The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFourth of July Creek Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment 2009FOURTH OF JULY CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT RECONNAISSANCE STUDY AND INITIAL FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT NOVEMBER 2009 By INDEPENDENCE POWER, LLC 1503 WEST 33Ro A VENUE, SUITE 211A ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Independence Power, LLC This report presents the findings of a reconnaissance study and initial feasibility assessment of a proposed run-of-river hydroelectric development on Fourth of July Creek near Seward, Alaska. Development of a run-of-river hydroelectric project on Fourth of July Creek with an installed capacity of 5.4 MW is technically and economically feasible. This project can provide approximately 21,700 MWh of energy annually (approximately 1/3rd of the Seward Electric System's current annual energy demand) at an estimated wholesale cost of $0.04 to $0.12 per kWh. Based on these estimates, the project appears competitive with future energy generation alternatives for the railbelt, and warrants continued investigation. These findings are based upon review of existing information and field investigations conducted for this project. Field investigations to date include: Y One year of hydrology data for Fourth of July Creek Y Visual (airborne and terrestrial) reconnaissance of the entire project Y RTK GPS survey of critical project elevations The proposed technical configuration of a hydroelectric development at Fourth of July Creek is summarized below. Intake Elevation (ft) Powerhouse Elevation (ft) Gross Head (ft) Net Head (ft) Penstock Length (ft) and diameter fincl1es) Des_i~~l~~Jc~~ . ~~Lnst~~~~.~~~<:ity~(~_!V) Plant Factor Parameter :rvfini.:num Annual OutputQ<W) Net Annual Energy Generation (kWh) Transmission Length (mi) Value 790' 120' 670' 636' 6,100' of 48"pipe 120 5,400 kW 47% 240kW 21,700,000 kWh 2 miles The next steps necessary to advance the project is a full feasibility study. This study will include collection of additional field data and detailed analysis of the project's technical and economic feasibility. Major feasibility study activities include: Y Continue to measure stream discharge to characterize basin hydrology. Y Complete topographic survey to support design and analysis activities. Y Conduct analysis of flood stages at key project locations to guide project design. Y Conduct geotechnical investigations. Y Conduct engineering analysis to determine optimal penstock routing. Y Project cost estimate and economic analysis. Y Feasibility study analysis and report. NOVEMBER 2009 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS Independence Power, LLC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... I TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................... II ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE ............................................................................. 3 1.2 COMMUNITY BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 3 1.3 PROPOSED ENERGY RESOURCE .............................................................................................. 3 1.4 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES ........................................................................................... 4 2.0 EXISTING ENERGY SYSTEM .............................................................................................. 6 2.1 COMMUNITY ENERGY PROFILE .............................................................................................. 6 2.2 ELECTRIC UTILITY ORGANIZATION ....................................................................................... 6 2.3 GENERATION SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 6 2.4 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS ......................................................................... 7 2.5 LOAD PROFILE ....................................................................................................................... 7 2.6 FUTURE LOAD PROJECTIONS .................................................................................................. 8 2.7 PLANNED UPGRADES ............................................................................................................ 8 2.8 ENERGY MARKET .................................................................................................................. 8 3.0 PROPOSED ENERGY RESOURCE .................................................................................... 10 3.1 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................... 10 3.1.1 Project Drainage Basin .................................................................................................... 10 3.1.2 Project Creek ................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 11 3.2.1 Flood Potential ................................................................................................................ 17 3.3 GEOTECHNICAL ................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Mass Soil Movement ....................................................................................................... 19 3.3.2 Avalanche ....................................................................................................................... 19 3.4 PROJECT LAND .................................................................................................................... 20 3.4.1 Site Control Requirements ............................................................................................... 20 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESIGN ......................................................................................... 22 4.1 ANALYSIS OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................ 22 4.2 RECOMMENDED PROJECT .................................................................................................... 25 4.3 ANNUAL ENERGY PRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 25 4.4 CONCEPTUAL SYSTEM DESIGN ............................................................................................ 26 4.4.1 Site Access ...................................................................................................................... 26 4.4.2 Power Line ...................................................................................................................... 27 4.4.3 Powerhouse ..................................................................................................................... 27 4.4.4 Penstock .......................................................................................................................... 27 4.4.5 Intake .............................................................................................................................. 28 4.5 CONCEPTUAL INTEGRATION DESIGN ................................................................................... 28 4.6 MAJOR REMAINING TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................. 28 4.6.1 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................... 28 4.6.2 Geotechnical .................................................................................................................... 29 4.6.3 Tapogra:phic Survey ......................................................................................................... 29 4.6.4 Penstock Routing ............................................................................................................ 29 4.6.5 Intake Configuration ....................................................................................................... 29 5.0 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................... 30 NOVEMBER 2009 II Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC 5.1 PROJECT COSTS .................................................................................................................... 31 5.2 PROJECf BENEFITS ............................................................................................................... 31 5.2.1 Fuel Displacement ........................................................................................................... 31 5.2.2 Grid Efficiency ................................................................................................................ 31 5.2.3 Environmental Attributes ................................................................................................ 31 5.2.4 Non-Monetary Benefits ................................................................................................... 31 6.0 PERMITS ............................................................................................................................... 33 6.1 FEDERAL PERMITS ............................................................................................................... 33 6.1.1 FERC Licensing .............................................................................................................. 33 6.1.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permits ............................................................................ 33 6.1.3 U.S. Coast Guard Permits ............................................................................................... 33 6.1.4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ........................................................................... 33 6.1.5 Federal Aviation Administration ..................................................................................... 33 6.2 STATE OF ALASKA PERMITS ................................................................................................. 33 6.2.1 Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) Permits ............................................. 33 6.2.2 Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) Permits ................................................... 34 6.2.3 Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) Permits ................................................... 35 6.2.4 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Permits .............................. 35 6.2.5 Regulatory Commission of Alaska .................................................................................... 35 6.3 LOCAL PERMITS ................................................................................................................... 36 6.3.1 Kenai Peninsula Borough ................................................................................................ 36 6.3.2 Plan Review .................................................................................................................... 36 6.3.3 Site Access ...................................................................................................................... 36 6.3.4 Utility Agreement ........................................................................................................... 36 6.3.5 Other Local Permits ......................................................................................................... 36 7.0 7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................... 37 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES .......................................................................... 37 7.2 FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE .................................................................................................... 37 7.2.1 Terrestrial Wildlife .......................................................................................................... 37 7.2.2 Fisheries .......................................................................................................................... 37 7.3 WATERANDAIRQUALITY .................................................................................................. 37 7.4 FLOOD CONTROL. ................................................................................................................ 37 7.5 WETLAND AND PROTECTED AREAS ..................................................................................... 38 7.6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES ............................................................... 38 7.7 LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................. 38 7.8 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND AVIATION ............................................................................. 38 7.9 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS RESOURCES ................................................................................. 38 7.10 MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................................................................................... 39 8.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 40 APPENDIX A -PUBLIC MEETINGS AND MEETING RECORDS .............................................. 1 NOVEMBER 2009 lD Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment LIST OF FIGURES Independence Power, LLC Figure 1-1: Location Map ....................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2-1: SES Quarterly Electrical Load 2002-2009 ......................................................... 7 Figure 2-2: SES Cost of Energy .............................................................................................. 9 Figure 3-1: Project Basin and Nearby Basins Used to Estimate Hydrology ...................... 12 Figure 3-2: Fourth of July Creek Gauge Installation ........................................................... 14 Figure 3-3: Stage-Discharge Curve for Fourth of July Creek Stream Gauge ..................... 14 Figure 3-4: Measured and Expected Discharge at Fourth of July Creek Powerhouse Site ................................................................................................. 15 Figure 3-5: Measuring Stream Discharge in Powerhouse Vicinity (April2009) ............... 16 Figure 3-6: Land Ownership in Project Vidnity .................................................................. 21 Figure 4-1: Proposed Project Layout and Penstock Route Options ................................... 