HomeMy WebLinkAboutJack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Final Report 2013JACK RIVER
HYDROELECTRIC RECONNAISSANCE STUDY
FINAL REPORT
MARCH 2013
Prepared For
NATIVE VILLAGE OF CANTWELL
PO BOX94
CANTWELL, ALASKA 99729
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In July 2011, the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) awarded the Native Village of Cantwell (NVC)
grant funds for a hydropower reconnaissance study of Jack River. The funds were awarded
under the state's Renewable Energy Grant Program, which is administered by the AEA. In
October 2011, the NVC hired Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. (Polarconsult) to conduct a hydroelectric
reconnaissance study of Jack River. This report presents the findings and recommendations of
the hydroelectric reconnaissance study completed for the NV C.
The reach of Jack River considered in this study for hydroelectric development is river mile (RM)
10 to RM 20, which drains an approximately 145-square mile subbasin in the northern
Talkeetna Mountains. Analysis of 2011-12 stream gauging data at Jack River collected for this
study indicates the average annual flow in the study reach of Jack River is approximately 150
cubic feet per second (cfs), with minimum annual flow in early May of approximately 30 cfs.
Summer flows
typically range from
300 to 600 cfs, and
flood events exceed
1,000 cfs.
There are three
potential dam sites
along the study
reach of Jack River.
Reconnaissance-
level investigations
indicate that
technically viable
hydroelectric project
configurations are
possible at all three
dam sites, ranging in
installed capacity
from approximately
1.7to7.3
megawatts (MW).
All project
configurations considered for Jack River are storage projects. The 1.4 MW project would only
have sufficient storage capacity to supply Cantwell and surrounding areas during a week-long
intertie outage, whereas the 7.3 MW project would have sufficient storage capacity to fully
regulate Jack River flow on an annual basis.
Estimated technical and economic attributes of selected project configurations at Jack River are
listed in Table ES-1.
March 2013 -Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Table ES-1: Summary of Selected Jack River Hydro Project Configurations
DAM SITE#l DAM SITE#2 DAM SITE#3
PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS (RM 15.13) (RM 12.42) (RM 11.69)
A: Maximum Dam C: Shorter Dam, A: Maximum C: Shorter Dam,
Height, Powerhouse Dam Height, Powerhouse ESTIMATED PROJECT Powerhouse Powerhouse Downstream Downstream Downstream
PARAMETERS Downstream
Design Flow (cfs) 250 cfs 250 ~ 250 cfs 250 cfs
t ~ t-
Dam Height (feet) 250 feet 150 feet 135 feet 40 feet
Active Band of Reservoir 2,600 to 2,675 ft.
1
_!2QO to 2,575 ft. 2,360 to 2,425 ft~ 2,270 to 2,300 ft.
Initial Active Reservoir Volume 50,700 acre-feet 12,200 acre-feet 25,500 acre-feet 2,100 acre-feet
Final Active Reservoir Volume 1 30,500 acre-feet 10,100 acre-feet 12,900 acre-feet 1,200 acre-feet
--1------~ 110 feet Gross ':!~ad (feet) 475 feet 185 feet 230 feet
-f------. ---:-
Penstock Length (feet) 16,000 feet I 2,400 feet/ 11,000 feet I 6,700 feet I
and Diame~hes) 2 X 60" lx60" 2x60" 2 x60" .-r -Net Head at Full Flow (feet) 452 feet 172 feet 214 feet lOOfeet 1--. -1--. ·---lnstalle_d_ C~pacity (k~) 7.3MW 3.0MW 3.6MW 1.7MW ---t-1--Avg. Ann. Net Energy Output 37,300 MWh 12,800 MWh 17,400 MWh 7,500MWh (MWh) ---Plant Capacity Factor 58% 49% 55% 51%
ESTIMATED TOTAL INSTALLED
COST RANGE (2012 $, $147.0.$235.7 $31.5 • $50.3 $69.5 • $111.9 $26.6 • $42.5
MILLIONS)
ESTIMATED RANGE OF FINANCIAL PARAMETERS (2012 $, MILLIONS)
Financed Capital Cost $139.0-$235.7 $23.5 -$50.3 $61.5-$111.9 $18.6-$42.5
~ 1-1--AnnuaiDebt~e~icing $5.4 -$17.1 $0.9-$3.7 $2.4-$8.1 $0.7 -$3.1
~ ----Annual OMR & R $0.6-$0.9
f-
$0.2-$0.3 $0.3-$0.4 $0.1-$0.2 -....
Operating Margins $0.6 -$1.8 $0.1 -$0.4 $0.3 -$0.9 $0.1 -$0.3 ---t---r
TotaiAnnuaiRevenue $6.6 -$19.8 $1.2-$4.4 $3.0-$9.4 $0.9-$3.6 Requirement
Estimated Range of Sales Rate
for Energy $0.18-$0.53 $0.095 -$0.34 $0.17 -$0.54 $0.12-$0.48
($per kWh)
Estimated Range of
0.50-1.88 0.78-3.00 0.49-1.85 0.56-2.06 Benefit-Cost Ratio
1. Fmal act1ve reservo1r volume reflects the estimated ava1lable volume once the reservoir has reached
equilibrium sedimentation. Estimates are developed in Appendix D, Section D.3.
The most accessible market for the electric output of a hydro project at Jack River is wholesale
purchase of the full electrical output of the project by Golden Valley Electric Association , Inc.
(GVEA), the local electric utility. Under existing market conditions and estimated site
conditions, the project configurations considered in this study are not economic with wholesal e
purchase at GVEA's current system average avoided energy cost. Under more favorable
financing, site, and/or market conditions, several of the project configurations evaluated in this
study appear to be economically viable with wholesale purchase of the electricity by GVEA .
ii
Native Village of cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, lnc.G
Project configurations that may warrant further study have estimated benefit-cost ratios of
between 0.50 and 3.00. This wide range incorporates a +/-30% range on total installed cost, as
well as a range of operating costs and financing terms.
Initial analysis of environmental impacts associated with the project configurations considered
indicates they would affect resident fish that are likely present in Jack River by impeding fish
passage through the project reach and by changing water quantity and quality downstream of
the project. Alaska's Fishway Act (AS 16.05.841 to 851) would require that a project at Jack
River either provide for fish passage, provide for hatchery operations to replace the value of
the impacted fisheries, or provide a lump-sum cash payment as mitigation for fish passage
impacts. In practice, ADF&G prefers to maintain existing habitat, and only rarely accepts
hatchery funding or cash payments in-lieu of on-site mitigation.
The project configurations considered in this study are not expected to significantly impact
anadromous fish habitat downstream of the project.
Reservoirs under some project configurations would inundate up to several hundred acres of
wetland and upland habitat for game along Jack River.
Based on the findings of this study, further investigation of hydroelectric development on Jack
River should focus on the following information in order to determine if a hydroelectric project
at Jack River is feasible:
• Collect additional hydrology data to better characterize resource hydrology.
• Market analysis to determine a preferred project configuration.
• Perform geotechnical investigations to assess technical suitability of dam sites and
define design parameters for dams.
• Conduct baseline fisheries survey to determine what resident species are present in the
study reach of Jack River, and the preferred fish passage or impact mitigation strategy.
• Hold scoping meetings with regulatory agencies to outline the scope of environmental
studies, define likely mitigation requirements for aquatic, wetland, and upland impacts,
and determine likely operational constraints on the project.
• Generate refined estimates of electrical output and project costs to determine
economic feasibility.
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
This page intentionally blank.
March 2013-Final Report iv
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
REPORT PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS
Purpose of this Report
A reconnaissance study is the first stage of screening for a potential hydroelectric project, and
represents a limited-effort, comprehensive review of relevant factors that pertain to the
technical, economic, environmentat and political viability of developing a hydroelectric project
at a given site or for a given power need. Depending on the available budget and the quality of
existing information, the reconnaissance study may include some field data collection for key
information, or may be limited solely to 'desk-top' review of existing information.
This reconnaissance study provides the Native Village of Cantwell (NVC) an initial assessment of
the overall viability of a hydroelectric project at Jack River, and provides information on the
advantages and disadvantages associated with various project sites and configurations. This
information is intended for use by NVC to decide whether to continue with investigation of a
project, and to decide which project site(s) and configuration(s) warrant further investigation.
Limitations
In conducting our analysis and forming the opinions and recommendations summarized in this
report, Polarconsult has relied on information provided by others, and has assumed this
information is complete and correct. Also, Polarconsult has made certain assumptions with
regard to future events, conditions, and circumstances. Polarconsult does not guarantee the
accuracy of the information, data, or opinions contained herein. The methodologies employed
to perform the analysis and arrive at the conclusions in this report follow generally accepted
industry practice for this level of study. We believe that the assumptions and methodologies
used are reasonable and appropriate for meeting the objectives of this study. Future events
and information may result in outcomes materially different from those projected in this study.
Such events and information include, but are not limited to, future energy demand, supply, and
cost along the railbelt; actual site conditions such as ownership, topography, hydrology, and
geology; future trends in local construction, material, and labor costs; and national, state, or
local policies that may affect aspects of the project.
The contents and findings of this report are limited to potential development of a hydroelectric
project at Jack River by NVC, and are suitable only for this intended purpose. Any use of this
report and the information contained therein constitutes agreement that (1) Polarconsult
makes no warranty, express or implied, relating to this report and its contents, (2) the user
accepts sole risk of any such use, and (3) the user waives any claim for damages of any kind
against Polarconsult. The benefit of such waivers, releases, and limitations of liability extend to
Polarconsult, its subcontractors, owners, employees, and agents.
March 2013 -Final Report v
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsuk Alaska, Inc. G
This page intentionally blank.
March 2013 -Final Report vi
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
a\
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. ~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... VI
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS ................................................................................................................ 2
1.4 CURRENT AND PREVIOUS STUDIES ............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 COMMUNITY PROFILE .............................................................................................................................. 5
2.1 COMMUNITY OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 EXISTING ENERGY SYSTEM ......................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ............................................................................................... 11
3.1 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS CONSIDERED ........................................................................ 15
3.3 RECOMMENDED PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS ......................................................................................... 16
3.4 ESTIMATED ENERGY GENERATION ........................................................................................................... 18
3.5 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT FEATURES ....................................................................................................... 19
4.0 MARKET ANALYSIS AND OPPORTUNITIES ............................................................................................... 22
4.1 POTENTIAL BUSINESS MODELS ................................................................................................................ 22
4.2 POTENTIAL MARKETS ............................................................................................................................... 26
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 30
5.1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULE ...................................................................................................... 31
6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 32
APPENDIX A-MAPS
APPENDIX B-PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C-HYDROLOGY DATA
C.l Methodology
APPENDICES
C.2 Gauging Station Information
C.3 Comparable Basins
C.4 Jack River Hydrology Model
APPENDIX D-RESOURCE DATA AND ANALYSIS
0.1 Land Status in Project Area
0.2 Maximum Probable Flood
0.3 Estimated Reservoir Life and Sedimentation
0.4 Outage Rates in Cantwell
APPENDIX E-ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
APPENDIX F-PERMITTING INFORMATION
APPENDIX G-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS
APPENDIX H-TABULAR HYDROLOGY DATA
APPENDIX 1-DRAFT REPORT REVIEW COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
March 2013-Final Report vii
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Recent Monthly Peak and Average Power Generation ............................................... 9
Figure 3-1: Estimated Typical Energy Generation for Configurations 1A and 3C. ....................... 18
Figure 5-1: Project Development Schedule ................................................................................. 31
Figure A-1: Project Overview and Location Map ........................................................................ A-1
Figure A-2: General Land Ownership in Project Vicinity ............................................................. A-2
Figure A-3: Map of Hydrology Basins and Sub-Basins ................................................................ A-3
Figure A-4: Hydro Project Configuration 1A at Dam Site 1.. ....................................................... A-4
Figure A-5: Hydro Project Configuration 2A at Dam Site 2 ......................................................... A-5
Figure A-6: Hydro Project Configuration 3A at Dam Site 3 ......................................................... A-6
Photograph B-1: Stream Gauging Station Installation, November 2011.. .................................. B-1
Photograph B-2: Bank Erosion at Stream Gauging Station, May 2012 ...................................... B-1
Photograph B-3: View Downstream Towards Cantwell from Gauging Station .......................... B-2
Photograph B-4: View Upstream Towards Dam Site 3 from Vicinity of Gauging Station .......... B-2
Photograph B-5: View of Jack River Canyon Near Dam Site 1.. .................................................. B-3
Photograph B-6: Panoramic View of Jack River Canyon From Wolf Point, Looking SW ............ B-4
Photograph B-7: Panoramic View of Jack River at Stream Gauging Site, Looking Upriver ........ B-4
Photograph B-8: Panoramic View of Dam Site 2, Looking Southwest ....................................... B-5
Photograph B-9: Panoramic View of Dam Site 11 Looking Northwest ....................................... B-5
Figure C-1: Winter Flow Measurements at Jack River and Susitna River ................................... C-6
Figure C-2: Jack River Hydrology Model ..................................................................................... C-7
Figure C-3: Flow Duration Curve for Jack River ........................................................................... C-8
Figure C-4: Stage-Discharge Data for Jack River Gauging Station .............................................. C-8
Figure C-5: 2011-2012 Jack River Stage Data ........................................................................... C-9
Figure C-6: 2011 2012 Jack River Gauging Station Air and Water Temperature Data ............ C-9
Figure D-1: Estimated Ultimate Reservoir Sedimentation Profile .............................................. D-5
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1: Summary of Selected Jack River Hydro Project Configurations .................................. ii
Table 2-1: GVEA's Major Energy Sources for Electricity Generation ............................................. 7
Table 2-2: Recent Electric System Statistics .................................................................................. 8
Table 2-3: Historic Population Data ............................................................................................... 8
Table 3-1: Estimated Attributes of Jack River Dam Sites ............................................................. 14
Table 3-2: Range of Project Configurations Considered in this Study ......................................... 15
Table 3-3: Cost Estimates and Financial Analysis for Jack River Project Configurations ............. 17
Table 4-1: Proposed Alternative Energy Supplies for GVEA ........................................................ 27
Table 4-2: Selected Railbelt Grid Wheeling Costs ........................................................................ 28
Table C-1: Jack River Flow Measurements ................................................................................. (-3
Table C-2: Summary of Jack River Hydrology Data ..................................................................... C-5
Table D-1: Maximum Probable Floods at Jack River Hydro Project Site .................................... D-2
Table D-2: Estimated Reservoir Sedimentation Rates and Useful Reservoir Life ....................... D-4
Table D-3: Estimated Impact of Reservoir Sedimentation on Annual Energy Output ............... D-6
Table D-4: 2012 Cantwell Outage Data and Recent GVEA Outage Data .................................... D-7
March 2013-Final Report viii
Native Village of Cantwell
PolarconsuR Alaska, Inc. 6 Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
ac-ft
A DCC ED
ADEC
ADF&G
ADNR
AEA
AEP
AGS
AIS
ANCSA
APA
ATV
Aurora
AS
BGS
BHC
BLM
btu
C. E.
CEA
cfs
ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY
degrees Fahrenheit
acre-foot, acre-feet. A measure of water volume equal to one acre covered in
water to a depth of one foot.
Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
Alaska Energy Authority
Alaska Environmental Power, LLC
above ground surface
Alaska lntertie System
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
Alaska Power Authority (predecessor to the AEA)
all-terrain vehicle
Aurora Energy, LLC
Alaska Statute
below ground surface
Brailey Hydrological Consultants
Bureau of Land Management
British thermal unit
Civil Engineer
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
cubic feet per second
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
DCRA
CPCN
discharge
EA
FERC
FIW
ft
FY
gal
GVEA
HDPE
in.
IPP
ISER
ISFR
Division of Community and Regional Affairs (organized under ADCCED)
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
A synonym for stream flow. Flow and discharge are used interchangeably in this
report.
environmental attributes. The term "environmental attributes" is used by the
utility industry to describe the desirable aspects of electricity that are generated
from environmentally benign and/or renewable sources. Environmental
attributes are tracked, marketed, bought, and sold separately from the physical
energy. Separating the environmental attributes from the physical energy allows
customers or ratepayers to elect to buy sustainable or "green" energy even if it is
physically unavailable from their electric utility.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Fire Island Wind, LLC
foot, feet
fiscal year
gallon(s)
Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc.
high-density polyethylene
inch, inches
independent power producer
Institute of Social and Economic Research (University of Alaska Anchorage)
in-stream flow reservation. A minimum amount of flow that must be left in a
river or stream during all or certain times of the year.
kV kilovolt, or 1,000 volts
kVA kilovolt-ampere
kW kilowatt, or 1,000 watts. One kW is the power consumed by ten 100-watt
incandescent light bulbs.
kWh kilowatt-hour. The quantity of energy equal to one kilowatt (kW) expended for
one hour.
March 2013-Final Report vii
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study 6 ~
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
LIDAR light Detection and Ranging
LLC limited liability company
MEA Matanuska Electric Association, Inc.
MHW mean high water
mi mile, miles
ML&P Municipal Light and Power
MP mile post
MW megawatt
MVA megavolt-ampere
MWh megawatt-hour
NAD North American Datum
O&M operations and maintenance
OMR&R operating, maintenance, repair, and replacement
PCE Power Cost Equalization (program)
P.E. Professional Engineer
Polarconsult Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
prime power, energy, electricity, load, demand
A use of electricity that utility customers expect to be supplied at their
convenience, as in turning on a light or television. The utility is responsible for
taking all reasonable measures to supply sufficient energy into the utility grid to
meet all instantaneous prime demand of its customers. Prime electricity can be
contrasted with excess or interruptible electricity, which is generated by the
utility only when conditions are favorable, and can be interrupted by the utility
without notice.
PTI pressure and temperature transducer
PVC polyvinyl chloride
PZF point of zero flow
March 2013-Final Report viii
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
RCA Regulatory Commission of Alaska
RCC roller-compacted concrete
RM river mile
rpm revolutions per minute
SDR standard dimension ratio
SFH South Fork Hydro, LLC
SNAP Sustainable Natural Alternative Power
sq.mi. Square mile
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
v volt
WSR wild and scenic river
March 2013-Final Report ix
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION
In July 2011, the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) awarded the Native Village of Cantwell (NVC)
grant funds for a hydropower reconnaissance study of Jack River. The funds were awarded
under the state's Renewable Energy Grant Program, which is administered by the AEA.
In October 2011, the NVC hired Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. (Polarconsult) to conduct a
hydroelectric reconnaissance study of Jack River. This report presents the findings and
recommendations of the hydroelectric reconnaissance study completed for the NVC.
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Reconnaissance-level investigations of Jack River conclude that several hydroelectric project
configurations appear to be technically viable at Jack River, ranging in installed capacity from
approximately 1.7 to 7.3 megawatts {MW). All project configurations considered for Jack River
are storage projects. The 1. 7 MW project would only have sufficient storage capacity to supply
Cantwell and surrounding areas during a week-long intertie outage, whereas the 7.3 MW
project would have sufficient storage capacity to fully regulate Jack River flow on an annual
basis.
The most accessible market for the electric output of a hydro project at Jack River is wholesale
purchase of the full electrical output of the project by Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc.
(GVEA), the local electric utility. Under existing market conditions and estimated site
conditions, the project configurations considered in this study are not economic with wholesale
purchase at GVEA's current system average avoided energy cost. Under more favorable
financing, site, and/or market conditions, several of the project configurations evaluated in this
study appear to be economically viable with wholesale purchase of the electricity by GVEA.
Project configurations that appear to warrant further study have estimated benefit-cost ratios
of between 0.50 and 3.00. This range incorporates a +/-30% range on total installed cost, and a
similarly broad range for operating costs and financing terms. Detailed economic assumptions
are presented in Appendix G.
Initial analysis of environmental impacts associated with the project configurations considered
indicates they would affect resident fish that are likely present in Jack River by impeding fish
passage through the project reach and by changing water quantity and quality downstream of
the project. Alaska's Fishway Act (AS 16.05.841 to 851) would require that a project at Jack
River either provide for fish passage, provide for hatchery operations to replace the value of
the impacted fisheries, or provide a lump-sum cash payment as mitigation for fish passage
impacts. In practice, ADF&G prefers to maintain existing habitat, and only rarely accepts
hatchery funding or cash payments in-lieu of on-site mitigation.
March 2013 -Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsuk Alaska, Inc. G
The project configurations are not expected to significantly impact anadromous fish habitat.
The nearest anadromous habitat is more than SO miles downstream in the Nenana River near
Healy, and the project could reduce flow at the upper limit of anadromous habitat by up to
approximately 7%. Peak project operation in late winter could increase flow at the upper limit
of anadromous habitat by approximately 50% from natural flow conditions. Proper discharge
ramping rates and thermal management of water releases would likely avoid any impacts to
anadromous habitat.
Reservoirs under some project configurations would inundate up to several hundred acres of
wetland and upland habitat for game along Jack River.
Based on the findings of this study, further investigation of hydroelectric developments at Jack
River should focus on the following information in order to determine if a hydroelectric project
at Jack River is feasible:
• Collect additional hydrology data to better characterize resource hydrology.
• Market analysis to determine a preferred project configuration.
• Perform geotechnical investigations to assess technical suitability of dam sites and
define design parameters for dams.
• Conduct baseline fisheries survey to determine what resident species are present in the
study reach of Jack River.
• Hold scoping meetings with regulatory agencies to outline the scope of environmental
studies, define likely mitigation requirements for aquatic, wetland, and upland impacts,
and determine likely operational constraints on the project.
• Generate refined estimates of electrical output and project costs to determine
economic feasibility.
1.3 PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS
Several hydroelectric development configurations at Jack River were evaluated to define the
range of expected project output and development cost. Relevant resource data for Jack River
were collected and analyzed to develop the project configurations. The resource data included
stream hydrology, site topography, and related information. Environmental and regulatory
factors were also considered in developing candidate project configurations. Economic
evaluations focused on wholesale purchase of the project's net electrical output by GVEA.
The estimated electrical output for each project configuration was integrated with economic
data comprised of fuel costs, construction costs, operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, and
financing options to develop an estimated benefit-cost ratio. Under the full range of costs and
financing terms considered in this study, project configurations have an estimated benefit cost
ratio of 0.23 to 3.00, and configurations that appear to warrant closer investigation have
estimated benefit-cost ratios of 0.50 to 3.00.
March 2013-Final Report 2
Native Village of Cantwell 1/11!
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.~ Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
1.4 CURRENT AND PREVIOUS STUDIES
1.4.1 Previous Studies
Review of available records indicates that Jack River was identified as a hydropower resource in
two statewide hydropower inventory studies prepared in the late 1970s: 1
1) The Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project, Phase I, Volume II lists a 7
MW project at Jack River. 2
2) The Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project, Phase II, Volume II lists a 13
MW project at Jack River. 3
Both studies were compilations of various prior resource inventories, and neither provided any
information regarding proposed hydroelectric developments at Jack River beyond the proposed
capacity. Given the lack of detail in these inventory studies, their reference sources were not
investigated as part of the current study.
1.4.2 Current Reconnaissance Study
Polarconsult conducted the following field investigations to collect site-specific information
about Jack River for this reconnaissance study:
4
• Installed a stream gauge in Jack River and conducted a series of flow measurements to
characterize the hydrology of the river and basin. Field data was analyzed in
conjunction with existing hydrology data for other regional rivers and streams to
generate an initial estimate of Jack River's hydrological characteristics.
• Performed topographic surveys to characterize two prospective dam sites in the lower
Jack River canyon and a nearby saddle that constrains maximum reservoir elevations for
these dam sites. These topographic surveys were supplemented with new topographic
data collected under the Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative Project in 2011.4
• Performed additional reconnaissance surveys of a third dam site in the Jack River
canyon for initial development concepts at this site.
Records reviewed include the AEA energy database and library, the Alaska Resource Library and Information
Service and University of Alaska Anchorage I Alaska Pacific University Consortium Library collections, the
Anchorage Municipal Library collections, and Polarconsult's archives.
Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project. Phase I, Volume II: Inventory of Oil, Gas, Coal,
Hydroelectric. and Uranium Resources, Final Report. State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development, Division of Energy and Power Development. October 1977.
Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project, Phase II: Coal, Hydroelectric, and Energy Alternatives
Volume II: Hydroelectric Development. State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development, Division of Energy and Power Development. 1980.
Infrared Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR} topographic data collected for the Statewide Digital Mapping
Initiative project in 2011.
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsuk Alaska, Inc. G
Three field visits were completed in support of the above-listed activities.
• November 2-3, 2011: Stream gauging station installation and initial stream flow
measurements.
• March 27, 2012: Additional flow measurements and gauging station maintenance.
• July 22-24, 2012: Additional flow measurements, field reconnaissance, and topographic
surveys.
Field data collected from these trips have been used to complete a reconnaissance study of
Jack River using the methodology described in Section 1.3. This report summarizes the findings
and recommendations of the reconnaissance study.
March 2013 -Final Report 4
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
2.0 COMMUNITY PROFILE
2.1 COMMUNITY OVERVIEW
The community of Cantwell is located at the junction of the Parks Highway and the Denali
Highway, mile post (MP) 209.5 of the Parks Highway. It is located in Broad Pass in the Alaska
Range, at an elevation of approximately 2,100 feet. The community is located approximately
150 air-miles north-northeast of Anchorage and 110 air-miles south-southwest of Fairbanks at
approximately 63.39° north latitude and 148.95° west longitude (Township 17 South, Range 7
West, Fairbanks Meridian and within U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] quadrangle map Healy B-4).
Nearby communities are located along the Parks Highway, and include Carlo Creek,
approximately 14 miles to the north, McKinley Village, approximately 21 miles to the north,
Healy, approximately 39 miles to the north, and Trapper Creek, approximately 95 miles to the
south. The Denali National Park entrance and associated developments are approximately 28
miles north of Cantwell along the Parks Highway.
Cantwell has a continental climate with relatively warm summers and long cold winters. Normal
summer temperatures are in the 50s to 70s °F, and normal winter temperatures range from 20
oF below to 10 oF above. The highest recorded temperature is 89 OF, and the lowest recorded
temperature is minus 54 °F. Total precipitation averages 15 inches a year, with an average
snowfall of 78 inches.
Cantwell is not an incorporated city. The NVC is a federally recognized Native village. The
community is located in the Nenana Recording District, the Denali Borough, and the Denali
Borough School District.5
2.2 EXISTING ENERGY SYSTEM
2.2.1 Community Energy Overview
Cantwell is connected to the communities of Carlo Creek and McKinley Village by a three phase
distribution line. Electric service in these communities is provided by GVEA. Electricity is
provided via the Cantwell Substation on the AEA-owned Alaska lntertie System (AIS) between
the Cook Inlet area and Healy.
2.2.2 Electric Utility Organization
GVEA was incorporated in 1946 under the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Electrification
Administration (Now Rural Utility Service) regulations. GVEA is a certificated electric utility,
holding Certificate of Convenience and Public Necessity No. 13, originally issued by the Alaska
Public Utilities Commission (predecessor to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA)) in
1964.
This community overview is compiled from data on the Alaska Department of Community and Economic
Development (ADCED) website.
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley Village are all located within GVEA's certificated service
area (Figure A-2). These communities are not eligible to participate in the state's Power Cost
Equalization Program (PCE Program).
2.2.3 Generation System
The community of Cantwell and surrounding areas rely on the Cantwell Substation of the AIS
for 100% of their electricity. The Native Village of Cantwell has two 2.4 kilowatt (kW) Skystream
3.7 wind turbines installed near the tribal building. These turbines feed energy into the electric
grid under GVEA's Sustainable Natural Alternative Power (SNAP) program. There is no other
local utility generation infrastructure. When the AIS experiences an outage, Cantwell and
surrounding areas are blacked out until intertie operation is restored. Past blackouts have been
caused by avalanches, lightning strikes, and similar events. Reversal of power flow on the AIS
also requires a brief outage in Cantwell. Some private businesses and homeowners maintain
backup generators, but these are not configured or suitable to energize the local distribution
system. Outage frequency in Cantwell is four to eight times higher than for GVEA customers
at-large. Outage frequency in Cantwell is discussed in Appendix D, Section D.4.
