195 !_7,f!2i J! &o.I2B >6.oo ~ ,233 >4. JOO m. >t6.ooo s5: ~33 .J:!7,837 2008 345,000 959.~~ 614,386 15.264 25,\)8; 25.08: 00.130 $3.270 i.OO HI ,973 ....t!Ull. .. 000 m H6.000 s61 :o5 s 39 .285 2oo9 345. ,,04 195 703,195 16,96: >0.133 so ;,ooo ~ ooo >31,233 .. ooo m. >16,00 ;57 . 535 .665 2010 1,04 195 703,195 !6,4@_ _Q W.l35 $C .000 ~ i31 ,000 o35, 16.00C ~34 ,6: 96 ,76: ~117!!~ 14,046 16,361 ~ 00.137 $2,237 i,OOO $4 !!&95_ 000 i35, 16.000 ~~~01 96 ,,541 6.li.J!! 13.72C .122 ~ .139 S4.544 ,,ooo s9 ,460 1.000 :Js, .ooo 62 ,35~~ 1,04 ;, 195 _]Q~,l95 15.070 .14 SO . $6,000 i,OOO :1 i4,()1)9 135,23 i.OOO ,688 1,048,195 1Q1_[~~ >14,6: 143 $0 $6,00C •.000 1.000 $35.23 i.OOC >30,765 1,026,483 6~L.m 11.1§7. .145 $0 $6,00 :,QQQ_ 1.000 $35,23 i.OOO i29.86!1 996,m 65!.m m,w. ~ 16.36 >o.l47 $2,411 s6.oo s4 lY§!. >4.ooo s3s. •.ooo ,30 .453 ,048,195 ~,!~ m_Jl/Q_ 149 ~() $6,00 $6,000 000 >35. 016.000 >28,!~5 B79.soc i34.SOC $9,88 s··.~ ~?.,. 15: ss !7 !~O<:l s1,9 16,339 >35. 16, 100 m.272 2o19 145. 1,048,195 ro~.!~ ~~.g 154 so l6.oo ~ >35.233 >16. JOO 157,23 t26 ,5J8 2020 !45,000 . 997,371 i52.37! .368 $0 16.00 >.Wl JOO >35.23' ',2: S25,765 202 !4S,Q!JQ 93l.7Sl i86, $9,9: .~. ;J'l __!!.79• ·S6. 16.000 s ,T oo 135.233 >6s. ,28 ,412 2022 !45.000 1.035,04: i90, )42 ,334 $0.1 ;o 10 16,0( !() ),()(](] lJll 00 i35.B: '.233 >24,286 202' 34 i.OC 701 195 ..J2.~~:l_ _! $0.171 SO $6,{)( $6,000 .000 S4 0( i.OOO . $26, $9,517 202! 34i,OC 614J.~Ji $8.45 25,08: 2508 $0.173 $4.334 16.()1)0 s· $1 !,036 JOO $4 i.OOO $31 $ 1,030 202~ 3H,OC 1,195 7 19: $9,39 SO. 175 SO $6.000 $6,000 ,000 ~~§ $8,971 203( 34 UJOC .04 ~9 11 ~ SO. SO $6 ~ 10 l,(l( i,OOO ilOIJ -~~ 2031 34 >.OOC 96 $7,27? ~ .1!J£ $0.179 $2,931 $6 $4 so ~ 1.000 H6,!lQQ 389 $9.55 2o32 34 ;,{)()( 96 17,596 .lb'm ..B...rr so.l81 $5,931 s6 s9 ..1J.b!!I ~4.ooo ol6.ooo ~!Q,n 2033 345.00: .04 i8,344 _! $0,183 $0 $6 10 ~.~ $4,000 ~16,000 )(){ ~7,971 2034 345.00C 9 .. 75 ,760 ~ 4 ,79· ~!.186 $7. $6,00 $1 -~ !.JII o4.000 >16.000 S34,923 $1{),394 2035 345,01X ,035,04: ',() IT.ll!! $0.188 $0 $6,()()() :M2Q_ !C! 100 1.100 >26,()1)0 ~~!1 2036 345. .002.64 657.64: .14 J6,361 16,1~ SO. 19!l SJ 04 Hi~ ,562 10_ JOO .ooc 000 $29,562 :,294 2037 345,()@ 1.375 604,175 .~~9 33.38 $0.19: $6.406 100 $9JI_ ,3~ 10 100 000 1.100 133,34! ',08! 203 345.000 .195 70:,195 198 () $0.194 su 00 >,()(](] $0 i4, 100 1.000 $26.000 ,875 2o: 345. Ill •~.1!01. ~! ~ &0.196 u.zo8 ;,(JOO S4: 2..~ so :4.ooo 1.00 000 ,29 •667 :-z,616 I- -2=0+--3?.:'-45•.,00C;;3-~7.1!! &0.198 >O ;,oo i,OOO I= ;~I·.·=OOOOO 1.000 16.000$:11 $6.4 8 l w 34s,ooc ~~~.7~55~-~25:,,o~s2 __ ~~··o~s.~&a~ .. ~2oot--~~•--o~r-~'-~ooo+---~$~~~--~~·~s~t.7~27~---•. w 1.000 16.ooo ,~n~+--~$?' .. 6~78 2C 345.000 ,395 $0.20 $6.00 ~ $6,000 :.000 16,000 .;:.:M:;H---~$6,,1~09 l-~20143+--~345i .. ~OOC-,209 &0.205 $6,000 i() -~{)(1(1 i4,000 :.000 i.OOO i,OOO $5,931 l-2~0441--::3:;:45i'3 .• oocl--',7631 &5,~96 .1Jhlli _.!!!JQ $0.207 $3,3.12 &6,000 $458 so ~MC so $4,000 100 116.000 1 s 29 ,84 c _$6,608 .... = p WORKSHEET FOR CALCULATION OF COSTS BASED ON DIESEL POWER PRESENT VALUE OF AU. COSTS INCURRED: TENAKEE ECONOMICS Interest("') Power demand growrll (!II) Fuel cost per kwh Fuel cost increase tn 1st X years (%) X years Fuel cost increase thereafter Length of study (yrs) Fuel cost DATE Demand $1,657,565 ruESEL 3.0% Yearly 0 &M cost 0.0% Overhaul cost SO.I06 Overhaul frequency (yrs) 1.0% Repl"""""nt cost S Rcplacemont frequency (yrs) 2.0% Diesel pans cost per kwh 30 Current Diesel must be rcplaa:d in 2 years sus Page 41 polarconsult alaska, inc. System Maintgam;r $6,000 Salary $8,500 Salary RallO of Increase $3 $33,000 6 $0.028 $16,000 0.0% $35.640 $26.069 $25.498 $27.056 $24.388 $23.&49 $30 849 $22.804 polarconsult alaska, inc. XII. Conclusions Based on the analyses in this report, the conclusion is that a hydro plant is superior to the current diesel generation under almost all reasonable scenarios. Hydro is superior to diesel generation in a conventional economic sense as the base project yields a present value of $440,718 for the difference between hydro and the diesel alternative. In addition, generation for the next 20 years adds $445,075 to the present worth, and the potential oil equivalent value of excess power is valued at $509,529. This yields a potential benefit of $1,395,322. From a practical aspect, however: the potential oil benefit is probably only 25% or so achievable; so the total value is nearer $1,000,000. This is without assigning further value to the plant beyond 50 years. In addition to being superior economically, the plant will be superior in an environmental sense as it will not discharge carbon dioxide nor nitrous oxides into the atmosphere. The new design of the plant in addition to reducing costs, fits into the terrain and requires the very minimum of earthwork. The generation facility is outside the community and will considerably reduce air and noise pollution in Tenakee, or anywhere for that matter. There is likely to be a carbon tax on diesel fuel. There are a number of indications that the US in an attempt to reduce payments to foreigners will create an increase in the costs of diesel fueL With the hydro the use of diesel generation is reduced to about 10% of its current use so changes in the cost of diesel fuel will have no appreciable impact on the cost of power. The plant will provide employment for the community for much of one year. The community instead of sending money out to pay for oil will capture the labor portion of the project. This will have multiplier effects throughout the community, and increase prosperity. The diesel plant will