Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCosmos Hills Reconnaissance Report 2012Field Reconnaissance Report Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project December 4, 2012 Lower Kogoluktuk Site Prepared for: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) [AVEC.~~ AlASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Prepared by: WHPacific, Inc. 300 W . 31st. Avenue Anchorage , AK 99503 WHPaclfiC December 4, 2012 Mr. Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development Alaska Village Electric Cooperative 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 RE: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Field Reconnaissance Report September 26-29, 2012 Dear Brent: WHPac1fic This report summarizes the field reconnaissance activities that Steve Coleman (WHPacific) and Dan Hertrich (Hatch) performed from September 26-29, 2012 at the Wesley Creek and Kogoluktuk River sites in the Cosmos Hills near Kobuk, Alaska. (See Figures 1 and 2.) Steve was primarily looking at possible road accesses to each of these sites and constructability issues. Dan was primarily looking at possible intake and powerhouse locations and power generation issues. Both of their individual Trip Reports are included as attachments to this letter. · The field reconnaissance and preliminary analysis indicates that there are definitely hydroelectric resources in the Cosmos Hills area that could serve the local energy needs. However, at this early stage, a specific project has not been identified. Further feasibility work, including additional data gathering and cost estimating, will need to be completed before a project recommendation can be made. Following are brief descriptions of each of the sites investigated during this Reconnaissance Trip. Wesley Creek Site The Wesley Creek Site is located approximately seven road-miles northwest of Kobuk, where the Bornite Mine Road crosses Wesley Creek. The intake structure would be located upstream of the bridge, and the powerhouse would be located below the bridge. (See Figures 3 and 5.) The Wesley Creek Site would have a hydropower output capacity of approximately 350 kW or an annual energy output of approximately 1,430,000 kWh. Power output would drop considerably during the winter months (October through mid-May). Modeling shows that this site would have a combined (electrical and heat) diesel fuel savings of between 77,000 and 110,000 gallons, annually, depending on which demand load combinations are looked at. These fuel savings correspond to net present value (NPV) savings of between $10M and $13M, based on a term of 30 years and a rate of 3%. Please refer to Dan's report for a much more detailed analysis discussion. 300 W 31st Avenue • Anchorage, AK 99503 • T907.339.6500 • F907.339.5327 • www.whpacific.com Field Reconnaissance Report WHPaciiic 2012 Of the sites investigated, the Wesley Creek Site would be the easiest to construct, as road access to the intake location currently exists. A short road, approximately one-mile in length, would need to be constructed to the powerhouse site. The pipeline route between the intake and powerhouse would also be fairly simple and straight forward. Please refer to Steve's report for a more detailed discussion. Dahl Creek, located just west of the Dahl Creek Airport, also has road access to it. This site would have a hydropower output very similar to Wesley Creek. If these two projects were combined, annual fuel savings would increase to 108,000 to 194,000 gallons, representing NPV savings of $14M to $24M. Lower Kogo/uktuk River Site The Lower Kogoluktuk Site is located approximately six-miles northeast of Kobuk, but does not have road access. The intake structure would be located upstream of the falls section, and the powerhouse would be located below the falls. (See Figures 4 and 6.) The Lower Kogoluktuk Site would have a hydropower output capacity of approximately 890 kW or an annual energy output of approximately 5,570,000 kWh. Power output would drop considerably during the winter months, but for a shorter time period (December through early May) than the Wesley Creek site. Modeling shows that this site would have a combined (electrical and heat) diesel fuel savings of between 175,000 and 298,000 gallons, annually, depending on which demand load combinations are looked at. These fuel savings correspond to NPV savings of between $25M and $40M. Please refer to Dan's report for a much more detailed analysis discussion. From a purely constructability point of view, the Lower Kogoluktuk Site would be doable, but would require construction of approximately seven miles of new access road. In addition, the pipeline route between the intake and powerhouse would be much more difficult and expensive to construct than the Wesley Creek site. Please refer to Steve's report for a more detailed discussion. Upper Kogo/uktuk River Site The Upper Kogoluktuk Site was discarded as a run of river option, as it was deemed not feasible due to lower available head, increased construction costs, and poor geology. However, this site may be suitable as a storage project, but the hydropower output capacity would be in the range of 1 0 MW, which is far more than the current power demands in the area. For these reasons, it is recommended that this site no longer be considered. Summary and Recommendations From a purely energy-related point of view, the Lower Kogoluktuk Site is preferable, as it displaces the most diesel fueL This project is even more attractive when Ambler, the Dahl Creek Camp, and/or the Bornite Mine Camp are included in the energy demands. Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Page2 Field Reconnaissance Report WHPaciiit 2012 However, the cost to construct the Lower Kogoluktuk Site will be considerably higher than the Wesley Creek Site. An access road to the Lower Kogoluktuk Site will be approximately ten times more expensive than to the Wesley Creek Site. And while the required pipeline length for the Lower Kogoluktuk Site is considerably shorter than what would be required at Wesley Creek, it will be much more difficult (and expensive) to construct and will require a significantly larger diameter pipe. To more fully understand and select the best solution for hydroelectric development, additional feasibility investigations will be required. The following recommendations for further work include: • Investigate in greater detail the inclusion of Ambler, the Dahl Creek Camp, and the Bornite Mine Camp in the energy demand and fuel displacement analysis • Extend the LIDAR data and orthophoto imagery to include the Lower Kogoluktuk Site • Perform a more detailed analysis of the capacity and static head of the two sites and select intake and powerhouse locations • Develop conceptual-level project designs, including access road, pipeline, and transmission line routes; and intake and powerhouse structures • Perform cost estimates and constructability investigations on the conceptual designs • Perform additional feasibility analyses, based on the conceptual designs and construction cost estimates, to select a recommended design scenerio If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to call me at (907) 339- 6527 or Jay Hermanson at (907) 339-6514. Sincerely, WHPacific Incorporated Steve Coleman, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer Attachments: 1) Figures 1 -6 2) Photo Log 3) WHPacific Trip Report by Steve Coleman 4) Hatch Trip Report by Daniel Hertrich Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Page3 Attachments Figures Arctic Ocean -------- Chukchi Sea- FAIRBANKS . Bering S e a ., ,. ~~cdJ~ Gulf o f Alaska UNALASKA --I ~ rcr • Red Dog Mine ,L' o~ RiJI~,. 