GVEA generates electricity from a diverse portfolio of energy sources. Major energy supplies
include coal, fuel oil/naptha, natural gas and hydro. GVEA is currently finishing construction of
an approximately 25 MW wind farm at Eva Creek near Healy that will introduce wind as a
significant energy source for the utility. GVEA expects Eva Creek to supply approximately
76,700 megawatt-hours (MWh) annually, placing it on par with the Bradley Lake Hydro Project
as an energy source for the utility.6 Table 2-1 summarizes GVEA's annual major energy supplies
and costs.
Data from GVEA website August 1, 2012: http://www.gvea.com/energy/evacreek
March 2013 -Final Report 6
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Table 2-1: GVEA's Major Energy Sources for Electricity Generation
Generation Source I Supply Fuel Source Typical Annual Energy Percent of Total Approximate Price
Generation (MWh) 111 GVEA Supply of Fuel Source \21
GVEA North Pole Plants, Diesei/Naptha 507,700 37% $189.18 per MWh Zehnder Plant, Delta Plant
GVEA Healy Plant and Aurora Coal 392,900 28% $50.95 per MWh Energy, llC
Wholesale Purchases from Natural Gas $90.74 per MWh Cook Inlet Utilities 398,800 31%
Bradley lake 1-Jydro 65,400 4% $57:82 pf?r rv1Wh
Small Member-Owned (3) Wind/Solar Not available <1% Not available
1,364,800 100% $105.53 per MWh
(1) Typical annual MWh data is compiled from GVEA quarterly tariff revisions TA231-13, TA230-13, TA224-13, TA222-13 filed
with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska and covering projected generation data for the period September 2011 through
August 2012.
(2} Price data consolidated from TA220-13, covering projected costs for the 4th quarter of 2011. Price per kWh obtained by
dividing by 1,000, so $105.53 per MWh is equal to 10.553 cents per kWh.
{3) Small member-owned generation includes several kW-scale wind and solar installations, including the two wind turbines in
Cantwell, that participate in GVEA's Sustainable Natural Alternative Power (SNAP) program, as well as the 1,000 kW Delta
Wind Project which sells energy to GVEA under GVEA's Experimental Renewable Resource Purchase (ERRP} program.
2.2.4 Electrical Distribution System
The distribution system in Cantwell consists of a 5 megavolt-ampere (MVA) step-down
transformer at the AIS Cantwell Substation and a three phase 7.2/12.47 kilovolt (kV}
distribution system. Three phase distribution extends along the Denali Highway for
approximately 1.75 miles east and 1.5 miles west of the Parks Highway Junction, and from this
junction north along the Parks Highway corridor for approximately 21 miles to the communities
of Carlo Creek and McKinley Village, ending at the boundary of Denali National Park and the
Nenana River crossing at MP 231.3. Single phase lines extend into local subdivisions and
neighborhoods. All distribution lines are overhead construction.
2.2.S Planned Upgrades
No upgrades to Cantwell's electrical infrastructure are planned.
2.2.6 Existing Load Profile
Cantwell's electrical demand varies seasonally. Total power throughput at the Cantwell
substation, which includes all demand in Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley Village, is
approximately 450 to 950 kW during the summer months (generally May 15 through
September 15) and 250 to 600 kW during the winter months (generally September 15 through
May 15). This does not include load at the Denali National Park entrance and associated
developments, which are served from Healy. Recent load patterns in Cantwell for 2010-2012
are shown in Figure 2-1 and presented in Table 2-2.7
7 load data for Cantwell Substation provided by GVEA.
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsutt Alaska, Inc. 6
Table 2-2: Recent Electric System Statistics
Parameter 2007/l) 2008 2009 2010
WINTER SEASON DEMAND (January 1 through May 31 and October 1 through December 31)
Average Demand (kW) 636 467 498 397
Hourly Peak Demand (kW) 131 1,073
Total Season Energy Demand (MWh} 1,044 2,732 2,952 2,293
SUMMER SEASON DEMAND (June 1 through September 30)
Average Demand (kW) 703 708
Hourly Peak Demand (kW) (31
Total Season Energy Demand (MWh) 506 2,072
ANNUAL DEMAND (January 1 through December 31}
Total Annual Energy Demand (MWh) 1,550 4,804
Data provided by GVEA.
(1) 2007 data available from September 1'1 through December 31 5t.
(2) 2012 data available from January 1'1 through August 31'1
•
627
1,835
4,787
(3) Peak hourly demand data is available from July 2, 2010 through August 2, 2012.
2.2.6.1 Population
618
871
1,808
4,101
2011
363
963
2,156
723
1,116
2,116
4,272
2012 12 )
302
776
1,377
615
1,793
1,358
2,735
Historic population data for Cantwell is summarized in Table 2-3. Prior to the completion of the
Parks Highway in 1971, Cantwell was accessible via air, the Alaska Railroad, and the unpaved
Denali Highway. In these years, Cantwell's population fluctuated between approximately 17
and 85 people. After the completion of the Parks Highway, Cantwell's population began
increasing, reaching 147 by 1990 and 222 by 2000. Since 2000, population has decreased by
approximately 10% to 202 in 2011.8
Year
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2011
Table 2-3: Historic Population Data
Historic population data from ADCED.
Population
17
0
85
62
89
147
222
219
202
8
Population data from Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development (ADCED) website.
March 2013-Final Report 8
c
0 ; ca
0 .c :::s
C/)
'ii
! c ca
0 -as
3: ~
~ as
Gl
D.
"D c ca
Gl
Cl)
f!
Gl > <
>-:c -c
0
==
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric ReGonnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Figure 2-1: Recent Monthly Peak and Average Power Generation
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
BOO
600
400
200
0
Jan 2007 Jan 2008 Jan 2009
2.2.7 Projected Future load Profile
Jan 2010
.,._Peak Hourly kW
-Average Monthly kW
Jan 2011 Jan 2012
Community electrical demand is a function of population, electricity cost, and available income.
Commercial, industrial, and transient loads can also be major factors in total electrical demand .
A hydro project at Jack River can be used to meet local demand during outages on the AIS.
Because Cantwell is connected to the railbelt energy grid, a Jack River project can generate
more energy than Cantwell needs and export the excess to other railbelt markets. These
market opportunities are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.
March 2013-Final Report
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
This page intentionally blank.
March 2013-Final Report 10
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
3.0 HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS
3.1 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
Jack River's headwaters are in the northern Talkeetna Mountains, draining in a generally
northerly direction towards the northeastern end of Broad Pass. Jack River collects tributaries
draining the northern Talkeetna Mountains, the northerly portion of Broad Pass, and portions
of the southern Alaska Range before discharging into the Nenana River at an elevation of
approximately 2,020 feet. Major tributaries include Cantwell Creek and Windy Creek (see
Figure A-3).
In total Jack River drains approximately 390 square miles. Its basin is comprised of subalpine
and alpine valleys and mountainous terrain rising to a maximum elevation of 7,258 feet in the
headwaters of Cantwell Creek in the Alaska Range. Glaciers cover less than 1% of the total
drainage basin. Approximately 20% of the total drainage basin is occupied by sub-alpine and
alpine valleys. These are generally vegetated by taiga meadows and forests. The balance of the
basin is alpine, either barren rock or tundra.
The reach of Jack River under consideration in this study for hydroelectric development is river
mile (RM) 10 to RM 20, which drains an approximately 145-square mile subbasin in the
northern Talkeetna Mountains. In the downstream reach, from the Nenana River up to RM 10,
Jack River traverses a low-gradient alluvial bed as an actively meandering river, with little-to-no
practical hydroelectric potential. The reach upstream of RM 20 may have hydroelectric
potential, but review of 1:63,360 scale USGS maps indicates similar gradients as the study
reach, and an apparent lack of promising dam sites. Also, the upstream reach is likely too far
from existing markets and transportation and transmission infrastructure for hydroelectric
developments to be economically viable. Viable micro-hydro sites suitable for off-grid
applications may exist in minor tributaries, but these are outside the scope of the current study.
The subbasin above the study reach is predominantly alpine, with approximately 10% of the
basin comprised of subalpine valley floors. There are no significant glaciers in the subbasin.
There are several lakes in the alpine headwaters, but their combined surface area is less than
1% ofthe total subbasin area.
From RM 20 to RM 16, Jack River meanders through an alpine valley at a grade of
approximately 1%.9 This reach would be wholly or partially inundated by reservoirs under some
project configurations considered in this study. From RM 16 to RM 14.4, Jack River traverses a
steeply incised canyon located approximately four miles southeast of the community of
Cantwell, maintaining a grade of 1 to 1.5% through the canyon. This canyon is one of three
9 Grades in the study reach are calculated using twenty-five foot and smaller contours, and are measured using
the general topography of the riverbed, not the more serpentine active channel meanders. The grade of the
active river channel will be slightly lower than the listed grades. Short cascades and falls that are not shown by
25-foot contours likely occur in some parts of the Jack River canyon.
March 2013-Final Report 11
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska,lnc.G
potential dam sites (dam site #1) considered in this study. The floor of this canyon is a
combination of alluvial deposits, talus debris, and in a few locations, bedrock.
Below the canyon, Jack River flows towards the west-northwest for approximately 2.9 miles
(RM 14.4 to RM 11.5) through a steep-walled valley. The valley walls are steep rock cliffs and
bluffs typically 50 to 200 feet tall. Most of the valley floor is covered in alluvial deposits, with
talus and rubble cones typically present along the sides of the valley. The valley floor is devoid
of bedrock outcrops, and approximately 400 to 1,000 feet wide. There are two narrow points
in this valley that are potential dam sites, both of which are considered in this study (dam site
#2 and #3). At RM 11.5, Jack River leaves this valley and emerges onto a broad alluvial flood
plain that covers much of the floor of Broad Pass. Jack River actively meanders across the floor
of Broad Pass for the remaining 11.5 miles to its mouth on the Nenana River. Jack River's active
channel and floodplain is generally 200 to 1,000 feet wide. Revegetated relict channels are
apparent in a corridor that is 2,500 to 5,000 feet wide along this 11.5 mile reach of Jack River.
Developments, including the community of Cantwell, Parks Highway, Denali Highway, and
Alaska Railroad, are protected from flood and erosion hazards by several dikes and similar flood
control structures.
Analysis of 2011-12 stream gauging data at Jack River indicates the average annual flow in Jack
River near dam site #3 (RM 11.4) is approximately 150 cubic feet per second (cfs), with
minimum annual flow in early May of approximately 30 cfs, summer flows typically in the range
of 300 to 600 cfs, and flood events exceeding 1,000 cfs. Annual precipitation in the Jack River
basin is estimated at 30 inches. Hydrology analysis of Jack River is presented in Appendix C.
The three dam sites in the study reach of Jack River are described below. Technical attributes
ofthe three dam sites are summarized in Table 3-1, and the dam sites are shown on Figure A-1.
Dam Site #1, in the Jack River canyon at approximately RM 15.13. This canyon presents a
potential dam site for a dam of up to approximately 250 feet in height, creating a
approximately 865-acre reservoir at an elevation of approximately 2,675 feet. The canyon
topography could support a taller dam to approximately 400 feet, but a saddle
approximately% mile to the east would require a supplemental gravity dam to increase the
reservoir elevation above approximately 2,690 feet.
Dam Site #2, in the river valley at approximately RM 12.42. At this point, the valley narrows to
a width of 430 feet at the floor (elevation 2,290 feet) and 1,050 feet at the valley rim
(elevation 2,470 feet). A significant prominence extends from the northeast valley wall to
the midpoint of the valley and a height of 2,400+ feet. This location presents a potential
dam site for a 135-foot tall dam, creating an approximately 450-acre reservoir at an
elevation of 2,425 feet. This reservoir elevation would require an approximately 45-foot tall
supplemental dam to block a saddle at 2,385-foot elevation located approximately %-mile
east of the dam site. This supplemental dam would have a 1,500 foot long crest.
March 2013 -Final Report 12
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsu~ Alaska, Inc. 6
Dam Site #3, in the river valley at approximately RM 11.69. At this point, the valley narrows to
a width of 550 feet at the floor (elevation 2,260 feet) and 740 feet at the valley rim
(elevation 2,370 feet}. This location presents a potential dam site for a 100-foot tall dam,
creating an approximately 350-acre reservoir at an elevation of 2,360 feet. This reservoir
elevation would require an approximately 20-foot tall by 850 foot long wing wall along the
northeast rim of the valley.
March 2013-Final Report
I
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
ATTRIBUTE
Location along Jack River
Conceptual Site Plans
Photographs (Appendix B)
Maximum Dam Height
DAM SITE FLOOR
Floor Elevation
Floor W idth
Floor Composition
DAM SITE #l
RM 15.13
Figure A-4
Photographs B-5, B-9
250 feet
2,425 feet
150 feet
Combination of alluvial deposits from Jack Ri v er and talus I rubble
deposits from mass wasting events along canyon walls . Exposed
bedrock likely at a few locations .
DAM SITE LEFT WALL (SOUTHWESTERLY SIDE OF JACK RIVER)
Description
Slope
Comments
Exposed rock faces , very sparsely vegetated at upper elevations .
Talus and rubble cones at lower elevatio ns.
1 :1 slope and steeper .
None .
DAM SITE RIGHT WALL (NORTHEASTERLY SIDE OF JACK RIVER)
Description
Slope
Comments
ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAM CREST
Length
Crest Elevation
Spillway Structure
Limiting Feature(s)
Comments
Mostly vegetated talus and rubble deposits, some rock outcrops at
h igher e levations .
1 :1 slope , var iable .
None .
750 feet
2,675 fe et
Over dam crest .
---
A 2,685 foot elevation saddle 3,400 feet south of RM 16 .0 .
Dam crest could be raised by adding a saddle dam. Stated dam
height provi des sufficient reservo i r storage for full annual regulat ion
of Jack River.
ESTIMATED MAXIMUM RESERVOIR CHARACTERISTICS
Active Ban d of Reservoir
Active Storage Capacity
Inactive St o rage Capacity
Maximum Reservoir Area
Upstream Limit of Reservoir
Design Flow for Constant Annual Output
2,600 to 2,675 feet
44,500 acre -feet
52,000 acre -feet
865 acres at 2,675 feet
RM 20 .0
150 cfs (full annual regulat i on of Jack River)
RM : river mile. Left and r ight are looking downstream .
March 2013-Final Report
ES TIMATED ATTRIBUTES OF JACK RIVER DAM SITES
DAM SITE#2
RM 12 .42
Figure A-5
Photograph B-8
135 feet
2,290 feet
430 feet
Allu vial deposits to unknown dept h . A significant rock outcrop
extends into the canyon from the right wall, rising to 2,430 ft . at the
dam site .
Exposed rock outcrop . Significantly weathered and decomposed,
sparsely vegetated .
1 :1 sl op e, d ec o m po se d .
rock face . More gradual at toe except where scoured by ri v er .
None .
Decomposed rock at angle of repose, mostly vegetated .
2 :1 vegetated slope
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc . 6
T able 3-1: Estimated Attributes of Jack Rive r Dam Sites
DAM SITE #3
RM 11.69
Figure A-6 ----------------------------------------------Photograp hs B-7, B-9
100 feet
2,260 feet
550 feet
Alluvial depos its to unknown depth . No bedrock is vi sible at surface .
Decomposin g rock face generally at angle of repose , mostly
vegetated .
1 :1 .5 un iform slope, with some st eeper rock faces . More gradual at
toe except where scoured by river.
None .
Exposed roc k outcrop . Significantly weathered and decomposed .
1 :1 to 1:4 sl o ped rock wall , some vertical faces. -----------
Bedrock likely within 5 ft . of surface in most areas.
950 feet
2,425 feet
Over dam crest .
A 2,385 foot elevation saddle abov e the right bank at RM 13.5 and a
second saddle above the right bank at RM 14.5 with elevation 2,4 35
feet .
The maximum crest elevation requires an approx imately 45 foot tall
by 1,500 foot long saddle dam located approximately 4,300 feet east
of main dam .
2,360 to 2,425 feet
25 ,500 acre -feet
7,800 acre -feet
450 acres at 2,425 feet
RM 15 .0
110 cfs
None .
740 feet
2,380 feet
Over dam crest or via Y.-mile spillway through right bank terrain .
Rim elevat ion above right bank for 3,400 feet upstream from dam site
and a saddle at 2,385 -foot elevation on the right bank at RM 13.5 .
The maximum crest elevation requ ires an approximately 25 foot tall
by 850 foot long wing wall along the right -side rim of the valley .
2,325 to 2,360 feet
9,300 acre -f eet
6,000 acre -feet
350 acres at 2,360 feet
RM 14.0
100 cfs
14
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 I
I I
I
1_1
I I
I I
Native VIllage of Cantwell
.iack River Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc •
3 2 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS CONSIDERED
There are three potential dam s1tes along the study reach of Jack R1ver At each dam s1te, up to
three potential project conf1gurat1ons were evaluated
A Tall dams that fully develop the reservoir capac1t1es of the three dam s1tes These projects
mclude penstocks and downstream powerhouses to max1m1ze total head on the project
B Tall dams that fully develop the reservoir capac1t1es of the three dam s1tes Powerhouses
are located at the base of the dam
C Shorter dams w1th penstocks and downstream powerhouses
decreased reservoir capac1ty and less total head, but they also
prov1de s1gn1f1cant generatmg capac1ty and reservoir storage
These projects have
are less costly yet st1ll
These conf1gurat1ons are listed m Table 3-2 All project conf1gurat1ons have a des1gn flow of 250
cub1c feet per second (cfs}
Th1s report refers to d1fferent development options at Jack R1ver by the dam s1te (1 through 3}
and the project conf1gurat1on (A through C) Thus, conf1gurat1on "2B" refers to a project With a
max1mum he1ght dam at dam s1te #2 and w1th the powerhouse located at the base of the dam
Table 3-2 Range of Project Conf1gurat1ons Considered m th1s Study
ProJect Conf1gurat1on
A Max1mum dam he1ght, powerhouse
downstream
B Max1mum dam he1ght, powerhouse
near base of dam
C Shorter dam, powerhouse
downstream
March 2013 -fma! Report
Dam S1te#l
{RM 15 13)
Conf1gurat1on 1A
Conf1gurat1on 1B
Conf1gurat1on 1C
Dam S1te#2
{RM 12 42)
Conf1gurat1on 2A
Conf1gurat1on 2B
Not Considered
(Substantially
s1m1lar to
Conf1gurat1on 3C)
Dam Slte#3
{RM 1169)
Conf1gurat1on 3A
Conf1gurat1on 3B
Conf1gurat1on 3C
15
Natave Vallage of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroe~ectnc Reco1111na•ssance St:UJJdy PolarconsuR Alaska, Inc •
3 3 RECOMMENDED PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS
The project conftgurattons ltsted tn Table 3-2 were analyzed for esttmated cost, energy
generatton, and economtcs The results of thts analysts are presented tn Table 3-3
Assumpttons used tn the analysts are explatned tn Appendtx G Table 3-3 does not constder any
operatmg restncttons that may be tmposed on reservotr management or flow releases for
envtronmental reasons
The most favorable project conftguratton at Jack Rtver wtll be deftned by the needs of the
market that the project ts butlt to serve Because Cantwell ts connected to the ratlbelt energy
gnd, tt ts likely that the most favorable project conftguratton wtll be that wtth the lowest cost of
energy Other factors that may tnfluence project selectton tnclude storage capactty for wmter
generatton and meetmg peak demand, backup generatton capabtltty for Cantwell and
surroundtng areas, flood control capabtltttes, and envtronmentaltmpacts
Project conftgurattons lA, lC, 2A, and 3C each have the potenttal to provtde energy at a lower
cost than GVEA's extstmg tncremental energy cost, tf project capttal costs and ftnanctng terms
are favorable Conftguratton lA provtdes the most reservotr storage, generatmg capactty, and
electncal output, and ts capable of fully regulatmg flow tn Jack Rtver throughout the year
Conftgurattons lC and 2A provtde an mtermedtate amount of reservotr storage, and are capable
of deltvertng peak power for sustatned pertods dunng the wmter months and provtdtng backup
generatton tn Cantwell dunng outages Conftguratton 3C ts essenttally a run-of-rtver project,
provtdtng sufftctent storage only to provtde back up generatton for Cantwell and surroundtng
areas dunng an outage All conftgurat1ons can generate full power throughout the summer
season
March 2013-!Fma! Report 16
~I
I
I I
I I
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Table 3-3: Cost Estimates and Financial Analysis for Jack River Project Configurations
PROJECT CONFIGURATIONS DAM SITE #1 (RM 15 .13) DAM SITE #2 (RM 12.42) DAM SITE #3 (RM 11.69)
A: Maximum Dam B: Maximum Dam C: Shorter Dam, A: Maximum Dam B: Maximum Dam A: Maximum Dam B: Maximum Dam C: Shorter Dam,
Height, Powerhouse Height, Powerhouse Powerhouse Height, Powerhouse Height, Powerhouse Height, Powerhouse Height, Powerhouse Powerhouse
ESTIMATED PROJECT PARAMETERS Downstream at Dam Downstream Downstream at Dam Downstream at Dam Downstream
Design Flow (cfs) 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs 250 cfs
Dam He ight (feet) 250 feet 250 feet 150 feet 135 feet 135 feet 100 feet 100 feet 40 feet
Sf)illway Elevation (feet) 2,675 feet 2,675 feet 2,575 feet 2,425 feet 2,425 feet 2,360 feet 2,360 feet 2,300 feet
Tailwater Elevation (feet) 2,225 feet 2,425 feet 2,385 feet 2,195 feet 2,290 feet 2,190 feet 2,260 feet 2,190 feet
Gross Head (feet) 475 feet 250 feet 185 feet 230 feet 135 feet 170 feet 100 feet 110 feet --Access Roads and Trails (feet) 28 ,000 feet 28 ,000 feet 28 ,000 feet 20 ,000 feet 20 ,000 feet 15,000 feet 15,000 feet 15 ,000 feet
Power and Communication Line Extensions (feet) 8,000 feet 16,000 feet 13,000 feet 800 feet 11,000 feet 800 feet 7,500 feet 800 feet
Pen stock Length (feet) and Diam eter (inches) 16,000 feet 12 x 60 " 300 feet I 2 x 48" 2,400 feet I 1 x 60 " 11 ,000 feet I 2 x 60" 500 feet I 1 x 60" 6, 700 feet I 2 x 60 " 500 feet I 1 x 60 " 6, 700 feet I 2x60 "
Net Head at Full Flow (feet) 452 feet 248 feet 172 feet 214 feet 132 feet 160 feet 97 feet 100 feet
Re se rvo ir Area (Acres ) 865 acres 865 acres 33 0 acres 45 0 acres 450 a cres 350 acres 350 acres 115 acres -Active Band of Reservoir 2,600 to 2,675 feet 2,600 to 2,675 feet 2,500 to 2,575 feet 2,360 to 2,425 feet 2,360 to 2,425 feet 2,325 to 2,360 feet 2,325 to 2,360 feet 2,2 70 to 2,300 ft .
In it ial Active Reservoir Volume (acre -feet) 1 50 ,700 acre-feet 50,700 acre-feet 12 ,200 acre -feet 25 ,500 acre -fe et 25 ,500 acre -feet 9,300 acre -feet 9,300 a cre -feet 2,100 acre -feet
Initial Inactive Reservoir Volume (acre-feet) 1 28,900 acre-feet 28 ,900 acre-feet 3,500 acre -feet 7,800 acre-feet 7,800 acre -feet 5,900 acre-feet 5,900 acre-feet 200 acre-feet
Installed Capacity (kW) 7 .3MW 4 .2MW 3 .0MW 3 .6MW 2.2MW 2.7MW 1.6 MW 1.7MW
Avg . Ann . Net Energy Output (MWh) 37,300 MWh 23,400 MWh 12,800 MWh 17 ,400 MWh 9,300 MWh 12,500 MWh 7,100 MWh 7,500 MWh
Plant Capacity Factor 58% 64 % 49 % 55 % 47 % 53 % 49 % 51 %
ESTIMATED TOTAL INSTALLED COST RANGE (2012 $, MILLIONS)
Pre-construction (studies, permitting, design, site control , etc.) $2 .3 -$3 .8 $2 .3 -$3 .8 $2 .3 -$3 .8 $1.2 -$2 .1 $1.2-$2 .0 $0.6-$1.0 $0.6 -$1.0 $0.4 -$0.7
Power and Commun icat ion Lines $0 .6 -$0.9 $0.5 -$0 .9 $0.6 -$1.0 $0 .2 -$0.3 $0 .4 -$0 .7 $0 .1 -$0.2 $0 .3 -$0 .5 $0 .1 -$0 .1
Access Roads and Flood Protection $1.6 -$2.6 $1.6 -$2 .6 $1.4 -$2.3 $1.0 -$1 .7 $1 .0 -$1.7 $0.8 -$1.4 $0.8 -$1.4 $1.0 -$1.6
Dam and Reservoir $70 .8 -$117 .9 $70.8 -$117 .9 $8 .6 -$14 .3 $23 .9 -$39 .9 $23 .9 -$39 .9 $32 .8 -$54 .6 $32 .8 -$54 .6 $8 .1 -$13 .5
Saddle Dam $0.0 -$0 .0 $0 .0 -$0.0 $0.0 -$0.0 $3 .8 -$6.3 $3 .8 -$6.3 $0 .0-$0.0 $0 .0 -$0.0 $0.0-$0.0
Penst ock $11.0 -$18.4 $0 .3 -$0 .5 $1.0 -$1 .7 $8 .2 -$13 .7 $0 .3 -$0 .5 $5 .3 -$8 .9 $0.3 -$0 .5 $5 .3 -$8 .9
Powerhouse $5.4 -$9.1 $3.5 -$5.8 $3 .0 -$5.0 $3.3 -$5 .5 $2 .7-$4.5 $2.8-$4.7 $2.5 -$4.1 $2 .2 -$3 .6
Construction Equipment $7 .9 -$13 .1 $4 .6 -$7 .7 $4.8 -$8 .0 $5 .8 -$9 .7 $4 .6 -$7 .7 $4 .6 -$7 .7 $3 .9 -$6 .5 $1.0 -$1.7
Construction Engineering and Inspections $4.4 -$7 .4 $4.3 -$7 .2 $0.6 -$1.0 $1.8 -$3 .1 $1.8 -$3 .0 $2.1-$3 .6 $2 .1 -$3 .5 $0 .7 -$1.1
Construction Management I Adm inistration $4 .9 -$8 .1 $4.1 -$6 .8 $1.0 -$1.6 $2.3 -$3 .8 $1.8 -$3 .1 $2.3 -$3 .9 $2 .0 -$3.4 $0 .9 -$1.5
Contingency $38 .1 -$54.4 $32.2 -$46.0 $8 .2 -$11 .6 $18 .0 -$25 .8 $14.5-$20.8 $18.0 -$25.8 $15 .9 -$22.7 $6.9-$9.8
ESTIMATED TOTAL INSTALLED COST RANGE (2012 $, MILLIONS) $147.0-$235.7 $124.2 -$199.2 $31.5 -$50.3 $69.5-$111.9 $56.0 -$90.2 $69.4-$111.8 $61.2 -$98.2 $26.6 -$42.5
ESTIMATED RANGE OF FINANCIAL PARAMETERS 2
Capital Cost Paid by Grants $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M $30,000 -$8M
Financed Capital Cost (Million $) $139 .0 -$235.7 $116 .2 -$199 .2 $23.5 -$50.3 $61.5 -$111.9 $48 .0-$90 .2 $6 1.4 -$111.8 $53 .2 -$98 .2 $18.6 -$42.5
Annual Debt Servicing Cost (Million$) $5.4 -$17 .1 $4.5-$14.5 $0.9 -$3.7 $2.4-$8.1 $1.9-$6.6 $2.4-$8.1 $2.1 -$7 .1 $0.7 -$3 .1
Annual OMR & R Costs (Million$) $0 .6 -$0 .9 $0.4 -$0.6 $0 .2 -$0 .3 $0.3 -$0 .4 $0.1 -$0.2 $0 .2 -$0 .3 $0 .1 -$0 .2 $0 .1 -$0 .2
Operating Margins (Million$) $0.6 -$1.8 $0 .5 -$1.5 $0.1 -$0.4 $0.3-$0.9 $0 .2 -$0 .7 $0.3-$0.8 $0 .2 -$0 .7 $0.1 -$0 .3
Total Annual Revenue Requ irement (M ill ion$) $6 .6 -$19 .8 $5.4 -$16.6 $1.2 -$4.4 $3 .0 -$9.4 $2.2 -$7 .5 $2.9 -$9 .2 $2.4 -$8.0 $0 .9 -$3 .6
Estimated Range of Sales Rate for Energy($ per kWh) $0.18-$0.53 $0.23 -$0.71 $0.095 -$0.34 $0.17-$0.54 $0.23 -$0.80 $0.23 -$0.74 $0.34-$1.13 $0.12-$0.48
Estimated Range of Benefit-Cost Ratio 0.50-1.88 0.37-1.39 0.78-3.00 0.49-1.85 0.33-1.23 0.36-1.33 0.23-0.86 0.56-2.06
1. See Appendix D, Sect1on D.3 for analysis of reservo1r sed1mentat1on rate, est1mated reservoir life , and estimated effect on proje ct economics . 2 . See Append1x G for economic analys 1s ass umptions.