24 Figure 4-2: Expected Seasonal Power Output ..................................................................... 26 Figure 4-3: View Looking Downstream at Intake Location (April2009) ........................... 28 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: Annualized SES Energy Purchases from CEA .................................................... 6 Table 3-1: Land Characterization in Project Basin .............................................................. 10 Table 3-2: Project Basin and Nearby USGS Basins .............................................................. 12 Table 3-2: Project Basin and Nearby USGS Basins .............................................................. l3 Table 3-3: Discharge Anomalies in Fourth of July Creek Discharge Record .................... 16 Table 3-4: Initial Assessment of Project Flood Hazards ...................................................... 18 Table 4-1: Comparison of Fourth of July Creek Project Configurations ............................ 23 Table 4-2: Comparison of Kasidaya Creek and Fourth of July Creek Projects .................. 25 Table 5-1: Summary of Economic Estimates for Fourth of July Creek Project .................. 30 Table A-1: Summary of Project Meetings ............................................................................. 2 NOVEMBER 2009 IV Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC ADEC ADFG ADNR AEA AVTEC CEA cfs COE DCC ED ft HDPE in IP kV kVA kW kWh LIDAR mi MW MWh ACRONYMS AND TER:'\1INOLOGY Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of Natural Resources Alaska Energy Authority Alaska Vocational Training Center Chugach Electric Association, Inc. cubic feet per second U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development foot, feet high-density polyethylene inch, inches Independence Power, LLC kilovolt, or 1,000 volts kilovolt-amp kilowatt, or 1,000 watts. One kW is the power consumed by ten 100-watt incandescent light bulbs. kilowatt-hour. The quantity of energy equal to one kilowatt (kW) expended for one hour. Light Detection and Ranging mile, miles megawatt, or 1,000 kilowatts 1,000 kWh. NOVEMBER 2009 1 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC powder blast A pressure wave of compressed air and entrained snow that can precede an avalanche down a mountain. Powder blasts can exert significant force, damaging objects well beyond the footprint of the avalanche's path and run out. RCA SES Surge-release flood USGS WRI(R) Regulatory Commission of Alaska Seward Electric System A flood caused by a creek or river becoming temporarily dammed behind an obstruction such as an avalanche or landslide. United States Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation (Report) NOVEMBER 2009 2 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE Independence Power, LLC In 2008, Independence Power, LLC was formed to develop a run-of-river hydroelectric resource identified on Fourth of July Creek in Seward, Alaska. The first step in the orderly development of Fourth of July Creek's hydroelectric potential is to complete a reconnaissance-level study and initial feasibility assessment of the resource to determine if the resource is likely suitable for a technically and economically viable renewable energy development. This reconnaissance study was funded in part by Independence Power, LLC and in part by a grant from the State of Alaska's Renewable Energy Grant Program. The purpose of this study is to present the findings of the reconnaissance-level investigations of the hydropower potential of Fourth of July Creek. 1.2 COMMUNITY BACKGROUND Fourth of July Creek is located within the city limits of Seward, Alaska. Seward is a community of approximately 2,600 residents first settled in 1903 and incorporated in 1912. It is located on Resurrection Bay along the southerly-facing gulf coast of the Kenai Peninsula. Seward is the southern terminus of the Seward Highway and the Alaska Railroad. It is a major shipping port for Alaska, and is also served by a state-owned airport. Seward's climate is maritime, and is characterized by frequent precipitation, relatively cool summers with typical temperatures of 49 to 63"F, and relatively warm winters with typical temperatures of 17 to 38°F. Normal annual precipitation is 66 inches of rainfall, and 80 inches of snowfall. Seward has a diverse economy. The Alaska SeaLife Center, Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC), Spring Creek Correctional Facility, Usibelli Coal Shipment Facility, Seward Shipyard, and Kenai Fjords National Park all contribute significantly to the local economy. More generally, tourism, commercial fishing, and government are also major contributors to the local economy. 1 1.3 PROPOSED ENERGY RESOURCE The proposed energy resource is a run-of-river hydropower resource located along Fourth of July Creek. The resource location is indicated on Figure 1-1. Development of the resource would consist of: 1 Background data from the DCCED's Alaska Community Database. NOVEMBER 2009 3 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC );;> An intake structure, which may include a dam up to 40 feet tall, located on Fourth of July Creek at an elevation of about 750 feet (dam spillway elevation of 790 feet), which is at the head of a prominent canyon located about three river- miles above tidewater; ;.. A 5,100 to 6,100 foot long, 48-inch diameter penstock to convey 120 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water; );;> A powerhouse with 5.4 MW of installed generating capacity located at an elevation of about 120 feet, located near the outlet of the same canyon; );;> A tailrace to return project waters to Fourth of July Creek; );;> A transmission line to connect the powerhouse to the City of Seward's electrical system; );;> Access roads and trails; and > Appurtenant facilities. The resource is estimated to provide approximately 21,700 megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy in a typical water year. This equates to roughly l/3'd of the Seward Electric System (SES)' s annual energy requirements. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES IP is unaware of any existing studies of hydropower development on Fourth of July Creek. There are several other existing studies that are relevant to the proposed development, which are summarized below. ;.. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Resources Investigation 81-21 (WRI 81-21). Hydrological investigation of the Fourth of July Creek alluvial fan area to identify suitable water supplies to support industrial development of the alluvial fan area. This report provides some instantaneous discharge data for Fourth of July Creek and information about the local hydrology in the alluvial area. The area covered by WRI 81-21 is downstream of the proposed powerhouse site. );;> USGS WRI 87-4728. Analysis of the cause, extent, and damage from a major storm event that dumped 15.05 inches of rain in Seward in a 24-hour period over October 9-11, 1986. The USGS characterized this storm event as a 100-year or greater event. Because of the magnitude of this storm event, this report provides very valuable analysis and data on expected peak discharges, mass soil movement, and sediment flows that any hydropower development along Fourth of July Creek would be designed to withstand. );;> A feasibility study for the development of an industrial park at Fourth of July Creek prepared for the City of Seward by Arctic Environmental Engineers in March 1979. NOVEMBER 2009 4 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Figure 1-1: Location Map FAIRBANKS Independence Power, LLC PRO..JI!CT VICINITY MAP 0 2 E3 E3 MILES NOVEMBER 2009 5 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC 2.0 EXISTING ENERGY SYSTEM 2.1 COMMUNITY ENERGY PROFILE The city of Seward and surrounding areas are served by SES. SES is connected to the railbelt electrical grid, and imports nearly all of its electrical energy from Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (CEA). Table 2-1 summarizes SES' annual electrical energy purchases from CEA. Note 1: Note 2: Note 3: Note4: Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Table 2·1: Annualized SES Energy Purchases from CEA CEA Energy Generation and Purchases for SES (MWh) 1 61,334 62,959 2 64,204 65,028 60,530 3 65,911 65,524 65,910 4 Data are compiled from CEA quarterly tariff filings with the RCA. Data are unavailable for second quarter of 2002. The average of 2002 and 2004 second quarter energy sales is used to estimate 2003 sales. A 26-day transmission outage in February 2006 required SES to self-generate. Data for 2nd half of 2009 are CEA projections. 2.2 ELECTRIC UTILITY ORGANIZATION The City of Seward owns and operates the SES under Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 102, issued by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). As a municipally-owned electric utility, SES is exempt from RCA economic regulation pursuant to AS 42.05.711(b). 2.3 GENERATION SYSTEM SES normally purchases 100% of its electricity from CEA, which includes SES' share of output from the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. SES maintains six diesel generators for backup generation when energy from CEA is unavailable. These include two World War II-era Alco generators installed after the 1964 earthquake. These systems are very old, and increasingly difficult to maintain and repair. Seward received funds to replace these aged generators in 2009. 2 Fiscal Year 2009 Capital Budget TPS Report 50617. Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development. NOVEMBER 2009 6 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 2.4 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS Independence Power, LLC SES maintains a 69-kV transmission line from the interconnection point with the CEA system into downtown Seward. There is also a 69-kV line that runs from Seward over to the Fourth of July Creek industrial area. The terminal substation for this line is located approximately two miles from the proposed hydroelectric powerhouse site. These transmission lines are in good condition, although portions of the line from CEA in the Kenai Mountains are located in avalanche hazard areas. An avalanche in February 2006 damaged this transmission line, resulting in loss of service for 26 days, forcing SES to rely on its diesel generators to provide electrical service to customers. 2.5 LOAD PROFILE SES' load profile is relatively constant seasonally, and has been relatively constant over the past several years. SES' quarterly load data are presented in Figure 2-1. It is expected that the energy and power from the Fourth of July Creek project can be completely consumed by existing SES system demand. Figure 2-1: SES Quarterly Electrical Load 2002-2009 18,000 9 --.....--r---r--r---r--r-- r--_-r--r--1--~ --~ r--" ---r--~ 1-- -r---~ r--~ ~ ~ ,. ~ ~ ~ n r--~ ~ ~ ' I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ r-~ ~ ~ r-" r- 16,000 8 14,000 ~ 12,000 "tt ~ ~ ~ 10,000 ...l til J.o.l til 8,000 j & 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Notes: SES Energy Load (MWh) -sES Average Power Load (MW) 1 0 Quarter These data are compiled from CEA quarterly tariff filings with the RCA. See Table 2-1 notes regarding second quarter 2006 and the second half of 2009. The data is CEA's combined energy generation and purchases for SES, reduced by 3% to account for CEA system losses that would not apply to local generation within the SES system. NOVEMBER 2009 7 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 2.6 FUTURE LOAD PROJECTIONS Independence Power, LLC Because SES has a reliable transmission connection with the railbelt, the potential load served by this project is considerably larger than this project. Should the project produce more energy than SES can use, excess energy can be exported to other railbelt utilities. 2. 7 PLANNED UPGRADES SES is in the process of installing new diesel generation to provide back-up electricity for the SES system. Planned upgrades on the remainder of the railbelt energy grid are not applicable to this project. 2.8 ENERGY MARKET SES is the logical customer for the electrical output of this project. More generally, the potential energy market for this project is the railbelt energy grid. The railbelt energy grid's electrical demand is considerably larger than the output of this project, and this project's output could be consumed by any of the six railbelt utilities. SES has contracted with CEA for energy supply. Under the contract, SES is obligated to purchase 100% of its energy needs from CEA, which includes SES' share of the output of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project near Homer. Under this contract, SES' electrical supply is interruptible with notice from CEA, and is also subject to outages on the transmission line from CEA. During such events, SES switches to diesel generators located in Seward. In exchange for interruptible service, SES only pays the direct costs incurred for its energy needs, and does not normally pay CEA for generation capacity. This contract is in effect through December 31, 2011, with two automatic five-year renewal periods to 2016 and 2021. To opt out of automatic contract renewal at the end of 2011, either party must provide notice by December 31, 2010. SES' cost of energy from CEA from 2002 through 2009 is presented in Figure 2-2. The energy costs presented in Figure 2-2 include energy CEA purchases on SES' behalf from the Bradley Lake project. Figure 2-2 does not include SES' costs for local diesel generation because self generation comprises a very small portion of SES' overall energy supply. NOVEMBER 2009 8 :a i Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Figure 2-2: SES Cost of Energy $0.080 $0.070 $0.060 $0 .050 Independence Power, LLC ~ $0.040 u ~ Qj ~ $0.030 ' $0.020 ~ -+-Ac tu a l SES En ergy Cos t a t Delivery ($/kWh) -A-Predicted SES Energy Cost at Delivery (cents/kWh) $0.010 $0.000+-------~-------,-------.--------.