The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPPLICATION - REF Round 15 Standard Application Form_Godwin_12-5-2022_FINALRenewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 1 of 32 10/04/2022 Application Forms and Instructions This instruction page and the following grant application constitutes the Grant Application Form for Round 15 of the Renewable Energy Fund (REF). A separate application form is available for projects with a primary purpose of producing heat (see Request for Applications (RFA) Section 1.5). This is the standard form for all other projects, including projects that will produce heat and electricity. An electronic version of the RFA and both application forms is available online at: https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy-Fund/2022- REF-Application. What follows are some basic information and instructions for this application: •If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms for each project. •Multiple phases (e.g. final design, construction) for the same project may be submitted as one application. •If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide milestones and grant budget for each phase of the project (see Sections 3.1 and 3.2.2). •In order to ensure that grants provide sufficient benefit to the public, AEA may limit recommendations for grants to preliminary development phases in accordance with 3 Alaska Administrative Code (ACC) 107.605(1). •If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases are completed and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. Supporting documentation may include, but is not limited to, reports, conceptual or final designs, models, photos, maps, proof of site control, utility agreements, business and operation plans, power sale agreements, relevant data sets, and other materials. Please provide a list of supporting documents in Section 11 of this application and attach the documents to your application. •If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with your submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed. Please provide a list of additional information; including any web links, in Section 12 of this application and attach the documents to your application. For guidance on application best practices please refer to the resource-specific Best Practices Checklists; links to the checklists can be found in the appendices list at the end of the accompanying REF Round 15 RFA. •In the Sections below, please enter responses in the spaces provided. You may add additional rows or space to the form to provide sufficient space for the information, or attach additional sheets if needed. •If you need assistance with your application, please contact AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-3081. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 2 of 32 10/04/2022 REMINDER: • AEA is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials submitted to AEA may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no statutory exemptions apply. • All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final recommendations are made to the legislature. Please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would like those excluded from the web posting of this application. • In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or proprietary company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by AEA. If you want information to be kept confidential the applicant must: o Request the information be kept confidential. o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their application. o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept confidential. If the Authority determines it is not confidential, it will be treated as a public record in accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon request. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 3 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Please specify the legal grantee that will own, operate, and maintain the project upon completion. Name (Name of utility, IPP, local government, or other government entity) Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Tax ID #: 92-0014224 Date of last financial statement audit: 12/31/21 dated 3/31/22 Mailing Address: Physical Address: 5601 Electron Drive 5601 Electron Drive Anchorage, AK 99518 Anchorage, AK 99518 Telephone: Fax: Email: 907-563-7494 n/a dustin_highers@chugachelectric.com 1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Coordinator Name: Dustin Highers Title: Vice President of Corporate Programs Mailing Address: 5601 Electron Drive Anchorage, AK 99518 Telephone: Fax: Email: 907-762-4775 n/a dustin_highers@chugachelectric.com 1.1.1 Applicant Signatory Authority Contact Information Name: Dustin Highers Title: Vice President of Corporate Programs Mailing Address: 5601 Electron Drive Anchorage, AK 99518 Telephone: Fax: Email: 907-762-4775 907-762-4514 dustin_highers@chugachelectric.com 1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact Name Telephone: Fax: Email: Sean Skaling 907-762-4192 n/a Sean_Skaling@chugachelectric.com Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 4 of 32 10/04/2022 1.2 Applicant Minimum Requirements Please check as appropriate. If applicants do not meet the minimum requirements, the application will be rejected. 1.2.1 Applicant Type ☒An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05 CPCN # 8 and CPCN # 121, or ☐An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1) CPCN #______, or ☐A local government, or ☐A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities) Additional minimum requirements ☒1.2.2 Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for the project by the applicant’s board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing authority is necessary. (Indicate yes by checking the box) ☒1.2.3 As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement (Section 3 of the RFA). (Indicate yes by checking the box) ☒1.2.4 If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the award as identified in the Standard Grant Agreement template at https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy- Fund/2022-REF-Application (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) (Indicate yes by checking the box) ☒1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant funds for the benefit of the general public. If no please describe the nature of the project and who will be the primary beneficiaries. (Indicate yes by checking the box) Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 5 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY 2.1 Project Title Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project. Type in the space below. Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project 2.2 Project Location 2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude (preferred), street address, or community name. Latitude and longitude coordinates may be obtained from Google Maps by finding you project’s location on the map and then right clicking with the mouse and selecting “What is here? The coordinates will be displayed in the Google search window above the map in a format as follows: 61.195676.-149.898663. If you would like assistance obtaining this information, please contact AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771- 3081. Latitude 60.101603 Longitude -149.295298 The proposed Project would be located on Godwin Creek, which is on the east side of Resurrection Bay, across from Seward, Alaska. See Figure 1 attached. 2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the beneficiaries of the project. At the end of 2021, Chugach served 113,211 metered locations in an area extending from Anchorage to the northern Kenai Peninsula, and from Whittier on Prince William Sound to Tyonek on the west side of Cook Inlet. 2.3 Project Type Please check as appropriate. 2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type ☐Wind ☐Biomass or Biofuels (excluding heat-only) ☒Hydro, Including Run of River ☐Hydrokinetic ☐Geothermal, Excluding Heat Pumps ☐Transmission of Renewable Energy ☐Solar Photovoltaic ☐Storage of Renewable ☐Other (Describe)☐Small Natural Gas 2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply) Pre-Construction Construction ☐Reconnaissance ☐Final Design and Permitting ☒Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☐Construction Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 6 of 32 10/04/2022 2.4 Project Description Provide a brief, one-paragraph description of the proposed project. There are two conceptual configurations for the proposed Project. The first is a run-of-river hydroelectric project with a diversion structure on Godwin Creek approximately one mile upstream from the confluence with Fourth of July Creek. From the diversion structure, water would be conveyed through a penstock to a powerhouse located near the confluence of both creeks (see Figure 1). This configuration was developed in 2014 based on early reconnaissance efforts, and all Project features would be located on State or City owned land. Since 2014, the Godwin Glacier has retreated significantly creating a natural lake at the base of the glacier. The lake has two lake outlets (a northern outlet and a southern outlet). Given this new development, an alternative configuration would be to construct a dam at both lake outlets to create some amount of storage potential. It should be noted that these Project features would be located on USFS land and would therefore trigger the need for a FERC license. Under this configuration the intake structure would likely be located near the southern lake outlet, from which point water would be diverted through a penstock to a powerhouse located near the confluence with Fourth of July Creek. For both configurations, tailwater from the powerhouse would be conveyed into Fourth of July Creek or Godwin Creek near the confluence of both creeks. A transmission line would be constructed from the powerhouse to an existing substation approximately 10,900 feet west of the proposed powerhouse location. Access roads, including a bridge crossing Godwin Creek would also be necessary for the construction and operation of the Project. 2.5 Scope of Work Provide a short narrative for the scope of work detailing the tasks to be performed under this funding request. This should include work paid for by grant funds and matching funds or performed as in-kind match. Both configurations will be further evaluated during the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase, and a preferred configuration will be selected based on anticipated costs, benefits, environmental impacts, and regulatory requirements. Specific tasks during this phase include: •Stream gauging and hydrological modeling for Godwin Creek •Acquiring detailed LiDAR and aerial imagery for the area, as well as geotechnical information •Developing conceptual design plans and cost estimates for both configurations •Initiating consultation with regulatory agencies and other potential stakeholders to discuss the pros/cons of each configuration (stakeholder engagement efforts would continue throughout the remainder of the planning process) •Selecting a preferred configuration based on early consultation •Summarizing all relevant existing information and identifying information gaps, or if the storage dam configuration is selected, then developing and filing a Pre-Application Document (PAD) with FERC to initiate the licensing process •Study planning, permitting, implementation and reporting for any additional studies that may be needed to evaluate Project feasibility or potential Project impacts •Developing protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PME) measures for fish, wildlife, and other environmental resources, and conducting a comprehensive alternatives analysis •Developing the Conceptual Design Report, or if the storage dam configuration is selected, then developing the draft and final license application (DLA and FLA) and filing with FERC 2.6 Previous REF Applications for the Project See Section 1.15 of the RFA for the maximum per project cumulative grant award amount Round Submitted Title of application Application #, if known Did you receive a grant? Y/N Amount of REF grant awarded ($) N/A Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 7 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 3 – Project Management, Development, and Operation 3.1 Schedule and Milestones Please fill out the schedule below (or attach a similar sheet) for the work covered by this funding request. Be sure to identify key tasks and decision points, including go/no go decisions, in your project along with estimated start and end dates for each of the milestones and tasks. Please clearly identify the beginning and ending of all phases (I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III. Final Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction) of your proposed project. See the RFA, Sections 2.3-2.6 for the recommended milestones for each phase. Add additional rows as needed. Task # Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date Deliverables 0 Stream gage permitting and water rights •Obtain necessary permit(s) for stream gage installation •Coordinate with ADNR re water right suspension and reactivation Sep 2022 Oct 2022 •ADFG determination of no permit needed •ADNR land use permit application 1 Project scoping and contractor solicitation •Develop a