Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Sunrise Lake Hydro Project 1997
HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MSAULIFFE Bee 7 ATTORNEYS é A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 200 Market BuILpina, Surte 1750 - i SEATTLE 200 S.W. MARKET STREET SS ' “CO PORTLAND x PORTLAND TACOMA OREGON 97201-5718 aod ANCHORAGE TELEPHONE: (503) 227-7400 ara Facsmie: (503) 241-0950 JAN FRANCISCO . = a Los ANGELES December 31, 199 7 EMENWE Ty) PaLo ALTO ID) uieuv & 11) |Meat | e < a 5 | | WasuincTon, D.C. | \ \ a y Honc Konc Leys JAN = 9 1$98 at SINGAPORE Alaska industrial Development and Export Authority 13206-0009 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Lois Cashell, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Room 11-G Washington, D.C. 20426 V Second Six Month Progress Report for Preliminary Permit: Sunrise Lake Water and Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 11591-000 City of Wrangell, Alaska Dear Ms. Cashell: Pursuant to Article 8 of the Director’s Order (dated January 13, 1997) issuing a preliminary permit for the proposed Sunrise Lake Water and Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 11591-000), the City of Wrangell, Alaska (“Wrangell” or “City”), hereby files its second six-month progress report. Actions Taken During the Last Six Months At the time of the last progress report, the City had just received an initial report on the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake from the Bentley Company (“Bentley Report”). After reviewing the Bentley Report, City officials held public workgroup session on August 13, 1997. Several issues were discussed, including: estimating the possible power output and costs of the project, commissioning a feasibility Lois Cashell, Secretary December 31, 1997 Page 2 study for the water supply aspects of the project, investigating rainfall and streamflow data; consulting with federal and state agencies; and planning the schedule of how to proceed. Based on the favorable results set forth in the Bentley Report, the City Manager was instructed to proceed with project investigation. Accordingly, the following actions have been taken since July 1997: 1. Special Use Permit. On or about August 22, 1997, the City applied the U.S. Forest Service, Wrangell Ranger District, for a Special Use Permit to gain permission to conduct hydrological/streamflow studies and conduct further on-site feasibility investigations (surveying, geotechnical studies, and environmental assessment) of the proposed dual purpose project on Woronkofski Island (which is within the Tongass National Forest). After consultations with relevant resource agencies and public comment, the U.S. Forest Service granted a Special Use Permit to the City on October 9, 1997. 2. Water Rights. At the request of the City, the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining and Water Management, confirmed that there are no existing or pending water rights of record in the Sunrise Lake watershed or to its outflow stream as of August 21, 1997. 3. Hydrological/Streamflow Studies. In September 1997, the City entered into agreements with a professional hydrologist and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to install, operate, maintain, and collect data from streamgaging equipment at the outflow of Sunrise Lake. Such equipment was installed on October 23, 1997, and is being operated by the USGS. 4. Water Quality Study. At the time the streamgaging equipment was installed, the hydrologist collected water samples for quality testing. The favorable results of inorganic chemical and coliform analyses is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 5. Project Feasibility Report. In August 1997, the City started an informal bidding process to retain an engineering/consulting firm to: (a) conduct a municipal water supply project feasibility study, determine the project’s basic design and equipment requirements, estimate its cost, and identify potential issues relating to use of Sunrise Lake’s outflow as a domestic water source; (b) confirm the general results of the Bentley Report; and (c) conduct preliminary engineering and design of the dual purpose project, make geotechnical studies, and survey affected lands. Lois C ashell, Secretary December 31, 1997 Page 3 After interviewing three finalists, the City selected R.W. Beck (Seattle, Washington) and, on October 17, 1997, hired R.W. Beck as project engineer/consultants. The most recent draft of R.W. Beck’s Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Report, dated December 30, 1997, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. First Stage Consultation Package. R.W. Beck is developing the First Stage Consultation Package necessary to initiate the Stage 1 Comment Period for the relevant State and Federal resource agencies, Native groups, and other interested arties. P (7 \ The Next SixMonths = ~~ eit On January 13, 1997, R.W. Beck will present its Final Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Proj easibility Report to the Wrangell City Council. At that time, the City Council will begin deliberations on whether to continue pursuing the dual purpos e project. If the City Council decides to continue, the City will undertake the following actions in the next six months: 1 First Stage Consultation Package/ Agency Consultation. As soon as possible after the decision has been made to proceed, the City will send out the First Stage Consultation Package and hold a joint meeting with relevant State and Federal resource agencies, Native groups, and interested public, as required by 18 CFR § 16.8(b). Within the next six months, the City also anticipates that it will begin Second Stage Consultation, pursuant to 18 CFR § 16.8(c). Water Rights. The City will apply to the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining and Water Management for water rights to the outflow of Sunrise Lake for domestic use and hydroelectric production. Hydrological/Streamflow Studies. The USGS will continue to operate, maintain, and collect data from streamgaging equipment at the outflow of Sunrise Lake. Field Investigations/Preliminary Design. After the consultation process is underway and the site becomes accessible (i.e. winter weather conditions), the City Lois Cashell, Secretary December 31, 1997 Page 4 will begin environmental and other field studies as deemed necessary by the City’s engineering consultants, environmental specialists, relevant State and Federal resource agencies, Native groups, and interested public through the consultation process. R.W. Beck has already recommended that the City commission a bald eagle nesting site study in May and June of 1998. Such studies will also include geotechnical investigations of the proposed project area. 5. Preparation of FERC Exemption Application. At the appropriate time, the City will begin drafting a license exemption application, provided that the City desires to continue pursing the dual purpose project. Barring unforeseen circumstances, the City plans to submit its final exemption application by January 1, 1999. Project Feasibility While the City has yet to receive R.W. Beck’s Final Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Report, the draft results look promising. R.W. Beck has found no fundamental engineering, regulatory, or environmental problems with the project. The quality of Sunrise Lake water is very high and may be used for domestic purposes with no significant treatment (only chlorination appears necessary). At the bottom line, R.W. Beck estimates that the City could build the combined water and hydroelectric project for about $10 million with about half of the costs attributable to the water supply project. Consequently, if the City receives State or Federal funding for the water supply project, the electric power would cost the City about 3.8 cents per kilowatthour (kWh). The Sunrise Lake Project may also displace the City’s need to build some diesel generation which would mean the economic cost of power (factoring in the avoided cost) would be about 2.1 cents per kWh. By comparison, the City currently pays about 6.2 cents per kWh for Tyee Lake power and would pay even more for power produced by new diesel generators. Wrangell is obligated by contract to use Tyee Lake power (if available) ahead of any other power source, but (a) Tyee Lake power is not always available, and (b) the proposed construction of the Swan-Tyee Intertie and other potential developments make it possible or perhaps even likely at this time that a market can be found for the Sunrise Lake power before construction of the project would begin. Accordingly, the City is Lois Cashell, Secretary December 31, 1997 Page 5 considering linking the operational start-up date of Sunrise Lake Water and Hydroelectric Power Project to that of the Swan-Tyee Intertie -- January 2000. Very truly yours, HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & McAULIFFE al Ae fe Todd G. Glass Attachments: Exhibits A & B Enclosures: Original and three copies ce: City of Wrangell, Alaska (w/o Exhibit B) Steve Brady, District Ranger (w/ exhibits) Tongass Nat’! Forest - Wrangell Ranger District \ Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (w/ exhibits) , We ATV@CET mene ee | | A541 4 ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING (360) 734-9033 WATER SAMPLE INFORMATION FOR INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSES DO NOT WRITE IN SHADED AREA. PLEASE FILL BOXES NUMBERED 1 THRU 14. SEE BACK FOR INSTRUCTIONS LABORATORY REPORT DO NOT WRITE INSIDE THIS BOX) 2 aay NAME: Arsenic As| 0.05? | Oli rice La E e Barium Ba| 2.0? Wye pe I A i I | Beryllium Be| 0.004 Cadmium_ Cd} 0.005? 3. SYSTEM LD. #: 4. CIRCLE GROUP Chromium Cr 0.1? 1 ia - TTT PNA EAE Copper: Cu 1.0 MAMA 8. SOURCE NO.: 9. SOURCE NAME: Silver Ag! O01 10. COLLECTED BY: fete dX Hawalley — | | Sodium Na i) [PHONE (_342)_(o7/-1/0.|| Thallium Ti! 0.002 5. COUNTY: + } Z . LU aAgelh. Ak Iron Fel 0.3 ae v , 6. Soca ah Pol 0.05? TTL oa Tl GXsurrace O] weit ——————— ee Cisprinc () PURCHASE Manganese Mn| 0.05 | << ’ os 7. SAMPLE TAKEN: Mercury Hg| 0.002? | —— ke Gkserore (]arTer ; : S TREATMENT TREATMENT Nickel Nil 0.1 <= PP. Selenium Se a 4 y << x Ke ZL (ey al ae i NINA N R IN O [< 11 IF TAKEN AFTER TREATMENT, —- aan Ley ‘i CHECK TREATMENT: Zinc Zn 5.0 m (J FLUORIDATION eve (of gf x LL C1 CHLORINATION Hardness [FILTRATION Conductivity 700 (CO waTER SOFTENER, lecpnasbecanientetsliacioiind TYPE: Turbidity 1.0? Oo OTHER» ___ Color 15.0 12, IF TAKEN FROM DISTRIBUTION. INDICATE ADDRESS: Chloride Cc! 250 —+- ——__- — Cyanide CN 0.2 13. PARTY TO PAY FOR TESTING: Fluoride Fi 2.0? Nitrate asN} 10.0? SIGNATURE: | NAME: itrite as N 1.0 + S04} 250 500 14, REMARKS: (water quality problems, address for extra ToL etc.) fotein al pow AIWIic ipa! Yow ‘ Yat or Source. Hie $27 Cle Len PPP thing: A bonik S FERC Project No. 11591-000 2nd 6-Month Progress Report Exhibit A DATE OF REPORT: /).7- 7 7 |. P - Primary ee > Total Dissolved Solids WATER SUPPLIER COPY , ¢ ' Avocet Environmental Testing 1500 North State Street, Suite 200 Bellingham, WA 98225 (360) 734-9033 Client Contact Name P.O. # Chain of Custody Date Sampled Date Received Date Reported Project Matrix Sunrise Lake near outlet pi AV@CET ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING Hydrology, N.W., Inc. Pete Rittmueller Wrangell #2 C10426 10/23/97 10/24/97 11/7/97 Sunrise Lake on Woronkefski Island near Wrangell, AK Surface Water EPA Sample Date Source of Sample Log Number Test Performed Method _ Result Units Analyzed Analyst 05737174 Total Coliform sm9221B 8 MPN/100m! = 10/24/97 CF Fecal Coliform sm9221B <2 MPN/100mi = 10/24/97 CF (Sample 02A) <= Less Than CE ‘Laboratory Supervisor _ Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study Report DRAET of hoaeaen = K cay December 1997 FERC Project No. 11591-000 2nd 6-Month Progress Report Exhibit B Hae January _, 1998 Mr. Scott W. Seabury City Manager City of Wrangell 205 Bruegar P.O. Box 531 Wrangell, AK 99929 Subject: Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study Report Dear Mr. Seabury: We herewith submit the Feasibility Study Report describing our investigations and recommendations for the Sunrise Lake Project. Our principal findings, conclusions and recommendations are set forth in the Executive Summary of the report. Details of the geotechnical and environmental site reconnaissance, supporting data, project development and conclusions are described in subsequent sections of the report. Respectfully submitted, R. W. BECK, INC. Stephen M. Hart, PE Project Manager SMH/ato Enclosure c: Todd Glass, Heller Ehrman Eric Redman, Heller Ehrman FILE: 12-00394-10000-00001 (O:\HART\SMH223.D0C) 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500 Seattle, WA 98154-1004 Phone (206) 695-4700 Fax (206) 695-4701 ® CERTIFICATE OF ENGINEER SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY ds The technical material and data contained in this report were compiled by John Haapala, PE.; Dr. David Hoopes; Jessica Guerrette; Reed Kelly, RE.; and Wilson Binger, PE., under the supervision and direction of Stephen M. Hart, PE., whose seal as a Professional Engineer is affixed below. (Washington seal to go here) Stephen M. Hart R. W. Beck, Inc. Date: (Alaska seal to go here) Reed Kelly R. W. Beck, Inc. Date: CITY OF WRANGELL/ SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL CERTIFICATE OF ENGINEER SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION GENERAL ......cssesesseeseseseereeees Authorization peat Scope! of Currentlnvestigations)cr-cccsssccccsscessasecesecsacecessaceeecsuseconensteereerssrers Backpround toi Present Study’ cccccccqcssersccacsrsrctscconstscvsseaseroovaserscsnsuceaceeceeees WATER SUPPLY Dee Water Demand|iccscc.cccoccscrsecsssrseressssosscrcessarseseeasserseeserseseectavventtecerers: teeter SEGTION:2 SSITE CONDITIONS. scccccosssccccssescccsvcssssstessesccoveccsscssecccecerscucsseuse ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS .. tees IMO UCT ON eecccceccacecsccsesecrececcereesescceseneeeecceneccesseree tee tee erate erates Recreation ae hazardous materials............ssscsescsesscsesscsseseesessescseseescseeeceeeaseaeeeeaeeeseeeaees Impacts Associated With Project Development ...........::cscsscssessesesseseeseneees 2-5 Summary of Environmental Assessment ev GEOLOGIC] CONDIMIONS treereccceccscccsscsanssescvesstsscsnssseersensessseeseceeresscsecseetss TIVIDROU OGY crvccccscsacceacsnscsscconcsentecacenccsscsnccesnsssstescssunecunssuasesesuseteneeseeeerees OWNERSHIP OF PROJECT LANDS ... eee WATERIQUALNTYccrccceccnrsecsorcnscorsersoscsscnacatsersvarscrsursonserssecersstcectcuasasstccs Tents X0110222.181 12/3/97 AH [ ( N TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 3 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS. .......sscsssesseeseeeeeeseees 3-1 INTRODUCTION Qu. eececccsceceeceeeeeeeseseessnsscnceeceeceseeeseeeececeeeeseesseeeeesesseneaes 3-1 WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT .........:ssssececsssssccccccesessseeceesseeeesecessseeeeessnes 3-1 General............0000 Water Treatment... Design Criteria Estimated Bottom Conditions .........c..ccsccccessecssseccesscccessecessesecssceeesseecenseens 3-4 Alignimentiecstscscssacecsecssccsrecesccsseceescasecscccesccescsssresussrcerercsnsnrasreneetese steer raeey 3-4 Construction Technique.. WATER SUPPLY PROJECT... 3-5 OTHER WATER SUPPLY SOURCES. 13-6 HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT....... aaioe9 General eccsccsscsecesscesvcctesccesrsccestcesrs7 nc x) Penstock Alignment /Powerhouse Site.. 13-9 Base) Casen crerccesssrsrccsncceccteccertetcerccentterentttneee eect 3-10 Construction Cost Estimates .......ssscscseseereeessseeesenseeeseseeeseaeeeseeseeeeeenees Comparison of Alternatives.......... SUNRISE WATERSHED STORAGE Siphon; Developed Storage csccccccccsccccsssscecestssesesessusccsaccsssessusarvncrcassesseses SUNRISE LAKE SIPHON INTAKE AND VACUUM PUMP HOUSE....... 3-13 GROUSE AND DEER LAKES Sunrise Lake Dam POWEIStUCicsiscesssssceccescecsscactocecsecceneecencectccescceoereeseeeettertett rere eeeneaeete Construction Cost Estimates ............... Comparison of Storage Alternatives.... SECTION 4 POWER OPERATION STUDIEG..........:scccssscesssseeeseeeeeeeceeseeeeenee 4-1 ROW. ERISIIW Di ESttamrsessssecenracssrecsnccocenssrsnencsuneessurssnarecvoncssesssecesesctestcceetss7 4-1 SECTION 5 SELECTED PROJECT ARRANGEMENT...........:csssessseeseseeseceeeenee 5-1 GENERA lBeecsentscessceccnssscsesecrenresurertcceurestecestssrereses pesmi HEADWORKS... PENSTOCK ....... pera POWER OW SEcrscsscccsccconsseuceraccsctsseccnaceuctesncescctsarcsctesncccecscscceccerssnccsscctsatets 5-3 ailFacelandWaterslatikteccrescerstesscsrssecrssseseersesssertescssssstecstcsnrsrestestsensseseacs 5-3 WATER PIPELINE oe Buried | Pipeline Segmenticcccsrscsececseccecssseesrseseessccnacorscerascrsocesntceeseescateesees 5-3 Marineteipeline srscssscsesstcrrstssrtectererstssacersustastestenrstesersstatentrsnsensc™ tetceretet 5-4 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W. Beck ii City OF WRANGELL/ SUNRISE LAKE WATER SupPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY SITETACCESSt ECE EEUU EEE EEE EEE Ee 5-4 TRANSMISSION AND INTERCONNECTION .....ccccscscssesesessescscsesscsessesescseees 5-4 SECTION 6 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST AND SCHEDULE...........004 6-1 CEE eT EEUU CEE EU EL ELE EL 6-1 BASISIOR. GOSTSH eee Ee Direct Construction Cost. CONTINGENCIES ........eeceeeseeererteeeeeeenees «6-1 Engineering and Owner Administration . «6-2 otal Construction COStscsrssaccucstscesscecssrsuccsssetncceesssstrsconesesnccsestsarceessessseres 6-2 Interest DuringiGonstructionvessscsesrescessrcseeesecesttttsettoetertsescseseteceeseseseretee 6-2 Total Investment Cost Escalationvessressscsrsscecsecsrssccscsrcsetucsesccencecsecsacsrececacesestesteccosesreaccesseseccetsteets Design and Contract Documents.. COMSUUCHION <2. sccconecovesonsenes=4 WATIER SUPPLY TIREATIMENIccccctsossecotaccsuscraccaccssascseseaccsasetacssacecesceesuccecscend 6-6 SECTION 7 ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSES .......sccscssessessesesseneesceeeneeee 7-1 ECONOMIGIANALYS IStrscmrecssrcstnssscstecscertncestccessesascrsrtcerarersrsessensersscernracers 7-1 Genefal ievsecsssesssseseseees e771 Financing AsSUMptiONs..........seseerereereeeeees woe 7-2 FIRST-YEAR TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS .....scssessesseseseesesreeeneees vee 772 ANNUAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE DIESEL INSTALLATION .......sceeeeeees 7-3 SENSITIVUTNZANALYS IStecscecessssetetecctasseccrescsstecesssscsersstsrcntcetsscssrancesverscesrese 7-5 SECTION 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION SG ..........csseceeeseeseeneees 8-1 CONCLUSIONS Benssesesenssteccencsecsscessrssssesseerssesseecesenresats 28-1 RECOMMENDATIONS tecssccerccesrsarstsstsaccusensacersstenccesctsscousersscestcescersncecenesees 8-2 SECTION 9 REFERENCES. .......csscscssesssreseresccsseesersaceasencersassnsessncsessnsecsessasecsess 9-1 X0110222.181 12/3097 R. W. Beck © iii a TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDICES APPENDIX A GEOTECHNI7AL SITE RECONNAISSANCE TRIP REPORT APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX C POWER OPERATION TABLES APPENDIX D DETAILED CONSTRUCTION COSTS This report has been prepared for the use of the client for the specific purposes identified in the report. The conclusions, observations, and recommendations contained herein attributed to R. W. Beck, Inc., (“R. W. Beck”) constitute the opinions of R. W. Beck. To the extent that statements, information, and opinions provided by the client or others have been used in the preparation of this report, R. W. Beck has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended and no representations or warranties are made. R. W. Beck makes no certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report. Copyright 1997, R. W. Beck, Inc. All rights reserved. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY gaa EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents our evaluation of the feasibility of constructing a combined water supply and hydroelectric power project for the City of Wrangell (City). The proposed project would involve developing the potential of Sunrise Lake on Woronkofski Island to meet the City’s future water supply and power needs. This report summarizes results of a geotechnical field reconnaissance and environmental survey and office studies including hydrology, optimization, cost estimates and economic sensitivity. We investigated various project designs, including Penstock alignment, installed capacity, storage and water supply pipeline alignment. We also compared the water supply component with and without hydro elements. We made economic comparisons and selected an optimum size project based on maximum power benefits at minimum cost. Sunrise Lake is located in a small subalpine basin of 1.2 square miles on Woronkofski Island, approximately six miles southwest of Wrangell. The outlet creek from the lake descends 1,500 feet through heavily forested terrain. Hydrologic studies determined that average annual runoff available for generation and water supply is 12.9 cfs. The proposed Project would consist of the following features: a jetty on the beach of Woronkofski Island; a 0.3 mile access road from the jetty to the powerhouse that would meet minimum Forest Service standards and that would be used only for construction, operation and maintenance; a 10-foot high concrete-faced rockfill structure and siphon intake for developing 1,560 acre-feet of storage at Sunrise Lake; a 1.5-mile-long steel Penstock, with a 20-inch diameter; a powerhouse located at about El. 200 containing a 2.5 MW and a 300 kW Pelton turbine-generator unit developed for an average gross head of 1,770 feet; a substation and interconnection facilities to the Tyee transmission powerline; chlorination facilities; a buried 12-inch HDPE water line that extends 1.8 miles alongside the Tyee transmission line; and a 2.4 mile-long, 12-inch marine pipeline. The proposed Project would provide 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD) of additional water to Wrangell; 2,500 kW of dependable capacity; 12,500,000 kWh of average annual energy; and 9,800,000 kWh of firm energy during an adverse hydrologic period. Based on the analysis of a single sample, Sunrise Lake water requires only disinfection to meet the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) standards for a domestic water supply. However, an on-going water sampling and testing program must be conducted to meet all SWTR requirements. The Direct Construction Cost of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately $6,480,000. After including 25 percent for contingencies, 20 percent for engineering, and escalation to a scheduled January 1999 bid date, the proposed project would have a Total Construction Cost of $10,010,000. X0110222.181 1230/97 mg i a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The estimated cost of energy from the Sunrise Lake Project, assuming complete subsidy of the water supply component by sales of hydroelectric power, is approximately 78 mills/kWh in the year 2000 as shown in the table below. If the water supply component can be funded separately (e.g., from state and/or federal grant programs), the cost of energy can be reduced to approximately 38 mills/kWh. This compares favorably to 64 mills/kWh for Tyee energy. The cost of the hydro portion was calculated by subtracting the cost of a water supply project from the total multipurpose project cost. The estimated cost of energy assumes a favorable power sales agreement where all potential energy from the project can be used. If such an agreement cannot be achieved, it would require shaping the generation to the load pattern, which would reduce Project generation by roughly 25 percent and result in an estimate of energy cost of approximately 50 mills/kWh. The economic cost of energy can be reduced by subtracting the cost of a 2.5 MW diesel generator, assuming that the City could avoid installing the generator. SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Cost COMPARISON WATER SuPPLy PROJECT AND WATER SUPPLY WITH HYDRO Water Supply Description Water Supply With Hydro Preparatory Work $ 374,000 $ 534,000 Headworks 244,000 617,000 Penstock/Pipeline 811,000 1,636,000 Power Plant/Energy Dissipater 102,000 1,530,000 Water Supply/Chlorination 65,000 65,000 Water Supply Pipeline 1,620,000 1,620,000 Transmission/Interconnection 20,000 ___ 480,000 Direct Construction Cost (Rounded) $3,240,000 $6,480,000 Total Construction Cost (Bid 1/99) $5,170,000 $10,010,000 Total Annual Cost $974,000 Average Annual Energy (MWh) 12,449 Cost of Energy (mills/kWh) 78 Cost Component for Hydro $4,840,000 Annual Cost of Hydro Component $471,000 Cost of Energy (mills/kWh) 38 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In general the proposed Project poses no unusual technical problems. Further, we believe that any permanent adverse environmental impact would be minimal. We recommend that Project development continue with FERC licensing starting with the FERC first-stage information package issued on January 1, 1998; pre- design work, including field investigations, this spring and summer; initiation of preliminary discussions with the State of Alaska on a purchase power sales agreement; and continuation of the water quality sampling program at Sunrise Lake. Assuming that a FERC license exemption can be granted by May 31, 1999, it is anticipated that the Project can be placed into commercial operation by January 2000. This schedule assumes, however, that we would begin final design about a year prior to issuance of an exemption order by the FERC. Beginning final design before receiving the exemption creates the risk of higher project design and construction costs if the FERC exemption order requires significant modifications after design work has begun or if the order requires changes that may also necessitate constructing additional features. However, this schedule assumes that final design would begin about a year prior to the FERC issue of exemption order, which is considered risk in both higher Project design and construction costs. The City may wish to consider a less aggressive schedule that would place the Project into commercial operation in January 2001. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 0-3 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION RW HECK SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION GENERAL Wrangell’s water supply is constrained by the City’s isolation and by the geological and topographical features of Wrangell Island. Currently, Wrangell collects the runoff from a small unnamed creek in two impoundments with a total capacity of 62 million gallons (190 acre-feet). The water is disinfected with chlorine before distribution. The water supply does not presently meet the EPA's Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) standards for drinking water, and the City has plans to construct a treatment plant (ozonation and slow sand filtration) and a new 400,000-gallon storage tank. Although Wrangell’s current water supply is adequate to serve the City’s existing residential population, any _ significant growth, including potential industrial/commercial, would require a greater supply, as well as increased treatment plant capacity. There are apparently no feasible sources at any accessible location on Wrangell Island (see Fig. 1-1). The inability to expand the City’s water supply is considered to be a major hindrance to economic development. The City wants to address both its future water supply and electric power needs by taking advantage of the combined hydroelectric and water supply potential that Sunrise Lake on Woronkofski Island appears to offer. AUTHORIZATION The work performed in this study was authorized by the City of Wrangell by an agreement for Engineering Consulting Services dated October 17, 1997. SCOPE OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of Sunrise Lake as a multipurpose project with water supply and a hydroelectric unit. As a water supply development, the Project would have the following components: 1) a siphon intake structure at Sunrise Lake; 2) a high-pressure pipeline with energy dissipation valve on Woronkofski Island; 3) a predominantly marine pipeline; and 4) a terminal storage tank on Wrangell Island. As a water supply project with hydroelectric development, the Project components would include the following additional components: 1) a high-pressure penstock with power plant; and 2) a terminal storage tank for power plant discharges. The penstock would have a larger diameter to accommodate higher flow requirements for hydroelectric SECTION 1 operation. The powerhouse would contain a single Pelton turbine-generator unit designed for remote operation. In addition to providing a feasibility report, the study will include initial discussions with the resource agencies to see what environmental mitigation would be requested. An environmental survey will be performed and agency consultation initiated as required during the FERC first-stage consultation process. The conclusion of this regulatory/environmental investigation will be the preparation and submittal of the first stage consultation package, required for either a license or exemption application. BACKGROUND TO PRESENT STUDY In May 1977, R. W. Beck was commissioned by the Thomas Bay Power Authority to investigate the hydroelectric potential of several sites to meet the projected power requirements of the Petersburg-Wrangell area. The investigation culminated in an Appraisal Report, The Virginia Lake Project, dated August 1977. Recommendations were made in that report to consider developing the Virginia Lake Project, but not to consider further, at that time, development of the Anita- Kunk, Thoms Lake or Sunrise Lake hydroelectric projects. The principal reason Sunrise Lake was not considered feasible at that time was the high cost of transmitting power to the communities of Wrangell and Petersburg, which accounted for 60 percent of the direct construction costs. Completion of the Tyee Lake Project in May 1984, which included a 138-kV transmission line that connects Woronkofski Island with Wrangell Island, makes the current cost of transmission negligible. A reconnaissance level study performed by the Bentley Company (June 1997) revisited the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power from Sunrise Lake. Based on the conclusions from this study, the City decided to move forward with the Project. In addition to the hydroelectric element of the Project, the City is interested in the feasibility of Sunrise Lake as a water source. No investigations have been performed on this other than a preliminary estimate by the Bentley Company of $1.4 million to $1.7 million for a marine pipeline crossing. Presently, the City is obtaining water samples from Sunrise Lake to better assess water quality. A stream gage was installed on October 23, 1997, to gather additional hydrologic information on the Sunrise Lake watershed. WATER SUPPLY The Wrangell water system serves residential and commercial customers in the City and south along Zomovia Highway. Wilson Engineering of Bellingham, Washington, prepared an assessment of the system in 1995, which is summarized in a report dated September 1995. Subsequently, Wilson Engineering assisted the City with preliminary engineering for water filtration facilities that would bring X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 1-2 INTRODUCTION the City’s existing source into compliance with the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR). A report describing these activities was completed in December 1996. The City has decided to proceed with design and construction of the filtration plant. Design is currently underway, with bidding scheduled for April 1998. The new facilities should be on-line by the end of 1998. The City of Wrangell presently gets water from two reservoirs located on the south side of the City. These reservoirs receive water from approximately 500 acres that drain directly into them. According to the City’s water system manager, there is also a diversion from another drainage area into the upper reservoir. There is no information or study available that discusses the firm yield of the existing City supply. Records from the June 1994 through May 1995 period show that both reservoirs were full except for the summer months when the lower reservoir was drafted. During that period, the water level in the lower reservoir dropped to about elevation 288 feet. This drop corresponds to a volume of about 11 million gallons, or approximately half the available storage in the lower reservoir. The upper reservoir has a usable volume of about 45 million gallons and remained full throughout the year. The quality of the water from the reservoirs is typical of surface water from the lower elevations in Southeast Alaska with low pH, high color, turbidity due to organics in the water, and high iron and manganese content. At present the water is chlorinated as it enters the distribution system, but is not filtered or otherwise treated. Past testing of the water in the distribution system has detected small amounts of trihalomethane, but levels have not exceeded the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for TTHM’s. Based on Wilson Engineering’s preliminary engineering, including pilot testing, the proposed treatment plant should produce treated water that will meet all water quality standards except for iron which will remain slightly above the MCL. The new treatment facilities will include ozonation, a roughing filter, a slow sand filter, and chlorination. The facilities will be located below the lower reservoir at Elevation 245 feet. Water from the filtration plant clearwell will be pumped into a new 400,000-gallon reservoir with a base elevation of 310 feet and a maximum water surface elevation of 340 feet. A copy of the hydraulic profile for the proposed plant is included as Fig. 1-2. WATER DEMAND Water demand in the City averages about 700,000 gallons per day, with peak demands of slightly over one million gallons per day (MGD) in the summer months and minimum demands of about one-half MGD in the fall and spring months. Based on the current population of about 2,400 people, the average water use is approximately 290 gallons per capita per day. The 1995 Water System Assessment projected demands throughout the year 2020 based on an annual X0110222.181 1230/97 R. W. Beck 1-3 SECTION 1 growth of one percent. Based on these projections, the peak day demand in 2020 will be 1.3 MGD. In sizing the water system facilities related to the Sunrise Lake Project, we assumed that the project would deliver a maximum day flow of 1.5 MGD to Wrangell Island. This amount is sufficient to meet the forecasted demand of the City and will provide a redundant source based on current usage rates. The new source can be used for the development of new industries. For comparison purposes, 1.5 MGD would serve a town of about 3,600 people at Wrangell’s present demand rate, or it could meet the needs of all local canneries operating at their peak daily capacity. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 1-4 UPPER RASERVOIR ‘LOWER RESERVOIR : : : : : 3 3 : 3 3 HYORAULIC & GRADKLINE | PERFORATED INLET HEADER TOTAL LENCIN = 40% 1$00 uF 17 — ROUCHING 0s aw wore _ PILTER SCHMUSZOECKE! | OZONE WAIER METER, STRAINER CONTACTOR COMIROL VAWES AND ; PEI EROMAIEO INLET HEADER SLOW SAND FILTERS FIGURE 1-2 RESERVOIR i OVERFLOW = 341° 7) Pune OF = 34M... Ete | 1S] PUMP ON = 335° 2ND PUMP ON = 330° i To oistABYTON BASE = stor SYSTEM; UNDER ORAN PIPE TONAL LENGIN = 316° LF © RPE w/0 25° GAMICES (1,656) @ J OC. HEADLOSS THROUGH INOMDUAL: FWICRS @ 300 GPM ; | i CONTROL VALVE od ORINCE A coos AND MISC FIMINGS a !CLEARWELL FUTER FeuSHCO FLOOK ELeV = 245° . MAXIMUM SUPCHNATAN) CLCV. = 255° PIPE CALLEKY figsitd FLOOR ELEV. = 243° WNIEMIOR ROOF tity. = 257° 3 SOURCE — WILSON ENGINEERING : SECTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS RWECK SECTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS INTRODUCTION Woronkofski Island (see photo 1 in Appendix B), under study as the site for a proposed water supply and hydroelectric power development for the City of Wrangell, is an uninhabited island within the Tongass National Forest. This 11,095 acre island lies about four miles southwest of the City of Wrangell, and about two miles from Wrangell Island at its closest point. The Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project transmission line runs from Wrangell Island under Zimovia Strait and crosses the northern portion of Woronkofski Island (Photos 2 & 3) to reenter the water in Stikine Strait near Wedge Point (Photos 4 & 5) and the outlet stream from Sunrise Lake. Sunrise Lake (elevation 1970 feet) (see Photo 6) is a natural lake of about 50 surface acres with a maximum depth of about 100 feet. The lake lies in a basin near the center of the island surrounded by hills from about 2400 to 3200 feet in elevation. The lake has a watershed of about 1.17 square miles that includes two smaller lakes, Grouse Lake at elevation 2,034 and Deer Lake at about elevation 2150. Sunrise Lake is drained by Sunrise Creek (see Photo 7) which flows for a distance of about 1.7 miles to Stikine Strait. Total drainage area of the creek is 2.8 square miles. From its outlet at Sunrise Lake, the creek flows through a steep channel over bedrock, boulders, and falls. About midway down the valley the gradient lessens and the valley walls widen. Here beavers have dammed the stream to create a pond several acres in extent. From this point downstream, Sunrise Creek flows through a shallow bedrock canyon showing evidence of active erosion along the stream banks with the addition of large woody debris. A series of low falls and rapids downstream of the beaver dam further reduces habitat for about % mile. A 25-foot waterfall (Photo 8) located about % mile above tidewater prevents all further upstream movement of fish. From the waterfall down to tidewater the substrate is comprised of bedrock and boulders. Conditions are unsuitable for spawning throughout this lower reach and the inter-tidal zone, the entire reach being one long rapid (Photos 9 & 10). A major tributary enters Sunrise Creek on the left bank about 100 yards downstream from the waterfall (Photo 11). VEGETATION The vegetation on Woronkofski Island is typical of the coastal spruce-hemlock forests of Southeast Alaska. These forests are composed primarily of western electors | Nate Aa SECTION 2 hemlock, Tsuga heterophyllia, Sitka spruce, Picea sitchensis, mountain hemlock, Tsuga mertensiana, Alaska-cedar, Chamaecyparis nootkatensis, red alder, Alnus rubra, and black cottonwood, Populus trichocarpa. Red alder is common along streams and beach fringes, and on soils recently disturbed by logging and landslides. Blueberries and huckleberries, Vaccinium sp.; highbush cranberry, Viburnum edula; salal, Gaultheria shallon; and devilsclub, Oplopanax horridus, are the most important shrubs. Because of the high rainfall and resulting high humidity, mosses grow in great profusion on the ground, on fallen logs, and on the lower branches and trunks of trees. In the open alpine areas around Sunrise lake cassiopes, Cassiope sp., provide an almost continuous ground cover. At these higher elevations the prevailing southerly winds have pruned most of the taller trees growing on open, exposed slopes. An area along the northwestern shore of the island was clear-cut some years ago and a good stand of primarily western hemlock has come in following logging. An old logging road up the Sunrise Creek valley is demarked by a vigorous growth of red alder along its route. The Tyee Lake transmission line right-of-way (ROW) has been cleared of all trees for a width of about 100 feet. Shrubs, herbs and mosses provide a dense ground cover along the cleared portion of the ROW. WILDLIFE Sunrise Creek was surveyed in 1981 by Forest Service fishery biologists who determined that salmon did not use the outlet stream for spawning. A Tlingit Elder, Dick Stokes, who has live in the Wrangell area for over 70 years also reported that salmon had never been known to spawn in Sunrise Creek. This observation was further substantiated by Todd Harding and Jim Lesley, charter boat operators from Wrangell. The two biologists did, however, observe small cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus clarki, up to about seven inches both downstream and upstream of the major falls. No attempt was made to confirm these observations during the initial field study for the present project. Woronkofski Island supports a population of Sitka blacktail deer, Odocoileus hemionus, and some sign was present although we saw no deer during the two days we spent on the island. Local hunters often hunt deer on Woronkofski Island according to Dick Stokes. One wolf, Canis lupus, track was observed. Wolves are known to frequent the island, preying primarily on the deer living there. Black bear, Ursus americanus, scat was common, the bear(s) having fed heavily on the ripe blueberries which were abundant on the island. Three bald eagles, Haliaeetus leucocephalus, were observed along the shoreline between Wedge Point and the point at which the TBPA transmission line leaves Woronkofski Island for Wrangell Island. These three birds were separated about equidistant from each other along the shoreline on both days. No eagle nests X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 2-2 SiTE CONDITIONS were observed between Wedge Point and the cable crossing. Other than an occasional raven, Corvus corax, birds were not noticeable at the site. One dipper, Cinclus mexicanus, was observed along the lower reach of Sunrise Creek and eight common mergansers, Mergus merganser, were seen feeding along the beach near the cable crossing at low tide. The most recent information received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, letter dated 11/12/97 from Mike Jacobson, FWS Eagle Management Specialist to Dr. David Hoopes, R. W. Beck) is based on a 1985 survey made prior to construction of the Tyee Lake transmission line. At that time four eagle nests were located between the Sunrise Creek estuary and the point at which the Tyee Lake cable crosses from Woronkofski Island to Wrangell Island. The FWS has suggested that a new nest survey be conducted in conjunction with the proposed Sunrise Lake Project. The best time to conduct a nest survey to determine active occupancy is during the first half of May after nesting eagles have had the opportunity to complete nest construction and have begun to lay and incubate their clutch. Regulations prohibit ground disturbance within 330 feet of any eagle nest and no repeated helicopter flights within 1/4 mile of an active nest between March 1 and August 31. The intertidal zone is, for the most part, rather steep and comprised of bedrock and boulders along the upper zone with broken rock, sand and gravel in the lower zone. A large, low gradient, sandy beach is present just north of the cable crossing and is a favorite recreation spot for residents of Wrangell. The beach provides habitat for a variety of shellfish, including the basket cockle, Clinocardium nuttalli. A thorough inventory of intertidal fauna was not compiled during this study. The shoreline on the Wrangell Island side of Zimovia Strait has been partially developed with boat harbors, boat launches, rip-rap, piers, and other man-made structures. Where the natural shoreline remains intact, the upper inter-tidal zone is largely composed of exposed bedrock and large boulders. A fairly short beach composed primarily of sand and gravel comprises the lower inter-tidal zone. Tides were not extreme during our visit and we were unable to determine the composition of the lower inter-tidal zone to any great degree, however, no unusual conditions were observed during our brief examination. CULTURAL SITES Discussions with Dick Stokes, a Tlingit Elder and chairman of the local Alaska Native Brotherhood chapter, indicated that there were no known sites of cultural importance on that portion of Woronkofski Island that would be involved in the proposed project. Mr. Stokes did report the presence of a grave site on East Point, more than two miles from the proposed project. According to Mr. Stokes, legends of the Stikine Tlingit people do not make reference to early use of the island except for normal hunting and gathering activities. No petroglyphs or other signs of early occupation were observed during a survey of the beach between Woronkofski Point and the cable crossing, the area in which the proposed water X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 2-3 SECTION 2 pipeline would cross the beach on its way to Wrangell Island. Likewise, no sites are known to exist on the Wrangell Island side in the area through which the pipeline would emerge and tie into the City’s present distribution system. The Forest Service notes in Appendix C of the revised Forest Plan (p. C-52) that in 1900 several gold mine claims were filed adjacent to the Elephants Nose, a rocky feature on the north end of the island. Currently proposed penstock alignment alternatives will fall almost a mile to the east of this feature, thus eliminating the possibility of compromising the historical value of the claims. AESTHETICS Woronkofski Island lies entirely within the Tongass National Forest. The most recent Land & Resource Management Plan (1997), hereinafter referred to as the Forest Plan, designates the island as having a Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of partial retention (Scenic Viewshed). In the case of Woronkofski Island, however, the FEIS notes (p. 3-192) that existing timber harvest on the western side of the island has reached or exceeded the level allowed by the adopted VQO’s, in all alternatives. While the Scenic Viewshed Land Use Designation (LUD) allows timber harvest to continue while providing for scenic quality and other values, the Forest Service has noted that further analysis may indicate that even-aged harvest will need to be reduced or deferred in this area for the next 10-20 years. Public comments on the Forest Rlan suggested assigning Sunrise Lake to the Transportation and Utility System (TUS) LUD. The Forest Service noted in its response that the TUS LUD has been applied to all potential utility interties identified by the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). No provision has been made, however, for specifically designating the proposed water supply pipeline as a TUS LUD. This designation will be requested as part of the Forest Service’s Special Use Permit application process for project construction and operation. While the final penstock alignment has not yet been selected, it is believed at this time that the visual impact of the penstock and power plant can be mitigated by careful planning and minimizing the removal of timber from the penstock alignment. Present plans are for the waterline leaving the power plant to follow the existing TBPA transmission alignment, thereby reducing the need for additional right-of-way clearing. RECREATION Woronkofski Island is an important deer hunting area for Wrangell residents. Deer habitat has suffered in recent years as a result of logging activities and commentators on the Forest Plan have stated that all timber sales on the island should be deferred indefinitely (FEIS, Appendix L, p. L-247). The Forest Plan places the island in the Scenic Viewshed LUD which will allow timber harvest to continue while providing for scenic quality and other values (ibid.). X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 2-4 SiITE CONDITIONS The saltwater bodies surrounding the island receive moderately heavy use by commercial and pleasure boats and the shoreline receives moderate recreational use, especially on the sandy beach along the northeast shore. In its Land & Resource Management Plan for the Tongass national Forest, the Forest Service notes that some recreational use occurs on the road system, generally from residents of Wrangell who sometimes transport small motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles by boat. Except for the re-vegetated logging road up the Sunrise Creek valley, we observed no evidence of a road system in the vicinity of the proposed project. Maintenance of the area in a roadless condition would enhance opportunities for resident of Wrangell to have a semi-primitive recreation experience. At present, the area provides primarily semi-primitive motorized recreational opportunities. There has been no formal support for or opposition to maintaining this area in a roadless condition. There is a good opportunity for solitude within the area, especially after one has gone a short distance from the roads. There is some subsistence use in the area as well. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS There is a potential for hazardous materials to be present on Woronkofski Island as a result of past mining, logging and construction activities. No effort was made during the present reconnaissance to locate any possible sites on the island that might contain hazardous materials. IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Proposed development of Sunrise Lake as a water source and hydroelectric project for the City of Wrangell may involve increasing the storage capacity of the lake by constructing a low (5-10 feet) dam across the lake outlet and fluctuating the lake level up to 30 feet by filling the reservoir during periods of high runoff and drawing it down during drier periods coupled with higher demand. While this mode of operation creates a potential for shoreline erosion, the probability that erosion would actually occur appears low due to the rocky nature of the shore itself. Flow from Sunrise Lake into the outlet stream would be markedly reduced during project operation (See Section on Hydrology which follows). The resident cutthroat trout population will require some instream flow for maintenance. During months with heavy precipitation, drainage from the watershed downstream of the lake (about 60 percent of the total Sunrise Creek watershed) will likely provide sufficient flow for trout. During periods of low flow, winter and late summer, instream flows at the lake outlet are planned because natural stream flows below the outlet appear to be sufficient. Construction of the penstock, powerhouse and pipeline will temporarily disturb terrestrial wildlife in the project vicinity. The removal of trees along the penstock alignment and at the powerhouse site may create a visual impact until new growth becomes established. Construction of the waterline along the existing X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 2-5 SECTION 2 TBPA right-of-way will result in a minimal loss of vegetation but will be a major disturbance during the construction phase of the project. Excavation of the inter-tidal zone to lay the water pipeline will temporarily disturb invertebrate habitat but restoration through natural colonization should be rapid and complete in a short period of time. Recreational opportunities on the beach in the vicinity of the pipeline crossing will be disrupted during construction but should return to normal soon thereafter. Impacts to fish and bottom fauna in Zimovia Strait during laying and bedding of the water pipeline will be temporary and have a minimal effect on benthic fauna due to the small size of the excavation required. On the Wrangell Island side, impacts associated with connecting the new pipeline to the existing water supply system will vary, depending on the point selected for the connection. Laying the pipeline may involve some traffic delays at times if a route along the Zimovia Highway is selected. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Based upon information available at this time and upon the results of field studies conducted from October 21 through 24, 1997, there appears to be no environmental issue that would preclude building the proposed water conveyance and hydroelectric facility as conceived at this time. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS A geotechnical site reconnaissance was performed by R&M Engineering on October 21-23, 1997. Their report is included in Appendix A. Southeast Alaska is underlain by Quaternary surficial deposits and by sedimentary, volcanic, intrusive and metamorphosed rocks ranging in age from Quaternary to Precambrian. The area is within an active tectonic belt that borders the north Pacific Basin. The bedrock outcrop pattern is the result of late Mesozoic and Tertiary deformation and intrusive events. Large scale right-lateral strike-slip faulting is common. Most of this tectonic activity is the result of the North American continental plate colliding with the Pacific plate. The physical manifestation in the bedrock structure is the general northwest southeast trend of the major mountain ranges and waterways of Southeast Alaska. Sunrise Lake is located in the central highlands of Woronkofski Island and is in a north facing glacial cirque at approximately 2000-foot elevation. Two other lakes (Grouse and Deer) share this small 1.2 square mile bowl. The outlet is covered with alpine vegetation consisting of muskeg peat, moss, heather, alpine blueberry, scrub cedar and scrub spruce trees. Extensive bedrock outcrops are prevalent in the area and are massive coarse-grained grandiorite. The outcrops had only thin surface weathering. Foundation conditions for a possible dam at X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 2-6 SITE CONDITIONS the lake are favorable. It would be necessary to remove the vegetation, fairly thin surface soil and some large angular boulders to reach bedrock. Any of the penstock routes would need to descend a 1,000-ft to 1,500-ft escarpment. The slope is very steep, with the first 1,000 feet of drop having an average slop angle of 35 degrees. The nature of the soils and bedrock are not definitely known; however, USGS mapping indicates that the penstock would be in a zone of Cretaceous sedimentation bedrock. Powerhouse foundation conditions are not known, but geomorphology and previous studies indicate that glacial till would likely be encountered. This material, if low in moisture, can provide reasonable foundation bearing. However, if wet and handled with heavy equipment, it tends to become soupy and flow. The most favorable route for the water supply pipeline on Woronkofski Island is on the natural bench that is 50-ft to 150-ft above seal level. The Tyee transmission powerline is on this bench. The soils along this bench are 1-ft to 11-ft of organics over deposits of glacial till. Generally, it appears that for the majority of the water supply pipeline route, a buried pipeline would be in glacial till covered by 1-ft to 2-ft of forest organics. HYDROLOGY The USGS gauged flows at Sunrise Lake outlet (station 15086960) for a period of three years from October 1977 through September 1980. Flows during this three-year period averaged 11.6 cfs, ranging from a low yearly average of 9.7 cfs average during water year 1978, to an average high of 13.6 cfs during water year 1980. Flows typically peak during the May and June snowmelt season, or during October rainfalls. Minimum flows would typically occur during the coldest periods of the winter. Three years of flow data is considered insufficient to establish either the long- term average flow, or the variability of flow critical to the determination of average energy generation and firm (minimum) energy generation when performing power studies. To extend the three years of flow to a long-term period, we used a multiple correlation computer model called HEC-4 Monthly Streamflow Synthesis developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center. The flow data record at Sunrise Lake outlet can be extended by correlation with other flow data in the region, but the data sets must overlap with the Sunrise Lake data. Figure 2-1 presents a summary of flow data in the region that was input to HEC-4. A 43-year period of record from 1952 through 1994 was chosen, because this period had data available from the greatest number of stations and is a record of adequate length to perform power studies. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 2-7 8-7 Pd MU L6/0€/21 ISI'7ZZOLLOX a3e3 aye] asuuns je papsoday, s6 00 £7 sz £6 981 r0 00 60 80 Le 67 ZI lon] SIZ O6F Sl GSE T8 wer St Le lh OS9 TEE Se ELZE wu 671 T9l 86 98 2. FOr 19 09 tL etl 62 6El $9% aseiaay StL ET 9 r6 691 907 SL oz UL OeL TUL TBI CC F661 TUL tw s€ OIL ZOL set s8 oor SZ ost 69 T6l «09% = «£661 9FL Ooze 62 es wor =L0t «66 IL) «80 £6 ool SOL 6 69% = 7661 STL 961 Stl 88 Tt 8«68l «698 rE OL sel 79 67 FIT OL66L OL st Sh Oz Vet soe OOF OO L£2 Ole TSE €0% LIZ 0661 96 Tl 1 eb 6b 661 GZ 00 8 Or 18 OIL “£7 6861 ssl Vit TIL OIL S6L 702 SIL HL 8s £6 09 LIZ eee 8861 TEL 617 ss £6 6 IL SIz v8 $0 SOL 60€ oS sel TOE 2861 oer 00 “Zs 17 gel g0@ £9 oce LL LH «EL 98 T0Z =: 9861 SIL FI 86 LL eZ4l 861 ¢9 TL 97 o8@ TS O7l L6Il S861 ost Zoe =O PIE 6S LIL F6e «ET $8 T8l «(06h C6 6Sl LZ F861 OIL €0L er sz TEL 91e 64 Ts TP 991 cr TZ €lz €861 $6 09 oF OOlL CLE TIZ OT 00 OF 16 rs TOL =98L 7861 SIZ PLE 601 69 £6 02 se 66 vip oso 18 9LT OE 1861 OEL 61L 16 ras €C 707 86 99 69 r6 PUL s0z SIz 0861 OIL TIL se SFL 807 6 16 bP 91 €@ co eel ete +6261 £6 s8 62 99 981 FIt 6S rT cE ly tF v9. 697 +8261 OL £0 TE tL vse 8°07 c6 6€ 9L €01 UCL 6L1 est +ZL6l LU £20 €St GIL St 66 Os £7 €or 08 $8 rs OEt 9L61 FIL se ZIL sol SOL 707 se 00 cE st 9 T8L ele SZ6l s6 OFL 8L os PLT e6L 88 00 FI LE 09 gs TH rL6l 601 08 £6 etl vol él OFS oe se 97L Fb TOL st €L6l SOL LY Sel o€ POL s6L se 69 tL 67 sr UL Ot cL6L s6 sh SIL vs PPL Lie oP 00 FE v9 os eel TE IZ6l TOL Oem Of SST “LEI LO TZ os €@ ge Sel 1h FLT OL61 66 €0 Zbl “LIL T1@ S6l o€ 00 60 80 lp TOL 60€ 6961 TST Tse 8 $8 GL ate ee O97 «=f ev 99 LEZ LOZ B9KT TL O6F ZEL FUL 6€7 sl 97 TO OT oe v9 TI 197 L961 OeL eer TOL gs T8L 8:07 9g 09 st tt v2 OL 87 9961 oor LT et eP Ost St 6€ Ot cy eZ s8 OIL Sve S961 OL OF LU oer 187 s6L 9 £0 es est SIL v8 T0€ $961 £91 £0 OF oe 6ST F6l ts “le SIz O0E “st 0:07 L% £961 U's 96 Ht 19 Te «896 LL v0 98 O98 SF $8 PRE 2961 ssl 06 £8 6ST St Fel £6 671 ¥8 807 66 esl 67E 1961 FUL se 8 +6 9Z1 OO 88 07 6s Tol «Fel «OLbL «6FSt (096L Sel 00 s6 OIL LY S07 St 87 Te 69 8 16 6FE 6S61 SZ Le Let 18 yO. Cél 98 €@ 6el O€f 92 lst 88l = 8S61 SIL TOL OLY bb cw «6LEL OE 00 a4 6 TH 86OSt 6ESt LSE rane TOL 61L PP 9€L 681 6 00 60 el Le SCL Pee 9S61 OFL Ll% PPL 06 esl 91e 8t TZ $9 SPI TOL ZL 667 SS6L 86 Tel ¥8 6s “2st Tz $0 70 ST 9€ Zs Sol TOE PS6L FOL s€ eo €CL PLL 981 se 00 st o€ ss UZ soe sé S01 61e 61L 96 FOL 007 Le 10 el 1T co LL 681 TS6L — ee aa —— eax a8eiaay dag S3ny nf unf Aew idy wp qjaq uef 22d «AON OPO Jaye []2@3ue1M Jeau ja]INC aye] astuns - (sJ9) sMOT] paynyysuoday pure ILI0}sSTPY TT P19eL Z NOLLD&3S SiTE CONDITIONS Results of the HEC-4 data extension were generally acceptable; there appeared to be sufficient correlation between the Sunrise Lake outlet data and that from other stations to produce a reasonably reliable long-term record of monthly flows. Results of the HEC-4 record extension are shown in Table 2-1. The long-term average flow was estimated to be 12.9 cfs, ranging from a maximum average annual flow of 21.8 cfs, to a minimum average annual flow of 9.5 cfs. A monthly flow duration curve based on the 43-year period of data is presented in Fig. 2-2. OWNERSHIP OF PROJECT LANDS Project lands on Woronkofski Island are entirely contained within the Tongass National Forest. WATER QUALITY The water from Sunrise Lake was sampled on October 23, 1997, and tested by Avocet Environmental Testing for standard inorganic chemicals and for both total coliform and fecal coliform. The results of these tests are listed in Table 2-2. The tests show that the water is of good quality, typical of a high lake in an undisturbed watershed. For all the tests except coliform, the water meets EPA standards for drinking water. TABLE 2-2 SUNRISE LAKE WATER QUALITY Test Performed Sample Results Units Antimony Sb .005 mg/1 Arsenic As 0.01 mg/1 Barium BA 0.02 mg/1 Beryllium Be 002 mg/1 Cadmium Cd 0005 mg/1 Chromium Cr 0.005 mg/1 Copper Cu 0.005 mg/1 Iron Fe 0.02 mg/1 Lead Pb 0.002 mg/1 Manganese Mn 0.005 mg/1 Mercury Hg -0005 mg/1 Nickel Ni 0.01 mg/1 Selenium Se 0.005 mg/1 Silver Ag 0.002 mg/1 Sodium Na 5 mg/1 Thallium Ti 001 mg/1 Zinc Zn 0.01 mg/1 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 2-9 SECTION 2 Test Performed Sample Results Units Hardness 6 mg/l AS CaCO3 Conductivity 11 umhos/cm 25° Tubidity 0.2 NTU Color 10.0 Color Units Chloride CI 1.0 mg/1 Cyanide CN 0.02 mg/1 Fluoride f 0.2 mg/1 Nitrate as N 0.5 mg/1 Nitrate as N 0.5 mg/1 Sulfate SO 11 mg/1 TDS 14 mg/1 Total Coliform 8/100ml Fecal Coliform <2/100ml X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W Beck 2-10 Station Sunrise Lake Outlet USGS 15086960 Goat Creek near Wrangell - USGS 15024750 Harding River near Wrangell - USGS 15022000 Mahoney Creek near Ketchikan - USGS 15068000 Fish Creek near Ketchikan - USGS 15072000 Upper Mahoney Lake Outlet - USGS 15067900 Gold Creek neat Ketchikan - USGS 15050000 Old Tom Creek near Kasaan - USGS 15085100 Big Creek near Point Baker - USGS 15086600 Complete years of record Partial years of record EE Hi FIGURE 2-1 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT DATA AVAILABILITY-WATER YEARS gaa ——| Based on 43 y years of historic and reconstituted monthly flows for the period 1952-1994 o oa oe o Flow (cfs) & 40 50 60 80 90 Percent of Time Flow is Exceeded FIGURE 2-2 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT MONTHLY FLOW DURATION CURVE Vai a te \wa, CANADA Mitkof Isiand fila KEY MAP VIRGINIA LAKE LEGEND .a PROPOSED POWERHOUSE = -——t—|—_ PROPOSED WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE Lom . -———-— -— EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE Wrangell Island Zarembo Island ZD LAKES (ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY SOURCES) 5 ° 5 miles al ha ease Scale - \ THOMS LAKE FIGURE 1-1 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA TO TYEE LAKE HYDRO PROJECT SUNRISE LAKE PROJECT LOCATION MAP Etolin Island SECTION 3 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS A aH SECTION 3 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS INTRODUCTION Development of Sunrise Lake for water supply, with or without hydropower, will require construction of an intake at Sunrise Lake, a pipeline or Penstock from the lake down to the shore, and a submarine pipeline to Wrangell Island. Development of hydropower will also require storage at Sunrise Lake, and a larger capacity pipeline or Penstock and a powerhouse. The alternatives for each part of the Project that were studied to arrive at the selected Project arrangement are described below. Because the Sunrise Lake Project was first identified as a power project, initial layouts were aimed at optimizing the hydroelectric potential of the site. In this study, previous layouts, as well as other alternatives, were studied for both hydropower and water supply. Our general approach was to determine the basic requirements for water supply and then to add hydropower as an adjunct to the project. This process established a base case which could then be optimized with regard to storage potential and power capacity. WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT GENERAL Major concerns in planning to supply water to Wrangell from Sunrise Lake are the amount of water needed and the head necessary to get the water to Wrangell. As discussed in Section 1, the Sunrise Lake supply is being planned for a peak daily flow of 1.5 MGD. The hydraulic head required to get water to Wrangell depends on pipe size. As water velocity in the pipe increases, friction also increases. Enough hydraulic head is needed to overcome this friction. The following table shows how hydraulic head and capacity change with pipe diameter. Pipe Diameter Length Headloss Flow 10 inch 22,100 feet 170 feet 1.5 MGD 12 inch 22,100 feet 70 feet 2.3 MGD ronment 125087 pH SECTION 3 For planning purposes, the project is designed to get water from Sunrise Lake to the shore of Wrangell Island south of the City. This study assumes that a pump station would be located at the point of connection to the City’s main water line along the Zomovia Highway and provide sufficient pressure to convey Sunrise Lake water to the City’s new storage tank (in design at this time), located in Wrangell. Alternatively, the water could be used south of the City which would require pumping to a new storage tank at that location. Costs for the Wrangell Island facilities are not included in this study. Given the relatively high elevation of Sunrise Lake, any water supply project would require an energy dissipater or dissipaters along the pipeline coming down from Sunrise Lake. The head being dissipated is the same head that could be used for hydropower generation. WATER TREATMENT Based on the water quality tests, the water from Sunrise Lake appears to be of significantly better quality than that from the existing City water supply. Thus, while the treatment requirements should be less rigorous, the source is a surface water source, and will be subject to the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR). The SWTR generally requires disinfection and filtration of surface water sources used for public water systems. The Rule does allow for exceptions from filtration when certain criteria are met. These criteria include the following: = Source water quality such that fecal coliform <20/100 ml or total coliform <100/100 ml and turbidity less than 5 NTU. = Disinfection that inactivates 99.9 percent of Giardia cysts and 99.99 percent of viruses. = Watershed Control program. = On-site inspections. = No waterborne disease outbreaks. = Compliance with total coliform MCL. Determining the need to filter Sunrise Lake water will first depend on the quality of the water in the lake. The first testing indicates that the quality is sufficiently good to allow for an exception from filtration, but an on-going water sampling and testing program must be conducted to meet SWTR requirements. For this study, we assumed that an exemption from filtration can be secured. In this case, disinfection will still be required. A number of disinfectants are available for use in the Sunrise Lake Project including ozone, chlorine, chlorine dioxide, and chloramines. The SWTR establishes CT (contact time) levels for each disinfectant under various conditions. Preliminary calculations indicate that the marine pipeline would provide sufficient CT for disinfection with chlorine. Thus, it is proposed that a Chlorination facility be constructed on Woronkofski Island near the powerhouse. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-2 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS SURFACE WATER TREATMENT RULES (SWTR) The first step in determining whether or not filtration will be required for Sunrise Lake is to determine whether the supply meets the source water quality criteria as specified in the SWTR Criteria for Avoiding Filtration (40 CFR - 141.71). The SWTR Criteria for Avoiding Filtration are fairly specific and must be followed. A copy of this particular section has been appended so that the City can develop and establish the necessary program, in conjunction with the Department of Environmental Conservation, and initiate the sampling and testing program at soon as possible. In general, the minimum requirements are as follows: Coliform e Demonstrate that the total coliform is less than 100 MPN/100 ml (or fecal coliform is less than 20 MPN/ml) in at least 90 percent of the samples taken in the previous 6 months. Turbidity ¢ Demonstrate that the turbidity level is less than 5 NTU. Sampling Frequency e 2representative samples per week Watershed Control Program Develop a watershed control program which: e Characterizes the watershed hydrology and land ownership e Identifies watershed characteristics and activities which may have an adverse effect on water quality ¢ Monitors the occurrence of activities which may have an adverse effect on water quality The adequacy of the program will be based on: the comprehensiveness of the watershed review; the effectiveness of the system’s program to monitor and control detrimental activities occurring in the watershed; and the extent to which the water system has maximized land ownership and/or controlled land use within the watershed. MARINE PIPELINE PERMITS The installation of an underwater pipeline from Woronkofski Island to Wrangell Island will require the following permits: X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-3 SECTION 3 = Section 10 permit for work in navigable waters from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Certificate of Reasonable Assurance under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and coordinated by the Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination. = Right-of-Way permit from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources The Coast Guard does not issue a specific permit for this type of work, but they will review the Corps of Engineers permit application. The Coast Guard will issue Notices to Mariners advising about construction activities and the permanent pipeline. A ‘no-anchor’ zone will be created over the pipe alignment DESIGN CRITERIA The most cost effective pipe for a marine crossing of the nature envisioned in this project is high density polyethylene (HDPE). Because both the pipe and the fresh water in it are slightly lighter than sea water, the pipe must be anchored to remain on the sea floor. The ends of the pipe would be buried out to a depth of approximately 6 feet below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW). Beyond that, the pipe would rest on the bottom. It would have concrete collars every 10 to 15 feet anchoring it to the sea floor. The concrete anchor collars would be designed to withstand the current in the channel, which is reported to reach as much as 2.9 knots. The pipeline will be designed to withstand a head of approximately 250 feet at the beach. Even though the pipe will be up to 150 under water, the external pressure on the pipe equalizes the additional pressure inside the pipe. The pressure conditions would normally call for an SDR of 15.5 for the 250 feet of head. It is recommended that an SDR of 13.5 be used on this project as an additional safety factor and to ensure long-term durability. ESTIMATED BOTTOM CONDITIONS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) chart 17384 shows that the bottom is quite uniform and appears to have gentle slopes. This is not surprising in that the mouth of the large Stikine River is just a few miles to the north. While no bottom profiles have been done, abrupt bottom discontinuities such as gullies that the pipe would have to span are not anticipated. However, in the event any of these are encountered, the collars on the pipe would be moved so that all anchors rest on the bottom. ALIGNMENT The alignment chosen and shown on Figure 3-1 was selected because it is nearly the shortest crossing and also crosses at the shallowest point between Woronkofski and Wrangell islands. The pipe will reach a charged depth of about 26 fathoms. This depth is workable for divers using scuba; however, most commercial divers doing this type of work use an umbilical that provides both air X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 3-4 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS. and communications. A detailed bathymetric survey would be required to design this pipeline. In addition, the alignment would probably be examined using a remote TV camera mounted on a towed sled to record the bottom conditions and note any anomalies not picked up by the survey. An alternative alignment to that shown in Figure 3-1 was investigated which would shorten the overall water pipeline length by about 400 feet but add 3,000 feet to the marine crossing. The cost of this alternative alignment would be about the same as for our selected alignment. CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE HDPE pipe usually comes in 40-foot lengths. These sections are then thermally welded together in the field. Common practice is to weld the pipe into sections of several thousand feet with flanges on the ends. As the pipe is welded, the anchors are attached, and the pipe is floated and stored in a protected area. The anchors are sized such that the pipe will float and support the anchors when the pipe is filled with air. The sections are floated into position connected to one another and the water is slowly let into the pipe from one end. The pipe is held in position with boats and anchors so that it sinks in the correct location. WATER SUPPLY PROJECT The water supply project will require: 1. a siphon intake and pipeline descending from the Sunrise Lake outlet with a capacity of 1.5 mgd 2. an energy dissipation station, i.e., fixed-cone type valve housed in a vault 3. a disinfection facility 4. a marine pipeline to Wrangell Island A preliminary construction cost estimate was prepared for the water supply alternative without hydro and was based on preliminary layouts and quantity estimates. The basis for deriving the costs is described in Section 6. A cost estimate summary for the project with and without hydro is shown in Table 3-1 below. All costs are based on a January 1998 bid price level. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-5 SECTION 3 TABLE 3-1 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Cost COMPARISON WATER SUPPLY PROJECT AND WATER SUPPLY WITH HYDRO Water Supply Cost Estimate Summary Water Supply + 2.5 MW Hydro Preparatory Work $ 374,000 $535,000 Headworks 244,000 617,000 Penstock/Pipeline 811,000 1,636,000 Power Plant/Energy Dissipater 102,000 1,530,000 Chlorination 65,000 65,000 Water Supply Pipeline 1,620,000 1,620,000 Transmission/Interconnection 20,000 480,000 Direct Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 3,240,000 $6,480,000 Contingencies 810,000 1,620,000 Engineering 810,000 1,620,000 Total Construction Cost (Bid 1/98) $ 4,860,000 $ 9,720,000 In combining a 2.5 MW hydro station with water supply, the power plant will need a small 300 kW Pelton turbine generator so that a relatively constant flow can be maintained to Wrangell and minimize the pipe diameter (and cost) of the 1.5 MGD water pipeline. Also, the hydro alternative includes a 10-ft. high dam at Sunrise Lake for additional storage. Consideration had been given to installing a storage tank near the powerhouse to equalize the flow to Wrangell; however, the storage tank would need to have 750,000 gallons of storage capacity and is a more costly alternative. OTHER WATER SUPPLY SOURCES Our investigation of alternative water supply for the City was based primarily on a review of topographical maps. Physical or visual investigations of potential water supply sources/sites were not made a part of this study, and consequently, such investigations were not conducted. Previous engineering reports and studies prepared for the City did not investigate or discuss alternative water supply sources for Wrangell. Topographical mapping indicates that there are numerous small creeks on both sides of Wrangell Island. In general, in the northerly portion of the Island the creeks drain either to the east into the Eastern Passage or to the west into Zomovia Strait. The creeks on the eastern side of the Island are located in fairly rugged, remote areas. None of the creeks on the easterly side of the Island have road access. Several small lakes exist approximately 6 miles southeast of the Wrangell at higher elevation (above elevation 1,500), but these lakes have a very small drainage area. Conversely, the westerly side of the Island has good road X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-6 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS access (northerly portion). As such, a water supply that could be developed on the western side of the Island is preferable, since it would not require a road to be constructed which results in significantly reduced project costs and environmental impacts. For the above reasons, potential alternative water supply sources located on the western side of the Wrangell Island were focused on for the purposes of this study. Three potentially feasible sources were identified on the western side of Wrangell Island that could possibly be developed to augment the City of Wrangell’s present supply. All are accessible via the Zomovia Highway which follows along the westerly shoreline of Wrangell Island. Two of the creeks, Institute Creek and an unnamed creek, are located approximately four to five miles south of Wrangell. The third creek, Pat Creek, is located approximately 10 miles south of Wrangell. Pat Creek drains into Trout Lake, a small lake that lies a quarter mile east of the road. The drainage area of each of the three creeks is greater than that of the existing water supply watershed. The drainage areas of Pat Creek and Institute Creek are significantly greater (on the order of 3 to 5 times) than that of the existing water supply watershed. The drainage area of the unnamed creek is greater than the existing water supply watershed, but not to the extent of the others. Because the unnamed creek is farther from Wrangell (1 mile) than Institute Creek and has considerably less drainage area, it was excluded from further study. As stream flow data was unavailable, based solely on the drainage areas of Pat Creek and Institute Creek, it would appear that either of these sources are capable of providing an adequate supply to meet the City’s long-term needs. As mentioned earlier, neither of these sources or dam/impoundment areas were physically investigated as a part of this study. However, based on available topographic information it is apparent that development of these sources would require the construction of a dam, and with the possible exception of Pat Creek, it appears some fairly extensive earthwork to create a suitable impoundment. Potential environmental issues that could be faced with such projects, such as fisheries, are unknown. Construction of the water supply pipeline for either of these alternatives would be relatively easy and straight-forward since the pipeline would follow along the existing road. As far as water quality, it is likely that the water quality would be similar to that of the existing water supply which is typical of surface water from the lower elevations in Southeast Alaska (low pH, high color, and turbidity due to organic materials and possibly high iron and manganese content). Therefore, treatment requirements would also likely be similar or perhaps more extensive than that required for the City’s existing source, i.e., ozonation, roughing filter, slow sand filter and disinfection. Due to the lack of detailed information on any of the sites, only a qualitative cost comparison of the alternatives could be made. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-7 SECTION 3 It is believed that the cost of developing the closest source (Institute Creek) would be greater than that of the proposed Sunrise Lake water supply. The major differences being that no treatment other than disinfection will likely be required for Sunrise Lake and the cost for constructing the dam on Sunrise Lake will be less as it does not have to be nearly as high (10 feet vs. 50 feet). In addition, there will be no earthwork required to create an impoundment at Sunrise Lake. As the distance is greater and a marine pipeline is required, the construction cost of the water supply pipeline for Sunrise Lake, nevertheless would be greater. Although more difficult to assess without better information, the cost of developing the furthest source (Pat Creek) is still likely to be greater than for Sunrise Lake water supply project. The major difference being that no treatment other than disinfection will be needed for Sunrise Lake. Without further investigation and better information, it is believed that the construction cost of the dams are likely to be similar for either site. Although the distance is greater from Pat Creek, because of the remote location, topography and marine pipeline, it is believed that the construction cost for the water supply pipelines for either of these sources is probably similar. Neither of the potentially feasible alternative sources on Wrangell Island offer the power generation potential of Sunrise Lake. In addition to these relatively “local” water supply sources on Wrangell Island, several other more remote but possible sources of water supply on Wrangell and other nearby Islands were explored. A qualitative comparison of these other sources to Sunrise Lake is provided in following table: Source Island Lake Level Pipe Diameter Pipeline Length Elevation (Ft. MSL) (Inches) (Miles) Sunrise Lake Woronkofski 1,980 12 6 Virginia Lake Mainland 85 15 8 Kunk Lake Etolin 300 12 4 Thoms Lake Wrangell 250 12 20 As can be seen in the table, Sunrise Lake’s water supply pipeline is the shortest. A marine pipeline of approximately the same length as for Sunrise Lake will be required for Virginia Lake so the difference in construction cost will be essentially equal to the additional length of pipeline. Consequently, the pipeline construction cost for Sunrise Lake will be approximately 25 percent less than for Virginia Lake. The pipeline construction costs for both Kunk and Thoms Lakes would be considerably greater than for Sunrise Lake. The water from Sunrise Lake is expected to be of higher quality than for any of these other sources. For the same reasons discussed above for water sources at X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-8 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS lower elevation in Southeast Alaska, the water quality is expected to be poorer and require additional treatment. The treatment requirements would likely be similar to or perhaps more extensive than that required for the City’s existing source, i.e., ozonation, roughing filter, slow sand filter and disinfection. The water from Sunrise Lake is expected to only require disinfection. HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT GENERAL Due to the elevation of Sunrise Lake (1950 ft.) and the relatively small head required to deliver water to Wrangell Island, developing a project with both a water supply and hydropower has obvious advantages. To establish a base case project for comparison with alternatives, the previously studied layouts were considered. In addition, a third arrangement with the Penstock going from Sunrise Lake down towards the east shore was also considered. This alternative generally minimizes the length of underwater pipeline to Wrangell Island. PENSTOCK ALIGNMENT /POWERHOUSE SITE For each alternative, the powerhouse was located so that sufficient head was available to convey the water to Wrangell Island without pumping. Figure 3-1 shows the general alignments for each alternative. A summary of the alternatives is presented in Table 3-2 below. TABLE 3-2 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT PRINCIPAL STATISTICS OF ALTERNATIVE PENSTOCK ALIGNMENTS Item Align. No. 1 Align. No. 2 Align. No. 3 Penstock: , Tool a Length 4,110 8,165 7,880 Diameter 20 inch 20 Inch 20 inch Water Supply Pipeline:* Length 25,300 13,200 9,500 Diameter 12 inch 12 inch 12 inch * Does not include marine pipeline. Table 3-3 presents the comparative costs of the three Penstock and water supply pipeline alignments. Only those features that would vary in cost are included. The dam, powerhouse, water tank, and marine pipeline have essentially the same cost for each alternative and, consequently, are not included. Alignment No. 3 provides a cost savings of $330,000 over Alignment No. 2 and about $970,000 in savings over Alignment No. 1. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-9 SECTION 3 TABLE 3-3 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Cost COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE PENSTOCK ALIGNMENTS Item Alt. No.1 Alt. No. 2 Alt No. 3 Mobilization (5%) 170,000 140,000 120,000 Road Access 600,000 150,000 150,000 Penstock 1,090,000 1,708,000 1,636,000 Water Supply Pipeline’ 1,668,000 890,000 650,000 Total Direct Construction Cost (rounded) 3,530,000 2,890,000 2,560,000 ‘Does not include marine pipeline component or water supply tank. BASE CASE Alignment 3 was chosen as the base case for a combined water supply and hydro project development. The project would require a siphon intake at Sunrise Lake, a Penstock from the lake to a powerhouse located somewhat above the existing Tyee transmission line, a water disinfection facility, and water transmission line to Wrangell Island. As for the water supply project, a preliminary construction cost estimate is summarized in Table 3-1 along with the water supply plus hydro project cost estimate. Development of Sunrise Lake for both hydropower and water supply adds $4,840,000 to the total construction cost estimated for the hydro component. OPTIMIZATION OF HYDRO PLANT CAPACITY GENERAL Development at Sunrise Lake looked at a project with a hydraulic capacity of about 15 cfs, which is considerably greater than the flow required for water supply to Wrangell. In order to size the power project, three installed capacities were investigated for the most promising of the alternative sites, Alternative Alignment No. 3. Installed plant capacities were derived from hydraulic capacities of 15 cfs, 20 cfs, and 40 cfs. The 15 cfs hydraulic capacity matches the assumptions in the preliminary permit application; the 20 cfs hydraulic capacity is based on the 20 percent excedance flow in the flow-duration curve (see Fig. 2- 2), which is similar to other hydro plants in Alaska with limited storage; 40 cfs hydraulic capacity is based on providing the City’s anticipated 5 MW capacity reserve requirement in the year 2000. The three project layouts will differ in the diameter of the Penstock and in the generating unit size. Fifteen cfs will allow installation of 1.8 MW and will require an 18-inch Penstock. A project with a hydraulic capacity of 20 cfs will have an installed capacity of 2.5 MW and will require a 20-inch Penstock. The 5 MW X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 3-10 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS alternative will have a 27-inch Penstock. Other project features will not change significantly from the base case. POWER STUDIES For each plant size, power studies were conducted, as described in Section 4, and determinations of firm and average annual energy and installed capacities were made. The results of the power studies are presented in Table 3-2. CONSTRUCTION COsT ESTIMATES Preliminary construction cost estimates were prepared for each alternative based on preliminary layouts and quantity estimates. The basis for deriving the costs is described in Section 6. For comparative purposes, the cost associated with the water component is subtracted from the subtotal since it is assumed that it would be funded separately (e.g., from state and/or federal grant programs). Also, the cost estimate includes a savings to the city equal to the construction of a diesel generator (e.g. 1.8 MW, 2.5 MW, and 5.0 MW respectively, for the three alternatives). This study assumes that the City would need to procure and install diesel generators for reserve capacity in the event the Tyee Power Plant was off- line. A cost estimate summary for each of these hydro capacities is shown in Table 3-4 below. All costs are based on a January 1998 bid price level. For each alternative, annual costs were derived assuming 30-year, tax-free revenue bonds at a 6 percent interest rate. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W. Beck 3-11 SECTION 3 TABLE 3-4 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE HYDROELECTRIC CAPACITY SIZES Description 1.8 MW 2.5 MW 5.0 MW Preparatory Work $505,000 535,000 $560,000 Headworks 617,000 617,000 711,000 Penstock 1,502,000 1,636,000 2,196,000 Power Plant 1,388,000 1,530,000 2,364,000 Water Supply Tank & Chlorination 65,000 65,000 65,000 Water Supply Pipeline 1,620,000 1,620,000 1,620,000 Transmission and Interconnection 480,000 480,000 505,000 DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST $6,180,000 $6,480,000 $8,020,000 (Rounded) a 1,550,000 1,620,000 2,010,000 Engineering & Owner Administration 1,550,000 1,620,000 2,010,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST (Bid 1/98) $ 9,280,000 $ 9,720,000 $12,040,000 Interest During Construction 310,000 320,000 400,000 TOTAD INS pe! $9,590,000 $10,040,000 $12,440,000 Cost of Water Supply (5,020,000) (5,020,000) (5,020,000) Cost Savings of Equiv. Diesel Generator (1,800,000) (2,500,000) (5,000,000) ADJUSTED INVESTMENT COST $ 2,770,000 $ 2,520,000 $2,420,000 Comparative Annual Cost $ 222,000 $ 202,000 $194,000 Average Annual Energy (MWh) 12,056 12,449 12,047 COMPARATIVE COST OF ENERGY 18.4 16.2 161 (mills/kWh) COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Table 3-4 shows that the cost of energy for the 1.8 MW, 2.5 MW, and 5.0 MW hydro alternatives is 18.4, 16.2, and 16.1 respectively. The analysis shows that the X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W. Beck 3-12 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS hydro comparative cost is lower for the 5.0 MW plant than for either 1.8 MW or 2.5 MW alternative plants, which implies that the larger hydro plant could be warranted if the additional capacity reserve is needed for the City. However, the 1997 report by Power Engineers indicates that the year 2000 total capacity requirement for the City of Wrangell will be 5.0 MW. However, the report does not clearly indicate that all the existing diesel units need to be replaced. Since the diesel units are now used only as backup for limited periods, it is likely that some of the existing units do not need replacement. Assuming that about half of the total load (2.5 MW) can be met with existing diesel units, then the Sunrise Lake Project could replace 2.5 MW of new diesel units. SUNRISE WATERSHED STORAGE GENERAL The watershed contains three lakes. The largest is Sunrise Lake which has a surface area of about 55 acres and a depth of up to 100 feet. The other two lakes, Grouse and Deer, are shallower and have surface areas of about 25 and 20 acres, respectively. Both of these lakes drain into Sunrise Lake. The outlet at Sunrise Lake flows through a bedrock notch. A siphon outlet at Sunrise Lake will allow a limited draindown of the lake and access to about 960 acre feet of storage in the lake. Additional storage could be developed by adding siphon outlets at Grouse and Deer lakes or by adding a dam at Sunrise Lake. These storage options were studied as described in the following sections. SIPHON DEVELOPED STORAGE A siphon to remove water from Sunrise Lake or from the other lakes in the Sunrise Lake watershed may be a cost effective way to develop storage without constructing a dam. At normal water surface elevation 1980 at Sunrise Lake, atmospheric pressure equals 31.6 feet of water at Sunrise Lake. After subtracting the losses at the trashrack and entrance, velocity head, and friction head losses in the siphon pipe, the limit to the siphon effect would be about 25 feet. SUNRISE LAKE SIPHON INTAKE AND VACUUM PUMP HOUSE The Sunrise Lake intake and siphon pipe would be designed for the maximum turbine flow capacity, which is assumed to be 20 cfs. The intake would consist of stainless steel wedge wire or punch plate screen with a total area of about 60 square feet. At the design flow of 20 cfs, the average approach velocity would be less than 0.35 feet per second. The screen structure will be approximately 10 feet in length and be of an “A’ frame configuration. The screens will be 3 feet high and 5 feet long, with 2 screens on each side of the “A” frame. This structure is conservatively designed to screen resident fish. If no fish population exists and X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W Beck = 3-13 SECTION 3 the resource agencies decide not to stock the lakes with fish (preferred for Project operation), then a simpler design would suffice. The structure would sit above, and be secured to, a section of 24 inch diameter HDPE pipe. To assure uniform flow through the screen and uniform approach velocity, the opening in the top of the HDPE pipe would be tapered with the narrow part of the taper at the downstream end. Cross braces would be required at the opening to maintain the shape and dimensions of the HDPE pipe. The normal water surface elevation in Sunrise Lake is believed to be about 1,970 feet. The top of the intake structure would be about El 1940, which would result in 10 feet submergence over the structure at minimum lake level (El 1950). The crown of the siphon pipe would be about El 1970, resulting in 20 feet of lake drawdown. The vacuum pump house would be located about 100 feet away from the lake shore on the right (east) bank of Sunrise Creek. The equipment to be housed would include two vacuum pumps that would be energized by a 480 V electrical circuit transformed from a 4160 V line from the powerhouse laid along the alignment of the Penstock. Cold weather appurtenances would be installed along with necessary electrical controls. The vacuum pumps would have the capability of removing all air and filling the Penstock with water in a matter of hours. When the air is removed from the pipe the vacuum pumps would shut off automatically, and when entrapped air reaches the high point of the siphon the pumps would be automatically activated to remove the air. The building would be heated by electric heaters to avoid freezing problems. GROUSE AND DEER LAKES Grouse and Deer lakes would likely be better developed for use on a seasonal basis, such as during the summer, when access is possible. The capacity of the siphons would only need to be modest (say 5 cfs) and operated continuously when Sunrise Lake is drawn down near its minimum pool. Because Deer Lake is the highest lake in the watershed, it would be drawn down first by about 15 feet. The siphon or pump discharge from Deer Lake would flow into Sunrise Lake via Grouse Lake, which is the intermediate lake within the watershed. When Deer Lake has been drafted to its limit of 20 feet, the Grouse Lake pumps or siphon would be used next. The limit to drafting Grouse Lake is assumed to be about 20 feet. At a continuous 5 cfs, the drafting of both Grouse and Deer lakes would be completed in about a month. Because of the limited seasonal operation of these facilities, the siphon (or pumping) operation at these lakes could be performed manually. SUNRISE LAKE DAM Two dam sizes were considered for Sunrise Lake. The construction of a 10-foot high structure with crest El. 2,080 would only require a modest amount of embankment fill. A more conventional concrete-face, rockfill structure was X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-14 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT ARRANGEMENTS examined to assess whether substantial storage at Sunrise Lake is beneficial to Project economics. For the 40-foot high rockfill embankment, the dam would be founded on sound rock. There exists a natural depression in the left abutment that could serve as a spillway. Grouting of the foundation is anticipated. The dam would be a concrete-faced rockfill structure and would have a crest at El. 2010, an upstream slope of 2:1 and a downstream slope of 1.5:1. The upstream slope would be faced with a reinforced concrete slab 12 inches thick at the crest increasing to 16 inches at the base. The crest width would be 16 feet and the elevation of the open spillway channel would be at El. 2,004. POWER STUDIES Power studies were conducted for each of the alternatives, as described in Section 4, and determinations of average annual energy were made. Power study results are shown in Table 3-5 for each of these alternatives. There is little difference between the different storage alternatives because little of the natural inflow into Sunrise Lake is spilled (about 4 percent based on the monthly operational model). The additional storage at Grouse and Deer lakes can reduce the spill by a very small amount. However, a storage dam at Sunrise Lake is much more effective in reducing spill. TABLE 3-5 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE STORAGE COMPONENTS Useable Average Storage Annual (acre- Generation Alternative feet) (kWh/year) Sunrise Lake Siphon plus 10-ft. high dam (base case) 1,560 12,449,000 Sunrise Lake siphon only 960 11,137,000 Sunrise Grouse and Deer Lake siphons only 1,380 11,720,000 Sunrise Lake Siphon plus 40-ft high dam 3,965 13,066,000 CONSTRUCTION Cost ESTIMATES Preliminary construction cost estimates were prepared for each alternative storage component based on preliminary layouts and quantity estimates. The basis for deriving the costs is described in Section 6. A cost estimate summary for each of the alternatives is shown in Table 3-6 below. All costs are based on a January 1998 bid price level. For each storage alternative, annual costs were derived assuming 30-year tax-free revenue bonds at a 6 percent interest rate. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W Beck 3-15 SECTION 3 COMPARISON OF STORAGE ALTERNATIVES The following table presents a summary of the cost and incremental energy benefit that each storage alternative provides to the Project. The results show that the siphon intake provides the greatest benefit based on revenue from energy at 64 mills/kWh. This is the cost of energy from the Tyee Lake Project, which also approximates the cost of fuel from diesel generator operation. Capacity benefits are a bit more difficult to categorize. However, if the project capacity can be used by the City or other utility to avoid the procurement and installation of a diesel generator, then the Project should recognize some capital cost savings. For a 2.5 MW hydroelectric plant at Sunrise Lake, we believe that a siphon using about 960 acre-feet of storage may not firm up the 2.5 MW hydro generating unit; however, the addition of a 10-foot-high dam should provide the necessary storage to firm up capacity. The additional storage provided by a 40-foot high dam would have diminished benefits and is too costly. We conclude that a 10-foot high dam would provide the greatest amount of additional benefits compared to its marginally small cost. A topographic survey of the dam site area is necessary to better characterize the amount of rockfill needed for the dam, to better assess its costs and to establish the recommended final height for construction. For example we may later find that a 5-foot-high concrete or masonry weir would be more practical to construct at this remote site. A siphon at either Deer Lake or Grouse Lake provides marginal benefits and, while the construction cost is small, the operation and maintenance of siphons at these lakes would be difficult and costly. TABLE 3-6 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT COMPARISON OF STORAGE ALTERNATIVES Sunrise Lake Sunrise Sunrise, Sunrise Siphon & 10- Lake Grouse & Lake ft. Dam Siphon Deer Lakes Siphon & Description only Siphons 40-ft Dam Preparatory Work $ 535,000 $ 515,000 $ 525,000 $ 665,000 Headworks 617,000 295,000 505,000 3,347,000 Penstock and Power Plant 3,166,000 3,166,000 3,166,000 3,166,000 Water Supply Features 1,685,000 1,685,000 1,685,000 1,685,000 Transmission and Interconnection 480,000 480,000 480,000 480,000 DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Bid $6,480,000 $6,140,000 $6,360,000 $9,340,000 1/98)(Rounded) Total Investment Cost $10,040,000 $9,510,000 $9,850,000 $14,480,000 Cost of Water Supply 5,020,000 5,020,000 5,020,000 5,020,000 Cost Savings of Diesel 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 Adjusted Investment Cost $2,520,000 $1,990,000 $2,330,000 $6,960,000 Comparative Annual Cost $202,000 $159,000 $187,000 $556,000 Average Annual Energy ((MWh) 12,449 11,137 11,720 13,066 Comparative Cost of Energy (Mils/kWh) 16.2 14.3 16.1 42.6 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 3-16 DN. E\WAJOI\CURFRM. 