-------~-------r-------,------~ Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-OS Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Date Notes 1. Actual and predicted SES energy costs are compiled from CEA quarterly tariff filings with the RCA . Actual energy costs are CEA's reported oosts for energy generation and purchase, increased by 3% to reflect cost at SES delivery instead of cost at CEA generation. NOVEMBER 2009 9 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 3.0 PROPOSED ENERGY RESOURCE 3.1 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION 3.1.1 Project Drainage Basin Independence Power, LLC Fourth of July Creek is a steep-gradient mountain creek that originates from small alpine glaciers in the Chugach Mountains along the gulf coast of the Kenai Peninsula. The creek above the proposed intake site drains a basin 9.4 square miles in area, with elevations ranging from 750 feet to 4,883 feet. This basin is generally oriented facing the northwest, and is ringed by peaks ranging from approximately 2,600 to 4,883 feet in height. Land classification in the basin above the proposed intake location is summarized in Table 3-1. Table 3-1: Land Characterization in Project Basin Classification Glaciated area Barren ground (alpine and ·-~ood plain ar~-~~L Forested I vegetated Lake/water Area (square miles) 3.6 4.2 1.1 0.03 (-17 acres) Percentage of Basin 40.6% 47.0% 12.1% 0.3% Based upon comparison of USGS 1:63,360 series topographic maps (ca. 1975 for the project vicinity) and more recent aerial imagery (ca. 2005), the land classifications in Table 3-1 in particular the extents of forested and glaciated areas have not changed significantly over the last 30 years. The project vicinity is shown in Figure 1-1. 3.1.2 Project Creek The headwaters of Fourth of July Creek are short, high-gradient alpine streams emanating from the termini of multiple small glaciers. Typical gradients along these headwater creeks are in the range of 15 to 50%. As these creeks converge along the upper valley floor to form Fourth of July Creek, the gradient drops to about 3 to 8%. The creek braids along the valley floor for about one mile, actively meandering across a well-defined flood plain 200 to 600 feet wide. The proposed project intake site is at the lower end of this braided reach of the creek, where it becomes confined between rock walls that are about 50 feet tall and channel the creek through a notch about 20 feet wide. Below this notch, the creek remains confined within an incised rock canyon for one mile, averaging a gradient of 12%. NOVEMBER 2009 10 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC The proposed powerhouse site is near the lower end of this canyon. Below the powerhouse site, the creek emerges onto a large alluvial fan and joins with Godwin Creek, which drains Godwin Glacier to the immediate north of the project basin. Before the early 1980s, the combined flow of these creeks actively meandered across this alluvial fan the remaining two miles to Resurrection Bay. The gradient across this alluvial fan varies from 1 to 6%, decreasing towards the coast. Since the lower alluvial fan was developed into an industrial park by the City of Seward in the early 1980s, Fourth of July Creek has been confined to a channel along the southern edge of the fan by a series of earth and rip-rap levees. 3.2 HYDROLOGY The project area has a maritime climate, and is exposed to frequent storms coming in from the Gulf of Alaska. Annual precipitation in the project basin is estimated at 40 to 100 inches annually, with the higher values probable in the alpine areas. While the project basin drains to the northwest away from prevailing on-shore flows, taller peaks on the northerly rim of the basin likely induce precipitation into the basin, compensating for any rain shadow effects caused by peaks along the basin's southeastern perimeter. Existing information about Fourth of July Creek's hydrology is available from: ~ A USGS report on major flooding that occurred around Seward in 1986. This report provides information about the cause and magnitude of floods on Fourth of July Creek. ~ USGS stream gauges in the region. These provide guidance on the expected seasonal discharge at Fourth of July Creek. ~ Engineering reports for the development of the Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park. These provide some discrete flow measurements on Fourth of July Creek. These data indicate that the creek has good hydropower potential. IP installed a gauge at Fourth of July Creek in 2008 to directly measure discharge, but has also synthesized expected hydrology for the project in order to conduct reconnaissance-level evaluations of the project. Expected hydrology was synthesized using USGS stream flow data for three nearby basins: the Nellie Juan River, Resurrection River, and Lowell Creek. The average daily median flows for these three basins were combined and scaled to the Fourth of July Creek basin to create expected average daily flows for the project. The relative location and size of these basins compared to the project basin are shown in Figure 3-1. Basin parameters and gauge information are summarized in Table 3-2. NOVEMBER 2009 11 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Figure 3-1: Project Basin and Nearby Basins Used to Estimate Hydrology 0 12 F3 F3 NOVEMBER 2009 12 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Table 3-2: Pro!ect Basin and Nearby USGS Basins USGS Basin Site Latitude Longitude Begin End Years of Location Size Elevation Gauge ID ~s9 mi) (ft) (OMS) (OMS) Date Date Data Project Basin 9.4 750 60°05'24" 149°16'41" (above Intake) Project Basin 10.0 100 60°05'53" 149°18'12" 9/26/08 Current 1.0 J<l!'()Y~~1.l!2_e} Nellie Juan 15237000 133 90 60°25'20" 148°43'30" 12/1/60 7/7/65 4.6 River ·- Resurrection 15237700 169 20 60°08'30" 149°25'00" 10/1/64 6/30/68 3.7 River ·----- Lowell Creek 15238500 4.02 5 60°05'55" 149°26'35" 5/1/65 9/30/94 6.4 The expected discharge model will be validated and supplemented with actual stream discharge being measured at Fourth of July Creek. These combined data will be used to assess project feasibiJity. The stream gauge IP installed in 2008 consists of a Druck 0 to 5 psi pressure transducer coupled to a battery powered data recorder. IP regularly visits the stream gauge to perform maintenance on the hardware and to collect manual discharge measurements to calibrate the installation. The gauging location was selected because it is easily accessible, appears to have a stable stream bed profile and section, is considered unlikely to experience significant subsurface flow, and is considered representative of flows at the intake site. The gauged basin is 10.0 square miles in area, compared with a 9.4 square mile drainage above the proposed intake site. Figure 3-2 is a picture of the installed stream gauge, Figure 3-3 presents the stage- discharge curve developed for the gauge site, and Figure 3-4 presents the calculated discharge in Fourth of July Creek over the period of record. The expected discharge is overlaid on the measured discharge in Figure 3-4 for comparison. The expected and measured discharge agree very well. There are six noteworthy discharge anomalies in the measured discharge data on Figure 3-4. These events and their probable causes are summarized in Table 3-3. NOVEMBER 2009 13 ~ ~ .. -5 .:!1 0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Figure 3-2: Fourth of July Creek Gauge Installation Figure 3-3: Stage-Discharge Curve for Fourth of July Creek Stream Gauge y • 16.109x3 + 151.16x2 + 503.93x + 601.4 R 2 ~ 1 0.0 +-------r-----~------~-------r------~------r-----~------~-------r----~ -3.50 -3.30 -3 .10 -2.90 -2.70 -2.50 -2 .30 -2.10 -1.90 -1.70 -1.50 Stage (ft) NOVEMBER 2009 14 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Figure 3-4: Measured and Expected Discharge at Fourth of July Creek Powerhouse Site 400 -Expected Discharge at Intake -Calrulated Discharge at Intake 350 e Measured Di~e 0 I See Table 3-2 for event description.! 300 250 i f200 A Zi 150 D E 100 50 0 9{1/fl8 10/6/08 11/10/fl8 12/15108 l/19!ffJ 2{13lffJ 3{J(JiffJ 514109 NOVEMBER 2009 G Cn.-oek section at gauge WIJ. changed by late uly 2009 flood. curve is 7/13/fYJ 8/17/f» 9/21/fYJ 10/26/f» 15 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Table 3-3: Discharge Anomalies in Fourth of July Creek Discharge Record Graph Key (Fig 3-5) A B c D E F G Dates of Discharge Anomaly October 10 to 13, 2008 December 13 to 19, 2008 December 27, 2008 to January 8, 2009 January 14 to 20, 2009 January 31 to February 13, 2009 July 5 to 16, 2009 July 20 to 30, 2009 Discussion Actual flood event. Eight inches of rain recorded in Seward over four days. Likely snow at higher elevations. Gauge and/or creek section affected by ice formation due to cold snap (nightly temperatures below l0°F). Gauge and/or creek section affected by ice formation due to cold snap (nightly temperatures below O"F). Actual flood event. Six inches of rain recorded in Seward over seven days. Likely snow at higher elevations. Gauge and/or creek section affected by ice formation due to cold snap (nightly temperatures below O"F). Actual flood event. No precipitation, but day time temperatures in the 70s and 80s oF accelerated snowpack and glacier melt. Actual flood event. 5.2 inches of rain recorded in Seward over 13 days. This flood changed the creek section at the stream gauge, requiring a new stage-discharge curve to be developed. Temperature and precipitation data compiled from National Weather Service station logs for Seward, Alaska (Station #50-8377). Figure 3-5: Measuring Stream Discharge in Powerhouse Vicinity (April 2009) ' ..... 16 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 3.2.1 Flood Potential Independence Power, LLC The project is not subject to coastal flooding hazards from storm surges, waves, or tsunami. The project is subject to flooding on Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek. Flooding may come from two causes -instantaneous surface runoff of precipitation and surge-release flooding caused by landslides or avalanches that temporarily block a stream. Both flooding mechanisms occur on Fourth of July and Godwin Creeks. Previous floods of note include: };> A flood on September 15-16, 1982, with an estimated peak discharge of 4,700 cfs at the levees. This estimated discharge represents the combined discharge from Fourth of July and Godwin Creeks. The USGS estimated this flood event has a 10-to 25-year recurrence interval. 3 » The USGS estimated the October 10 to 11, 1986 storm event to have a 100-year recurrence interval. Normalized instantaneous flood discharges from this storm for basins in the Seward vicinity varied from 300 to 1,000 cfs per square mile. Seward-vicinity basins similar in size to the project basin experienced estimated peak instantaneous discharges of 500 to 600 cfs per square mile. Based on these data, the 100-year peak flood discharge at the project intake site is estimated at 5,600 cfs. 3 » A surge-release flood occurred on Godwin Creek during the October 1986 storm with an estimated peak discharge just upstream from the alluvial fan of 30,000 cfs. The USGS characterized this flood flow as having a velocity of 16 feet per second, width of 170 feet, and depth of 12 feet. The levees were overtopped and severely damaged, but successfully confined this flood. The 1986 storm caused surge-release floods of similar magnitude in several basins around Seward. 3 USGS analysis of the Fourth of July Creek basin indicates the presence of perched glacial deposits capable of producing surge-release floods like the 1986 Godwin Creek flood. Conditions for such floods to occur are present in the canyon between the intake and powerhouse and also upstream of the intake location. In addition to flood hazards from Fourth of July Creek, floods on Godwin Creek could endanger the powerhouse, site access, and power lines. Flood hazards based on these data are summarized in Table 3-4. WRlR 87-4278. USGS; Anchorage, Alaska; 1988. NOVEMBER 2009 17 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Table 3-4: Initial Assessment of Project Flood Hazards Location I Design Flood Feature Flow (cfs) Intake 20,000 ~------·--------- Powerhouse ~q!QQO Access Road 30,000 Power Line 30,000 3.3 GEOTECHNICAL Recurrence Interval (years) 100 100 100 100 Basis ... 1,_600 cfsj s~q:~:.~ll~e~rele~se flood up_~th of JE.!Y: ____ _ 1,600 cfs/ sq. mi. ~ll.!Se-release flood 4th of 2,200 cfs/ sq. mL~l1r_g~r~~~ase_t1()<Jcl.l11'§odwin. 2,200 cfs/ sq. mi. surge-release flood up Godwin. Geology in the project area can be generalized into two groups. Steep mountainous areas characterized by shallow or exposed bedrock, and flatter or valley bottom areas characterized by a variety of fluvial and glacial deposits. Bedrock areas in the project vicinity generally consist of alternating units of moderately metamorphosed greywacke and phyllite. Greywacke is a sedimentary rock comprised of sand-sized grains with a fair amount of fine grains. Phyllite is a low grade metamorphic rock derived from silty shale. The bedrock in the general Seward vicinity was deposited 70 to 90 million years ago. The bedrock in the project vicinity has a foliation strike about north-south, with a dip of 85 degrees. 