scope of work •Interview qualified consultants •Select a consultant Nov 2022 Jan 2023 •Scope of work •Consultant proposals •Executed contract 2 Project kick-off •Conduct a kick-off meeting •Develop a detailed project schedule •Compile, organize, and review existing information •Develop a stakeholder contact list Feb 2023 Mar 2023 •Kick-off meeting minutes •Project schedule •Existing information index •Stakeholder contact list 3 Early study efforts •Conduct site visit •Install a stream gage •Acquire LiDAR and aerial imagery •Conduct initial geotechnical assessment •Develop 5% designs and phase V cost estimates •Preliminary resources assessment based on existing information •Identify land and regulatory issues Apr 2023 July 2023 •Stream gage installation tech memo •LiDAR and aerial imagery •Geotechnical assessment tech memo •5% designs and phase V cost estimates •Environmental and regulatory tech memo •Current and future energy market tech memo Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 8 of 32 10/04/2022 •Detailed analysis of current cost of energy and future market 4 Initial stakeholder consultation •Schedule and conduct individual stakeholder consultation meetings •Schedule and conduct a group stakeholder consultation meeting (may include site visit) Aug 2023 Sep 2023 •Agendas and other meeting materials •Meeting minutes 5 Summarize existing info and identify data gaps (or PAD) •Select preferred configuration •Develop summary document (or PAD) •File with FERC (if applicable) Oct 2023 Feb 2024 •Draft summary document (or PAD) •Final summary document (or PAD and NOI if applicable) 6 Study planning and permitting •FERC scoping meeting and site visit (if applicable) •Develop study plans •Obtain necessary permits Mar 2024 Mar 2025 •Meeting agendas, presentations, and minutes •Draft study plans •Final study plans •Permit applications 7 Field season •Conduct field work Apr 2025 Nov 2025 •Raw data, logs, spreadsheets, etc. 8 Data analysis and study reporting •Analyze data •Develop study reports Nov 2025 Apr 2026 •Draft study reports •Final study reports 9 Detailed engineering and financial analysis •Finish developing conceptual designs and capex cost estimates •Conduct a detailed economic and financial analysis •Develop a conceptual business and operations plan Apr 2025 Apr 2026 •35% conceptual design plans and cost estimates •Economic and financial report •Business and operations plan 10 Alternatives analysis •Develop potential PME measures •Build comprehensive alternatives •Compare alternatives May 2026 Aug 2026 •Detailed PME measures •Alternatives analysis matrix 11 Final report and recommendations (or FERC license application) •Develop draft report and recommendations (or DLA) •90-day review and comment period •Develop final report and recommendations (or FLA) Sep 2026 Feb 2027 •Draft report and recommendations (or DLA) •Final report and recommendations (or FLA) Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 9 of 32 10/04/2022 3.2 Budget 3.2.1 Funding Sources Indicate the funding sources for the phase(s) of the project applied for in this funding request. Grant funds requested in this application $1,729,000 Cash match to be provideda $306,117 In-kind match to be provideda $0 Energy efficiency match providedb $0 Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of above) $2,035,117 Describe your financial commitment to the project and the source(s) of match. Indicate whether these matching funds are secured or pending future approvals. Describe the impact, if any, that the timing of additional funds would have on the ability to proceed with the grant. Chugach is committed to providing the stated matching funds. The matching funds are secured, and this phase of the project is approved. Chugach’s match will not impact the ability of this grant to proceed rapidly once issued. All funds from the REF will reduce project costs that are ultimately paid for by the customers of Chugach. Therefore, the grant will decrease the long-term cost of energy for about one half the state’s population. a Attach documentation for proof (see Section 1.18 of the Request for Applications) b See Section 8.2 of this application and Section 1.18 of RFA for requirements for Energy Efficiency Match. 3.2.2 Cost Overruns Describe the plan to cover potential cost increases or shortfalls in funding. Chugach will be responsible to manage or cover any cost overruns. 3.2.3 Total Project Costs Indicate the anticipated total cost by phase of the project (including all funding sources). Use actual costs for completed phases. Indicate if the costs were actual or estimated. Reconnaissance Actual $53,722 Feasibility and Conceptual Design Estimated $2,035,117 Final Design and Permitting Estimated $6,105,353 Construction Estimated $59,018,409 Total Project Costs (sum of above) Estimated $67,212,601 Metering/Tracking Equipment [not included in project cost] Estimated $TBD 3.2.4 Funding Subsequent Phases If subsequent phases are required beyond the phases being applied for in this application, describe the anticipated sources of funding and the likelihood of receipt of those funds. •State and/or federal grants •Loans, bonds, or other financing options •Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits) •Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or programs that might be available) Final design, permitting, and construction will be paid by Chugach using traditional financing methods. If state or federal grants are available and awarded, those funds would help offset the Project cost and will lower the cost of energy from the Project for all residences and business served by Chugach, about half the state’s population in the Anchorage and upper Kenai Peninsula region. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 10 of 32 10/04/2022 3.2.3 Budget Forms Applications MUST include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in Section 2.3.2 of this application — I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III. Final Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction. Please use the tables provided below to detail your proposed project’s total budget. Be sure to use one table for each phase of your project, and delete any unnecessary tables. The milestones and tasks should match those listed in 3.1 above. If you have any question regarding how to prepare these tables or if you need assistance preparing the application please feel free to contact AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-3081. Phase 2 — Feasibility and Conceptual Design Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In- kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Stream gage permitting and water rights Oct 2022 $0 $5,117 Cash $5,117 Project scoping and contractor solicitation Jan 2023 $0 $5,000 Cash $5,000 Project kick-off Mar 2023 $0 $25,000 Cash $25,000 Early study efforts July 2023 $0 $175,000 n/a $175,000 Initial stakeholder consultation Sep 2023 $0 $50,000 n/a $50,000 Summarize existing info and identify data gaps (or PAD) Feb 2024 $29,000 $46,000 n/a $75,000 Study planning and permitting Mar 2025 $250,000 $0 n/a $250,000 Field season Nov 2025 $500,000 $0 n/a $500,000 Data analysis and study reporting Apr 2026 $250,000 $0 n/a $250,000 Detailed engineering and financial analysis Apr 2026 $400,000 $0 n/a $400,000 Alternatives analysis Aug 2026 $125,000 $0 n/a $125,000 Final report and recommendations (or FERC license application) Feb 2027 $175,000 $0 n/a $175,000 TOTALS Feb 2027 $1,729,000 $306,117 Cash $2,035,117 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits Feb 2027 $1,469,650 $260,200 Cash $1,7229,850 Travel & Per Diem Feb 2027 $216,125 $38,264 Cash $254,389 Equipment, Materials & Supplies Feb 2027 $43,225 $7,653 Cash $50, 878 Contractual Services Feb 2027 Included above Included above Cash Included above Construction Services n/a $0 $0 n/a $0 Other n/a $0 $0 n/a $0 TOTALS Feb 2027 $1,729,000 $306,117 Cash $2,035,117 Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 11 of 32 10/04/2022 3.2.4 Cost Justification Indicate the source(s) of the cost estimates used for the project budget, including costs for future phases not included in this application. Cost estimates for the Project were developed in August 2014 during the Reconnaissance Phase and were based on the run-of-river conceptual design presented in the attached reports. For the purposes of this grant application, the August 2014 cost estimates have been escalated to October 2022 dollars using the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator. These cost estimates will be confirmed and further updated as part of the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase to reflect any significant design changes to the proposed Project. 3.3 Project Communications 3.3.1 Project Progress Reporting Describe how you plan to monitor the progress of the project and keep AEA informed of the status. Who will be responsible for tracking the progress? What tools and methods will be used to track progress? In early 2023, after the Project kick-off meeting, a detailed Gantt chart style Project schedule will be developed using Microsoft Project and updated monthly. The Chugach PM and Consultant PM will meet on a regular basis (no less than monthly) to discuss the status of ongoing tasks, coordinate on any items that require decisions from Chugach, and review the Project schedule. Other Chugach staff or Consultant team members may attend these meetings as needed. Meeting minutes documenting the attendees, discussion topics, any decisions made, and action items will be developed for each meeting. The progress of this Project will be a regular agenda item for the Chugach CEO and Board of Directors. The Chugach will also update AEA as required. All pertinent meeting minutes will be provided to AEA for context and quarterly calls will be held with the appropriate AEA contact to keep them apprised of current status. 3.3.2 Financial Reporting Describe the controls that will be utilized to ensure that only costs that are reasonable, ordinary and necessary will be allocated to this project. Also discuss the controls in place that will ensure that no expenses for overhead, or any other unallowable costs will be requested for reimbursement from the REF Grant Program. Budget for the studies will be approved by the Chugach CEO and the Board of Directors through established processes with strong internal controls. Enterprise software will be used to track line- item cost detail, and the utility will remain subject to its annual audit. Expenses for overhead or other unallowable costs will not be requested for reimbursement and will be reviewed by the Chugach project management team and its Finance department. All contracts will be time and materials (not lump sum) so that only actual Project costs are invoiced. The Consultant will submit monthly invoices and progress reports that track the Project budget. Any subconsultant invoices and/or expense reports and all back up documentation (receipts, etc.) will be included with the monthly invoice. Both the Chugach PM and Project Accountant will review all invoices to ensure that only allowable costs are billed to the Project. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 12 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 4 – QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE 4.1 Project Team Include resumes for known key personnel and contractors, including all functions below, as an attachment to your application. In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would like those excluded from the web posting of this application. 4.1.1 Project Manager Indicate who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information. If the applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management support. If the applicant expects project management assistance from AEA or another government entity, state that in this section. Dustin Highers – Chugach Electric (dustin_highers@chugachelectric.com) 4.1.2 Project Accountant Indicate who will be performing the accounting of this project for the grantee. If the applicant does not have a project accountant indicate how you intend to solicit financial accounting support. Chugach supports a fully proficient finance and accounting team. This department will handle all financial accounting support for the project. 4.1.3 Expertise and Resources Describe the project team including the applicant, partners, and contractors. For each member of the project team, indicate: •the milestones/tasks in 3.1 they will be responsible for; •the knowledge, skills, and experience that will be used to successfully deliver the tasks; •how time and other resource conflicts will be managed to successfully complete the task. If contractors have not been selected to complete the work, provide reviewers with sufficient detail to understand the applicant’s capacity to successfully select contractors and manage complex contracts. Chugach Electric has selected McMillen, Inc. to serve as the lead engineering, natural resources, and regulatory Consultant for this Project. McMillen conducted the early reconnaissance efforts for this Project and has served as the lead Consultant for several other hydroelectric projects across Alaska, including Eklutna, Cooper Lake, Grant Lake, Nuyakuk, Salmon and Annex Creek, Allison Creek, and others. Known key Consultant team members for this Project are listed below. Samantha Owen – Project Manager •The Consultant PM will be responsible for developing and maintaining the detailed Project schedule, conducting strategic planning sessions and regular status meetings with Chugach; managing subconsultants and coordinating workflow within the Consultant team to meet project schedules and deadlines; QA/QC of all deliverables; proactive engagement with agencies and stakeholders; succession planning; budget tracking; progress reporting; and invoicing. •Samantha has 10 years of experience providing project management, FERC Licensing, and other environmental services. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 13 of 32 10/04/2022 •Proactive workload planning will be utilized to manage time and resource commitments amongst projects. Support staff within McMillen will be utilized to assist with administrative activities when needed. Cory Warnock – Strategic Advisor •The Strategic Advisor will assist early on with selecting a preferred configuration and determining the best path forward based on the regulatory (and FERC licensing) requirements. The Strategic Advisor will then be responsible for adherence to all regulatory requirements, developing strategies for communication and collaboration/engagement with agencies, Tribes, and NGS, and assisting with settlement agreement negotiations if needed. •Cory has 21 years of experience providing FERC licensing, regulatory, and other environmental services, including expensive experience on greenfield projects. •Proactive workload planning will be utilized to manage time and resource commitments amongst projects. Support staff within McMillen will be utilized to assist as needed. Chuck Sauvageau – Water Resources Lead •The Water Resources Lead will initially be responsible for permitting and installing the stream gage on Godwin Greek and coordinating with ADNR regarding the Project’s water rights. The Water Resources Lead will then be responsible for all hydrologic and water quality assessments throughout the duration of the Project. •Chuck has 24 years of experience providing hydrologic and water quality services for hydroelectric projects, including extensive experience on greenfield projects. •Proactive workload planning will be utilized to manage time and resource commitments amongst projects. Support staff within McMillen will be utilized to assist with field work and data analysis as needed. Sean Ellenson – Engineering Lead •The Engineering Lead will initially be responsible for coordinating any geotechnical investigations and developing the high-level conceptual designs and cost estimates for both configurations. The Engineering Lead will then be responsible for engineering related efforts throughout the duration of the Project. •Sean has 8 years of experience providing engineering services for hydroelectric projects, including extensive experience on greenfield projects. •Proactive workload planning will be utilized to manage time and resource commitments amongst projects. Other engineering staff will be utilized throughout the Project as needed. It is anticipated that additional technical expertise will likely be needed for this Project. This may include but is not limited to fisheries, instream flows, geomorphology, terrestrial wildlife, wetlands, recreation, and/or cultural resources. McMillen will subcontract to fill these technical resource areas as needed. 4.2 Local Workforce Describe how the project will use local labor or train a local labor workforce. For any subconsultant needs, preference will be given to local firms. In addition to the technical expertise listed above, this may include but is not limited to bear guard services, LiDAR and aerial imagery acquisition, meeting facilitation, and equipment rentals. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 14 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 5 – TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY 5.1 Resource Availability 5.1.1 Assessment of Proposed Energy Resource Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available, including average resource availability on an annual basis. For pre-construction applications, describe the resource to the extent known. For design and permitting or construction projects, please provide feasibility documents, design documents, and permitting documents (if applicable) as attachments to this application (See Section 11). Likelihood of the resource being available over the life of the project. See the “Resource Assessment” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. The Godwin Creek watershed is primarily glacially fed with a mean annual precipitation of 130 inches. The creek experiences high rain events in the fall and transports heavy sediment loads and large debris. The Godwin Creek watershed varies in elevation from 415-5,624 ft and is composed primarily of glaciers with minimal rocky outcrops located at the highest elevations. The watershed upstream from the proposed intake location has an estimated area of 13.3 sq. mi. There are significant glaciers present in the watershed (63%) and runoff from rainfall, annual snowmelt, and glacial melt (primary) make up the water sources. Nearby USGS stream gages used in this analysis included the 26-year long record of the WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK (#15236900) stream gage. The WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK stream gage was chosen as the surrogate for developing flows out of Godwin Creek due to the similar percentage of the watershed that is composed of glaciers (75% vs. 63%). The estimated unit discharge for the Godwin Creek watershed is 10.1 cfs/mi. while the 100-yr event is 3,720 cfs. 5.1.2 Alternatives to Proposed Energy Resource Describe the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be available for the market to be served by your project. Alternatives to Godwin Creek are largely in the form of other hydroelectric projects which are actively being investigated. Projects such as Snow River have been raised in the past, and will be reevaluated. With decarbonization goals being developed against a backdrop of diminishing natural gas reserves, all such viable hydroelectric resources will be key to the future of the Railbelt system making Godwin one of many resources that may come online in the next ten years. Additionally, the pairing of hydroelectric with other types of renewable energy like wind and solar make a project such as Godwin highly valuable in the energy portfolio. No new natural gas fired power plants are being considered, so alternatives exist only in the form of other hydroelectric projects. 