1\r.•dlitw Noat.lk • T e Deering WHPac1fiC 300 West 31st Avenue Anchorage, AK 99503 907-339-6500 Fax 907-339-5327 www.whpacific.coni E NANA k Ri '-0" 1J •K"'ut.l •Noorvik REGION /" •Amblc:r- Shu~lk e •Kobuk Location Maps Field Reconnaissance Report Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Alaska Village Electric Cooperative JOB NO.: 6032 DATE: Dec 2012 DRAWN BY: SEC CHECKED BY: SEC FIGURE NO.: 1 wo~·~111~ed4M"MMM lZ£S·6££·l06 ""~ OOS9·6££·L06 t0S66 )IV 'a6eJ04~uy anuaAy IS~£ IS8M 00£ aA!JeJadooo ::>!JJ::>al3 a6emA e}ise1v ~~afoJd ~!JJ~alaOJP~H SII!H sowso~ JJOda~ a::>uess1euuo::>a~ Pla!:l (.0009 = .. ~ :a1e::>g) dew ~J!U!:l!J\ ~ fdfrl $ 11)11) ;.: .. ~ ~ ci zw zu.;:;:~ all-c:iW Q~c~ w w 5 1-:::> ~ 0 0: 0 w ~ (...) z 0: 4: en en en en w <{ (...) z (...) 0 z 4: 0 ...J z (...) 4: w ;= w 0:: z 0 w (.9 ...J 5 w w u: Q... ...J Wo:J.:I!J!:Ied4M.MMM .LZts-6££· .L06 xe :l OOS9·6££· .L06 £0>66 )fG' 'e6eJ04:1U'o' &nUBA'o' ~S~£ ~S&M 00£ w 1-:::> 0 0: w z ::i w Q... a: ...J 4: ~ w 1-0 Q... aA!JeJadoo:) =>!JJ=>913 a6emA e)lse1v l:lafoJd :l!Jl:lataOJP~H SII!H sowso~ JJOdaH a:>uess,euuo:>a~ Pl9!.:1 <.ooot = .. ~ :a,e:>s) ssa=>=>v )laaJ:) Aa1saM \0 N ' \ w w 1-1-:::J :::J 0 0 a:: a:: 0 w ~ (.) z a:: ~ en en en en < w (.) z (.) 0 z ~ 0 <i! z (.) w ;:: w 0:: z <.9 0 w ...J 1-w 0 w u::: a... __. WO:>"~!Jped4NI" NININI .LZtsil££·.1.06 XU:f 00S911tt·.t.06 £0S66 >t'o' 'e6UJ04~U'o' enuel\'lf IS~£ ISBM 00£ w 1- :::J 0 a:: w z :J w a... a: ...J ~ ~ w 0 a... aA!JeJadoo~ =>!JJ=>al3 aBemA e)!se1v l~afOJd ~!Jl~alaOJP,(H SII!H sowso~ JJOdaH a:>uessJeuuo:>aH Pl8!:1 (.000£ = .. 1. :a1e:>g) ssa:>:>'tf JaA!H ll"lll"lo6o>t u u w w Cl) Cl) LEGEND FIELD RECONNAISSANCE ROUTE POTENTIAL ACCESS ROAD ROUTE • • • • • • • • • • • POTENTIAL PIPELINE ROUTE WHPac1fiC 300 West 31st Avenue Anchorage, AK 99503 907-339-6500 Fax 907-339-5327 www.whpacific.com Wesley Creek Sites (Scale: 1" = 1500') Field Reconnaissance Report Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Alaska Village Electric Cooperative JOB NO.: 6032 DATE: Dec 2012 DRAWN BY: SEC CHECKED BY: SEC FIGURE NO.: 5 LEGEND FIELD RECONNAISSANCE ROUTE Pl .£ PHOTO LOCATION POTENTIAL ACCESS ROAD ROUTE • • ••••• •••• POTENTIAL PIPELINE ROUTE WHPacifi( 300 West 31st Avenue Anchorage, AK 99503 907·339-6500 Fax 907-339-5327 www.whpaclflc.com Kogoluktuk River Sites (Scale: 1" = 1500') Fie ld Reconnaiss a nce Report Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project Alaska Village Elect ric Cooperative JOB NO.: 6032 DATE: Dec 2012 DRAWN BY: SEC CHECKED BY: SEC FIGURE NO.: 6 Photo Log ... Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo wg 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Wesley Creek: Intake Site above the Bridge. Wesley Creek, above the bridge, from the hill east of the creek. Looking south-southwest at potential intake locations. 9/27112. Wesley Creek, above the bridge, from the hill east of the creek: Looking west-northwest at potential intake locations. 9/27112. Wesley Creek, above the bridge. Looking upstream to the north. 9/27112. W!fPadfic, Inc. Wesley Creek, above the bridge, from the hill east of the creek. Looking southwest at potential intake locations. 9/27112 . Wesley Cr~ek, above the bridge, from the hill east of the creek. Looking northwest at potential intake locations. 9/27112. Wesley Creek, above the bridge. Looking upstream to the north. 9i27 112. Page I Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo Log 6032: Cosnws Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Pt. 2: Kogoluktuk River near the Lower Powerhouse Site. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River, below the Lower Powerhouse Site. Looking upriver to the northeast. 9/28112. WHPacific, Inc. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River, just above the Lower Powerhouse Site. Looking upriver to the northeast. 9/28/12. Page2 Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo Log 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Pt. 3: Bluff above the Kogoluktuk River within the Lower River Run. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River. Looking upriver to the northeast. 9/28112. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River. Looking south. 9/28112. WHPacific, Inc. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River. Looking east -southeast. 9/28112. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River. Looking downriver to the southwest. 9/28112. Page3 Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo Log 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Pt. 4: Bluff above the Kogoluktuk River near the Lower Intake Site. Lower run of the Kogo1uktuk River, near Lower Intake Site. Looking upriver to the northwest. 9/28112. Lower run of the Kogo1uktuk River, near Lower Intake Site. Looking east. 9/28112. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River, near Lower Intake Site. Looking downriver to the southwest. 9/28/12. WHPacific, Inc. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River, near Lower Intake Site. Looking northeast. 9/28/12. Lower run of the Kogoluktuk River, near Lower Intake Site. Looking west-southwest. 9/28112. Page4 Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo Log 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Pt. 5: Kogoluktuk River near the Upper Powerhouse Site. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, above the Upper Powerhouse Site. Looking downriver to the southwest. 9/28/12. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, above the Upper Powerhouse Site. Looking downriver to the west. 9/28112. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, above the Upper Powerhouse Site. Looking upriver to the northeast. 9/28112. WHPacific, Inc. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, above the Upper Powerhouse Site. Looking downriver to the west-southwest. 9/28112. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, above the Upper Powerhouse Site. Looking downriver to the west. 9/28112. Page5 Field Reconnaissance Trip Photo Log 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Pt. 6: Bluff above the Kogoluktuk River near the Upper Intake Site. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, from the bluff above the Intake Site. Looking upriver to the northwest at the intake location. 9/28112. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, near the Intake Site. Looking downriver to the east. 9/28112. WHPacific, Inc. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, from the bluff above the Intake Site. Looking upriver to the northwest. 9/28/12. Upper run of the Kogoluktuk River, near the Intake Site. Looking downriver to the south. 9/28112. Page6 ' WHPacific Trip Report by Steve Coleman Date: Project: No.: Field Reconnaissance Trip Report Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project 209.006032 Location: Reporter: Kobuk, Alaska Steve Coleman, P.E. Purpose: Steve Coleman, WHPacific Sr. Civil Engineer, and Daniel Hertrich, Hatch Sr. Civil/Hydro Engineer, traveled to Kobuk to conduct Field Reconnaissances of the potential Wesley Creek and Kogoluktuk River hydroelectric sites. Time and Events Summary: WednesdaY, September 26, 2012 4:30PM: Arrived at Anchorage International Airport and checked in for Alaska Airlines Flight 153 to Kotzebue. 5:30PM: Departed Anchorage for Kotzebue. 7:00PM: Arrived in Kotzebue. Checked in at the Nullagvik Hotel. 8:00 PM Dinner at hotel. 9:00 PM Walked to the AC Store to get food supplies for trip. 10:30 PM Returned to the Nullagvik Hotel. Kotzebue Weather: 30-35°F; 20 25 mph northerly winds; Clear skies. ThursdaY, September 27, 2012 7:00 AM Breakfast at hotel. 8:00 AM: Arrived at Era and checked in for Era Flight 3302 to Kobuk. 8:50AM: Departed Kotzebue for Kobuk. 1 0:20 AM: Arrived in Kobuk. 10:40 AM: Picked up by Johnny 0. (Assistant Camp Manager of NovaCopper's Bornite Mine) 11 :45 AM: Arrived at Bornite Mine (13 road miles from Kobuk). Met Michael Lilly and Tommy Jones at Wesley Creek on the way to camp. Checked in at camp and assigned to Tent No.9. 12:30 PM: Lunch at camp. Page 1 of6 Field Reconnaissance Trip Report 6032: Cosmos Hi!fs Hydroelectric Project September 26-29,2012 1:15PM: Met Tommy, who had four-wheelers for me and Dan. Fueled up the four-wheelers and went down to Wesley Creek. 1:45PM: Looked at potential intake areas above Wesley Creek Bridge. See Discussion section, below. 2:45PM: Hiked downstream to look at potential powerhouse locations below Wesley Creek Bridge. See Discussion section, below. 4:00PM: Finished .the reconnaissance of the Wesley Creek sites and headed towards the Kogoluktuk River partly following a cat trail. See Discussion section, below. 5:15 PM: Arrived at the Kogoluktuk River. 5:45 PM: Departed the Kogoluktuk River. 7:45PM: Arrived back at Bornite Camp. 8:00 PM: Dinner at camp. Kotzebue Weather: 30°F; 30 35 mph NNE winds; Clear skies. Kobuk Weather: 30-350f; 10-20 mph northerly winds; Overcast skies. Fridav, September 28, 2012 7:30 AM: Breakfast at camp. 8:30AM: Departed Bornite Mine for Kobuk. 9:15AM: Met Tommy, who had arranged the rental of a skiff to take us up the Kogoluktuk River. Bought 1 0 gallons of gas from the City of Kobuk for the skiff. 10:00 AM: Departed Kobuk for the Lower Rapids area on the Kogoluktuk River. Headed approximately 9 miles up the Kobuk River, and then turned north up the Kogoluktuk River for approximately 5 miles. 11 :00 AM: Arrived at the Lower Rapids area, approximately 1.5 miles upstream from where we took the four-wheelers yesterday. (Labeled Pt. 1 on Figure 6.) Beached the skiff on the west bank and proceeded on foot. See Discussion section, below. 11 :10 AM: Arrived at the Lower Kogoluktuk Powerhouse Site. (Labeled Pt. 2 on Figure 6.) 11 :25 AM: Arrived at the bluff above the river. (Labeled Pt. 3 on Figure 6.) 12:00 PM: Arrived at the bluff above the Lower Kogoluktuk Intake Site. (Labeled Pt. 4 on Figure 6.) 12:40 PM: Arrived at the Upper Kogoluktuk Powerhouse Site. (Labeled Pt. 5 on Figure 6.) Inc. Page2of6 Field Reconnaissance Trip Report 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 1 :05 PM: Arrived at the bluff above the Upper Kogoluktok Intake Site. (Labeled Pt. 6 on Figure 6.) 3:15 PM: Arrived back at the skiff. 4:45 PM: Arrived back at Kobuk. Bought 10 more gallons of gas for the skiff. 5:30 PM: Departed Kobuk. Arranged to drop the four-wheelers and the trailer off at Tommy's house, tomorrow, when we catch our flight to Kotzebue. 6:30PM: Arrived back at Bornite Camp. 7:00 PM: Dinner at camp. Kobuk Weather: 25-40°F; 0-10 mph NE winds; Overcast skies; Overnight snows. Saturdav. September 29, 2012 8:00 AM: Breakfast at camp. 9:00 AM: Rescheduled our flights so we could leave Kobuk on Era's 10:30 AM flight. Flight was delayed due to bad weather in the Kobuk area. 1 :00 PM: Morning flight canceled. Rescheduled on Era's 4:55 PM flight. 3:00 PM: Departed Bornite Mine camp and headed to Kobuk on the four-wheelers. 4:00PM: Arrived in Kobuk airport. Bering Air plane was on the ground. Because the weather was iffy, decided to take this plane, instead of Era. Returned the four-wheelers and trailer to Tom my. 4:15PM: Departed Kobuk on Bering Air 5:30PM: Arrived in Kotzebue. 5:45 PM: Checked in at Alaska Airlines. 6:00 PM: Dinner at Bayside Inn. 7:30 PM: Departed Kotzebue on Alaska Airlines Flight 153. 11 :00 PM: Arrived in Anchorage, via Nome. Kobuk Weather: 30-35°F; 0-5 mph westerly winds; Overcast skies; Overnight snows. Kotzebue Weather: 35°F; 0-5 mph westerly winds; Clear skies. WHPacific, Inc. Page 3of6 Field Reconnaissance Trip Report 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 Discussion: Wesley Creek Wesley Creek is accessed by a road that connects Kobuk to the Bornite Mine. The road is approximately 12-15 feet wide and constructed of dirt and gravel. During the time of the field reconnaissance the road was thawed in the afternoons and was very muddy. This road also accesses the Dahl Creek Landing Strip. Starting at Kobuk, the Dahl Creek Airport is located at approximately Mile 3, Wesley Creek Bridge at Mile 7, and NovaCopper's Bornite Mine Camp at Mile 13. The existing road to the Bornite Mine crosses Wesley Creek approximately 4 miles northwest of the Dahl Creek Airport. Currently a small bridge, satisfactory only for foot and four-wheeler traffic, crosses the creek. Full-sized vehicles currently must ford the creek, just below the bridge. NovaCopper plans to construct a new bridge that can handle their mine traffic at the ford location, next summer. Above the bridge, Wesley Creek parallels the existing road for approximately two miles in a northerly direction. Approximately 0.3 mile upstream from the bridge, near where a small creek enters from the east, the gradient begins to flatten. An intake area near this section was investigated. Road access to a potential intake structure would