4 Geotechnical investigations for the industrial park development included borings and seismic profiling of the valley area. Glacial deposits in the project area include lateral moraines of loose silt, sand, and gravel, with minor amounts of clay, cobbles, and boulders. The Fourth of July Creek valley floor is composed of coarse sands and gravels with some silt. This material is coarser, including cobbles and boulders towards the head of the valley, and finer towards Resurrection Bay. Test borings indicate alluvial depths in excess of 30 to 50 feet and a consistent absence of permafrost in the valley floor. There is a large outcrop of sandstone exposed in the middle of the valley, located near the dikes upstream of the prison facility. The alluvial fan below the proposed powerhouse site would be used for access to the project and also for a transmission line from the powerhouse to the existing SES system located on the lower alluvial fan. Available information and site review indicate that conventional design and construction methods will be appropriate for these improvements. Based upon site review, the powerhouse site is comprised of alluvial or glacial deposits over bedrock. Site investigations will be necessary once a specific powerhouse site is Information is condensed from Fourth of july Creek Industrial Development Feasibility Study, Arctic Environmental Engineers, March 1979. Also: Flood of 1986 at Seward Alaska: WRIR 87- 4278, USGS, 1988. NOVEMBER 2009 18 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC identified to determine the presence, depth, and quality of bedrock. It may be desirable to anchor the powerhouse foundation to bedrock if suitable rock is present at the powerhouse site. Based upon site review, both penstock routes are comprised of a combination of shallow bedrock, organic soils, and mineral soils. Shallow bedrock areas will require ripping or blasting to establish a bench for construction and access. The greywackes and phyllites found in the area do not present unique challenges for this type of construction. Construction in areas of organic or mineral soils can be completed using conventional methods. The intake site consists of an incised rock notch roughly 50 feet deep by 20 feet wide. The exposed rock on the cliff walls appears competent and may be suitable for a concrete darn. Geotechnical investigations and engineering analysis are necessary to determine what type of darn is best for the intake site. 3.3.1 Mass Soil Movement The steep slopes, perched glacial deposits, and heavy rains characteristic of the project area are known to cause mass soil movements within the project drainage. These slides generally occur when intense rainfall causes glacial deposits on steep bedrock slopes to fail and collapse. When the resulting landslide impounds a creek or river, the surge- release floods discussed in Section 3.2.1 can result. Mass bedrock slabbing or slides are less common owing to the near-vertical strike of bedrock in the project area. In the 1986 flood, soil failures in the mountains around Seward principally occurred on slopes greater than 32 degrees (63% grade) in areas of shallow (a few inches to two feet) till soils underlain by bedrock 5 • These conditions occur in the Fourth of July Creek basin, but not in proximity to the intake, penstock, or powerhouse locations. 3.3.2 Avalanche A number of well-defined avalanche chutes and hazard zones are evident in the immediate project vicinity. Avalanches along the south side of the valley have been observed with runouts of 200 feet from the foot of the mountains, and significant powder blasts out to 400 feet. 6 Avalanche hazard areas will be avoided by appropriate routing and positioning of project features. WRIR 87-4278, page 6. Fourth of July Creek Industrial Development Feasibility Study, Arctic Environmental Engineers, March 1979 NOVEMBER 2009 19 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 3.4 PROJECT LAND Independence Power, LLC The intake, penstock, and powerhouse sites are all located on land owned by the State of Alaska. Power line and project access routes are primarily on land owned by the City of Seward. These routes would also cross state land near the powerhouse site. There are no federal or private land holdings in the project footprint. Land ownership is indicated on Figure 3-6. The project area is zoned by the City of Seward as 'Resource Management'. Responsible hydroelectric development is consistent with the description of the Resource Management district in the Seward City Code: "SCC 15.05.025(b)(13): Resource Management (RM): Lands which are generally undeveloped and cannot be precisely zoned due to inadequate information on the extension of public services and utilities; the suitability of the land to support commercial, residential, industrial or public uses, and other possible environmental considerations." 3.4.1 Site Control Requirements IP will require legal access to the project site across City of Seward land. There is a 100- foot wide section line easement between sections 8 and 17 that may be appropriate for part of the power line and site access road, but site conditions will require some deviations from this easement. Authorization can come in the form of platting a right- of-way or access easement to the site, or executing some other form of access agreement with the City of Seward. IP will require authorization to develop the project on state land. Consultations with ADNR indicate this will consist of easements for the penstock, access, and power line routes, and leases for the intake and powerhouse sites. NOVEMBER 2009 20 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Figure 3-6: Land Ownership in Project Vicinity LEGEND ~ STATE LAND 1. UNHATCHED AREAS ARE OWNED OF' CITY OF SEWARD UNLESS ANNOTATED OTHERWISE. CHUGACH NAnONAL 2. PROPERTY LINES ARE APPROXIMATE AND FOR FOREST BOUNDARY ILLUSTRATlVE ANO PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. SEWARD CITY LIMITS _,.,..I'..,. PENSTOCK/ACCESS _,-.. • .., POWER/ ACCESS J. LAND STATUS AND OWNERSHIP IS BASED UPON REVIEW Of STATE STATUS PlATS, RECORDED PlATS, AND OTHER PUBLIC INFORMATION. LAND STATUS AND OWNERSHIP SHOWN ON THIS MAP IS SUITABL£ FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. INFORMATION ON THIS MAP SHOULD BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO USE FOR OTHER PURPOSES. 0 ~5 1 E3 E3 4. t.tAP EXTENTS ARE WITHIN SEWARD MERIDIAN, T1 S, Rl E. 19 7~ I I r . : /1--·--·-~-·~-~ . I I 1·~-....--~ I .--~-4C-t 20 NOVEMBER 2009 5 / : 4 / / INTAKE LOCATION ' ., .. 21 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESIGN 4.1 ANALYSIS OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Independence Power, LLC Several access and transmission corridors to the project are possible from the existing roads and transmission lines in the project area. The preferred route will depend on site conditions, land status, technical and economic factors. The topography of the project area creates well-defined intake and powerhouse sites. A variety of intake configurations may be viable. Defining a preferred intake configuration will require additional field investigations and engineering analysis. The type of intake will in part be determined by the penstock routing -there are two general penstock routes that warrant consideration. One penstock route (Route' A') requires an approximately 40-foot tall dam at the intake location to provide sufficient elevation at the project intake to cross a saddle and head around the north side of a hill to avoid steep sidehilling along the canyon. This route is about 6,100 feet long, rejoining Fourth of July Creek at the powerhouse site just below the canyon. An alternate route (Route 'B') can utilize a shorter intake structure, following the north side of the creek along the rim of the canyon for about 5,100 feet down to the powerhouse. For Route B to use a shorter dam or intake weir, significant rock benching along the upper 1,000 to 1,500 feet of the canyon would be required, or the penstock would need to be hung from the canyon walls. Route B includes about 500 feet of grades near 50%. Because of the steep grades and location in the upper canyon, separate penstock and access routes will be necessary for a significant portion of Route B. Additionally, Route B will likely have greater erosion potential than Route A. Project parameters for the two different penstock routes and key route considerations are summarized in Table 4-1. Penstock routes are shown in Figure 4-1. NOVEMBER 2009 22 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Table 4-1: Comparison of Fourth of July Creek Project Configurations Parameter ~~_t_a}<e g~~'-'ati~~~(ft) Powerhouse Elevation (ft) Gross Head (ft) Net Head (ft) Penstock Length (ft) an'!_diameter (inches) .!2~~~Fl~~.(cfs)_ Installed Capacity (kW) J:'}~~_!.C::~p~~~ty £ <l_C!()r .. !"!!~i1!1_~~~nnual Ou!pu!J~W) Net Annual EE~ GenerationQ<Wll.) ~ Transmission Length (mi) Penstock Rou!e Description _.J:>enstock Lengt~~~ . ~a?<i.!l"I.~J!l: g!.a~e Intake Discussion NOVEMBER 2009 Penstock Route 'A' with Dam 790' 120' 670' 636' 6,100' of 48" pipe 120 5,400 kW 47% 240kW 21,700,000 kWh Penstock Route 'B' without Dam 750' 120' 630' 602' 5,100' of 48" pipe 120 5,100kW 47% 230kW 20,500,000 kWh 2 miles 2 miles Around knob Along rim ofcanyon ~ 6,100' 5,100' 20% 50% 40 foot tall dam 15 foot tall structure --·~·· ~· -·-· .... Route requires less sidehilling in rock, fewer steep grades, less work near the creek and along steep slopes. Route A may encounter some marshy areas. Route B is shorter, but likely involves more rock work, steeper grades, more clearing, and greater erosion potential. 23 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC NOVEMBER 2009 tiOI.ES; 1.20-.. ETER CONTOURS ARE FROM USGS 1 :25,000 SCALE QUAD MAP SEWARD A.-7 SE. ELEVATIONS ARE LABElED IN FEET. 2. MAP BACKGROUND IS AERIAL IMAGERY FROM AEROMETRIC, INC. DATED 6/17/95. 0 600 1200 E3 E3 FEET 24 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 4.2 RECOMMENDED PROJECT Independence Power, LLC Defining the optimal project configuration will require additional engineering studies. At this stage in project development, penstock Route A-around the knob, is considered a superior route. A site plan showing the recommended project is shown in Figure 4-1. The project's overall configuration and size is quite similar with the Kasidaya Creek Project recently completed by Alaska Power and Telephone, Inc. near Skagway, Alaska. These two projects are compared in Table 4-2. Table 4-2: Comparison of Kasidaya Creek and Fourth of July Creek Projects Attribute . II!~ t(ll!~<f ~CIP.t:ci ty Op~rational Mode Average An~~al<?utp~~--~-~ Gross Head Intake Structure J::Iy<f_raulic fapacity Penstock Leng!~ . Penstock Diameter Powerhouse Capital Cost Capital Cost per Installed kW Fourth of July Creek (Proposed, Route A) 5.4MW Run of River 21,700MWh 670ft 100 ft long x 40 ft tall 120 cfs 6,100 ft 48 inches TBD $10.8 to $21.6 million (!econnaissance estimate) $2,000 to $4,000 per kW 4.3 ANNUAL ENERGY PRODUCTION Kasidaya Creek {Commissioned 2009, for comparison) 3.0MW Run of River 537ft 70 ft long x 16 ft tall reinforced concrete 88 cfs 4,000 ft 42 inches 24' x 48' Metal Buildii!g__ $10 million $3,330 per k W Discharge data collected to date at Fourth of July Creek supports continued use of the expected hydrology developed from adjacent USGS-gauged river basins for project analysis. Based upon the expected hydrology and measured gross head of the project, average annual net energy production is estimated at 21,700 MWh. For perspective, this is approximately 1/3'd of the annual energy SES purchases from CEA. Expected seasonal energy generation is shown in Figure 4-2. NOVEMBER 2009 25 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC 5,000 1,000 Figure 4-2: Expected Seasonal Power Output -Expected Power Generation (From Hyd ro logy Mo d e l) -Ex p ec ted Power Gene ra ti on (From 200 8-09 Dis charge Data) 0+-----r----.-----r----~----~----r----.-----r----,-----~--~~~ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Date 4.4 CONCEPTUAL SYSTEM DESIGN 4.4.1 Site Access Two site access points are possible. These are (1) the City of Seward's quarry or (2) the road leading from the City's water wells east past the north perimeter of the Spring Creek Correctional Facility to the northeastern end of the levee system. Access from either point could traverse north along the levee to the section line between sections 8 and 17; and then follow the section line to the powerhouse location. The overall length of the access road would be about 1.2 miles from the quarry or 0.7 miles from the levee. Either route would be starting from restricted-access roads on City of Seward property or easements, requiring IP to coordinate access with the City of Seward and/or the correctional facility. Design of the road will need to consider the flooding characteristics of both Godwin and Fourth of July Creeks. Because there is a high probability for both of these creeks to shift their course during the design life of this project, it may be appropriate to structure the access agreement with the City of Seward for a low-impact road constructed from local material that can be readily abandoned, repaired, or rerouted after flood events. There is an ample supply of suitable aggregates on the flood plain for such road construction. NOVEMBER 2009 26 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 4.4.2 Power Line Independence Power, LLC Approximately two miles of new power line are needed to connect the powerhouse with the existing 69 kV line along Nash Road. This line may be an overhead line similar to the existing lines in the area. The new line would likely start at the existing substation at the comer of Nash and Mustang Roads. The power line route through the existing industrial park, correctional facility, and quarry developments will need to be coordinated with existing land uses and property owners. Two potential routes are shown on Figure 3-7. The last 3,000 feet of the power line route near the powerhouse traverses the active alluvial fan of Godwin and Fourth of July Creeks. Avalanche hazards near the mountains require that this line be located out on the alluvial fan where it is exposed to flood hazards. During the design life of the project, any alignment through this area has a good chance of being inundated by floods and may be subject to inundation, flood velocity, and erosion hazards. The most practical way to mitigate for these hazards is to design the approximately 8 to 12 power poles that will be located in this area to withstand the flood hazards. Because of the flood hazards in this area, which includes significant scour potential, burying this part of the power line is not practical. 4.4.3 Powerhouse The powerhouse will be located on a hill above the alluvial fan at the lower end of the Fourth of July Creek canyon at an elevation of about 120 feet. This will provide flood protection from both Fourth of July and Godwin Creeks. The exact siting and elevation of the powerhouse should include analysis of potential flood stages at the powerhouse site from Godwin and Fourth of July Creeks. A small parking area will be located at the powerhouse. Lighting will be installed at the powerhouse. The powerhouse is proposed to house two Pelton-type impulse turbines. Each turbine would be a two-jet machine with a rated capacity of 2.7 MW. The total installed capacity of the project would be 5.4 MW. Each turbine would drive a synchronous generator. The powerhouse would also house controls, switchgear, and associated equipment necessary for operation of the project. 