5.1.3 Permits Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address outstanding permit issues. See the “Environmental and Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. • List of applicable permits • Anticipated permitting timeline • Identify and describe potential barriers including potential permit timing issues, public opposition that may result in difficulty obtaining permits, and other permitting barriers In 2014, during the Reconnaissance Phase of the Project, Chugach submitted a water right application to ADNR. That water right has since been suspended due to inactivity; however, Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 15 of 32 10/04/2022 Chugach has recently reached out to ADNR to reinitiate the processes for adjudicating the water right. For the planned stream gage installation in early 2023, Chugach has already obtained the necessary ADNR land use permit. Since the stream gage will be located above the anadromous reach, no ADFG permit is needed. Since at least one of the proposed configurations would definitively require a FERC license, Chugach will submit a Preliminary Permit Application (PPA) to FERC in early 2023 to maintain priority for the site. A formal determination of FERC jurisdiction will be requested once a preferred configuration is selected. If the Project requires a FERC license, then Chugach will follow all FERC licensing requirements. If any additional studies are needed, then any necessary permits and/or land access permissions will be identified and acquired in advance of study implementation. Per the current Project schedule, this permitting effort is slated for early 2025. All necessary permits for construction of the Project will be identified and obtained during the Final Design Phase. 5.2 Project Site Describe the availability of the site and its suitability for the proposed energy system. Identify potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project or how you intend to approach land ownership and access issues. See the “Site control” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. The run-of-river configuration for the Project would be entirely located on lands owned by the City of Seward and State of Alaska (managed by ADNR). Figure 1 illustrates land ownership as provided by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Flex Parcel Viewer (Kenai Peninsula Borough 2014). The storage configuration for the Project would include Project features located on lands within the Seward Ranger District of the Chugach National Forest (managed by the USFS). If this configuration is selected, the location of Project features on Federal lands would trigger the need for a FERC license. 5.3 Project Technical & Environmental Risk 5.3.1 Technical Risk Describe potential technical risks and how you would address them. • Which tasks are expected to be most challenging? • How will the project team reduce the risk of these tasks? • What internal controls will be put in place to limit and deal with technical risks? See the “Common Planning Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. Installation of the stream gage in 2023 presents an early technical challenge and risk. There is a narrow window of opportunity to install the stream gage next year. It needs to be installed after the snow has melted at lower elevations but before the spring freshet. Based on past experience on nearby projects, it is anticipated that McMillen staff will be able to install the stream gage in early April. However, to ensure that this narrow time window is not missed, McMillen staff will closely coordinate with local Chugach staff (located in Cooper Landing) on a weekly basis starting in early March to monitor local weather and snow conditions. It will also be critical that the stream gage is installed at the right location, above the braided channel section but below the confluence where Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 16 of 32 10/04/2022 the two forks from the norther and southern lake outlet meet. The stream gage will also need to be installed on a solid natural feature that will not be washed away during the spring freshet (such as a large boulder or bedrock). To ensure appropriate site selection, a site reconnaissance will be conducted in advance of installation. Another risk is that during study planning regulatory agencies and/or other stakeholders will request costly unnecessary studies that increase the overall Project cost and could delay the Project schedule. To mitigate this risk, Chugach will coordinate with the agencies/stakeholders early in the process to determine and reach agreement on what information is actually necessary to make informed decisions about the development of the Project. This coordination will serve as the basis for the development of the overall study program. Finally, it is possible, and likely, that there will be some amount of turnover within the regulatory agencies and/or other key stakeholders, and the risk is that there will be some institutional knowledge lost during this transition. To mitigate this risk, the Consultant team will meet with any new agency/stakeholder representatives (ideally before the previous representative leaves) to help facilitate that transfer of knowledge and bring them up to speed on the Project, efforts conducted to date, and any specific resource issues relevant to that agency/stakeholder. The Consultant will also prepare meeting minutes for all stakeholder engagement meetings to document any agreements or decisions made so they can be referenced later if needed. 5.3.2 Environmental Risk Explain whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so which project team members will be involved and how the issues will be addressed. See the “Environmental and Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. • Threatened or endangered species • Habitat issues • Wetlands and other protected areas • Archaeological and historical resources • Land development constraints • Telecommunications interference • Aviation considerations • Visual, aesthetics impacts • Identify and describe other potential barriers The following environmental resources areas have been reviewed to support the development of this application. • Anadromous fish – The Anadromous Waters Catalog maintained by ADFG identifies Fourth of July Creek (AWC Code 231-30-10130) as an anadromous stream from its mouth to just above the confluence with Godwin Creek (see attached). Coho salmon have been identified as present, and chum salmon have been identified as spawning. Godwin Creek is not identified as anadromous. For both configurations, any flows diverted from Godwin Creek would be discharged back into Godwin Creek or Fourth of July Creek above the anadromous reach. Potential impacts from Project operations to instream flows and how that would impact downstream fish habitat will be considered when evaluating potential Project impacts and determining, in coordination with agencies and stakeholders, what additional studies are need for informed decision making. If it is determined that an instream flow study or other fisheries studies are needed, then the Consultant will subcontract a firm with the appropriate technical expertise to conduct those studies. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 17 of 32 10/04/2022 • Threatened and endangered species – The USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) tool was used to identify any threatened or endangered species in the Project area (see attached). The only ESA listed species that was identified as being potentially affected by activities in this area is the Short-tailed Albatross; however, the proposed Project is unlikely to significantly impact this species, and no critical habitat has been designated for this species. The Consultant team will work with USFWS and ADFG during early consultation efforts to identify any potential Project impacts and determine what, if any, additional studies might be needed for informed decision making. If it is determined that an avian study is needed, then the Consultant will subcontract a firm with the appropriate technical expertise to conduct this study. • Migratory birds – Also using the IPaC, several migratory birds were identified as utilizing the Project area (see attached); however, the proposed Project is unlikely to significantly impact these species. The Consultant team will work with USFWS and ADFG during early consultation efforts to identify any potential Project impacts and determine what, if any, additional studies might be needed for informed decision making. If it is determined that an avian study is needed, then the Consultant will subcontract a firm with the appropriate technical expertise to conduct this study. • Critical habitat – Per the online USFWS and NMFS Critical Habitat Mapper, there is no identified critical habitat in the Project area (see attached). • Wetlands – The USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) was used to identify any wetlands in the Project area. There are riverine and freshwater wetlands adjacent to Fourth of July Creek (see attached). The Consultant team will coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) during the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase to evaluate any potential Project impacts to wetlands, and a detailed wetlands delineation will be conducted by a qualified consultant during Final Design to support permitting efforts. • Historic and archaeological resources – Per the online map for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), there are no historic properties within the Project area (see attached). The Consultant team will coordinate will work with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and local tribal entities during early consultation effort to confirm this. However, if it is determined that a cultural resources study is needed, then the Consultant will subcontract a firm with the appropriate technical expertise to conduct this study. • Land use/development constraints – The proposed Project features will be located on City and State owned/managed land (see attached) and potentially on Federally owned/managed land within Chugach State Park. The Consultant will work with the City of Seward, Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) during early consultation efforts to identify any land development constraints so that they can be considered when the conceptual designs are developed. The PM, Strategic Advisor, and Engineering Lead will be involved in this consultation. • Recreation and aesthetics – The Godwin Glacier Overlook can be accessed via the Alice Mountain Trailhead. The trail is lightly trafficked, approximately 3 miles long (6 miles roundtrip), has an elevation gain of approximately 3,530 feet, and is considered difficult. The overlook itself provides a bird’s eye view of Godwin Glacier and the surrounding area. If the storage configuration is selected, then the Project could have some aesthetic impacts for any recreational users at the overlook. The Consultant team will work with the USFS during early consultation efforts regarding this topic. If it is determined that a recreation and/or aesthetics study is needed, then the Consultant will subcontract a firm with the appropriate technical expertise to conduct this study. No telecommunications or aviation issues are anticipated. A more detailed environmental assessment will be conducted as part of the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 18 of 32 10/04/2022 5.4 Technical Feasibility of Proposed Energy System In this section you will describe and give details of the existing and proposed systems. The information for existing system will be used as the baseline the proposal is compared to and also used to make sure that proposed system can be integrated. Only complete sections applicable to your proposal. If your proposal only generates electricity, you can remove the sections for thermal (heat) generation. 5.4.1 Basic Operation of Existing Energy System Describe the basic operation of the existing energy system including: description of control system; spinning reserve needs and variability in generation (any high loads brought on quickly); and current voltage, frequency, and outage issues across system. See the “Understanding the Existing System” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. The existing energy system is the Alaska Railbelt grid serving communities from Homer to Fairbanks. Chugach’s service territory is in the middle of the system, serving the Anchorage and upper Kenai Peninsula regions. The Chugach system includes several power plants including two combined cycle power plants, two simple cycle gas turbine plants, one owned hydroelectric plant, one shared-ownership hydroelectric power plant, and one wind project under PPA. Alongside these assets, Chugach has a 56% share of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. The thermal plants carry most of the load on the system with participation from the hydroelectric plants and a small amount from the wind farm. The upper Kenai Peninsula transmission system between Cooper Landing, near the Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Project, and Seward is occasionally isolated due natural hazards and other issues that sometimes occur. Being adjacent to the City of Seward, the Godwin project has the ability to support that part of the system which traditionally suffers from voltage issues while isolated. In addition, the Godwin project represents a significant amount of energy contribution to the functioning of the Chugach system under normal operating conditions. If sufficient water impoundment exists, Godwin could also participate in the regulation of new wind and solar renewable energy resources. 