March 2013-Final Report 17
i =-c
0 ·.;;
Rl ....
Ill c
Ill
C)
....
Ill
~
0
CL.
~
"iii c
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
3.4 ESTIMATED ENERGY GENERATION
Figure 3-1 presents estimated typical annual energy genera t ion for project configurations 1A
and 3C, which represent the largest and smallest proj ect configurations, respectively.
Estimated annual energy generation for all project configura t ions considered in this study are
listed in Table 3-3 .
Figure 3-1 shows two annual power curves for Configuration 1A. The bold red line reflects the
power generation if the plant is operated at full capacity continuously until the reservoir is
drawn down. In practice, this peak output can be shifted to an y time of day or year when it has
the greatest value . The light red line represents power gener at ion if the plant is operated at a
steady flow year-round. The slight variation in this line is due t o fluctuations in reservoir level,
which affect project head and thus power generation . Config u ration 3C lacks this operational
flexibility due to its smaller reservoir volume . In Figure 3-1, t h e Configuration 3C reservoir is
drawn down between late September and early November, an d then the project operates as a
run -of-river project until the reservoir refills in June . In prac t ice , it would be preferable to
reduce generation in September in order to maintain a full reserv oir so the project can be used
to provide backup generation for Cantwell through the winter m o nths.
Figure 3-1: Estimated Typical Energy Generation for Configurations lA and 3C
8 ,000
-configurat ion l A (Peak Out p ut )
-Configurat ion l A (Cons t ant Output )
7,00 0 -con f igurati o n 3C
6,0 0 0
5,000
4,00 0
3,0 00
2,000
1,000
0
v v v 'b0. 'b0. cs ~~ ~'b~ <::-ll, ~~ ~ v (§> ~ ~ «-"' ~"' ~~ "'?-~ ""' ) ~ ~ ~ ,:;.ll, (.,e; \'b '<~ "'?-.::> ~ll, 0 ~0 <:;)e; c.,ll,~
March 2013 -Final Report 18
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
.lack River Hydlroeiectnc Reconna~ssance Study Polarcons•lt Alaska, Inc 6
3 5 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT FEATURES
Key features of project conf1gurat1on 1A are descnbed m the followmg sections As
appropnate, the narratives also apply to other project conf1gurat1ons as well
3 5 1 Access and Stagmg
Access to the project would requ1re construction of new roads from the Denali Highway to the
project dam s1te and powerhouse s1te Construction matenal and equipment would be trucked
mto the dam and powerhouse s1tes over these roads If poss1ble, a quarry would be s1ted and
developed near the dam s1te to prov1de a local source for aggregate for the dam Cement, clay,
p1pe, and other matenals could be brought to Cantwell v1a the Parks H1ghway or Alaska Ra1lroad
and then hauled by truck to the project s1te One or more stagmg yards would be requ1red for
the project SUitable terram ex1sts m reasonable prox1m1ty to the project work s1tes for stagmg
yards
3 5 2 Construction Schedule
Conf1gurat1on 1A IS estimated to take two or three years to construct The f1rst year of
construction would mclude constructmg access roads, extendmg power to the dam s1te, scalmg
the canyon walls at the dam s1te, developmg an on-s1te quarry, d1vertmg Jack R1ver, and
excavatmg the canyon floor to rock The base of the dam would be bu1lt, 1ncludmg the
permanent bypass structure to route Jack R1ver through the dam structure
The second year would Include completion of the dam, cleanng of the reservoir, mstallat1on of
the penstocks, construction of the powerhouse, tailrace, and power lmes, mstallat1on of the
turbmes and generators, and commiSSionmg
If a th1rd year were requ1red, 1t would focus on work at the dam s1te, w1th most other year 2
work deferred to year 3
Conf1gurat1on 3C, and possibly other conf1gurat1ons at dam s1tes 2 and 3, could be constructed
m a smgle year
3 5 3 Transm1ss1on Lme
The electncal output of the project would be brought to market v1a a three-phase overhead
d1stnbut1on lme For projects under approximately 5 MW, the d1stnbut1on lme would be s1m1lar
to the ex1stmg 7 2 I 12 47 kV d1stnbut1on line along the Denali Highway near Cantwell For
larger projects, a h1gher voltage lme may be requ1red A larger project may also reqUire
upgrade of the ex1stmg 1 9 miles of three phase lme along the Denali H1ghway to a h1gher
voltage Also, a larger (or second parallel) step-up transformer at the Cantwell Substation
would be requ1red to feed project output onto the AIS for transm1ss1on to rail belt markets
March 2013 -Fmal Report :1!.9
I I
I~
f'
I
I~
l I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
l_j
L_l
Nat1ve VIllage of Cantweli
Jack Rnver Hydlroeiectm: Reconnaissance Studly Polarconsult Alaska, Inc •
3 5 4 Controls and System Integration
The project would mclude ded1cated commumcat1ons cirCUits between the mtake at the dam
and the powerhouse to operate the project A dedicated commumcat1ons c1rcu1t would also be
mstalled between the powerhouse and the Cantwell Substation to mtegrate the project w1th
GVEA's control systems These CircUits would allow for remote operation, momtormg, and
d1agnos1s of the project
The control reg1me used to manage project operations would depend on the market for the
electr1c1ty If the electriCity was sold to GVEA on a wholesale bas1s, the project could be
configured to be d1spatchable by GVEA to mm1m1ze GVEA's fuel and purchased power costs,
thereby max1m1zmg the project's value Conf1gurat1on 1A's s1gn1f1cant storage capac1ty would
allow GVEA to d1spatch the Jack R1ver project m order to reduce use of 1ts highest-cost peakmg
plants
3 5 5 Dam I Intake
Dam s1te 1 appears su1table for a roller-compacted concrete (RCC) grav1ty dam The dam IS
assumed to be founded on bedrock beneath Jack R1ver, and constructed w1th a vertical
upstream face and 11 slope on the downstream face The center port1on of the downstream
face would serve as the reservoir sp1llway The mtake structure would be mtegral to the dam,
or Sited on ex1stmg terram on the r1ght bank at the dam s1te
Dam s1tes 2 and 3 appear su1table for 1mperv1ous core rock f1ll grav1ty dams These dams are
assumed to be founded on bedrock or su1table material beneath Jack R1ver The upstream face
1s assumed to have a 2 1 slope, and the downstream face 1s assumed to have a 2 5 1 slope A
concrete spillway would be constructed on the downstream face of the dam
Detailed geological assessments of the dam s1tes would be requ1red to determme the1r
geotechmcal su1tab1llty for the reservOir Impoundments considered m th1s study and the
techmcal des1gn cntena for the dams, spillways, and associated proJect features
3 5 6 Penstock
Conf1gurat1on B projects would mclude penstocks that are mtegral to the dam structure
I
Conf1gurat1on A and C projects would mclude bur1ed penstocks to convey water from the mtake
structure to the off-s1te powerhouse Th1s study assumed the use of one or two 60-mch
penstocks dependmg on penstock length and head losses Penstock materials could mclude
h1gh-dens1ty polyethylene (HOPE) or PVC m the lower pressure sect1ons, and steel or ductile
1ron m the h1gher pressure sections
Reconnaissance-level analysis of penstock opt1ons md1cates that the mstalled cost of multiple
60-mch penstocks may be lower than the mstalled cost for a smgle larger-d1ameter penstock
The cost savmg ar1ses pr1nc1pally from the lower cost of sh1ppmg 60-mch p1pe to Cantwell Two
March 20:11.3 -Fmai Report 20
Nat1ve V11lage of Cantwell
.lack R1ver Hydroelectric !Reconnaissance Sti.Bdly Po!arconsuit Aiaska, ~nc
sections of 60-mch p1pe can be sh1pped per truck, whereas larger d1ameter p1pe IS typically
llm1ted to one sect1on per truck Th1s approximately doubles the per-foot sh1ppmg cost for the
p1pe Also, prov1dmg a separate penstock for each turbme-generator un1t prov1des greater
operational redundancy and reliability, wh1ch may be desirable for the larger project
conf1gurat1ons considered Penstock des1gn and conf1gurat1on would be addressed m the
des1gn stage of the selected project conf1gurat1on
3 5 7 Powerhouse
For conf1gurat1on 1A, the powerhouse would be a metal or concrete bu1ldmg s1ted north of the
Denali Highway It would house the turbmes, generators, controls, and appurtenances A
senes of Franc1s turbmes would likely be used for Conf1gurat1on 1A, 18, 1C, and 2A Project
conf1gurat1ons With net head less than approximately 110 feet (conf1gurat1ons 28, 38, and 3C)
could also use a senes of Kaplan turbmes
3 5 8 Ta1lrace
The tailrace for project conf1gurat1on 1A would d1scharge to a senes of ponds and wetlands
located north of the Denali H1ghway These ponds dram to a mmor tnbutary that discharges to
Jack R1ver at approximately RM 9 8 The tailrace would cons1st of a senes of channels and
control structures excavated between these ponds to establish a pathway capable of handlmg
the project flow Without s1gn1f1cantly changmg the normal water levels m these ponds
The v1ab1hty of th1s tailrace conf1gurat1on would depend on the spec1f1c conf1gurat1on and
associated Impacts on water quality and b1ology of the affected ponds and wetland areas If
th1s conf1gurat1on were s'elected for further study, detailed analysis of these matters would
occur dunng the feas1b1llty, perm1ttmg, and des1gn phases of the project
The ta1lra~e for project conf1gurat1on 1C would d1scharge back to Jack R1ver at approximately
RM 14 The tailrace would be an excavated channel extendmg from the powerhouse to the
act1ve channel of Jack R1ver
The tailrace for project conf1gurat1ons 2A, 3A, and 3C would discharge back to Jack R1ver at
approximately RM 10 2 The tailrace would be an excavated channel extendmg from the
powerhouse to the act1ve channel of Jack R1ver
Tailraces for project conf1gurat1ons 18, 28 and 38 would be located at the downstream toe of
the dams, d1schargmg mto the natural channel of Jack R1ver 1mmed1ately downstream of the
dam s1te
March 20113-Fma~ Report 21
I
I I
J
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
'~ I
I I
I
Natnve V1i!age of CantweH
.lack !Rover IHydlll'oe~ectnc Reconnaissance Stll.idy Polarconsu~t A~aska, ~nc
4 0 MARKET ANALYSIS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The market for electrrcrty from Jack R1ver 1s frrst servrng the Cantwell I Carlo Creek I McKrnley
V1llage drstrrbut1on servrce area, and second exportrng electrrcrty to the ra1lbelt over the AIS
Based on current rnformatron and market cond1t1ons, the most accessible market for electrrcrty
from a hydro project at Jack R1ver would be wholesale purchase by GVEA at rts avorded energy
cost or a negotiated prrce Under thrs busrness arrangement, NVC would be operatrng as an
Independent Power Producer (IPP) GVEA 1s aware of and supportive of th1s study Detailed
drscussrons wrth GVEA regardrng power sales are premature at thrs stage of study Thrs and
other potentral busrness models and markets are drscussed rn thrs sectron, as follows
(} Section 4 1 drscusses potential busrness models for a Jack Rrver Hydro Project
o Section 4 2 drscusses potentral market for electrrcrty from a Jack Rrver Hydro Project
4 1 POTIENTIAL BUS~NESS MODHS
There are three busrness models that NVC could adopt as the owner of a hydro project at Jack
Rrver
o Independent Power Producer,
Cl Electrrc Utrlity, or
e Non-Utrlity Entrty wrth Drrected Sales
4 11 Independent Power Producer
NVC could become an Independent Power Producer (IPP) IPPs are non-utrlity energy
producers that output commercral quantrtres of electrrc1ty to the electrrc grrd on a wholesale
bas1s They are generally drstmgurshed from 'tradrt1onal' utrlitres by the fact that they do not
provrde retarl sales of electrrcrty to end users, and do not own and marntarn transmrssron or
drstrrbutron systems beyond what rs necessary to deliver therr electrrcrty to the local grrd
IPPs are a well-established market presence rn the Lower 48, but therr role m Alaska's (and the
rallbelt's) electrrc rndustry rs strll relatrvely new and evolvrng IPPs have been operatrng on the
rallbelt grrd for over 20 years, but unt1l very recently therr role has not been fully recognrzed by
most Alaska utrlity plannrng efforts or rn the State's regulatory framework 10 Thrs srtuatron has
started to change rn the past few years, wrth rncreased recognrtron of the cost savrngs, rrsk
management benefrts, and other benefrts IPPs provrde to electrrc utrlitres and therr
ratepayers 11
10 One of the earliest pnvate-sector IPPs on the ratlbelt gnd was Enerdyne, LLC, operator of a 100-kW run-of-nver
hydro proJect near Palmer that has sold wholesale energy to MEA smce 1991 Enerdyne ts owned by pnnctpals
of Polarconsult Another early IPP ts Aurora Energy, LLC, whtch started selling electnctty to GVEA from tts coal-
fired plant m Fatrbanks m 1995
11 There are at least ftve commerctal-scale IPPs now operatmg on the ratlbelt, wtth several others m pre-
March 2013-Fma~ Report 22
NatRve V1ilage of CantweH
.llatk Rover IHiydroelectr!c Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc 6
Under Alaska's ex1stmg regulations, many IPPs st1ll fall under the defm1t1on of a ut1llty, and may
face varymg levels of regulatory overs1ght or exemption by the RCA Representative examples
of regulatory oversight exercised over IPPs operatmg on the rallbelt mclude
• Aurora Energy, LLC (Aurora) Aurora, an affiliate of Us1belll Coal Mme, Inc, operates a coal-
fired power plant m Fa1rbanks and sells wholesale power to GVEA Aurora IS an
economically regulated cert1f1cated public ut1llty operatmg under CPCN No S20 12
• F1re Island Wmd, LLC (FIW) FIW, a wholly owned subs1d1ary of Cook Inlet Reg1on, Inc, IS
currently bu1ldmg a 17 MW wmd farm on F1re Island that Will sell 100% of 1ts output to
Chugach Electnc Assoc1at1on, Inc (CEA) at a f1xed net pnce of $97 per MWh over a 2S-year
term FIW was exempted from RCA regulation by Alaska Statute (AS) 42 OS 711{r), and does
not have a CPCN 13
e South Fork Hydro, LLC (SFH) SFH IS a pnvately-owned company currently developmg a 1 2
MW run-of-nver hydro proJect on the south fork of Eagle R1ver near Anchorage SFH Will
sell 100% of 1ts output to Matanuska Electnc Assoc1at1on, Inc (MEA) at a f1xed net pnce of
$70 per MWh over a 30-year term 14 SFH was granted exemption from RCA regulation
under AS 42 OS 711(d), and does not have a CPCN 15
~ Alaska Environmental Power, LLC (AEP) AEP IS a pnvately-owned company that operates a
wmd farm w1th an mstalled capac1ty of approximately 1,000 kW m Delta Junction, Alaska
AEP sells 100% of 1ts output to GVEA for a vanable pnce equal to GVEA's system average
avo1ded energy cost reported m 1ts tanff on a quarterly bas1s AEP IS a Qualified Fac1llty
under Federal regulations, wh1ch exempts 1t from state ut1llty regulation However, because
of cond1t1ons associated w1th a construction grant rece1ved from the AEA, AEP IS requ1red to
operate as a cert1f1cated public utility under CPCN No 742 16
4 1 2 Independent Electnc Ut1hty
Cantwell and surroundmg areas could Withdraw from GVEA serv1ce terntory and form an
mdependent electnc ut1llty The resultmg utll1ty would resemble the City of Seward's Electnc
Department, wh1ch 1s an mdependent ut1llty servmg Seward and the surroundmg area Formmg
an mdependent ut1llty would allow Cantwell to establish 1ts own electnc rates mdependent of
commercial stages of proJect development The Ralfbelt Integrated Resource Plan acknowledged the pos1t1ve
role IPPs can play m the rallbelt energy market (AEA, 2010)
12 See Order No 2m RCA Docket U-97-139 I
13 See Order No 5 m RCA Docket U-11-100 AS 42 OS 711(r) 1s a very narrowly defmed exemption cntena that w1ll
not apply to NVC
14 See AEA I AIDEA Board Resolution 2012-02 One of the members of SFH 1s a pnnc1pal at Polarconsult
15 See Order No 2 m RCA Docket U-08-102
16 See Order No 2 m RCA Docket U-11-111
March 210:11.3 -IFmai Report 23
I
I
J
I I
I
I
•
I f
I 1
I I
I I
I
I I
I
I
iJ
I I
I I
I~
I I
I \_I
r I I I
t_
I I
~ I
Li
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
J
l I
u
I
1 I
I ~I
I
I I
,-
1 I
j I
_)
Nat1ve Village of Cantwe!i
Jack River Hydroelectrnc Reconnaissance StiUidly Polarconsult Alaska, Inc 6
GVEA's rates Th1s would expose Cantwell to the costs or savmgs associated w1th a hydro
project at Jack R1ver
While th1s course IS an opt1on, 1t would be an amb1t1ous endeavor for NVC and the commun1ty
of Cantwell w1th s1gn1f1cant cost, r1sk, and respons1b1hty Even 1f the cost of energy from Jack
R1ver was lower than the cost of energy from GVEA, the reduced econom1es of scale for such a
small ut1hty could still result m h1gher retail electric rates than GVEA 17 Based on available
mformat1on and analysis m th1s study, 1t IS hkely that formation of an Independent Cantwell
electric ut1hty would result m h1gher rates for local ut1hty customers
In order to form a separate ut1hty, Cantwell would need to
s Demonstrate to the RCA that 1t 1s f1t, w1llmg, and able to operate as an electric ut1hty
servmg Cantwell
• Purchase the ex1stmg d1str~but1on mfrastructure from GVEA The cost bas1s or fa1r
market value of th1s mfrastructure 1s unknown, but could eas1ly be m the m1lhons of
dollars Some of the mfrastructure was hkely bUilt usmg government grants or loans
• Assume respons1b1hty for all electric ut1hty operations, mcludmg mamtenance and repair
of the d1str1but1on system, b1llmg, metermg, and customer serv1ce, and operat1on and
mamtenance of local generation plants
~ Prov1de for backup energy generation to supplement the hydro when 1t IS out of serv1ce
Th1s could be ach1eved w1th local d1esel generators or poss1bly through power purchase
agreements v1a the AIS
& Become a party to the Alaska lntert1e Agreement that governs access to and use of the
AIS Th1s agreement was updated m 2011, and now allows for the entrance of non-
utility part1es, although 1t IS questionable 1f a stand-alone Cantwell ut1hty could qualify as
a party to the agreement 18
• Successfully demonstrate to the RCA that the secess1on of Cantwell from GVEA IS m the
pubhc mterest It IS unknown how easy th1s would be to ach1eve There IS a general
movement towards mcreased mtegrat1on of the ra1lbelt ut1ht1es, and formmg a separate
C9ntwell utllrty would be counter to thrs trend 19
4 1 3 Non-Utrhty Entrty
If NVC rdentrfred a non-utrhty market for electr1crty from a project at Jack Rrver, rt may be able
to directly sell energy to that market Under state regulatrons, there are two general optrons
for such an arrangement
17 Non-fuel expenses for Tok-Tanacross, wh1ch has a s1m1lar electrrc load as the Cantwell area, were $0 121 per
kWh 1n FY 2011, compared w1th $0 023 per kWh for GVEA (PCE Program Stat1st1cal Report, FY 2011, AEA}
18 See Art1cle 4 of the 'Amended and Restated Alaska lntert1e Agreement', November 18, 2011
19 F1ve of the s1x ra1lbelt ut1lrt1es formed the Alaska Ra1lbelt Cooperative Transm1ss1on and Electrrc Company
(ARCTEC} m 2011 to focus on centralized plannrng and ownership of ra1lbelt generation and transm1ss1on
projects
March 2013-fma~ !Report 24
Nat1ve V1ilage of Cantwell
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc • Jlack Rover Hydroelectnc IReconna!ssance StiUdy
20
1 Sale to less than 10 mdependent end users that are not w1thm an ex1stmg cert1f1cated
utility serv1ce area 1s not regulated by the RCA F1gure A-2 shows the extent of GVEA's
ex1stmg cert1f1cated serv1ce terntory around Cantwell 20 To reach such markets, NVC
would need to arrange for wheelmg over power lmes owned by GVEA, AEA, and possibly
other ut1llt1es, or bUild dedicated power lmes to serve these customers
Potential examples of the market mclude mmes, lodges, resorts, or s1m1lar busmesses
operatmg m the VICinity of Cantwell Th1s busmess model would need to cons1der the
market demand for electnc1ty and the supply capab1llty of the selected hydro project
Mismatches between demand and supply could potentially be met by sale or purchase
of energy from GVEA Th1s busmess model would requ1re detailed analysis to venfy a
spec1f1c project busmess plan complied w1th ex1stmg statutes and regulations
2 Sale to aff1llated mterests of the hydro project owner Under th1s structure, NVC (or 1ts
subs1d1ary ownmg the hydro project) could sell electnc1ty to affiliated mterests located
w1thm an ex1stmg ut1llty serv1ce terntory m certam llm1ted s1tuat1ons A spec1f1c busmess
plan would requ1re detailed analysis to determme 1f It complied w1th RCA regulations
3 Direct sale of electnc1ty to un-affiliated ent1t1es w1thm an ex1stmg ut1llty serv1ce area IS
not allowed under RCA regulations Some electnc1ty markets m the Lower 48 have been
deregulated to allow such d1rect sales, but Alaska remams a regulated market where
such act1v1t1es are not allowed
The RCA approved a mod1f1cat1on to GVEA's service terntory boundanes m the Cantwell VICinity 1n September
2012 See RCA Docket U11-127 F1gure A-2 reflects the new serv1ce terntory boundanes m the proJect area
March 2013-IFmal Report 25
~I
I I
I I
I
I
i I
I
I I
I I
-I
I
I \
I l
I
I_ j
I
I I
L~
Jl
I I
\_)
I I tr
~)
I 1
I I
I I
\ I
I I
l
I :
I~
I I I I
'-I
I
1 I l
Natove Vui!age of Cantwe!~
Jack Rover Hydroeiectnc 1Reco11'1111'11anssance Study IPoiarconsuit A!aska, Inc
4 2 POTENTIAL MARKETS
4 2 1 Local Market-Cantwell and Surroundmg Areas
Ex1stmg local demand m Cantwell and surroundmg areas could be served year-round by a
hydroelectric project w1th generatmg capac1ty of 2+ MW and suff1c1ent storage to generate
3,000 MWh through the wmter season All project conf1gurat1ons at Dam S1te #1 and #2 meet
these cr1ter1a, and conf1gurat1on 3A at Dam S1te #3 meets th1s cr1ter1a Most project
conf1gurat1ons at Dam S1te #2 and #3 would requ1re careful reservoir management m order to
supply all of the area's energy needs through the wmter season
Alternately, because Cantwell IS connected to the ra1lbelt gr1d, the storage requirement can be
reduced to 450 MWh, wh1ch IS the approximate amount needed to serve Cantwell and
surroundmg areas through a week-long outage at any t1me of year The balance of Cantwell's
energy demand dur1ng the wmter months would be Imported v1a the AIS as IS current pract1ce
All project conf1gurat1ons except for 3C meet th1s cr1ter1a Conf1gurat1on 3C could meet local
demand for approximately two days dur1ng the summer months, and for approximately ten
days m the wmter months The project would need to be routmely operated w1th a full
reservoir m order to supply local energy demands durmg an mtert1e outage
4 2 2 Ra1lbelt Market
The ra1lbelt 1s the largest smgle electric market m Alaska, and IS capable of rece1vmg the full
output of a Jack R1ver hydro project The rallbelt presents a w1de var1ety of mterestmg market
opportumt1es and challenges for the NVC's cons1derat1on The feas1b1llty of the ra1lbelt ut1llt1es
purchasmg electr1c1ty from Jack R1ver depends on the pr1ce of the electr1c1ty and the particular
ut1llty's energy cost structure
Wh1le the ra1lbelt IS mterconnected, 1t IS not an mtegrated market Different sections of the
ra1lbelt transm1ss1on system are owned by different ent1t1es, and there are several techmcal and
contractual bottlenecks that restrict flow of power w1thm the ra1lbelt Many of the ut1ht1es are
subject to all-requirements or some-requirements power supply contracts that llm1t the ab1llty
of an IPP to sell electr1c1ty on a wholesale bas1s The result 1s a very complicated techmcal and
legal 'patchwork' The ra1lbelt electric ut1llt1es are currently m a cycle of capital remvestment
and structural reform, wh1ch may s1mpllfy th1s patchwork over the next 5 to 10 years
4 2 21 GVEA
Because Cantwell 1s located w1thm GVEA's serv1ce terntory, GVEA 1s the most log1cal purchaser
of electr1c1ty from Jack R1ver Also, GVEA currently has the h1ghest avo1ded energy cost of the
s1x ra1lbelt electric ut1llt1es, so 1t could afford to pay more than other ra1lbelt ut1llt1es for Jack
River's electrical output
March 2013-IFma~ !Report 26
Natnve Vuliage of Cantwe!!