be relatively easy, as the existing road is only about 200 feet from the creek at this location. Vegetation consists of alders. However, road construction would be complicated by the presence of large boulders throughout this area. These boulders would also complicate the construction of any buried pipelines or support piles. Below the bridge, Wesley Creek parallels the existing road for approximately 0.5 mile in a south- southwesterly direction. After that, the creek continues in a southwesterly direction, while the road veers to the southeast. The creek gradient is steepest during the first one-mile below the bridge. A specific powerhouse location was not identified, but would likely be below this steeper section. Road access to a potential powerhouse structure would be relatively easy, as the existing road is only about 800 feet from the creek at this location. If the powerhouse was located further downstream, then the access road would be longer. Vegetation consists of spruce trees. The large boulders, prevalent above the bridge, were not observed in this area. To minimize the need for a separate maintenance road along the pipeline route, the pipeline between the intake and Wesley Creek Bridge would likely follow near to the existing road. Because of the large boulders present it would be beneficial to keep the pipeline above ground, possibly bedded on fill material. At the bridge the pipeline would go under the bridge and cross over to the east side of the creek. Again, it would be desirable to follow the existing road as far as practical below the bridge. An access road to construct and maintain the intake, powerhouse, and pipeline would need to be designed and constructed wide and strong enough to support construction activities. A 12- foot wide, single-lane, gravel-surfaced road with pull-outs should be adequate. Figures 3 and 5 show a possible configuration. WHPacific, Inc. Page 4 of 6 Field Reconnaissance Trip Report 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 An access road would be between 0.7 mile and 1.6 miles long, depending on the actual locations of the intake and powerhouse. A pipeline would be between 9,000 LF and 14,000 LF in length. Koqoluktuk River Access There is currently no road access to the Kogoluktuk River. An old cat trail does connect the River to the existing road system, but it is not passable with full-size vehicles. During the field reconnaissance, it was barely passable with four-wheelers in numerous areas. Our local field guide stated that this was the worst that he's seen this trail and was because of the heavy rains the area has experienced this fall. During our field reconnaissance, we followed an existing trail starting at the east end of the Dahl Creek Runway. Much of this route was across very wet, open tundra areas. Near the river, the trail traveled through spruce forest and was much better. A better route would be to follow the 250-foot contour (as shown on the USGS maps), north of the existing cat trail. This route was not investigated, but spruce forests were observed, and would likely avoid much of the wet areas. The Kogoluktuk River is approximately 3.5 -4.0 miles east of the east end of the Dahl Creek Runway. This section of road would have fairly shallow grades until a ridge at the Kogoluktuk River. Two potential hydroelectric sites were investigated during the field reconnaissance. These are referred to as the Lower and Upper Kogoluktuk sites on the figures. An access road to the Kogoluktuk sites would be similar to that described for the Wesley Creek Site. A 12-foot wide, single-lane, gravel-surfaced road with pull-outs should be adequate. Figures 4 and 6 show the locations of these sites, as well as possible access routes to them. Lower Koqoluktuk Site A potential powerhouse location for the Lower Kogoluktuk site is located approximately 0.5 mile northeast of where Glacier Creek enters the Kogoluktuk River. This is just below the steep rapids area. (Labeled Pt. 2 on Figure 6.) An access road to the powerhouse site would need to cross over a ridge that blocks easy access to the Glacier Creek Valley. This section of road would require fairly steep slopes, but once over the ridge, the terrain in the Glacier Creek Valley flattens out. Access to the Lower Kogoluktuk Intake site would likely follow the Glacier Creek valley up to a plateau and around a small valley. The road would then access the river by side sloping down a steep hill. A pipeline between the intake and powerhouse would likely follow the river. It would be above grade supported on the rocks. An access road to construct this section would need to be cut out of the rock. It is possible that a buried pipeline, connecting the intake and powerhouse in a more direct route would be feasible, but additional topographic information will be needed to determine this. An access road to the Lower Kogoluktuk Site would be approximately 6.7 miles long, depending on the actual locations of the intake and powerhouse. This length starts at the existing road WHPacific, Inc. Page 5 of6 Field Reconnaissance Trip Report 6032: Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project September 26-29, 2012 system, just west of the Dahl Creek Airport and does not include a construction road along the pipeline. A pipeline following the river would be between 3,500 LF and 4,000 LF in length. Upper Koqoluktuk Site A potential powerhouse location for the Lower Kogoluktuk site is located approximately 2,000 feet northeast of where Radio Creek enters the Kogoluktuk River. This is just below the steep rapids area. (Labeled Pt. 5 on Figure 6.) An access road to the powerhouse site would start back at the ridge that blocks easy access to the Glacier Creek Valley. Rather than going down into the Glacier Creek Valley, the road would roughly follow the 300-foot contour over to the Radio Creek Valley and then side slope down the steep hill (old river bank?) to the powerhouse site. Access to the Upper Kogoluktuk Intake site would branch off of the powerhouse road and continue at the higher elevation to a point upriver of the intake site. It would then side slope down a very steep hill to access the river and the intake. A pipeline between the intake and powerhouse would likely follow the river. It would be above grade supported on the rocks. An access road to construct this section would need to be cut out of the rock. It is highly unlikely that a buried pipeline, connecting the intake and powerhouse in a more direct route, would be feasible, as the hill between the two is well over 100 feet high. An access road to the Upper Kogoluktuk Site would be approximately 8.5 miles long, depending on the actual locations of the intake and powerhouse. This length starts at the existing road system, just west of the Dahl Creek Airport and does not include a construction