4.4.4 Penstock The penstock (using Route 'A') will be 48 inches in diameter and approximately 6,100 feet long. The penstock will generally be co-located with the access trail to the intake. It will be buried where practical. Where shallow bedrock or other adverse conditions preclude burial, the penstock will be built above grade on pipe supports. Power and communications will be installed to the intake to operate and control the intake systems. These will be installed adjacent to the penstock. NOVEMBER 2009 27 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 4.4.5 Intake Independence Power, LLC The intake will be located in a bedrock notch at the upper end of the Fourth of July Creek Canyon. This notch is approximately 20 to 60 feet wide and 50 feet tall, and accommodates the entire flow of Fourth of July Creek. Visual inspection of the notch suggests that it may be suitable for a 40-foot tall concrete dam. Geotechnical investigations would be necessary to confirm this and guide design of such a dam. If a concrete dam is not feasible at this site, a rock-fill dam with concrete faces may warrant consideration. Utility dispatchers with SES and/or CEA would have the ability to dispatch the project. Project controls would be automated, and would allow for authorized remote access, interrogation, and control of the project works. 4.6 MAJOR REMAINING TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.6.1 Hydrology IP has collected approximately one year of discharge data at Fourth of July Creek. Continued stream gauging is appropriate to improve the characterization of Fourth of NOVEMBER 2009 28 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC July Creek's hydrology. This will be useful in designing the project for flood events and sizing the project. 4.6.2 Geotechnical Geotechnical investigations are needed to identify a specific powerhouse site, determine feasibility and design parameters for a dam at the intake site, and to determine the extent and nature of rock work needed for site access and penstock construction. 4.6.3 Topographic Survey A detailed topography survey of the project area will aid in locating and designing the access road, transmission line, powerhouse site, intake structure, penstock route, and other project features. Given the extent and rugged nature of the area involved, a LIDAR survey may be cost-effective. 4.6.4 Penstock Routing Two penstock routes are apparent. At this time, Route A around the hill, appears more favorable than Route B along the canyon. Further technical and economic analysis will determine which route is superior. 4.6.5 Intake Configuration The intake configuration will depend on the outcome of technical and economic analyses of the intake and penstock design options. If Route 'A' is preferred, as assumed in this study, then the intake will consist of an approximately 40-foot tall dam creating an impoundment approximately three acres in area. Intake works would be located at one end of the dam or built into the adjacent shore. Intake works would filter out any materials deleterious to the project works. NOVEMBER 2009 29 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 5.0 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Independence Power, LLC Insufficient information exists to prepare an accurate financial profile of this project. Unknowns on the project hydrology, geology, permit conditions, financing arrangements, contractual arrangements, operating costs, and other factors preclude developing detailed project financial projections at this time. The next step in development of this project is a feasibility study to provide answers for these unknowns. Based upon existing information and reconnaissance activities, it appears probable that the project can be developed for an installed cost in the range of $2,500 to $4,000 per k W of installed capacity. For the proposed 5.4 MW installation, the total installed cost would be in the range of $13.5 to 21.6 million. Depending on how the project is financed, the project's benefit-cost ratio ranges from 0.9 to 2.7, and energy from the project could cost from $0.04 to $0.12 per kWh. This compares favorably with projected energy costs for other proposed energy sources for the railbelt, and also compares favorably with long-term forecasts for gas-fired electrical generation. Table 5-1 summarizes economic projections for the project. Assumptions used to generate the estimates in Table 5-1 are discussed on the following pages. Table 5-1: Summary of Economic Estimates for Fourth of July Creek Project Item PROJECT COSTS Probable Installed Cost -c--•·--"""~--~·-----·---•-• Est. Annual Cost~_(O,iyf~R &r_R, etcJ(5Q years) Est. Annual Debt Service (30 years) ESTIMATED PRESENT VALUE OF PROJECT COSTS PROJECT BENEFITS Est. Displaced Energy Generation (kWh I year) Est. Wholese~!e Cost of Energy (A voided Cost) Es!. Annual Value of Displaced Fuel ($/year) Estimated Present Value of Displaced Fuel (50 years) Est. Net Gain in CEA/SES Grid Efficie11cy Est. Reduction in Grid Energy Losses (kWh/yr) Est. Annual Value of Energy Est. Present Value of Improved Grid Efficiency (50 years) Est. Annual Revenue from Environmental Attributes Est. Present Value of Environmental Attributes (50 years) Estimated Present Value of Project Benefits (50 years) Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio (Energy Only) Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio (All Attributes) ESTIMATED COST OF ENERGY($ per kWh) NOVEMBER 2009 Low Range $13,500,000 • •••-••••~---~·•••-•.-••rn~•~•• $285,000 $600,000 $19,000,000 High Range $21,600,000 $785,000 ~--~--~------"·~~~-- $1,900,000 $49,100,000 21,700,000 kWh/ year $0.077 /kWh $1,670,000fyr $42,500,000 4% 866,000 kWh/yr $66,300 I yr $1,700,000 $0 $434,000 $0 $8,500,000 $44,200,000 $52,700,000 2.3 0.9 2.8 1.1 $0.04/kWh $0.12/kWh 30 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 5.1 PROJECT COSTS Independence Power, LLC The estimated installed cost of the project is based on a unit installed cost of $2,500 to $4,000 per kW. The 3.0 MW Kasidaya Creek project near Skagway, commissioned in 2009, was completed at an installed cost of $3,300 per kW. The technical parameters and configuration of Kasidaya Creek is very similar to Fourth of July Creek. Annual costs for operations, maintenance, repair, replacement, and margins are estimated to be in the range of $0.013 to $0.036 per kWh. The annual estimated debt service payment is estimated to be in the range of $0.028 to $0.088 per kWh. The low-end of this range assumes the lower installed cost, a $2.5 million grant, and debt financing over 30 years at 4.0%. The high-end of this range assumes the higher installed cost, no grant, and debt financing over 30 years at 8.0%. 5.2 PROJECT BENEFITS 5.2.1 Fuel Displacement The estimated cost of energy displaced by the project, $0.077 per kWh, is based on an assumed long-term average price of $9.00 per MCF of natural gas and an average railbelt generation heat rate of 8,500 btu/kWh. 5.2.2 Grid Efficiency SES' existing energy deliveries from CEA incur approximately 3% losses on the CEA system between point of generation and point of wholesale delivery to SES. Additional losses on the SES system between delivery and use are estimated at 1.5%. By comparison, energy from this project would incur estimated losses on the SES system of 0.5%, increasing the overall efficiency of SES and CEA's transmission and distribution systems. 5.2.3 Environmental Attributes The project may be able to earn revenue from its environmental attributes. This will depend on the project's eligibility for government and private sector green energy programs and markets. The range of revenues from environmental attributes is based on a rate of $0.00 to $0.02 per kWh. 5.2.4 Non-Monetary Benefits The project will likely have significant non-monetary benefits. These may include: NOVEMBER 2009 31 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC >-Local employment. The project will work to employ qualified local residents during construction. During operation, the project would prefer to employ local residents for periodic maintenance activities. >-Recreational opportunities. By providing a year-round road to the upper Fourth of July Creek alluvial fan and also the alpine country along the penstock and around the intake, the project will improve public access to these areas. The land owners -the City of Seward and State of Alaska will need to determine how this improved access is managed. >-Electric system reliability/stability. Having 5.4 MW of local generation will tend to improve the reliability and stability of the local electric grid. >-Educational opportunities. There is an opportunity for IP to work with A VTEC on training in the construction and operation of hydroelectric projects during both the construction and operational phases of this project. This synergy would benefit IP, A VTEC, and the state of Alaska in promoting a skilled workforce that is knowledgeable about hydro projects. NOVEMBER 2009 32 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 6.0 PERMITS Independence Power, LLC The following permits would be required for study, construction, and/or operation of this project. 6.1 FEDERAL PERMITS 6.1.1 FERC Licensing This project does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The FERC issued a finding of non-jurisdiction for this project on November 6, 2008. 6.1.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permits The project would consist of placing structures within waters of the United States, and therefore requires a wetlands permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The project is expected to require an individual permit from the COE. Once IP delivers drawings of the project intake works and wetlands impacts, the COE will issue a jurisdictional determination and begin the applicable permit processes. 6.1.3 U.S. Coast Guard Permits Not applicable to this project. 6.1.4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required for the project during construction. ADEC has assumed responsibility for managing the SWPPP program from USEP A. 6.1.5 Federal Aviation Administration Not applicable. 6.2 STATE OF ALASKA PERMITS 6.2.1 Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) Permits 6.2.1.1 Coastal Zone Consistency Review The project is located within the Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal Zone District. IP submitted a Coastal Project Questionnaire to ADNR's Division of Coastal and Ocean NOVEMBER 2009 33 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Management on August 27, 2008. Coastal zone consistency review is on hold until the COE determines what COE permits the project will require. 6.2.1.2 Dam Safety The state's Dam Safety Program has jurisdiction over dams exceeding 10 feet in height or impounding more than 50 acre-feet of water. The proposed intake structure for this project falls under these criteria. Dam safety review is an involved technical process to verify that the dam and reservoir are adequately designed so as to not pose a public safety hazard. 6.2.1.3 Land Authorizations The project would be located on city and state land. The project will require easements for the penstock, access, and transmission alignments, and leases for the powerhouse and intake sites. IP filed applications for these easements and leases on August 27, 2008 (ADL 230487). 6.2.1.4 Tidelands Permits Not applicable to this project. 6.2.1.5 Material Sale Agreement Use of on-site materials for construction would require a material sale agreement with the owner of the applicable subsurface estate. Material sources have not been identified for this project. Potential sources include the City of Seward's quarry in the Fourth of July Creek industrial area or cut or borrow sites within the project footprint. Some of the timber cleared for the project may have commercial value. Commercially valuable timber would be sold in accordance with the land owner's preferences. 6.2.1.6 Water Use Permit I Water Rights The project will require an appropriation of water from Fourth of July Creek. A water rights application was completed and submitted to ADNR on August 28, 2008 (LAS 27051). All waters diverted from the creek at the intake would be returned to the creek at the tailrace, with no downstream change in water quantity or quality. 6.2.2 Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) Permits 6.2.2.1 Fish Habitat Permit According to the Atlas of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fishes, maintained by AFDG, the upper limit of anadromous fish habitat on NOVEMBER 2009 34 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Fourth of July Creek occurs below the proposed powerhouse location. IP submitted a Fish Habitat Permit application to ADFG on August 27, 2008. Action on this permit is on hold awaiting completion of the coastal zone consistency review. IP is working with ADFG staff to coordinate a site visit to the project powerhouse site to facilitate processing of this permit. 6.2.3 Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) Permits Not applicable. 6.2.4 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Permits 6.2.4.1 DEC Wastewater or Potable Water Pennits Human wastes during construction would be handled by portable latrines and refuse receptacles. Human wastes during operations of the project would be handled off-site or by a DEC-permitted wastewater system located at the powerhouse. 6.2.4.2 Solid Waste Disposal Pennit Solid wastes generated during construction would be hauled offsite to an approved disposal facility, burned on-site under a burn permit, or buried on-site in a permitted monofilt as appropriate to the nature of the waste and local conditions. Solid waste generation during operations would be minimal, and would be disposed of off-site. 6.2.4.3 Air Quality Pennit Not applicable to this project. 