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study PolarconsuR Alaska, Inc 6
There are several energy projects m vanous stages of development that could lower GVEA's
energy costs, adversely affectmg th1s market for a Jack R1ver project Some of these projects
are listed m Table 4-1
Table 4-1 Proposed Alternative Energy Supplies for GVEA
Resource I ProJect
Eva Creek Wmd Farm 111
New Natural Gas Fmds
m Cook Inlet
Start Up of Healy Clean
Coal Plant 121
Truckmg LNG from
North Slope
Alaska Stand-Alone Gas
Pipeline (ASAP)
Sus1tna-Watana
Hydroelectnc Project
Trans-Canada Gas
Pipeline
Proposed
Operational
Date
Fall2012
2014-2016
2014
2015
2018 I 2019
2024
Unknown
Proposed
Energy Pnce
(2012 $)
$0 086 per
kWh
NA
$0 11 per
kWh
$12 2 per
kWh 131
$0 094 per
kWh 141
$0 17 per
kWh 151
Unknown
Probable Impact on GVEA Avo1ded Cost Structure
ProJected output IS approximately 4% of total GVEA
supply W1ll result m modest decrease m energy
costs 1f performance forecasts are ach1eved
Neutral Extends the status quo of GVEA purchasmg
economy energy from ML&P and CEA If these fmds
do not result m s1gmf1cant new natural gas reserves,
GVEA's avo1ded cost of energy w1llmcrease as low-
cost energy purchases from Cook Inlet-area ut11it1es
decrease
Assummg 75% of plant output displaces d1esel and
naptha consumption, would reduce system average
avo1ded cost approximately 12%
Assumed to eliminate all d1esel and naptha
consumption, wh1ch would reduce Incremental
avo1ded cost approximately 35%, and system
average avo1ded cost approximately 20%
Assumed to elimmate all d1esel and naptha
consumption, wh1ch would reduce mcremental
avoided cost approximately 50%, and system
average av01ded cost approximately 25%
Assumed to elimmate all d1esel and naptha
consumption, reducmg mcremental avoided cost
approximately 10% and system average av01ded cost
approximately 5%
Too many unknowns to speculate Likely s1m1lar to
other gas supply projects listed m th1s table
(1) Based on Eva Creek Project 1nformat1on on GVEA webs1te www gvea com/energy/evacreek
(2) Based on an October 3, 2012 art1cle m the Fairbanks Da1ly News-Mmer
(3) Based on low-end of range of delivered cost for LNG m Fa1rbanks ($13 60 per MCF) as forecast 1n January 10,
2013 presentation to AIDEA Board of Directors Converted to pnce per kWh usmg assumed net heat rate of
9,000 btu/kWh
(4) Based on an assumed net heat rate of 9,000 btu/kWh and delivered natural gas cost m Fairbanks of
$10 45/MCF (ASAP Project Plan, Alaska Gaslme Development Corporation, July 2011)
(5) Based on mformat1on m January 10, 2013 presentation to AIDEA Board of Directors
All of these projects have some degree of nsk and uncertamty W1th the exceptions of the Eva
Creek wmd farm, wh1ch IS nearly completed and partially operational, and poss1bly the Healy
Clean Coal Plant, wh1ch 1s bu1lt but has been shut down for over a decade, 1t IS unknown 1f or
when any of these projects w1ll be bUJit, or whether the estimated budgets w1ll be met and
reduced energy costs for GVEA Will be realized
March 2013-Fmai !Report 27
I I
I I L)
I I
~\
I
1 I
I
I I
I )
I I
I I
I I I I -_)
1
I I
II
I
I
I 1
I
I I
I I
I 1
I I
I
l I
I I
Nat1ve V11iage of Cantwell
Jack IRnver IHiydroeiectnc Recon1111aussance Studly Poiall'consult Alaska, inc
4 2 2 2 Other Rallbelt Utilities
Electr1c1ty from Jack R1ver could be sold to one or more of the other f1ve ra1lbelt utll1t1es These
are
e Matanuska Electric Assoc1at1on, Inc (Eagle R1ver and Matanuska-Sus1tna Valleys)
• Chugach Electric Assoc1at1on, Inc (Southern Anchorage and northern Kenai Pen~nsula)
e Anchorage Mumc1pal L1ght and Power (Northern Anchorage)
e Seward Electric System (City of Seward)
• Homer Electric Assoc1at1on (Southern Kenai Pen~nsula)
All of these utll1t1es currently have lower energy costs than GVEA, so they would not be
expected to pay as much as GVEA for Jack R1ver's output Add1t1onally, delivering energy to
these utll1t1es would 1ncur wheel~ng costs over the AIS, and potentially MEA, ML&P, or CEA
transm1ss1on systems, decreasing the net revenues from the project
Table 4-2 prov1des some examples of ex1st1ng transm1ss1on wheeling rates on the rallbelt gr1d
Table 4-2 Selected Ra1lbelt Gnd Wheeling Costs
Energy Transm1ss1on
Customer Lme Owner
GVEA AEA
GVEA MEA
GVEA CEA
Transm1ss1on Descnpt1on and Location
Wheeling Bradley Lake Energy over the AIS
(MEA's Douglas Substation to Healy)
Wheeling Bradley Lake Energy over MEA System
MEA's Teeland Substation to Douglas Substation)
Wheeling Bradley Lake Energy over CEA system
from Kenai Penmsula to Anchorage (Dave's Creek
Substation to Rutherford Substation m Anchorage)
Wheelmg costs denved from GVEA f1hngs m RCA Docket TA230-13
4 2 2 3 Individual Customers
Transm1ss1on
Lme Length
170 m1les
19 miles
98 m1les
Wheeling Cost
$0 0257
per MWh-m1le
$0 0242
per MWh-m1le
$0 0316
per MWh-mlle
Sale to 1nd1v1dual customers 1s poss1ble 1f the total number of customers IS less than ten and
they are located outside of an ex1st1ng utility's cert1f1cated serv1ce area (the llm1ts of GVEA's
serv1ce area m the project v1c1n1ty are shown on F1gure A-2) If the customers are located w1thm
the ut1hty's cert1f1cated serv1ce area, d1rect sale IS generally not allowed, as 1t would v1olate the
terms of the cert1f1cate of public convemence and necessity granted to the ut1llty by the RCA
GVEA's ex1st1ng cert1f1cated serv1ce terntory 1ncludes the Parks Highway corndor from Cantwell
north to Fairbanks
Mal1'ch 2013-IFma~ Report 28
Natuve Vnllage of CantweH
Jack R1ver Hydme~ectrJc Reconnaassance Study Polarconsu~t Aiaska, ~nc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
I I
March 2013 -fmaliReport 29
I I
I
I 1
I
I I
I I
r-
1 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
I
I I
I I
' I I I
L_;
r)
I I
I
NatHve Voliage of Cantwell
;ack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
5 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I
Reconnaissance-level mvest1gat1ons of Jack R1ver conclude that several hydroelectric project
-' conf1gurat1ons appear to be technically v1able at Jack R1ver, rangmg m mstalled capacity from
approximately 1 7 to 7 3 MW All project conf1gurat1ons considered for Jack R1ver are storage
projects The 1 7 MW project would only have suff1c1ent storage capacity to supply Cantwell
and surroundmg areas dur1ng a week-long mtert1e outage, whereas the 7 3 MW project would
' have suff1c1ent storage capac1ty to fully regulate Jack R1ver flow on an annual bas1s
The most accessible market for the electric output of a hydro project at Jack R1ver IS wholesale
purchase of the full electrical output of the project by Golden Valley Electnc Assoc1at1on, Inc
(GVEA), the local electric utll1ty Under ex1stmg market cond1t1ons and estimated s1te
cond1t1ons, the project conf1gurat1ons considered m th1s study are not economic w1th wholesale
purchase at GVEA's current system average avo1ded energy cost Under more favorable
fmancmg, s1te, and/or market cond1t1ons, several of the project conf1gurat1ons evaluated m th1s
study appear to be economically v1able w1th wholesale purchase of the electr1c1ty by GVEA
Project conf1gurat1ons that appear to warrant further study have estimated benefit-cost rat1os
of between 0 50 and 3 00 Th1s w1de range mcorporates a +/-30% range on total mstalled cost,
and a range of operatmg costs and fmancmg terms
I'
ln1t1al analysis of environmental Impacts assoc1ated w1th the project conf1gurat1ons considered
md1cates they would affect res1dent f1sh that are likely present m Jack R1ver by 1mpedmg f1sh
passage through the project reach and by changmg water quant1ty and quality downstream of
the project Alaska's F1shway Act (AS 16 OS 841 to 851) would requ1re that a project at Jack
R1ver e1ther prov1de for f1sh passage, prov1de for hatchery operations to replace the value of
the Impacted f1sher1es, or prov1de a lump-sum cash payment as m1t1gat1on for f1sh passage
Impacts In practice, ADF&G prefers to mamtam ex1stmg hab1tat, and only rarely accepts
hatchery fundmg or cash payments m-lleu of on-s1te m1t1gat1on
The project conf1gurat1ons are not expected to s1gn1f1cantly Impact anadromous f1sh hab1tat
The nearest anadromous hab1tat 1s more than 50 m1les downstream m the Nenana R1ver near
Healy, and the project could reduce flow at the upper llm1t of anadromous hab1tat by up to
approximately 7% Peak project operation m late wmter could mcrease flow at the upper llm1t
of anadromous hab1tat by approximately 50% from natural flow cond1t1ons Proper d1scharge
rampmg rates and thermal management of water releases would likely av01d any 1mpacts to
anadromous hab1tat
Reservoirs under some project conf1gurat1ons would 1nundate up to several hundred acres of
wetland and upland hab1tat for game along Jack R1ver
March 2013-fnna~ !Report 30
Nat1ve Vni!age of Cantwell
Jack IR~ver IH!ydroelectric Reconna~ssance StiUldly l?o!arconsuit A~aska, ~nc
Based on the fmdmgs of th1s study, further mvest1gat1on of hydroelectric development on Jack
R1ver should focus on the followmg mformat1on m order to determme 1f a hydroelectric project
at Jack R1ver IS feas1ble
s Collect add1t1onal hydrology data to better charactenze resource hydrology
e Market analysis to determme a preferred proJect conf1gurat1on
• Perform geotechmcal mvest1gat1ons to assess techmcal su1tab1llty of dam s1tes and
defme des1gn parameters for dams
e Conduct baseline f1sher1es survey to determme what res1dent spec1es are present m the
study reach of Jack R1ver
~ Hold scopmg meetmgs w1th regulatory agenc1es to outline the' scope of environmental
stud1es, defme likely m1t1gat1on requirements for aquatiC, wetland, and upland Impacts,
and determme likely operational constramts on the project
• Generate refmed estimates of electrical output and project costs to determme
econom1c feas1b1llty
5 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULE
The next step m the development of a hydro project at Jack R1ver IS to perform a feas1b1llty
study to validate and bUild on the reconnaissance-level fmdmgs m th1s study The feas1b1llty
study would focus on collectmg more f1eld data to better defme the hydroelectric resource and
potential environmental and regulatory constramts that may be Imposed on the project's
operations Once these parameters are better defmed, a new econom1c analysis can be
performed to evaluate the project's econom1c feas1b1llty
The proposed development schedule for the project IS presented m F1gure 5-1 F1gure S-1
assumes that the preferred project conf1gurat1on 1dent1f1ed m the feas1b1llty study does not fall
under Federal Energy Regulatory Comm1ss1on (FERC) JUriSdiction, and can be bUilt m two
construction seasons If the project requ1res a FERC license, or requ1res three construction
seasons, the overall project development schedule Will be longer
F1gure S-1 Project Development Schedule
March 20:11.3-Fmai Report 3:11.
' I
I I
\
I
I I
I
I
I I
I
I l
I I
I
I I
I I
I l
I
( 1
I
I j
(I
1_1
I
[_I
\
I i
~'
I
I J
I I
I
I I I
I I
-I I
Nat1ve V11lage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
6 0 REFERENCES
Alaska Department of Commerce, Commumty, and Econom1c Development (ADCCED) 2012
Cantwell Web s1te http //www commerce state ak us /dca/commdb/CIS cfm?
Comm Boro name=Cantwell - -
ADCCED, D1v1s1on of Energy and Power Development, October 1977 Alaska Reg1onal Energy
Resources Plannmg Project, Phase I, Volume II Inventory of 011, Gas, Coal, Hydroelectnc,
and Uramum Resources, Fmal Report
ADCCED, D1v1s1on of Energy and Power Development, 1980 Alaska Reg1onal Energy Resources
Plannmg Project, Phase II Coal, Hydroelectnc, and Energy Alternatives Volume II
Hydroelectnc Development
ADCCED, Statewide D1g1tal Mappmg lmt1at1ve 2012 Web s1te
http //www alaskamapped org/sdm1
Alaska Energy Authonty (AEA) 2010 Ra1lbelt Integrated Resource Plan Prepared by Black &
Veatch, Inc
AEA 2011 November 18, 2011 Amended and Restated Alaska lntert1e Agreement
AEA 2012a Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Web s1te
http //www akenergyauthonty org/RE Fund-6 html July
AEA 2012b Sus1tna-Watana Hydroelectnc Project Webs1te http //www susltna-
watanaydro org
AEA 2012c Board Resolution 2012-02
AEA 2012d PCE Program Stat1st1cal Report for F1scal Year 2011
AEA 2013a Presentation to the AIDEA Board of Directors on the Sus1tna-Watana
Hydroelectnc Project January 10, 2013
AEA 2013b Presentation to the AIDEA Board of Directors on the North Slope LNG to
Fa1rbanks Project January 10, 2013
Alaska Gaslme Development Corporation 2011 Alaska Stand Alone Gas P1pelme I ASAP
Project Plan July 1, 2011
U S Department of the lntenor, Bureau of Land Management June 2006 East Alaska
Proposed Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement
Fa1rbanks Da1ly News-Mmer, October 2, 2012 Ed1t1on "Deal reached to restart Healy Clean Coal
Plant"
March 2013-IFmal Report 32
/
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc •
Golden Valley Electnc Assoc1at1on, Inc 2012a Eva Creek Wmd Farm Project Web s1te
http //www /gvea com/energy/evacreek
Institute of Soc1al and Economic Research (ISER), Umvers1ty of Alaska Anchorage 2012b
Alaska Fuel Pnce Projections 2012-2035 ISER Workmg Paper 2012 1 and Microsoft
Excel Spreadsheet Pnce Model July
Regulatory Comm1ss1on of Alaska (RCA) 1997a Docket U-97-139, Order No 2
RCA 2008 Docket U-08-102 Order No 2
RCA 2011a Docket Ull-100 Order No 5
RCA 2011b Docket Ull-111 Order No 2
RCA 2011c Docket U11-127
RCA 2012 I Docket TA230-13
U S Geological Survey (USGS) 2003 Est1matmg the Magmtude and Frequency of Peak
Streamflows for Ungaged S1tes on Streams m Alaska and Contermmous Basms m
Canada Water-Resources lnvest1gat1ons Report 2003-4188 By Curran, Janet H , Meyer,
Dav1d F , and Tasker, Gary D
March 2013-Fmal Report 33
I
I I
I
I
I
J_l
I
I I
I
J
I I
I
I I
l
l I I
'J
, I
I l
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
REPORT APPENDICIES
March 2013-Final Report
Nat1ve V1Hage of CantweH
Jack !River IHydlroe~ectnc IReconna~ssance Study Polarconsult Alaska, ~nc
APPENDiX A-MAPS AND FIGURES
I I
I
I I
I I
March 2013 -fma! !Report
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -Fmal Report
I I
I I
I l
I
I I
I I
I I
l
I J
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Po la rconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Figure A-1: Project Overview and Location M a p
D 2!10
E3F31 0 25
WI.IS F3 E3 I
ALAS KA RANGE
~
TH IS PROJECT
PAXSO N
March 2013 -Final Report A-1
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Figure A-2: General land Ownership in Project Vicinity
~ GVEA SERVICE TERRITORY
.__ _ ___,I PRIVATE LA ND VILLAGE REGION
LAND LAND
NAT IVE ALLOTMENT
-PATENTED TO STATE OF ALASKA
8888883 TA'd TO STATE OF ALASKA
~ SELECTED BY STATE OF ALASKA
PATENTED TO AHTNA , INC .
SELECTED BY AHTNA , INC .
FIGURE IS INTENDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. LAND OWNERSHIP DATA RETREIVED FROIA BLIA SOIAS WEBSITE.
ON AUGUST 19, 2012 (HTTP:/ /SDIAS.AK .BLIA .GOV).
ENTIRE FIGURE IS LOCATED WITHIN FAIRBANKS IAERIDIAN.
GVEA SERVICE TERRITORY BOUNDARY FROIA GVEA TARIFF SHEETS 1.5.1 o!r: 1.6, APPROVED BY RCA
IN U-06-060(2), JAN . 2, 2006 AND U-1 1-127, APPROVED SEPT. 14, 2012.
March 2013 -Final Report
0
E3 E3
2
A-2
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Figure A-3: Map of Hydrology Basins and Sub -Basins
IN AND HYDRO UBBASIN IN ON
A REA
GA UGE NO . (SQU AR E MILES)
391
US GS 15516050 325
145
142
139
USGS 15292000 6 ,160
March 2013 -Final Report A-3
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Figure A-4 : Hydro Project Configu rat ion lA at Dam Site 1
DAM ACCESS ROAD
PENSTOCK ROUTE TO
POWERHOUSE SITE 2
TH IS FlGURE IS INTENDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. AU. QI..WffiTlES AND LENGTHS ARE PREUWINARY ESTlMAl£5 .
ENTIRE FIGURE IS LOCAl£0 WITHIN FAI RBANKS MERIDIAN .
AERIAl. IMAGE CREDIT: U.S. DEPT. OF COMMERCE , CENSUS BUREAU . SUMMER 2006. 0
25-FT AIN D 125-FT CONITOURS GENERATED FROM IFSAR DATA FOR THE ALASKA SDIAI PROJECT, 2,200
VERTICAL DATU M IS ORTHOMETRIC HEIGHT A8fJVE MEAN SEA LEVEL, NAI/IJ88 , GEOI012 . t---tE=c:"'"'"""""""E3:=E====3 PROJECT FEATU RES ARE LOCATED ON LAN D PATENTED OR INTERIM CONVEYED TO AHITNA, INC.
EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE NOl£0. SCALE IN Fm
March 2013-Final Report A-4
A i Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. "iP
Figure A-5: Hydro Project Configuration 2A at Dam Site 2
ROCK-FlU. GRAVITY MAIN DAM
CANYON FLOOR El..: +/-2.290' :,
ll'M CREST El..: 2,425'
CREST LENGTH: 950'
AGURE IS INTENDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. All. QUANT!TlES AND LENGlHS ARE PREUMINMY ESTIMATES .
ENTIRE FIGURE IS LOCATED WITHIN T18S, R7W, FAIRBANKS MERIDIAN .
AERIAl.. IMAGE CREDIT: U.S. DEPT. OF COMMERCE, CENSUS BUREAU . SUMMER 2006.
5-FT AND 25-FT CONTOURS GENERATED FROM IFSAR DATA FOR THE ALASKA SDMI PROJECT, Q
SUPPLEMENTED WITH PCA SURVEYS IN CANYON VICINm'. VERTlCAL DATUM IS ORTHOMETRIC 1,500
HEIGHT ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. NAVOBB, GEOID12 . E=:J:::::J=3:=E=====3 All. PROJECT FEATURES ARE LOCATED ON LAND PATENTED OR INTERIM CONVEYED TO AHTNA, INC .t==i t==i
EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE NOTED.
ENTIRE PROJECT IS WITHIN DENAU BOROUGH UMITS . SCALE IN FEET
March 2013 -Final Report A-5
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study 6 ~
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. ,
Figure A-6: Hydro Project Configuration 3A at Dam Site 3
FIGURE IS INTENDED FOR PlANNING PURPOSES ONLY. AU. QUANTITIES AND LENGTHS ARE PREUI.IINARY ESTII.IATES .
2. ENTIRE FIGURE IS LOCATED WITH IN TI8S, R7W, FAIRBANKS I.IERIDIAN .
3. AERIAL II.IAGE CREDIT : U.S. DEPT . OF COI.II.IERCE , CENSUS BUREAU . SUI.II.IER 2006 .
4
• iu~LE~~N~~~o~u~G~~~T~~M ~~TY~T~~~~ TH~~~ 6~~~;:~fgt· 0 1,200
HEIGHT ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. NAV088 , GEOI01 2. E=:c:J=3:=E=====3 . ALL PROJECT FEATURES ARE LOCATED ON lAND PATENTED OR INTERI!A CONVEYED TO AH TNA, INC . t==! t==!
EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE NOTED .
ENTIRE PROJECT IS WITHIN DENAU BOROUGH UI.IITS . SCALE IN FEET
March 2013-Final Report A-6
Natnve Village of CantweU
.llack R~ver Hydroeiectr~c Reconnaissance Study Polarconsu!t Alaska, ~nc
I I
I I
APPENDIX B ~PHOTOGRAPHS
I I
I I
I I
l I
I I
March 20:1..3 -Fmal Report
Nat1ve V1Hage of CantweU
.lack !Rover Hydroelectric Recormaossance Studly 1Poiarcons11.11it Alaska, ~nc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank I I
I I
i I \
March 2013-FmaiiReport
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
March 2013 -Final Report
Po larconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
Photograph B-1: Stream Gauging
Station Installation, November 2011
View lo ok ing upstream at stream
gauging station in stalled November 2,
2011.
Brailey Hydrological Consultants,
November 2, 2 011
Photograph B-2: Bank Erosion at
Stream Ga uging Station, May 2012
View look i ng upstream at stream gauging
station d uring spring runoff installed
Novembe r 2, 2011 . Note bank erosion
since inst allation (Photo B-1)
Photo Co urtesy of Calvin Carlson,
June 6, 2 012.
8 -1
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
March 2013-Final Report
View looking downriver from rock
outcrop on left bank of Jack River.
Brailey Hydrological Consultants,
November 3, 2011
GAUGING STATION
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Photograph B-3: View Downstream
Towards Cantwell from Gauging Station
Photograph B-4: View Upstream
Towards Dam Site 3 from Vicinity of
Gauging Station
View looking upriver towards dam site #3 from rock outcrop on
left bank of Jack River overlooking gauging station .
Brailey Hydrological Consultants, November 3, 2011
B-2
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Photograph B-5: View of Jack River Canyon Near Dam Site 1
View of Jack River canyon from Wolf Point . Proposed Dam Site 1 is located just
downstream of the tributary visible in the photograph . Jack River i s running from left to
right in this photograph .
Polarconsult, July 22, 2012
March 2013 -Final Report B-3
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
Photograph B-6: Panoramic View of Jack River Canyon From Wolf Point, looking SW
Polarconsult, July 22, 2012
Polarconsult, July 23, 2012
Photograph B-7: Panoramic View of Jack River at Stream Gauging Site, looking Upriver
March 2013 -Final Report B-4
Native Village of Cantwell Polarconsult Alaska, lnc.l/1 ~ Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study ~
----------~------------------------~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------
Photograph B-8: Panoramic View of Dam Site 2, looking Southwest
Photograph B-9: Panoramic View of Dam Site 1, Looking Northwest
March 2013-Final Report
View of dam site 2 from the right rim of the Jack River valley . The
brown line traces the approximate alignment of the proposed dam
site. Jack River is flowing from left to right in this photograph .
Polarconsult July 23, 2012
View looking downstream at dam site 1. The brown line
traces the approximate alignment of the proposed dam site .
The community of Cantwell is located in the distance .