road along the pipeline. A pipeline following the river would be between 6,000 LF and 6,500 LF in length. WHPacific, Inc. Page 6of6 Hatch Trip Report by Daniel Hertrich ~HATCH™ Trip Report WHPacific Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project H342690 12/3/2012 Distribution Daniel Hertrich, Hatch Steve Coleman, WHPacific Jay Hermanson, WHPacific Reconnaissance Trip Report Final Date: 9/26/2012-9/29/2012 Location: Wesley Creek and Kogoluktuk River Kobuk, AK and Bornite Mine, AK Present: Daniel Hertrich, Hatch Steve Coleman, WHPacific Tommy Jones, Kobuk resident, (907) 948- f 2005 Purpose: Investigate Potential Hydroelectric Sites 1. Introduction This investigation relates to the overall feasibility effort for hydroelectric development in the Cosmos Hills area of Alaska. projects that would potentially serve the communities of Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler with consideration for serving current and future mining operations. The purpose of this investigation is to • Review the existing reports and data collected • Travel to the project sites for reconnaissance purposes • provide a summary report with an initial analysis of the potential benefits of the projects based on the existing data and site visit. The existing studies and information collected for this report are listed in the Reference section at the end of this report. If youCi'5'ii'J mnn contained herein, please ad,ise imme~:;e'6 ~ 1[11 Page1 Safety • Quality· • Susta>nabi!ity • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. ~HATCH™ 2. Log is tics Dan and Steve departed Anchorage for Kotzebue on Alaska Airlines Wednesday 5:20 pm September 26th and stayed at the Nullagvik Hotel (907 442-3331 ). Departed Kotzebue for Kobuk on Era Aviation Thursday 8:50 am. NovaCopper Camp manager Johnny 0 transported (13 miles) to the NovaCopper's Bornite Mine camp before noon. The camp provided lodging and food for the remainder of the trip and was equipped with a kitchen and cook, showers, restrooms, laundry, medical, and other facilities. Dan and Steve utilized 2 four wheelers, owned by residents in Kobuk that were left at the camp, were accompanied by Tommy Jones on his own four wheeler and proceeded with reconnaissance of Wesley Creek and the cat trail from Dahl Creek airport to the Kogoluktuk River and arrived back at the camp around 8 pm. On Friday Steve and Dan departed the camp around 9 am to Kobuk and met Tommy who arranged the use of a skiff for transport up the Kogoluktuk river. After obtaining fuel the 3 set out and arrived at the lower end of the white water section of the Kogoluktuk around 11:30 which is about 1.5 river miles upstream of the end of the cat trail. Thence the reconnaissance proceeded to various river locations upstream to the upper end of the falls section (approximately 2.25 walking miles each way). Upon returning to Kobuk at 5 pm the boat was refuelled and Steve and Dan returned to the NovaCopper camp around 6:30 pm. Weather delays forced the cancelation of Era's morning flight but were able to travel back to Kotzebue on Bering Air and then back to Anchorage arriving at 10:30 pm. 3. Project Sites The table below lists the hydroelectric resources available in the Cosmos Hills vicinity and included in this analysis. The table also indicates the elevation configurations used where there is a lack of clear definition as to the best location for the powerhouse and/or features are outside the limits of the detailed elevation and imagery data. Table 1 -Project Configurations Parameter Wesley Kogoluktuk Dahl Cosmos Kogoluktuk-Dam Basin Area (sq mi) 5.2 290 8.4 11.1 290 Avg Annual Flow (cfs) 13.3 780.3 19.2 24.7 780.3 Design Flow (cfs) 19 275 24 25 1300 Intake Elevation (ft) 656 225 523 700 360 Powerhouse Elevation (ft) 333 175 273 380 250 Static Head (ft) 323 50 250 320 110 Conduit Diameter (in) 22 96 26 26 N/A Conduit Length (ft) 8,000 3,900 9,370 11,000 N/A Net Efficiency 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% Capacity (kW) 354 886 345 460 9,696 Annual Energy Output (kWh) 1,430,000 5,570,000 1,550,000 1,950,000 32,480,000 3.1 Wesley Creek The Wesley Creek project is a run of river configuration with numerous possible configurations primarily varying in powerhouse location and length of pipeline. Further Safety • Quality • Sustainabdity • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved. Including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents Rev. 0 Page2 ~ HATCH TM feasibility is required to determine the most appropriate project configuration. Initial estimates indicate that total head can vary from about 320' to over 400' with pipeline lengths from about 8,800' to almost 14,000'. Future analysis should consider, in addition to the variety of powerhouse locations, the option of moving the intake upstream slightly, and the possible diversion of tributaries located just outside the Wesley Creek basin near the headwater boundary (potentially increase basin area by -60%). Photo 1 -Possible Intake Site, Wesley Creek Small tributary visible at the right of the photo. 3.2 Lower Kogo luktuk The Kogoluktuk project, also referred to as the Lower Kogoluktuk site, is a potential run of river project with very low head and large flows. The suggested intake site has bedrock features along the banks and is located where the river cross section is relatively narrow (100' wide at 12' above river surface) which is an important consideration with regard to glaciation and capturing low flows during the winter. The suggested powerhouse site is located at the end of the falls section where the river opens up to a broad, flat section width. The static head listed in the configuration table is estimated based on visual observations and the elevations from the Digital Elevation Model. Elevation distance between the Aerometric ground points at the point of intake and the edge of coverage limit is 36'. Future feasibility analysis must consider the actual head based on additional survey data, location of features, diversion structure heights, draft tube locations and efficiencies, and ice considerations. Safety • Quality • Sustainability o Innovation © Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page3 ~HATCH ™ Photo 2 -Possible intake site on Kogoluktuk River The intake site could support a typical concrete divers ion structure , an obermeyer type structure, or possibly an intake excavated out of the bedrock. The last option would sacrifice the additional head gained by a raised dam and should only be considered in order to keep concrete use to an absolute minimum and offer the possibility for the project to use the natural water feature FERC licensing exemption. The pipeline route for the Kogoluktuk project is expected to generally follow the right bank of the river when looking downstream although a buried route that