6.2.4.4 Bulk Fuel Pennit Not applicable to this project. 6.2.5 Regulatory Commission of Alaska In order to sell wholesale electricity to a public utility, state law requires that IP either receive a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) or be exempted from RCA regulations. Either action would be taken by the RCA based upon a filing brought by IP. Separately, any contract for wholesale power purchase between IP and a public utility requires RCA review and approval before it can take effect. NOVEMBER 2009 35 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 6.3 LOCAL PERMITS 6.3.1 Kenai Peninsula Borough Independence Power, LLC Because the entire project is located within Seward's city limits, no Borough permits are required for the project. 6.3.2 Plan Review The City of Seward has a plan review process this project would follow. The plan review would cover items such as planning and zoning review and approval, code compliance, coordination with utilities, any variances that may be required, and other local matters. Plan review does not normally occur until engineering documents have been completed. Because of the unique nature of this project and several key coordination issues, IP has held preliminary meetings with city personnel to begin coordination for this project. 6.3.3 Site Access All roads and property in the developed portion of the Fourth of July Creek valley are owned by the City of Seward. The city also owns sections 8 and 17, which will be crossed by the project access road and power line. Rights of way for existing roads in this area have not been platted. Access to the project site would require an access agreement with the City of Seward. 6.3.4 Utility Agreement The project will connect to the SES electric grid. This will require an interconnection agreement. If the project sells electricity to SES, a power purchase agreement will also be required. 6.3.5 Other Local Permits The project will need to obtain other approvals, such as obtaining a city business license. NOVEMBER 2009 36 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES Independence Power, LLC Resource agencies were consulted during completion of the Coastal Project Questionnaire. The project area is not designated as critical habitat for any threatened or endangered species. 7.2 FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE 7.2.1 Terrestrial Wildlife Previous studies and field observations have identified the general project area as being habitat for black bear, moose, and winter mountain goat range. The area is likely habitat for most of the wildlife and game typically found in south central Alaska. The project area has not been designated critical habitat for any species. The project is not expected to significantly affect terrestrial wildlife or its habitat. Project features will not alter a significant amount of habitat area, nor will they deter natural migration through the project vicinity. The total project footprint, including access roads and utility alignments, is estimated to be less than 30 acres spread over a distance of over three miles. 7.2.2 Fisheries The project is not expected to have any significant effect on fish, fish habitat, or fisheries. The bypassed reach of Fourth of July Creek is not listed by ADFG as an anadromous stream. Natural barriers in the vicinity of the powerhouse site likely limit the upstream extent of any resident fish that may be present in the creek. This project is a run-of-river project, so it will not affect water quality or quantity in anadromous fish habitat below the powerhouse. The project may include a 40-foot tall dam at the intake. This dam will initially create a small reservoir, but the reservoir is too small to significantly affect water quality. This reservoir will quickly fill with sediment, eliminating any long-term potential to affect water quality. 7.3 WATER AND AIR QUALITY The project will not affect air or water quality. 7.4 FLOOD CONTROL The project does not offer significant flood protection potential to downstream improvements. The project may include a 40-foot tall dam at the intake site. The NOVEMBER 2009 37 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC impoundment behind this dam would initially have a volume of approximately 80 acre- feet, but will rapidly collect sediment, reducing its effective volume. Even at its initial volume, this impoundment represents less than three minutes' flow at the estimated 100- year design flood of 20,000 cfs. Accordingly, this project offers very little if any flood control or protection for downstream improvements along Fourth of July Creek. 7.5 WETLAND AND PROTECTED AREAS The project would include selected disturbance or fill of some wetlands areas. At a minimum, this would include the intake and tailrace structures. The penstock and project access routes will likely also require some disturbance or fill of wetlands. 7.6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES No significant archaeological or historical resources are known to be present in the project area. 7.7 LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS Not applicable. 7.8 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND AVIATION The project will not affect telecommunications operations in the area. The project would include construction of new overhead power lines in the Fourth of July Creek area. These would be similar in scale to existing lines in the area, and would not affect aviation. 7.9 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS RESOURCES The project would consist of the following visual elements: > A road continuing up the Fourth of July Creek alluvial fan from the existing road system approximately 1.5 miles to the powerhouse. This road would likely be gravel, and would include one or more bridges. > A transmission line between the existing substation in the industrial park and the powerhouse. For technical reasons, this line will likely be required to be overhead. > A powerhouse structure at the top of the Fourth of July Creek alluvial fan, near the bottom of the canyon. This building would be much smaller than the major buildings at the Spring Creek Correctional Facility or Seward Ship Yard, and would be located about 1.5 miles farther up the valley than existing buildings. NOVEMBER 2009 38 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC > An access road extending up the hill at the head of the lower Fourth of July Creek valley. This road would initially follow the old logging road through the clear cut on this hill, and then wrap around the hill and towards the intake site. The penstock would generally parallel this road, and may be buried or above grade. Shortly after this road exits the old timber sale clear cut area, it would wrap around the hill and is no longer visible from existing readily accessible locations on the ground. > An intake structure at the 750-foot elevation on Fourth of July Creek The intake site is not visible from existing readily accessible locations on the ground. None of the project features would be prominently visible from downtown Seward or vantage points on Resurrection Bay. The project's greatest visual impact is expected to be from the air, for example from the vantage point of air traffic between Seward and tourist operations on Godwin Glacier. 7.10 MITIGATION MEASURES None proposed. NOVEMBER 2009 39 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC 8.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the findings in this reconnaissance study, the project appears viable and warrants continued study. The next steps to advance the project include additional data collection and a feasibility study; preliminary engineering; continued processing of permits necessary for the project; and continued discussion with SES regarding a power sales contract. The scope of the feasibility study and preliminary engineering includes: Feasibility Study Tasks );;-Continue to measure stream discharge to characterize basin hydrology. );;-Obtain detailed topographic data over the project footprint to support design and analysis activities. );;-Conduct analysis of flood stages at key project locations to guide project design. );;-Conduct geotechnical investigations. );;-Conduct engineering analysis to determine optimal penstock routing. );;-Project cost estimate and economic analysis. );;-Draft Business Plan. );;-Feasibility study report. Permitting Tasks );;-Negotiate access agreement with City of Seward. );;-Negotiate power sales terms and interconnection requirements with SES. );;-Continue to process all permit applications listed in Section 6. Preliminary Engineering Tasks );;-Conceptual dam design. );;-Penstock routing and design. );;-Powerhouse siting and design. );;-Access routing and design. );;-Transmission routing and design, interconnection design. NOVEMBER 2009 40 Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC APPENDIX A PUBLIC MEETINGS AND MEETING RECORDS NOVEMBER 2009 APPENDIXA PAGEl Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment Independence Power, LLC Meetings to discuss project issues with various stakeholders are summarized below. Meeting records and/or minutes as appropriate are provided on the following pages. Table A-1: Summary of Project Meetings Meeting Date Venue I Audience Partid ants Willard Dunham, Vice-September 25, 2008 Mayor December 5, 2008 February 23, 2009 Aprill, 2009 September2,2009 NOVEMBER 2009 City Manager, Phillip Oates SES Manager Tim Barnum City Council Meeting Ports and Commerce Advisory Board Ports and Commerce Advisory Board I Subject Meet to provide overview of project. Discussed key issues that will need to be addressed, including power sales contract and site access. Introduction and overview of project, scope, status. Discussed key issues that will need to be addressed, including power sales contract<lll_? site access. Gave a presentation on the project to the city council, answered questions from the council. Gave a presentation on the project to the P ACAB, solicited questions from the P ACAB and attendees. Gave a project update to PACAB to report on findings of reconnaissance and stream gauging efforts. APPENDIXA PAGE2 - - City ofSeward. Alaska Febnmrv 13. 2009 CALL TO ORDER City Council Minutes Volume 38, Page22 The February 23, 2009 regular meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 7:00p.m. by Mayor Clark Corbridge. OPENING CEREMONY Lt. Butch Tiner led the pledge of allegiance to the flag. ROLl. CALL There were present: Clark Corbridge presiding and Boh Valdatta Tom Smith comprising a quorum of the Council; and Jean Bardarson Betsy Kellar Kirsten V cscl. Assistant City Manager Johanna Dollerhide, Assistant City Clerk ABSENT-Willard Dunham, Marianna Keil CITIZENS' COMMENTS ON ANY SUB.JECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARIN(; Matt Gray, representing Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance, updated the council on the alliance's recent events. He commended the llarbormaster's efforts on containment in the harbor. The alliance's community program would start back up in the spring for bear resistant cans and dumpsters. The alliance's annual spring beach and river progrAm would be kicking off on May 9, 2009. Walter Corrigan spoke in support ofRcsolution 2009-012. The Fire Department's current vehicle was beyond its service life. It was a second hand vehicle that had served the department well. and Corrigan thought this purchase was a cost effective item. Theresa Butts thanked the council for squeezing in some support for net metering for legislation. She wanted to clear up a misconception that windmiJls were dirty power. Butts announced there were devices available at the library for check out to plug into appliances to see how much energy was consumed and how much could be saved. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSF.NT AGENDA Motion {Bardarson/Smith) Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda Resolution 2009-011 was placed on the regular agenda upon the request ofCouncilmcmbcr Kellar. City of."''eward. Alaska Felmwrv n. 2009 Motion Passed Unanimous The clerk read the following approved consent agenda items: City Council Minutes Volume 38, Page23 The February 9, 2009 Regular And Special City Council Meeting Minutes Were Approved. SPI<:CIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS Proclamations and Awards The ''Adelmann Award" was presented to Seward High School Senior Lee Yoo. A proclamation was read to welcome the 53rd Annual Western District Convention of the American Legion. Borough Assembly Report. Borough Assembly Representative Ron Long-not present. City Manager's Report. Assistant City Manager Kirsten Vesel stated $40,944.00 had been authorized for Cable Fault Locators to find underground cable faults. The Seward Community Library recently received kudos for service outputs in the new 2009 Library Journal Index of Public Library service. The Seward Community Library was given a 4 star rating within the peer group category. A total of 7115 libraries were rated nationwide with six libraries in Alaska earning star reviews. The Chamber of Commerce had reported that Holland American Cruise Line had signed an agreement to stay in Seward for six years. The Alaska Railroad had signed a letter agreeing to all tenns and conditions with Aurora Energy concerning the tug boat agreement for Seward (a 3000 horse power Lug operated by Amak Towing Co. out of Ketchikan). The City of Seward Fire Department had issued an .. Intent to Award'' notice for the contract for a Triple Combination Pumper to Spencer Manufacturing. Harhor/SMIC: A 50 foot recreational vessel sunk in the Harbor (in its slip) on the evening of Friday, February 13,2009. The owner and USCG were immediately notified, and a local salvage company was hired to re-float the vessel and provide additional containment. The City was reviewing inspection reports for Seward Ship's Dry Dock and should have a report ready for Council in early March. The South Harbor Uplands area (created by dredged material from the Harbor Expansion Project) was platted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 17, 2009. The plat would come before Council soon. Finance: The Finance Director attended her first meeting of the Alaska Retirement Management Board in Juneau this past week and would be serving on two sub-committees on the Board; the audit committee and the real estate investment committee. The Finance Department had been awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for its - - - City of Sewlml. A Iaska Febmary 23. 