not provide these benefits. Page 44 polarconsult alaska, inc. XIII. Recommendations There are a number of advantages that can accrue to the people of Tenakee if a hydroplant is constructed. If these advantages are to be acquired it is recommended that the following steps be undertaken. • • • • • • • • Ascertain whether the people believe it is in their best interest to build the plant. If pursuing the project is favorable, then the following additional steps be taken. Get a grant from the Legislature to design and construct a portion of the plant . King Cove has a grant which funds a large amount of their hydro plant's cost. The Railbelt has been granted money for Bradley Lake. The 4 dam pool has received great amounts of largess from the state. It would seem that equity should result in equal consideration for Tenakee. Governor Hickel likes to keep money within Alaska and philosophically supports the concept of the plant. Money can be borrowed from Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, Farmers Home Administration, Municipal Bond Bank and other sources to make up the balance. The project can be accomplished without a grant as it is still viable. There is sufficient money to pay for it, especially if as projected, power cost equalization continues for the next 20 years. A grant however is more certain, defmable, and can not be arbitrarily terminated as can power cost equalization. Only consider doing the work with force account, i.e. City employees. Be very careful with management of the project. Non innovative construction people who are accustomed to high cost state government projects can ruin a small project like this. Paraphrasing Shumaker think small. Give the project manager absolute authority to fire people who are not performing. There is no money for feather bedding. Plan to and execute methods of taking advantage of the excess energy that is available to reduce costs, decrease pollution, and improve the quality of life in the community. Begin the application for water use permits from the Department of Natural Resources, and hold discussions with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Continue working with the fisheries people from the US. Forest Service, particularly Mr. Greg Killinger. Consider granting the U.S.F.S. rights-of-way for a fish passage over barrier #4, but make sure the result of fish spawning above the barrier does not create a problem with regard to water releases and screening. And fmally, remember before the time of cheap diesel fuel , and the ubiquitous diesel generator, hydro was the generation method of choice throughout much of Alaska. If it could be successfully constructed and used in the past with limited logistics, and resources it most certainly can be done today by the people of Tenakee. Page 45 polarconsult alaska, inc. Appendix A DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) lshort Aluminum Flume Option (with Man Camp) I FERC NCNo. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways-steel pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST Contingency Allowance (*) TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1 993 * Contingencies included in line item totals Amount($) $2,000 $101,317 $49,277 $149,624 $109,357 $20,944 $10,628 $0 $10,098 $6,200 $38,312 $4,032 $501,788 $65,369 $501,788 $16,000 $65,232 $583,020 $612,171 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 1 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) lshort Aluminum Flume Option (without Man Camp) I FERC NCNo. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways -steel pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 * Contingencies included in line item totais Amount($) $2,000 $54,503 $49,277 $149,624 $109,357 $20,944 $10,628 $0 $10,098 $6,200 $38,312 $4,032 $454,974 $65,369 $454,974 $16,000 $59,147 $530,120 $556,626 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 2 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) lshort Wood Flume Option (with Man Camp) I FERC A/C No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways -steel pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 * Contingencies included in line item totals Amount($) $2,000 $101,317 $49,277 $159,334 $109,357 $20,944 $10,628 $0 $10,098 $6,200 $38,312 $4,032 $511,497 $63,684 $511,497 $16,000 $66,495 $593,992 $623,691 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 3 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) lshort Aluminum Flume Option (without Man Camp) I FERC AJC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Water.Nays-steel pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights {Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded} Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 * Contingencies included in line item totals Amount($) $2,000 $54,503 $49,277 $159,334 $109,357 $20,944 $10,628 $0 $10,098 $6,200 $38,312 $4,032 $464,683 $63,684 $464,683 $16,000 $60,409 $541,092 $568,147 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 4 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) ILong Wood Flume Option I FERC AIC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways -wood flu 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. ESTIMATED COSTS SUBTOTAL Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST (rounded) City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 Amount($) $19,500 $92,902 $41,321 $255,967 $71,113 $21 '180 $50,450 $2,000 $2,000 $5,018 $30,772 $2,688 $594,910 $72,019 $666,930 $16,000 $86,701 $769,630 $808,112 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 5 