short circuits the river bend may be feasible (see Figure 1) in conjunction with a higher diversion structure . Consideration should be given to utilizing different sizes of pipe so that smaller diameters can be shipped inside the larger diameters to maximize the bulk versus weight considerations of air transport. The powerhouse location along the Kogoluktuk is at the end of the exposed bedrock section and some additional site investigation is required to select the best location once the Digital Elevation Model and Orthoimagery is extended to cover this area. The powerhouse will need to be situated high enough to avoid glaciation related flooding. A split level powerhouse with a vertical turbine potentially below submergence levels and a generator situated above may allow for lower turbine elevations if draft tube designs are not able to maximize head while avoiding potential flooding. · Turbine and generator options must also be investigated to determine the optimal project configuration. A Kaplan type turbine is expected although an enclosed Archimedes screw may be feasible as well. The Kogoluktuk project utilizes heavy and bulky components that will require feasibility investigation of shipping by air freight to the Dahl Creek runway. Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its content~.: Rev.O Page4 ~HATCH™ . ~ Photo 4 -Kogoluktuk lower falls area not included in Digital Elevation Model and Orthoimagery (looking upstream from same Bluff as photo above). Safety o Quality o Sustainability o Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev.O Page 5 ~HATCH ™ BURIED PIPELINE AL Figure 1 Map of Kogoluktuk Project with 10' Contours 3.3 Up pe r Kogoluktuk -Dam The Kogoluktuk river flows through a narrow canyon area upstream from the run of river project location discussed above. Two projects were considered at this location , a run of riv er project and a storage proj ect. Th is upper canyon area is also referred t o as the Uppe r Kogoluktuk site. Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation © Hatch 2012 All rights reserved , in cl uding all rights relating to the use of th is document or its contents . Rev.O Page6 ~ HATCH >M The run of river option at this site is generally discarded because of issues associated the inclination of faults in the bedrock, poor intake site options, lower head (-32'), and the longer distance from roads and transmission . The storage option along the upper Kogoluktuk would be suitable for loads about 1 0 times larger than the communities current needs (including heat and electricity). The capacity of the project is suggested to be about 10 MW (utiliz ing 1300 cfs). Further analysis including modeling of reservoir volumes would be required to more accurately establish capacity and energy. The storage project may be desirable for a moderate sized future industrial load but is oversized at this time. Lacking demand for this much energy it is not considered further. 3.4 Dahl Creek Heads for projects on Dahl Creek vary from about 250' to over 300' with corresponding pipeline lengths of 9,400' to 12 ,000'. A site visit to this project was not done. The suggested configuration is based on review of the Digital Elevation Model and Orthoimagery . Safety • Quality • Sustalnability • Innovation © Hatch 2012 Ali rights reserved, including ali rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page 7 ~HATCH™ 3.5 Cosmos Creek Consistent with other sites in area, configurations for this project have static heads ranging from 300' to over 370' with pipeline lengths ranging from 14,000' to 18,000' although there is some estimation based on USGS topographic mapping 1 . A site visit to this project was not done. The suggested configuration is based on review of the Digital Elevation Model and Orthoimagery and USGS 1:63360 topographic maps. 4. Project Energy and Benefit Analysis This trip report also presents a preliminary analysis of the benefits of the projects to aid in defining future feasibility efforts. 4.1 Methods The resource analysis pairs the hydrology data collected for the water year 2010/2011 with load data for the same period. A basic operational model is used wherein diesel fuelled energy is displaced by the available hydroelectric energy. Hydroelectric energy is determined using a fixed efficiency value and the headless occurring at full flow. Design flow (and capacity) for the Kogoluktuk project is based on limiting capacity with a total head loss of about 5%. Design flow for the remaining creek projects is based on limiting head loss to 15% of the static head. The hydrology and electric demand data sets were reduced to daily averages with daily peak loadings retained and used to simulate diesel generated electricity when the hydroelectric output was at or below this peak value. The model utilizes a minimum diesel loading of 30 kW over a 12 hour period whenever the hydro potential is below the daily peak demand. Diesel usage in the model is determined using a fixed efficiency of 13 kWh/gallon for electricity and 133,000 BTU/gal with an 80% conversion efficiency for heating. The determination of the economic value of the displaced diesel is based on present day prices for electrical generation of $6 per gallon and a retail fuel price of $10 per gallon for heating. The net present dollar value is calculated based on a 30 year term and 3% rate. 4.2 Analysis The hydrology data used in the analysis has been compared with the USGS historical data for the Kobuk River and Dahl Creek. Table 2 -Hydrology Comparison Sites Site Name 15744500 KOBUK R NR KIANAAK 15743850 DAHL C NR KOBUK AK Latitude 66°58'25" 66°56'46" Longitude 160°07'51" 156°54'32" DrainaQe Area (mi"2) 9,520 11 Discharge Begin Date 9/1/1976 7/17/1986 Discharge End Date 10/10/2012 10/10/2012 Record Count 11728 7425 1 USGS 1:63360 scale Alaska Topographic Quad maps Safety • Quality • Sustainabi!ity • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page8 RHATCH™ The historical data has been reduced to average daily values and is compared with 2010/2011 data used in this report using the following chart. Unit Hydrograph (cfs/ sq mi) 100 ~~~~~~~~ t====== ----Kobuk-USGS ===== ----Dahl-USGS -wesley -Kogoluktuk -Dahl -cosmos 0.1 ~--~----~----~---r----~--~-----r----~--~----~----r----r--~ 9/1 9/29 10/27 11/24 12/22 1/19 2/16 3/16 4/13 5/11 6/8 7/6 8/3 8/31 Day of Year {2010 data) Figure 2 -Chart of Hydrology Data Basic comparison of the hydrology data sets shows that the data used in this analysis appears generally consistent with the historical data and this may be typical for the climate associated with this region. Additional analysis should examine annual and seasonal variability in the historical data along with the more recent collected 2011/2012 data when it is available. The electrical load information provided by AVEC was summarized