Polarconsult, July 23, 2012
B-5
1 I
I
I I
I I
r I
I I
I I
I :
I I I
Natnve VnHage of CantweU
Jack R1ver Hydroe~ectnc Reconnaissance Studly
fi2~
Poial!'consult A~aska, ~nc ~
APPENDIX C-HYDROLOGY DATA
Cl Introduction and Methodology pages C-1
C2 Stream Gauge Stat1on Information pages C-2 to C-4
C3 Comparable Basms page C-5
C4 Jack R1ver Hydrology Model page C-6 to C-9
Mall'ch 20:1!.3 -IFma! Report
Natnve VIllage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Studly IP'olarconsult Alaska, inc
I I
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
I I
I I
March 2013 -Fma! Report
1 I
(
I I
I I
I :
I I
I I
I
] I
I ~I
I I
I
Nat1ve Vll~age of CantweU ~
.]ack R1ver Hydroelectric !Reconnaissance Studly Poiall"consult Aiaska, ~nc ,
C 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
Jack R1ver hydrology mformat1on JS used to 1dent1fy the appropnate mstalled capac1ty of the
hydroelectnc proJect, evaluate the expected electncal generation potential of the project,
evaluate storage conf1gurat1ons for the proJect, and determme the magn1tude of flood flows on
Jack R1ver Moreover, th1s hydrology mformat1on can help assess the effect the proJect may
have on the natural environment
Hydrology mformat1on for Jack R1ver IS based on (1) a stream gaugmg stat1on mstalled JUSt
below the ex1t of the canyon at RM 11 34 and (2) companson of data from th1s gaugmg stat1on
to data for nearby comparable basms With ex1stmg or h1stoncal hydrology records By analyzmg
Jack R1ver data m conJunction w1th data from nearby nvers w1th longer penods of record, a
better estimate of the long-term hydrology of Jack R1ver can be developed Th1s allows for
better est1mates of the proJect's long-term performance
Approximately 11 months of hydrology data have been collected at Jack R1ver and analyzed for
th1s proJect The gaugmg station below the nver valley rema1ns m serv1ce and IS descnbed m
Sect1on C 2 Th1s Appendix summanzes the hydrology data and analysis used for th1s study
Appendix I prov1des the dally stage and calculated flow data m tabular form
C 2 STATION INFORMATION
C 2 1 STATION SETTING
The locat1on of the gaugmg stat1on IS shown on F1gure A-3 and Photographs B-1, B-2, B-4 and B-
7 Stream morphology at the gaugmg station Js a contmuous nffle runnmg at the grade of the
alluv1al plam, wh1ch IS approximately 0 6% to 0 8% There are a senes of overflow channels on
the left bank (ms1de bend) and at a h1gher elevation on the nght bank (outs1de bend)
Approximately 100 feet upstream of the gaugmg stat1on, the fan IS confmed to a w1dth of 400
to 1,200 feet by the nver valley's walls, wh1ch are a m1x of weathered bedrock and glac1al till
w1th some unconsolidated overburden (see Photographs B-7 and B-9) Immediately
downstream of the gaugmg stat1on, the valley walls open up and trans1t1on to bluffs w1th
occasional bedrock outcrops Approximately J4 mile downstream of the gaugmg stat1on, the fan
opens up to the valley between the Nenana R1ver and Broad Pass, and 1s effectively laterally
unconfmed Prox1m1ty to the nver valley and v1sual assessment of s1te geology suggests that
surface flow at the gaugmg stat1on Js representative of surface flows w1thm the canyon
SJgn1f1cant mf1ltrat1on to groundwater 1s poss1ble downstream of the gaugmg stat1on
SJgn1f1cant groundwater flow may also occur through the unconsolidated sediments that cover
the valley floor at and above the gaugmg stat1on
C 2 2 STATION INSTALLATION
On November 2, 2011, Polarconsult subcontractor Bralley Hydrological Consultants (BHC)
supervised 1nstallat1on of a new gaugmg stat1on near the outlet of the Jack R1ver valley The
Mall"ch 2013 -IFmaiiReport C-1
Nat1ve V1Uage of Cantwell
.Dack R1ver Hydroelectrsc IReconnaussance Study Polarconsu!t Alaska, ~nc
gaugmg station IS a 6-mch steel well casmg Installed m the act1ve plam of Jack R1ver where 1t
emerges from 1ts valley and onto the floor of Broad Pass At the t1me of mstallat1on m
November 2011, the well was located approximately f1ve feet from the top of the nght bank of
the mam channel of Jack R1ver along an outs1de bend The well casmg was set approximately
7 5 feet above ground surface (AGS), and extends approximately 20 feet below ground surface
(BGS) The bottom of the well casmg IS open ended, and the casmg IS perforated from the
casmg bottom up to approximately seven feet BGS The top of the casmg IS f1tted With a bolt-
on steel plate
A Keller Acculevel senes vented pressure and temperature transducer (PTT) 1s deployed down
the well to record water stage and temperature The PTT IS f1tted to a Keller GSM-2 cellular
enabled data logger that 1s mounted m the top of the well casmg The data logger records
water stage and temperature data at 15-mmute mtervals and emalls th1s data to Polarconsult
once da1ly
C 2 3 STATION HISTORY
The gaugmg station operated contmuously from November 2, 2011 through February 17, 2012
On February 17, 2012, the frost lme reached the PTT m the well, approximately 9 5 feet BGS
Calvm and Gordon Carlson of Cantwell made several attempts to thaw the well and recover the
sensor, but were unsuccessful The pressure mcrease associated w1th the freezmg act1on
exceeded the mechamcall1m1ts of the PTT on February 24, 2012, destroymg the PTT
BHC f1tted the data logger w1th a replacement Acculevel PTT on March 27, 2012 The PTT was
not deployed down the well due to contmued freezmg cond1t1ons Calvm Carlson deployed the
sensor on May 20, 2012 after the well thawed Calvm Carlson v1s1ted the gaugmg stat1on on
June 6th, and reported that Jack R1ver was actively erodmg the nght bank, and the gaugmg well
was now located m mid-channel
Polarconsult engmeer Joel Groves v1s1ted the s1te July 22 to 24, 2012 At that t1me, the channels
at the gaugmg station were quasi-stable, w1th a new 55-foot w1de channel to the nght of the
gaugmg well, and a 35-foot w1de channel to the left of the gaugmg well There was a brush p1le
upstream of the well that was helping to form a shallow cobble bar downstream of the well
Add1t1onal channel sh1ftmg likely occurred dunng the flood events of September 20 to 23, 2012,
based on rev1ew of the stage data from the gaugmg station Contmued channel sh1ftmg at the
gaugmg stat1on IS l1kely dunng future h1gh flow cond1t1ons
It appears that the mam channel of Jack R1ver Will eventually cross the well as Jack R1ver
contmues to meander The bottom of the mam channel appeared to be approximately 84 to 86
feet m the stat1on datum dunng the July s1te v1s1t, suggestmg that the well will retam
approximately 11 to 13 feet of casmg embedment m the stream bed as the mam channel
meanders across the station locat1on
March 2013 -Fmal Report C-2
l
I
I i
I
I I
I
I I
I I
I
1 I
I I I
1 I
I
Natave Vallage of Cantwell
.lack R1ver Hydroelectrrc Reconnaussance Study Polarconsllllt Alaska, ~nc
C 2 4 FLOW MEASUREMENTS AND STATION CALIBRATION
Flow measurements at the Jack R1ver gaugmg stat1on are summanzed 1n Table C-1
Table C-1 Jack R1ver Flow Measurements
Date/Time Party Flow Stage Method I Equipment (cfs) (ft)
11/3/201111 30 Bralley 0 83 7 Estimated (1)
11/3/201111 30 Bralley 63 5 87 73 Current velocity (z)
3/27/2012 14 00 Bralley 29 6 86 00 Sudden dose salt (3 )
7/23/2012 11 30 Groves 0 85 6 Estimated (1l
7/23/2012 11 30 Groves 600 90 60
Current veloc1ty and
v1sual est1mates (4)
(1) November 2011 pomt of zero flow (PZF) estimated from measured stream bed profile, stream gradient, and
distance between gauge and measurement section July 2012 PZF estimated from measured stream bed
profile, stream gradient, distance between gauge and measurement section, and v1sual estimate of depth of
mam channel at thalweg
(2) Current-velocity stream flow method With March McB1rney FlowMate 2000 current velocity meter
(3) Sudden dose salt mtegrat1on stream flow method w1th Hanna HI 9828 conduct1v1ty meter
(4) Stream depths and veloc1t1es were unsafe to perform a complete measurement w1th available equipment
One of two mam channels at the gaugmg stat1on were measured usmg the current-velocity method, and the
depths and veloc1t1es m the 2nd channel were Visually estimated The w1dth of the 2nd channel was surveyed
usmg a reflectorless total station Mmor flow over the outwash fan and m a channel that bifurcates from the
mam channels approximately 200 yards upstream of the gauge were also v1sually estimated
To cal1brate the gaugmg stat1on, two flow measurements were taken on November 2, 2011 and
March 27, 2012 The pomt of zero flow was also measured on November 2nd These three data
pomts are suff1c1ent to develop a ratmg curve for the gaug1ng stat1on that 1s valid from
November 2, 2011 through approximately June 1, 2012 (F1gure C-4)
Rev1ew of stage data md1cates that Jack R1ver started sh1ftmg 1ts channel w1th the on-set of
peak spnng melt flows between May 24th and June 1st Peak flows had subs1ded by July 1st The
changed channelmvalldated the stage d1scharge curve developed dunng the wmter of 2011-12
A new stage-discharge curve was started w1th the July 23, 2012 flow measurement and
estimated po1nt of zero flow (PZF)
The flood events of September 21 to 23, 2012 likely resulted m add1t1onal channel sh1ftmg at
the gaugmg stat1on, based on rev1ew of the stage record No flow measurements have been
taken to establ1sh an 1n1t1al ratmg curve for the stat1on after September 23rd, and this stage data
1s not used for the reconnaissance study analysis
The flow measurements taken for th1s study are adequate to develop stage-discharge curves for
the gaugmg station su1table for reconnaissance-level analysis On-gomg nver meanders at the
gaugmg stat1on w1ll requ1re contmued frequent flow measurements to mamtam a valid ratmg
curve for the gaugmg stat1on
March 2013 -Fmal !Report C-3
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver IHydroeiectnc IReconnanssance Study
@ I
Polarconsu~t Alaska, ~nc
C 2 5 FUTURE GAUGING EFFORTS AT JACK RIVER
Three prospective gaugmg stat1on locat1ons were considered along Jack R1ver for th1s study
These s1tes, the rationale for selection of the RM 11 34 s1te, and recommendations for future
gaugmg efforts at Jack R1ver are d1scussed below
Locat1on 1 In the canyon m the v1cm1ty of RM 15 There are exposed rock outcrops and
well-confmed stream channels m th1s reach that are likely to be more stable than the
selected gaugmg stat1on at RM 11 34 Th1s would be a relatively remote mstallat1on that
would be very d1ff1cult to access for mstallat1on, flow measurements, or stat1on
mamtenance Th1s s1te would most likely not have cellular or satellite coverage due to
the steep canyon terram, requ1rmg on-s1te data storage and mtroducmg the nsk of data
loss m the event the station hardware was destroyed m a flood or landsl1de
Cons1derat1on of these factors m concert w1th the llm1ted funds available for th1s study
precluded use of th1s s1te
Location 2 The selected gaugmg stat1on The s1te at RM 11 34 IS 1mmed1ately downstream
of the canyon outlet, and 1s bel1eved to accurately charactenze surface flow m Jack R1ver
at the prospect1ve dam s1tes The s1te 1s read1ly accessible, and has cellular coverage for
a telemetered mstallat1on Act1ve meandermg of Jack R1ver was a known nsk w1th th1s
s1te (hence the dec1s1on to house the mstallat1on m a steel well casmg), and turned out
to be worse than anticipated for the 2011-12 gaugmg campaign
Locat1on 3 Gaugmg stat1ons at e1ther the Parks Highway Bndge (RM 9 51) or the Denali
H1ghway Bndge (RM 7 21) over Jack R1ver Both s1tes would be read1ly accessible and
would have cellular coverage The pnmary llm1tat1on of these s1tes 1s that Jack R1ver
traverses two to four m1les of alluv1al plam between RM 11 5 (Dam S1te #3) and these
s1tes A s1gn1f1cant fraction ofthe surface flow at RM 11 5 may percolate mto the alluv1al
substrate upstream of RM 9 51 and 7 21, resultmg m a potentially s1gn1f1cant
underestimate of the flow available for hydropower generation Th1s concern led to
exclus1on of these s1tes for th1s study
Based on expenence from the 2011-12 stream gaugmg campa1gn, future stream gaugmg efforts
should e1ther (1) contmue the use of the RM 11 34 s1te, but budget for frequent flow
measurements through the summer season to recharactenze the s1te after channel sh1ftmg
events, or (2) mstall a new gaugmg stat1on at one of the two downstream bndge s1tes, and
conduct a senes of concurrent flow measurements to quant1fy d1fferent1al flow between the
downstream gaugmg stat1on and the prospective dam s1te(s) The hardware at the RM 11 34
gaugmg stat1on remams m workmg order and can be moved to a new station location
March 2013 -IFmal Report C-4
I I
I 1
I
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
.lack R1ver IHiydlroelectnc Reconnaussance Study IPolarconsult Alaska, inc
C 3 COMPARABLE BASINS
Generally, 5 to 10 years of s1te-spec1f1c hydrology data IS needed to make well-mformed
dec1s1ons for hydroelectnc development However, 1f a gauge w1th a long-term record
correlates well w1th the shorter record at Jack R1ver, the longer record can be used to extend
the shorter record through a regression analysis
Ex1stmg available hydrology data 1n the v1c1mty of Jack R1ver 1s summanzed 1n Table C-2 Of the
seven nvers and streams listed 1n Table C-2, only the Sus1tna R1ver at Gold Creek gaugmg stat1on
(USGS gauge No 15292000) IS currently operational Because of the reasonable prox1m1ty,
concurrent record, and long penod of record for th1s stat1on, 1t IS used to create an extended
record for Jack R1ver
Table C-2 Summary of Jack R1ver Hydrology Data
USGS Basm S1te End Number
Location Size Elevation Lat1tude 11l Long1tude 11l
Begm of Da1ly GaugeiD (sq m1) (ft) (1) Date Date Records 12 l
Jack R1ver N/A 145 2,480 63°20'N 148°46'W 11/2/11 Current 212 below canyon
Seattle 15515800 36 0 2,250 63°19'N 148°15'W 10/1/65 9/30/75 3,651 Creek
Sus1tna at 15292000 6,160 676 62°46'N 149°41'W 8/1/49 Current 23,059 Gold Creek
Nenana R nr 15516000 710 2100 63°27'N 148°48'W 6/16/50 9/30/73 8,513 Wmdy
Nenana R nr 15518000 1,910 1,270 63°51'N 148°57'W 10/1/50 9/30/79 10,598 Healy
Nenana Rat 15518040 2,100 1,350 63°15'N 148°57'W 4/24/90 9/30/07 6,372 Healy
Lignite Cab
Mouth nr 15518080 481 1,300 63°54'N 148°59'W 5/30/85 9/30/04 7,068
Healy
Teklanika R 15518350 490 1550 63°55'N 149°30'W 10/1/64 9/30/74 3,654 nr Lignite
(1) Coordmates for USGS gauges are m North Amencan Datum of 1927 (NAD 27) All other coordmates are m NAD
83 Elevations for USGS gauges are from the USGS, elevations for other s1tes are mterpreted from USGS quad
maps Elevation for the Jack R1ver station IS an orthometnc he1ght m NAVD88, computed usmg GEOID12
(2) The record count for current gaugmg stations reflects data through August 31, 2011
March 2013-Fma~ Report C-5
·e
cr
"' .......
"' ...
~
~ 0 u::
"C
Qj
• !::!
iii E ...
0 z
Native Village of Cantwell
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
C.4 JACK RIVER HYDROLOGY MODEL
A model was developed based on available data to approximate the hydrology of Jack River .
• Summer flows (June 1 through August 15) are based on data from USGS Gauge #15292000,
Susitna River at Gold Creek . The relatively good correlation between available data for Jack
River (June 4, 2012 to August 1, 2012) and this station (coefficient of determination (R 2
) =
0.78) suggests that this is a good model for summer-time flows in Jack River .21 Equation C-1
provides the summer model.
Equation C-1: Q Jack= 0.000882 X Q Susitna + 326.7
Q Jack= Jack River flow; Q Su sitna = Susitna Riv er flow at Gold Creek .
• Winter flows (November 1 through April 30) are based on gauged Jack River flows for the
2011-12 winter. To evaluate whether flow during the winter of 2011-12 was average, 2011-
12 winter flow measurements on the Susitna River at Gold Creek were reviewed. Figure C-1
shows winter flow measurements on the Susitna River from 1949-2012. Susitna
measurements since 1975 and for the 2011 -1 2 winter are highlighted. The two
measurements for the winter of 2011-12 appear generally representative of winter flows
for the 37-period of record 1975 -2012 , so no adjustments to the Jack River record appear
warranted . Equation C-2 provides the winter model.
Equation C-2: Q Jack = 0.01995 X Q Susitna
Figure C-1: Winter Flow Measurements at Jack River and Susitna River
0 .8 ..,.------ -I -I -----r--~ ~
0
0 .7
0 .6 0
0
0 .5
0.4
-
0 .3
D
0
0 .2 0
0
0 .1
o 1949-2012 Winter Flow Measurements, Sus itna River at Gold Creek II
• 1975-2012 Winter Flow Measurements, Susitna River at Gold Creek
A 2011 -2012 Winter Flow Measurements, Sus itna River at Gold Creek
Mea sured Flow, Jack River Gauge
-Calculated Flow, Jack River Gauge
0 • • ~ • • •
&c • • • •• • o oo 0 .......
1:;!, • • o I
0 rJ • 0 I 0 J oD 0 ~
D D 0 • .o 0 0 D D 0 D • 0 oCoo
0 0
0.0 +----------+----------~--------~----------~--------~~---------r--~
~No~v~1~----~N~o~v~2~9 ______ ~Dec27 Jan 24 Feb 21 Mar 20 Apr 17
21 Because of the scarcity of hydrology data in Alaska, a correlation coefficient of 0 . 78 between these basins is
considered good . In other regions of the United States, this coefficient may be considered marginal. Also, t he
sh ort period of common record limits the confidence of this finding .
March 2013-Final Report C-6
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study G \
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
• Spring Flows (April 30 through June 1) are calculated by a line ar weighted average of the
summer and winter models. The winter model receives 100% weighting on April 30,
decreasing linearly to 0% on June 1. The summer model increase s in a similar fashion .
• Fall flows (August 15 through November 1) are calculated by a linear weighted average of
the summer and winter models. The summer model receives 100% weighting on August 15,
decreasing linearly to 0% on November 1. The winter model increases in a similar fashion .
The resulting Jack River hydrograph for an average water year is shown in Figure C-2 along with
average hydrographs for several other basins in the vicinity of Jack Riv er.
Figure C-2: Jack River Hydrology Model
6.--------------------------------.----------------------------------------.
5
-~ 4
ra
a! -0
..S!
~
~ 3 ra
:I
C"
VI ...
QJ
Q.
VI
~ 2
1
Seattle C nr Cantwell (15515800)
Nenan a R nr Windy (15516000)
Nen ana R nr Healy (15518000)
Ne nana Rat Healy (15518040)
Teklanika R nr Lignite (15518350)
-susitna at Gold Creek (15292000)
-Jack River Model
\
"""
0 +-----~-----,------r-----,------,-----,------~----~----~------r-----.---_J
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
This hydrology model is based on limited hydrology data, and should be reevaluated when
more data is available from the Jack River stream gauging station . Th is model is sufficient for a
reconnaissance-level analysis of Jack River . Figure C-3 presents the flow duration curve for Jack
River (based on the hydrology model) and for the Susitna River at Gold Creek.
March 2013 -Final Report C-7
~ ·e
Cll ..
'" :I
tT
"' ..
Cll c.
"' -~
3:
0 u::
-o
Cll
~
'" E ..
0 z
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Figure C-3: Flow Duration Curve for Jack River
10
9 -
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Susitna at Gold Creek
-+-Jack River Model
0% 10 % 20 % 30 % 40% 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 %
Pe rcentage of Time Flow is Equalled or Exceeded
Figure C-4: Stage-Discharge Data for Jack River Gauging Station
92 .0 .-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
91 .0
Qj 90 .0 ~
0
0 .....
II
~ 89.0 ·v;
'" u
~
!: 0 88 .0
~ Winter 2011 -12 Stage-Discharge Measurements
• Summer 20 12 Stage-Discharge Measurements
-Poly . (Winter 2011-12 Stage-Di sc harge Mea s urements)
85 .0 +----------.----------.----------.----------.----------.-----------r--------~
0 100 200 300 400 50 0 600 700
Ja ck Rive r Discharge at Gauging Station (cubic feet per second)
March 2013 -Final Report C-8
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
93 .50
92 .50
r:::-0 ... 91.50
",ij CIJ ra cu ... -V) 0 90 .50
tiOC! .~ 0
1:100 ::::s ....
ra 11
C) tiO 88 .5 ... r::: ra "iii
~ a 87.5
ra -iii 0
~ c.
CIJ 0
> t:. ~ 85 .50
84.50
• Water Stage, Logger Reading (ft)
X Water Stage, Manual Reading (ft)
•
X
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Figure C-5:
2011-2012 Jack River Stage Data
83 .50 +----------r--------~~--------~------~~----------~--------~----------~--------~----~--~~--~~--~----~--~~--------~------~~----~--~~~~~
11/1/11 12/6/11 1/10/12 2/14/12 3/20/12 4/24/12
100
80 ---Station Water Temperature (F)
~ 60 -Station Air Temperature (F)
Cll ...
::J ....
11) ... 40 Cll c.
E
Cll
1-
20
0
-20
-40
11/1/11 12/6/11 1/10/12 2/14/12 3/20/12 4/24/12
March 2013-Final Report
5/29/12 7/3/12 8/7/12 9/11/12 10/16/12
5/29/12 7/3/12 8/7/12 9/11/12 10/16/12
11/20/12 12/25/12 1/29/13 3/5/13
Figure C-6:
2011-2012 Jack River Gauging Station Air and Water
Temperature Data
11/20/12 12/25/12 1/29/13 3/5/13
C-9
Nat1ve V1llage of CantweH
.lack R1ver Hydl!"oe~ectnc IReconna~ssance Studly Polarconsuk Alaska, [nc ® I I
I
I t
APPENID~X D-RESOURCE DATA AND ANAlYSIS
I I
I
D 1 land Statii.Jls page D-1
D 2 Ma}(~mii.Jlm Probabie IFiood pages D-1 to D-2
D 3 IReservo~r l~fe pages D-3 to D-6
D 4 Carntwei! Outage Rate page D-7
I I
I
I
Mall"ch 2013 -FmaiiReport
Nat1ve VnHage of Cantwe!l
Jlack 1R1ver Hydlroelectnc Reconnaissance Study IPo~arconsu~t Aiaska, inc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -Fma! Report
I
J
I
I I I
I
I I
)
I I lj
I 1
I
) I
l
I I
! I
I I
r_l
I !
I
I I I
Native V1l~age of Cantwel~
.llack IR~ver Hydroeiectll'nc IReconna!ssaJ111ce StiLIIdly Polarcons•H Alaska, Inc ~
D 1 LAND STATUS
General land status of the project area 1s shown m F1gure A-2 In summary, most of the land
where development would occur for the hydro project (s1te access roads, power lme,
powerhouse, dam, tunnels, penstocks, and mtake structure) have been e1ther patented to,
mtenm conveyed to, or selected by Ahtna, Inc W1th the exception of project conf1gurat1on 3C,
portions of the proposed reservoirs would be located on land e1ther patented to or tentative
approved for patent to the State of Alaska Reservoirs above dam s1te 1 w1th max1mum
elevations greater than approximately 2,615 feet would extend onto federal land (sect1ons 3
and 10 of T19S, R6W, Fairbanks Mend1an)
Ahtna, Inc IS aware of and supportive of th1s project It IS assumed that Ahtna, Inc would
authonze access and use of the project lands under easements, long term leases, and/or sale to
the nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell Detailed d1scuss1ons w1th Ahtna, Inc on th1s matter were not
held for th1s study
D2 MAXIMUM PROBABLE FLOOD
Determmmg the max1mum probable flood for Jack R1ver 1s Important for (1) des1gnmg the dam,
spillway, and associated project works so they can Withstand flood flows, and (2) evaluatmg the
potential flood hazard m1t1gat1on capab1llt1es of a storage project on Jack R1ver USGS stat1st1cal
models for reg1onal Alaska streams were used to develop m1t1al estimates of the 100-year and
500-year flood flows for Jack R1ver These data are compared agamst annual peak flows
measured at Jack R1ver by the USGS
The USGS has developed stat1st1cal models to est1mate the max1mum probable floods for
streams m Alaska These models are developed based on stream gaugmg data throughout the
state, and spec1f1c parameters for the dramage basm of the stream of mterest 22 USGS model
mput parameters and estimated flood flows are summanzed m Table D-1
USGS models for both mtenor Alaska (Reg1on 6) and southcentral Alaska (Reg1on 4) were
evaluated Jack R1ver IS located m Reg1on 6 close to the border to Reg1on 4 The good
correlation between Jack R1ver and the upper Sus1tna R1ver (located m Reg1on 4) suggest that
the Reg1on 4 model may prov1de a better estimate of Jack R1ver's peak flows
The USGS recorded a max1mum annual flow at Jack R1ver of approximately 4,900 cfs at USGS
Gauge 15516050 over 9 years of peak flow gaugmg from 1973 to 1982 Th1s gauge IS
downstream of the proposed project, and drams 325 square m1les Scalmg th1s peak flow to the
project basm area y1elds an estimated peak flow of 2,095 cfs over th1s nme-year penod Th1s
peak flow 1s 20 to 40% lower than the estimated 10-year floods
The Reg1on 6 model provides h1gher estimated peak flows, and these are used for the
prelim mary des1gns m th1s study
22 See USGS Water Resources lnvest1gat1on Report 2003 4188
Mall'ch 2013-IFma~ Report ID-1
Natuve Vuilage of Cantwell
Jack !Rover Hydroelectric Reconnaussance St~dy Polarconsult Alaska, ~nc
Table D-1 Max1mum Probable Floods at Jack R1ver Hydro ProJect S1te
Parameter Jack R1ver
Basm Area (square m1les) 1391
Mean Annual Precipitation (mches) (l) 30
Percentage of Basm as Storage {lakes, ponds) 05%
Percentage of forested area (2) 10%
USGS WRIR 2003-4188 Estimated Peak Flows Reg1on 4
(lntenor)
Reg1on 6
(Southcentral)
(Used for th1s Study)
Est1mated 500 year flood (lmt1al Estimate of Des1gn Flood) 5,828 cfs 7,445 cfs
Estimated 100 year flood 4,461 cfs 5,745 cfs
Estimated 10-year flood 2, 705 cfs 3,487 cfs
Estimated 5-year flood 2,185 cfs 2,829 cfs
Jack R1ver Max1mum Recorded Flow (1973-1982) 131 2,095 cfs
(1) Annual prec1p1tat1on m Cantwell IS reported as 15 Inches Source maps spec1f1ed m the USGS publication md1cate
prec1p1tat1on m the Jack R1ver basm IS approximately 30 mches annually
(2) Estimated from aenal1magery and USGS maps
(3) Reported at USGS Gauge 15516050 on Jack R1ver near 1ts mouth Adjusted to project area by rat1o of basm areas (O 427 =
139/325 square m1les)
March 2013 -fma~ !Report D-2
1
I j
1 I
I I_J
I f
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 I
I I
j I
Ll
I
: I
I I
I I
I _I
\
I I
I _I
\I
I I
I_ I
I I
I I
Nat1Ye V11iage of Cantwe~i
Jack !Rover Hydlme~ectroc IReconnaossance Study lfllolarconsu~t A~aska, ~nc
D 3 ESTIMATED RESERVOIR LIFE
All of the hydroelectnc project conf1gurat1ons considered m th1s study are storage projects,
featunng dams that create reservoirs of vanous capac1t1es m the Jack R1ver canyon As these
reservo1rs accumulate sediment over t1me, the1r ab1llty to store water for power generation w1ll
decrease Eventually, the amount of sed1ment earned mto the reservoir and flushed out of the
reservoir will reach equ1llbnum The amount of the act1ve reservoir volume that f1lls w1th
sed1ment can have a s1gn1f1cant 1mpact on project operations and total energy output How
qu1ckly equ1llbnum sed1mentat1on IS reached, and what that equ1llbnum volume of
sed1mentat1on 1s, depends on many factors, mcludmg
);>-The rate sed1ment 1s earned mto the reservoir by Jack R1ver,
~ The geography of the reservoir, wh1ch mfluences where sed1ment IS deposited and how
much can be scoured out of the reservoir by flushmg operations,
~ The operational reg1me for the reservoir-how and when 1t IS f1lled to capac1ty, drawn
down, mm1mum drawdown levels, etc, and
);>-The conf1gurat1on of the dam and regulatory allowances for reservoir draw down and
sed1ment flushmg operations Some sed1ment flushmg 1s normally desirable for recruitment
of sed1ment m the downstream reach of the nver, but flushmg schedules and protocols
depend on resource-spec1f1c cons1derat1ons that are beyond the scope of th1s study and are
not defmed at th1s t1me
The m1t1al, order-of-magnitude analysis of reservoir sed1mentat1on md1cates that the vanous
reservoir conf1gurat1ons considered m th1s study would reach an equ1llbnum sed1ment volume
m 10 to 460 years, and the fmal act1ve volume of the reservoirs would be between 50 and 76%
of the m1t1al act1ve volume Actual s1te cond1t1ons and fmal operational protocols for spec1f1c
projects may result m actual sed1mentat1on rates that s1gn1f1cantly d1ffer from these m1t1al
estimates
D 3 1 Est1mated Sed1ment Transport Rate
No stud1es of sed1ment transport m Jack R1ver are known to ex1st To form an m1t1al order-of-
magnitude estimate of sed1ment transport rate, data from stud1es on the Sus1tna R1ver basm
were adapted to Jack R1ver 23 Sed1ment transport rates on the Sus1tna, Talkeetna, and Chulitna
R1vers were measured rangmg from 800 to 1,400 tons per year per basm square m1le These
rates applied to Jack R1ver y1eld an est1mated sed1ment transport rate of 110,000 to 200,000
tons per year Assummg a reservoir sed1ment trap eff1c1ency of 100% and an m-place dens1ty of
75 pounds per cub1c foot, th1s sed1ment would fill between 70 and 120 acre-feet of reservoir
annually
23 Sediment transport data for Sus1tna R1ver and maJor tnbutanes as summanzed m Susttna Hydroelectnc Project,
Reservotr and Rtver Sedtmentatton Fmal Report, FERC No 7114 Harza-Ebasco Sus1tna Jomt Venture, Apnl1984
March 2013 -fma~ Report 10-3
Nat1ve Vil~age of Cantwe~l
Jack R1ver Hydroe~ectnc 1Reconna1ssance Studly Polarconsuk Alaska, Joe 6
D 3 2 Estimated Reservoir Sed1mentat1on Rate and Locat1on
The fate of the sed1ment entermg the reservoir depends on reservoir geometry and operational
patterns Also, the Impact of the sed1ment on useful reservoir volume depends on where m the
reservoir the sed1ment ultimately accumulates ln1t1al order-of-magmtude est1mates for these
phenomenon are based on the assumption that the reservoirs would be managed to enter the
wmter full, would be drawn down through the wmter months, would use peak spnng flows to
slu1ce sed1ment accumulated m delta deposits at the reservoir mlet deeper mto the reservoir
and/or through the dam, and would ref1ll the reservoir w1th summer and fall flows Under
these operational assumptions, sed1ment prof1le m the reservoirs would take the general form
shown on F1gure D-1 for dam s1tes 1, 2, and 3 The delta formations shown m F1gure D-1 are
based on a topset slope of 0 3% startmg from the reservoir mlet a foreset slope of 2% from the
mvert of the dam bypass up to the p1vot pomt of the delta formation 24
Table D-2 summanzes m1t1al order of magmtude estimates of m1t1al act1ve, mact1ve, and total
reservoir volume, reservoir sed1mentat1on rates, fmal act1ve, mact1ve, and total reservoir
volume once sed1mentat1on reaches a steady state, and the approximate number of years 1t Will
take for the reservoir to reach steady-state sed1mentat1on cond1t1ons
Table D-2 Est1mated Reservoir Sed1mentat1on Rates and Useful Reservoir Life
Estimated Parameter Reservoir Conf1gurat1on
1A, 1B 1C 2A,2B 3A,3B 3C
ln1t1al Act1ve ReservOir Volume (ac-ft) 50,700 15,700 25,500 9,300 2,100
lnlt1allnact1ve ReservOir Volume (ac-ft) 28,900 3,500 7,800 5,900 200
ln1t1al Total ReservOir Volume (ac ft) 79,600 19,200 33,300 15,200 2,300
ReservOir Volume as Percentage of Total 73% 18% 31% 14% 2%
Annual Flow Volume 1
Annual Sed1mentat1on Rate (ac-ft) 70 to 120 70 to 120 70 to 120 70 to 120 70 to 120
Reservoir Sed1ment Trap Eff1c1ency 2 80to 95% 75 to 90% 80 to 95% 75 to 90% 55 to 65%
Trap Eff1c1ency Used 100% 100% 100% 100% 65%
Final Act1ve ReservOir Volume (ac-ft) 30,500 10,100 12,900 7,100 1,200
F1nal as Percentage of ln1t1al 60% 64% 50% 76% 57%
F1nallnact1ve Reservoir Volume (ac-ft) 17,000 1,300 3,400 2,600 100
F1nal Total ReservOir Volume (ac-ft) 47,500 11,400 16,300 9,700 1,300
Reservoir L1fe (years) 270to 460 65 to 110 140to 240 45 to 80 10to 20
1 Total annual flow volume IS 108,595 acre-feet, based on an average annual flow of 150 cfs
2 Eff1c1ency range IS calculated us~ng the Churchill and Brune methods for lower and upper estimates,
respectively 24
24 Estimated delta parameters are based on methods descnbed 1n Sect1on 2 6 of the Eros1on and Sed1mentat10n
Manual U S Bureau of Reclamation, November, 2006
March 20:!1.3-IFma~ !Report [11-4
I ~
! I
I I
I I
I
I I I
l -
1
I I \ I I
)
I
I I
I
-
I I
I I
I I
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. G
Figure D-1: Estimated Ultimate Reservoir Sedimentation Profile
2800 -Natural River Grade
-Maximum Pool Elevation
2750 Estimated Equilibr ium Level of Sediment in Reservoir
2700
-;:;-
~ 2650
!!:;..
s 2600 ·.;:;
"' 1:1 2550 w
2500
2450
• • Minimum Normal Pool Elevation
2400 +---------.---------.---------.--------.---------,--------~---------T--------~
12.50 13.50 14 .50 15 .50 16 .5 0
River Mile
2600 -Natural River Grade
-Ma ximum Pool Elevation
2550 Estimated Equilibrium Level of Sediment in Reservoir
• • Minimum Normal Pool Elevation 25oo r-------~~~~~~~~~~--------------~
...