11-17-97 @ 13:06 LEGEND seeecceccces EXISTING 138KV TRANSMISSION LINE am == == PROPOSED WATER SUPPLY LINE UNDER WATER Hm ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY LINE ON LAND Gu ALTERNATIVE PENSTOCK || ALTERNATIVE POWERHOUSE z= e osaiges Pe, fey fe, fey wees Light St Wrangell S Base’ Seaplane Ramp & eeccecccccs me FIGURE 3-1 % CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA ALTERNATIVE ‘ PENSTOCK/WATER SUPPLY S PIPELINE ALIGNMENTS Wane SECTION 4 POWER OPERATION STUDIES SECTION 4 POWER OPERATION STUDIES POWER STUDIES We developed a monthly reservoir operation and power study model written in FORTRAN for the Project based on R. W. Beck's standard reservoir power study model routines. Input to the model consisted of 43 years of estimated monthly flow data, an elevation-capacity table, desired minimum flows through the conduit, maximum and minimum lake operating levels, unit hydraulic capacity, and unit efficiencies. Efficiency and loss data included the following: = turbine efficiency—90 percent = generator efficiency—9%6 percent = transformer efficiency—99 percent = transmission losses—2 percent = station use—0.5 percent = outage losses—3 percent We assumed that an operating reserve would be maintained in Sunrise Lake at all times. This operating reserve was sized to guarantee the availability of hydroelectric capacity, but would also be large enough to serve as an operating reserve for water supply. The operating reserve was sized to supply generation for 30 days at a 65% plant factor, which was considered to be typical of winter load factors in the vicinity. Therefore, the larger units would require larger operating reserves. Natural inflows to Sunrise Lake would tend to reduce the operating reserve requirements. For sizing of the operating reserve, it was assumed that the inflows would be the median flow during the lowest flow month. The resulting assumed inflow of 2.4 cfs would be exceeded about 90% of the time based on the flow duration curve. A series of power study runs was performed to determine average and firm energy, the effect of additional storage, different unit maximum flows, the effects of different storage reserve requirements, and a minimum instream flow requirement. Results of the various power study runs are summarized in Table 4-1. Most of the runs (Runs 1, 2, 3, and 7) assumed a siphon at Sunrise Lake and a 10-ft dam which would provide accessible storage between El 1950 and El 1980. Storage and costs could be reduced by eliminating the dam (Run 4). Alternative storage could be provided by adding siphons at Grouse Lake and Deer Lake, or with the addition of a larger dam (Run 6) at the outlet of Sunrise Lake. The effects of minimum instream flow releases at Sunrise Lake outlet are shown in Run 7, which is the same as Run 2 except for the minimum releases. SECTION 4 The requirements for an operating reserve greatly reduced the storage available to regulate inflows for energy generation in a few of the runs. Run 3, which has the largest unit (5.0 MW) has very little regulating capacity, operating almost as a run-of-river plant. It is a general principle that using monthly data with a run-of- river operation will tend to over-estimate the generation. An adjustment factor to account for the use of monthly data would be a function of both the available regulation storage and the plant hydraulic capacity. Based on a comparison of monthly and daily data for the available three years of gaged data, the results in Table 4-1 for Run 3 include an 8% reduction in generation to account for the expected differences in monthly and daily modeling. In a similar manner, modeled energy generation results were reduced by 6% for Run 4 and 3% for Run 5 to account for limited regulation storage for energy. The adjustment factors are approximate, the accuracy of all of the energy results could be improved by developing a daily operation model for Sunrise Lake. Regulating storage in Grouse and Deer Lakes in Run 5 was not considered to be completely effective because the siphons would not be remotely operable, a disadvantage during the winter. The average annual generation is shown to vary among the runs from 11,137 MWh to 13,066 MWh. Factors causing variation in energy generation among these runs include static head, head losses, turbine hydraulic capacity, energy regulation storage, and minimum instream flows. All runs show a relatively high degree of utilization of inflows. For example, for Run 2 the spill is only 3% of inflow. Firm energy did not show great variation among the runs, ranging from about 9,200 MWh to about 9,750 MWh, except for Run 7. The firm energy in Run 7 was 8,500 MWh, reduced by the requirements for minimum releases during even the driest year. A few cautionary notes should be added to the power studies. An important assumption in the power studies was that all energy that could be generated was assumed to be usable. The assumption that all energy is usable as generated eliminates the requirement of shaping generation to a load pattern and reduces the perceived value of reservoir storage. The Project generation may to be out of phase with the probable load, generation peaks in spring and fall, while load would peak in summer and winter. If shaping of generation to the load pattern were required, the availability of increased active storage would become more important. Although a study that includes loads and all resources is beyond the scope of the current studies, it is estimated that the output from the Sunrise Lake Project could be reduced by roughly 25% due to shaping requirements. The generation reduction due to shaping requirements would increase for the alternatives with the smallest energy regulation storage. If generation reduction due to shaping requirements is a significant consideration, further study is recommended. The use of a monthly time increment also tends to under- estimate spill. If more detailed studies were performed, a daily time increment model could be developed. As additional flow data becomes available, it may be worthwhile to revise the Sunrise Lake hydrologic data. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 4-2 POWER OPERATION STUDIES Table 4-1 Sunrise Lake Water and Hydroelectric Project Power Study Results Sunrise| Active Unit Average Adjusted Max. | Storage | Max. Annual Avg. Ann.| Firm Pool (acre- Flow Energy |Adjust.| Energy | Energy Run Alternative Level | feet) | (cfs) (MWh) _| Factor | (MWh) | (MWh) Sunrise Lake w/10 ftdam | 1980 | 1550 15 | 12,056 | 0% | 12,056 | 9,460 Sunrise Lake w/10ftdam | 1980 | 1550 [ 20 | suntan Lake w/ 0 Rdem 1980 | 1550 s | 956 Suniue + Grouse + Det Sunrise Lake w/ 40 ftdam | 2010 | 7 |Sunrise Lake w/10 ftdam | 1980 and minimum release Notes © All generation is assumed to be usable. ® Includes 200 acre-foot reserve allocated to water supply. ® Sunrise Lake minimum pool is at El 1950 in all runs. Grouse and Deer Lakes have 20 feet of siphon drawdown. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R.W.Beck 4-3 SECTION 5 SELECTED PROJECT ARRANGEMENT SECTION 5 SELECTED PROJECT ARRANGEMENT GENERAL The Project will provide a new supply of water to the City of Wrangell from Sunrise Lake. Because of the large fall below the outlet at Sunrise Lake at El. 1,980, the project will also develop hydroelectric power at the site to help reduce the cost of the water supply. A number of structures, collectively referred to herein as the headworks, will be constructed near the Sunrise Lake outlet to allow drafting of Sunrise Lake by as much as 30 feet: 10 feet by gravity and 20 feet by siphon. The primary features of the Project are as follows: = Submerged intake in Sunrise Lake = Siphon at Sunrise Lake to draw water into the Penstock when the lake level is below El. 1,970 = Penstock to convey water from Sunrise Lake to the powerhouse = Powerhouse containing one 2.5 MW Pelton-turbine generating unit and one 200 kW Pelton-turbine generating unit = Transmission line to transmit generation to the existing 115kV Tyee transmission line = Port facility and access road to the powerhouse from the beach = Chlorination facilities = Water supply pipeline, including a 2.4 mile marine pipeline to convey water from the storage tank on Woronkofski to Wrangell Island. As investigations progress into preliminary design, additional features could be added, including a booster pump to convey water to a higher elevation on Wrangell Island, additional storage tank, additional water treatment, ie. - filtration. A more detailed description of the Project features appears in the following subsections. HEADWORKS A small 10-foot high concrete-face rockfill dam would be constructed at Sunrise Lake to raise the pool level to El. 1,980. A siphon intake would permit drawing the lake down to minimum pool El. 1,950, which would provide 1,560 acre-feet of storage for regulation. Of this total, 200 acre-feet is assumed to be dedicated for water supply with the remainder used for hydroelectric generation. X0110222.181 12/30/97 nal [ a SECTION 5 The siphon intake will extend into Sunrise lake a distance of about 400 feet to be submerged to El. 1,940. The siphon pipe is assumed to be 24-inch-diameter HDPE. The vacuum pump house would be located about 100 feet away from the lake shore on the right (east) bank of Sunrise Creek. The equipment to be housed includes two vacuum pumps that will be energized by a 480 V electrical circuit transformed from a 4160 V line from the powerhouse laid along the alignment of the Penstock. Cold weather appurtenances would be installed along with necessary electrical controls. The vacuum pumps would have the capability of removing all of the air and filling the Penstock with water in a matter of hours. When the air is removed from the pipe the vacuum pumps will shut off automatically, and when entrapped air reaches the high point of the siphon the pumps will be automatically activated to remove the air. The building would be heated by electric unit heaters to avoid freezing problems. Presently, we are assuming that no minimum flow releases are required at the headworks facility. From our site reconnaissance, it appears that anadromous fish runs in the creek do not exist. We have also noted that the drainage below the outlet is greater than that within the Sunrise Lake watershed; therefore, flows at the creek outlet into Stikine Strait would only be reduced by about one-half their current flow. PENSTOCK The 20-inch steel Penstock pipe would connect with the 24-inch HDPE siphon at the vacuum pump house. The pipe would be in a deep trench beneath the vacuum pump house and would continue in a northerly direction for about 400 feet where would daylight above ground and turn to a northeasterly direction (see Alt. 3; Fig. 3-1). The pipe alignment would continue for about 1,700 feet generally along the 1800 contour elevation before making its descent down the steeply inclined hillside for about 5,500 feet to the powerhouse. Because the gradient varies between steep and relatively flat slopes, the Penstock would be a combination of above ground and buried (see Fig. 5-1). Because of difficult access, the Penstock would be constructed with the help of a cableway (see photos 12 and 13 of typical installation method). Because much of the Penstock is above ground, it would require frequent draining during the winter months to avoid freeze damage to the pipe when the hydro unit is not operating. Accordingly, we are not assuming any thermal protection for the Penstock pipe, such as heat tape or an insulating blanket. At the upper end, and at every bend, the Penstock will be anchored in blocks of reinforced concrete. Between anchors, where the pipeline is located above ground, the pipe will rest on steel saddles anchored to concrete or steel piers as shown in Fig. 5-2. The exact distance between saddles will be determined later during design, but we are assuming average spacing of 50 feet. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 5-2 SELECTED PROJECT ARRANGEMENT POWERHOUSE The powerhouse would be located at about El. 200 feet, which would provide sufficient hydraulic head for conveying water to Wrangell Island. The structure would be constructed on the face of a 15 percent slope (about 4 H to 1 V). The powerhouse structure would measure about 50 feet by 35 feet. Its substructure would be cast-in-place concrete; its superstructure an insulated prefabricated metal building. It will contain two horizontal twin-jet Pelton turbine units. One unit will deliver 2.5 MW at a rotational speed of 1200 rpm and a design head of 1700 feet. The maximum discharge from the unit would be 20 cfs. The second unit will deliver 300 kW at a discharge of about 2 cfs. This unit would operate to meet rate demands in Wrangell when the larger unit is off line. A 15-inch spherical inlet valve would be provided upstream of the turbines to serve as a guard valve for the unit. In addition, a bypass line will be provided with a Howell-Bunger type pressure relief valve, which will operate in the event of a plant shutdown. A site plan of the powerhouse area and a floor plan and section of the proposed powerhouse are shown in Figs. 5-3 and 5-4. TAILRACE AND WATER TANK A tailrace channel would be excavated to convey the plant discharge to the waterline to Wrangell Island. Flow in excess of that going to Wrangell Island would be discharged into a stream that passes beside Powerhouse site. A small valve house and disinfection facility would be located at the outlet from the tank on the water line to Wrangell. This facility would control flow to Wrangell as well as provide disinfection to the water supply. The valve system would automatically shut off flow if a break in the marine pipeline should occur. WATER PIPELINE The water supply pipeline from the powerhouse would be comprised of two segments: a buried HDPE line on Woronkofski Island that generally follows the existing Tyee transmission line corridor; and a marine pipeline that would cross from Woronkofski Island to Wrangell Island. The marine crossing could be initiated at the same beach head that the Tyee cable leaves the island or possibly further north where other partially sandy beaches are located. Then, after crossing to Wrangell Island, there are a number of sandy beach locations along the west side of the island where the marine pipeline can come on shore. The final alignment will be determined later when the location for the future treatment facility is decided. BURIED PIPELINE SEGMENT The entire alignment for the water supply pipeline on Woronkofski Island generally follows the existing Tyee Lake 138-kV transmission ROW. The water X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 5-3 SECTION 5 supply pipe would likely be a buried 10 or 12-inch HDPE pipeline. The six-foot- deep trench in muskeg materials would be relatively easy to excavate. Bedding material may need to be imported; although sources other than that found on the beach would likely need to be obtained. The pipeline would cross over several small streams, and at these locations we are assuming that insulation would be provided to protect the pipe against freezing damage. The pipe spanning the creek would be supported on either side by concrete saddles; the creek spans generally would be from 5-feet to about 25 feet in length. There would be about 6 creeks that would need to be crossed. MARINE PIPELINE The pipeline would cross at the shortest and shallowest point between Woronkofki and Wrangell islands as shown on Figure 3-1. The marine pipeline would be HDPE and have concrete collars every 10’ to 15’, anchoring it to the sea floor. SITE ACCESS Initially, a jetty and access road would provide access for the contractor to transport equipment and personnel around the project area; during the life of the project they would provide access for inspection and maintenance of project structures. However, access would only be constructed to the powerhouse, since it would be too difficult and expensive to construct a road to Sunrise Lake. Access to Sunrise Lake would continue to be by helicopter. The jetty for boat access would be located on the east side of Wrangell Island, below the powerhouse. We have assumed that the jetty would be 100-foot long with a 30-foot width at the head for barge docking. This configuration would enable a barge to be tied to the jetty to unload, to remain between tides if necessary, and rest on the bottom at low tide. The access road would connect the jetty with the powerhouse. With an average construction grade of 10 percent, the road would be about 0.5 miles long. TRANSMISSION AND INTERCONNECTION The electrical interconnection between the Sunrise Lake Powerhouse 2.5 MVA generator and the Tyee Lake Project would require a step-up substation adjacent to the Sunrise Lake power house and a short tap line to the existing 69 kV/138 kV Tyee Lake Transmission Line. Since the Tyee Lake Project is designed to operate at either 69 kV (current situation) or 138 kV, it would be prudent to include provisions in the Sunrise Lake system for operation at either voltage level. The substation would consist of a step-up transformer (13.8 kV - 69 kV/138 kV, Delta, grounded wye windings, 2.5 MVA), a circuit switcher for transformer protection, a deadend structure for terminating the tap line and supporting surge X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 5-4 SELECTED PROJECT ARRANGEMENT arresters and a control power transformer for station service. In addition, line traps would be required to block or interface with the Tyee Lake line’s PLC signals. It is assumed that a review of the Tyee Lake line’s protective relaying would be required to prevent tripping the Tyee Lake line for faults on the Sunrise Lake Line tap. It is assumed also that equipment in the substation would allow for remote operation via the RTU shared by the hydroelectric portion of the project. The transmission line tap would be designed for ultimate 138 kV service. The maximum required conductor capacity for 2.5 MVA at 69 kV is only 20 amperes per phase. Current is not limiting. Other factors such as corona onset require use of 336 kcmil size conductor for operation at 138 kV. The tap line would consist of a guyed deadend structure on one side of the Tyee Lake line and a disconnect switch with ground switch, used for safety reasons, mounted on a structure on the other side of the line. A reduced tension span will connect the two. The Tyee Lake line would be tapped in this span. The remaining tap line would use either H-frames to maintain a flat configuration or single pole construction if a narrow right-of-way is required. The length of this tap line is estimated at 500 feet, requiring perhaps three structures in addition to those described above. Soil conditions are expected to be unstable, requiring special foundations and guy anchors. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 5-5 G.D. i: \WAJOI\WAIO1002 12-04-97 @ 11:35, a = a = — td i + z S < > wy — a — VACUUM HOUSE SIPHON INTAKE | 2+00 4+00 NORMAL MAX W.S., EL 1980) MIN EL 1950 SURFACE PENSTOCK | |_ 50° BETWEEN PIERS} TYP CONCRETE ANGHOR BLOCK, TYP STA 26+00 | | | MATCH LINE A BURIED _PENSTOCK Bs INE B MATCH STA 5. SURFACE: FENSTOCK BURIED PENSTOCK on nN MATCH STA 52+00 °o oO | | | | TAN 750,000 GAL WATER STORAGE NEW POWER PLANT | PROFILE SCALE: |1"=200' l SUNRISE LAKE WAT! FIGUR CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA R/HYDRO PROJECT PENSTOCK PROFILE GD. :\WAUOI\WAOI004 12-04-97 @ 13:08 NOTE: PROVIDE BRACE AT ALL SUPPORTS WHERE THERMAL MOVEMENT OF PIPE RESULTS IN SUPPORT DEFLECTIONS. 20°° 1.D. STEEL PENSTOCK BRACING ROCK ANCHOR TYPICAL SLIDING BRACE SUPPORT NOTE: THRUST BLOCK DESIGNS SHALL BE FINALIZED DURING FIELD ALIGNMENT OF PIPE. TYPICAL SAG THRUST BLOCK 20”* PENSTOCK TYPICAL SUMMIT CURVE THRUST BLOCK THRUST BLOCK SECTION STEEL STRAP EPOXY NON—SHRINK GROUT VACUUM RECEIVER TANK 24"6 SDR 17 TYPICAL PIPE SUPPORT VACUUM_HOUSE_ SECTION ae FIGURE 5-2 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT TYPICAL SECTIONS & DETAILS G.0. 1: \WAJO1\WAJOI001 12-04-97 @ 13:14 en GUARD VALVE SUBSTATION GENERATOR | x _——— PENSTOCK ———— TERMINAL ANCHOR BLOCK | WATER SUPPLY BY-PASS LINE TURBINE RETURN OVERFLOW TO CREEK. Oo ® VALVE HOUSE DISINFECTION FACILITY 12” HDPE WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE TO WRANGELL ———— PIPELINE TO ale FOR FLOW REGULATION 750,000 GALLON WATER STORAGE TANK FIGURE 5-3 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF POWER STATION VAM ELEVATION GD. 1: \WAJOI\WAO100S 12-04-97 @ 13:15 15 TONS SCALE: 1”=10" OVERFLOW WEIR TO CREEK FIGURE 5-4 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT CROSS SECTION OF POWERHOUSE CUT SLOPE NV SECTION 6 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST AND SCHEDULE NH a SECTION 6 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST AND SCHEDULE GENERAL Cost estimates for the Project were prepared for the selected project arrangement based on the preliminary conceptual design layouts and details shown in Figs. 3 through 6 and based on our opinion of geotechnical site conditions. The estimated project cost was determined by preparing a Direct Construction Cost estimate, applying indirect costs to arrive at the Total Construction Costs, applying interest during construction to determine the Total Investment Cost and making a final adjustment for escalation to arrive at the Total Investment Cost for the scheduled on-line date of December 31, 1999. BASIS OF COSTS Direct CONSTRUCTION COST This cost includes the total of all costs directly chargeable to the actual construction of the project, which, in essence, represents a contractor’s bid based on a January 1998 bid price level. The Direct Construction Cost was developed based on unit prices from actual contractor’s bids on similar projects, adjusted to reflect location, project size and bid price level and applied to quantities estimated for the major construction features. Costs for turbine, generator and pipeline procurement were based on preliminary quotations from equipment suppliers, catalog values and adjusted with experience costing data. The estimated direct construction cost for the civil features (with the exception of the water pipeline) were verified by an independent estimate prepared by Dick Freeman, a consultant experienced in preparing estimates for contractors on hydroelectric projects and other major civil works projects. Escalation during construction has been included in the detailed unit prices, so a separate line item is not required. CONTINGENCIES To allow for unforeseen difficulties during construction and items not reflected in the estimate, a 25 percent contingency allowance was applied to the Direct Construction Cost. If the Project were developed under a two-season construction schedule, as described under “Design and Construction Schedule” X0110222.181 12/30/97 mai i f N SECTION 6 of this report, then we feel that the construction contingencies could be reduced to 20 percent. With a compressed schedule, we anticipate more claims and change orders to the civil works contracts. ENGINEERING AND OWNER ADMINISTRATION The Engineering and Owner Administration Costs are based on actual experience with costs for similar work. This item includes all preliminary engineering work, project feasibility and environmental studies; field investigations, processing of required permits and licenses; final design and preparation of construction contract documents; inspection of construction; and owner administration. An allowance of 20 percent of the sum of the Direct Construction Cost plus contingencies is considered a reasonable estimate for this item. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST The Total Construction Cost includes the Direct Construction Cost plus contingencies and Engineering and Owner Administration. INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION Interest During Construction was determined from an empirical formula that considers cash flow expenditure for a typical hydroelectric project, the project's construction duration and the prevailing interest rate. The interest rate during the construction period was assumed at 6 percent per year, which is the same rate assumed for a long term revenue bond. TOTAL INVESTMENT COST The Total Investment Cost is the sum of the Total Construction Cost plus Interest During Construction. Total capital requirements are based on a 30-year, 6 percent tax-deferred revenue bond. The total capital requirements include the Total Investment Cost plus a reserve fund equal to one year of debt service. ESCALATION As discussed previously, the Total Direct Construction Cost is based on a January 1998 bid price level and includes assumed escalation of prices expected during the construction period. Since the earliest practical date for bidding major contract items for the Project is January 1, 1998, escalation is applied for the intervening period of one year to adjust the estimated Total Investment cost to the actual bid date. Escalation was assumed at an average of 3 percent per year for the purpose of this estimate. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 6-2 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COst AND SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE A cost estimate summary is shown in Table 6-1. Detailed Direct Construction Cost estimates are shown in Appendix 3. The estimated Total Investment Cost for the Project with a bid date of January 1999, corresponding to a construction completion in December 31, 1999, is $10,570,000. Table 6-1 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate Summary FERC Account Total Project Water Hydro Code Description _ _ Cost___ Component ___ Component _ 60 MOBILIZATION $235,000 150,000 85,000 330 LAND AND LAND RIGHTS = 331 STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS 331.1 Powerhouse 395,000 27,000 368,000 331.2 Switchyard 100,000 100,000 332 RESERVOIR, DAM AND WATERWAY 332.1 Reservoir 44,000 44,000 332.2 Dam, Concrete-Faced Rockfill 278,000 278,000 332.3 Waterway 332.31 Siphon Intake 295,000 244,000 51,000 332.32 Penstock or Water Pipeline 1,636,000 811,000 825,000 332.33 Water Supply/Chlorination Facility 65,000 65,000 332.34 Water Supply Pipeline 1,620,000 1,620,000 333 TURBINES AND GENERATORS 920,000 920,000 334 ACCESSORY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 80,000 25,000 55,000 335 MISCELLANEOUS POWER PLANT EQUIPMENT 135,000 50,000 85,000 336 ROADS, JETTY 299,000 224,000 75,000 380 TRANSMISSION & INTERCONNECTION 380,000 20,000 360,000 DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Bid 1/98) $6,480,000 $3,240,000 $3,250,000 Contingencies 1,620,000 810,000 810,000 Engineering & Owner Administration 1,620,000 810,000 810,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST (Bid 1/98) $9,720,000 $4,860,000 $4,870,000 Escalation 290,000 150,000 150,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST (Bid 1/99) $10,010,000 $5,010,000 $5,020,000 Interest During Construction 170,000 TOTAL INVESTMENT COST (Rounded) $5,190,000 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 6-3 SECTION 6 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE GENERAL A design and construction schedule developed for the project is shown in Fig. 7. This schedule contemplates commercial operation of the hydro turbine- generating unit by December 31, 1999, which is considered to be the earliest possible date considering the time required for additional feasibility investigations, preparation and processing of the FERC License/Exemption Application, design and construction. If notices to proceed by the dates indicated are not met, then project construction would likely be delayed into the next season. The staging of the contracts is based on necessary lead times for fabricating the turbine-generator equipment, the marine pipeline, the Penstock pipe and the powerhouse building. As shown in Fig. 6-1, the start of procurement activities would need to commence before FERC issues an exemption order, which is financially risky. Furthermore, the schedule contains a large number of critical work activities that will likely cause higher costs for design and construction due to additional change orders and claims. If the schedule was given an additional year to complete, then it would be desirable to delay award of contracts until the FERC issues the exemption order. Also, it would be very desirable to have a two-season construction period, where in the first season, a limited civil works contract would be issued to construct the access road, excavate the powerhouse foundation, install the port facility, and clear the timber along the Penstock right-of-way. Then, the civil works contractor can readily be underway at the outset of the following year. He would have more lead time to plan his work and procure materials. His work scope would be better defined, since the powerhouse structure’s excavation work is completed. With more float time in the performance of each work activity, the contract price would invariably be lower. FERC LicENSE/EXEMPTION Throughout the performance of Project work, the City will decide at key milestone dates whether Project development is to continue. Through preliminary design, the schedule is driven primarily through the three stage consultation process, but also by the City’s desire, should the Project be feasible, to complete the Project concurrently with the scheduled completion date of the Swan-Tyee Lake Intertie. The schedule for licensing would approximate that shown in Fig. 6-1. The first key milestone date for Phase II work depends on what environmental studies are requested by resource agencies and whether the agencies request mitigation that could impact Project feasibility. With a 2.5 MW plant capacity, the City would likely want to submit an application for “Exemption of Small X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 6-4 mm ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COsT AND SCHEDULE Hydroelectric Power Project of 5 Megawatts or Less”. Under an exemption, the City would have to acquiesce to the resource agencies requested mitigation. Under a license application, the FERC would act as an arbitrator. Because 2.5 MW capacity would be considered a major license application, considerable work would need to be performed to prepare the application. Therefore, if the City applied for a license so that the FERC could arbitrate between the City and resource agencies, the City may wish to consider changing the hydro plant capacity to 1.5 MW, so that it can proceed with a minor license, which is easier and less costly to prepare. In any event, we do not anticipate a dispute with the resource agencies and the preparation of an exemption application is assumed herein. DESIGN AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Final design activities would need to commence on about July, 1998 (see Fig. 6-1) in order to complete the Project construction during the 1999 season. The work would be divided up into three contracts, which are as follows: = Contract 1—Procurement of Turbine-Generator equipment. = Contract 2—Civil Works (includes, headworks, powerhouse, Penstock, water storage tank, installation of turbine-generator, miscellaneous mechanical and electrical equipment, chlorination equipment, and telemetry). = Contract 3—Water Supply Pipeline (from powerhouse to Wrangle Island, including pumping station). If the water project were deferred for a year following completion of the hydroelectric facility, then the water storage tank and chlorination facilities would be included in Contract No. 3 rather than Contract No. 2. CONSTRUCTION Figure 6-1 shows a schedule of the construction activities for completing the Project by January 2000. Fabrication of the turbine-generator equipment would commence on November 1, 1998, which is well ahead of when the FERC could issue the exemption order. The suppliers have indicated a 12-month lead time before the last turbine-generator component is delivered. However, we are assuming that initial embedded turbine parts would arrive before September 1, 1999. Other construction activities that would need to commence prior to the exemption order include fabricating the Penstock pipe, fabricating the powerhouse superstructure, constructing the marine jetty and access road to the powerhouse and initiating the construction of the water pipeline. Should the FERC dictate design changes to the Project, cost implications to both design and construction could very well occur. Construction of the primary structures (dam and intake siphon, Penstock and powerhouse) is assumed not to start until June 1, 1999, when it is assumed that X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 6-5 SECTION 6 the FERC would issue the exemption order. The major civil works construction activities would be completed by October 31, 1999, leaving 2 months to install the remainder of the powerhouse mechanical and electrical equipment and to perform all necessary start-up and commissioning tests. WATER SUPPLY TREATMENT Based on the initial water quality testing, the only treatment required is disinfection. As discussed in Section 3, an on-going water sampling and testing program still needs to be conducted to satisfy the SWTR requirements (as described under Criteria for Avoiding Filtration) and to verify that the water supply is suitable and eligible for an exemption from filtration. for this study, it has been assumed that an exemption from filtration will be able to be obtained. It is presently proposed to disinfect the water from Sunrise Lake using a calcium hypochlorite tablet chlorinating system. This type of system is being proposed because it offers cost savings (capital and operating), simplicity of operation and maintenance as well as safety advantages over gaseous chlorination systems. One of these systems is currently in use and operating successfully in Hydaburg, Alaska. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 6-6 1 ACTIVITY [uit iniatny i | i i i _-Submit Gonsultatiod Package | LICENSING PHASE | elec thane 1 ie} — rr ee L-7— Public oat i i i i | { First Stage Consultation Met et a aac ane hoy Parform: Enviconmental Studies Dralt Exemption Applicatipn | i i i Second Stage Consultation eet cae Third Stage Consultation fot Flnot a nit Preliminary besign Repdrt j i i i | | i | i lon Order Preliminary Design DESIGN PHASE Contract 1 (Turbine/Generator Procurement) | Contract 2 (Marine Pipeline) eae tae a — Contract 3 (Civil Works) CONSTRUCTION PHASE Access Road/Pier .. Mobilization Headworks Facility Powerhouse Excavation 2002.0... . i (etseed eed cath ata | i oun ‘ Boies orll occas et bows eevee sechalsees —tine ye Tur! dtor Procurpmen 1 eee | | Fabyicatd Bullding Inst pit Powerhouse Concrete eee es Turbine /Generator ea eceall oa Install Powerhouse Building Ingtoll fenstdck i i t i | Fabricate !Pipe i Aword Pipeline al Pipdiine Penstock 1 ! i Water Pipeline ! i seeps —— | a : : i i i Transmission Interconnection 3 ba ade treed peed tocol asst levee eed, Oc OA Atos JOA Oo N OILS F M A MJ 2 ASS Ol _iNi oO FIGURE 6-1 CITY OF WRANGELL, ALASKA SUNRISE LAKE WATER/HYDRO PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE VE SECTION 7 ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSES AH a SECTION 7 ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSES ECONOMIC ANALYSIS GENERAL The economic feasibility of the Sunrise Lake Project was determined based on a comparison of the cost of water and power of the Project with that of the least cost alternative water and generating resources available to the City. The City presently gets water from two reservoirs located on the south side of the City. A new treatment facility, consisting of ozonation, filtration and chlorination will provide the City with 1.5 MGD of water supply in compliance with SWTR. The Sunrise Lake water would provide an additional redundant source based on current usage. Alternative water supply sources were more expensive. These other water sources were from other lakes on Wrangell Island and vicinity and each required treatment to be compliant with SWTR. The City provides for all of its normal power supply with purchases from the State-owned Lake Tyee hydroelectric project. Diesel generating units provide the City with backup power supply. The Cities of Wrangell and Petersburg are the only two communities interconnected with the Lake Tyee Project, which has an installed capacity of 20 MW. Present peak power demand from the two communities is approximately 11.7 MW, consequently, there is a surplus of capacity from the Lake Tyee Project. From a base capacity perspective, the development of Sunrise Lake Project would not appear to be justified. However, several of the City’s diesel generators need to be replaced and there are plans for the Lake Tyee Project to be interconnected with Ketchikan by January 2000. Therefore, by using the Sunrise Lake Project for backup reserve capacity and by selling its energy generation to KPU, the Project can become economically viable. Power Engineers’ has indicated that Wrangell’s peak load would conservatively increase from about 4,000 kW today to about 5,000 kW in two years to about 8,500 kW in 20 years. Power Engineers has also indicated that all but the City’s 2,100 kW EMD unit and the 500-kW Caterpillar unit will need to be replaced. Consequently, if the City retires several of its diesel generating units as suggested by Power Engineers, the City would have a need of about 2.4 MW of backup generating capacity by the year 2000. The economic feasibility of the Project assumes that the City would want to add an additional water resource, such as from Sunrise Lake, for attracting industry ' Power Engineers, “Wrangell Municipal Light and Power Plant Upgrade/Rebuild Study” dated May 1997. yoni, 12808 gL SECTION 7 to Wrangell for its economic development. Accordingly, the cost of water component was subtracted from the total project costs to arrive at the cost of the hydro generating component. It is assumed that funding for the water component could be obtained from a State and/or federal grant. Financing the hydro cost component would be obtained from municipal tax-free revenue bonds. However, because the Sunrise Lake hydro project will provide reserve capacity to the City and, the City will not need to purchase new diesel generation capacity as a result of implementing the hydro project, the cost of an equivalent diesel generating unit was subtracted from the hydro cost component. The remaining Project cost element represents the cost of energy that would need to be derived from power sales to KPU or other entities. In all likelihood, KPU would want to purchase this surplus energy as an avoided cost to running their diesel units. The Sunrise Lake Project, as discussed in this report, does not necessarily represent the optimum installation which might be constructed at the site. Sizing of various project features has been done on a preliminary basis considering two different reservoir sizes and three different generating capacities in an effort to determine a project size which will provide the greatest economic benefits, while keeping capital investment costs to a minimum. Future, more detailed investigations and economic evaluations may show that a slightly different size arrangement, installed capacity or method of operation is desirable and more economic; however, variations of a magnitude sufficient to affect decisions based on the outcome of this study are not anticipated. FINANCING ASSUMPTIONS As discussed in Section 6, cost estimates for the Sunrise Lake Project were prepared based on contract bids for the major items of work being received around January 1999, which corresponds to an on-line date of January 2000. However, contract work on the turbine-generator procurement would need to occur by October 1998. Project financing for the water supply component has been assumed to be based on a State and/or federal grant; the hydro power component is based on a 30-year, 6 percent interest rate, tax-free municipal bond. Total Capital Requirements are assumed to consist of the Total Investment Cost of the hydro generating component plus a reserve fund equal to one year of interest on the debt which was assumed reinvested at the same rate of interest. As shown in Table 7-1, the Total Capital Requirements for the Sunrise Lake Project is estimated to be $5,784,000. FIRST-YEAR TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS The annual cost of the projects consists of the debt service necessary to repay its capital cost over a specified number of years plus all the other operating expenses, which include the following items: = Operation and maintenance (O&M) X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 7-2 ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSES = General and administration = Insurance = Interim Replacements The assumptions used in estimating the operation and maintenance costs and interim replacements vary for each feature of the hydroelectric project. For dams, water conveyance structures and roadways, the operation and maintenance costs and interim replacements are typically assumed to be a function of the Total Investment Cost (TIC), as follows: Operation and maintenance: 0.25 percent of TIC for pipeline, dam & roadways plus $6/kW of installedcapacity for power plant Interim Replacements: $6/kW installed capacity Administrative and General: 40 percent of the O&M costs Insurance was estimated from rates on other projects. ANNUAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE DIESEL INSTALLATION Development costs for an alternative diesel generating installation were based on the cost for similar installations in southeast Alaska, with which we are familiar. The estimated Total Investment Cost of $1,000 per kW for an on-line date of January 2000 is consistent with the detailed cost estimates derived by Power Engineers in their May 1997 report. It is assumed that the investment would be financed from the sale of bonds. Annual cost of the diesel alternative include fixed costs consisting of debt service and operation and maintenance (O&M), general administrative, insurance and interim replacements and variable fuel costs. Debt service is for 6 percent, 20- year bond repayment period, and operating expenses are based on historic maintenance cost experience of several southeast communities which compare favorably with FERC data and other sources. O&M cost for diesel generating plants typically have been $70, kW with average utilization of 60 percent. Because the City’s diesel generation is typically held as a backup reserve to Tyee, its use would be much lower than is typical for diesel generating plants, probably about 5 percent plant factor. Consequently, we have assumed O&M would be about $20/kW for diesel generation. Variable annual cost (cost of diesel fuel) would be about 60 mills/kWh. Development of the Capital Cost, Total Capital Requirements, Fixed annual cost and Variable Annual Cost for both alternative diesel and hydro installations are shown in Table 7-1. The first-year operating cost for a 2.5 MW diesel and hydro alternatives are $397,000 and $471,000, respectively. Because the cost estimates are within 20 percent of each other, the hydro component may be justified on the basis of its capacity reserve. With the potential of cost of hydro power being as low as 38 mills per kWh, the Sunrise Lake Project compares favorably with Lake Tyee power at about 62 mills per kWh. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 7-3 SECTION 7 TABLE 7-1 SUNRISE LAKE WATER SUPPLY AND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Cost OF POWER Total Capital Cost Diesel Hydro Total Investment Cost (TIC) $2,500,000 $5,190,000 Reserve Account 251,000 420,000 Cost of Issuance 5,000 174,000 Total Capital Requirements (TCR) $2,836,000 $5,784,000 PROJECT ANNUAL COST Annual Debt Service $251,000 $420,000 Less Interest on Reserve 15,000 25,000 Net Amortization Costs $236,000 $395,000 Operation and Maintenance 50,000 33,000 General Administration 20,000 13,000 Insurance 10,000 15,000 Interim Replacement 15,000 15,000 Fuel Cost (based on 5 percent plant 66,000 0 factor) Total Operating Expenses $161,000 $ 76,000 Total Annual Cost $397,000 $471,000 Average Generation, MWh 1,100 12,449 Cost of Power, mills/kWh 360 38 X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 7-4 ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSES SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS The Sunrise Lake Project, providing 2.5 MW of installed generating capacity, shows that the cost of power would be 38 mills per kWh based on the Project being able to sell all available generation without curtailment. If the Project is required to provide a minimum flow release of 1 cfs at Sunrise Lake outlet, the hydro plant would produce 921 MWh less generation (7.4 percent), as discussed in Section 4. Consequently, the cost of power would increase to 41 mills per kWh. A factor that would have a greater influence on Sunrise Lake Project in generating energy would be a favorable power purchase sales agreement. Presently, the City would be obligated to purchase power from the Lake Tyee Project. Therefore, Sunrise Lake could only generate whenever, Tyee was not operating. Under this scenario, hydro plant would operate only about 3 weeks of the year. The remainder of the time, the plant would be idle, much like the diesel generators. However, when the Lake Tyee Intertie is completed, surplus generation from the Lake Tyee Project could be sold to KPU. Under the most favorable of contractual terms with KPU, we believe that only 75 percent of potential generation could be made available from the Sunrise Lake Project, or about 9,340 MWh for 51 mills/kWh power. The Sunrise Lake Project would also provide some capacity benefit to KPU in that it would have a capacity reserve available should the Swan Lake Project be shut down due to maintenance or an outage. Actual generation from the Sunrise Lake Project would depend upon contractual arrangements with KPU and/or some other entity who might be willing to purchase Sunrise Lake Power. Once the type of terms are defined, then we recommend that a detailed operation model be performed that considers system loads and daily operation. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 7-5 SECTION 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SECTION 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS From our preliminary investigations for this feasibility study, we conclude: I Sunrise Lake can be developed as a multipurpose project supplying water to Wrangell Island and providing hydroelectric generation. The environmental impacts of development do not appear to preclude development at this time. Some additional studies of specific environmental issues will likely be required. The Project will require licensing or an exemption from licensing by the FERC. The City will likely want to file for an exemption of Small Hydroelectric Power Projects of 5 MW or less, unless the resource agencies make mitigation requests that are overly detrimental to Project economics. In that case, the City would be better served to file an application for License for Minor Water Power Projects and Major Water Power Projects 5 Megawatts or Less. The Project could deliver 1.5 MGD of water or more from Sunrise Lake to Wrangell Island. Based on the one water sample analyzed, the water could be used with only disinfection and still meet the SWTR. Additional sampling and testing will be necessary to confirm the water quality and to meet the requirements of the SWTR. A 2.5 MW hydroelectric station could be installed on Woronkofski Island that would generate an average of about 12,770 MWh per year. This generation is based on providing a 10-foot high dam at Sunrise with a siphon inlet that could draft Sunrise Lake an additional 20 feet. The generation also assumes that Project energy would be used before generation from the Tyee Lake Project. Also, the estimate is based on no minimum flow release requirements. Power from the Project would cost about 70 mills per kilowatt-hour under a favorable purchase power sales agreement with the State of Alaska (ie., Project energy would be used before Swan Lake or Tyee) where all potential energy from the project is used. If this cannot be achieved, then shaping the generation to the load pattern would be required, which would reduce Project generation by roughly 25%, or to about 9,600 MWh. Under this scenario, power from the Project would cost about 93 mills per kilowatt-hour. The Project would provide an additional 2.5 MW of firm capacity benefits to the City of Wrangell, which would eliminate a possible need to install 2.5 MW of diesel generation. If the City has a need for additional firm capacity, it may = Aaa SECTION 8 be worthwhile to install a hydroelectric station of even greater capacity on Woronkofski Island. The design and construction schedule to place the Project into commercial operation by January 2000 is achievable if environmental studies requested by the resource agencies are not onerously time-consuming and only if the City submits a FERC Exemption Application. This schedule would require final design commencing in July 1998, which is 6 months prior to submittal of the final exemption application documents and a year or more prior to the FERC order issuing the exemption. Consequently, the Project would be better served if an additional year were provided to the schedule. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are submitted: uh The first-stage consultation with the resource agencies should continue. Discussion with the agencies will determine the type and extent of environmental studies required. The required studies should be authorized and started as soon as possible. Engineering field investigations should start as soon as the weather permits. These investigations should include: identification of the powerhouse site; mapping of the powerhouse site, the Sunrise Lake outlet area, and a profile along the Penstock centerline; and geotechnical investigations at the powerhouse site and the outlet. Preparation of the project basis of design report should be authorized. Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe, on behalf of the City, should initiate discussions with the State of Alaska and/or KPU on a power purchase sales agreement to better ascertain Project operation criteria. The City of Wrangell should continue with a water quality sampling program at Sunrise Lake to meet the SWTR. Commissioning of the Project be delayed until a January 2001 in-service date to reduce the risk that licensing may result in additional design and construction costs. X0110222.181 12/30/97 R. W. Beck 8-2 SECTION 9 REFERENCES SECTION 9 REFERENCES U.S. Forest Service, 1991. Tongass Land Management Plan Revision: Supplement to the draft Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Revised Forest Plan. Alaska Region R10-MB-146, Juneau, AK Power Engineers, May 1997. “Wrangell Municipal Light and Power Plant Upgrade/Rebuild Study” R.W. Beck. August 1977. “Virginia Lakes Project -- Appraisal Report” Wilson Engineering, September 1995. “Water System Assessment, City of Wrangell” Wilson Engineering, December 1996. “Preliminary Engineering Report for Water Filtration Facilities, City of Wrangell” Bentley Company, June 1997. “Sunrise Lake Hydroelectric Project, Reconnaissance Level Study” City of Wrangell, August 1996. “Application for Preliminary Permit - Sunrise Lake Water and Hydroelectric Project.” X0110222.181 12/30/97 ta [ a APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL SITE RECONNAISSANCE TRIP REPORT Ag Wale = SLL oC REM ENGINEERING, INC. - - - . November 4, 1997 Steve Hart R. W. Beck 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500 Seattle, Washington 98154-1004 Re: Sunrise Lake R&M Project No. 972382 Dear Steve: On October 21 thru 23, 1997 I joined you and your team on a reconnaissance field trip of the proposed City of Wrangell, Sunrise Lake water supply and hydroelectric project . This was a preliminary field trip to identify basic topographic and geologic features that will affect the proposed development. The work scope was to review available geotechnical and geologic information; preform geotechnical reconnaissance of up to three alternative pipeline alignments and power house locations; assess foundation conditions at Sunrise Lake for a rockfill dam; and conduct a geotechnical reconnaissance of a siphon intake at Sunrise Lake. GEOTECHNICAL STUDY This was a preliminary investigation to evaluate geotechnical aspects of the projects. It is not intended to provide specific design or foundation recommendations. The on site studies were limited to observing existing outcrops and geomorphology. No test holes were drilled nor samples taken. REGIONAL GEOLOGY Southeast Alaska is underlain by Quaternary surficial deposits and by sedimentary, volcanic, intrusive and metamorphosed rocks ranging in age from Quaternary to Precambrian (Gehrels, 1992). The area is within an active tectonic belt than borders the north Pacific Basin. The bedrock outcrop pattern is the result of late Mesozoic and Tertiary deformation and intrusive events (Brew, 1966). Large scale right-lateral strike-slip faulting is common. Most of this tectonic activity is the result of the North American continental plate colliding with the Pacific plate. The physical manifestation in the bedrock structure is the general northwest- southeast trend of the major mountain ranges and waterways of Southeast Alaska. INEAU KETCHIKAN SERVING SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA FOR OVER 25 YEARS Steve Hart November 4, 1997 Page 2 GLACIATION Southeast Alaska, except for the highest peaks, was covered by ice during the late Pleistocene ice ages. The glacier ice varied in maximum thickness from 2000 feet near the outside coast line to 6000 feet in the Coast Mountains (Drawing 3). In the Wrangell area the surface of the ice was 3500 feet above present day sea level (Coulter and others, 1962). The present day topography of deep fiords, elongated lakes and steep sided U- shaped valleys reflect the effects of glaciation. When the ice begin melting 10,000 years ago the glacial gouged valleys begin filling with sea water. At that time sea level was over 300' higher than it is today. Over time the land rose relative to sea level due to the unloading of the ice and tectonic forces. Large amounts of silt and sand were deposited from the sea water, concurrently wave cut sand and gravel beaches were being formed along some of the shorelines. The bedrock mantling deposits left behind by the glaciers, outwash streams and seawater include glacial till, alluvium filled fiords, marine deposits and elevated beach deposits. SEISMICITY Evaluating earthquake probability, strength and destructive affects is difficult if not impossible. The most common approach has been to review the area's earthquake history and its proximity to major active faults. With this information seismic zone maps are prepared that define design parameters for structures in each zone. See Fig. 1 for 1994 UBC Seismic Zone Map. Also included is a seismic map of Southeast that we prepared some years past. It is included for general information. Southeast Alaska lies in one of the two most seismically active areas in Alaska. Since the turn of the century 8 earthquakes with magnitudes of 7 or greater have occurred (Drawing 4) and 23 with magnitudes between 7 and 5 (Lemke and Yehle, 1972). Geologic mapping has indicated the existence of several faults in the Wrangell area. Most of these faults are structural manifestations of faulting that occurred in the Mesozoic Era. However they do represent weak zones along which faulting could again occur. An active fault, and the one along which Southeast Alaska's strongest historical earthquakes have occurred, is the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte fault system. This fault roughly parallels the Southeast Alaska outer coast line and at its closest point is over 100 miles from Wrangell. An earth quake strong enough to cause major damage in Wrangell would most likely occur along the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Fault. Predicting the effects of such an earthquake is problematical. Some of the destructive events associated with strong ground motion are: surface displacement, ground shaking, compaction, liquefaction, slides, slumps, water ejection and seismic waves. Steve Hart November 4, 1997 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE AND DAM SITE Sunrise Lake is located in the central highlands of Woronkofski Island, approximately six miles southwest of Wrangell. The lake is in a north facing glacial cirque at approximately 2000' elevation. There are two other smaller lakes that share this small (1.2 sq. mi.) alpine bowl. Low clouds and rain limited access preventing a thorough aerial or ground reconnaissance of the cirque. However, we were able to reach the outlet area of Sunrise Lake by helicopter Thursday morning for a limited site visit. The outlet area is covered with alpine vegetation consisting of muskeg peat, moss, heather, alpine blueberry, scrub cedar and scrub spruce trees. Though no test holes were dug it is likely that the organic soils are only a thin (less than 2') mantel over bedrock. Extensive bedrock outcrops are prevalent in the area. The bedrock at the outlet is massive coarse grained granodiorite. It exhibits faint foliation that trends northwest. The bedrock outcrops observed had a widely spaced joint pattern, 6" to 4'. Two of the joint sets measured had a strike of N-S and dip of vertical and a strike of N80E and dip 85 north. The outcrops had only thin surface weathering. USGS mapping (Gehrels and Berg, 1992) indicates a change in rock type to the west of the lake outlet (Drawing 2). Due to the weather caused brevity of our visit this area was not investigated. These rocks are mapped as sedimentary rock (Cretaceous and Jurassic). Outcrops of this rock unit at tide water that we did have the opportunity to observe, w2re massive graywacke. Foundation conditions for the proposed dam at the lake outlet are favorable. The bedrock is massive and only surface weathered. It would be necessary to remove the vegetation, fairly thin surface soil and some large (3') angular boulders to reach bedrock. Founding of a concrete faced rockfill dam would require preparing a shallow trench by blasting and possibly some grouting of bedrock fractures. A spillway could be blasted from bedrock and probably would not require concrete lining. The outlet area is not threatened by avalanches or rockfalls. However, the steep ridge at the back of the lake was not inspected. It is possible that a large earthquake could cause a rockfall from the steep ridge at the back of the lake, generating a wave that would impact the dam. Prior to dam construction we recommend a thorough investigation of the basin geology with particular attention to joint and fracture patterns at the dam site and the potential for slide or rockfall generated wave damage to the dam. We further reccmmend drilling a minimum of two test holes at the dam site to confirm overburden depth and bedrock quality. PENSTOCK ROUTES AND POWERHOUSE SITES Three penstock routes to power houses near tide water (elevation 250) were considered. All three options have the water line paralleling the Woronkofski Island shore line to a marine crossing on the island’s northeast shore. The penstock routes were not traversed, nor were the power house sites visited. The routes and sites were inspected during helicopter and boat reconnaissances. Steve Hart November 4, 1997 Page 4 It is necessary for all three penstock routes to descend a 1000! to 1500' cliff. This cliff is a very steep, with the first 1000' of drop having an average slope angle of 35 degrees. The nature of the soils and bedrock are not definitely known. However, USGS mapping indicates that all 3 options will be in the zone of Cretaceous sedimentation bedrock. No apparent slides or other geologic hazards were observed along route 1 & 2 when inspecting from the helicopter and boat. Because steep slopes in Southeast Alaska's forest are subject to a variety of slide and soil stability problems (rock falls, debris slides, mass wasting and soil creep), prior to construction a reconnaissance of the routes should be conducted that includes soils probes, mapping of bedrock outcrops and evaluation of foundation and slide conditions. The #1 site has the shortest penstock route (0.6 mi.) but the longest waterline. This penstock would be west of and nearly parallel to the outlet stream. The water line from #1 power house to the marine crossing would traverse around "Elephants Nose" on a irregular hillside and bench joining the Tyee powerline alignment on the island’s northeast shore. Geomorphology indicates that this is a rocky route and waterline burial may be difficult. The #2 penstock and power house site is nearly due north of Sunrise Lake. The penstock initially parallels the east side of the outlet stream (as it drops down the cliff) but turns northeast to the powerhouse, avoiding the long water line traverse along the beach around Elephants Nose. The terrain and geology are similar to the #1 option. The #3 penstock and power house traverses across the initial cliff area, crosses a small ridge, and descends a small drainage to the powerhouse. This route approaches several small slide paths and nearly touches the runout zone of a large slide track. A large slide is on the north face of Sunrise Peak starting in very steep terrain and follows a "V" notch until stopping at the break in slope 1300' further down the hill. The number 3 penstock route passes close to the terminus of this slide path. The smaller slide paths are partially avoided by traversing high on the mountain. Rock bolts will likely be required to secure the pipe on the upper section of this precipitous route. We recommend rerouting the penstock as follows to avoid the slide paths. Traverse to the north trending ridge off Sunrise Peak, follow the ridge staying west of the slide zone (discussed previously) to a muskeg area (vicinity elevation point 1140), traverse northeast staying above the gully followed by the slides. (See Fig. 2); Power house foundation conditions are not known but geomorphology and previous studies indicate that glacial till will likely be encountered at the powerhouse sites. This material if low in moisture can provide reasonable foundation bearing. However, when wet and handled with heavy equipment it tends to become soupy and flow. The advantages to this route are as follows: following the ridge places the penstock on terrain less susceptible to sliding, and the active slide track off the north of Sunrise Peak is avoided. It is also more likely that this assy Steve Hart November 4, 1997 Page 5 route has sufficient soil cover for penstock burial on its lower segment (below elevation 1200’). WATER LINE ROUTE The most favorable route for the waterline on Woronkofski Island is on the natural bench that is 50'-150' above the beach. The Tyee powerline is on this bench. The soils investigation for the powerline by Golder Associates provides some reconnaissance soils information. The soils indicated by this study are 1' to 11' feet of organics over “shoreline” deposits and glacial till. During our field visit on October 22, 1997, we observed that much of the elevated bench was muskeg. The southeast 1000' of the powerline route was in an area of elevated beach deposits covered with 1' to 2' of forest organics. Similarly the 1000' prior to reaching powerhouse site 3 was in an area of soils (glacial till predominately) covered with 1' - 2' of forest organics. The waterline route is not threatened by slides. Following the power line route places the waterline zone with sufficient soil and organic cover for frost protection burial. Burial should be minimum of 5', stream crossings could be buried or insulated elevated crossings. There is potential for some sections of waterline to be in areas of shallow bedrock. In these area trench blasting or pipe insulation may be required. In the muskeg area trenching equipment must be of a type that exerts very low ground pressure, and/or an access pad must be provided. To obtain the geotechnical information for design and construction, we recommend a thorough geotechnical investigation. The investigation should include a minimum of two test borings at the Sunrise Lake dam site to confirm overburden depth and bedrock quality. Additionally, a minimum of two test borings should be accomplished at the powerhouse site to determine foundation soil conditions and to determine soil bearing capacity. A traverse of the penstock and waterline routes should be conducted that includes geologic mapping and soil probes. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. Should there be questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, R&M ENGINEERING, INC. Ml} Dnt! Ralph Swedell Malcolm A. Menzies, P.E., L.S. Engineering Geologist Civil Engineer 2S Steve Hart November 4, 1997 Page 6 SELECTED REFERENCES Berg, H. C., Elliott, R. L., and Koch, R. D., 1988, Geologic Map of the Ketchikan and Prince Rupert Quadrangles, Southeastern Alaska, USGS Map I-1807. Brew, D. A., Ovenshine, A. T., Karl S. M., and Hunt, S. J., 1984, Preliminary Reconnaissance Geologic Map of the Petersburg and Part of the Port Alexander and Sumdum 1:250,000 Quadrangles, Southeastern Alaska, USGS Open File Report 84-405. Buddington, A. F. and Chapin, T., 1929, Geology and Mineral Deposits of Southeastern Alaska, USGS Bulletin 800. Coulter, H. W. and others, 1965, Map Showing Extent of Glaciation in Alaska, USGS Map I-415. Gehrels, G. E. and Berg, H. C., 1992, Geologic Map of Southeastern Alaska, USGS Map I-1876, 1992. Lemke, R. W., 1974, Reconnaissance Engineering Geology of the Wrangell Area, Alaska, USGS Open File Report 74-1062. Open File Report. Lemke, R. W., 1975, Reconnaissance Engineering Geology of the Ketchikan Area, Alaska, USGS Open File Report 75-250. Lemke, R. W. and Yehle, L. A., 1972, Regional and Other General Factors Bearing on Evaluation of Earthquake and Other Geologic Hazards to Coastal Communities of Southeastern Alaska, USGS, USGS Open File Report Preliminary. Musial, M. R. and Dugan, R. G, 1996, Phase 2 Geotechnical Investigation Tyee Transmission Line Improvements, Golder Associates for Power Engineers, Inc. Selkregg, L. L. and others, 1977, Alaska Regional Profiles, Southeast Region, University of Alaska. Wolff, E. N. and Heiner, L. E., 1971, Mineral Resources of Southeastern Alaska, University of Alaska MIRL Report No. 28. C.\WP61\1997LE111972382.LET 972382/SE-EARTH.DWG/FIT ' NOTE: BASED ON 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, FIGURE 16-2 SCALE IN MILES 0 825 «650 75) = =—100 125150 FIGURE 6 SOUTHEAST ALASKA SEISMIC ZONE MAP DATE SCALE L 11-24-97 | NOTED | KEY SEDIMENTARY ROCK (CRETACEOUS AND JURASSIC) WRANGELL GRANODIORITE (CRETACEOUS) ALTERNATE MARINE PIPELINE ROUTES WRANGELL INSTITUTE GEOLOGIC MAP OF WORONKOF SKI ISLAND (AFTER GENRELS AND BERG 1992) aE SCALE , C 11/24/97 1"=1 MILE P. RS. 972382 20F 4 9723582/WOR-GEO.DWG/1:1 Petersburg \ A XS mee IC) SO WA ( Ketchikan 9 cy \ye SCALE IN MILES 3 2S 0 a 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 FIGURE_ 3 MAP SHOWING SURFACE ELEVATION OF PLEISTOCENE GLACIATION IN SOUTHEAST ALASKA (AFTER COULTER, 1962) 11-24-97 NOTED -P. .S. 972382 972382/SE-GLAC.DWG/SFIT 1949 ; = | aaa? Tae 136° EARTHQUAKE _EPICENTERS- SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA NOTES THIS MAP INCLUDES EPICENTERS OCCURING WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY: $5.0 AND 61.0 N. LATITUDE, 130.0 AND 140.0 LEGEND W. LONGITUDE. EPICENTER LOCATION AND MAGNITUDE DATA COMPILED RICHTER MAGNITUDE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, e< 5.0 HYPOCENTER ATA _FILE,ANO UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH REPORT NO. 8, e@ 50 TO65 ATA OF ALASKAN 3 =I , AUGUST 1962. e >6s SCALE IN MILES 134° Se ee on ms A 5 WORONKOFSKI ISLAND FEASIBILITY STUDY DATE SCALE “CHECKED BY r ( 11-24-97 N/A lt R.S. 972382 4 OF 4 (LEFT) TYEE POWER LINE ON NORTHEAST SHORE OF WORONKOFSKI ISLAND LOOKING SOUTHEAST TOWARD WRANGELL ISLAND CABLE LANDING. (BOTTOM) SLIDE PATH OFF NORTH FACE OF SUNRISE PEAK. WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE \ R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 1 R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WORONKOFSKI ISLAND NORTHEAST BEACH WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 2 TYEE POWERLINE CABLE CROSSING EAST SIDE WORONKOFSKI ISLAND. WORONKOFSKI ISLAND LOOKING SOUTH AT EAST CABLE CROSSING WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 3 0-1.0' ORGANICS 1.0'-3.0' GRAVEL 3.0'-9.0'(+) TILL CUT BANK ON STREAM #12 TYPE POWERLINE. SHOWING GLACIAL TILL COVERED WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS. WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE SSM _ So UY R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE4 (LEFT) SUNRISE LAKE OUTLET NEAR PROPOSED DAM SITE (BOTTOM) SUNRISE LAKE OUTLET STREAM WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 5 TYEE POWERLINE ON WORONKOFSKI ISLAND LOOKING NORTHWEST TYEE POWERLINE CABLE CROSSING NORTH END OF WORONKOFSKI ISLAND. WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 6 SUNRISE LAKE LOOKING SOUTH FROM OUTLET WRANGELL CITY SUNRISE LAKE WATER LINE R&M PROJECT NO. 972382 WRANGELL, ALASKA PAGE 7 APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ga 1; Woronkofski Island 2. 115kV Tyee Transmission line entering Woronkofski Island at North end. 3. Typical marshy terraine along Transmission R.O.W. on Woronkofski Island. Sandy beach area, where existing 115kV Tyee Transmission cable leaves Woronkofski Island for Wrangell Island. View of marine cable crossing alignment from Woronkofski Island to Wrangell Island. 6. Aerial view of Sunrise Lake. _ View of Sunrise Lake outlet to creek. The notch-outlet should allow for construction of approximate 10 foot high dam at modest cost. 25 foot falls on Sunrise Creek, which is believed to be unpassable by anadromous fish. It is located about 100 yards upstream of tributary. 9. Sunrise Creek discharging into bay at its mouth. Estimated flow is about 50cfs. 10. View of Sunrise Creek near its mouth. 11. Major Tributary into Sunrise Creek located about 0.2 mi from tidewater. Photo 12: Steel pipe being delivered via construction Photo 13: Cableway hoist delivering the pipe a Sl access road to tunnel portal area. penstock alignment where it is to be installed. APPENDIX C POWER OPERATION TABLES RW HECK RUN 1 Page 1 12-22-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-1.IN VERSION 1.00 16:59:42 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-1.IN 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1980. Spill level at dam 1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980. Top of power maximum pool 1960. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,15. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 DS cp 182, 19s 2S og 1 9p 1S sig Vig 195g 1S LO oy L Os 1 Os Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270.,6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft) 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) RUN1 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-1.IN 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE TOTAL INFLOW TO SUNRISE LAKE (CFS) 1952 6.2 Zok 1.3 ol 2.7 20.0 16.4 9.6 11.9 31.9 10.7 1953 5.8 3.0 1.8 -0 3.8 18.6 17.4 12.3 10.3 3.8 10.4 1954 5.7 3.6 1.8 2 4 212 15.7 5.9 8.4 13)d 9.7 1955 10.2 14.5 6.4 2.1 2.8 21.6 18.3 9.0 14.4 27.7 14.5 1956 3.7 1.3 9 0 4.9 18.9 13.6 4.4 11.9 16.2 10.2 1957 14.2 4.9 2.3 0 3.6 19.7 22.2 13.4 4.7 5.8 11.8 1958 7.6 13.0 13.9 2.3 8.6 19.2 16.4 8.1 13.7 Sea 125) 1959 8.6 6.9 3.1 27.8 4.5 20.5 24.7 11.0 9.5 +0 13.4 1960 13.4 19.2 5.9 2.0 8.8 20.0 17.6 9.4 8.1 3.8 aes) 1961 9.9 20.8 8.4 12.9 9.3 19.4 22.8 15.9 8.7 9.0 18.7 1962 4.5 56.0 23.6 el 7.7 19.6 23.2 6.1 14.1 19.6 18.1 1963 15.7 30.0 21.8 37.7 §.2 19.4 15.9 3.0 4.0 7 16.7 1964 11.5 15.3 5.3 7 6.4 19.8 28.1 13.0 a2 4.0 12.9 1965 8.5 7.3 4.2 1.0 3.9 22.5 18.0 4.3 2.3 Ve) 10.0 1966 Tiorks 2.2 1.8 6.0 5.6 20.8 18.2 5.5 10.1 43.3 13.0 1967 6.1 3.0 1.0 el 2.6 19.8 23.9 12.4 13.7 49.0 14.1 1968 6.6 4.3 BES 26.0 3.3 21.4 11.2 8.5 8.5 35.1 15.1 1969 4.1 -8 9 0 3.6 19.5 21.1 11.7 14.7 BS) 9.8 1970 13.8 3.8 2.3 8.0 Ties 20.7 18.7 15.5 13.6 49.0 16.2 1971 5.0 6.1 3.4 +0 4.4 21.7 14.4 5.1 11.8 4.8 9.4 1972 4.8 2.9 1.2 6.9 3.8 19.8 16.4 3.6 13.8 26.7 10.8 LIS 4.4 12.6 3.5 3.0 §.1 19.2 16.4 12.3 9.7 8.0 10.8 1974 6.0 Ela t/ 1.4 +0 8.8 19.3 17.4 5.0 7.8 14.0 SoA 1975 6.4 4.5 3.2 -0 3.8 20.2 16.8 10.5 11.7 3.5 Le 1976 8.5 8.0 10.3 2.3 5.0 19.9 15.1 11.6 15.3 20d 12.7 1977 12.1 10.3 7.6 3.9 9.3 20.8 25.1 7.2 Sea oil 1S) 1978 4.4 4.1 3.2 2.4 5.9 21.4 18.6 6.6 oe) 8.5 9.7 L979) 6.2 2.3 1.6 4.4 9.1 19.3 20.8 14.5 3.5 Tle: 11.5 1980 12.4 9.4 6.9 6.6 9.8 20.2 22.3 12.0 9.1 1G RSC) 13.6 1981 8.1 65.0 41.4 9.9 3.8 20.1 9.3 6.9 10.9 37.4 21.9 1982 5.1 Wort 4.0 0 1.6 21.2 Meier 10.0 4.6 6.0 gS 1983 4.2 16.6 4.1 5.1 4.9 21.6 13.2 2.5 14.3 10.3 10.9 1984 4.9 49.0 18.2 8.5 2.3 29.4 11.7 5.9 11.4 B0eu 17.9 1985 5.1 28.0 12.6 1.2 6.5 19.8 17.3 tat 9.8 1.4 11.8 1986 eo) 26.7 ind 33.0 6.7 20.8 13.5 4.1 5.7 0 12.8 1987 5.6 30.9 10.8 5 8.2 21.5 11.9 9.3 5.8 21 39) ae) 1988 6.0 9.7 5.8 7.4 11.5 20.2 19.8 11.0 11.1 41.1 15.8 1989 8.1 14.0 8.3 +0 7.5 19.9 14.9 4.3 3.1 1.1 9.6 1990 18.2 31.0 7.7 10.0 10.0 20.5 19.1 7.0 4.6 24.5 16.2 1991 6.2 13.8 7.0 3.4 8.6 18.9 22.2) 8.8 14.8 19.6 12.7 1992 10.5 16.0 oS) .8 11.9 20.7 19.2 5.8 79) 37.0 14.6 1993 6.1 15.6 7.5 16.0 8.5 18.8 10.7 11.0 3.5 2.2 12a. 1994 12.2 E23 7.0 12.5 20.6 16.9 9.4 6.4 23.4 L4rS) AVG 7.9 14.3 Uy 6.0 6.1 RUN 1 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2~-1.IN 15 CES MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) YEAR 1952 15.0 15.0 14.3 4.1 1.2 1.0 1.8 15.0 14.0 12.4 15.0 10.3 1953 15.0 15.0 15.0 10.2 2.5 1.0 2.9 15.0 15.0 12.2 5.1 10.3 1954 15.0 15.0 14.6 5.7 1.7 1.0 1.0 15.0 10.5 8.9 11.8 9.6 1955 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 6.2 2.8 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.3 1956 15.0 15.0 15.0 5.1 1.0 1.0 3.7 14.9 7.0 10.9 14.6 9.9 1957 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.2 1.1 3.4 15.0 15.0 13.2 Tod 11.5, 1958 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.8 5.9 8.1 15.0 12.6 13.5 5.3 12.5 1959 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.0 3.9 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 7.6 13.1 1960 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 6.2 8.3 15.0 15.0 9.8 4.4 12.4 1961 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 1962 15.0 15.0 13.8 15.0 15.0 15.0 9.2 153.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.4 1963 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.1 5.9 1.0 13.0 1964 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 9.3 2.2 6.1 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.7 12.7 1965 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.1 5.4 1.6 3.7 15.0 13.1 4.0 1.7 9.8 1966 15.0 15.0 11.5 3.5 1.7 6.1 5.4 15.0 13.0 10.7 15.0 10.6 1967 15.0 15.0 15.0 7.5 1.1 1.0 1.7 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 10.9 1968 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.8 4.3 15.0 13.0 15.0 T1739, 9.3 15.0 12.9 1969 15.0 15.0 14.4 2.9 1.0 1.0 2.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 7.1 9.9 1970 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.7 3.7 8.1 7.1 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.6 1971 15.0 15.0 15.0 10.7 4.1 1.0 3.7 15.0 10.4 11.5 5.8 10.2 1972 15.0 12.6 6.7 3.0 1.1 6.9 3.8 15.0 9.3 12.8 15.0 9.7 1973 15.0 15.0 14.7 13.1 4.8 3.5 4.9 15.0 15.0 11.5 8.6 11.3 1974 15.0 13.4 8.0 3.9 1.3 1.0 7.5 15.0 10.9 8.5 12.4 9.3 1975 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.8 4.2 1.0 3.1 15.0 15.0 12.7 4.9 10.6 1976 15.0 12.0 9.6 8.4 9.1 3.7 4.8 15.0 14.6 15.0 15.0 11.4 1977 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.4 eo 8.7 15.0 15.0 10.7 1.7 12.3 1978 15.0 15.0 7.6 4.2 2.9 2.7 5.6 15.0 14.6 9.4 8.5 9.6 1979 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.7 1.9 4.5 8.5 15.0 15.0 12.1 11.1 11.4 1980 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 10.6 8.3 9.2 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.8 13.5 1981 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.9 14.4 8.9 10.5 15.0 14.0 1982 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.4 5.6 1.0 1.2 15.0 15.0 tot 5.9 10.5 1983 15.0 15.0 8.7 14.8 5.9 5.7 4.8 15.0 7.4 12.8 10.6 10.9 1984 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.7 15.0 15.0 13.4 15.0 14.6 1985 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.2 8.1 15.0 13.4 10.6 2.4 12.8 1986 15.0 12.1 8.7 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.1 1.0 12.5 1987 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.4 8.9 15.0 12.2 Ned 15.0 13.4 1988 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 8.1 10.5 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.5 1989 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.7 2.5 7.1 15.0 8.9 3.6 1.1 10.4 1990 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.5 15.0 15.0 8.1 15.0 14.3 1991 15.0 15.0 10.7 13.1 7.8 4.3 8.1 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.4 1992 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.6 4.3 10.6 15.0 14.7 9.4 15.0 13.2 1993 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.8 15.0 11.3 13.8 12.0 4.9 2.2 12.3 1994 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.4 9.7 11.6 15.0 15.0 9.3 15.0 13.7 ° 1685.9 1683.4 1685.9 1681.9 1685.9 1685.9 1685.9 1669.8 1685.9 1675.4 1685.9 1678.3 1685.9 1676.5 1685.9 1680.4 1685.9 1676.6 1685.9 1685.9 1681.0 1682.4 1685.9 1672.7 1682.9 1684.7 1685.9 1674.7 1685.9 1685.9 1685.9 1675.4 DEC 1672.6 1676.4 1671.1 1680.9 1671.0 1685.1 1674.5 1672.7 1676.6 1680.6 1675.5 1685.9 1672.2 1675.7 1685.8 1672.0 1677.2 1672.0 1678.9 1673.3 1701.5 1670.4 1697.9 1677.0 1693.0 1682.9 1699.0 1674.9 1679.4 1678.8 1675.6 1695.9 1672.0 1671.8 1696.0 1670.6 - 1676.6 1674.5 1683.6 1688.9 1675.6 1676.7 1675.8 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-1.IN 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE 1709.9 1706.2 1709.9 1707.2 1695.8 1673.8 1708.8 1709.6 1690.6 1685.9 1704.7 1704.2 1685.9 1683.7 1673.2 1682.0 1699.0 1686.5 1679.1 1699.3 1673.0 1676.9 1674.1 RUN 1 NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) 1669.1 1685.9 1709.1 1709.5 1703.0 1708.8 1679.9 1708.5 1697.6 1709.1 1701.0 1707.7 1708.7 1709.2 1707.4 1699.8 1708.7 1706.1 1697.0 1680.6 1709.4 1703.9 1679.2 1673.0 1685.9 1681.7 1697.5 1708.9 1673.4 1706.5 1706.5 1671.5 1692.5 1697.9 1709.5 1708.6 1708.3 1708.7 1707.6 1708.0 1697.9 1669.9 1697.5 1670.8 1694.6 1676.1 1703.2 1707.6 1704.6 1709.6 1679.9 1709.0 1700.8 1707.6 1707.5 1705.7 1699.5 1708.3 1705.8 1696.3 1704.2 1696.9 1694.6 1675.4 1709.8 1705.9 1685.6 1698.0 1677.6 1695.5 1690.4 1700.5 1677.3 1698.0 1690.0 1687.2 1686.0 1697.1 1680.6 1672.6 1675.9 1673.8 1672.3 1676.8 1671.9 1673.8 1674.9 1672.4 1671.7 1672.1 1672.9 1672.6 1674.5 1674.6 1672.4 1673.9 1675.8 1674.1 1674.8 1684.7 1672.9 1683.6 1675.5 1674.5 1672.8 1676.1 1671.8 1675.1 1673.0 1675.4 1685.1 1671.9 1674.0 1683.8 1678.6 1679.4 1679.2 1684.0 1675.3 1678.5 1690.1 1694.1 1670.0 1688.3 1669.3 1671.0 1676.8 1671.2 1678.4 1678.5 1695.1 1670.3 1699.4 1670.9 1677.1 1669.5 1683.0 1675.3 1695.2 1670.9 1672.8 1670.5 1683.8 1670.5 Page 4 RUN 1 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2~-1.IN 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP AVG YEAR 1952 1980.0 1972.7 1962.8 1960.1 1960.2 1959.0 1960.1 1966.6 1968.4 1962.7 1962.1 1980.0 1966.2 1953 1980.0 1980.0 1970.5 1961.2 1960.4 1959.1 1960.2 1964.9 1967.9 1964.4 1962.0 1960.4 1965.9 1954 1978.1 1973.6 1962.9 1960.2 1960.3 1959.2 1958.5 1966.5 1967.4 1961.4 1960.8 1962.4 1964.3 1955 1979.3 1980.0 1975.0 1974.5 1965.6 1960.2 1960.2 1968.8 1972.3 1965.1 1964.4 1978.2 1970.3 1956 1980.0 1977.8 1965.1 1960.2 1960.0 1958.7 1960.3 1965.3 1963.7 1960.2 1961.5 1963.5 1964.7 1957 1975.5 1980.0 1979.2 1968.4 1961.5 1960.0 1960.3 1966.4 1974.3 1972.7 1962.4 1960.5 1968.4 1958 1965.5 1976.5 1968.6 1966.0 1964.9 1960.2 1960.8 1966.3 1968.0 1962.2 1962.5 1960.4 1965.1 1959 1980.0 1974.1 1966.8 1961.5 1960.6 1975.8 1964.0 1971.0 1980.0 1975.9 1970.2 1960.6 1970.0 1960 1973.3 1972.4 1970.7 1975.1 1965.7 1960.2 1960.9 1967.4 1970.5 1963.4 1961.1 1960.3 1966.7 1961 1980.0 1980.0 1974.7 1980.0 1973.8 OTL od 1964.9 1970.5 1978.3 DOs. 1972.7 1965.9 1974.3 1962 1980.0 1973.7 1962.6 1980.0 1980.0 1963.2 1961.3 1967.3 1976.0 1966.0 1964.8 1970.5 1970.4 1963 1980.0 1980.0 1980.0 1980.0 1980.0 1980.0 1970.2 1974.7 1975.6 1962.7 1960.2 1959.8 1973.6 1964 1977.5 1970.7 1966.3 1966.7 1962.1 1960.1 1960.5 1966.7 1980.0 1977.9 1975.5 1963.5 1969.0 1965 1980.0 1976.6 1969.8 1962.3 1960.9 1960.1 1960.3 1970.0 1973.0 1962.3 1960.1 1960.1 1966.3 1966 1976.0 1967.5 1961.7 1960.1 1960.3 1960.2 1960.4 1967.9 1971.6 1962.3 1961.5 1980.0 1965.8 1967 1980.0 1976.1 1966.1 1960.2 1960.2 1959.0 1960.1 1966.4 1976.0 1973.3 1972.0 1980.0 1969.1 1968 1980.0 1980.0 1971.3 1961.9 1960.7 1974.0 1962.8 1970.9 1966.4 1961.9 1960.9 1980.0 1969.2 1969 1980.0 1975.0 1962.8 1960.1 1960.0 1958.7 1960.2 1966.0 1973.0 1969.4 1969.0 1960.5 1966.2 1970 1963.9 1974.3 1973.0 1962.2 1960.6 1960.5 1960.5 1967.9 1972.1 1972.6 1971.1 1980.0 1968.2 1971 1980.0 1978.3 1967.4 1961.4 1960.6 1959.3 1960.3 1969.0 1968.2 1961.3 1961.7 1960.4 1965.7 1972 1969.5 1962.7 1960.2 1960.1 1960.2 1960.2 1960.3 1966.5 1968.3 1960.9 1962.2 1975.5 1963.9 1973 1980.0 1975.1 1963.0 1962.3 1960.8 1960.1 1960.4 1965.8 1967.6 1964.1 1961.7 1961.0 1965.2 1974 1972.4 1963.0 1960.4 1960.1 1960.2 1958.9 1960.6 1966.2 1969.2 1961.5 1960.6 1962.6 1963.0 1975 1980.0 1980.0 1971.1 1961.9 1960.7 1959.4 1960.2 1967.0 1969.3 1963.4 1962.2 1960.4 1966.3 1976 1970.6 1962.4 1961.0 1960.6 1962.0 1960.1 1960.4 1966.7 1966.9 1962.9 1963.3 LO7704 1964.5 1977 1980.0 1980.0 1977.0 D91Zie; 1964.7 1960.2 1961.0 1968.6 1979.0 1970.9 1961.4 1960.1 1969.6 1978 1974.5 1964.4 1960.3 1960.1 1960.5 1960.1 1960.4 1968.7 1972.6 1962.9 1961.0 1961.0 1963.9 1979 1980.0 1978.3 1969.0 1960.7 1960.3 1960.1 1961.0 1966.5 1973.2 1972.5 1962.0 1962.0 1967.1 1980 1970.7 1976.2 1973.5 1967.1 1962.8 1960.5 1961.3 1968.0 1975.8 1972.6 1965.6 1963.2 1968.1 1981 1980.0 1980.0 1972.9 1980.0 1980.0 1974.7 1963.2 1969.9 1963.4 1960.8 1961.4 1980.0 1972.2 1982 1980.0 1980.0 1969.7 1962.8 1960.9 1959.6 1960.1 1968.2 1970.7 1964.4 1960.3 1960.4 1966.4 1983 1975.1 1966.5 1960.7 1963.0 1960.9 1960.2 1960.4 1968.9 1966.7 1960.2 1962.2 1961.8 1963.9 1984 1976.5 1977.4 1966.1 1980.0 1980.0 1973.3 1962.3 1978.8 1975.5 1965.0 1962.4 1979.7 1973.1 1985 1980.0 1977.0 1965.9 1980.0 1977.8 1962.8 1960.8 1967.0 1969.9 1962.5 1961.4 1960.2 1968.8 1986 1966.8 1962.5 1960.7 1974.7 1967.3 1980.0 1971.7 1977.7 1976.2 1963.6 1960.5 1959.2 1968.4 1987 1977.0 1975.5 1964.7 1980.0 1976.1 1962.1 1961.2 1969.6 1965.7 1962.0 1960.2 1968.9 1968.6 1988 1978.8 1980.0 1970.7 1964.0 1961.4 1960.5 1961.8 1968.6 1973.7 1969.4 1964.3 1980.0 1969.4 1989 1980.0 1976.0 1968.6 1967.3 1963.3 1960.1 1960.5 1966.9 1966.8 1960.8 1960.1 1960.1 1965.9 1990 1968.8 1974.4 1977.7 1980.0 1973.2 1967.5 1963.1 1970.2 1974.3 1965.0 1960.5 1971.9 1970.5 1991 1980.0 1967.3 1961.4 1962.3 1961.4 1960.1 1960.8 1965.9 1973.9 1966.9 1966.6 1971.9 1966.6 1992 1980.0 1974.4 1969.7 1970.8 1964.7 1960.1 1961.8 1969.2 1973.6 1962.9 1961.0 1980.0 1969.0 1993 1980.0 1980.0 1970.8 1971.4 1964.3 1965.6 1962.1 1967.1 1963.2 1961.9 1960.2 1960.2 1967.2 1994 1969.5 1972.8 1969.9 1967.3 1964.6 1961.1 1962.3 1969.5 1971.5 1964.6 1960.9 1971.2 1967.1 AVG 1976.7 1974.5 1968.0 1967.2 1964.8 1962.9 1961.5 1968.4 1971.4 1965.6 1963.2 1967.3 1967.6 RUN 1 Page 6 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-1 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2~-1.IN 15 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 486 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION = 9461. RUN 2 Page 1 12-22-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN VERSION 1.00 16:40:26 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1980. Spill level at dam 1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980. Top of power maximum pool 1964. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,20. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270.,6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) RUN 2 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) YEAR ocT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP AVG 1952 20.0 20.0 7.8 2.1 1.3 1.0 1.8 20.0 16.4 9.6 11.9 20.0 11.0 1953 20.0 20.0 20.0 3.1 1.8 1.0 2.8 18.6 17.4 12.3 10.3 3.8 10.9 1954 20.0 20.0 6.7 3.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 19.8 TS) 5.9 8.4 13nd 9.8 1955 20.0 20.0 view 14.5 6.4 2.1 2.8 20.0 20.0 9.0 14.4 20.0 13.9 1956 20.0 20.0 11.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 3.8 18.9 13.6 4.4 ig) 16.2 10.3 1957 20.0 20.0 20.0 9.2 2.3 1.0 2.6 19.7 20.0 15.5 4.7 5.8 11.7 1958 18.8 20.0 12.5 13.0 13.9 2.3 8.6 19.2 16.4 8.1 13357 3.7 1235) 1959 20.0 20.0 12.3 6.9 Sel 20.0 12.6 20.0 20.0 16.0 9.5 1.0 13.5 1960 20.0 18.7 13.4 19.2 5.9 2.0 8.8 20.0 17.6 9.4 8.1 3.8 122, 1961 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.6 12.9 9.3 19.4 20.0 18.6 8.7 950 Sn 7 1962 20.0 20.0 7.8 20.0 20.0 14.4 Tee 19.6 20.0 9.2 14.1 19.6 16.0 1963 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 19.9 19.4 15.9 3.0 4.0 1.0 15.3) 1964 20.0 18.3 11.5 15.3 5.3 1.0 6.1 19.8 20.0 20.0 13.5 4.0 12.9 1965 20.0 20.0 14.6 7.3 4.2 1.0 3.9 20.0 20.0 4.9 2a) 1.7 10.0 1966 20.0 15.7 7.1 2.2 1.8 6.0 5.6 20.0 19.0 5.5 10.1 20.0 11.1 1967 20.0 20.0 11.8 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 19.8 20.0 16.2 13.7 20.0 12.3 1968 20.0 20.0 20.0 5.2 3.3 20.0 9.5 20.0 12.6 8.5 8.5 20.0 14.0 1969 20.0 20.0 8.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.3 19.5 20.0 12.8 14.7 1.0 10.2 1970 16.9 20.0 17.8 3.8 2.3 8.0 dick. 20.0 19.4 15.5 13.6 20.0 13a L971 20.0 20.0 12.8 6.1 3.4 1.0 3.4 20.0 16.2 5.1 11.8 4.8 10.4 1972 20.0 9.2 4.8 2.9 1.2 6.9 3.8 19.8 16.4 3.6 13.8 20.0 10.2 1973 20.0 20.0 6.4 12.6 3.5 3.0 S.1 19.2 16.4 12.3 9.7 8.0 11.4 1974 20.0 9.8 6.0 3.7 Lad 1.0 7.8 19.3 17.4 5.0 7.8 14.0 9.4 1975 20.0 20.0 18.9 4.5 3.2 1.0 2.8 20.0 17.0 10.5 1? 335 ted 1976 20.0 8.5 8.5 8.0 10.3 2.3 5.0 19.9 15.1 11.6 15.3 20.0 12.0 1977 20.0 20.0 20.0 i ot 7.6 3.9 9.3 20.0 20.0 12.9 3.2 1.0 12.6 1978 20.0 12.9 4.4 4.1 sae 2.4 5.9 20.0 20.0 6.6 7.9 8.5 9.7 1979 20.0 20.0 12.0 2.3 1.6 4.4 9.1 19.3 20.0 15.3 3.5 11.1 11.5 1980 20.0 20.0 14.7 9.4 6.9 6.6 9.8 20.0 20.0 14.4 oe 11.9 13.6 1981 20.0 20.0 18.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.1 20.0 9.4 6.9 10.9 20.0 16.1 1982 20.0 20.0 14.3 9.1 4.0 1.0 1.0 20.0 18.0 10.0 4.6 6.0 10.7 1983 20.0 14.6 4.2 16.6 4.1 5.1 4.9 20.0 14.9 2.5 14.3 10.3 11.0 1984 20.0 20.0 8.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 3.5 20.0 20.0 7.3 eS 4 20.0 15.9 1985 20.0 20.0 7.4 20.0 20.0 2.5 6.5 19.8 eS) 7.7 9.8 1.4 1227 1986 20.0 8.7 Lao) 20.0 15.1 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.5 4.1 Deal 1.0 13.0 1987 20.0 20.0 8.4 20.0 20.0 3.1 8.2 20.0 13.4 9.3 5.8) 20.0 14.0 1988 20.0 20.0 13.8 9.7 5.8 7.4 11.5 20.0 20.0 11.0 11e7 20.0 14.2 1989 20.0 20.0 13.7 14.0 8.3 1.0 6.5 19.9 14.9 4.3 3.1 ed 10.6 1990 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.1 10.0 20.0 19.6 7.0 4.6 20.0 LS 9) 1991 20.0 14.0 6.2 13.8 7.0 3.4 8.6 18.9 20.0 10.9 14.8 19.6 13.1 1992 20.0 16.5 10.5 16.0 9.3 1.0 eed. 20.0 19.9 5.8 1.9 20.0 1312: 1993 20.0 20.0 19.6 15.6 7.5 16.0 8.5 18.8 10.7 11.0 325 2.2 12.8 1994 20.0 20.0 12.7 13.0 12.1 7.0 12.5 20.0 Ait. Si 9.4 6.4 20.0 14.2 1650.2 1644.4 1644.6 1647.2 1635.7 1646.3 1643.2 1651.6 1637.8 1648.0 1644.0 1651.6 1638.5 1643.8 1648.1 1643.2 1665.8 1642.7 1651.6 1641.6 1640.8 1644.9 1697.5 1638.2 1695.0 1649.8 1699.8 1647.9 1681.2 1642.8 1638.6 1647.5 1646.3 1672.0 1640.2 1638.6 1699.2 1639.3 1644.9 1642.6 1638.2 1675.5 1660.4 1650.8 1636.2 1692.4 1638.7 1682.6 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN RUN 2 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE JAN 1 Se 2 1712.2 1711.5 1672.8 1713.7 1697.3 1680.9 1704.7 1641.7 1638.1 1651.6 1649.7 1668.1 1703.6 1713.1 1712.2 1708.8 1713.5 1711.2 1706.7 1712.4 1682.9 L712) 1710.0 1701.5 1680.3 1710.7 1713.0 1696.7 1651.6 1697.8 1660.0 1651.6 1645.1 1643.8 1648.1 1695.6 1675.6 1648.4 1676.7 1663.8 1666.3 1680.9 1713.4 1713.8 1711.9 1713.4 1713.0 1711.7 hos uy 1711.6 1713.6 1712.0 1693.2 1702.7 1712.0 1713.5 1704.7 1651.6 1710.9 1710.7 1649.9 1637.3 1669.2 1639.0 1707.4 1700.5 1635.7 1704.4 1697.0 1703.0 1685.3 NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) 1713/22 1681.4 1673.5 1651.6 1713.4 1713.8 1706.9 1712.6 1643.0 1712.1 1701.5 1712.5 1704.7 1712.2 1712.5 1712.5 1713.0 1711.0 1712.9 1710.2 1705.5 1641.0 1712.5 1708.9 1637.1 1712.8 1650.3 1712.1 1703.3 1712.5 1694.1 1711.7 1713.5 1663.8 1704.4 1702.2 1712.5 1709.1 1697.0 1707.2 1697.8 1695.2 1701.1 1713.3 1709.3 1711.6 1705.7 1635.8 1700.8 1688.1 1705.8 1694.4 1699.5 1687.2 1699.8 1683.4 1644.0 1637.9 1641.7 1636.3 1635.6 1640.2 1638.7 1640.2 1637.2 1638.9 1636.6 1637.2 1637.4 1639.5 1636.5 1637.8 1637.2 1641.7 1641.0 1635.9 1636.4 1636.6 1637.4 1641.0 1635.9 1635.7 1636.6 1637.7 1646.6 1637.2 1636.8 1637.6 1635.9 1636.4 1636.3 1644.0 1636.5 1644.7 1636.4 1638.5 ~ ~ - ° Page 3 1972.4 1980.0 1966.9 1968.3 1972.2 1964.0 1971.6 1964.0 1971.1 1980.0 1970.0 1969.2 1973.3 1964.0 1966.6 1964.0 1978.2 1964.0 1976.3 1964.0 1971.2 1967.0 1975.9 1974.7 1964.0 1968.6 1967.0 1964.0 1967.7 1973.3 1971.0 1966.6 1964.0 1964.0 1979.2 1964.6 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE RUN 2 END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) MAR 1962.8 1962.7 1963.0 1964.0 1962.6 1962.7 1964.0 1973.3 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1980.0 1963.6 1964.0 1964.0 1962.8 1971.4 1962.3 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1969.4 1962.7 1964.0 1965.5 1964.0 1978.7 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1963.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.9 1964.0 1964.8 Page 4 RUN 2 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-2 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-2.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION = 9490. RUN 3 Page 1 12-22-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN VERSION 1.00 16:42:46 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1980. Spill level at dam 1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980. Top of power maximum pool 1979. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,41.4 Min and Max flows through Unit 1 40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40.,40. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.0455 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929. 31305. 71505.,2261.,2855.,4362. ;5270., 6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) RUN 3 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) YEAR oct NOV DEC JAN FEB 1952 19.9 7.7 6.2 Zel 1.3 1.0 1.8 16.4 9.6 =a) Lie) -8 1953 25.8 22.1 5.8 3.0 1.8 1.0 2.8 17.4 12.5) 10.3 3.8 10.4 1954 30.2 10.5 5.7 3.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 15.7 5.9 8.4 Nise) OB 1955 29.9 17.5 10.2 14.5 6.4 2.1 2.8 18.3 9.0 14.4 27eT 14.5 1956 33.4 12.8 3.7 1.3 1.0 1.0 3.8 13.6 4.4 11.9 16.2 10.2 1957 25.3 25.0 14.2 4.9 2.3 1.0 2.6 22.2 nS 4) 4.7 5.8 11.8 1958 18.8 25.1 7.6 13.0 13)-9) 2.3 8.6 16.4 8.1 13.7 Sat 12.5 1959 34.9 9.1 8.6 6.9 3.1 27.8 4.5 24.7 11.0 9.5 1.0 13.5 1960 24.4 14.1 13.4 19.2 5.9 2.0 8.8 17.6 9.4 8.1 3.8 12.2 1961 32.9 18.3 9.9 20.8 8.4 D2eo 9.3 22.8 15.9 8.7 9.0 15.7 1962 34.4 8.7 4.5 41.4 24.7 1.0 6.8 23.2 6.1 14.1 19.6 17.0 1963 26.7 20.0 15.7 30.0 21.8 SUSI 5.2 15.9 3.0 4.0 1.0 16.7 1964 29.8 8.2 11.5 15.3 §.3 1.0 6.1 28.1 13.0 12.7 4.0 12.9 1965 34.5 11.6 8.5 7.3 4.2 1.0 3.9 18.0 4.3 2.3 ded 10.0 1966 28.4 7.0 7.1 2.2 1.8 6.0 5.6 18.2 5.5 10.1 41.4 12.8 1967 Zhek 11.1 6.1 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 23.9 12.4 Ss 41.4 13.5 1968 30.7 23.7 6.6 4.3 3.3 26.0 3.3 alae 8.5 8.5 35.1 15.2 1969 30.9 10.0 4.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.3 Ziad Tie 14.7 1.0) 9.9 1970 16.9 24.1 13.8 3.8 2.3 8.0 7.21 18.7 15.5 13.6 41.4 15.5 1971 24.2 13.3 5.0 6.1 3.4 1.0 3.4 14.4 Sel. 11.8 4.8 9.5 1972 22.0 7.1 4.8 219) 1.2 6.9 3.8 16.4 3.6) 13.8 26.7 L057 1973 25.1 10.1 4.4 12.6 3.5 3.0 5.1 16.4 12.3) 9.7 8.0 10.8 1974 24.2 5.5 6.0 3.7 1.4 1.0 7.8 17.4 5-0) 7.8 14.0 9.4 1975 Sies) 18.2 6.4 4.5 3.2 1.0 2.8 16.8 1105: 11.57 SS) ties) 1976 23.0 5.4 8.5 8.0 10.3 2.3 5.0 15.1 11.6 15.3 27 oil 12.7 1977 25.3 17.9 12-1 10.3 7.6 S29) 9.3 25.1 7.2 3.2 1.0 12.0 1978 26.6 6.1 4.4 4.1 Ser} 2.4 5.9 18.6 6.6 7.9 8.5 9.6 1979 32.3 13.3 6.2 203 1.6 4.4 9.1 20.8 14.5 3.5 Lid 11.5 1980 21.8 20.5 12.4 9.4 6.9 6.6 9.8 22.3 12.0 9.1 Lig 13.6 1981 32.6 17.6 8.1 41.4 41.4 10.9 3.8 9.3 6.9 10.9 37.4 20.0 1982 18.6 16.2 5.1 9.1 4.0 1.0 1.0 17.2 10.0 4.6 6.0 925) 1983 21-3 7.21 4.2 16.6 4.1 5.1 4.9 13.2 2.5) 14.3 10.3 10.9 1984 27.5 15.9 4.9 41.4 19.3 8.5 2.3 ZL. 7 S29) 11.4 30.7 17.4 1985 19.7 12.0 5.1 28.0 12.6 1.2 6.5 17.3 7.7 9.8 1.4 11.8 1986 20.1 8.6 7.3 26.7 7.7 3350) 6.7 13.5 4.1 5.7 1.0 1229) 1987 29.1 13.5 5.6 30.9 10.8 1.0 7.7 11.9 9.3 5.8 2152) 14.1 1988 24.3 eer 6.0 9.7 5.8 7.4 11.5 19.8 11.0 11.1 41.1 15.8 1989 220 11.0 8.1 14.0 8.3 1.0 6.5 14.9 4.3 3.1 ay 9.6 1990 21.7 20.3 18.2 31.0 7.7 10.0 10.0 Doe. 7.0 4.6 24.5 16.2 1991 26.4 Zao) 6.2 13.8 7.0 3.4 8.6 22.2 8.8 14.8 19.6 12.7 1992 26.9 9.4 10.5 16.0 9.3 1.0 ied US 5.8 7.9 37.0 14.6 1993 26.0 19.2 6.1 15.6 7.5 16.0 8.5 10.7 11.0 3.5 2.2 1200 1994 22.2 18.2 12.2 13.0 12.1 7.0 12.5 16.9 9.4 6.4 23.4 14.5 1711.0 1698.7 1687.5 1688.3 1678.2 1699.9 1712.9 1673.6 1701.8 1679.8 1675.2 1696.6 1688.6 1674.8 1692.3 1695.7 1686.2 1685.6 1716.0 1702.4 1707.0 1700.3 1702.4 1665.7 1704.9 1699.9 1696.8 1681.5 1707.4 1680.6 1713.3 1695.1 1694.6 1711.3 1710.6 1690.4 1702.1 1705.6 1707.6 1697.3 1696.1 1698.2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN RUN 3 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE 1720.2 1728.6 1727.4 1725.8 1701.3 1707.4 1727.7 1728.2 1728.9 1729.0 1728.5 1728.7 1728.8 1728.5 1728.9 1728.4 1728.9 1728.5 1724.2 1726.4 1728.5 1728.9 1726.8 1652.0 1728.3 1728.2 Dizi 1721.8 1726.3 1723.7 1727.5 1725.9 1726.3 1726.8 1725.1 1726.4 1722.3 NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) 1664.3 1728.6 1729.0 1727.4 1728.0 1698.2 1727.6 1726.1 172129) 1726.8 1728.6 1727.9 1727.9 1728.8 1728.3 1728.7 1728.1 1727.0 1723.6 1727.9 1727.8 1725.7 1728.9 1679.5 1728.4 1726.5 1727.9 1724.4 1728.5 1728.7 1717.4 1726.8 1710.8 PTTL .9) 1711.5 1711.9 1711.2 1706.0 1709.3 1711-2 1708.2 1711.7 1709.5 1707.6 1711.2 1712.2 leis 1710.4 1711.0 1709.3 1708.2 1722.1 1710.4 1710.6 1709.4 1707.8 1689.7 1711.2 1709.3 1708.0 1710.4 1711.0 1709.9 1712.7 1709.5 1712.9 1709.7 1703.0 1723.3 1708.7 1713.1 1719.6 1716.8 1716.8 1715.2 1716.2 1718.6 1700.3 1713.3 1709.3 1706.4 1725.1 1715.5 72d 1722.8 1715.4 1720.7 1722.6 1711.2 1718.9 1712.4 1706.6 1712.2 T72326 1716.0 Page 3 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN RUN 3 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1980.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1978.8 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1980.0 1979.0 1979.0 1980.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1978.1 1979.0 1978.7 1979.0 1979.0 1978.1 1979.0 1977.7 1979.0 1978.0 1979.0 1979. 1978. 1978. 1979. 1979. 1979. 1979. 1979. 1979. 1978. 1979, 1979. 1979. 1979. 1978. 1979. 1978.0 1979.0 1979.0 1978.8 1979.0 1979.0 SMODDDRDDRDROCGCOCOO 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1978.6 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 197920) 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 197920 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 1979.0 Page 4 RUN 3 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-3 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-3.IN 41.4 CFS MAX. Q - 10-FT DAM+SIPHON - MAX POOL EL 1980 - 1506 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION = 9750. RUN 4 12-23-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-4.IN 09:53:38 20 CES MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-4.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1970. Spill level at dam 1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970. Top of power maximum pool 1964. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,20. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270.,6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft) 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) VERSION 1.00 Page 1 RUN 4 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-4.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) YEAR AUG SEP AVG 1952 20.0 11.3 6.2 2.1 1.3 1.0 1.8 20.0 16.4 9.6 11.9 20.0 10.1 1953 20.0 20.0 10.4 3.0 1.8 1.0 2.8 18.6 17.4 12.3 10.3 3.8 10.1 1954 20.0 15.3 5.7 3.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 19.8 15.7 5.9 8.4 13.1 9.3 1955 20.0 20.0 12.4 14.5 6.4 2.1 2.8 20.0 20.0 9.0 14.4 20.0 13.5 1956 20.0 17.6 3.7 1.3 1.0 1.0 3.8 18.9 13.6 4.4 119) 16.2 9.4 1957 20.0 20.0 18.8 4.9 2.3 1.0 2.6 19.7 20.0 159. 4.7 S28 11.3 1958 18.8 20.0 12.2 13.0 13.9 2.3 8.6 19.2 16.4 6-1: Loe? 3.7 12.5 1959 20.0 13.9 8.6 6.9 3.1 20.0 9.3 20.0 20.0 15.6 9.5 1.0 12.3 1960 20.0 18.7 13.4 19.2 5.9 2.0 8.8 20.0 17.6 9.4 8.1 3.8 12-2. 1961 20.0 20.0 12.9 20.0 9.3 12.9 9.3 19.4 20.0 18.6 8.7 9.0 15.0 1962 20.0 13.5 4.5 20.0 20.0 4.7 7.7 19.6 20.0 9.2 14.1 19.6 14.4 1963 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 19.4 15.9 3.0 4.0 1.0 14.4 1964 20.0 13.0 11.5 15.3 5.3 1.0 6.1 19.8 20.0 17.6 12.7 4.0 L2a2 1965 20.0 16.4 8.5 7.3 4.2 1.0 3.9 20.0 20.0 4.9 2.3 dia? Dard 1966 20.0 11.8 7.1 2.2 1.8 6.0 5.6 20.0 19.0 5.5 10.1 20.0 10.8 1967 20.0 15.9 6.1 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 19.8 20.0 16.2 13.7 20.0 11.5 1968 20.0 20.0 11.2 4.3 3.3 20.0 8.1 20.0 12.6 8.5 8.5 20.0 13.0 1969 20.0 14.8 4.