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) I Long Aluminum Flume Option I FERC AIC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways-Alum. flu 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. ESTIMATED COSTS SUBTOTAL Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST (rounded) Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 Amount($) $19,500 $92,902 $41,321 $232,399 $71 '113 $21,180 $50,450 $2,000 $2,000 $5,018 $30,772 $2,688 $571,342 $71,158 $642,500 $134,925 $777,425 $816,296 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 6 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) IPE Pipe Penstock Option I FERC AJC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways -PE pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. ESTIMATED COSTS SUBTOTAL Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST (rounded) City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 Amount($) $19,500 $92,902 $41,321 $278,309 $71,113 $21 '180 $50,450 $2,000 $2,000 $5,018 $30,772 $2,688 $617,253 $69,492 $686,746 $16,000 $89,277 $792,023 $831,624 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 7 of 8 DETAILED COST ESTIMATE-TENAKEE SPRINGS POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) IPE Pipe Penstock Option I FERC A/C No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights 330.5 Mobilization and Logistics 331 Structures and Improvements 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways-steel pipe 333 Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) 353 Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices 359 Line Clearing, Mob., Demob. ESTIMATED COSTS SUBTOTAL Contingency Allowance TOTAL ESTIMATED DIRECT COST (rounded) City Administration Engineering and Administration (**13%) TOTAL PROJECT COST SEP 1992 (rounded) TOTAL PROJECT COST MAR 1993 (rounded) Escalation at 5% to Mar 1993 Amount($) $19,500 $92,902 $41,321 $356,309 $71,113 $21 '180 $50,450 $2,000 $2,000 $5,018 $30,772 $2,688 $695,253 $69,492 $764,746 $16,000 $99,417 $880,163 $924,171 **Covering design and specification (8%), and construction management (5%) TSPESUM.XLS Page 8 of 8 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. !TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights .01 Land Rights -Legal and Administrative Costs FERC permit & licensing engineering fees misc. expenses Subtotal Ace no. 330 330 .50 Mobilization and Logistics .51 Start-up (air transportation) .52 Construction Buildings Camp frames and floors tents 14'x16' cots, matresses chairs tables shelves/lockers racks gas dryer washing machine sheets pillows wood stove kerosene stove blankets sink tank elevated stove pots/ pans dishes, utensils freezer referigerator .53 Construction Power generator 5 Kw gas .54 Temporary Water System latrine shower water pump -electric water tank -85 gal filter hot water heater -propane .55 Construction Surveys TSPE04SF.XLS Page 1 of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 0 0 0 a 2 36 3 3 10 10 2 10 1 1 1 20 10 3 3 20 3 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $4,000 ea $500 30% $2,652 ea $500 10% $1,650 ea $43 10% $473 ea $15 10% $165 ea $150 10% $330 ea $122 15% $1,403 ea $500 10% $550 ea $300 10% $330 ea $300 10% $330 set $8 10% $176 ea $5 10% $55 ea $800 10% $2,640 ea $600 10% $1,980 ea $13 10% $286 ea $70 10% $231 ea $150 10% $165 ea $300 10% $330 set $250 10% $275 set $15 10% $165 ea $600 10% $660 ea $500 10% $550 ea $600 10% $660 ea $500 10% $1,100 ea $200 10% $220 ea $400 10% $440 ea $220 10% $242 ea $200 10% $220 ea $300 10% $330 $6,000 10% $6,600 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 330 .59 Barge Transport offload .60 Vehicles used truck 4-wheeler w/ trailer .61 Crew Camp Costs cook (80 days) material (food) misc. freight Subtotal -Materials Subtotal -Labor (with Construction Camp) Subtotal-Ace no. 330.5 (without Construction Camp) Subtotal-Ace no. 330.5 331 ·Structures and Improvements .10 Powerhouse roofing material .12 Excavation (hand) blasting .13 Concrete (including reinforcing) rebar forms transportation to site .16 Electrical lights 3/4" conduit 2" conduit 3" conduit electrical devices (receptacles. etc.) fan #12AWGwire 250 MCMwire panels Labor .18 HVAC and Plumbing 22" valve I 125# flange increaser-22" to 30" __ i 45 deg elbow 22" pipe e)(pansion coupling TSPE04SF.XLS Page 2 of 9 Labor {mh) Quantity 1 106 1 1 1000 800 1 1142 480 9,000 20 320 600 80 16 40 2 40 500 50 20 300 5 20 5 20 6 2 1 1000 250 3 80 1 2 1 1 20 1 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) $27,000 10% $29,700 10% $1,749 ea $5,000 10% $5,500 ea $6,000 10% $6,600 10% $16,500 md $12 10% $10,560 Is $1,500 $1,500 $84,187 $15 $17,130 $101,317 $54,503 bd-ft $0.50 10% $12,870 sf $2 20% $1 '128 40% $12,600 40% $0 cy $65 20% $2,688 T $560 30% $2,236 sf $2 30% $2,080 30% $975 15% $0 ft $1.50 15% $863 ft $4 15% $178 ft $8 15% $270 15% $104 ea $200 15% $265 ft $0.10 15% $115 ft $2.10 15% $604 ea $700 1.5% $2.415 15% $1,380 ea $4,000 15% $4,600 ~ $350 15% $805 $600 15% $690 $300 15% $345 $22 30% $572 $300 15% $345 ·--···-· SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 331 mise bolts & fittings Labor (welding) Subtotal-Material Subtotal-Labor Subtotal-ace. no. 331 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways Clearing (in Trails Section) Intake System Trough 1/4" steel plate-9 sq. ft./ ft fabricate haul & place drill & bolt grout bolts Screen fabricate Trough transition misc. material Diversion Dam material per 1 0' section -150' fabricate & install planks grout bolts misc. material Gate 32-inch Diameter Steel Pipe haul, place, & level straps