Ql 2450 ~ s 2400 :.;:;
"' 1:1 2350 w
2300
2250
17 .50 18 .50 19.50 20 .50
2200 +---------.----------r--------~---------.----------.---------.---------.---------~
11.50 12 .00 12.50 13.00 13.50 14 .00 14.50 15 .00 15 .50
River Mile
2600 -Natural River Grade jDAM SIT E 31
-Ma xi mum Pool Elevat ion
2550 Estimated Equilibrium Level of Sediment in Re servoir --Minimum Normal Pool Elevation 2500
-;:;-
Ql 2450 Ql
!!:;..
c 2400 -0 ·.;:;
"' > 2350 Ql w ~-~------2300
2250 -
2200
11 .00 11 .50 12 .00 12 .50 13.00 13 .50 14 .00 14 .50 15 .00
River Mile
March 2013-Final Report 0-5
Native Village of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 6
0.3.3. Sediment loading from Reservoir Bank Erosion
Bank erosion along the perimete r of the reservoirs will also contribute to reservoir
sedimentation . The magnitude of this sedimentation depends on how susceptible the banks
are to erosion, and where the eroded bank material settles within the reservoir . Initial
estimates are that bank erosion will not contribute significantly to overall reservoir
sedimentation rates.
Initial assessment of site conditions for the dam site 1 reservoir suggest that bank erosion will
not contribute significantly to the overall reservoir sedimentation rate. Eroded material along
most of the reservoir perimeter is likely to deposit below t he active band of the reservoir . In
the upper approximately 1-}'2 miles of the reservoir eroded material is likely to settle in the
act ive band of the reservoir. However, the bank slopes in this area are generally 1:10 or less,
and therefore less susceptible to erosion than steeper banks elsewhere along the reservoir
perimeter.
Initial assessment of site conditions for the reservoirs above dam sites 2 and 3 suggest that
bank erosion will not contribute sign ificantly to the overall reservoir sedimentation rate. Most
of the reservoir shoreline is exposed weathered rock at slopes of approximately 1:1. Rapid
erosion of this rock is not expected , and eroded material is expected to migrate down these
slopes to the valley floor, which is generally below the active band of the reservoir.
0.3.4 Significance of Reservoir Sed i mentation on Project Economics
Table D-3 summarizes the estimated initial and final annual energy generation of project
configurations considered in this study . Reservoir sedimentation has the greatest relative
impact on configurations 1A and 1B, decreasing annual generation to 88% once equilibrium
sediment levels are reached . Because the estimated time to reach this level of sedimentation
(270 to 460 years) is significantly longer that the timeframe for economic analysis, reservoir
sedimentation is not expected to be a significant factor in project economics.
For all other project configurations, reservoir sedimentation is estimated to reduce annual
energy output to between 94% to 98% of initial output. Because of the modest impact of
sedimentation and the expected time before equilibrium sedimentation is reached, reservoir
sedimentation is not expected to be a significant factor in project economics.
Table 0-3: Estimated Impact of Reservoir Sedimentation on Annual Energy Output
Estimated Parameter Project Configuration
1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 3A 3B 3(
Initial Annual Energy Output (MWh) 37 ,300 23,400 12,800 17,400 9,300 12,500 7,100 7,500
Final Annual Energy Output (MWh) 32,800 20 ,600 12,500 16,400 9,100 12,300 7,000 7,400
Final as Percentage of Initial 88 % 88% 98 % 94% 98 % 98% 98 % 98 %
Estimated Time to Reach Equilibrium 270to 270 to 65 to 140 to 140 to 45 to 45 to 10 to
Reservoir Sedimentation (years) 460 460 110 240 240 80 80 20
March 2013-Final Report D-6
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I I I
I I
I I
Nat1ve V1llage of CantweH
.Dack IR!ver IHydlll'oe~ectrnc !Reconnaissance Study Polarconsu~t Alaska, ~nc
D 4 ANALYSIS OF POWER OUTAGE RATES
GVEA prov1ded outage data for the Cantwell Substation for 2012 Analysis of th1s data that the
ent1re Cantwell serv1ce area (Cantwell, McKmley VIllage, and Carlo Creek) expenenced a total of
17 outages w1th a combmed total duration of 8 85 hours m 2012 Th1s does not 1nclude outages
to port1ons of the Cantwell serv1ce area due to local d1stnbut1on mterrupt1ons, so total outage
rates m Cantwell and associated commun1t1es IS somewhat h1gher than md1cated by the data m
Table D-4 By companson, the aggregate outage rate over the ent1re GVEA system has vaned
from 1 to 2 hours per customer annually for the past several years Table D-4 summanzes 2012
Cantwell outage data and recent GVEA outage data Based on th1s mformat1on, the outage rate
m Cantwell IS approximately 5 3 t1mes higher than for GVEA customers m general
Table D-4 2012 Cantwell Outage Data and Recent GVEA Outage Data
Start and End T1mes for Outages at Cantwell Substation
(2012}
2/14/12 1111 2/14/12 11 23
2/14/12 11 26 2/14/12 11 41
2/14/12 13 00 2/14/12 13 27
3/2/12 10 10 3/2/12 10 19
3/13/12 19 28 3/13/12 20 13
3/13/12 21 54 3/13/12 22 03
9/13/12 13 51 9/13/12 16 16
9/13/12 20 47 9/13/12 21 22
10/18/12 10 26 10/18/12 10 38
10/18/12 10 39 10/18/12 11 09
10/18/12 13 10 10/18/12 14 58
10/18/12 17 41 10/18/12 18 06
12/13/12 9 38 12/13/12 9 54
12/13/12 11 16 12/13/12 11 34
12/13/12 16 44 12/13/12 16 52 -------------
12/13/12 23 33 12/13/12 23 39
12/18/12 15 00 12/18/12 15 11
TOTAL 17 events
Outage Duration
(mmutes) 1
---
531 mmutes
(8 85 hours)
12
15
27
9
45
9
145
35
12
30
108
25
16
18
8
6
11
Year Aggregate GVEA Outage
T1me (Hours) 2
2010 1 ----------------------------------
2011 2
2012 2
2010-2012 Average 1 67 hours
CANTWELL OUTAGE RATE AS PERCENTAGE OF GVEA OUTAGE RATE 8 85/1 67 = 530%
{1) Data for Cantwell Substation for calendar year 2012 Provided by GVEA
(2) Data compiled from GVEA Annual Reports for respective years
March 20JI.3 -fmaiiReport ID-7
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsuk Alaska, Inc •
I I
I I
I I
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
I )
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
\
I I _!
I I
I
I
D-8 -
1
I
I I
March 2013-Fmal Report
_)
I I
I
I i
I
I : I
I l
I I
I I
I
I I
~
I I
I I
I I
I
I :
I I
Natuve Vu!iage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydlroe~ectr1c Reconnaissance Study PolarconsiUIIt A~aska, ~nc
APPENDIX E-ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
March 20:11.3 -IFmaliReport
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
.lack R1ver IHydlroelectruc Recormanssance Stuclly Poiarconsll.llit Aiaska, ~nc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
~ 1
I
March 20:1L3 -Fma~ !Report I
I I
I
I I
I I
1 r I -
! I
I I
I I
I t
I
I I
I
I I
; i
I
Natuve V11iage of Cantwe~~
Jack IRtvell' Hlydll!'oeiectrac Reconnaissance St~dly Po~all'cons~~t Alaska, ~nc
E 1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
The U S F1sh and Wildlife serv1ce and Nat1onal Manne F1shenes Serv1ce were consulted
regardmg the proposed project conf1gurat1ons The project areas do not mclude any designated
or proposed cnt1cal hab1tat areas for threatened or endangered spec1es
E 2 FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
The reservoir associated With a hydro project at Jack R1ver would mundate a s1gn1f1cant area
{lOs to lOOs of acres dependmg on the spec1f1c project conf1gurat1on) Th1s would have some
Impact on Wildlife m the project area Spec1f1c Impacts would depend on the spec1f1c project
conf1gurat1on and are beyond the scope of th1s reconnaissance study
Jack R1ver IS not listed as anadromous hab1tat m the Atlas and Catalog of Waters Important to
the Rearmg, Spawnmg, and M1grat1on of Anadromous F1shes Res1dent f1sh such as sculpm,
wh1te f1sh, graylmg, and likely Dolly Varden occur m the study reach of Jack R1ver Spec1f1c
1mpacts on res1dent f1sh passage would depend on the spec1f1c project conf1gurat1on The
project would need to m1t1gate 1m pacts to res1dent f1sh General requ1rements are descnbed m
Appendix F, Section F 2 2 1
None of the project conf1gurat1ons are expected to s1gn1f1cantly 1mpact anadromous f1sh
habitat, wh1ch starts more than 50 m1les downstream of the study area m the Nenana R1ver
near Healy By regulatmg flow m Jack R1ver, the project could reduce flow at the upper llm1t of
anadromous hab1tat by up to approximately 7% Peak project operation m late wmter could
mcrease flow at the upper llm1t of anadromous hab1tat by approximately 50% from natural flow
cond1t1ons Proper d1scharge rampmg rates and thermal management of water releases would
likely av01d any Impacts to anadromous hab1tat
E3 WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS STATUS
Jack R1ver IS not a designated W1ld and Scen1c R1ver (WSR), WSR corndor, or mcluded on the
Nat1onw1de R1vers Inventory 25 Jack R1ver has not been des1gnated for study for future
des1gnat1on as a WSR or WSR corndor by the U S Congress (S(a) study) or by eligible federal
agenc1es (S(d)(l) study) 26 The 2006 East Alaska Proposed Resource Management Plan, wh1ch
covers the project area, d1d not fmd Jack R1ver ellg1ble for WSR des1gnat1on 27
E 4 WATER AND AIR QUALITY
The project would tend to Improve a1r quality by reducmg the amount of foss1l fuel f1red
electnc1ty generation m the rallbelt The type and locat1on of avo1ded power plant em1ss1ons
25 Nat1onw1de Rivers Inventory status checked July 11, 2012 http //www nps gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/nn/
26 Personal commumcat1ons w1th Cass1e Thomas, NPS, Zachary Babb, NPS, and Heath Evans, BLM, July 12, 2012
27 East Alaska Proposed Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, U S Department of
lntenor, Bureau of Land Management June 2006
Mall'ch 2013-IFma~ Report IE-1
Natnve Vni~age of CantweH
Jatk R1ver IHydlD"oeiectD"ot Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc ~
would depend on the spec1f1c power plants that were offset by Jack R1ver Based on GVEA's
fuel costs, the most likely avo1ded em1ss1ons would be from oll-f1red power plants m Fairbanks
and/or North Pole These avo1ded em1ss1ons would have an mcremental benef1c1al 1mpact on
a1r quality m the Fairbanks reg1on In recent years, wmter-t1me a1r qual1ty has become very
poor m Fa1rbanks, frequently v1olatmg Federal Clean A1r Act standards for PM 2 5 particulates
EPA fmes or sanctions could be Imposed startmg m 2014 1f cond1t1ons contmue 28 Quant1fymg
the magnitude of Improved a1r quality m Fairbanks from a Jack R1ver hydro project IS beyond
the scope of th1s study
Impacts on water quality m Jack R1ver would depend on the spec1f1c hydro project
conf1gurat1on, des1gn, and operational protocols The reservoir could change oxygen
saturation, suspended sed1ment levels, sed1ment transport and depos1t1on charactenst1cs,
temperature, and other water quality parameters m Jack R1ver below the project Many of
these changes could be controlled through proper des1gn and/or project operational
constramts to av01d or mm1m1ze any adverse Impacts Such des1gn or operational constramts
could have a negative Impact on the project's economic feas1b1llty as mcreased costs or
decreased electncal generation potential
E 5 WETLAND AND PROTECTED AREAS
A s1gn1f1cant fraction of the land to the northeast of Jack R1ver m the project area 1s a complex
mosa1c of wetland and upland areas Dependmg on project conf1gurat1on, some of these
wetlands areas could be crossed by penstocks, access roads, or other project mfrastructure
These 1m pacts can be avo1ded or mm1m1zed by proper routmg of these features
There are also s1gn1f1cant wetlands areas located along the bottom of the Jack R1ver valley and
canyon that would be permanently mundated by a project reservoir These Impacts do not
have a practical av01dance or mm1m1zat1on opt1on, and would likely requ1re offs1te m1t1gat1on 29
E 6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES
None are known m the project area Deta1led consultations w1th SHPO or other ent1t1es were
not completed as part of th1s study
E 7 lAND DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Extension of roads and power lmes mto the project area could support development of land m
the v1cm1ty of the project
28 EPA Warns of Consequences of Fairbanks Fads to meet A1r Qua!Jty Dead/me, Fairbanks Da1ly News-Mmer,
September 28, 2012
29 Prelim mary estimated acreage of wetlands that would be mundated are 65 acres for dam s1te 3, 110 acres for
dam s1te 2, and 220 acres for dam s1te 1
MaD"ch 2013-IFmai IRe[port IE-2
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 ' I I I
-
: I
'" I I
I
I
I I
I I
I I I
i I
I
,-I
I I
l__j
I I
I I
I
I I,
I I
Natove ViUage of Cantwei~
.lack Rivell' Hlydroe!ectl!'oc Reconnaissance StiUidy l?oiarconsiUIIt Alaska, ~nc
The Jack R1ver valley and canyon IS an ex1stmg snow machme corndor from Cantwell mto the
Talkeetna Mountams Development of dams and reservoirs m the valley would requ1re
alternate routes for snow machme traffic through the project area Upland areas adjacent to
the reservoir footprmts would likely be su1table as alternate snow machme corndors
Cons1derat1on of spec1f1c snow machme corndors would depend on the spec1f1c hydro project
under cons1derat1on
Dependmg on the spec1f1c proJect conf1gurat1on, the project reservoir could be a s1gn1f1cant
recreational asset for Cantwell and surroundmg areas The reservoir could be su1table for
motonzed or non-motonzed water sports, or stocked for recreational f1shmg
Dependmg on the spec1f1c project conf1gurat1on, a storage hydro project at Jack R1ver could
reduce downstream flood hazards along Jack R1ver, makmg portions of the ex1stmg Jack R1ver
floodplam su1table for development Th1s would depend on the fmdmgs of dam break analyses
nsk assessments, and s1m1lar stud1es that would need to be completed for a spec1f1c project
conf1gurat1on
E 8 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND AVIATION CONSIDERATIONS
The project w1ll not affect telecommumcat1ons or av1at1on
E 9 VISUAL AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES
None of the proposed project features would be prommently v1s1ble from read1ly accessible
vantage pomts such as the Parks H1ghway, Denali H1ghway, or Alaska Railroad All of the
proposed project features would generally be v1s1ble from remote alpme vantage pomts m the
Cantwell area or from the a1r
E 10 MITIGATION MEASURES
Wetlands 1mpacts would likely requ1re m1t1gat1on Spec1f1c m1t1gat1on options have not been
developed at th1s stage of study
Dependmg on the spec1f1c development concept, m1t1gat1on will likely be requ1red to address
Impacts to res1dent f1sh passage, and poss1bly downstream anadromous f1sh hab1tat
M1t1gat1on may also be requ1red for Impacts to game hab1tat mundated by the reservOir
Mall'ch 2013-Irma~ Report IE-3
Nat1ve VIllage of CantweU
.lack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance StiUidly Polarconsult Alaska, inc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013-IFmal Report E-4
I I
-
I I
: I
I I
I
I I
I
i_l
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I I I
l ;
I I
I
I I
I
~J
Native VIllage of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc •
APPENDIX F-PERMITTING INFORMATION
Fl Federal Perm1ts pages F-1 to F-2
F2 State Perm1ts pages F-2
F3 Local Perm1ts pages F-3
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc •
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -Fmal Report
I
I I
~'
l
I I
I I
f
I
I J
I I
I
I !
I
I ~?
fl
I
I
I
I I
I I
(
I I
L_l
I i
I
("'-
I
I
I_ I
I I
I
I I L
I~
I
I_ I
il
I I , I
I l
I I
Natuve Vu~lage of CantweU
.lack R1ver IHiydlroelectrlc IReconD'11aBssance Study IPolarconsllllt A~aska, i011c
F 1 FEDERAL PERMITS
F 11 Federal Energy Regulatory Comm1ss1on
The Federal Energy Regulatory Comm1ss1on (FERC) has JUriSdiction over hydroelectric proJects
that meet certam cr1ter1a Generally, these cr1ter1a mclude
(1) The proJect IS located on navigable waters,
(2) The proJect 1s located on federal land,
(3) The proJect affects mterstate commerce, or
(4) The proJect 1s part of an mterstate electrical gr1d
ProJects at dam s1te 1 w1th max1mum reservOir elevations of approximately 2,615 feet would
partially mundate federal lands (Sections 3 and 10 m T19S R6W, Fairbanks Mer1d1an) Th1s
would trigger FERC JUriSdiction by bemg partially located on Federal land
Rev1ew of land records m the proJect area md1cate there was llt1gat1on mvolvmg the nav1gab1llty
of Jack R1ver and other area r1vers that was resolved m approximately 2003 30 Th1s llt1gat1on
appears to have been related to determmmg the ellg1b1llty of submerged lands for Nat1ve
Corporation selection under the Alaska Nat1ve Cla1ms Settlement Act (ANCSA) If th1s llt1gat1on
concluded that Jack R1ver IS nav1gable, then any proJect on Jack R1ver w1ll likely fall under FERC
JUriSdiction Documentation for th1s llt1gat1on was not rev1ewed as part of th1s reconnaissance
study, and the nav1gab1llty status of Jack R1ver, 1f any was made, IS unknown
The outcome of th1s llt1gat1on would need to be researched and a Declaration of Intention f1led
w1th the FERC m the perm1ttmg phase of the proJect to ver1fy the JUriSdictional status of the
proJect
If the proJect enters the perm1ttmg phase before project lands are conveyed out of federal
ownership, then the project Will fall under FERC JUriSdiction per cr1ter1a (2) above
F 1 3 U S Army Corps of Engmeers (USACE) Perm1ts
The d1vers1on structures, tailraces and other features of the recommended project w1ll be
located w1thm wetlands, therefore a wetlands perm1t from the USACE w1ll be requ1red
Dependmg on the selected project conf1gurat1on, the project may be el1g1ble for a Nat1on W1de
Perm1t #17 for hydro proJects Otherwise, the project Will obtam an md1v1dual perm1t
Add1t1onal USACE perm1ts w1ll be requ1red 1f the study reach of Jack R1ver IS considered
nav1gable
30 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Alaska State Off1ce Internal Memorandum 9630 (AK-925), pertammg to
ANSCA selection F-14844-A, dated Novembe~ 19, 2003
March 2013 -Fma~ !Report f-1
.
Nat~ve V~Hage of CantweH
..llack R~ver Hydroe~ectr~c Recorrma~ssance Studly Polarcons11.1it Alaska, ~nc ,
F 1 4 U S Envtronmental Protectton Agency
A stormwater pollution prevention plan w1ll be requ1red for construction of the project
F 1 5 Federal Av1at1on Admm1strat1on
The recommended project w1ll not have any features likely to present a hazard to av1at1on
F2 STATE OF ALASKA PERMITS
F 2 1 Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) Permits
F 2 1 1 Coastal Zone Consistency Rev1ew
The State of Alaska does not currently have a Coastal Zone Management Program The
prev1ous program, wh1ch was termmated June 30, 2011, generally applied to land below 1,000
feet m elevation The project s1te IS over 2,000 feet m elevation, so was not located w1thm the
state's coastal zone as defmed under the old program
F 2 1 2 Land AuthoT1zat1ons
Port1ons of the reservoirs for all project conf1gurat1ons but 3C would submerge some state land
Th1s would likely requ1re an easement or s1m1lar authonzat1on from ADNR
F 2 1 3 Tidelands Perm1ts
No tidelands permits are needed for the project
F 2 1 4 MateTial Sale Agreement
The project would requ1re a s1gn1f1cant volume of matenal for construction of the dam(s)
Matenal could be sourced from state or nat1ve-owned lands located m the project v1cm1ty
F 2 1 5 Water Use Permit I Water Raghts
The project w1ll need to obtam water nghts from the ADNR
F 2 2 Alaska Department of F1sh and Game Perm1ts
F 2 2 1 F1sh Habitat Permit
ln1t1al consultations With ADF&G md1cate the project reach 1s likely hab1tat for res1dent f1sh such
as sculpm, grayling, wh1te f1sh, and poss1bly res1dent Dolly Varden F1shenes surveys would
need to be conducted to determme the presence, abundance, and life stages of f1sh m Jack
R1ver Th1s mformat1on would gUide development of m1t1gat1on requirements for the project
Generally, m1t1gat1on would need to comply w1th the Alaska F1shway Act (AS 16 OS 841 to 851),
wh1ch requ1res that the project mamtam f1sh passage around the dam The F1shway act also
Mal!'ch 2013-IFmal Report IF-2
J
I I
~l
I I
I
lj
~i
I I
I I
:_j
I I
I I
I t
)
I I
~)
,---I
~
I I
I I
(__
f I
I
I
I I_ I
-
I I
I_ I
1_:
I
I I
Nat1ve V!ilage of Cantwell
.llack Rnver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsu!t Aiaska, Inc
prov1des for payment for operation of hatchenes, or a lump sum payment to the ADF&G m lieu
of on-s1te m1t1gat1on In pract1ce, the ADF&G prefers to mamtam the b1olog1cal mtegnty of the
nver, and only rarely allows cash payments as m1t1gat1on Spec1f1c requirements would depend
on the spec1f1c project conf1gurat1on proposed for development
F 2 3 Alaska Department of Transportation Perm1ts
Not applicable
F 2 4 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Perm1ts
F 2 4 1 ADEC Wastewater or Potable Water Permtts
Not applicable
F 2 4 2 Soltd Waste Dtsposal Permtt
Not applicable
F 2 4 3 Atr Qua/tty Permtt & Bulk Fuel Permtt
Not applicable
F3 LOCAL PERMITS
F 3 1 Borough Perm1ts
All project conf1gurat1ons are located w1thm the Denali Borough The southern port1on of
reservoirs above dam s1te 1 would be located m the Matanuska-Sus1tna Borough (See F1gure A-
3) Both boroughs have local perm1ttmg processes that the project would need to follow
F 3 2 Local City Perm1ts
The commumty of Cantwell IS unmcorporated, so no local government permits are requ1red for
the project
March 2013-Fma~ !Report F-3
Natnve V1llage of Cantwell
.lack R1ver Hydroelectm: Reconnaussance Study Polarconsu!t Aiaska, ~nc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013-Fmal Report F-4
I I
I
I
I
1
I
1 I
_J
)
I
l
I \
r I
i I
\ _)
r~
I I
Jj
I
,_)
r~
' I I_;
LJ
I
I
L~
I I
I
I I
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
APPENDIX G -ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS
March 2013-Fmal Report
Natave V!Uage of Cantweil
Jack R1ver Hydlroelectrnc !Reconnaissance Study IPo~arconsult Alaska, nne
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -Fmai Report
I 1
_j
J
I
IJ
~I
I
I l
I
-1
I
I I
~~'
I I
I I
I I IJ
I I
I
I_ I
l
1 I
~,
: I ~~
I 1
I I
I
r r
I
~
( I
I I
I
I I I
I I
(___)
u
1)
L!
r -,
I I
I_;
' I I I
1 I
' -1
I
II
lj
I I
I I
I I
'~
I
r_ I
I I
I _l
I I _ _)
Nat1ve V1Hage of Cantwel~
Jack IRBver Hydlroe~ectnc 1Reconnaussa1111ce St11.1dly Polarconsu~t Aiaska, ~nc
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS
The economic analysis of the project conf1gurat1ons considered m th1s study used a range of
estimated cap1tal costs and related fmanc1al parameters to develop a range of est1mated energy
costs for each conf1gurat1on and a range of estimated benefit cost rat1os for each conf1gurat1on
Th1s appendix explams the ranges used for each parameter
G1 ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST
Reconnaissance level cost estimates were developed for each project conf1gurat1on by
est1matmg Unit quant1t1es and volumes of project components and applymg estimated un1t
costs to each component line 1tem The resultmg estimated cost was multiplied by a range of
+/-30% to develop a range of probable cost An approximate 30% contmgency was then
applied to the result
G 2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL PROJECT COSTS
G 2 1 General, Admm1strat1ve, Operat1on, Mamtenance, Repa1r, and Replacement Expenses
All operatmg costs of the projects are assumed to cost between $0 015 and $0 025 per kWh
Th1s term mcludes general, admm1strat1ve, operation, mamtenance, repa1r, and replacement
expenses associated w1th the project
G 3 FINANCING
G 3 1 Low-Cost Debt Fmancmg
Capital project costs are assumed to be fmanced w1th $8 m1ll1on m grants and the balance IS
assumed to be a low-mterest loan w1th a 1 OS% mterest rate and 30-year term A 3% surcharge
IS added to the fmanced amount to cover loan ongmat1on fees, underwntmg, and guarantee
fees These loan terms are based on the loan terms for GVEA's Eva Creek Wmd Project, except
the term has been mcreased from 20 years to 30 years because hydro proJects typ1cally have a
longer des1gn life than wmd proJects
G 3 2 H1gh-Cost Debt Fmancmg
The ent1re project cap1tal cost IS assumed to be fmanced at a 30-year term at 6% mterest Loan
ongmat1on costs of 3% are assumed for 1tems such as application fees, loan guarantee fees, and
other ongmat1on fees
G 3 3 Grants
The ab1llty of the project to obtam grant funds w1ll depend on what state and federal grant
programs ex1st, whether the project meets spec1f1c program ellg1b1llty cntena, and whether the
project successfully competes for grant funds
March 2013 -IFma! !Report G-1
Natuve V1Uage of Cantwe~i
.]ack 1R1ver IHiydlll'oeiectr•c Recormanssance St~dlv PoiarconsUJiit Alaska, ~nc
The Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Grant Program, used m part to fund th1s reconnaissance
study, IS one of several potential sources of grant funds for th1s project Under current program
rules, th1s project would be ehg1ble for a max1mum of $4 m1lhon m construction grant funds
from the REF As an IPP, the NVC would have to agree to certam regulatory and economic
cond1t1ons 1f 1t accepted construction grant funds under the REF program These cond1t1ons
mclude a requirement to obtam a CPCN from the RCA, and to be economically regulated by
e1ther the RCA or AEA, hm1tmg the power sales rate for the project to cost-based rates
Different cond1t1ons may apply dependmg on the program rules m effect when grant funds are
awarded Based on ava1lable mformat1on, these cost-based rates appear compatible w1th the
estimated range of power sales rates presented m th1s study
G 4 OPERATING MARGINS
Operatmg margms of 10% of gross revenue and 20% of gross revenue are assumed
G 5 ESTIMATED POWER SALES RATE
Annualized estimated costs as descnbed above are summed and d1v1ded by the estimated total
energy output of the project to calculate an estimated power sales rate for energy from the
project H1gh and low range estimated annual costs are d1v1ded by the same estimated total •
energy output
G6 ESTIMATED BENEFIT-COST RATIO
The low-end of the estimated benefit-cost rat1o range IS calculated usmg the h1gh-end cap1tal
cost estimate, h1gh end operatmg costs, h1gh-end fmancmg scenano, and h1gh-end operatmg
margms Future cash flows are converted to present-value usmg a 50-year hfe, 30-year debt
term, zero salvage value at year 50, and 3% d1scount rate Project benefits were calculated
usmg the economic model developed for the Alaska Energy Authonty (AEA)'s Renewable Energy
Grant Program Round 6 by the lnstrtute of Sacral and Economrc Research (ISER) at the
Umvers1ty of Alaska Anchorage
The h1gh-end of the estrmated benefit-cost rat1o range IS calculated usmg the AEA/ISER
economrc model Low-end cap1tal and operatmg costs were mput to the model
G 7 ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES
No revenue from sale of the project's envrronmental attnbutes rs consrdered m the
reconnaissance study
G 8 INDIRECT AND NON-MONETARY BENEFITS
The recommended hydroelectnc project offers s1gn1f1cant md1rect and non-monetary benefits
m addrtron to drrect economrc benefrts These other benefrts mclude
e Reduced arr pollutron (NOx, SOx, partrculates, and hydrocarbons) due to decreased
operatron of the dresel power plants m Farrbanks
March 2013 -fmai !Report G-2
:J
1
I )
I
I I
.-,
I I (_j
( 1
I I I I
L
I I
I L,
1 I
I j I
'I I '~-
I I
I
I_ I
I'
I I
_)
I_)
I
I I
,_I
r
I i
I I
I I
I~ )
Nat1ve VBIIage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
" More stable energy pnces Jack R1ver would mcrementally help to stab1hze GVEA's
energy rates
e The project reservoir may offer new recreational opportumt1es for the Cantwell area,
mcludmg f1shmg and motonzed or non-motonzed water sports
March 2013-Fma! Report G-3
Nat1ve Vo!lage of CantweH
.]ack 1R1ver Hydroelectrnc Reconnaissance Study IPo~arconsu~t Alaska, ~nc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -FmaliReport G-4
I \
I I
_)
I
I I
I j
I I : I
I
I I
( )
LJ
I I L:
,,
I I u
I~ I
I I
r_l
I I I
I I ~)
r I
lJ
II I
( I
I I
I I '~I
~-1
I
I
I
' I
I I
j I
\
~l u
II
I ~)
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study PolarconsuR Alaska, Inc.