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.3 19.5 20.0 12.8 14.7 1.0 9-3) 1970 16.9 20.0 17.8 3.8) 2.3 8.0 71 20.0 19.4 15.5 13.6 20.0 13.7 1971 20.0 18.1 5.0 6.1 3.4 1.0 3.4 20.0 16.2 5.1 11.8 4.8 9.6 1972 20.0 9.2 4.8 2.9 1.2 6.9 3.8 19.8 16.4 3.6 13.8 20.0 10.2 1973 20.0 14.9 4.4 12.6 3.5 3.0 5.1 19.2 16.4 12.3 9.7 8.0 10.8 1974 20.0 9.8 6.0 3.7 1.4 1.0 7.8 19.3 17.4 5.0 7.8 14.0 9.4 1975 20.0 20.0 9.3 4.5 3.2 1.0 2.8 20.0 17.0 10.5 11.7 3.5 10.3 1976 20.0 8.5 8.5 8.0 10.3 2.3 5.0 19.9 15.1 11.6 15.3 20.0 12.0 1977 20.0 20.0 14.7 10.3 7.6 3.9 9.3 20.0 20.0 11.8 3.2 1.0 11.8 1978 20.0 10.9 4.4 4.1 3.2 2.4 5.9 20.0 20.0 6.6 7.9 8.5 9.5: 1979 20.0 18.1 6.2 2as 1.6 4.4 9.1 19.3 20.0 15.3 3.5 11.1 10.9 1980 20.0 20.0 14.7 9.4 6.9 6.6 9.8 20.0 20.0 14.4 9.1 11.9 13.6 1981 20.0 20.0 10.4 20.0 20.0 14.5 3.8 20.0 9.4 6.9 10.9 20.0 14.7 1982 20.0 19.5 5.1 9.1 4.0 1.0 1.0 20.0 18.0 10.0 4.6 6.0 9.9 1983 20.0 11.9 4.2 16.6 4.1 §.1 4.9 20.0 14.9 2.5 14.3 10.3 10.7 1984 20.0 20.0 5.5 20.0 20.0 11.5 2.3 20.0 16.5 5.9 11.4 20.0 14.4 1985 20.0 16.5 5.1 20.0 17.7 1.2 6.5 19.8 17.3 Tal 9.8 1.4 1.9 1986 20.0 8.7 7.3 20.0 12.8 20.0 11.5 20.0 14.3 4.1 5.7 1.0 12.1 1987 20.0 18.3 5.6 20.0 15.9 1.0 ea 20.0 13.4 9.3 5.8 20.0 13.1 1988 20.0 20.0 10.6 9.7 5.8 7.4 11.5 20.0 20.0 11.0 21.1 20.0 13.9 1989 20.0 15.8 8.1 14.0 8.3 1.0 6.5 19.9 14.9 4.3 3.1 1.1 Ga7 1990 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 12.8 10.0 10.0 20.0 19.6 7.0 4.6 20.0 153) 1991 20.0 7.7 6.2 13.8 7.0 3.4 8.6 18.9 20.0 10.9 14.8 19.6 12.6 1992 20.0 14.2 10.5 16.0 9.3 1.0 11.7 20.0 19.9 5.8 7.9 20.0 13.0 1993 20.0 20.0 9.9 15.6 7.5 16.0 8.5 18.8 10.7 11.0 3.5 2.2 12.0 1994 20.0 20.0 12.7 13.0 12.1 7.0 12.5 20.0 17.5 9.4 6.4 20.0 14.2 RUN 4 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-4.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) YEAR APR MAY 1952 1640.2 1688.8 1706.5 1713.1 1713.7 . 1635.6 1661.3 1695.9 1686.2 1641.6 1684.1 1953 1641.6 1641.6 1692.8 1712.2 1713.4 1712.5 1712.5 1646.2 1654.7 1684.3 1693.2 1711.2 1684.7 1954 1641.6 1668.3 1707.6 1711.5 1713.4 1712.8 1712.0 1637.0 1665.7 1707.2 1700.2 1680.4 1688.1 1955 1641.6 1638.5 1683.9 1672.8 1706.0 1713.1 1712.5 1637.7 1636.0 1698.1 1673.4 1641.6 1671.3 1956 1641.6 1653.5 1711.3 1713.7 1713.7 1712.4 1711.2 1644.0 1677.7 1710.2 1686.2 1662.6 1686.5 1957 1641.6 1641.6 1644.6 1709.3 1713.0 1712.5 1712.7 1637.9 1638.4 1666.7 1709.7 1707.4 1678.0 1958 1644.7 1641.6 1684.8 1680.9 1676.1 1713.0 1699.5 1641.7 1661.3 1701.1 1677.2 1711.3 1677.8 1959 1641.6 1676.3 1699.5 1704.7 1712.1 1641.6 1697.2 1636.3 1641.6 1666.2 1696.3 1712.5 1677.2 1960 1641.4 1645.6 1678.8 1641.7 1707.2 1713.2 1698.8 1635.6 1653.3 1696.7 1701.1 1711.2 1677.1 1961 1641.6 1639.5 1681.6 1636.6 1697.1 1681.4 1697.0 1640.2 1639.1 1646.1 1699.2 1698.1 1666.5 1962 1641.6 1678.5 1710.0 1641.6 1641.6 1709.7 1702.4 1638.7 1639.6 1697.4 1675.0 1638.7 1667.9 1963 1641.6 1641.6 1636.0 1641.6 1641.6 1641.6 1694.5 1640.2 1664.4 1712.2 1710.9 1713.4 1665.0 1964 1641.6 1681.1 1688.1 1668.1 1708.5 1713.4 1706.7 1637.2 1641.6 1653.2 1682.4 1710.9 1677.7 1965 1641.6 1661.5 1699.8 1703.6 1710.5 1713.8 1711.0 1638.9 1636.3 1709.4 1713.0 1713.4 1687.7 1966 1641.6 1686.9 1704.1 1713.1 1713.4 1706.9 1707.9 1636.6 1643.0 1708.1 1694.0 1641.6 1683.1 1967 1641.6 1664.7 1706.7 1712.2 1713.8 1712.6 1713.5 1637.2 1640.5 1662.7 1677.2 1641.6 1677.0 1968 1641.6 1641.6 1689.4 1710.4 1711.9 1641.6 1701.3 1637.4 1682.7 1699.8 1699.8 1641.6 1674.9 1969 1641.6 1671.3 1710.7 1713.5 1713.4 1712.1 1713.0 1639.5 1637.0 1682.1 1671.6 1712.9 1684.9 1970 1657.9 1640.8 1652.1 1711.2 1713.0 1701.5 1704.1 1636.5 1640.1 1666.9 1677.7 1641.6 1670.3 1971 1641.6 1650.0 1709.1 1706.7 1711.7 1712.5 1711.8 1637.8 1662.8 1708.9 1686.7 1709.5 1687.4 1972 1638.2 1697.5 1709.5 1712.4 1713.7 1704.7 1711.2 1637.2 1661.3 1711.5 1676.7 1641.6 1684.6 1973 1641.6 1670.7 1710.2 1682.9 1711.6 1712.2 1708.9 1641.7 1661.3 1684.3 1695.6 1701.5 1685.2 1974 1641.1 1695.0 1706.9 L71t.3 1713.6 1712.5 1702.2 1641.0 1654.7 1709.1 1702.1 1675.6 1688.8 1975 1641.6 1639.3 1697.2 1710.0 1712.0 1712.5 1712.5 1635.9 1657.3 1692.4 1687.2 1711.6 1684.1 1976 1639.5 1699.8 1699.8 1701.5 1693.2 1713.0 1709.1 1636.4 1669.3 1687.6 1668.1 1641.6 1679.9 1977 1641.6 1639.0 1671.8 1693.2 1702.7 1711.0 1697.0 1636.6 1641.6 1686.7 1712.0 1713.4 1678.9 1978 1641.6 1690.9 1710.2 1710.7 1712.0 1712.9 1707.2 1637.4 1635.7 1705.3 1701.8 1699.8 1688.8 1979 1641.6 1650.0 1706.5 1713.0 1713.5 1710.2 1697.8 1641.0 1636.6 1668.3 1711.6 1689.9 1681.7 1980 1637.9 1638.6 1671.7 1696.7 1704.7 1705.5 1695.2 1635.9 1638.8 1673.2 1697.8 1686.2 1673.5 1981 1641.6 1638.6 1692.8 1641.6 1641.6 1672.7 1711.2 1635.7 1696.7 1704.7 1690.7 1641.6 1667.5 1982 1639.8 1639.3 1708.9 1697.8 1710.9 1712.5 1713.3 1636.6 1650.4 1694.4 1709.9 1706.9 1685.1 1983 1641.6 1686.4 1710.5 1660.0 1710.7 1708.9 1709.3 1637.7 1670.8 1712.8 1673.9 1693.2 1684.6 1984 1641.6 1636.4 1708.0 1641.6 1639.5 1688.1 1713.0 1641.6 1660.9 1707.2 1688.5 1641.6 1667.3 1985 1641.2 1660.9 1708.9 1641.6 1652.6 1713.7 1705.7 1637.2 1655.3 1702.4 1695.2 1713.6 1677.4 1986 1635.7 1699.2 1703.6 1641.6 1681.9 1641.6 1688.2 1636.6 1673.8 1710.7 1707.6 1712.5 1677.8 1987 1641.6 1648.6 1707.9 1641.6 1664.4 1713.2 1702.4 1637.6 1678.5 1697.0 1707.4 1638.0 1673.2 1988 1641.6 1641.6 1691.9 1695.6 1707.4 1703.3 1688.1 1635.9 1635.6 1690.3 1689.9 1641.6 1671.9 1989 1641.6 1665.3 1701.1 1675.6 1700.5 1712.5 1705.8 1636.4 1670.5 1710.4 1712.1 1713.8 1687.1 1990 1637.8 1638.2 1635.8 1641.6 1681.9 1694.4 1694.4 1636.3 1638.6 1704.4 1709.9 1641.3 1662.9 1991 1641.6 1702.5 1706.5 1676.7 1704.4 1711.7 1699.5 1644.0 1638.4 1690.6 1671.1 1638.7 1677.1 1992 1641.6 1674.7 1692.4 1663.8 1697.0 1713.5 1687.2 1636.5 1636.2 1707.4 1701.8 1641.6 1674.5 1993 1641.6 1640.6 1694.6 1666.3 1703.0 1663.8 1699.8 1644.7 1691.6 1690.3 1711.6 1713.1 1680.1 1994 1638.5 1636.2 1682.6 1680.9 1685.3 1704.4 1683.4 1636.4 1653.8 1696.7 1706.0 1639.9 1670.3 AVG 1641.4 1660.1 1693.6 1684.1 1697.7 1700.9 1704.1 1638.3 1654.1 1693.3 1693.9 1678.6 1678.4 RUN 4 Page 4 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-4.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) 1964.0 1970.0 1969.8 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1964.0 1970.0 1966.6 1970.0 1969.5 1970.0 1967.9 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1966.3 1970.0 1968.2 1970.0 1970.0 1969.6 1964.1 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1966.2 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1966.9 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1969.2 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1967.7 1964.0 1967.4 1964.0 1964.0 1967.0 1967.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.8 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1966.6 1964.0 1964.0 1969.0 1964.6 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1963.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1970.0 1970.0 1964.0 1963.6 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.8 1964.0 1970.0 1963.6 1962.3 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1967.9 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.0 1964.0 1963.3 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1963.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.5 1964.2 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1963. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 1964. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O oO 0 0 oO 0 0 0 0 oO 0 0 5 0 ecooo090c0CCCoo 1966.1 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1967.3 1965.0 1964.0 1965.8 1964.0 1964.9 1966.2 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.3 1964.0 1965.0 1965.8 1964.0 1964.3 1964.1 1965.0 1966.1 1970.0 1964.0 1965.0 1966.0 1964.3 1964.0 1964.7 1964.0 1964.9 1964.0 1964.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . -0 0 1966.8 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1967.5 1964.0 1964.0 0 1968.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 6 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.7 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1968.9 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1965.4 1964.0 1964.0 1 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 .0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 6 1964.1 1964.0 1964.0 0 1965.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1967.2 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 U 1966.8 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 3 RUN4 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-4 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2~-4.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON ONLY - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) YEAR 1952 1671 943 539 183 103 87 150 1667 1343 829 1022 1619 10156 1953 1673 1619 898 262 142 87 234 1560 1420 1055 889 321 10158 1954 1673 1256 496 314 142 87 84 1653 1289 513 728 1085 9320 1955 1673 1616 1063 1236 502 183 236 1669 1609 a9 1228 1619 13412 1956 1673 1432 323 113 ue 87 318 1583 1125 383 1022 1328 9467 1957 1673 1619 1576 427 181 87 217 1644 1616 i319) 409 488 11255 1958 1575 1619 1048 1113 1072 201 721 1606 1343 702 1171 312 12483 1959 1673 1146 745 599 244 1673 775 1667 1619 1325 821 84 12371 1960 1672 1516 1146 1606 463 175 737 1667 1435 813 702 321 12252 1961 1673 1617 1102 1668 725 1105 778 1621 1616 1561 753 754 14972 1962 1673 1114 392 1673 1511 410 646 1636 1617 795 1203 1584 14254 1963 1673 1619 1667 1673 1511 1673 832 1621 1305 262 349 84 14268 1964 1673 1075 989 1300 417 87 512 1651 1619 1483 1089 337 12232 1965 1673 1341 736 634 331 87 329 1670 1614 424 201 144 9181 1966 1673 978 616 192 142 522 472 1668 1541 479 872 1619 10773 1967 1673 1302 530 262 ag 87 141 1651 1618 1370 sbi BE 1619 11503 1968 1673 1619 965 375 260 1673 676 1668 1049 736 736 1619 13049 1969 1673 E217 357 87 719 87 191 1629 1614 1094 1252 84 9365 1970 1429 1618 1496 331 181 693 597 1668 1571 1316 1162 1619 13681 1971 1673 1470 435 530 268 87 284 1669 1325 444 1014 405 9603 i972 1669 767 418 253 95 599 321 1651 1343 314 1179 1619 10228 1973 1673 1224 383 1080 276 262 430 1606 1343 1055 838 671 10842 1974 1672 822 522 323 110 87 652 1614 1420 435 676 1157 9490 1975 1673 1616 801 392 252 87 234 1667 1390 905 1006 295 10318 1976 1671 712 7136 693 803 201 421 1659 1243 997 1300 1619 12055 1977 1673 1616 1250 889 595 340 778 1668 1619 1015 279 84 11806 1978 1673 906 383 357 252 209 497 1668 1613 577 685 22) 9533 1979 1673 1470 539 201 126 383 762 1614 1614 1298 305 925 10909 1980 1669 1616 1251 813 541 573 819 1667 1616 1230 787 989 13571 1981 1673 1616 896 1673 1511 1237 321 1667 787 599 939 1619 14535 1982 1671 1578 444 787 315 87 84 1668 1465 863 401 505 9868 1983 1673 986 366 1404 323 444 413 1669 1224 218 1220 860 10799 1984 1673 1614 482 1673 1509 988 194 1673 1348 $13 981 1619 14266 1985 1672 1347 444 1673 1346 105 547 1651 1412 668 846 118 11830 1986 1667 729 634 1673 991 1673 954 1668 1182 357 496 84 12108 1987 1673 1485 487 1673 1218 87 645 1669 1113 804 505 1615 12973 1988 1673 1619 915 838 456 642 957 1667 1613 948 956 1619 13901 1989 1673 1294 702 1195 649 87 544 1659 1227 375 270 93 9769 1990 1669 1615 1667 1673 991 863 835 1667 1585 608 401 1618 15192 1991 1673 643 539 1179 549 297 721 1583 1616 941 1260 1584 12583 1992 1673 1170 905 1356 726 87 973 1668 1607 505 685 1619 12973 1993 1673 1618 858 1324 588 1356 712 1575 892 947 305 186 12035 1994 1669 1613 1085 LTS) 938 608 1037 1667 1429 813 556 1617 14147 AVG MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION 9181. RUN5 Page 1 12-23-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN VERSION 1.00 10:04:22 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= iz SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1970. Spill level at dam 1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970.,1970. Top of power maximum pool 1960. Minimum desired power pool level Ono, 20. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20<,20.,20. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270., 6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft) 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) RUN 5 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) 1952 20.0 14.5 6.2 2.1 1.3 1.0 1.8 20.0 16.4 9.6 9 0 4 1953 20.0 20.0 13.5 3.0 1.8 1.0 2.8 18.6 17.4 12.3 10.3 3.8 10.4 1954 20.0 18.4 5.7 3.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 19.8 15.7 5.9 8.4 13-0 9.5 1955 20.0 20.0 15.5 14.5 6.4 2.1 2.8 20.0 20.0 9.0 14.4 20.0 13.7 1956 20.0 20.0 4.4 i) 1.0 1.0 3.8 18.9 13.6 4.4 d9) 16.2 Oat 1957 20.0 20.0 20.0 6.8 2.3 1.0 2.6 19.7 20.0 15.5 4.7 5.8 11.5 1958 18.8 20.0 12.5 13.0 13.9 2.3 8.6 19.2 16.4 8.1 Usa] 3.7 12.5 1959 20.0 17.0 8.6 6.9 3.1 20.0 12.4 20.0 20.0 16.0 9.5 1.0 12.19) 1960 20.0 18.7 13.4 19.2 5.9 2.0 8.8 20.0 17.6 9.4 8.1 3.8 12.2 1961 20.0 20.0 15.9 20.0 9.3 1269 9.3 19.4 20.0 18.6 8.7 9.0 15.3 1962 20.0 16.6 4.5 20.0 20.0 7.8 7.7 19.6 20.0 9.2 14.1 19.6 14.9 1963 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 13.1 19.4 15.9 3.0 4.0 1.0 14.7 1964 20.0 16.1 11.5 aS) 5.3 1.0 6.1 19.8 20.0 20.0 13.4 4.0 12.7 1965 20.0 19.5 8.5 7.3 4.2 1.0 3.9 20.0 20.0 4.9 2.3 de? 9.4 1966 20.0 14.9 od Za2 1.8 6.0 5.6 20.0 19.0 5.5 10.1 20.0 11.0 1967 20.0 19.0 6.1 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 19.8 20.0 16.2 13.7 20.0 11.8 1968 20.0 20.0 14.3 4.3 3.3 20.0 9.5 20.0 12.6 8.5 8.5 20.0 13.4 1969 20.0 Biot) 4.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.3 19.5 20.0 12.8 14.7 1.0 9.6 1970 16.9 20.0 17.8 3.8 2.3 8.0 7.1 20.0 19.4 15.5 13.6 20.0 iS ou E971 20.0 20.0 6.2 6.1 3.4 1.0 3.4 20.0 16.2 5.1 11.8 4.8 9.8 1972 20.0 9.2 4.8 2.9 1.2 6.9 3.8 19.8 16.4 3.6 13.8 20.0 10.2 1973 20.0 18.0 4.4 12.6 3.5 3.0 5.1 19.2 16.4 12.3 9.7 8.0 11.0 1974 20.0 9.8 6.0 3.7 1.4 1.0 7.8 19.3 17.4 5.0 7.8 14.0 9.4 1975 20.0 20.0 12.3 4.5 Ose 1.0 2.8 5 oi 5 79 1976 20.0 8.5 8.5 8.0 10.3 2.3 5.0 6 ao) 0 +0 ESET 20.0 20.0 17.8 10.3 7.6 3.9 9.3 9 -2 0 «2 1978 20.0 Zi9) 4.4 4.1 3.2 2.4 5.9 6 a) 5 oth 1979 20.0 20.0 7.4 2.3 1.6 4.4 9.1 3 5 Hl +2 1980 20.0 20.0 14.7 9.4 6.9 6.6 9.8 4 ol 9 26) 1981 20.0 20.0 13.5 20.0 20.0 2756) 3.8 3 9 0 ae. 1982 20.0 20.0 reel 9.1 4.0 1.0 1.0 0 6 0 1 1983 20.0 14.6 4.2 16.6 4.1 5.1 4.9 5 <2) 3 -0 1984 20.0 20.0 8.4 20.0 20.0 14.6 2.3 9 4 0 ai 1985 20.0 19.6 §.1 20.0 20.0 2.2 6.5 7 8 4 eS, 1986 20.0 8.7 7.3 20.0 15.1 20.0 14.6 1 aH 0 26 1987 20.0 20.0 7.0 20.0 19.3 1.0 Ted 3) 8 0 0) 1988 20.0 20.0 13.7 9.7 5.8 7.4 11.5 0 «1 0 «2 1989 20.0 18.9 8.1 14.0 8.3 1.0 6.5 2) ol 1 -0 1990 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 16.2 10.0 10.0 0 +6 0 16 1991 20.0 10.8 6.2 13.8 7.0 3.4 8.6 9 -8 6 8 1992 20.0 16.5 10.5 16.0 9.3 1.0 DLet 8 9 0 2 1993 20.0 20.0 13.0 15.6 7.5 16.0 8.5 0 “9 2 ae 1994 20.0 20.0 12.7 13.0 12.1 7.0 12.5 4 4 0 2 8 6 RUN5 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) DEC APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP AVG 1702.5 1709.1 1709.7 1708.6 1709.4 1631.6 1657.3 1691.9 1682.2 1641.6 1679.4 . . 1674.4 1708.2 1709.4 1708.5 1708.5 1642.2 1650.7 1680.3 1689.2 1707.2 1680.1 1954 1641.6 1643.3 1703.6 1707.5 1709.4 1708.8 1708.0 1633.0 1661.7 1703.2 1696.2 1676.4 1682.7 1955 1641.6 1638.5 1663.1 1668.8 1702.0 1709.1 1708.5 1633.7 1632.0 1694.1 1669.4 1641.3 1666.8 1956 1641.6 1632.5 1706.2 1709.7 1709.7 1708.4 1707.2 1640.0 1673.7 1706.2 1682.2 1658.6 1681.3 1957 1638.5 1641.6 1634.1 1701.0 1709.0 1708.5 1708.7 1633.9 1634.4 1662.7 1705.7 1703.4 1673.5 1958 1640.7 1638.0 1679.2 1676.9 1672.1 1709.0 1695.5 1637.7 1657.3 1697.1 1673.2 1707.3 1673.7 1959 1641.6 1653.1 1695.5 1700.7 1708.1 1641.6 1679.7 1632.3 1638.2 1659.5 1692.3 1708.5 1670.9 1960 1637.4 1641.6 1674.8 1637.7 1703.2 1709.2 1694.8 1631.6 1649.3 1692.7 1697.1 1707.2 1673.1 1961 1641.6 1639.5 1660.2 1632.6 1693.1 1677.4 1693.0 1636.2 1635.1 1642.1 1695.2 1694.1 1661.7 1962 1641.6 1655.7 1706.0 1641.6 1641.6 1698.1 1698.4 1634.7 1635.6 1693.4 1671.0 1634.7 1662.7 1963 1640.3 1640.3 1634.7 1641.6 1641.6 1641.6 1676.2 1636.2 1660.4 1708.2 1706.9 1709.4 1661.5 1964 1641.6 1658.9 1684.1 1664.1 1704.5 1709.4 1702.7 1733.2 1641.6 1632.5 1674.9 1706.9 1671.2 1965 1641.6 1635.2 1695.8 1699.6 1706.5 1709.8 1707.0 1634.9 1632.3 1705.4 1709.0 1709.4 1682.2 1966 1641.6 1666.2 1700.1 1709.1 1709.4 1702.9 1703.9 1632.6 1639.0 1704.1 1690.0 1641.6 1678.4 1967 1641.6 1638.9 1702.7 1708.2 1709.8 1708.6 1709.5 1633.2 1636.5 1658.7 1673.2 1641.6 1671.9 1968 1641.6 1641.6 1670.0 1706.4 1707.9 1639.4 1692.3 1633.4 1678.7 1695.8 1695.8 1641.6 1670.4 1969 1641.6 1646.9 1706.7 1709.5 1709.4 1708.1 1709.0 1635.5 1633.0 1678.1 1667.6 1708.9 1679.5 1970 1653.9 1636.8 1648.1 1707.2 1709.0 1697.5 1700.1 1632.5 1636.1 1662.9 1673.7 1641.6 1666.6 1971 1641.6 1633.2 1702.5 1702.7 1707.7 1708.5 1707.8 1633.8 1658.8 1704.9 1682.7 1705.5 1682.5 1972 1634.2 1693.5 1705.5 1708.4 1709.7 1700.7 1707.2 1633.2 1657.3 1707.5 1672.7 1640.0 1680.8 1973 1641.6 1646.2 1706.2 1678.9 1707.6 1708.2 1704.9 1637.7 1657.3 1680.3 1691.6 1697.5 1679.8 1974 1637.1 1691.0 1702.9 1707.3 1709.6 1708.5 1698.2 1637.0 1650.7 1705.1 1698.1 1671.6 1684.8 1975 1641.6 1639.3 1680.1 1706.0 1708.0 1708.5 1708.5 1631.9 1653.3 1688.4 1683.2 1707.6 1679.7 1976 1635.5 1695.8 1695.8 1697.5 1689.2 1709.0 1705.1 1632.4 1665.3 1683.6 1664.1 1641.3 1676.2 1977 1641.6 1639.0 1648.2 1689.2 1698.7 1707.0 1693.0 1632.6 1639.1 1677.2 1708.0 1709.4 1673.6 1978 1640.2 1677.2 1706.2 1706.7 1708.0 1708.9 1703.2 1633.4 1631.7 1701.3 1697.8 1695.8 1684.2 1979 1641.6 1633.2 1699.3 1709.0 1709.5 1706.2 1693.8 1637.0 1632.6 1664.3 1707.6 1685.9 1676.6 1980 1633.9 1634.6 1667.7 1692.7 1700.7 1701.5 1691.2 1631.9 1634.8 1669.2 1693.8 1682.2 1669.5 1981 1641.6 1638.6 1674.5 1641.6 1641.6 1649.4 1707.2 1631.7 1692.7 1700.7 1686.7 1641.6 1662.3 1982 1639.8 1635.0 1698.4 1693.8 1706.9 1708.5 1709.3 1632.6 1646.4 1690.4 1705.9 1702.9 1680.8 1983 1641.1 1668.0 1706.5 1656.0 1706.7 1704.9 1705.3 1633.7 1666.8 1708.8 1669.9 1689.2 1679.7 1984 1641.4 1636.2 1696.1 1641.6 1639.5 1668.5 1709.0 1641.6 1634.4 1703.2 1684.5 1641.6 1661.5 1985 1641.2 1634.5 1704.9 1641.6 1632.9 1709.1 1701.7 1633.2 1651.3 1698.4 1691.2 1709.6 1670.8 1986 1631.7 1695.2 1699.6 1640.3 1665.2 1641.6 1668.0 1632.6 1669.8 1706.7 1703.6 1708.5 1671.9 1987 1641.6 1633.4 1700.4 1641.6 1636.9 1709.2 1698.4 1633.6 1674.5 1693.0 1703.4 1634.0 1666.7 1988 1639.6 1641.6 1673.3 1691.6 1703.4 1699.3 1684.1 1631.9 1631.6 1686.3 1685.9 1641.6 1667.5 1989 1641.6 1639.7 1697.1 1671.6 1696.5 1708.5 1701.8 1632.4 1666.5 1706.4 1708.1 1709.8 1681.7 1990 1633.8 1634.2 1631.8 1641.6 1658.5 1690.4 1690.4 1632.3 1634.6 1700.4 1705.9 1637.3 1657.6 1991 1641.6 1687.0 1702.5 1672.7 1700.4 1707.7 1695.5 1640.0 1634.4 1686.6 1667.1 1634.7 1672.5 £992 1640.6 1656.4 1688.4 1659.8 1693.0 1709.5 1683.2 1632.5 1632.2 1703.4 1697.8 1641.6 1669.9 1993 1641.6 1640.6 1676.8 1662.3 1699.0 1659.8 1695.8 1640.7 1687.6 1686.3 1707.6 1709.1 1675.6 1994 1634.5 1632.2 1678.6 1676.9 1681.3 1700.4 1679.4 1632.4 1649.8 1692.7 1702.0 1635.9 1666.3 AVG 1640.3 1649.2 1685.7 1680.7 1692.5 1696.2 1698.9 1634.4 1649.7 1688.7 1689.9 1675.7 1673.5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN RUN5 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) Page 4 1962.3 1970.0 1968.2 1969.5 1969.8 1969.6 1960.1 1970.0 1968.0 1970.0 1962.2 1970.0 1969.0 1970.0 1962.9 1960.0 1970.0 1960.0 1966.9 1960.9 1970.0 1966.4 1960.0 1960.0 1967.9 1960.0 1968.7 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1960.0 1965.2 1961.6 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1967.7 1960.0 1967.4 1960.0 1961.6 1963.0 1967.0 1963.4 1960.0 1964.6 1960.0 1960.0 1961.8 1970.0 1960.0 1962.6 1960.0 1960.0 1969.0 1960.6 1962.9 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1962.5 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1963.1 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.2 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.1 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1970.0 1968.7 1970.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1960.0 1960.0 1967.9 1961.3 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1959.6 1960.0 1960.0 1958.8 1967.8 1958.3 1960.0 1958.7 1960.0 1960.0 1958.7 1958.7 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1958.7 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1970.0 1959.3 1960.0 1958.7 1960.0 1960.0 1959.7 1960.0 1960.0 1958.2 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1959.5 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.3 1960.0 1961.0 1961.8 1960.0 1960.3 1960.1 1961.0 1962.1 1970.0 1960.0 1961.0 1962.0 1960.3 1960.0 1960.7 1960.0 1960.9 1960.0 1960.8 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1962.8 1960.0 1966.6 1960.0 1963.5 1964.0 1960.0 1970.0 1960.7 1960.0 1964.9 1960.0 1961.4 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1967.5 1960.1 1961.0 1963.2 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1962.8 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.9 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 1960.0 RUN5 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-5 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-5.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+GROUSE+DEER - MAX POOL EL 1970 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) RUN 6 Page 1 12-23-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-6.IN VERSION 1.00 10:11:12 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-6.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 2010. Spill level at dam 2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010.,2010. Top of power maximum pool 1964. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,20. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270., 6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft) 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) RUN 6 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-6.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) 1952 20.0 20.0 18.0 12.8 8.7 5.7 4.3 10.5 12.4 11.5 0 8 1953 20.0 20.0 16.9 12.2 8.5 5.4 4.6 10.1 12.5 12.6 11.8 8.9 12.0 1954 16.4 14.3 11.4 8.7 6.0 3.6 2.1 10.0 11.8 9.9 oe) 10.5 9.5 1955 17.2 aed, 15.2 14.9 11.7 8.7 6.5 12.0 14.0 12.4 13 17.6 13.4 1956 20.0 20.0 15.5 10.5 7.1 4.2 4.4 10.2 LZ 8.9 10.0 12.0 11.2 1957 16.7 18.9 17.7 13.6 9.5 6.3 5.0 10.7 14.5 14.3 10.9 9.0 12.3 1958 12.6 16.6 13.8 13.5 13.2 9.8 9.2 12.9 13.9 12.0 1276! 9.4 12.5 1959 18.1 15.3 13.1 10.9 8.0 15.3 11.4 14.8 17.6 15.8 13.6 8.8 13.6 1960 14.8 14.4 14.2 15.9 12.2 9.0 8.8 12.9 14.4 12.8 lee 8.5 12.4 1961 17.0 17.2 15.1 16.9 13.8 14.0 12.2 14.9 17.1 16.9 ars) 23) 15.1 1962 19.5 16.2 12.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 16.3 17.5 18.9 TSe3) 14.8 16.2 Lies 1963 19.4 19.4 18.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 15.3 3) TS) 17.6 1964 15.6 12.9 12.5 13.5 10.4 7.3 6.9 11.6 16.9 15.9 14.8 10.9 12.4 1965 18.8 16.6 14.1 17 8.9 6.2 §.1 ae 13.8 10.6 7.6 5.1 10.8 1966 13.8 11.3 10.0 Tele, 4.8 5.5 5.5 11.3 13.5 10.8 10.6 20.0 10.4 1967 20.0 19.9 16.0 11.5 ok 4.8 3.8 10.2 14.8 14.1 14.0 20.0 13.1 1968 20.0 20.0 20.0 17.3 12.6 17.4 12.7 15.9 14.2 12.3 11.0 18.5 16.0 1969 20.0 19.3 14.9 9.9 6.6 3.9 3.7 10.0 13.7 dS /32) ised 8.9 11.5 1970 12.1 16.0 15.5 11.3 8.1 8.3 7.8 12.5 14.5 15.0 14.5 20.0 13.0 1971 20.0 20.0 19.2 15.3 10.9 7.4 6.1 11.9 12.6 10.1 10.7 8.6 D2a7 1972 13.4 ave 9.0 6.8 4.2 5.6 4.1 10.6 12.5 9.5 11.0 16.2 9.6 1973 18.9 16.2 12.4 12.4 9.1 7.3 6.3 Llok 12.8 12.8 TT 10.3 11.8 1974 15.3 11.8 9.9 7.7 5.0 3.0 5.5 10.7 29) TOES) 9.4 10.9 9.4 1975 19.6 19.0 15.4 a LAC) 8.5 5.4 4.6 10.7 12.7 12.0 1129) 8.9 17 1976 14.0 10.9 10.2 9.4 9.4 7.2 6.2 11.3 12.5 12.3 13.4 Life d) pL ay2 1977 20.0 19.3 17.4 15.2 12.3 9.7 9.5 13.6 17.1 14.1 10.2 6.8 13.8 1978 14.0 11.2 8.9 ie 2 5.3 4.2 4.9 11.2 13.6 11.3 10.1 9.4 o.3 1979 17.3 16.0 12.8 or 6.2 5.7 7.1 11.5 14.5 14.7 10.7 10.7 11.4 1980 14.8 16.4 15.3 13.2 10.7 9.6 9.6 13.5 16.2 15.0 1259) 12.4 13.3 1981 19.0 18.4 15.6 20.0 20.0 20.0 18.1 18.9 16.0 13.0 12.3 929) 17.6 1982 19.7 18.5 14.5 12.6 9.4 6.3 4.1 10.8 12.9 12.0 9.4 8.1 ali bees) 1983 15.0 Zod 9.5 12.0 9.0 8.0 6.8 12.2 12.4 9.0 10.9 10.6 10.6 1984 16.5 16.2 12.5 20.0 20.0 19.9 14.5 19.2 16.9 13.4 Ea 18.2 16.7 1985 18.8 16.7 13.0 ve 16.0 11.3 9.5 13.3 14.5 12.3 11.4 7.8 13.5 1986 12.3 10.9 9.7 15.7 12.6 19.5 18.7 17.3 16.1 Ze 9.8 6.2 132.2 1987 14.9 14.2 11.3 17.8 15.4 10.7 9.7 14.0 13.1 pS) Jot 13.8 Hes ru 1988 17.3 18.4 14.8 13.0 10.2 9.6 10.1 13.8 15.7 14.2 13.1 20.0 14.2 1989 20.0 19.6 16.4 15.7 12.8 8.7 8.2 12.4 Se 10.2 Ul 4.9 12.5 1990 11.3 14.3 15.8 20.0 16.4 14.9 13.0 15.8 16.6 13.6 10.4 15-2 14.8 1991 18.7 13.7 11.2 UZ 10.1 8.0 8.1 12.0 15.4 13.2 13.8 15.6 1267 1992 19.1 16.2 14.4 15.0 12.7 8.9 9.8 13.8 So 12.2 10.7 18.9 13h9 1993 20.0 20.0 16.9 16.5 13.2 14.7 12.4 14.8 13.2 12.6 9.4 6.8 14.2 1994 12.4 14.2 13.7 13.4 12.5 11.0 11.4 14.8 1533 13.4 10.9 15.1 ae! RUN 6 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2~-6.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) JUN YEAR 1952 1680.9 1672.8 1678.3 1700.7 1712.1 1714.9 1715.9 1707.9 1702.6 6 8 2 1953 1668.6 1670.3 1683.8 1702.9 1712.5 1715.1 1715.8 1708.6 1702.2 5 2 7 1954 1686.0 1695.3 1705.3 1711.3 1715.2 1715.6 1715.3 1708.9 1704.4 2; 1 1 1955 1682.3 1683.1 1691.4 1692.5 1705.5 1711.3 1714.2 1703.6 1696.6 8 3 9 1956 1673.6 1668.3 1689.8 1707.9 1713.9 1715.7 1715.8 1708.6 1706.3 0 9) 0 1957 1684.8 1674.2 1679.9 1698.1 1710.9 1714.2 1715.6 1707.4 1694.6 2 0 4 1958 1701.6 1685.7 1697.3 1698.4 1700.6 1709.4 1710.7 1700.6 1697.0 5 4 4 1959 1678.0 1691.3 1699.9 1706.9 1713.0 1690.8 1705.7 1693.1 1680.7 8 4 4 1960 1693.1 1695.2 1695.6 1688.1 1703.8 1710.8 1711.3 1700.5 1695.3 3 9 i 1961 1683.4 1682.8 1691.7 1683.8 1698.1 1696.5 1703.2 1692.6 1683.0 2 9 4 1962 1670.3 1687.1 1702.3 1681.3 1681.6 1667.4 1686.7 1681.1 1673.9 1691.0 1692.8 1687.3 1683.6 1963 1670.5 1671.2 1675.7 1672.4 1673.5 1681.6 1671.9 1671.5 1668.2 1691.0 1705.9 1713.0 1680.5 1964 1689.4 1700.9 1701.8 1698.2 1709.0 1713.0 1713.6 1704.9 1684.3 1688.2 1693.0 1707.1 1700.3 1965 1674.2 1685.7 1696.1 1704.6 ati 9 1714.3 1715.5 1704.4 1697.7 1707.7 PILZ 1715.5 1703.4 1966 1697.1 1706.0 1709.0 1713.1 1716.1 1715.0 1715.2 1705.8 1698.5 1707.1 1707.7 1669.7 1705.0 1967 1674.1 1668.3 1687.5 1705.2 1713.3 1715.5 1715.8 1708.5 1693.5 1695.9 1696.5 1677.9 1696.0 1968 1681.6 1681.6 1672.5 1681.7 1702.7 1681.3 1701.5 1688.2 1696.1 1702.6 1706.7 1676.0 1689.4 1969 1673.5 1671.8 1692.7 1709.2 1714.5 1715.7 1715.8 1708.8 1697.8 1699.6 1697.5 1711.2 1700.7 1970 1703.2 1688.1 1690.0 1705.6 1713.0 1711.8 1712.7 1702.0 1694.8 1692.2 1694.3 1678.6 1698.9 1971 1680.8 1676.4 1671.9 1690.9 1707.6 1712.9 1714.6 1703.9 1701.8 1708.7 1707.4 1711.8 1699.1 1972 1698.6 1706.6 1710.8 1713.5 1716.2 1714.9 1715.7 1707.6 1702.3 1710.0 1706.6 1687.4 170955 1973 1673.3 1687.1 1702.4 1702.1 1711.4 1713.0 1714.4 1706.3 1701.3 1701.0 1704.6 1708.7 1702.1 1974 1690.7 1704.6 1709.2 1712.6 1715.9 1715.4 1715.2 1707.3 1700.8 1708.4 1710.1 1707.3 1708.1 1975 1669.9 1673.6 1690.3 1705.0 1712.4 1715.1 1715.8 1707.4 1701.7 1703.4 1703.8 1711.2 1700.8 1976 1696.4 1707.2 1708.6 1710.1 1711.1 1713.1 1714.5 1705.8 1702.4 1702.6 1698.8 1680.2 1704.2 EO 1667.6 1671.7 1681.4 1691.2 1703.7 1709.5 1710.3 1698.0 1683.2 1696.1 1708.5 1713.8 1694.6 1978 1696.2 1706.5 1711.0 1713.1 1715.7 1715.7 1715.7 1705.9 1698.1 1705.7 1708.7 1710.3 1708.6 1979 1681.7 1688.1 1700.9 1710.7 1714.9 1714.9 1713.5 1705.2 1694.5 1693.5 1707.3 1707.6 1702.7 1980 1693.1 1686.3 1690.7 1699.3 1708.2 1709.6 1710.1 1698.5 1687.2 1692.0 1700.4 1702.5 1698.2 1981 1672.8 1676.5 1689.6 1681.6 1681.6 1674.8 1678.2 1673.7 1688.3 1700.2 1702.8 1668.6 1682.4 1982 1669.1 1676.2 1694.1 1701.5 1711.0 1714.2 1715.9 1707.1 1700.9 1703.5 1710.1 1712.3 1701.3 1983 1692.1 1703.5 1710.0 1703.6 1711.6 1712.3 1713.8 1703.1 1702.7 1710.8 1706.9 1708.1 1706.5 1984 1685.5 1687.4 1702.0 1676.7 1675.6 1667.9 1694.7 1671.8 1684.1 1698.5 1701.2 1677.7 1685.3 1985 1674.0 1685.0 1700.2 1679.0 1689.2 1705.7 1710.1 1699.1 1694.6 1702.7 1705.5 1712.7 1696.5 1986 1702.7 1707.3 1709.5 1688.9 1702.5 1670.2 1689.5 1681.6 1687.8 1703.3 1709.3 1714.5 1697.3 1987 1692.6 1695.7 1705.6 1679.2 1691.5 1707.5 1709.9 1696.4 1700.1 1703.9 1709.4 1697.5 1699.1 1988 1681.6 1676.6 1693.1 1700.2 1709.5 1709.7 1709.0 1697.1 1689.4 1695.4 1699.7 1671.7 1694.4 1989 1673.5 1670.0 1685.9 1689.0 1701.9 1711.2 1712.2 1702.1 1700.0 1708.6 1712.6 1715.7 1698.6 1990 1705.6 1695.6 1688.6 1668.1 1687.1 1692.7 1700.4 1688.6 1685.5 1698.0 1708.1 1692.1 1692.5 1991 1674.8 1698.0 1706.1 1703.2 1709.8 1712.2 1712.3 1703.4 1690.8 1699.3 1697.2 1689.7 1699.7 1992 1672.5 1687.5 1694.6 1692.2 1702.4 1711.0 1709.6 1697.2 1690.4 1702.8 1707.4 1673.9 1695.1 1993 1670.6 1670.0 1683.8 1685.5 1700.4 1693.6 1702.7 1693.0 1699.7 1701.6 1710.1 1713.8 1693.8 1994 1702.4 1695.8 1697.7 1698.6 1702.8 1706.6 1705.8 1693.1 1691.0 1698.6 1706.8 1692.2 1699.3 RUN 6 Page 4 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-6.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) 1952 2009.3 2001.2 1991.8 1983.1 1977.0 1971.2 1969.5 1979.4 1982.7 3 <3 0 1953 1997.0 1998.7 1989.6 1982.1 1976.5 1970.9 1970.0 1978.8 1982.9 1982.7 1981.5 1976.8 1982.3 1954 1988.7 1985.7 1981.0 1976.0 1972.1 1968.2 1966.1 1978.5 1981.9 1978.3 1977.3 1979.9 1977.8 1955 1990.3 1990.6 1986.5 1986.2 1982.3 1976.1 1972.4 1981.8 1985.2 1982.4 1983.5 1991.5 1984.0 1956 2002.0 1996.7 1987.0 1979.4 1973.7 1969.2 1969.7 1978.8 1981.0 1976.5 1978.5 1982.1 1981.2 1957 1989.2 1994.0 1991.2 1984.1 1978.5 1972.0 1970.5 1979.9 1985.9 1985.2 1980.2 1977.0 1982.3 1958 1982.7 1989.4 1984.4 1984.0 1984.6 1978.1 1977.4 1983.1 1985.1 1981.9 1982.7 1977.7 1982.6 1959 1992.0 1987.1 1983.4 1980.2 1975.6 1986.7 1981.3 1985.9 1991.5 1987.6 1984.2 1976.5 1984.3 1960 1985.9 1985.7 1985.1 1987.7 1983.1 1976.7 1976.6 1983.1 1985.7 1982.9 1980.5 1975.9 1982.4 1961 1989.8 1990.7 1986.4 1989.6 1985.6 1984.7 1982.4 1986.1 1990.6 1989.7 1985.2 1982.6 1987.0 1962 1994.7 1988.8 1982.4 2009.7 2010.0 1995.8 1989.0 1990.7 1994.1 1986.6 1986.0 1988.7 1993.1 1963 1994.6 1995.1 1992.8 2000.8 2001.9 2010.0 2000.3 1999.9 1996.6 1986.6 1980.7 1974.1 1994.5 1964 1987.2 1983.5 1982.6 1984.1 1980.3 1973.5 1973.0 1981.2 1990.0 1987.7 1986.0 1980.5 1982.5 1965 1993.3 1989.4 1984.9 1981.3 1977.3 1971.9 1970.7 1981.4 1984.8 1979.6 1974.1 1970.6 1979.9 1966 1984.5 1981.1 1978.4 1973.3 1970.5 1971.0 1971.1 1980.8 1984.4 1980.1 1979.6 1998.1 1979.4 1967 2002.5 1996.1 1988.0 1981.1 1975.0 1970.1 1968.7 1978.9 1986.3 1984.9 1984.7 2006.3 1985.2 1968 2010.0 2010.0 2000.9 1990.5 1983.7 1990.7 1983.2 1987.7 1985.4 1982.3 1980.3 1993.3 1991.5 1969 2001.9 1994.9 1986.1 1978.3 1973.0 1968.7 1968.5 1978.6 1984.7 1983.5 1984.3 1976.8 1981.6 1970 1982.0 1988.4 1987.0 1980.8 1975.7 1975.4 1974.6 1982.5 1985.8 1986.3 1985.5 2007.0 1984.2 1971 2009.2 2004.8 199452 1986.7 1981.1 1973.7 1972.0 1981.7 1983.1 1978.7 1979.9 1976.1 1985.1 1972 1983.9 1980.8 1976.6 1972.6 1969.7 1971.1 1970.2 1979.7 1982.8 1977.5 1980.3 1988.7 1977.8 1973 1993.7 1988.8 1982.3 1982.5 1977.8 1973.4 1972.2 1980.5 1983.3 1982.9 1981.3 1979.4 1981.5 1974 1986.8 1981.8 1978.3 1974.2 1970.8 1967.2 1971.1 1979.9 1983.5 1979.0 1977.4 1980.4 1977.5 1975 1994.9 1994.3 1986.9 1981.1 1976.5 1970.9 1970.0 1979.9 1983.1 1981.9 1981.7 1976.7 1981.5 1976 1984.8 1980.4 1978.8 1977.4 1978.3 1973.2 1972.0 1980.7 1982.8 1982.3 1983.8 USOt 7 1980.5 1977 1996.0 1994.9 1990.6 1986.6 1983.2 1978.0 1977.8 1984.2 1990.5 1984.9 1978.9 1972.8 1984.9 1978 1984.8 1980.8 1976.4 1973.2 1971.3 1969.2 1970.4 1980.7 1984.6 1980.8 1978.7 1977.8 1977.4 1979 1990.5 1988.3 1983.0 1976.8 1972.5 1971.2 1973.2 1981.0 1986.0 1985.8 1979.9 1980.2 1980.7 1980 1985.9 1989.2 1986.8 1983.6 1980.8 1977.9 1978.1 1984.0 1988.8 1986.3 1983.2 1982.8 1983.9 1981 1993.8 1993.2 1987.1 2010.0 2010.0 2003.2 1992.5 1993.5 1988.3 1983.3 1982.2 1996.0 1994.4 1982 1995.1 1993.3 1985.6 1982.7 1978.4 1971.9 1969.2 1980.1 1983.5 1981.8 1977.4 1975.3 1981.2 1983 1986.3 1982.3 1977.5 1981.8 1977.6 1974.7 1972.8 1982.0 1982.7 1976.7 1980.2 1979.9 1979.5 1984 1988.9 1988.7 1982.5 2005.1 2004.0 1995.5 1985.9 1994.2 1990.1 1984.0 1982.9 1992.7 1991.2 1985 1993.4 1989.7 1983.3 1991.6 1989.1 1980.8 1978.0 1983.7 1985.9 1982.2 1980.9 1974.7 1984.4 1986 1982.2 1980.4 1978.0 1987.4 1983.7 1994.8 1987.7 1990.5 1988.5 1982.0 1978.2 1972.0 1983.8 1987 1986.1 1985.5 1980.8 1991.5 1988.1 1979.8 1978.3 1984.8 1983.8 1981.7 1978.0 1984.8 1983.6 1988 1990.5 1993.1 1985.9 1983.3 1980.0 OTT 1979.1 1984.5 1987.7 1985.1 1983.5 2000.1 1985.9 1989 2001.9 1995.5 1988.7 1987.3 1984.0 1976.1 1975.4 1982.5 1983.8 1978.8 1974.1 1970.3 1983.2 1990 1980.8 1985.6 1987.5 1996.5 1990.1 1986.1 1983.7 1987.5 1989.5 1984.1 1979.3 1986.8 1986.5 1991 1993.1 1984.6 1980.6 1982.0 1979.6 1974.8 1975.3 1981.9 1987.3 1983.6 1984.5 1987.6 1982.9 1992 1994.0 1988.6 1985.4 1986.2 1983.8 1976.4 1978.5 1984.5 1987.4 1982.1 1979.8 1994.1 1985.1 1993 1999.0 1998.4 1989.6 1988.9 1984.7 1985.8 1982.7 1986.0 1984.0 1982.7 1977.3 1972.8 1986.0 1994 1982.3 1985.5 1984.3 1983.9 1983.6 1980.3 1981.2 1985.9 1987.2 1983.9 1980.2 1986.8 1983.8 AVG 1992.0 1990.1 1985.1 1985.2 1981.7 1978.2 1976.3 1983.5 1986.1 1982.7 1980.9 1983.5 1983.8 RUN 6 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-6 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-6.