into daily averages and is shown in the chart below. AVEC has a generating plant in Shungnak that is connected to Kobuk by a transmission line. AVEC also operates a generation plant in Ambler and is planning another transmission line to connect to Shungnak and Kobuk. Review of the three years of load data does not show any significant change in patterns or trends in electrical demand for both Shungnak/Kobuk and Ambler. AVEC reports that the drop in load that occurred around December 2010 is an anomaly (likely a transmission line failure serving Kobuk). Therefore, that event has been removed from the comparison data by using the 2011 data for the same period. The ongoing data collection and reporting ability by AVEC is adequate for future feasibility analysis. Rev.O Page 9 Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation ~Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. ~HATCH ™ 300 250 ~ -g 200 111 E QJ a 5 ·;: 150 tl QJ iii 100 50 During the site visit the NovaCopper exploration camp utilized a 175 kW generator for their operations. It was reported by the camp manager that the generator was slightly undersized for their needs and that exploration activity was expected to increase over the next several years. Camp operations begin around mid May and end after September. A 200 kW flat load scenario occurring from 5/15 through 9/30 annually has been added as an optional demand in the benefit analysis. -Ambler -shungn ak/Kobuk Date Figure 3 -Chart of Demand Data The analysis of displaced heat energy utilizes the daily average heating degree days from the Bettles Airport to allocate total annual community heating requirements to daily values. The Bettles meteorological data has been collected since 1951 and is situated fairly close to the Cosmos Hills area making it suitable for this purpose. The annual heating requirements were obtained from the Alaska Energy Pathway 2010 data that was reported in mmBTU for Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler with about 80% of that demand being met by diesel and 20% by wood . For this report displaced heat demand was assumed to be entirely diesel fuelled. Future work should refine the annual heating requirements, the fuels used, their costs, and the timing of their use if displacing heat is to factor into the feasibility . 5. Results The modeling of the hydroelectric benefits indicates that the run of river project on the lower Kogoluktuk will displace the most diesel fuel. Without cost or constructability considerations, this project would be the clear choice for hydroelectric development. The benefits of this project are more pronounced when heating loads and the Ambler intertie is modelled. Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rig hts reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev.O Page 10 ~ HATCH™ The modeling also shows that the gain in benefits reduces as projects are combined. Thus, if the Wesley and Dahl creek projects are constructed there is generally little additional gain in fuel savings by adding the Kogoluktuk project. Another result of the modeling is the need for sizing projects to maximize economics based on the projected energy needs. For the Kogoluktuk, the capacity should be larger when considering incorporating the Ambler demand and heating loads. For the remaining projects, reduced capacities would be appropriate when combining multiple projects because the availability of water does not generally coincide with the need for energy. The modeling results for each load scenario and project development scheme are presented as the annual displaced fuel and net present value (NPV) in the following table. Table 3 -Annual Fuel Savings and Present Value Benefits for Each Project Option Demand/Hydro Scenario Electrical Heat Combined Hydro Annual NPV Annual NPV Annual NPV Size Fuel Savings Fuel Savings Fuel Savings (kW) Savings (millions Savings (millions Savings (millions (qal) of$) (oal) of$\ (gal) of$) Shungnak-Kobuk (SK) Wesley Creek 350 64,000 $7.5 13,000 $2.6 77,000 $10.1 Wesley + Dahl Creek 700 87,000 $10.2 21,000 $4.2 108,000 $14.4 Wesley + Dahl + Cosmos Creek 1160 103,000 $12.2 30,000 $5.8 133,000 $18.0 Kogoluktuk 890 116,000 $13.6 59,000 $11.6 175,000 $25.2 Wesley + Kogolutuk 1240 117,000 $13.8 65,000 $12.8 183,000 $26.6 Wesley+ Dahl Creek Kogoluktuk 1580 119,000 $14.0 71,000 $14.0 191,000 $28.0 Ambler-Shungnak-Kobuk (ASK) Wesley Creek 350 88,000 $10.4 9,000 $1.7 97,000 $12.1 Wesley +Dahl Creek 700 125,000 $14.7 28,000 $5.5 153,000 $20.2 Wesley+ Dahl+ Cosmos Creek 1160 152,000 $17.9 38,000 $7.4 190,000 $25.3 Kogoluktuk 890 188,000 $22.1 62,000 $12.0 249,000 $34.1 Wesley + Kogolutuk 1240 196,000 $23.1 70,000 $13.8 267,000 $36.9 Wesley+ Dahl Creek K()QQIL!ktuk 1580 203,000 -.. $23.9 80,000 $15.7 283,000 .......... ~ SK + Mine Camp Wesley Creek 350 102,000 $12.0 3,000 $0.6 105,000 $12.6 Wesley + Dahl Creek 700 137,000 $16.1 21,000 $4.1 158,000 $20.2 Wesley + Dahl + Cosmos Creek 1160 154,000 $18.1 30,000 $5.8 184,000 $23.9 Kogoluktuk 890 166,000 $19.6 59,000 $11.5 225,000 $31.1 Wesley + Kogolutuk 1240 168,000 $19.7 65,000 $12.9 233,000 $32.6 Wesley+ Dahl Creek Kogoluktuk 1580 170,000 $20.0 71,000 -· $14.0 241 ,00()__ $34.0 ASK+ Mine Camp Wesley Creek 350 110,000 $12.9 0 $0.0 110,000 $12.9 Wesley+ Dahl Creek 700 173,000 $20.4 21,000 $4.0 194,000 $24.4 Wesley+ Dahl +Cosmos Creek 1160 202,000 $23.8 37,000 $7.3 239,000 $31.1 Kogoluktuk 890 238,000 $28.0 59,000 $11.6 298,000 $39.6 Wesley + Kogolutuk 1240 247,000 $29.0 70,000 $13.8 317,000 $42.8 Wesley + Dahl Creek Kogoluktuk 1580 254,QQO $29.9 80,000 $15.6 334,000 $45.5 The following charts show the daily modeling results for selected projects. Safely • Qual>ty • Sustainabflity • lnrovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, includ>ng all rights relating to the use of thiS document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page 11 ~HATCH ™ 1200 -Diesel for Heat -Diesel for Electridty -Hydropower for Heat, kW 1000 -Hydropower for Electridty -HydropowerOutput --Avg Electrical Demand --Heat+ Electrical Demand 800 ~ Qj 600 ~ 0 Cl.. 400 200 0 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 Day of Year (2010) Figure 4 -Power Profile of Wesley+ Dahl Creek with Shungnak/Kobuk Demand 2500 2000 _1500 ~ :! .. Cll ~ 0 Cl.. 1000 500 0 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 Day of Year (2010) -Diesel for Heat -Diesel for Electridty -Hydropower for Heat, kW -Hydropowerfor Electridty -Hydropower Output --Avg Electrical Demand --Heat+ Electrical Demand 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 Figure 5 -Power Profile of Wesley+ Dahl Creek with Ambler+ Shungnak/Kobuk Demand Safety o Quality o Sustainability o Innovation © Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page 12 ~ HATCH™ 1200 1000 800 i .lO: .. 600 Ql ~ 0 1:1. 