APPENDIX H-TABULAR HYDROLOGY DATA
March 2013-Fmal Report
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
October 2011-Fmal Report H-6
J
:J
i
_)
1
I
I I
_j
-I
l
:~t
I
I
I
J
I
I
I I
_I
I
I I
J
I
I
< I
I I
I
I i L_J
I I I -~
I I
I
I I
I
I
~ I
I
I ~__!
I I
I I
1
I I
)
1 r
(__)
I I
L J
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft stabon datum)
Record Daily Da1ly Da1ly Corrections Corrected Date to Da1ly Count Min Max Mean Mean Da1ly Mean
11/2/11 13 87 75 88 20 87 91 87 91
11/3/11 48 87 70 88 08 87 77 87 77
11/4/11 48 87 86 87 97 87 91 87 76 87 76
11/5/11 48 87 74 87 93 87 82 87 74 87 74
11/6/11 48 87 82 8847 87 92 87 72 87 72
11/7/11 48 87 68 87 88 87 82 87 71 87 71
11/8/11 48 87 50 8772 87 64 87 69 87 69
11/9/11 48 87 49 88 22 87 90 87 68 87 68
11/10/11 48 8775 8827 88 00 87 66 87 66
11/11/11 48 87 61 87 75 87 68 87 65 87 65
11/12/11 48 8662 87 86 87 59 87 63 87 63
11/13/11 48 86 77 86 83 86 80 87 61 87 61
11/14/11 48 86 71 8684 86 74 8760 87 60
11/15/11 48 86 84 87 84 87 29 87 58 87 58
11/16/11 48 87 84 88 33 88 11 87 57 87 57
11/17111 48 88 33 88 65 88 51 87 55 87 55
11/18/11 48 88 09 88 50 88 31 87 54 87 54
11/19/11 48 87 80 88 09 87 96 87 52 87 52
11/20/11 48 87 47 87 80 87 61 87 51 87 51
11/21/11 48 87 44 87 61 87 50 87 49 87 49
11/22/11 48 87 42 87 50 87 45 87 47 87 47
11/23/11 48 87 42 87 48 87 46 87 46
11/24/11 48 87 47 87 60 87 52 87 52
11/25/11 48 87 51 87 60 87 55 87 55
11/26/11 48 87 47 87 54 87 49 87 49
11/27/11 48 87 46 87 50 87 48 87 48
11/28/11 48 87 38 87 47 87 43 87 43
11/29/11 48 87 27 87 38 87 32 87 32
11/30/11 48 87 27 87 34 87 30 87 30
12/1/11 48 8718 87 30 87 23 87 23
12/2/11 48 87 07 8718 87 11 87 11
12/3/11 48 87 02 8710 87 06 8706
12/4/11 48 86 94 8714 87 04 87 04
12/5/11 48 8712 87 27 87 24 8724
12/6/11 48 8717 87 26 87 21 87 21
12/7/11 48 87 06 8719 8713 8713
12/8/11 48 86 95 87 06 87 01 87 01
12/9/11 48 86 87 86 95 86 91 86 91
12/10/11 48 86 81 86 89 86 87 86 87
12/11/11 48 8685 87 04 86 93 86 88 86 88
12/12/11 48 86 97 87 20 8712 86 89 86 89
12/13/11 48 87 20 8840 87 73 86 90 86 90
12/14/11 48 8840 88 71 88 61 86 90 86 90
12/15/11 48 88 07 8869 88 52 86 91 86 91
12/16/11 48 87 33 88 07 87 57 86 92 86 92
12/17/11 48 8712 87 33 8724 86 93 86 93
12/18/11 48 8704 8717 87 09 86 94 86 94
12/19/11 48 86 98 87 06 87 03 86 94 86 94
12/20/11 48 86 90 86 99 86 94 86 95 86 95
12/21/11 48 8685 86 93 86 89 86 96 86 96
12/22/11 48 8687 87 03 86 97 86 97
12/23/11 48 87 01 87 46 8714 86 95 8695
12/24/11 48 87 46 88 99 88 21 86 94 86 94
12/25/11 48 88 89 8917 89 06 8692 86 92
March 2013 -Final Report
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Notes Da1ly (F) Dally (F) Flow
32 97 Gauging Station Installed
32 97 63 5 Flow mmt by D Bralley
32 97 start 1ce affect
32 97
32 96
32 96
32 97
32 96
32 96
32 97
32 98
33 03
33 00
32 95
32 94
32 94
32 95
32 95
32 95
32 96
32 96 end 1ce affect
32 95
32 96
32 98 -
32 94
32 94
32 97
32 97
32 96
32 97
32 98
32 96
32 99
32 95
32 95
3297
32 97
32 96
32 94
32 96 start 1ce affect
32 94
32 92
32 90
32 91
32 94
32 94
3294
32 95
32 96
3294 end 1ce affect
32 94
32 93 start 1ce affect
32 90
32 89
Appendix H-Page H-1
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft stat1on datum)
Record Dally Da1ly Da1ly Corrections Corrected Date to Dally Count Mm Max Mean Mean Da1ly Mean
12/26/11 48 8917 8944 89 35 86 91 86 91
12/27/11 48 89 23 89 41 89 29 86 89 86 89
12/28/11 48 89 07 8923 8915 86 88 86 88
12/29/11 19 89 04 89 09 89 07 86 86 86 86
12/30/11 5 88 01 89 04 88 74 86 85 86 85
12/31/11 4 87 97 88 98 88 64 86 83 8683
1/1/12 3 87 95 88 90 88 38 86 82 86 82
1/2/12 2 87 90 88 32 88 05 8680 8680
1/3/12 1 87 67 87 90 87 78 8679 86 79
1/4/12 45 87 38 87 67 87 53 8677 8677
1/5/12 1 48 8717 87 38 87 27 8676 86 76
1/6/12 48 87 04 8717 87 11 8674 86 74
1/7/12 48 86 95 87 04 87 00 86 73 86 73
1/8/12 48 86 85 86 96 86 90 86 71 86 71
1/9/12 48 86 78 86 87 86 85 86 70 86 70
1/10/12 48 86 75 86 85 86 80 86 68 8668
1/11/12 48 8674 86 78 86 76 8667 86 67
1/12/12 48 8672 86 79 86 75 86 65 86 65
1/13/12 48 86 71 8674 86 72 86 64 8664
1/14/12 48 86 68 86 73 86 71 8662 86 62
1/15/12 48 86 63 86 69 8666 8660 86 60
1/16/12 48 86 60 86 63 86 61 86 59 86 59
1/17112 48 86 56 86 60 8658 86 57 86 57
1/18/12 48 86 54 86 56 86 55 86 56 86 56
1/19/12 48 86 52 8654 86 53 86 54 8654
1/20/12 48 86 49 86 52 86 51 86 53 8653
1/21/12 48 86 50 8653 86 52 86 51 86 51
1/22/12 48 8649 86 51 86 50 86 50
1/23/12 48 8648 86 50 8649 86 49
1/24/12 3 86 47 8649 8648 86 48
1/25/12 45 86 46 86 47 8646 8646
1/26/12 48 86 45 86 46 8645 86 45
1/27/12 48 8644 86 45 8644 8644
1/28/12 48 86 43 8644 8644 8644
1/29/12 48 8643 8644 8644 8644
1/30/12 48 86 43 86 45 8644 8644
1/31/12 48 8644 86 45 8644 8644
2/1/12 48 86 42 86 45 8644 8644
2/2/12 48 86 42 8643 86 43 8643
2/3/12 48 86 42 8644 86 43 8643
2/4/12 48 86 41 8642 86 41 86 41
2/5/12 48 8639 8642 86 41 86 41
2/6/12 48 86 39 8642 86 40 8640
2/7/12 48 8639 8642 8640 86 40
2/8/12 48 8634 8640 86 38 86 38
2/9/12 48 8635 8639 86 38 86 38
2/10/12 48 86 36 8637 86 37 86 37
2/11/12 48 8634 8636 8635 8635
2/12/12 48 86 33 8636 86 34 8634
2/13/12 48 8632 8634 8633 86 33
2/14/12 48 86 32 86 35 8634 8634
2/15/12 48 86 29 86 34 86 32 8632
2/16/12 48 8629 8634 86 31 86 31
2/17112 48 8626 86 41 86 31 86 31
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Dally (F) Da1ly (F) Flow
32 89
3289
32 90
32 87
32 90
32 88
32 93
32 95
32 92
32 92
32 93
32 92
32 93
32 92
32 91
32 92
32 92
32 93
32 94
32 92
3292
32 93
32 94
32 94
32 95
32 93
32 93
32 92
32 90
3292
32 92
32 91
32 92
32 92
32 92
32 93
32 92
3292
3293
3292
32 92
32 91
32 92
32 91
32 93
32 93
32 92
32 92
32 94
3294
32 93
32 91
32 89
32 89
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Notes
end 1ce affect
I
AppendiX H -Page H 2
I_]
:]
IJ
~~
I I ,_
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I (
-"
I :J
'__j
I ,
I I
I
I~
r 1
I I I
u
I
I I
\~I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I I
I
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft stat1on datum)
Record Dally Dally Dally Corrections Corrected Date to Da1ly Count Mm Max Mean Mean Dally Mean
2/18/12 48 86 41 87 01 8665 86 31 86 31
2/19/12 48 87 01 87 95 87 45 86 30 86 30
2/20/12 48 87 71 89 74 88 61 86 29 86 29
2/21/12 48 89 34 9318 91 35 86 29 86 29
2/22/12 48 9318 97 65 9564 86 28 86 28
2/23/12 48 9720 99 07 9824 8627 86 27
2/24/12 48 98 11 99 34 98 78 8627 86 27
2/25/12 48 9613 98 11 97 33 86 26 86 26
2/26/12 48 9448 9613 9517 86 25 86 25
2/27112 48 93 52 94 48 94 03 86 25 86 25
2/28/12 48 92 75 93 60 93 07 86 24 8624
2/29/12 48 91 77 92 75 92 25 86 23 86 23
3/1/12 48 90 89 91 77 91 34 86 23 86 23
3/2/12 48 9013 90 89 90 52 86 22 86 22
3/3/12 48 8977 9246 9118 86 21 86 21
3/4/12 48 9219 92 60 9246 86 21 86 21
3/5/12 48 91 64 9219 91 88 86 20 86 20
3/6/12 48 9117 91 64 91 39 8619 8619
3/7/12 48 9072 9117 90 92 8619 8619
3/8/12 48 9049 90 72 9058 8618 8618
3/9/12 48 8824 9050 89 80 8617 8617
3/10/12 48 84 70 8824 8640 8617 8617
3/11/12 48 82 05 84 70 83 35 8616 8616
3/12/12 48 79 90 82 05 80 90 8615 8615
3/13/12 48 7810 79 90 78 99 8615 8615
3/14/12 48 77 33 84 05 81 07 8614 8614
3/15112 48 8405 84 05 84 05 86 13 8613
3/16/12 48 84 05 84 05 84 05 86 13 8613
3/17112 48 84 05 84 05 84 05 8612 8612
3/18/12 48 8405 84 05 84 05 86 11 86 11
3/19/12 32 84 05 84 05 84 05 86 11 8611
3/20/12 21 84 08 84 09 84 08 8610 8610
3/21/12 48 84 06 84 09 84 09 86 09 86 09
3/22/12 48 84 06 8410 84 09 86 09 86 09
3/23/12 48 84 08 84 09 8409 86 08 86 08
3/24/12 48 84 08 84 09 8409 86 07 86 07
3/25/12 48 84 08 84 09 8409 86 07 86 07
3/26/12 48 84 05 8422 84 09 86 06 86 06
3/27112 48 8406 87 49 8477 86 05 86 05
3/28/12 48 84 06 84 09 8407 86 05 86 05
3/29/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 86 04 86 04
3/30/12 48 84 05 8412 84 08 86 03 86 03
3/31/12 48 84 07 84 09 84 08 86 03 86 03
4/1/12 48 84 06 8410 84 08 86 02 86 02
4/2/12 48 84 06 84 09 84 08 86 01 86 01
4/3/12 48 84 07 8410 84 08 86 01 86 01
4/4/12 48 84 06 84 09 84 08 86 00 86 00
4/5/12 48 84 06 84 09 84 08 85 99 85 99
4/6/12 48 84 04 84 09 84 08 85 99 85 99
4/7/12 48 84 05 8409 84 08 85 98 85 98
4/8/12 48 8406 84 09 8408 85 97 85 97
4/9/12 48 8406 8409 8408 85 97 8597
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Notes Da1ly (F) Dally (F) Flow
32 90 start sensor freeze anomaly
32 87
32 83
32 77
32 71
32 68
32 65
32 65
32 63
3262
32 61
32 59
32 58
3256
3254
3248
3247
3245
32 43
3242
3240
3242
3248
32 54
32 58
32 77 PTI failure due to freeze
damage
33 20
33 63
34 02
3444
34 77
52 00
34 07 A1r temperature sensor
enabled New PTI 1n a1r
36 31
43 17
45 88
45 85
43 51
51 43 29 6 Flow mmt by D Bralley
39 78
31 75
36 77
3494
4147
25 27
26 78
26 77
3819
41 29
38 39
36 58
34 37
AppendiX H -Page H 3
Native VIllage of Cantwell
Jack River Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft station datum)_
Record Daily Daily Daily Corrections Corrected Date to Daily Count Min Max Mean Mean Daily Mean
4/10/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 85 96 85 96
4/11/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 85 95 85 95
4/12/12 48 8406 8409 84 08 85 95 85 95
4/13/12 48 84 05 84 09 84 08 85 94 85 94
4/14/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 85 93 85 93
4/15/12 48 8406 8410 84 08 85 93 85 93
4/16/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 85 92 85 92
4/17112 48 84 06 8409 8408 85 91 85 91
4/18/12 48 84 06 8409 8408 85 91 85 91
4/19/12 48 84 06 8409 84 08 85 90 85 90
4/20/12 48 84 05 8409 84 08 85 89 85 89
4/21/12 48 84 05 84 09 84 08 85 89 85 89
4/22/12 48 8405 8410 84 08 85 88 85 88
4/23/12 48 8406 84 09 84 08 85 87 85 87
4/24/12 48 8405 84 09 8408 85 87 85 87
4/25/12 48 84 06 84 09 8408 85 86 85 86
4/26/12 48 84 06 84 09 8408 85 85 85 85
4/27112 48 84 06 84 09 8408 85 85 85 85
4/28/12 48 84 07 8468 8427 L 8584 8584
4/29/12 48 84 07 84 41 84 24 85 83 85 83
4/30/12 48 84 08 8424 8410 85 83 85 83
5/1/12 48 84 09 8410 84 09 85 82 85 82
5/2/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 85 81 85 81
5/3/12 48 8407 8410 84 08 85 81 85 81
5/4/12 48 84 07 8410 84 09 85 80 85 80
5/5/12 48 8408 84 11 8409 85 79 85 79
5/6/12 48 8408 8410 84 09 85 79 85 79
5/7/12 48 84 07 8410 8409 85 78 85 78
5/8/12 48 84 08 8410 8409 85 77 8577
5/9/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 85 77 8577
5/10/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 85 76 85 76
5/11112 48 84 07 8411 84 09 85 75 85 75
5/12/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 85 75 85 75
5/13/12 48 8408 8410 84 09 86 05 86 05
5/14/12 48 8408 8411 84 09 86 35 86 35
5/15/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 86 65 86 65
5/16/12 48 84 08 8410 84 09 86 95 86 95
5/17/12 48 8408 84 10 8409 87 26 87 26
5/18/12 48 84 08 84 12 8409 87 56 8756
5/19/12 48 84 08 84 11 8409 87 86 87 86
5/20/12 48 84 06 8819 86 06 8816 8816
5/21112 48 88 09 88 32 8816 8816
5/22/12 48 88 21 8840 88 28 88 28
5/23/12 48 8833 88 65 8842 8842
5/24/12 48 8862 89 00 88 77 8877
5/25/12 48 8897 89 60 89 21 89 21
5/26/12 48 89 42 89 61 89 51 89 51
5/27112 48 89 54 89 96 89 78 89 78
5/28/12 48 89 78 90 00 89 88 89 88
5/29/12 48 89 72 90 00 8984 89 84
5/30/12 48 89 53 89 75 89 60 89 60
5/31/12 48 8947 89 63 89 54 89 54
6/1/12 48 8946 89 57 8952 89 52
6/2/12 48 89 50 9024 89 82 89 82
March 2013 Final Report
Temperature Data
Air Mean Water
Mean Daily (F) Daily (F)
32 94
37 21
41 85
50 59
4648
4976
50 35
47 96
4527
51 90
4996
4544
4900
4677
45 93
48 72
48 64
4818
4417
4948
41 85
2949
3445
33 61
42 33
44 70
4429
47 96
4572
4302
44 04
43 65
37 83
46 21
4818
46 17
5005
52 57
5464
5362
5262
55 87 3764
53 91 38 28
55 61 38 31
55 20 3815
51 45 36 97
50 72 36 74
46 58 36 48
51 48 37 32
49 89 37 40
54 77 38 49
51 31 38 59
4529 3774
54 26 38 38
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Measured Notes Flow
assumed start of melt
end sensor freeze gap
PTT deployed Into well
end rating curve 1
est calc flow
Appendix H -Page H 4
I
j
I I
-
I I
I
I I
I -'
I ~I
l_
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
)
I
I
LJ
I
l
r
I
"-I
I I
' I
r-I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I I
\__
I
I I
I
l
I
)
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft stat1on datum)
Record Da1ly Dally Da1ly Corrections Corrected Date to Dally Count M1n Max Mean Mean Da1ly Mean
6/3/12 48 90 18 90 37 90 26 90 26
6/4/12 48 90 28 90 75 9040 90 40
6/5/12 48 90 64 91 39 91 03 91 03
6/6/12 48 91 08 91 41 91 22 91 22
6/7/12 48 91 05 91 29 91 17 9117
6/8/12 48 91 21 91 60 91 30 I 91 30
6/9/12 48 91 07 91 78 91 46 91 46
6/10/12 48 90 81 91 09 90 92 90 92
6/11/12 48 90 95 91 14 91 04 91 04
6/12112 48 90 94 91 38 91 17 91 17
6/13/12 48 90 80 91 36 91 13 9113
6/14/12 48 90 57 9094 90 71 90 71
6/15/12 48 90 69 90 93 90 79 90 79
6/16/12 48 90 62 91 DO 90 79 90 79
6/17112 48 90 61 90 93 90 69 9069
6/18/12 48 90 71 91 DO 90 86 9086
6/19/12 48 90 84 91 05 90 94 90 94
6/20/12 48 90 87 91 12 90 98 90 98
6/21/12 48 90 88 9112 91 DO 91 DO
6/22112 48 90 85 91 08 90 96 90 96
6/23/12 48 90 87 91 02 9095 90 95
6/24/12 48 90 81 91 01 9090 90 90
6/25/12 48 90 70 90 87 90 78 90 78
6/26/12 48 90 66 90 77 9072 90 72
6/27112 48 90 56 90 74 9064 90 64
6/28/12 48 90 50 90 58 9055 90 55
6/29/12 48 9044 9053 9049 9049
6/30/12 48 9042 9055 9048 9048
7/1/12 48 9042 9050 9045 9045
7/2/12 48 90 38 9048 90 43 9043
7/3/12 48 90 39 90 51 90 46 9046
7/4/12 48 90 30 90 41 90 36 90 36
7/5/12 48 90 23 90 32 90 27 90 27
7/6/12 48 90 17 90 25 90 21 90 21
7/7/12 48 90 18 90 25 90 23 90 23
7/8/12 48 90 24 90 35 90 30 90 30
7/9/12 48 90 18 90 27 90 22 90 22
7/10/12 48 90 14 90 19 90 16 9016
7/11/12 48 90 09 90 17 90 13 90 13
7/12112 48 90 06 90 11 90 09 90 09
7/13/12 48 90 04 90 08 9006 90 06
7/14/12 48 90 01 90 05 9004 90 04
7/15/12 48 89 99 90 02 90 01 90 01
7/16/12 48 89 97 90 01 89 99 89 99
7/17112 48 89 95 89 99 89 97 89 97
7/18/12 48 89 93 89 97 89 95 89 95
7/19/12 48 89 92 89 95 89 93 89 93
7/20/12 48 89 93 90 13 90 06 9006
7/21/12 48 9004 90 18 90 10 90 10
7/22112 48 90 17 90 38 90 30 90 30
7/23/12 48 90 38 90 61 90 53 9053
7/24/12 48 90 33 90 50 90 41 90 41
7/25/12 48 9024 90 35 90 29 90 29
March 2013 -F1nal Report
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Notes Dally (F) Da1ly (F) Flow
51 71 37 81 est calc flow
5419 38 72 start rat1ng curve 2
60 89 38 83
50 98 37 76 -
57 61 3879
55 31 38 98
50 73 37 58
58 06 37 76
49 38 38 34
43 58 37 84
53 96 37 55
57 05 3915
5462 3977
54 85 3916
58 78 3985
58 82 39 88
61 20 4056
65 25 40 90
63 78 41 61
64 68 41 99
71 04 42 01
66 61 43 03
5582 42 51
5449 41 37
52 79 4042
51 43 4072
59 55 41 36
57 39 42 81
56 26 43 34
60 47 43 68
51 74 43 99
51 49 42 09
58 03 42 25
6217 42 85
53 70 4429
5055 42 93
5548 41 59
4644 42 01
54 98 41 68
50 58 4265
5245 4216
53 02 42 56
50 73 4265
53 67 42 74
59 84 43 61
59 80 4411
6324 45 21
57 67 45 91
52 84 4456
56 35 4423
52 37 43 86 600 Part1al flow mmt part1al
estimate by J Groves
56 74 4262
6220 4334
AppendiX H Page H-5
Native VIllage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft station datum)
Record Daily Daily Daily Corrections Corrected Date Count Mm Max Mean to Daily Daily Mean Mean
7/26/12 48 90 17 9026 90 21 90 21
7/27112 48 90 11 90 19 9015 90 15
7/28/12 48 90 07 90 13 90 10 90 10
7/29/12 48 90 05 90 09 90 07 90 07
7/30/12 48 90 01 9006 90 03 90 03
7/31112 48 89 97 90 01 89 99 89 99
8/1/12 48 89 95 89 98 89 96 89 96
8/2/12 48 89 94 90 02 89 97 89 97
8/3/12 48 89 97 9003 90 00 90 00
8/4/12 48 89 96 9000 89 97 89 97
8/5/12 48 89 96 90 01 89 99 89 99
8/6/12 48 89 94 89 98 89 96 8996
8/7/12 48 89 90 89 94 89 93 8993
8/8/12 48 89 89 89 92 89 91 89 91
8/9/12 48 89 87 89 91 89 89 8989
8/10/12 48 89 89 89 94 89 91 89 91
8/11/12 48 89 89 89 92 89 90 8990
8/12/12 48 89 87 89 90 89 88 8988
8/13/12 48 89 85 89 87 89 87 8987
8/14/12 48 89 84 89 87 89 85 8985
8/15/12 48 8982 89 85 89 84 8984
8/16/12 48 8982 89 84 89 83 89 83
8/17112 48 8980 89 83 89 82 89 82
8/18/12 48 89 80 89 82 89 81 89 81
8/19/12 48 89 81 89 83 89 82 89 82
8/20/12 48 89 82 89 94 8986 89 86
8/21112 48 89 92 89 98 8995 89 95
8/22/12 48 89 88 89 92 8990 89 90
8/23/12 48 89 87 89 89 8988 89 88
8/24/12 48 8985 89 88 89 87 89 87
8/25/12 48 89 85 89 87 8986 89 86
8/26/12 48 89 85 89 96 89 88 89 88
8/27/12 48 89 96 90 18 90 11 90 11
8/28/12 48 90 04 90 13 9009 90 09
8/29/12 48 90 00 90 05 90 02 90 02
8/30/12 48 89 97 90 01 89 99 89 99
8/31/12 48 89 98 90 04 90 02 90 02
9/1/12 48 90 03 90 07 90 05 90 05
9/2/12 48 9007 90 14 90 11 90 11
9/3/12 48 90 13 90 20 90 15 90 15
9/4/12 48 90 20 90 32 90 26 90 26
9/5/12 48 9032 90 39 90 36 90 36
9/6/12 48 9035 90 41 90 38 90 38
9/7/12 48 90 29 9037 90 33 90 33
9/8/12 48 9024 9032 90 28 90 28
9/9/12 48 90 18 9024 90 21 90 21
9/10/12 48 90 12 9020 90 15 90 15
9/11/12 48 90 07 90 13 9010 90 10
9/12/12 48 90 03 90 08 9005 9005
9/13/12 48 89 98 90 04 90 01 90 01
9/14/12 48 89 95 8999 8997 8997
9/15/12 48 89 95 90 03 89 98 8998
9/16/12 48 90 03 90 41 90 18 9018
9/17112 48 9035 9043 90 39 90 39
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water
Daily (F) Mean
Daily (F)
6544 44 73
66 61 4547
6349 4604
57 21 4689
53 31 4494
5805 43 91
4958 4454
47 94 4347
4817 4263
4767 42 99
5495 4264
56 45 43 06
57 74 43 95
55 66 43 94
62 63 44 11
58 97 4556
60 04 45 29
65 37 45 73
60 75 45 83
6415 46 06
58 82 46 30
56 64 46 08
51 82 4449
50 40 4429
4915 43 59
48 01 4362
57 90 4342
55 99 4254
4718 43 50
47 51 42 80
52 66 4265
46 36 4340
48 74 4237
49 31 41 11
47 98 4076
51 92 42 00
45 83 4249
4515 41 85
45 96 41 65
45 09 41 29
43 78 40 98
40 02 40 07
41 59 39 58
40 60 39 06
41 22 3859
41 79 3823
4253 37 93
41 13 37 39
4626 37 80
43 72 38 97
40 15 3866
40 13 3852
4027 38 86
3932 3824
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Measured
Flow Notes
Appendix H -Page H 6
:j
J
t
J
-
I I
I f
: r
I j
~
I \
l
I I
I I
( I
I I
1__!