paint blocks bolts connect to flume Fore bay lumber slide gate slide gate bypass hardware 1/2" x 12" galv. bolts 1/2" galv. nuts 5/8" x 2' galv. bolts 5/8" galv. nuts -----············- TSPE04SF .XLS Page 3 of 9 Labor (mh) · Quantity 1 40 1468 34 16 8 6 90 10 1 15 180 1000 10 30 8 1 75 80 30 15 10 1 20 15 15 1 8 3000 1 1 700 100 240 20 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ea $400 15% $460 15% $690 $27,257 $15 $22,020 $49,277 ea $36 15% $1,408 15% $0 15% $276 15% $138 15% $0 sf $10 15% $1,139 15% $0 15% $173 Is $500 15% $575 $60 20% $1,080 20% $3,240 bd-ft $0.50 10% $550 ea $5 20% $360 10% $0 ea $1,000 15% $1,288 ft $72 30% $7,020 30% $1,560 ea $15 10% $743 Is $150 10% $330 ea $6 10% $429 Is $200 10% $468 30% $156 bd-ft $0.50 10% $1,650 ea $1,150 10% $1,265 ea $600 10% $660 $0 lb $1.67 ur $1,344 lb $1.67 15% $192 lb $1.67 15% $461 lb $1.67 15% --·-~ ------·····················-- SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. ~ENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 332 Forebay, continued clamps, couplers 24" pipe trash rack metal mise Labor Short Flume (aluminum) per 10 ft Section 1 O"x12"x1 0' beam 5"x10"x10' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace, 2"x4"x12' rails 4"x4"x8' 2"x4"x10' saddle rolled aluminum joints supports misc. hardware, screws, etc erection Subtotal -aluminum flume per 1 0' section Subtotal -labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -aluminum flume Subtotal -labor Subto\al-extra labor per 10 deg bend Short Flume (wood) per 1 0 ft Section 6"x10"x10' beam 3"x10"x10' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace rails 5x5-20' 2x4-40' sides, bottom misc. corners bottom support, 4x8x6x6 Labor (mh) 184 2 1.5 0.6 1.33 0.75 1 1 1.25 1 3.25 0.5 1 1.3 16.48 8 2 1.5 0.6 1.33 0.75 2 1 4 1 ' 2 TSPE04SF.XLS Page 4 of9 Quantity 1 150 35 1 200 110 37 12 16 21 27 12 10 60 145 145 19 100 60 37 12 16 42 27 200 20 96 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) Is $3 15% $3 ft $24 15% $4,140 sf $7 15% $282 Is $500 15% $575 $15 20% $3,312 bd-ft $0.50 15% $150 bd-ft $0.50 15% $89 bd-ft $0.50 15% $32 bd-ft $0.50 15% $30 bd-ft $0.50 15% $22 bd-ft $0.50 15% $29 bd-ft $0.50 15% $33 bd-ft $0.50 15% $28 ft $10.75 25% $153 25% $61 bd-ft $0.50 25% $47 25% $19 20% $23 $469 $15 $247 sections $67,959 sections $35,844 $15 30% $527 bd-ft $0.50 15% $92 bd-ft $0.50 15% $60 bd-ft $0.50 15% $32 bd-ft $0.50 15% $30 bd-ft $0.50 15% $22 15% bd-ft $0.50 15% $59 bd-ft $0.50 15% $33 bd-ft $0.50 15% $184 bd-ft $0.50 15% $29 bd-ft $0.50 _1_5% . ··-----$90 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description side braces, 4x2x2x6x6 mise hardware, nails, & plates erection Subtotal-wood flume per 10' section Subtotal -labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -wood flume Subtotal labor Subtotal -extra labor per 10 deg bend Supported Penstock Clearing Excavation (including drilling and blasting) Backfill Common Bedding 30" Diameter PE Penstock 10"x10"x10' beam 5"x10"x10' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace, 2"x4"x12' rails 4"x4"x8' 20' 2"x4"x1 0' -40' saddle joints supports misc. hardware, screws, etc erection Subtotal-supported PE penstock per 10' section Subtotal-labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -PE penstock Subtotal -labor Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways Subtotal -Ace. No. 332 -with Aluminum Flume Subtotal -Ace. No. 332 -with Wood Flume TSPE04SF.XLS Page 5 of 9 Labor (mh) Quantity 4 48 2 1.3 23.48 145 145 4 19 0 1 10 2 167 1.5 110 0.6 37 1.33 12 0.75 16 1 21 1 27 1.25 12 3.25 0.5 60 1 1.3 16.48 11 11 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) bd-ft $0.50 15% $97 15% $35 15% $22 $431 $15 $352 sections $62,521 sections $51,069 $15 30% $449 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ft $36.00 10% $413 bd-ft $0.50 10% $125 bd-ft $0.50 10% $85 bd-ft $0.50 20% $33 bd-ft $0.50 20% $31 bd-ft $0.50 20% $23 bd-ft $0.50 20% $31 bd-ft $0.50 20% $34 bd-ft $0.50 20% $30 20% $59 bd-ft $0.50 20% $45 20% $18 20% $23 $702 $15 $247 sections $7,722 sections $2,719 $149,624 $159,334 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 333 Turbines and Generators Turbine, Cross Flow Generator Switch Gear spare bearings, etc Labor Subtotal -Materials tariff (10%) shipping Subtotal -Labor Subtotal-Ace. No. 333-Turbines and Generators 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment Basic tools shovel hammer claws 1/2" drive socket set 5/8" drive socket set elec impact wrench 3Kw light plant wrench sets chainsaws chain sharpener files, extra chain Cobra rock drill bits, spades gasoline cans chain binders double bit axes mattox 3/8" galv. cable 3/8" nylon rope 5/8" nylon rope blocks 4 wheel cart portable lights heater sledge hammer Homelite gas eire. saw Homelite winches electric drills TSPE04SF.XLS Page6of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 1 1 1 1 418 1 418 10 10 5 3 1 2 2 4 4 2 1 1 5 5 1000 600 600 4 3 2 4 2 2 ' 3 -- Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) ea $50,000 10% $55,000 ea $12,000 10% $13,200 ea $17,220 10% $18,942 ea $3,700 10% $4,070 $6,270 $91,212 10% $9,121 Is $1,500 $1,500 $15 20% $7,524 $109,357 ea $15 10% $165 ea $15 10% $165 ea $10 10% $55 ea $100 10% $330 ea $150 10% $165 ea $150 10% .$330 ea $400 10% $880 ea $60 10% $264 ea $350 10% $1,540 ea $40 10% $88 Is $60 10% $66 ea $6,000 10% $6,600 ea 10% $0 ea 10% $0 ea 10% $0 ea $20 10% $110 ea $20 10% $110 ft $0.38 10% $418 ft $0.32 10% $211 ft $0.73 10% $482 10% $0 ea $300 10% $1,320 ea $100 10% $330 ea $175 10% $385 ea $15 10% $66 ea $300 10% $660 ea $650 10% $1,430 ea $150 10% $495 ·sHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ~cc No. Description 335 Basic Tools, Continued hole saw saws all homesteaders jack hydralic jack radio volt I ammeter power cords pumpw/ hose rebar cutter bender mixer-gasoline pry bar screen (sifting) bags -pack sacks, etc shipping Subtotal Ace. No. 