2009 City Coundl Minute.\ Volume 38. Page24 comprehensive annual financial report, for the tenth consecutive year. The finance department staff continued to prepare for the annual audit which would take place from March 23-April 3. 2009. The City anticipated receiving the final permit for the Japanese Creek levee/road project next week from the Anny Corps of Engineers, which would allow the City to proceed with property acquisition and with issuing a Request for Information to begin the initial phase of construction. The penn it with DOT had not been finalized, and the city was awaiting the outcome of their department review of the pennit application. The Public Works Department completed and submitted two questionnaires to the State of Alaska, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's Alaska Clean Water Fund (ACWF) loan fund program for the State's Fiscal Year 2010 Intended Use Plan for two projects: North Seward Water Storage Tank & Pumping Facility and a New Lift Station No.3 Electrical Building. Sports and Recreation: Visiting coach T'Ncisha Turner met with students and athletes with an all school assembly at the Middle School and with the High School basketball teams. She was here promoting Mini Camp basics as well as the basketball camps coming this summer. Community Development: Bob Hicks received his Flood Plain Management Certification from the Association of State Floodplain Managers. The Planning and Zoning Commission recently approved two conditional use permits allowing Captain Jack's Seafood Locker to operate a commercial processing business in Leirer subdivision. and allowing Blue Rose Enterprises to convert first floor commercial vendor space into additional residential apartments. The South Harbor Upland plat was approved and would come to council for approval prior to being sent to the Borough. An Alaska Harbor Observation Network Tower was approved as an unlisted use in the Harbor Commercial District. Other Reports, Special Presentations A presentation was given by Dan Hertrich of Polar Consult on a proposed Hydro- electric project at the 4•11 of July Creek area. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ordinance 2009-002, Amendin& Seward City Code Title J 5, Land Uses Allowed Table 15.10.225 To Allow Lodging, Multi-Family Dwelling Apartment By Conditional Use Permit In The Harbor Commercial Zoning District. Community Development Diredor Christy Terry stated the intent of the Ordinance and gave some background infonnation. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval for this zoning change. There were no life safety concerns and it also received support by the harbom1aster. Notice ofthe public hearing being posted and published as required by law was noted and the public hearing was opened. City ofSewllrtl. Alaska Februm)' 23, 20()9 City Council Minutes Volume 38. Page25 Dennis Bailey, owner of Harbor Lights Condominiums, spoke in support ofthis Ordinance. They had tried very hard to keep the lodging as monthly rentals and it was consistently proving to be - difficult. They were now being approached for summer rentals to be able to make ends meet and were now hoping to provide a nightly rental in addition even though they preferred the monthly rentals. Motion (Rardarson/Kellar) Enact Ordinante 2009-002 Kellar commended the owners of the condominiums on their service to the community and she supported this ordinance. Motion Passed Unanimous UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None NEW BUSINESS Resolution 2QQ9-0ll. Accepting A Grant In The Amount Of $662.11 From The Alaska Highway Safety Office For 2009 Every •'ifteen Minutes Program And Appropriating Funds. Motion (Bardarson/Smith) Approve Resolution 2009-011 Vesel stated administration was in support of this resolution and summarized the Every Fifteen Minutes Program. Kellar thought it sounded like a great program, but she had researched and found information indicating the program may not be that effective. She was concerned with the intensity and severity of the program. She feared the program could come otT as scare tactics or could have even worse effects on the youth. Kellar would not be supporting this resolution because of the approach it took to educate Seward's youth. In response to Valdatta, Police Lieutenant Butch Tiner believed there were other costs other than the grant funded portion. It was volunteer time, as well as some SPD time. The $662 awarded was just to cover the additional costs not already taken care of. The extra costs to the city would be personnel costs, basically staff time. Motion Passed Yes: Smith, Bardarsoo, Valdatta. Corbridge No: Kellar Resolution 2009-012, Authorizing The City Manager To Purchase One Light Rescue Fire Apparatus From Spencer Manufacturing, Inc., And A Mobile Radio And Automatic External Defibrillator From Other Vendors, In An Amount Not To Exceed $161,877.00 Subject To Obtaining Financing And Appropriating Funds From The Motor Pool Internal Service Fund. Motion (Kellar/Smitb) Approve Resolution 2009-012 - - - Cit.v of Seward, Alaska Februaty 23, 2009 Ci~v Coundl Mimues Volume 18, Page26 Vesel stated administration's support for this resolution. This would be a multi purpose vehicle that would be replacing two fire department vehicles that were old and dilapidated. Staff anticipated a reduction in fuel costs. Fire Chief Dave Squires reported this vehicle would have everything needed to combine the light rescue vehicle and brush truck. Squires answered some questions on the technical specifications of the vehicle and stated no capabilities would be lost with this purchase. In response to Kellar, Squires stated both new units would be housed in the fire station, with one old vehicle going over to SMIC. Motion Passed Unanimous INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action required) 4 1h of July Creek Hydro Electric Project Informational Item. COUNCIL COMMEI\TS Smith thought the fire department made a smart decision with this purchase. Valdatta complimented the Harbor for their informational Jetter going out to boat owners. Bardarson agreed with Valdatta on the Harbor letter. CITIZENS' COMMENTS Theresa Butts hoped PACAB could be involved with the Hydro Project proposal. She thanked Kellar for her comments on the Every Fifteen Minutes Program. She hoped the SMIC tire response would remain adequate. Corbridge responded to Butts that this hydro project proposal was in a very preliminary state. and was sure if it progressed, PACAB would be brought on board on this issue. COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS Kellar thanked Butts for her support and for Corbridge's assurance that PACAB would be involved with the hydro project if it went anywhere. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned al 8: 15 p.m. Ci(r ofSewunl. A/w.ka FefmWIJ 23, 2009 1ohanna Dollerhide, CMC Assistant City Clerk (City Seal) Clark Corbridge Mayor City Cmmcil Mit111tes Volume 38. Page27 - - - - - City ot"Sewttrd. Alaska April I. 2009 CALL TO ORDER Port am/ Comme1·n' At!l•ism:\· Board Minutes Volume 3. Pagl:' 56 The regular April I, 2009 meeting ofthe Seward Port and Commerce Advisory Board was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Chair Ron Long. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCI£ TO THE FLAG Board Member Long led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. RoU Call There were present: Board Member Ron Long presiding, and Theresa Butts Dan Oliver Deborah Altermatt Darryl Schaefermeyer Paul Tougas (12:08 p.m.) comprising a quorum of the Board; and Kari Anderson, Harbormaster Christy Terry, Community Development Director Anne Bailey, Executive Liaison Oliver explained he would have to leave at 12:40 p.m. tor another meeting. ARRC Representative Louis Bencardino Alaska Railroad Dock Manager - Louis Bencardino reported on the following issues: • He had talked to Kurt Wright and trains would not arrive in Seward until April6, 2009 due to an avalanche. A coal train was waiting in Anchorage to arrive. • A coal ship would arrive today, April I, 2009 at 3:00 p.m. and a second coal ship would arrive on April 7, 2009. • A railroad Board Meeting was held on March 31-April I, 2009 in Anchorage. • An inspection had occurred at the Yukon to make sure all the equipment and systen'L.'l worked properly and the Southeast Stev<.-dore were working. • The cruise ship coming to Seward on April 16, 2009 had requested water capability and he hoped it would not be too difticult. • Discusst.-d the vessels that would be moored at the Railroad dock (fishing vessels, dredging barges, and Sampson vessels). • Noted he had a community service worker currently working tor the Railroad. In response to Altcrmatt, Bencardino stated he had not heard from Holland America regarding Seward trips being cancelled. Ci~v (~(Sewurd, Alaska April I, 2009 Porr ami Commer('c Adl'isory Board Minute.v Volume 3, Page 57 Long explained that the Anchorage Daily News had an article stating some Holland America tum-a-round ships would not be stopping in Seward in 20 I 0. Chamber Report by Laura Cloward Executive Director-None Administrative Report - llarbormaster Kari Anderson reported on the following items: • The Harbor Department continued to work with Community Development on Tariff and Code Revisions. • The Harbor Department recently attended a workshop sponsored by the EPA and ADEC on the new MSGP tor Stonnwater Pollution. ADEC would review the Harbor Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and the city anticipated obtaining the NPDES permit in the next couple of months. • Northern Economics was completing the SM I C feasibility study and copies would be available at the May 6, 2009 Port and Commerce Advisory Board meeting and a joint work session with Council was planned tor May II, 2009. • The Harbor sent out a newsletter to slip holder and she discussed the items included. • Used oil collection sites at the top ofD and F float have been renovated to include used anti- freeze collection sites, which would be recycled through the assistance of a private company. The sites should be ready tor used anti-freeze collection by May I, 2009. • The Harbor was applying tor fi.lur grants with April deadlines and she reviewed the projects. • Welcomed Jen Kain to the Harbor Department who would begin on April 6, 2009. Long congratulated the Harbor on changing the layout of the front ofthe harbor building stating it was a great improvement. Community Development Director Christy Terry reported on the following items: • Explained the lay downs bdbre the Board: 2006 Economic Forum with staff accomplishments. an Alaska SeaLife Center document, Coal Dust Task Force Meeting Document, an email regarding Polar Consult, a copy of a color proposal from Polar Consult, and a Natural Resource Development tlycr. • The Chamber regretted not being in attendance but two film crews were in Seward filming a wedding show and a tourism/small business development DVD. • The PACAB North Harbor recommendations would go bct(Jre Council the same evening as the PAC AB priority resolution. • The Planning and Zoning Commission would begin discussions on their code updates and PACAB would begin their code review shortly after that. • On April27, 2009, Council entered into agreement with Harmon Construction to construct - - the Adam's Street Pavilion and would reach substantial completion by July 4, 2009 and final - completion by July 17, 2009. • A list ofStimulus Funds would be continuously updated. - City o/Se~rard. Alasku April/. 1009 Port am/ Commerce Ach•i.wry Boun/ Mimtles Voltmw 3. Pugc: 5 X • The Voice Over IP conversion would occur on April 4, 2009. In response to Altennatt, Terry stated there was a meeting with DOT to discuss road closures and would email the Board the information. Schaetermeyer interjected that there was discussion about having a weekend road closure. In further response to Altermatt, Terry stated before the Harbor Tariff rough drafts were available they needed to be vetted by the City Attorney and would be provided to the Board prior to the meeting. Anderson stated the existing Harbor Tarift' was available on the harbor website and Terry would send the Board the link. The Board discussed the code review and coordinating with the Planning and Zoning Commission. In response to Butts, Terry explained the proposed change to the zoning of the South Harbor Uplands would occur after the Borough replats it and PACAB's recommendations would go before Planning and Zoning and then Council. -Presentation by Polareonsult on the proposed 4111 of July Creek Hydro Project - Joel Groves, outside city limits, explained Polar Consult was an engineering consultation firm based out of Anchorage and one of the key focuses was hydro electric power development and projects had been done throughout the state. He stated a prospective project on Fourth of July Creek had been identified and was in the reconnaissance phase to see ifthis wa"l a viable project. He gave an overview of what has been done so far, initial estimate of electric capacity and usage, and the future schedule with it operational in 2011. He noted the property was on State land within the City limits and the requirements they would need to operate. In response to Long, Grovt..