400 200 0 2500 2000 _1500 ~ .. Ql ~ 0 1:1. 1000 500 0 -Diesel for Heat -Diesel for Electridty -Hydropower for Heat, kW -Hydropower for Electricity -Hydropower Output 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 Day of Year (2010) Figure 6 -Power Profile of Kogoluktuk with Shungnak/Kobuk Demand -Diesel for Heat -Diesel for Electridty -Hydropower for Heat, kW -Hydropower for Electricity -Hydropower Output -Avg Electrical Demand -Heat+ Electrical Demand 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 Day of Year (2010) Figure 7 -Power Profile of Kogoluktuk with Shungnak/Kobuk+ Ambler Demand Safety • Quality • Sustalnability • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, inCluding all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev .O Page 13 ~ HATCHTK 6. Conclusions and Recommendations This site visit and preliminary analysis indicates that there are definite hydro resources in Cosmos Hills area that could serve local energy needs. However, there is a need for further feasibility work including data gathering and cost estimating before a development recommendation can be made. A preliminary opinion regarding project selection is that the lower Kogoluktuk is preferable if it can be constructed for a reasonable cost and is properly designed and constructed to ensure low maintenance operation. Additional feasibility investigations with a focus on the option of displacing energy for Ambler and heating needs, construction methods and costs, capacity configurations, and general risk assessments should result in a clearer understanding of the best solution for hydroelectric development. The following general recommendations are made for future work: • Extend collection of LIDAR data and orthoimagery, or obtain elevations from land surveying, for the lower Kogoluktuk powerhouse and the Cosmos Creek intake. • Perform additional hydrology review and analysis. • The capacity and/or static head for each project should be further evaluated especially where multiple projects are considered. • Evaluate access road and transmission route at the hillside next to the Kogoluktuk. • Perform additional reconnaissance, particularly for the Kogoluktuk features including the pipeline, and develop preliminary conceptual project design(s). • Perform additional feasibility analysis including cost estimates and investigations of construction and other development issues to conclude the recommended development scenario. 7. Disclaimer This report was prepared by Hatch, together with WHPacific, for the sole and exclusive benefit of Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (the "Owner") for the purpose of assisting the Owner to determine the feasibility of hydroelectric development near Cosmos Hills (the "Project")], and may not be provided to, relied upon or used by any third party. Any use of this report by the Owner is subject to the terms and conditions of the Services Agreement between Hatch, WHPacific, and the Owner, including the limitations on liability set out therein. This report is meant to be read as a whole, and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The report includes information provided by the Owner, WHPacific, and by certain other parties on behalf of the Owner and WHPacific. Unless specifically stated otherwise, Hatch has not verified such information and disclaims any responsibility or liability in connection with such information. This report contains the expression of the professional opinion of Hatch, based upon information available at the time of preparation. The quality of the information, conclusions and estimates contained herein is consistent with the intended level of accuracy as set out in this report, as well as the circumstances and constraints under which this report was prepared. However, this report is a scoping study and, accordingly, all estimates and projections contained herein are based on limited and incomplete data. Therefore, while the work, results, estimates and projections herein may be considered to be generally indicative of the nature and quality of the Project, they are not definitive. No representations or predictions are intended as to the results offuture work, nor can there be any promises that the estimates and projections in this report will be sustained in future work. Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page 14 ~HATCH™ 8. References Cosmos Hills Hydrologic Network Installation and Operation, August 2010-December 2011, Lilly, Brailey, and others, May 2012. Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Project, Preliminary Assessment & Technical Memorandum, WHPacific, 17 pages. Geotechnical Investigation Kogoluktuk River Hydropower Site, Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study, WHPacific, December 14, 2011 Draft Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report, AVEC Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study, Golder Associates Inc., December 1, 2010. Digital Elevation Model obtained from WHPacific, LIDAR data acquired by Aerometric on August 2010. Acquired at 1200 meters above mean terrain (AMT) and have a horizontal accuracy of 0.38 meters, vertical accuracy of 0.15 meters or better, and with a nominal point spacing of 0. 75 meters, for production of 1' contours. Orthoimagery obtained from WHPacific, Digital Orthomosaic based on 24 August 2010 aerial photography with a pixel ground resolution of 0.5 ft originating from Aerometric. Climate data resource: National Climate Data Center, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, average daily heating degree days for station "Bettles Airport, AK", station id "GHCND:USW00026533", located on page http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo- web/datasets/NORMAL DL Y/stations/GHCND:USW00026533/detail. Hydrology resource: http://cosmos.gwscientific.com/Main/HomePaqe, password "hydropower", hydrology data files containing data collected from each of the resources considered in this report for the 2010/2011 water year. Files are located on the page http://cosmos.gwscientific.com/Main/2011 SQ. Files used include the following excel files: Upper_Cosmos_Creek_Corrected_Stage_Mean_Daily_Fiow.xlsx, Upper_Dahi_Creek_Corrected_Stage_Mean_Daily_Fiow.xlsx, Upper_Kogoluktuk_River_Corrected_Stage_Mean_Daily_Fiow.xlsx, and Upper_Wesley_Creek_Corrected_Stage_Mean_Daily_Fiow.xlsx Community electrical demand provided by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative consisting of 15 minute interval energy usage for Shungnak/Kobuk and Ambler for 2009 through mid 2012. Annual heating fuel use obtained from Alaska Energy Authority, Alaska Energy Pathway 2010. ftp://ftp.aidea.org/201 OAiaskaEnergyPian/201 OAiaskaEnerqyReport.html Daniel Hertrich Safety • Quality • Sustainability • Innovation ©Hatch 2012 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Rev. 0 Page 15