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment 336 Roads, Railroads, and Bridges .01 Clearing .02 Trail to Intake-820' .03 Pipeline Trail -1500' pull out usable logs .04 Skidway to Powerhouse -1400' planks 2"x12" path logs .05 Transmission Line Trail-3300' .06 Bridge Subtotal-Labor Subtotal -Material Subtotal -Ace. No. 336 -Roads, Railroads, and Bridges 350 Land and Land Rights (Transmission) .01 Land Rights -Transmission Line Subtotal -Ace. No. 350-Land and Land Rights TSPE04SF.XLS Page 7 of 9 Labor (mh) Quantity 1 1 4 3 4 1 10 1 1 1 1 5 1 68 150 70 24 1170 24 170 0 506 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) ea $100 10% $110 ea $160 10% $176 ea $45 10% $198 ea $50 10% $165 ea $200 10% $880 ea $200 10% $220 ea $30 10% $330 ea $250 10% $275 ea $200 10% $220 ea $150 10% $165 ea $1,000 10% $1,100 ea $20 10% $110 ea $300 10% $330 10% $0 $0 $20,944 30% $0 30% $1,326 30% $2,925 30% $0 30% $1,365 bd-ft $0.50 30% $1,229 30% $468 30% $3,315 0% $0 $15 $7,590 $3,038 $10,628 $0 $0 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 353 .10 Substation Equipment .11 Transformer 3 phase, 150 KVA .12 Transformer-10 KVA .13 Switches, Breakers, and Misc. Equipment Fused 3 phase switch Subtotal -Labor Subtotal -Material Subtotal -Ace. No. 353 -Substation Equipment 355 Poles and Fixtures .10 Powerhouse to Tenakee Springs, 1mile .11 Poles .12 Guys, Anchors, and other material .13 Installation River Crossing Subtotal -Material Subtotal -Labor Subtotal -Ace. No. 355 -Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices .10 Conductors tree cable (incl. all hardware) 1 phase upgrade Insulators Hardware and Miscellaneous connector brackets (in conductor) clamps (in conductor) splice stringing blocks (rent) Installation -layout, pulling, etc layout pulling line pull in line pull in messenger pull in cable -2000' pull cable winch cable to end clip in Subtotal -Materials Subtotal -Labor Subtotal-Ace. No. 356-O.H. Conductors and Devices TSPED4SF.XLS Page 8 of 9 Labor (mh) Quantity 0 1 0 1 30 1 30 160 10 30 100 24 314 1 60 1 60 30 30 30 36 9 20 24 20 10 16 16 70 362 ... Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) ea $5,000 15% $5,750 ea $600 10% $660 ea $2,500 25% $3,688 $15 $450 $9,648 $10,098 $0 ea $25 25% $3,3131 25% $563 25% $1,875 25% $450 $1,490 $15 $4,710 $6,200 mi $25,000 15% $28,750 ea $2,000 15% $3,335 $0 ea 15% $1,035 ea 15% $518 ea $60 15% $1,242 30% $0 30% $390 30% $468 30% $390 30% $195 30% $312 30% $312 30% $1,365 $31,253 $15 30% $7,059 i $38,312 1 SHORT ALUMINUM AND WOOD FLUME ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC [Ace No. Description 359 Demobilization Subtotal -Ace. No. 359 Demob. Subtotal Aluminum Flume With Camp Subtotal Aluminum Flume Without Camp Subtotal Wood Flume With Camp Subtotal Wood Flume Without Camp TSPE04SF.XLS Page 9 of 9 Labor (mh) Quantity 224 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) $15 20% $4,032 $4,032 $501,788 $454,974 $511,497 $464,683 LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 330 Land and Land Rights .01 Land Rights -Legal and Administrative Costs FERC permit & licensing engineering fees misc. expenses Subtotal -Ace no. 330 330 .50 Mobilization and Logistics .51 Start-up (air transportation) .52 Construction Buildings Camp frames and floors tents 14'x16' cots, matresses chairs tables shelves/lockers racks gas dryer washing machine sheets pillows wood stove kerosene stove blankets sink tank -elevated stove pots/ pans dishes, utensils freezer referigerator .53 Construction Power generator -5 Kw gas .54 Temporary Water System latrine shower water pump -electric water tank-85 gal filter hot water heater-propane .55 Construction Surveys TSPE03.XLS Page 1 of9 Labor (mh) Oua.1tity 400 150 2 36 3 3 10 10 2 10 1 1 1 20 10 3 3 20 3 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) $15 $6,000 $70 $10,500 $2,000 $1,000 $19,500 $2,000 $4.000 ea $500 30% $1,500 ea $500 10% $1,500 ea $43 10% $430 ea $15 10% $150 ea $150 10% $300 ea $122 15% $1,220 ea $500 10% $500 ea $300 10% $300 ea $300 10% $300 set $8 10% $160 ea $5 10% $50 ea $800 10% $2,400 ea $600 10% $1,800 ea $13 10% $260 ea $70 10% $210 ea $150 10% $150 ea $300 10% $300 set $250 10% $250 set $15 10% $150 ea $600 10% $600 ea $500 10% $500 ea $600 10% $600 ea $500 10% $1,000 ea $200 10% $200 ea $400 10% $400 .. I. ~20 I ;~r $220 ea $200 10% $200 ea . $300 10% $300 -. $6,0.00 15% $6,QOO. LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC j.Acc No. Description .59 Barge Transport off load .60 Vehicles used truck 4-wheeler w/ trailer .61 Crew Camp Costs cook (80 days) material (food) misc. freight Subtotal -Materials Subtotal -Labor Subtotal-Ace no. 330.5 331 Structures and Improvements .10 Powerhouse (##' X ##') roofing mat'l .12 Excavation (hand) blasting .13 Concrete (including reinforcing) rebar forms transportation to site .16 Electrical lights 3/4" conduit 2" conduit 3" conduit electrical devices (receptacles, etc.) fan #12AWG wire 250 MCM wire panels Labor .18 HVAC and Plumbing 22" valve 125#flange increaser 22" to 30" 45 deg elbow 22" pipe expansion coupling mise bolts & fittings TSPE03.XLS Page 2 of 9 Labor (mh) Quantity 1 160 1 1 1000 800 1196 480 10,000 20 320 600 80 16 40 2 40 500 50 20 300 5 20 5 20 6 2 1 1000 250 3 80 1 2 1 I 1 20 1 1 Unit