I I
I I
I
I I I
I I
I
ll
~}
I
I I
I I
'--
(
I I
I
I
I I
rl
I I
Ll
I I
(~I
I
I I
I ~I
I I
I I
: I
I
Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft station datum)
Record Dally Da1ly Da1ly Corrections Corrected Date to Da1ly Count MJn Max Mean Mean Dally Mean
9/18/12 48 90 30 9036 90 33 90 33
9/19/12 48 90 28 90 74 9038 90 38
9/20/12 48 90 74 91 75 91 25 91 25
9/21/12 48 91 13 9244 91 80 91 80
9/22112 48 91 07 91 29 9118 9118
9/23/12 48 9077 91 25 90 97 90 97
9/24/12 48 9018 90 77 90 47 90 47
9/25/12 48 89 76 9018 89 96 89 96
9/26/12 48 8948 89 76 89 60 89 60
9/27112 48 89 27 8948 89 37 89 37
9/28/12 48 8914 8927 89 20 89 20
9/29/12 48 8899 8914 89 06 89 06
9/30/12 48 88 89 88 99 88 92 88 92
10/1/12 48 88 77 89 00 88 89 88 89
10/2/12 48 88 74 88 90 88 81 88 81
10/3/12 48 88 67 88 79 88 71 88 71
10/4/12 48 88 70 88 80 88 75 88 75
10/5/12 48 88 67 88 85 88 72 8872
10/6/12 48 88 67 88 74 88 71 88 71
10/7112 48 88 58 88 69 88 61 88 61
10/8/12 48 88 55 88 58 88 57 88 57
10/9/12 48 8849 88 55 88 52 88 52
10/10/12 48 8843 8849 8846 8846
10/11/12 48 8843 88 61 88 54 88 54
10/12/12 48 88 41 88 54 8846 8846
10/13/12 48 88 30 8845 88 36 88 36
10/14/12 48 8833 8864 8842 8842
10/15/12 48 88 32 88 58 8843 8843
10/16/12 48 88 30 8848 88 41 88 41
10/17/12 48 88 24 8848 88 35 88 35
10/18/12 48 8814 88 37 88 23 88 23
10/19/12 48 8813 8834 8820 8820
10/20/12 48 8810 88 23 8816 8816
10/21/12 48 88 09 88 30 8819 8819
10/22/12 48 8818 88 29 8822 8822
10/23/12 48 88 22 88 50 88 37 88 37
10/24/12 48 8847 88 87 88 67 8867
10/25/12 48 88 67 88 96 88 83 88 83
10/26/12 48 88 54 88 76 88 65 88 65
10/27/12 48 8838 8859 88 45 88 45
10/28/12 48 8834 8845 88 41 88 41
10/29/12 48 88 24 88 37 88 31 88 31
10/30/12 48 88 08 88 29 8816 8816
10/31/12 48 88 27 88 91 88 69 88 69
11/1/12 48 88 90 89 51 89 23 89 23
11/2/12 48 89 51 89 83 89 72 89 72
11/3/12 48 89 40 89 62 8949 89 49
11/4/12 48 89 58 89 92 89 71 89 71
11/5/12 48 89 92 90 46 90 17 90 17
11/6/12 48 90 34 9072 90 54 90 54
11/7112 48 90 72 90 99 90 84 90 84
11/8/12 48 90 93 91 30 91 15 9115
March 2013 -F~nal Report
Polarconsult Alaska Inc
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Notes Dally (F) Dally (F) Flow
37 22 37 39
38 06 37 42
4328 37 61 End rat1ng curve 2
51 88 3767 No rat1ng curve
57 45 3793
47 51 37 97
39 87 3836
47 57 3858
46 74 3830
4450 3806
4046 37 87
33 98 37 69
3429 37 47
2947 36 81
33 86 35 75
37 55 3482
4090 34 74
41 64 3525
37 84 3611
37 91 36 74
38 52 36 88
37 73 3690
31 79 36 88
26 72 3643
22 72 3525
20 37 33 86
2615 32 83
21 50 32 31
19 11 32 11
21 68 31 92
19 89 31 78
22 20 31 67
20 53 31 61
9 06 31 59
8 95 31 58 Start suspected 1ce affect
2 98 31 56
482 31 54
11 76 31 50
15 60 31 50
13 56 31 56
19 36 31 57
18 41 31 54 End suspected 1ce affect
Subsequent records not
15 96 31 55 rev1ewed for suspected Jce
affect
11 80 31 52
0 82 31 46
6 09 31 41
10 35 31 40
8 03 31 38
5 09 31 37
-1 69 31 36
-3 05 31 35
367 31 33
Appendix H Page H-7
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft station datum)
Record Dally Da1ly Dally Corrections Corrected Date to Dally Count Mm Max Mean Mean Dally Mean
11/9/12 48 9115 91 32 91 27 91 27
11/10/12 48 90 93 91 15 91 03 91 03
11/11/12 48 90 71 9096 90 81 90 81
11/12/12 48 90 67 90 80 90 73 90 73
11/13/12 48 9044 90 70 90 58 90 58
11/14/12 48 90 59 90 86 90 73 90 73
11/15/12 48 9043 90 79 90 61 90 61
11/16/12 48 90 06 90 43 90 27 90 27
11/17112 48 90 03 90 13 90 08 9008
11/18/12 48 90 01 90 13 90 07 90 07
11/19/12 48 90 01 9003 90 02 90 02
11/20/12 48 89 90 90 02 89 97 89 97
11/21/12 48 89 64 89 95 89 80 89 80
11/22/12 48 89 23 89 64 8943 89 43
11/23/12 48 89 07 8923 8914 8914
11/24/12 48 88 88 8910 89 05 89 05
11/25/12 48 88 94 8916 89 04 8904
11/26/12 48 88 76 88 94 88 86 88 86
11/27112 48 88 51 88 76 88 65 88 65
11/28/12 48 8843 88 54 88 51 88 51
11/29/12 48 8817 8848 88 34 8834
11/30/12 48 8804 8818 88 11 8811
12/1/12 48 87 91 8804 87 96 8796
12/2/12 48 8778 87 92 87 85 87 85
12/3/12 48 8768 87 90 87 77 8777
12/4/12 48 87 64 87 79 87 71 87 71
12/5/12 48 87 43 8764 87 54 87 54
12/6/12 48 87 36 87 43 87 38 87 38
12/7112 48 87 38 87 42 87 40 87 40
12/8/12 48 87 23 87 38 87 30 87 30
12/9/12 48 87 22 87 24 87 23 87 23
12/10/12 48 87 21 87 22 87 22 87 22
12/11/12 48 87 22 87 24 87 23 87 23
12/12/12 48 87 24 87 24 87 24 87 24
12/13/12 48 87 23 87 27 8725 87 25
12/14/12 48 87 21 87 26 8724 87 24
12/15/12 48 8710 87 22 8716 8716
12/16/12 48 87 07 87 11 87 08 87 08
12/17/12 48 87 01 87 07 87 04 87 04
12/18/12 48 86 98 87 03 87 00 87 00
12/19/12 48 86 94 86 98 86 96 86 96
12/20/12 48 86 91 86 97 86 93 86 93
12/21/12 48 86 88 86 91 86 89 8689
12/22/12 48 86 83 86 88 86 86 8686
12/23/12 48 86 81 86 84 86 83 86 83
12/24/12 48 86 81 86 85 86 83 8683
12/25/12 48 86 79 86 82 86 81 86 81
12/26/12 48 86 80 86 81 86 81 86 81
12/27/12 48 8677 86 80 86 79 86 79
12/28/12 48 8673 86 77 86 75 8675
12/29/12 48 86 73 87 11 86 90 86 90
12/30/12 48 86 78 86 93 8684 8684
12/31/12 48 86 70 86 78 8674 8674
1/1/13 48 8667 86 70 8669 86 69
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water
Mean Da1ly (F) Da1ly (F)
17 85 31 32
25 89 31 33
20 23 31 33
147 31 34
3 87 31 34
17 30 31 32
11 22 31 32
4 81 31 32
-11 35 31 33
-11 52 31 31
-16 51 31 28
-15 79 31 29
-17 64 31 28
-11 46 31 29
-10 39 31 29
-8 37 31 30
-7 76 31 28
-5 01 31 29
-6 67 31 29
-13 67 31 29
-1 40 31 31
-12 77 31 31
-15 99 31 32
0 81 31 33
-9 07 31 33
-2614 31 32
-19 58 31 34
-16 97 31 35
-13 74 31 35
-3 22 31 35
13 56 31 34
18 42 31 34
15 95 31 34
18 62 31 33
16 89 31 33
-0 05 31 33
-6 21 31 34
-0 01 31 31
-18 57 31 31
-12 42 31 32
-3 37 31 32
-1 55 31 34
-22 51 31 29
-18 65 31 30
-15 10 31 31
-5 01 31 31
19 01 31 31
20 91 31 29
21 06 31 30
18 05 31 31
29 81 31 31
37 06 31 30
27 68 31 32
33 51 31 30
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Measured Notes Flow
I
Appendix H -Page H 8
,j
I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
ij
I
I I
1
I I
j
)
I I
I I
I
I
I
I I I
:
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I
~
I I
I l
I
I
I I
I I I I
I I
I
l J
l
J
I I
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Stage (ft station datum)
Record Da1ly Dally Dally Corrections Corrected Date to Da1ly Count Mm Max Mean Mean Da1ly Mean
1/2/13 48 86 63 86 70 86 66 8666
1/3/13 48 86 57 86 63 86 60 86 60
1/4/13 48 86 55 86 58 86 56 8656
1/5/13 48 8653 86 55 86 54 86 54
1/6/13 48 86 51 86 53 86 52 8652
1/7/13 48 8647 86 51 8649 8649
1/8/13 48 8643 86 47 8644 8644
1/9/13 48 8640 86 43 86 41 86 41
1/10/13 48 8642 86 51 8645 8645
1/11/13 48 8646 86 51 8648 8648
1/12/13 48 8643 86 47 8644 8644
1/13/13 48 8642 8644 8643 8643
1/14/13 48 86 41 8645 8643 8643
1/15/13 48 86 41 8646 8644 8644
1/16/13 48 86 38 86 55 8644 8644
1/17113 48 86 33 86 55 8643 8643
1/18/13 48 86 33 86 62 8647 8647
1/19/13 48 86 44 86 73 86 57 86 57
1/20/13 48 86 56 86 73 86 65 86 65
1/21/13 48 86 42 86 56 8647 8647
1/22/13 48 86 38 86 53 8643 86 43
1/23/13 48 86 37 8647 8642 8642
1/24/13 48 86 35 8644 8638 86 38
1/25/13 48 8624 86 37 8628 8628
1/26/13 48 86 27 8640 8633 86 33
1/27/13 48 8634 8645 8639 86 39
1/28/13 48 86 27 8634 8629 86 29
1/29/13 48 86 22 86 31 8628 86 28
1/30/13 48 86 25 86 30 8627 86 27
1/31/13 48 86 21 8625 86 23 86 23
2/1/13 48 8616 86 21 8619 8619
2/2/13 48 8615 86 31 86 22 86 22
2/3/13 48 8619 8640 86 25 86 25
2/4/13 48 8624 86 34 86 29 86 29
2/5/13 48 86 22 86 34 86 26 86 26
2/6/13 48 8618 86 30 86 22 86 22
2/7/13 48 8616 86 23 86 20 86 20
2/8/13 48 8612 86 44 86 22 86 22
2/9/13 48 86 30 86 42 86 35 86 35
2/10/13 48 8622 8634 86 28 86 28
2/11/13 48 8615 86 22 8619 8619
2/12/13 48 86 11 8616 8614 8614
2/13/13 48 86 08 8614 8610 8610
2/14/13 48 86 07 8612 86 09 86 09
2/15/13 48 86 03 86 08 86 07 86 07
2/16/13 48 86 00 8613 8605 86 05
2/17/13 48 8600 8619 8608 86 08
2/18/13 48 85 95 86 08 8600 86 00
2/19/13 48 86 07 8626 8615 8615
2/20/13 48 86 21 8628 86 25 86 25
2/21/13 48 8610 86 21 8614 8614
2/22/13 48 86 03 8610 86 06 8606
2/23/13 48 85 98 86 03 86 00 86 00
2/24/13 48 85 95 85 98 85 97 85 97
March 2013 -Fmal Report
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Notes Da1ly (F) Dally (F) Flow
23 76 31 30
26 61 31 31
19 20 31 32
22 85 31 32
23 75 31 33
16 23 31 33
-0 32 31 29
2 28 31 31
14 31 31 31
18 39 31 32
2516 31 29 I
31 94 31 30
32 75 31 30
14 92 31 30
8 72 31 31
566 31 31
-3 40 31 31
9 78 31 32
17 88 31 31
13 88 31 31
12 51 31 32
10 57 31 31
7 36 31 33
-6 67 31 32
-13 12 31 34
-14 70 31 32
-21 87 31 35
-2 90 31 34
11 00 31 33
2563 31 32
19 68 31 32
24 80 31 33
29 04 31 32
26 34 31 34
23 51 31 32
10 05 31 31
11 57 31 31
2214 31 31
27 42 31 32
2947 31 30
2263 31 30
15 37 31 31
2227 31 32
2606 31 33
18 62 31 32
5 76 31 29
8 08 31 29
-0 59 31 31
-9 20 31 31
435 31 28
526 31 31
9 68 31 29
16 57 31 30
21 01 31 31
AppendiX H -Page H-9
Nat1ve Village of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectnc Reconnaissance Study
Recorded Staqe (ft stat1on datum)
Record Dally Dally Dally Corrections Corrected Date to Da1ly Count Min Max Mean Mean Da1ly Mean
2/25/13 48 85 90 8596 85 94 85 94
2/26/13 48 85 90 8593 85 92 85 92
2/27113 48 85 87 85 91 85 89 85 89
2/28/13 48 85 87 85 90 85 88 85 88
3/1/13 48 85 85 85 90 85 87 85 87
3/2/13 48 85 85 85 88 85 87 85 87
3/3/13 48 8582 85 92 85 86 85 86
3/4/13 48 85 84 85 89 85 86 85 86
3/5/13 48 8582 85 85 85 83 85 83
3/6/13 48 85 78 85 84 85 81 85 81
3/7/13 46 8580 8613 85 99 85 99
March 2013 -Final Report
Temperature Data
A1r Mean Water Measured Mean Dally (F) Dally (F) Flow
21 48 31 32
13 60 31 32
17 28 31 33
22 95 31 33
2447 31 34
23 01 31 33
17 20 31 31
19 48 31 31
19 42 31 29
20 39 31 30
26 92 31 32
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
Notes
download for final recon
study report Station sbllin
work1ng order
AppendiX H-Page H-10
iJ
l]
I
I
I
J
l
I I
I I
l
J
I I
'~)
I I
I I
J
I l
I I
I I
I I
I
I i
I_!
1
I I
I I
I I
I_ I
I
I I
1 l
I I J
I I
I
Nat1ve V1Uage of CantweH
Jack IR~ver IH!ycfiroelectnc !Reconnaissance StiUidly IPolarconsuit Aiaska, ~nc
APPENDIX 1-DRAFT REPORT REVIEW COMMENT'S AND RESPONSES
I -1 March 2013 -!Ftnal Report
Nat1ve VIllage of Cantwell
Jack R1ver Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Polarconsult Alaska, Inc
l
I_!
Th1s page mtent1onally blank
March 2013 -Fmal Report
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 11, 2013
polarconsult alaska, inc.
1503 West 33rd Avenue , Suite 310
Anchorage , Alaska 99503-3638
Phone : (907) 258-2420
FAX: (907) 258 -2419
TO: Gordon Carlson, Project Manager, Native Village of Cantwell
FROM: Joel Groves, Project Manager, Polarconsult
SUBJECT: Response to AEA Review Comments on Jack River Hyd r oelectric Study and
Summary of Other Major Revisions to Final Report
CC: Final Report Appendix I
The Client Review Draft of the Burro Creek Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Final Report was
provided to the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) on November 28, 2012. The AEA provided
comments on January 7, 2013.
AEA comments and Polarconsult responses are summarized be low. As appropriate, AEA's
comments have been incorporated into the final release of the Jack River Hydroelectric
Reconnaissance Study Final Report, dated March 2013 .
AEA Comments Received (Polarconsult responses in BLUE )
1. Page iii: All the schemes considered in the recon study are for storage projects which will
impact resident fish movement through the construction of dams r anging from 40 to 250 feet in
height. The consultant needs to have a general conversation w ith ADF&G to assess whether
such a project (100-200 feet high dam) could be permitted by AD F&G without an upstream fish
passage system implemented .
Polarconsult contacted Bill Morris of the Fairbanks ADF&G fie ld office to generally discuss
ADF&G mitigation requirements for the project configuration s considered. ADF&G would
first require baseline fisheries surveys to characterize the existing resident fish populations in
the affected reach of Jack River. Mitigation measures would then depend on the results of
the surveys. Generally, AS 16.05.841 -51 requires that the p r oject either provide for fish
passage or provide monetary mitigation by funding hatchery operations or lump sum
payment to ADF&G. In practice, ADF&G attempts to maintain the biological function of the
river and only rarely resorts to payments in-lieu of on -site mitigation. The report narratives
have been revised to include a more detailed discussion of this matter.
2. The proposed hydro sites are in major snow machine corridors of travel and would have
impacts to that use during winter drawdown .
Continued snow machine access to areas upstream of the project can be accommodated by
routing traffic along corridors that are outside of the reservoir inundation zone. Specific
routes would depend on the hydro project configuration that is selected for development.
Section E. 7 in Appendix E has been revised to include a discussion of this topic.
13031 1-JACKRREPORT _AEACOMMENTS . DOC
POLARCONS ULT M E MO RA NDUM
3 . Provide all field data collected from Jack River flows in appendix of the report, including
river stage data from the data logger located in the Jack River well casing installed for this
study.
Jack River flow measurements are documented in Appendix C of the Draft Report, and stage
data from the well casing data logger at RM 11.34 are documented in Appendix I of the Draft
Report. These sections are also provided in the Final Report, with data from November 2012
to March 2013 appended to the tables and figures as appropriate.
4 . Given the high degree of active stream channel moving around in the wide flood channel of
Jack River, the amount of erodible and weathered material lying on the banks/cliffs of the
proposed reservoirs for the three proposed dam sites and the associated potential for
significant debris load movement during high flow events, it would appear any impoundment
being considered would be at risk for a short life due to infill from sediment transport and
capture . Please comment on this and attempt a high level analysis of the issue .
Reservoir sedimentation is estimated to reduce annual energy output of project
configurations 1A and 18 by 88% once equilibrium sedimentation is reached in 270 to 460
years. The reservoirs of other project configurations are estimated to reach equilibrium
sedimentation more quickly {10 to 240 years), but sedimentation is estimated to decrease
annual energy output by only 94 to 98% for these configurations. Reservoir sedimentation is
not expected to effect the economics of any project configurations as presented in this study.
A narrative discussing reservoir sedimentation and providing initial estimates of probable
reservoir life has been added to Appendix D, section D.3. and referenced in the main
narrative of the report.
5. 3.1 : Says to see Figure A-3 to find Windy Creek and Cantwell Creek tributaries. Could not
make these out on Figure A-3. If possible, Figure A-3 can be fixed to be made more clear.
Text labels for Windy Creek and Cantwell Creek have been added to Figure A-3.
6. The basis for a Jack River project is to provide backup should the AIS experience an outage .
Section 3 .2.3 mentions past blackouts being caused by ava lanches, lightning strikes. On average
how long do these blackouts last? And how often?
Reducing the outage rate in Cantwell is one benefit of the project, but is not the project's sole
basis. Other potential benefits are discussed in paragraph two of Section 3.3 of the report,
and include providing long-term rate relief from GVEA's increasing electric rates, possible
flood protection by using the project reservoir for flood control, and a potential revenue
source for the Native Village of Cantwell.
GVEA outage data at the Cantwell Substation for 2012 indicates that outage rates in the
Cantwell service area are about 5.3 times higher than for the GVEA system at-large. This does
not include outages due to problems on the local distribution system, so actual outage rates
in Cantwell and nearby communities are somewhat higher. A discussion of outages and
March 11, 2013 Page 2 of 7
POLARCONSUL T MEMORANDUM
outage data has been added to Appendix D, section 0.4, and referenced in the main narrative
of the report.
7. Figure A-3: Difficult to see what arrows are pointing at, espec ially with outlines of basins all
the same color. Perhaps different colors or line types with a legend would be more clear .
Figure A-3 has been revised to enhance clarity of the information presented.
8 . Page 20 and Page G-1: All the economic analyses performed for the various options for Jack
River include an $8 M grant, (presumably from AEA's REF Gra nt program). Accepting a REF
grant for construction funding requires the grant recipient to be come a CPCN regulated by the
RCA. Adjust your narrative so it is consistent with your table information.
The source of grant funding for this project is not limited to the Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
Grant Program. The ability of the project to obtain grant funds will depend on what state and
federal grant programs exist, whether the project meets specific program eligibility criteria,
and whether the project successfully competes for those grant funds, if and when the project
is ready to pursue construction funding. If the Native Village of Cantwell diligently advances
the project, this would not occur until2016 or 2017.
The narrative in Appendix G, Section G.3 has been expanded to clarify the regulatory and
contractual conditions associated with construction grants to IPPs from the REF Grant
Program. Also, the narrative has been revised to clarify that renewable energy projects
located on the railbelt are only eligible for $4 million in construction grant funding under
current REF program rules.
9. Page 22: Section 4.1.2 -If NVC were to form an independent electric utility, they would also
be responsible to maintain all distribution , metering, billing an d other non -generation related
services of a bonafide utility. This needs to be highlighted in yo ur narrative discussion since it
may not be readily discernible to the lay reader.
The narrative in Section 4.1.2 has been revised to emphasize these and other responsibilities
of a full-service electric utility.
10. Page 25 : Table 4-1. The Susitna Watana hydro project is ex p ected to come on line in 2024
(not 2022).
Table 4-1 has been revised to reflect information on the Susitna-Watana Hydro Project as
presented to the AEA Board of Directors on January 10, 2013.
11. There are two Table 4-1s.
Table numbering has been corrected.
12. Figure A-2: There are several portions of unconnected red lines indicating GVEA service
territory boundaries on this map . Verify the boundaries and ed it the map as needed .
March 11, 2013 Page 3 of 7
PO L ARCONSULT MEMORANDUM
The GVEA service area in the project vicinity includes Township 18 South, Range 7 West.
Areas south and east of this are outside the GVEA service area. The lighter red lines on Figure
A-2 were associated with land status boundaries. Figure A-2 has been revised to correct this
ambiguity.
13 . Report states projects ranging in installed capacity f r om 1.4-7.3 MW appear technically
viable-which arrangement is the 1.4 MW project? {Table 3-3 does not show a 1.4 project)
References to a 1.4 MW project are typographic errors and are meant to read 1.7 MW. Also,
the installed capacities shown in Table 3-3 for project configurations 3A, 38, 3C were
incorrect. All other information on Table 3-3 was reviewed and these were the only errors.
All instances of "1.4 MW" in the report tables and narrative were corrected to "1.7 MW".
The narrative and related tables were also reviewed for related errors and none were found.
14. Tailrace with 150 cfs of flow will greatly affect and al t er the pond habitat for Option 1A.
Don't know if this is a viable option.
This is a valid question for this particular project configuration that is beyond the scope of a
reconnaissance study. The narrative at Section 3.5.8 has been revised to discuss this matter
in more detail.
15. B-2 : Caption for Photo B-4 may be incorrect.
The caption for Photograph B-4 has been corrected.
16. Appears the channel where the stream gage is loc ated is continually shifting causing
discharge curves to be questionable at best for unknown periods of time until measurements
are taken again . Usually gages are placed in portions of streams that are fairly stable, please
comment on the rationale for placing the stream gage at that location and if it is the best
location should the project be advanced .
Three general gauging station sites appropriate for this study were considered along Jack
River. These sites, and the reason the RM 11.34 site was selected, are discussed below.
1. In the canyon in the vicinity of RM 15. There are exposed rock outcrops and well-confined
stream corridors that are likely to be more stable than the selected gauging station at RM
11.34. This would be a relatively remote installation that would be very difficult to access
for installation, flow measurements, or station maintenance. This site would most likely
not have cellular or satellite coverage due to the steep canyon terrain, requiring on-site
data storage and introducing the risk of data loss in the event the station hardware was
destroyed in a flood or landslide. Consideration of these factors in concert with the
limited funds available for this study precluded use of this site.
2. The selected gauging station. The site at RM 11.34 is immediately downstream of the
canyon outlet, and is believed to accurately characterize surface flow in Jack River at the
prospective dam sites. The site is readily accessible, and has cellular coverage for a
telemetered installation. Active meandering of Jack River was a known risk with this site
March 11, 2013 Page 4 of 7
POLARCONSU L T M E MORANDUM
(hence the decision to house the installation in a steel well casing), and proved to be
worse than anticipated for the 2011-12 gauging campaign.
3. Gauging stations at either the Parks Highway Bridge (RM 9.51) or the Denali Highway
Bridge (RM 7.21). Both sites would be readily accessible and would have cellular
coverage. The primary limitation of these sites is that Jack River traverses two to four
miles of alluvial plain between RM 11.5 (Dam Site #3) and these sites. A significant
fraction of the surface flow at RM 11.5 may percolate into the alluvial substrate upstream
of RM 9.51 and 7.21, resulting in a potentially significant underestimate of the flow
available for hydropower generation. This concern led to exclusion of these sites for this
study.
Based on experience from the 2011-12 stream gauging campaign, future stream gauging
efforts should continue the use of the RM 11.34 site, but budget for frequent flow
measurements through the summer season to recharacterize the site after channel shifting
events. An alternate approach would be to install a new gauging station at one of the two
downstream bridge sites, and conduct a series of concurrent flow measurements to quantify
differential flow between the downstream gauging station and the prospective dam site(s).
The hardware at the RM 11.34 gauging station remains in working order and can be moved to
a new station location.
A narrative discussing the issues with the existing gauging station and recommended
strategies for future gauging efforts at Jack River has been added to Appendix C as Section
C.2.5.
17. Appendix E: There are two subsections listed as E.3.
Section numbering in Appendix E has been corrected.
18. Some project schemes call for two 60-inch penstocks. Wou ld n't it be less costly to use a
single, larger penstock?
The reconnaissance-level analysis of penstock costs indicated that the installed cost of
multiple 60-inch penstocks may be less than that of a hydraulically-equivalent larger-
diameter penstock. This is principally due to increased cost of shipping. Two sections of 60-
inch pipe generally fit on a single flat-bed trailer, compared w ith only one section typically
permitted for larger diameter pipe. This approximately doubles the per-foot shipping cost for
larger diameter pipe. Also, providing a separate penstock for each turbine-generator unit
provides greater operational redundancy and reliability, which may be desirable for the
larger project configurations considered. This issue would be addressed in the design stage of
the selected project configuration. This point has been clarified in the report narrative at
Section 3.5.6.
19 . B/C ratios for the various projects range between 0.5-3.0 . B/C ratio of 0.5 for a hydro
project is rather low and normally would not be recommended however we understand the
ranges stem from reconnaissance-level work .
March 11, 2013 Page 5 of 7
POLARCONSULT MEMORANDUM
The wide range of B/C ratios are a direct result of the quality of data available to perform the
reconnaissance-level analyses for this study. Site geology is not well characterized, and
would significantly affect the cost and feasibility of various dam configurations. Potential
environmental constraints on the project operating regime, the cost and nature of
environmental mitigation requirements, and the resource hydrology are additional factors
that contribute to the to range of B/C ratios.
20. Wholesale purchase of electrical output from a Jack River project by GVEA appears to be
the most accessible market. Based on other alternative energy projects GVEA purchases from
(Delta Wind Farm) GVEA would only purchase power at the average avoided energy cost, which
may be in the range of $0 .11-$0.13/kWh. Based on t his and the estimated cost for the
alternative projects, only if the recommended projects can be built within the "low-end"
estimates would a Jack River project be feasible .
This is correct. None of the project configurations considered in this study are economic at
GVEA's current system average avoided energy costs using the 'average' cost estimates.
Other assumptions for costs and purchase rates do indicate that some of the project
configurations at Jack River are economically viable. This point has been clarified in the
report narratives.
March 11, 2013 Page 6 of 7
I I
I I
-
I I
I
I I
I
I :
I I
I
II
I I
I
II
POLARCONSULT MEMORANDUM
OTHER SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS FROM DRAFT REPORT
1 The executive summary, Sect1on 11, and Sect1on 5 0 narratives were rev1sed to more clearly
explam the h1gh-level objectives of a reconnaissance study, and the mherent llm1tat1ons of the
fmdmgs descnbed m the reconnaissance study report
2 Table 3-3 was rev1sed to add a row w1th the estimated mact1ve reservOir volume for each
project conf1gurat1on
3 Table 4-1 was updated to reflect new estimates on delivered energy costs for LNG trucked
from the North Slope to Fairbanks and for the Sus1tna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
4 The narrat1ve m Sect1on F 11 was amended to clar1fy that unt1l proJect lands selected by
Ahtna, Inc or the Nat1ve V1llage of Cantwell are patented out of Federal ownership, a hydro
project occupymg these lands may fall under FERC JUriSdiCtion, regardless of other JUriSdictional
cr1ter1a
March 11, 2013 Page 7 of 7