>s discussed the proposed funding, the renewable grant program and hydro-electric, and whether hydro-electric was considered renewable energy. In further response to Long, Groves explained other projects Polar Consult had taken on stating Fourth of July Creek was not the largest one and other projects Polar Consult were involved in were operational. In response to Schaefermeyer, Groves explained Independence Power, LLC would own and operate the project and was comprised of the same people involved in Polar Consult. Groves continued to explain the business entity. In further response to Schaefermeycr, Groves explained the sustainability of the project through the summer and winter months, the rough cost estimate, and the lifeline of the project. In response to Butts, Groves discussed the location of the project. the land owner's requirements, the design-style of the project, the lite of the project. cost of operation, and stated he could get the financial int{mnation to the Board. City (J(Seward, Alusk(l April I, 2009 Board Member Oliver left at 12:40 p.m. Port ami Commerce A{l\·i.~my Board Miflutes Voluml.! 3, Page 59 In response to the Board, Groves explained projects that were geographically similar to Fourth of July Creek, the tlow of intake during the winter and summer months, creek debris and the effects on the turbine, and the costs t(lr power. In response to City of Seward Utility Manager John Foutz, Groves discussed the effect this project would have on the natural habitat. He continued to say there was not a biologist on staffbut had brought a habitat biologist on board when needed on other projects. In response to Long, Groves discussed the permits and requirements that would be needed. Citizens' comments on any subject except those items scheduled for public hearing- Russ Maddox, 3385 Nash Road, Chris Rose from the Renewable Energy Alaska project would do a presentation on April 7, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. in the Rae Building to address renewable energy opportunities, fund, and net-metering meeting that recently occurred. He stated the definition ofrenewable energy was a Federal definition and Senator Murkowski was trying to change this. He said many Board members did not make it to the Coal Dust Task Force and they discussed what would be done about the problem. He said he had received 14 complaints regarding the dust and wondered if there was another method tor these complaints to be received. He continued to discuss the dust problem and how to assess it. In response to Terry, Maddox stated it would be great to have the complaints be directed to the railroad but it needs to he advertised or the complaints needed to be quantified. Anderson stated she did not want to add coal dust complaints to her staft"'s workload. Marianna Keil, inside City limits, hoped the Board would add the update to the llarbor Master Plan to their list of priorities. Mark LuttreU, outside City limits, suppt:>rted the Resurrection Bay Cons<..'TVatiun Alliance concept of renewable energy and urged the Board to include a hydro project proposal to Lowell Creek. He continued that he was concerned about road access trail to the intake and the notion of clean energy to Seward not subject to disruptions was attractive. Approval of the Agenda and Consent Agenda Motion (Butts/Schaefcrmeyer) Approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda Motion Passed Unanimous Consent The following items were approved under the Consent Agenda: - - Citv c}/Se11'ard, Al11ska April 1, 2009 * March 4, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes Port ami Commerl'e Aclvhm:v Bourd Minutes Volwll<' 3, Page 60 Board Member Tougas excused himself from the meeting. Unfinished Business -None New Business- Resolution 2009-03, Providing a Recommendation to Seward City Council Supporting the Low-Impact Run-of-River Hydroelectric Facility Proposed on Fourth of July Creek Motion (Butts/Altermatt) Approver Resolution 2009-03 Schaefermeyer stated he would like this to come to the Board at a later date following the completion of the feasibility study. Motion (Schaefermeyer/Long) Lay Resolution 2009-03 on the table Butts suggested rather than supporting the project they support the feasibility study. Long thought laying this on the table was not stopping the project and would like to revisit -this at a later date when there was more information available. Butts countered that a few words could be changed in Section !ofthe Resolution to change the support of the project to the feasibility itself Motion Passed Yes: Altermatt, Schaefermeyer, Long No: Butts Long explained how this agenda item could be brought back before the Board. Provide Recommendations for the Economic Stimulus Forum Scheduled for May 13,2009 at 7:00p.m. Tt!rry stated Council had set the next economic torum on May I 3, 2009 at 7:00p.m. but the City Manager had asked tor the Boards recommendation on the torum tormat, location, facilitators, specific invitations, groups and topics to be addr'--ssed. She continued that statr comments on what had been accomplished from the last forum. Altermatt thanked Terry for the lay down and thought it was a great idea to do something but was concerned with the feedback. She noted the lack of communication devices and that a lot of participants did not receive feedback from the last torum. Long surmised that the last t(lfum was a good session but the tollow through might not have been the best and did not think it went as tar as it could have. He thought the facilitators should not City ()/'Seward. Afuska April I. 2009 be known political figures. Port t/1/(/ Comm<?rce Advi.wn~v Board Minure.'> Volume J, Page 61 In response to Butts, Terry stated Council Members had directed the City Manager to resurrect this, this would not take place if the City did not want the biggest response possible, and tallow-up needed to occur from the last torum. Bailey clarified this Economic Forum took place in September 2007. Schactenneyer asked what the goal o fthis thrum was and suggested fucusing on certain issues and having more structure. Altcrmatt stated a lot of people had attended the 2007 forum and the problem was not getting enough feedback and it might be easy to hone in on a narrower topic. She suggested the high school for the location but did not like separating into groups. She asked what impact the efficiency study had on the community. Anderson commented this torum could address the efficiency study and what the City had done with the information gathered in 2007. The Board continued to discuss their stance on the Economic Forum and suggested the High School Auditorium or Rae Building tor the location, any method to get the word out to the public, the 2007 facilitators and others not involved in local politics, a creative method of debate, place as much information in the invitations about the ti1rum, whether or not to break up into groups, breaking the forum into two stages, and the need tin open communication. Discuss contracting Northern Economics to do a presentation at a joint work session with City Council on the SMIC feasibility study Anderson stated that Northern Economics had been contracted to do a SMIC tea.-.ibility study and there was an additional cost to do a pn.!SL'lltation to the Board and Council that was beyond the original scope of work. She explained that this was a request to the Board to use a portion ofthe PACAB budget to tund the presentation and recommended the Board approve a resolution to authorizing $1000 of the PAC AB budget to help with the presentation cost. In response to Long, Anderson said she did not have the PAC AB fund information available. Long stated he was surprised Northern Economics did not include a presentation in the scope of work and supported the drafting of a resolution tor the next business meeting. Terry interjected the Board could authorize these tunds by a motion. Motion (Schaefermeyer/ Altermatt) Motion Passed Designate $1,000 from the PACAB budget for a SMIC Feasibility Study Presentation Unanimous Consent - - - - City (?(Sell'lml. Alaska April I. 2009 Port ami Comnu:rce Acl1·i.wrr Board Minutes Volume 3, Page 62 Anderson stated the presentation had been scheduled tor May II, 2009 at 6:00p.m. and the feasibility study should be distributed on May 6, 2009. Discuss the PACAB priorities in preparation for Council and Board joint work session scheduled for April 8, 2009 at 8:00 p.m. Anderson agreed with Keil to add the Harbor Master Development Plan and requested this he done in the tall. Terry interjected the 1993 Small Boat Harbor Master Plan needed an update and requested to do this in the tall. The Board suggested reviewing the Small Boat Harbor Master plan in October 2009. In response to Altermatt, Anderson discussed what was being completed or worked on in the harbor. Long said he expected Council to provide their input on the Board's priorities. Discuss the World Trade Center Alaska Membership Renewal Long stated this renewal was worth it if the Wednesday PACAB meetings could be rescheduled so Board Members could attend the World Trade Center meetings. Butts agreed if we were not going to have a presence there than the renewal was not necessary. Altcrmatt thought it was a good liaison t()r the Board. In response to Butts, Terry stated this World Trade Center Alaska renewal was budgeted ti.u· 2009. Motion (Aitermatt/Schaefermeyer) Motion Passed Renew the World Trade Center Alaska Membership Unanimous Consent Correspondence, Information Items and Reports (no action required)-None Board Comments- Altermatt stated Seward Harbor Opening weekend was May 16, 2009 and was hoping to re- energize the Community Street Dance at the Harbor Plaza. City of Seward, A!uska Apri/1, 2009 Port ami Commern: Atb•i.ml)' Board MinuteJ Volume 3. Page 63 Butts expressed gratitude on having the public and council members attend and clarified the April 8, 2009 joint work session with Council. Schaetermeyer thanked Joel Groves tor his hydro presentation and stated a lot of time was spent on looking at a Lowell Creek project. He reviewed the Sealitc Center report and stated there may be an opportunity to use sea water has a heating source in Seward. Anderson recommended cancelling the April 15, 2009 work session. By general consensus, the April 15, 2009 work session had been cancelled. Long thanked Joel Groves and the utility manager tor coming noted the Harbor Opt.-ning Weekend dance was sponsored by the Kenai Fjords Yacht Club and Sailing Inc and some of the proceeds would go towards the Mariner's MemoriaL Citizen Comments [5 minutes per individual -Each individual has one opportuni~v to speak.J- None Board and Administrative Response to Citizens' Comments-None Adjournment L~ha:~~~~==~mOO the m~ting a~ ~ ) RonLong f Executive Liaison Chair (City Seal) - - - Independence Power, LLC 1503 WEST 33RD AVE!';UE, MCHORAGE, ALASKI\ 99503 PHO!';E: (907) 258-2420 FA.X: (907) 258-2419 MEMORANDUM DATE: JUNE 2, 2010 SUBJECT: FOURTH OF JULY CREEK HYDROLOGY-PROGRESS REPORT TO: PROJECT FILE FROM: JOEL GROVES -PROJECT MANAGER BACKGROUND: Flooding in late July 2009 scoured the stream bed at the powerhouse site gauging station on Fourth of July Creek, invalidating the stage-discharge rating curve developed in 2008-2009. This flood event also damaged the stream gauge installation. The extent of scour and flood damage was not characterized until a site visit in December 2009. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: 1. In March 2010, the stream gauge was relocated to a more sheltered location to reduce the likelihood of future damage to the gauge. The relocated gauge is in the same pool as the original gauge. 2. In March 2010, a second gauge was installed approximately 100 yards downstream of the original gauge. This gauge will serve as a backup gauge to reduce the potential for loss of data. 3. Additional flow measurements have been conducted to establish new rating curves for both powerhouse site gauging stations. DATA: Flow measurements have been conducted to develop rating curves over the range of proposed project flows at both gauging stations. L Discharge data from September 2008 through May 2010 is presented on Page 2. 2. The current (2009-2010) rating curves for both stations and the 2008-2009 curve for the upper powerhouse station are presented on Page 3. 3. Flow measurements used to develop the rating curves are tabulated on Page 4. Page 1 of 1 ""0 Q) co CD "' a .,J:::o. FOURTH OF JULY CREEK-DISCHARGE DATA 400 j I I I II -... I' 350 -(/) 300 u. u -ILl 1-lj; 250 ILl ~ c:c 1-z 200 1-1 1- c:c ILl C) 150 a:: c:c J: u (/) 1-1 100 Q 50 0 9/1/08 10/27/08 12/22/08 2/16/09 4/13/09 6/8/09 8/3/09 e Measured Discharge --Expected Discharge at Intake (Based on Hydrology Model) -2008-09 Calculated Flow at Intake -2009-10 PROVISIONAL Calculated Flow at Intake (UPPER PH GAUGE) --2009-10 PROVISIONAL Calculated Flow at Intake (LOWER PH GAUGE) 9/28/09 11/23/09 1/18/10 3/15/10 5/10/10 NOTE: Calcu l ated flows are based on the stage recorded at the gauging station and the stage-discharge curve(s) for each gauge. Flows are scaled by basin area to the proposed intake site. DATE INDEPENDENCE POWER, llC -JUNE 201 0 -.:3 v -~ ~ -5 Ill .... Q "'0 Q) co (l) w 0 ....... ~ RATING CURVES FOR POWERHOUSE SITE GAUGING STATIONS 160 --------------------------------------------------------------------------· 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2009-10 Rating Curve -Lower PH Station y = 43 .124x2 + 598.55x + 2080.8 A 2008-09 Measurements (Upper PH Station) + 2009-1 0 Measurements (Upper PH Station) • 2009-1 0 Measurements (Lower PH Station) R2 = 1 -Poly. (2008-09 Measurements (Upper PH Station)) -Poly. (2009-1 0 Measurements (Upper PH Station)) -Poly. (2009-1 0 Measurements (Lower PH Station)) 2009-10 Rating Curve -Upper PH Station y = 39.47x3 + 37l.81x2 + 1203.8x + 1347 R2 = 0.9991 2008-09 Rating Curve-Upper PH Station y = 16.1 09x3 + 151.16x2 + 503.93x + 601.4 R2 = 1 -7.50 -6.50 -5.50 -4.50 Stage (ft) -3.50 -2.50 -1.50 INDEPENDENCE POWER, LLC -JUNE 2010 FOURTH OF JULY CREEK HYDROLOGY STUDY STAGE-DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS Stage (ft, Upper PH Stage (ft, Lower PH Date/Time Site Gauging Site Gauging Station) Station) 9/26/08 15:00 -1.58 - 12/4/08 15:45 -2.92 - 3/27/09 13:20 -3.24 - 4/9/09 12:1 s -3.27 - 4/23/09 19:55 -3.16 S/S/09 17:30 -2.23 - 12/3/09 16:05 -2.45 - 3/31/1017:15 -3.20 -6.58 4/25/1018:05 -2.99 -6.42 5/l /10 16:30 -2.64 -6.07 5/29/2010 14:45 -1.85 -5.15 INDEPENDENCE POWER, LLC 6/2/2010 Measured Discharge (cfs) Notes 119 17.7 7.5 6.6 10.2 50.8 pre 7/09 flood 47.7 post 7/09 flood 9.6 15.3 36.6 142.8 S-D data, _4thJulyGauging.xls Page 4 of 4