Risk Amount I Unit Price Factor ($) ! $27,000 10% $27,000 10% ea $5,000 10% $5,000 ea $6,000 10% $6,000 10% md $12 10% $9,600 $5,000 $78,550 $12 $14,352 $92,902 bd-ft $0.50 10% $5,000 sf $2 20% $640 40% 40% $2,500 cy $65 20% $1,040 T $560 30% $1,120 sf $2 30% $1,000 30% 15% $150 ft $1.50 15% $450 ft $4 15% $80 ft $8 15% $160 15% $100 ea $200 15% $200 ft $1.00 15% $1,000 ft $2.10 15% $525 ea $1,000 15% $3,000 15% ea $4,000 15% $4,000 ea $350 15% $700 ea $600 15% $600 ea $300 15% $300 ft I $22 30% $440 ea $300 15% $300 ea $400 15% $400 ·-·~ LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 331 Labor (welding) Subtotal-Material Subtotal-Labor Subtotal-ace. no. 331 332 Reservoirs, Dams, and Waterways Clearing (in Trails Section) Intake System Trough 1/4" steel plate-9 sq. ft. fabricate haul & place drill & bolt grout bolts Screen fabricate Trough transition misc. material Diversion Dam material per 1 0' section -150' fabricate & install planks grout bolts misc. material Gate 32-inch Diameter Steel Pipe haul, place, & level straps paint blocks bolts connect to flume Forebay lumber slide gate slide gate bypass hardware Labor (mh) 40 1468 16 8 6 10 90 8 104 45 30 20 8 1/2" x 12" galv. bolts . ~. 1/2" galv. nuts 5/8" x 2' galv. bolts 5/8" galv. nuts TSPE03.XLS Page 3 of9 Quantity 34 90 15 1000 1 280 15 15 3000 1 1 I 700 1000 240 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) 15% $23,705 $12 $17,616 $41.321 15% ea $36 15% $1,224 15% $500 15% 15% 15% $50 sf $10 15% $900 15% $700 15% $600 15% $200 $60 20% $900 20% $200 bd-ft $0.50 10% $500 10% $200 10% $300 ea $1,000 15% $1,000 ft $72 30% $20,160 30% $300 ea $15 10% $225 10% $150 ea $6 10% $90 10% $250 30% $300 bd-ft $0.50 10% $1,500 ea $1,150 10% $1,150 ea $600 10% $600 lb $1.67 15% $1,169 lb $1.67 15% $1,670 lb $1.67 15% $401 lb $1.67 15% $100 LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 332 Forebay clamps, couplers 24" pipe trash rack metal mise Labor Flume, wood (per 10' section) 6"x10"x10' beam 3"x10"x##' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace rails 5x5-20' 2x4-40' sides, bottom misc. comers bottom support, 4x8x6x6 side braces, 4x2x2x6x6 mise hardware, nails, & plates erection Subtotal -wood flume per 1 0' section Subtotal -labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -wood flume Subtotal -labor Subtotal extra labor per 10 deg bend TSPE03.XLS Page 4 of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 150 35 184 2 100 1.5 60 0.6 37 1.33 12 0.75 16 2 42 1 27 4 200 1 20 2 96 4 48 2 1.3 23.48 260 260 4 29 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) 15% $1,500 ft $24 15% $3,600 15% sf $7 15% $245 15% $200 15% bd-ft $0.50 15% $50 bd-ft $0.50 15% $30 bd-ft $0.50 15% $19 bd-ft $0.50 15% $6 bd-ft $0.50 15% $8 15% bd-ft $0.50 15% $21 bd-ft $0.50 15% $14 bd-ft $0.50 15% $100 ! bd-ft $0.50 15% $10 bd-ft $0.50 15% $48 bd-ft $0.50 15% $24 15% $100 15% $429 $12 $282 sections $111,540 sections $73,258 $12 30% $1,392 LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLAR CONSULT ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 332 Flume (aluminum) 1 O"x1 O"x1 0' beam 5"x 1 O"x##' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace, 2"x4"x12' rails 4"x4"x8' -20' 2"x4"x10'-40' saddle rolled aluminum joints supports misc. hardware, screws, etc erection Subtotal-aluminum flume per 10' section Subtotal -labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -aluminum flume Subtotal labor Subtotal-extra labor per 10 deg bend 332 Supported Penstock Clearing Excavation (including drilling and blasting) Backfill Cammon Bedding 30" Diameter Steel Penstock 30" Diameter PE Penstock 1 O"x1 O"x1 0' beam 5"x1 O"x##' side brace base blocks (w/rancher) cross brace, 2"x4"x12' rails 4"x4"x8' -20' 2"x4"x10'-40' saddle joints TSPE03.XLS Page 5 of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 2 167 1.5 110 0.6 37 1.33 12 0.75 16 1 21 1 27 1.25 12 1 10 3.25 0.5 60 1 1.3 16.48 260 260 8 29 0 1 10 1 10 2 167 1.5 110 0.6 37 1.33 12 0.75 16 1 21 1 27 1.25 12 3.25 ·- Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) bd-ft $0.50 15% $84 bd-ft $0.50 15% $55 bd-ft $0.50 15% $19 bd-ft $0.50 15% $6 bd-ft $0.50 15% $8 bd-ft $0.50 15% $11 bd-ft $0.50 15% $14 bd-ft $0.50 15% $6 ft $8.60 25% $86 25% bd-ft $0.50 25% $30 25% $100 20% $417 $12 $198 sections $108,420 sections $51,418 $12 30% $2,784 ft $66.00 10% $660 ft $36.00 10% $360 bd-ft $0.50 10% $84 bd-ft $0.50 10% $55 bd-ft $0.50 20% $19 bd-ft $0.50 20% $6 bd-ft $0.50 20% $8 bd-ft $0.50 20% $11 bd-ft $0.50 20% $14 bd-ft $0.50 20% $6 20% .. ' LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 332 supports misc. hardware, screws, etc erection Subtotal-supported PE penstock per 1 0' section Subtotal-labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -PE penstock Subtotal -labor Subtotal-supported Steel penstock per 1 0' section Subtotal-labor per 1 0' section Subtotal -Steel penstock Subtotal labor Subtotal Labor Subtotal -ace. no 332 w/ wood flume Subtotal -ace. no 332 w/ aluminum flume Subtotal ace. no 332 w/ PE penstock Subtotal ace. no 332 w/ Steel penstock 333 Turbines and Generators Turbine Generator Switch Gear spare bearings, etc Labor Subtotal -Materials tariff (1 0%) shipping Subtotal -Labor Subtotal -Ace. No. 333 -Turbines and Generators ' TSPE03.XLS Page 6 of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 0.5 60 1 1.3 16.48 260 260 16.48 260 260 529 1 1 1 418 418 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) bd-ft $0.50 20% $30 20% $100 20% $691 . $12 $198 sections $179,660 sections $51,418 $991 $12 $198 I sections $257,660 sections $51,418 $12 $6,348 ! $255,967 $232,399 $278,309 $356,309 I ea $27,036 10% $27,036 ea $10,832 10% $10,832 ea $17,220 10% $17,220 10% $3,000 $58,088 $5,809 $2,200 $12 20% $5,016 $71,113 LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC IACC No. Description 335 Misc. Mechanical Equipment Basic tools shovel hammer claws 1/2" drive socket set 5/8" drive socket set elec impact wrench 3Kw light plant wrench sets chainsaws chain sharpener files, extra chain Cobra rock drill bits, spades gasoline cans chain binders double bit axes mattox 3/8" galv. cable 3/8" nylon rope 5/8" nylon rope blocks 4 wheel cart portable lights heater sledge hammer Homelite gas eire. saw Homelite winches electric drills hole saw saws all homesteaders jack hydralic jack radio volt I ammeter power cords pumpw/ hose rebar cutter bender mixer gasoline TSPE03.XLS Labor (mh) Quantity 10 10 5 3 1 2 2 4 4 2 1 5 5 1000 600 600 4 3 2 4 2 2 3 1 4 3 4 1 1 1 1 Page 7 of9 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) ea $15 10% $150 ea $15 10% $150 ea $10 10% $50 ea $100 10% $300 ea $150 10% $150 ea $150 10% $300 ea $400 10% $800 ea $60 10% $240 ea $250 10% $1,000 ea $40 10% $80 ea 10% $200 ea $6,000 10% $6,000 ea 10% $1,000 ea 10% $200 ea 10% $300 ea $20 10% $100 ea $20 10% $100 ft $0.38 10% $380 ft $0.32 10% $192 ft $0.73 10% $438 10% $300 ea $300 10% $1,200 ea $100 10% $300 ea $175 10% $350 ea $15 10% $60 ea $300 10% $600 ea $650 10% $1,300 ea $150 10% $450 ea 10% $250 ea $160 10% $160 ea $45 10% $180 ea $50 10% $150 ea $200 10% $800 ea $200 10% $200 ea 10% $300 10% $200 ea $200 10% $200 ea $150 10% $150 ea $1,000 10% $1,000 LONG FLUME AND PENSTOCK ESTIMATE POLARCONSUL T ALASKA, INC. TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT INDIAN RIVER DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (September 1992 Dollars) FERC ACC No. Description 355 Poles and Fixtures .10 Powerhouse to Tenakee Springs, 1mile .11 Poles .12 Guys, Anchors, and other material .13 Installation River Crossing Subtotal -Material Subtotal -Labor Subtotal -Ace. No. 355 -Poles and Fixtures 356 Overhead Conductors and Devices .10 Conductors tree cable 1 phase upgrade Insulators Hardware and Miscellaneous connector brackets (in conductor) clamps (in conductor) splice stringing blocks (rent) Installation -layout, pulling, etc layout pulling line pull in line pull in messenger pull in cable -2000' pull cable winch cable to end clip in Subtotal Materials Subtotal -Labor Subtotal-Ace. No. 356-O.H. Conductors and Devices 359 Demobilization Subtotal -Ace. No. 359 -Demob. TSPE03.XLS Page 9 of9 Labor (mh) Quantity 160 10 30 100 24 314 1 60 1 60 30 30 30 36 9 20 24 20 10 16 16 70 186 224 Unit Risk Amount Unit Price Factor ($) ea $25 25% $250 25% $1,000 25% 25% $1,250 $12 $3,768 $5,018 mi $25,000 15% $25,000 ea $2,000 15% $2,000 ea 15% $0 ea 15% $0 ea $60 15% $540 30% $1.000 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% $28,540 $12 30% $2,232 $30,772 . ] 2Wo $2,688 $2,688 polarconsult alaska, inc. Appendix B I I I I I --~ .P~~· 'f .. _ -'!~ -~--- \ BUILDINGS - CONNECT TO EXISTING TOv.tl II ,; ~TENAKEE SPRINGS PO~ GRID ----: 3-PHASED FUSEO DISCONNECT ----~ AREA MAP N.T.S. 1503 WEST 33RD AVE, SUITE 31 0 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 59503 \ \ ' ' 'q;, ... ,~-­.. 0 ~ \ \ \ PR OJEC T LOCATION - SEE AREA MAP ~ AT RIGHT----- KEY MAP N.T.S. ENERGY CO NS ULTANTS PHONE (907) ·258-·2420 FAX (907) 258-2419 TO LOG LANDING TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN ·ROAD 200 0 200 <4(10 600 H H H H SCAt£ IH FEET camlUR INTrRV~L 5 FEIT LEGEND O't{RHOO ---------1RAN911SSION CAlLE CONTOURS \ '·500 . ~ - aEI</RI't{R ~ TRAil ~--~:::::::-_..:::::::::::::: TENAKEE SPRINGS HYD R~O ELECTRIC PROJECT T -·1 OF 4 PIPruNE I ! I ENGiNEERS -SURVEYORS 1503 WEST 33RD ·WE. SUITE 310 ANCHORAGE, Al,;.sr<A 99503 ------ I J ~· ENERGY CONSULTANTS ""ONE (907) 258-2420 f:AX (907) 258-2419 TO EXISTING ROAD \ "' ,, ,, \\ \\ \\ \\ '\~SKID TRNL ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, \\ \\ ,, \\ )) LEGEND 0\IERHEAO ---------1RAHSWISSION CASI.£ PENS roo< CONTOURS '\sao~ ClEEK/RI\el .. ~ TRNL .~:::::::::; .. _-:;.. ~· . .:::::::;. NOTES; I. W# DENOTES WATERFALL N!AEJERS. 100 100 SCALE IN FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL 5 F[ET 200 SHEET TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN SHOWING PIPELINE DESIGN TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT T-2 OF 4 / ' FlU liE TRASHRACK AND DE SANDER I TO EJOSTING ROAD ,, ,, ,, \\ ,, \\ \\ \\ '\.-~SKID l!!Ail ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, \\ \\ ,, \\ ,, \\ )) LEGEND O'vmHEAO ---------l!!ANSiotiSSlOH CAlli.£ PENSlOCI< CONTOURS '"\500.......-r- IJ'(EEK,/RI'IER ~~ l!!Ail . .-;:::::::.:::::.::: .-;::.. 'l' ·~· SCAlf IN FEET CONTOUR INTERV""-5 FEET L---~~~==~~==~~~~~~~~==~~~~~~==========~==~~==-:~==========~~~ iJ~;c --2'~-i~ "' .J~-:: oEscRIP71oN poI arc on suIt a I ask a ' inc. DRAWING PROJEcT . sHEET I' ORA 'IIN1 -· -~--Q,!l CrlcCKED1 • ---~fl. . SCftLf: j~ N0f8; Ji!C -:;-g '~__. ENGiNEFRS SURVEYORS -ENERGY CONSULTANTS '503 WEST 33RD AVE, SUITE 310 ANCHORAGE, ALA "i<CA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-· 2420 FAX (907) 258-~:""19 TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN SHOWING FLUME DESIGN ~~ l ________ , ______ ,. __ _ TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDFOELECTRIC PROJECT -------------------------------- T-3 / / / / / / / /. / '/ #/// ' / / DME: DESiG~C). DRA¥!1\ CHLCK~ ·: ,/;. _I /I / / I I ,<::!' ' ; I . SCA:.E· -·· . "'-•. 