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q - SIPHON+40-FT DAM - MAX POOL EL 2010 - 680 AF POWER RESERVE NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION = 9533. RUN7Z 12-23-1997 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN 10:31:44 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL INPUT DATA ECHO FROM UNIT= 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL 11111111111111110000 43,1952 Number of years in run and starting year 1.0 Flow factor 1980. Spill level at dam 1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980.,1980. Top of power maximum pool 1964. Minimum desired power pool level 0.5,20. Min and Max flows through Unit 1 20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20.,20. Normal desired flow thru Plant 1. Min desired flow thru Plant 0.196 Head loss k factor 0.96 Generator efficienty 0.99 Transformer efficiency 0.98 Transmission line loss factor 0.97 Forced outage factor 0.995 Station Use factor 1890.,1900.,1910.,1930.,1940.,1950.,1954.,1970.,1980.,2000.,2010.,2020. Reservoir level (feet) 21.,69.,193.,631.,929.,1305.,1505.,2261.,2855.,4362.,5270., 6300. Res. Vol. (ac-ft) 250. Turbine centerline elevation (tailwater level) VERSION 1.00 Page 1 RUN7 Page 2 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL PIPELINE FLOW TO POWERHOUSE (CFS) YEAR ocT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL 1952 20.0 19.3 5.2 ales 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.1 15.4 8.6 10.9 20.0 10.1 1953 20.0 20.0 Lek 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Adez 16.4 Pies) 9.3 2.8 10.1 1954 20.0 19.0 4.7 2.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 16.7 14.7 4.9 7.4 r2eh 8.8 1955 20.0 20.0 14.7 13.5 5.4 dad 1.8 20.0 17.9 8.0 13.4 20.0 13.0 1956 20.0 20.0 9.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 12.6 3.4 10.9 15.2 9.3 1957 20.0 20.0 20.0 5.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 18.2 20.0 13.6 Sot) 4.8 10.7 1958 17.8 20.0 10.6 12.0 12.9 1.3 7.6 18.2 15.4 Tal 250 Ze 11.5 1959 20.0 20.0 10.0 5.9 2.1 20.0 10.5 19.5 20.0 13.6 8.5 1.0 12.6 1960 20.0 15.6 12.4 18.2 4.9 1.0 7.8 19.0 16.6 8.4 7.1 2.8 11.2 1961 20.0 20.0 18.2 19.8 7.4 11.9 8.3 18.4 20.0 16.6 7.7 8.0 14.7 1962 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 13.4 6.7 18.6 20.0 7.2 13.1 18.6 15.2 1963 20.0 20.0 19.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 18.9 18.4 14.9 2.0 3.0 1.0 14.8 1964 20.0 15.3 10.5 14.3 4.3 1.0 4.1 18.8 20.0 18.9 Lie? 3.0 11.8 1965 20.0 20.0 11.9 6.3 3.2 1.0 1.9 20.0 18.6 3.3 e13) 1.0 9.0 1966 20.0 13.3 6.1 ees 1.0 4.8 4.6 19.8 aFie2 4.5 9.1 20.0 TOD 1967 20.0 20.0 9.8 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 16.6 20.0 14.2 aid 20.0 11.5 1968 20.0 20.0 19.9 3.3 2.3 20.0 7.5 20.0 10.6 7.5 7.5 20.0 13.2 1969 20.0 20.0 6.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 15.9 20.0 10.8 13.7 1.0 9.3 1970 15.0 20.0 15.8 2.8 1.3 7.0 6.1 19.7 17.7 14.5 12.6 20.0 12.7 1971 20.0 20.0 10.8 5.1 2.4 1.0 1.3 20.0 14.1 4.1 10.8 3.8 9.5 1972 20.0 ens 3.8 1.9 1.0 5.2 2.8 18.8 15.4 2.6 12.8 20.0 9.3 L973 20.0 19.0 3.4 11.6 2.5 2.0 4.1 18.2 15.4 obs) 8.7 7.0 10.3 1974 20.0 7.8 5.0 Ze 1.0 1.0 5.2 18.3 16.4 4.0 6.8 13.0 8.4 1975 20.0 20.0 17.0 3.5 Zine 1.0 1.0 18.9 15.8 9.5 10.7 2.5 10.2 1976 20.0 6.5 7.5 7.0 9.3 SS 4.0 18.9 14.1 10.6 14.3 20.0 11.1 LOTT 20.0 20.0 18.9 9.3 6.6 2.9 8.3 19.8 20.0 10.2 2.2 1.0 11.6 1978 20.0 9.9 3.4 3.1 aie. 1.4 4.9 20.0 18.0 5.6 6.9 7S 8.6 1979 20.0 20.0 9.0 1.3 1.0 3.0 8.1 18.3 19.8 13.5 2.5 10.1 10.6 1980 20.0 20.0 Te7 8.4 5.9 5.6 8.8 19.2 20.0 12.3 8.1 10.9 12.6 1981 20.0 20.0 15.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 6.1 19.1 8.3 5.9 9.9 20.0 15.4 1982 20.0 20.0 11.3 8.1 3.0 1.0 1.0 17.8 16.2 9.0 3.6 5.0 OFT, 1983 20.0 12.6 3.2 15.6 3.1 4.1 3.9 20.0 12.8 1.5 13).3) 9.3) 10.0 1984 20.0 20.0 5.5 20.0 20.0 1952 1.3 20.0 19.4 4.9 10.4 20.0 15.1 1985 20.0 19.4 4.1 20.0 19.3 1.0 4.7 18.8 16.3 6.7 8.8 1.0 ee 0 1986 18.5 7.6 6.3 20.0 13.0 20.0 18.1 19.8 12.5 Sel. 4.7 1.0 12a 1987 20.0 19.9 4.6 20.0 20.0 1.0 6.4 20.0 11.4 8.3 4.8 20.0 13.0 1988 20.0 20.0 9.8 8.7 4.8 6.4 10.5 Siz 18.8 10.0 10.1 20.0 13.2 1989 20.0 20.0 11.7 13.0 7.3 1.0 4.4 18.9 13.9 3.3 Zeal: 1.0 9.7 1990 19.8 19.3 Lice 20.0 17.8 9.0 9.0 19.5 18.1 6.0 3.6 20.0 14.9 1991 20.0 11.0 5.2 12.8 6.0 2.4 7.6 ET 9) 20.0 9.0 13.8 18.6 12.0 1992 20.0 14.5 9.5 15.0 8.3 1.0 org 19.7 18.2 4.8 6.9 20.0 123) 1993 20.0 20.0 17.6 14.6 6.5 15.0 7.5 17.8 9.7 10.0 2.5 1.2 11.9 1994 20.0 18.4 11.2 12.0 Lied 6.0 ats 5) 19.6 15.9 8.4 5.4 20.0 isis) 1649.4 1651.6 1646.4 1646.0 1651.6 1641.2 1651.9 1651.2 1638.8 1649.1 1650.7 1642.7 1644.9 1650.8 1644.2 1651.6 1651.6 1651.6 1670.2 1651.6 1636.9 1646.8 1639.8 1651.6 1638.2 1648.0 1641.6 1648.5 1636.6 1648.8 1649.1 1643.3 1643.6 1645.2 1646.8 1644.2 1641.0 1651.6 1636.9 1645.9 1642.9 1651.6 1637.2 1651.6 1640.3 1639.5 1643.9 1704.0 1643.0 1702.1 1648.8 1705.8 1644.9 1694.8 1640.6 1636.0 1645.4 1644.3 1682.8 1637.6 1640.6 1702.7 1636.4 1641.8 1641.6 1641.0 1690.4 1672.8 1649.8 1647.4 RUN7 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL 1708.3 1711.6 1713.7 1681.4 1713.1 1709.3 1703.3 1651.6 1646.9 1710.4 1712.0 1713.6 1712.6 1713.0 1710.9 L719. ¢ 1712.9 1712.9 1712.8 1713.1 1713.1 1697.0 1705.5 1713.1 1713.3 1707.2 1651.6 1712.2 1712.1 1649.0 1640.6 1680.8 1636.5 1709.5 1703.6 1652.1 1706.9 1700.5 1705.7 1689.9 NET HEAD ON UNIT (FEET) 1711.2 1713.7 1643.9 1713.8 1686.2 1679.0 1651.6 1712.1 1712.5 1709.4 1710.2 1642.0 1708.3 1704.4 1711.2 1708.7 1713.2 1710.5 1711.2 1713.7 1712.4 1713.6 1712.2 1707.9 1639.7 1711.2 1710.7 1641.4 1712.8 1649.2 1712.7 1706.0 1711.2 1698.1 1712.9 1712.2 1669.9 1706.9 1713.2 1709.2 1713.4 1712.6 1713.2 1702.7 1692.3 1702.1 1700.5 1705.2 1643.6 1710.8 1713.3 1709.9 1710.9 1703.1 1710.4 1706.7 Le@Loet 1712.5 1710.7 1708.8 1713.5 1710.9 1700.5 1709.3 1701.1 1698.8 1706.8 1710.7 1711.0 1713.7 1709.7 1649.8 1706.1 1692.4 1710.1 1698.1 1702.7 1695.7 1703.0 1688.1 1636.1 1648.4 1641.7 1642.5 1651.8 1636.4 1645.5 1644.7 1637.2 1636.3 1641.7 1644.0 1639.5 1651.2 1637.9 1651.9 1638.7 1651.1 1682.9 1637.1 1667.5 1640.3 1660.0 1637.9 1638.4 1670.5 1643.9 1646.6 1656.0 1639.3 1691.9 1635.7 1652.6 1674.9 1667.5 1667.5 1661.3 1665.1 1675.0 1640.8 1650.4 1637.2 1637.2 1700.5 1662.6 1681.8 1640.4 1661.9 1683.4 1688.5 1644.7 1676.1 1649.8 1637.1 1649.1 1695.6 1664.4 JUL 1699.5 1689.0 1709.3 1701.5 1711.7 1678.0 1704.1 1677.9 1700.2 1659.7 1703.8 1713.2 1644.2 L7T9 1710.0 1674.4 1703.0 1691.2 1672.8 1710.7 1712.7 1689.0 1710.9 1696.3 1692.0 1693.7 1707.9 1678.3 1684.5 1707.2 1698.1 1713.6 1709.3 1705.2 1712.1 1700.5 1694.4 1711.9 1706.9 1698.3 1709.5 1694.4 1700.2 AUG 1690.7 1697.0 1703.3 1678.8 1690.7 LTS 1682.4 1699.8 1704.1 1702.4 1680.4 1712.2 1687.2 1713.7 1697.8 1682.4 1703.0 1677.2 1682.9 1691.1 1681.9 1699.2 1704.9 1691.6 1673.9 1713.1 1704.7 1712-8 1701.1 1694.8 1711.5 1679.3 1692.8 1698.8 1709.7 1709.5 1694.0 1713.1 1711.5 1676.7 1704.7 1712.8 1708.3 Page 3 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN RUN7 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL END OF MONTH RESERVOIR ELEVATION (FEET) 1968.7 1967.9 1972.3 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1977.2 1964.0 1973.3 1964.0 1969.0 1964.4 1973.8 1972.7 1964.0 1966.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1970.2 1970.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1978.2 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1965.8 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1974.5 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1962.4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1980.0 1964.0 1964.0 1980.0 1972.5 1971.1 1975.5 1964.0 1964.0 1975.6 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1980.0 1962.3 1962.7 1964.0 1960.4 1970.4 1958.5 1964.0 1961.4 1964.0 1964.0 1960.7 1961.4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1968.1 1961.4 1964.0 1964.0 1963.0 1977.6 1962.9 1964.0 1961.4 1964.0 1964.0 1962.4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1961.1 1964.0 1960.6 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1963.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1960.9 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.8 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1966.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.5 1964.0 1964.0 1964.9 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.5 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.8 1973.9 1964.0 1964.0 1964.7 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1971.9 1962.4 1964.0 1964.0 1964.0 1980.0 1964.0 1964.0 1974.9 1963.2 1961.5 1965.1 1980.0 1962.9 1968.4 1964.0 1980.0 1964.0 1967.0 Page 4 1964.1 1964.4 RUN7 Page 5 SUNRISE LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - RUN 2-7 - 43 YEARS - INPUT=SUN2-7.IN 20 CFS MAX. Q-10-FT DAM+SIPHON-MAX POOL EL 1980-486 AF POW RES.- 1 CFS MIN REL NET ENERGY FROM UNIT 1 (MWH) MINIMUM ANNUAL GENERATION = 8495. APPENDIX D DETAILED CONSTRUCTION COSTS Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-1 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Water Project Alternative Without Hydro $ $ $ 1.0 PREPATORY WORK 374,000 .01 Mobilization 154,000 .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill 2,000 10.00 20,000 b. Sheet Piling 5,000 25.00 125,000 .03 Access Road 0.3 250,000.00 75,000 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake .01 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 600 10.00 6,000 b. Rock 2,500 25.00 63,000 -02 Concrete cutoff wall 10 1,000.00 10,000 .03 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 420 100.00 42,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House 100 20.00 2,000 .04 Backfill 2,000 20.00 40,000 .05 Screen Intake 6,000 .06 Control Building, pre-fabricated 25,000 .07 Siphon, Valve and controls 50,000 3.0 WATER PIPELINE TO DISSIPATING VALVE 811,000 .01 Clearing 9 8,000.00 72,000 .02 Rock Excavation 150 500.00 75,000 .03 Steel Pipe Procurement, 8" 1.D. a. 3/16" plate thickness 7,880 20.00 158,000 b. 1/4" plate thickness - - - c. 3/8" plate thickness - - - .04 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground 4,530 65.00 294,000 b. Buried 3,350 25.00 84,000 .05 Supports, Anchored 83 1,000.00 83,000 .06 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 9 5,000.00 45,000 4.0 ENERGY DISSIPATOR 102,000 .01 Clearing 0.2 8,000.00 2,000 .02 Excavation a. Common 50 20.00 1,000 b. Rock 10 90.00 1,000 .03 Concrete Vault 20 1,000.00 20,000 .04 Reinforcing Steel 2,000 | LBS 1.50 3,000 .05 Prefabricated Metal Bidg. - 80.00 - .06 Architechtural - .07 Valves a. Procure Valves b. Install Valves .08 Accessory Electrical Equi Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-1 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Water Project Alternative Without Hydro ptm feuantyfune] gs |S |" Unit ($) $ $ 5.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Clearing .02 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline b. Marine Pipeline .03 Stream Crossings 1,620,000 8,000.00 60.00 77.00 10,000.00 570,000 970,000 80,000 6.0 CHLORINATION 65,000 7.0 TRANSMISSION & INTERCONNECTION 20,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 3,240,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell 1.0 PREPATORY WORK .01 Mobilization .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill b. Sheet Piling .03 Construction Access Road 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake .01 Diversion & Care of Water .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common b. Rock .03 Concrete cutoff wall .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe b. Buried to Vacuum House .05 Backfill .06 Screen Intake .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated .08 Siphon, Valve and controls 2.2 Dam .01 Reservoir .02 10ft Dam 3.0 PENSTOCK .01 Clearing .02 Erosion Control .03 Rock Excavation a. 3/16" plate thickness b. 1/4" plate thickness c. 3/8" plate thickness .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground b. Buried .06 Supports, Anchored .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 4.0 POWER PLANT 4.1 Powerhouse Civil Works .01 Clearing .02 Excavation a. Common b. Rock .03 Concrete Substructure .04 Reinforcing Steel .05 Prefabricated Metal Bidg. .06 Architechtural .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" 1.D. 2,000 5,000 0.3 600 2,500 10 420 100 2,000 200 3,840 2,050 1,990 4,530 3,350 83 840 280 250 Backup for Table 3-1, 3-4, and 3-6 Construction Cost Estimate Project Alternative with 2.5 MW Hydro Unit (base case) LS CY SF MI LS cY cY cy LF LF cY LS LS LS AC LS cY EF LF LF Seah LS cY CY CY Unit Price ($) 10.00 25.00 500,000.00 10.00 25.00 1,000.00 150.00 20.00 20.00 8,000.00 500.00 43.00 52.00 70.00 140.00 40.00 2,000.00 11,000.00 20.00 90.00 240,000 20,000 125,000 150,000 5,000 6,000 63,000 10,000 63,000 2,000 40,000 6,000 25,000 75,000 44,000 278,000 1, 72,000 20,000 100,000 165,000 107,000 139,000 634,000 134,000 166,000 99,000 10,000 17,000 25,000 150,000 38,000 140,000 15,000 535,000 295,000 322,000 636,000 395,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-1, 3-4, and 3-6 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 2.5 MW Hydro Unit (base case) 4.2 Turbines and Generators .01 Procure Turbine and Governor .02 Procure Generator and Exciter .03 Procure Spherical Valve .04 Install Turbine and Governor .05 Install Generator and Exciter .06 Install Spherical Valve .07 Procure and Install 300 kW Pelton Unit 4.3 Accessory Electrical Equipment 4.4 Misc. Power Plant Equipment .01 Powerhouse Mechanical Systems .02 Hoisting Equipment 5.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Clearing .02 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline b. Marine Pipeline .03 Stream Crossings 6.0 CHLORINATION 7.0 TRANSMISSION & INTERCONNECTION 7.1 Switchyard Structures 7.2 Transmission Line 7.3 Substation .01 Transformer .02 Circuit Switcher .03 Relaying Control .04 Bus work/Line Taps .05 Conduit wiring .06 Grounding 9,500 12,600 0.1 Item Quantity | Unit Unit Price AC LF LF EA LS LS Mi LS LS LS LS LS ($) 920,000 LS 230,000 Ls 320,000 Ls 50,000 Ls 55,000 Ls 55,000 Ls 10,000 200,000 80,000 80,000 Ls 135,000 Ls 85,000 LS 50,000 1,620,000 8,000.00 60.00 570,000 77.00 970,000 10,000.00 80,000 65,000 65,000 100,000 750,000.00 75,000 100,000 75,000 305,000 125,000 40,000 75,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 6,480,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell Item 1.0 MOBILIZATION 2.0 ROAD .01 Access Road to Powerhouse a. Permanent Road, with course material surface 3.0 PENSTOCK .01 Clearing .02 Erosion Control .03 Rock Excavation .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" |.D. a. 3/16" plate thickness b. 1/4" plate thickness c. 3/8" plate thickness .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground b. Buried .06 Supports, Anchored .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 4.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline .02 Stream Crossings Quantit he 200 1,920 560 1,630 3,460 650 58 25,300 15 Backup for Table 3-3 Construction Cost Estimate Penstock Alignment No. 1 Unit MI AC LS cY LF LF LF oe at Unit Price ($ 500,000.00 8,000.00 500.00 43.00 52.00 70.00 140.00 40.00 2,000.00 11,000.00 60.00 10,000.00 Amount $ 170,000 600,000 40,000 10,000 100,000 83,000 29,000 114,000 484,000 26,000 116,000 88,000 1,518,000 150,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): Total $ 170,000 600,000 1,090,000 1,668,000 3,530,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-3 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Penstock Alignment No. 2 Unit Price Amount Total Item Quantity | Unit ($) ($)_ ($) 1.0 MOBILIZATION 140,000 140,000 2.0 ROAD 150,000 .01 Access Road to Powerhouse a. Permanent Road, with course 0.3] MI 500,000.00 150,000 material surface 3.0 PENSTOCK 1,708,000 .01 Clearing 10} AC 8,000.00 80,000 .02 Erosion Control LS 10,000 .03 Rock Excavation 200| CY 500.00 100,000 .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" 1.D. a. 3/16" plate thickness 2,025 | LF 43.00 87,000 b. 1/4" plate thickness 3,600 | LF 52.00 187,000 c. 3/8" plate thickness 2,240 | LF 70.00 157,000 d. 7/16" plate thickness 300] LF 82.00 25,000 .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground 4,330] LF 140.00 606,000 b. Buried 3.6351 LF 40.00 153,000 .06 Supports, Anchored 69| EA 2,000.00 138,000 .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 15} EA 11,000.00 165,000 4.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline 13,200 | LF .02 Stream Crossings 10} EA 892,000 60.00 792,000 10,000.00 100,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 2,890,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell 1.0 MOBILIZATION 2.0 ROAD .01 Access Road to Powerhouse a. Permanent Road, with course material surface 3.0 PENSTOCK .01 Clearing .02 Erosion Control .03 Rock Excavation a. 3/16" plate thickness b. 1/4" plate thickness c. 3/8" plate thickness .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground b. Buried .06 Supports, Anchored .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 4.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline .02 Stream Crossings .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" 1.D. 0.3 200 3,840 2,050 1,990 4,530 3,350 Backup for Table 3-3 Construction Cost Estimate Penstock Alignment No. 3 MI AC LS cY LF LF LF Seat Unit Price $) 500,000.00 8,000.00 500.00 43.00 52.00 70.00 140.00 40.00 2,000.00 11,000.00 60.00 10,000.00 Amount ($) 120,000 150,000 72,000 20,000 100,000 165,000 107,000 139,000 634,000 134,000 166,000 99,000 570,000 80,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 120,000 150,000 1,636,000 650,000 2,560,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-4 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 1.8 MW Hydro Unit Unit Price $ 1.0 PREPATORY WORK 505,000 .01 Mobilization LS 210,000 .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill 2,000 | CY 10.00 20,000 b. Sheet Piling 5,000 | SF 25.00 125,000 .03 Access Road 0.3} Mi 500,000.00 150,000 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake 295,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 600 | CY 10.00 6,000 b. Rock 2,500 | CY 25.00 63,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall 10} CY 1,000.00 10,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 420 | LF 150.00 63,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House 100 | LF 20.00 2,000 .05 Backfill 2,000 | CY 20.00 40,000 .06 Screen Intake LS 6,000 .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated LS 25,000 .08 Siphon, Valve and controls LS 75,000 2.2 Dam 322,000 .01 Reservoir 44,000 .02 10ft Dam 278,000 3.0 PENSTOCK 1,502,000 .01 Clearing 9} AC 8,000.00 72,000 .02 Erosion Control 20,000 .03 Rock Excavation 200 | CY 500.00 100,000 .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 18" 1.D. a. 3/16" plate thickness 3,840 | LF 39.00 150,000 b. 1/4" plate thickness 2,050 | LF 47.00 96,000 c. 3/8" plate thickness 1,990 | LF 63.00 125,000 .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground 4,530 | LF 125.00 566,000 b. Buried 3,350 | LF 40.00 134,000 .06 Supports, Anchored 83] EA 1,800.00 149,000 .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 9] EA 10,000.00 90,000 4.0 POWER PLANT 4.1 Powerhouse Civil Works 368,000 .01 Clearing LS 10,000 .02 Excavation a. Common 840) CY 20.00 17,000 b. Rock 280] CY 90.00 25,000 .03 Concrete Substructure 230) CY 600.00 138,000 .04 Reinforcing Steel 23,000 | LBS 1.50 35,000 .05 Prefabricated Metal Bidg. 1,600 | SF 80.00 128,000 .06 Architechtural LS 15,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-4 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 1.8 MW Hydro Unit r.—COsS Unit Price [ Amount | Total | Item Quantity | Unit ($) ($) ($) 4.2 Turbines, Generators, and Valves 830,000 .01 Procure Turbine and Governor LS 195,000 .02 Procure Generator and Exciter (1,500 kW) LS 275,000 .03 Procure Spherical Valve LS 50,000 .04 Install Turbine and Governor LS 50,000 .05 Install Generator and Exciter LS 50,000 .06 Install Spherical Valve LS 10,000 .07 Procure & Install Turbine/Generator (300 kW) 200,000 4.3 Accessory Electrical Equipment 70,000 4.4 Misc. Power Plant Equipment LS 120,000 .01 Powerhouse Mechanical Systems LS 75,000 .02 Hoisting Equipment LS 45,000 Total Power Plant Cost: | 1,388,000 5.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE 1,620,000 .01 Clearing - AC 8,000.00 - .02 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline 9,500 | LF 60.00 570,000 b. Marine Pipeline 12,600 | LF 77.00 970,000 .03 Stream Crossings 8] EA 10,000.00 80,000 6.0 CHLORINATION LS 65,000 65,000 7.0 TRANSMISSION & INTERCONNECTION 7.1 Switchyard Structures LS 100,000 100,000 7.2 Transmission Line 0.1} Mi 750,000.00 75,000 75,000 7.3 Substation ; 305,000 .01 Transformer LS 125,000 .02 Circuit Switcher LS 40,000 .03 Relaying Control LS 75,000 .04 Bus work/Line Taps LS 25,000 .05 Conduit wiring LS 20,000 .06 Grounding LS 20,000 bo TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 5,380,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell 4.2 Turbines and Generators .03 Procure Spherical Valve .04 Install Turbine and Governor .05 Install Generator and Exciter .06 Install Spherical Valve 4.4 Misc. Power Plant Equipment .02 Hoisting Equipment 5.0 WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE .01 Clearing .02 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline b. Marine Pipeline .03 Stream Crossings 6.0 CHLORINATION 7.0 TRANSMISSION & INTERCONNECTION 7.1 Switchyard Structures 7.2 Transmission Line 7.3 Substation .01 Transformer .02 Circuit Switcher .03 Relaying Control .04 Bus work/Line Taps .05 Conduit wiring .06 Grounding .01 Procure Turbine and Governor .02 Procure Generator and Exciter (4,700 kW) .07 Procure and Install 300 kW Pelton Unit 4.3 Accessory Electrical Equipment .01 Powerhouse Mechanical Systems Backup for Table 3-4 Construction Cost Estimate Item Quantity | Unit LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS 9,500 | LF 12,600 | LF LS LS 0.1 | Mi LS LS LS LS LS LS Project Alternative with 5.0 MW Hydro Unit Unit Price ($) Total Power 8,000.00 60.00 77.00 10,000.00 750,000.00 Plant Cost: 390,000 550,000 75,000 90,000 90,000 15,000 200,000 130,000 140,000 80,000 570,000 970,000 80,000 65,000 100,000 75,000 150,000 40,000 75,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 1,410,000 130,000 220,000 2,364,000 1,620,000 65,000 100,000 75,000 330,000 8,020,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell 1.0 PREPATORY WORK .01 Mobilization .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill b. Sheet Piling .03 Access Road 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake .01 Diversion & Care of Water .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common b. Rock .03 Concrete cutoff wall .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe b. Buried to Vacuum House .05 Backfill .06 Screen Intake .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated .08 Siphon, Valve and controls 2.2 Dam .01 Reservoir .02 10ft Dam 3.0 PENSTOCK .01 Clearing .02 Erosion Control .03 Rock Excavation a. 3/16" plate thickness b. 1/4" plate thickness c. 3/8" plate thickness d. 1/2" plate thickness .05 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground b. Buried .06 Supports, Anchored .07 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 4.0 POWER PLANT 4.1 Powerhouse Civil Works .01 Clearing .02 Excavation a. Common b. Rock .03 Concrete Substructure .04 Reinforcing Steel .05 Prefabricated Metal Bldg. .06 Architechtural .04 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" 1.D. Backup for Table 3-4 Construction Cost Estimate Project Alternative with 5.0 MW Hydro Unit Unit Price Amount Total Unit ($ $ $ LS 2,000 5,000 0.3] Ml 500,000.00 LS 600 | CY 10.00 2,700 | CY 25.00 11| CY 1,000.00 420] LF 200.00 100 | LF 25.00 22,000 | CY 20.00 LS LS 9) AC 8,000.00 LS 200 | CY 500.00 3,150 | LF 58.00 700 | LF 70.00 2,300 | LF 94.00 1,730 120.00 4,530 | LF 180.00 3,350 | LF 52.00 83 | EA 2,700.00 9) EA 15,000.00 1,400 | CY 20.00 450) CY 90.00 400) CY 600.00 40,000 | LBS 1.50 80.00 CY 10.00 SF 25.00 560,000 265,000 20,000 125,000 150,000 389,000 5,000 6,000 68,000 11,000 84,000 3,000 44,000 8,000 40,000 120,000 322,000 44,000 278,000 2,196,000 72,000 20,000 100,000 183,000 49,000 216,000 208,000 815,000 174,000 224,000 135,000 604,000 10,000 28,000 41,000 240,000 60,000 200,000 25,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project City of Wrangell 1.0 PREPATORY WORK .01 Mobilization .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill b. Sheet Piling .03 Access Road 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake .01 Diversion & Care of Water .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common b. Rock .03 Concrete cutoff wall .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe b. Buried to Vacuum House .05 Backfill .06 Screen Intake .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated .08 Siphon, Valve and controls TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): Backup for Table 3-6 Construction Cost Estimate Sunrise Lake Siphon Unit Price Quantity | Unit ($) LS 2,000 | CY 10.00 5,000 | SF 25.00 0.3] Mi 500,000.00 LS 600} CY 10.00 2,500 | CY 25.00 10] CY 1,000.00 420| LF 150.00 100] LF 20.00 20.00 ——-— (8) 515,000 220,000 20,000 125,000 150,000 295,000 5,000 6,000 63,000 10,000 63,000 2,000 810,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-6 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Sunrise, Deer, and Grouse Lake Siphons Unit Price ($) 1.0 PREPATORY WORK 525,000 .01 Mobilization LS 230,000 .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill 2,000 | CY 10.00 20,000 b. Sheet Piling 5,000 | SF 25.00 125,000 .03 Access Road 0.3} MI 500,000.00 150,000 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake 295,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 -02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 600 | CY 10.00 6,000 b. Rock 2,500} CY 25.00 63,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall 10} CY 1,000.00 10,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 420| LF 150.00 63,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House 100} LF 20.00 2,000 .05 Backfill 2,000} CY 20.00 40,000 .06 Screen Intake LS 6,000 .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated LS 25,000 .08 Siphon, Valve and controls LS 75,000 2.2 Siphon Intake (Grouse Lake) 105,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 200} CY 10.00 2,000 b. Rock 50| CY 80.00 4,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall SCY, 1,000.00 3,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 320] LF 100.00 32,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House Ce 20.00 - .05 Backfill 50} CY 20.00 1,000 .06 Screen Intake LS 3,000 .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated LS 15,000 .08 Siphon, Valve and controls LS 40,000 2.3 Siphon Intake (Deer Lake) 105,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 200] CY 10.00 2,000 b. Rock 50} CY 80.00 4,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall 3] CY 1,000.00 3,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 320| LF 100.00 32,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House LF 20.00 - .05 Backfill 50] CY 20.00 1,000 .06 Screen Intake LS 3,000 .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated LS 15,000 .08 Siphon, Valve and controls TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST: 1,030,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 3-6 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell 40' Dam Unit Price Amount Total Item Quantity | Unit ($) ($) ($) 1.0 PREPATORY WORK 665,000 .01 Mobilization LS 370,000 .02 Marine Pier a. Native Gravel/Rockfill 2,000 | CY 10.00 20,000 b. Sheet Piling 5,000 | SF 25.00 125,000 .03 Access Road 0.3] Ml 500,000.00 150,000 2.0 HEADWORKS 2.1 Siphon Intake (Sunrise Lake) 295,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 600 | CY 10.00 6,000 b. Rock 2,500 | CY 25.00 63,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall 10] CY 1,000.00 10,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE a. Lake pipe 420] LF 150.00 63,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House 100} LF 20.00 2,000 .05 Backfill 2,000 | CY 20.00 40,000 .06 Screen Intake LS 6,000 .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated LS 25,000 .08 Siphon, Valve and controls LS 75,000 2.2 Reservoir 168,000 .01 Clearing 42) AC 4,000.00 168,000 2.3 Dam, Concrete-Faced Rockfill 2,884,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 50,000 (Use of siphon to lower lake) .02 Foundation Excavation a. Unclassified 5910) CY 20.00 118,000 b. Rock Trench 650} CY 50.00 33,000 .03 Foundation Treatment a. Curtain Grouting 1,400 | LF 70.00 98,000 .04 Rockfill a. From Feature Excavation 5,200 | CY 5.00 26,000 b. From Borrow 41,400} CY 20.00 828,000 .05 Concrete Facing a. Bedding Material 10,000} CY 40.00 400,000 b. Concrete Face 1,380 | CY 600.00 828,000 c. Concrete Toe 320] CY 600.00 192,000 d. Reinforcing 170,000 | LBS 1.50 255,000 .06 Spillway : a. Common Excavation 500} CY 15.00 8,000 b. Rock Excavation 1,500} CY 25.00 38,000 .07 Low-level Outlet | LS 10,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 4,010,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 6-1 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 2.5 MW Hydro Unit Unit Price | Item Quantity | Unit ($) 60 MOBILIZATION LS 240,000 240,000 331 STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS 331.1 Powerhouse 395,000 .01 Clearing LS 10,000 .02 Excavation a. Common 840) CY 20.00 17,000 b. Rock 280} CY 90.00 25,000 .03 Concrete Substructure 250} CY 600.00 150,000 .04 Reinforcing Steel 25,000 |} LBS 1.50 38,000 .05 Prefabricated Metal Bldg. 1,750 | SF 80.00 140,000 .06 Architechtural LS 15,000 336 Switchyard Structures LS 100,000 100,000 332 RESERVOIR, DAM AND WATERWAY 332.1 Reservoir 44,000 .01 Clearing 11] AC 4,000.00 44,000 332.2 Dam, Concrete-Faced Rockfill 278,000 .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 30,000 (Use of siphon to lower lake) .02 Foundation Excavation a. Unclassified 740) CY 20.00 15,000 b. Rock Trench 150] CY 50.00 8,000 .03 Foundation Treatment a. Curtain Grouting 440| LF 70.00 31,000 .04 Rockfill a. From Feature Excavation 2,500 | CY 5.00 13,000 b. From Borrow - CY - .05 Concrete Facing a. Bedding Material 940] CY 50.00 47,000 b. Concrete Face 95] CY 800.00 76,000 c. Concrete Toe 35] CY 800.00 28,000 d. Reinforcing 13,000 | LBS 1.50 20,000 .06 Spillway (none) - .07 Low-level Outlet LS 10,000 332.3 Waterway 332.31 Siphon Intake .01 Diversion & Care of Water LS 5,000 .02 Excavation, (trench for pipeline) a. Common 600} CY 10.00 6,000 b. Rock 2,500 | CY 25.00 63,000 .03 Concrete cutoff wall 10] CY 1,000.00 10,000 .04 Siphon Piping, HDPE, 24" I.D. a. Lake pipe 420) LF 150.00 63,000 b. Buried to Vacuum House 100} LF 20.00 2,000 .05 Backfill 2,000 | CY 20.00 40,000 .06 Screen Intake .07 Control Building, pre-fabricated .08 Siphon, Valve and controls Sunrise Lake Water Supply and Hydroelectric Project Backup for Table 6-1 Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 2.5 MW Hydro Unit (a ! Item 332.32 Penstock .01 Clearing .02 Erosion Control .02 Rock Excavation .03 Steel Pipe Procurement, 20" 1.D. a. 3/16" plate thickness b. 1/4" plate thickness c. 3/8" plate thickness .04 Install Pipeline a. Above Ground b. Buried .05 Supports, Anchored .06 Concrete Anchor/Thrust Blocks 332.33 Water Supply Pipeline .01 Clearing .02 Procure and Install 12" HDPE a. Buried Pipeline b. Marine Pipeline .03 Stream Crossings 332.34 Chlorination 333 TURBINES AND GENERATORS .01 Procure Turbine and Governor .02 Procure Generator and Exciter .03 Procure Spherical Valve .04 Install Turbine and Governor .05 Install Generator and Exciter .06 Install Spherical Valve .07 Procure and Install 300 KW Pelton Unit 334 ACCESSORY ELECTRICAL EQUIP. 335 MISC. POWER PLANT EQUIPMENT .01 Powerhouse Mechanical Systems .02 Hoisting Equipment 336 ROADS, JETTY .01 Marine Pier a. Native gravel/rockfill b. Sheet piling .02 Access Road to Powerhouse a. Clearing b. Permanent Road, with course material surface 200 3,840 2,050 1,990 4,530 3,350 83 9,500 12,600 2,000 5,000 0.5 0.3 337 TRANSMISSION LINE AC LS cY LF LF LF LF LF AC LF LF EA LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS cY SF AC MI Unit Price ($) 8,000.00 500.00 43.00 52.00 70.00 140.00 40.00 2,000.00 11,000.00 8,000.00 60.00 77.00 10,000.00 10.00 25.00 8,000.00 500,000.00 750,000.00 Amount ($) 72,000 20,000 100,000 165,000 107,000 139,000 634,000 134,000 166,000 99,000 570,000 970,000 80,000 65,000 230,000 320,000 50,000 55,000 55,000 10,000 200,000 80,000 85,000 50,000 20,000 125,000 4,000 150,000 75,000 Total 1,636,000 1,620,000 65,000 920,000 80,000 135,000 299,000 Sunrise Lake Water Supply Backup for Table 6-1 and Hydroelectric Project Construction Cost Estimate City of Wrangell Project Alternative with 2.5 MW Hydro Unit tem aunty | unt | Pr |S || Unit ($) $ $ 338 SUBSTATION .01 Transformer .02 Circuit Switcher -03 Relaying Control .04 Bus work/Line Taps .05 Conduit wiring .06 Grounding 305,000 125,000 40,000 75,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Rounded): 6,490,000 we. & it a