'OT£~ 01'<: pol a reo n suIt a Ia ska, inc. ENGINEERS SvRVEYORS -ENERGY CONSULTANTS 150.3 WEST 33RD A iE. SUITE 310 ANCHORAGE. ALAS':' 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 FAX (907) 258-2"-19 / DRAWING TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN SHOWING SHORT FLUME DESIGN LEGEND OVERHEAD --------TRANSioiJSSION CABLE PENS TOO< CONTOURS "\.&Jo~ PROJECT CRED</RIIIER ~ TR-'IL -~:::::::::.::_.:::=-~ __,. NOTES: 1. Wf DENOTES WATERFALL NUIE!ERS. SC"'-.E < N FEET CONTCIJR INTERVAL 5 FEU TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT c 2 X 4 \1000 RAILING 4 X 4 \1000 POST----...! 2 X 4 \1000 "'-PRESSURE TREATED 8 "'"' """ ""'"" ELEYAII(ll X 30" • PIPE L----4 X 4 \1000 SLPPCI<T -2 X 6 \1000 RAILING _ 4 X 4 \\OOD POST AT 10'-<J" O.C. . __.... WALI<JIA Y (WOOD PLANK I NG) -4 X 4 WOOD STRINGER ·--\1000 SADDLE PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BLOCK 6. WOOD SAD!JL E 4 X 6 \\000 SUPPORT 30" • PIPE X 4 X 6 \\000 SUPPORT PRESSURE TREATED ilOOO SLOCK G) OVER-HEAD PIPE SUPPORT ----------------------------------------1® pIPE SUPPORT ON .GR::..A=D=E=---------------; STEEL 3AND (TY~· 30" ~ POLYETHYLENE P GALVAN I ZD GABLe (7YP) ~ANCHOR (TYP) 5~EE: SCALf G)-Ehl~t:-I---=_E__QL.YJ;It!YLENE P..:..I-=-P-=E=--=B:..::E=N_!.:D:;:.._ ________________________________ -:- ra CENTER OF RADIUS DAlEc ____ l,/~:1/~ OE~: GNFIL_. _ _JJ. DRAWN'-·-____ DJfi C>ltCKEJJ :._ E;, SCALL _ ___:..s ~'jOH'D DWG: ---~··~~-~ ~SH! pol a reo nsu It a Iaska, in c. ENGINEERS -SURVEYORS -ENERGY CONSULTANTS 1503 WEST 33RC AVE, SUITE 310 ANCHORAGE, AL~SKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 ~AX (907) 253-2419 DRAWl NG PIPE SUPPORT DETAILS PROJECT TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT SHEET H-1 OF 6 i i . ...., f-, U!-i i i '-.... , I • I 'I t! I I ! ; X 4 WOOC ~ROSS BRAG: NG LJ I -2 X 4 Yr'OOD RA ILl NG ----2 X 6 \IOOD RAILING ---5 X 5 \1000 POST "i' -5 X 5 lltOOD POST ';.-., ----2• S''li CEO '11000 PLANKING 5 X 5 WOOD BRACE ~I l~-,L~:::t====:LL~ 5 • S•lUARE '11000 BRACE AT E.\CH POST 6 X 6 WOOD STR I NCER PRESSURE TREATED WOOC BLOCK 4 X 4 \\\XIO SUPPORTS \.2 X 4 'lt1JOD CROSS BRAC INC GRADE 6 X ,; \IOOD STRINGER 6 X '0 \IOOD BEAM 4 X 4 'lt1JOD SUPPORT PRESSURE TREATED ~ 30•-STEEL PIPE GALVANIZED STEEL CABLE--==:::-:1-- ~PIPE SUPPORT AT CORNERS ----------------------------------~ (1)!Y99_~) __ t'J_UME: --~UP PORT -----fi=;;;:=_~;_~~-,~·~-=----~----~-=-_-~=-.. ~--~--~-5 __ :.:R~_::_:.:~--~~~::-~10·~;:::._S~~~~~--~~~~--_=_.~=_= ___ =_~;::=~p~O:=;I~a:.=:r~C:=:O:=:n:=:S~U~I~t==Q~~=O=S=;:k=a=,=:::j=n=C=.~-;::::::~~:=:~-;:.========~O;:RA:7W~I~N~G~=======~-r===:-=====;:P~R~O~JE::;C::T========,-;:=;:S~H~EE;::T;=~ r:~=-----------1 ENGINEERS_ SURVEYORS ENERGY CONSULTANTS FLUME AND PIPE TENAKEE SPRINGS H-z l_ .... _ -~--=~--=---_-_----------------_____ --_-_-_--_--_--_-_--_--./. :~~~c;!;;. J~:~s:~~E . 9 ~~~;E 31 a PH~~Ex \~a;}) z2~~-=_z2:~ o9 D ETA I l S H Y DR 0 E L E C T R I C P R 0 J E C T Dii'G: OF 6 STRAP 1\.~D SUPPORT WIRE l X 4 'II(X)D RAILING t---Z X 'MJOD DECKING 6 X 9 'MJOD BEAM ~======~~~~ '-..._ 2 X 4 I\OOD CF;OSS BRACING PRESSURE TREATED 'MJOO 3LOCK BEYOND 0.005 GAGE ALUM I NLM FLUME l.l....l.l---+--~-z X 4 'MJOD CROSS BRACING 4 X 4 'MJOD SUPPORTS PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BLOCK ®ALUMINUM FLUME Sl.J::!..P...:..P-=O~R...:_T.!___ ________________ , SUPPORT WIRE (TY?) 2X4'11(X)DPOST 2 X I\OOD DECKING 6 X 9 '11000 BEAM 4 X 4 'MJOD SUPPORT I FLUA£ OR PIPE AS APPc ! CAB!; 0' ..... ~ @ ....L------- I r 1 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I i I R I I I I I I I I I 11 i. STEEL . ' BEAM--.-""' I I I I ADJUSTABLE OVERFLOW WE I R -TRASH RACK -MESH SPACING PER TRUBI NE MANUt ACTURER I I ! I TT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / I I I I I I I I 24'-D' CENTERL ! NE OF I I I I DESANOER I I ~ AJTCW.TIC GATE D I YERS I ON STR~CTURE ,. 1' DE SANDER I I I I I I I I Z X 4 T/G \\000 PLANKING I I I I 1- ' I I I ' I I I I I I 1- FLOW -6 X 6 WOCf) S TUOS ( TYP AROUN ) . "" I FLOi -~ ~~~ANCHOR BOLT (TYP) DIVERSION STRUCTURE\ GAL VAN I ZED STEEL GRATING GRATING SPACES = 3/4" D.C. II I ,I 1lli II PROTECT! VE WALL~ X J2" e PIPE----..... 32" • PIPE VALVE ENCLOSURE J ~~~E~L~~TRUCT~U~R~E~----*-P_.~-~--------------~ ·----~~DIVERSION STR~U~C~T~U~R~E~---------------------~ ~-~~~==~~==~~~~~~~~~~~~~:r=====~==========~==============~~~ ~~~~c;N~~~-l!~~; polarconsuit alaska, inc. DRAWING PROJECT• SHEET t ~:.'\AWN:·~·-__ ___)~ I CHECKED;·--~ :CAL!:: ---'~_':! -~TE~ bwc. •SH< ENGINEERS -SURVEYORS ENERGY CONSULTANTS 1503 WEST 33~1 AVE, SUiTE 310 PHONE (907) 258-2420 ANCHORAGE, .,SKA 99503 FAX ( 907) 258-241 9 FLUME AND PIPE DETAILS TENAKEE SPRINGS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT H-4 OF 6 T! . ' :::" "'I -"·--- 1' 0 1--y ~---·:- t:.!.!:: . .r::--.....=.::_. -- 42" ~DISCHARGE PIPE HYDRAULIC TLRB I NE GENERATOR r LOUVERED A! R : NTAKE JO" ~PIPE -., :..--CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK I I STEE!_ PIPE SWITCH GEAR CONTiWLS 6 X 6 CEDAR LOG CONSTRUCTION -----k::.L..-----1 CONCRETE FOUNDATION EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: NONE GRAOE POWER HOUSE PLAN AND DETAILS .q, 4 1 i l WATER DISCHARGE HYDRAULIC TURBINE ":'ENAKEE SPRINGS HYD'~OELECTRIC PROJECT H-5 OF 6 l TURBINE -EX~LODED VIEW DRAF TIJSE BELG'W l ~- L---·- J ______ _ -·----···---------· t LCWEi'lED AIR EXHAUST WITH FAN TRANSIT I ON PiECE 1 CASING. 2. GUIDE VANE"S. 3. ROTOR. 4. ~IN BEARING. 5. CORNER CAS I NG . 6. AIR INLET VALVE. 7 . DRAFT TUBE. 8. TRANSITICN PIECE. CONCRETE FOUNDATION EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: NON£ LOUVERED EXHAUST FAN TRANSITION PIECE +--WAfER FRCO.I ?IPL.iNE OR FLDME X 4. ... SEC ON '--·-----