5.4.2.1 Existing Power Generation Units Include for each unit include: resource/fuel, make/model, design capacity (kW), minimum operational load (kW), RPM, electronic/mechanical fuel injection, make/model of genset controllers, hours on genset Unit 1: This project will displace energy from fossil fuel units in the Railbelt. Unit 2: AEA’s Evaluation Model contains the information needed for the Railbelt system. Unit 3: Unit 4: Unit 5: Unit 6: 5.4.2 Existing Energy Generation Infrastructure and Production In the following tables, only fill in areas below applicable to your project. You can remove extra tables. If you have the data below in other formats, you can attach them to the application (see Section 11). Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes estimated annual displaced heating fuel (gallons) No Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 19 of 32 10/04/2022 5.4.2.2 Existing Distribution System Describe the basic elements of the distribution system. Include the capacity of the step-up transformer at the powerhouse, the distribution voltage(s) across the community, any transmission voltages, and other elements that will be affected by the proposed project. This project serves the Chugach grid between the upper Kenai Peninsula and Anchorage and power from the project is delivered at transmission voltages. If specific details are needed for application review, please contact Chugach Electric. 5.4.2.4 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Existing System) Use most recent year. Replace the section (Type 1), (Type 2), and (Type 3) with generation sources Month Generati on (Type 1) (kWh) Generatio n (Type 2) (kWh) Generatio n (Type 3) (kWh) Fuel Consumptio n (Diesel- Gallons) Fuel Consumptio n [Other] Pea k Loa d Minimu m Load January February March April May June July August Septembe r October November December Total 5.4.3 Future Trends Describe the anticipated energy demand in the community, or whatever will be affected by the project, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and provide year by year forecasts. As appropriate, include expected changes to energy demand, peak load, seasonal variations, etc. that will affect the project. The electric demand in the Railbelt is expected to remain steady over the 50-year life of the hydro project, barring any significant changes to economic conditions or population. Most of the Railbelt 5.4.2.3 O&M and replacement costs for existing units Power Generation Thermal Generation i.Annual O&M cost for labor N/A ii.Annual O&M cost for non-labor N/A iii. Replacement schedule and cost for existing units N/A Covered by AEA’s REF Evaluation Model for the Railbelt. Contact Chugach if additional information would be helpful. $4.1M $8.8M $635M Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 20 of 32 10/04/2022 utilities have been experiencing overall reductions of load over the past decade resulting mostly from end-use energy efficiency improvements and slow or declining economic conditions. It is expected that these efficiency changes will continue, but at a slower rate in the coming decades and will be matched with increased loads and beneficial electrification such as the electrification of transportation. The US Energy Information Administration in their Annual Energy Outlook, which projects energy use to 2050, projects less than 1 percent growth per year through 2050. This projection is a combination of energy efficiency measures that reduce load and economic development that increases load at a greater pace. Due to current economic conditions in Alaska, it is likely that demand will continue to decrease slightly each year before economic growth and the addition of electric vehicles to the load surpass the efficiency decline. On the relatively large (by Alaska standards) Railbelt grid, these changes are expected to be slow, incremental changes to an otherwise stable load. 5.4.4 Proposed System Design Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system: •A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location •The total proposed capacity and a description of how the capacity was determined •Integration plan, including upgrades needed to existing system(s) to integrate renewable energy system: Include a description of the controls, storage, secondary loads, distribution upgrades that will be included in the project •Civil infrastructure that will be completed as part of the project—buildings, roads, etc. •Include what backup and/or supplemental system will be in place See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. The proposed Project would be a hydroelectric project on Godwin Creek. Based on the reconnaissance efforts conducted in 2014, the Project features for the run-of-river configuration (see Figures 1) would include: •An intake structure located approximately 440 feet above mean sea level (MSL) positioned across Godwin Creek and measuring approximately 110 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 18 feet tall. •A penstock approximately 3,500 feet long with a diameter of 78 inches and a capacity of 308 cfs; buried where feasible. •A powerhouse located approximately 120 feet above mean sea level (MSL) upstream of the confluence with Fourth of July Creek containing a horizontal Francis turbine/generator. The estimated nameplate of the turbine is 6.1 MW based on the 20% exceedance flow, and the estimated annual generation based on mean annual nameplate (using mean annual flow) is approximately 23,000 MW-hrs. Further details on the Godwin Creek Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation are attached. Project features for the storage configuration would include a dam located at one or both lake outlets, an intake structure located near the southern lake outlet, a penstock, and a powerhouse located near the confluence with Fourth of July Creek. More detail regarding this configuration will be developed during the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase. Both configurations would include: •A tailrace consisting of a concrete drop box within the powerhouse that connects to a rip rap channel and discharges water into Fourth of July Creek just above the confluence with Godwin Creek. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 21 of 32 10/04/2022 •A 69 kV transmission line from the powerhouse to an existing substation approximately 10,900 feet west of the proposed powerhouse location. •A gravel access road approximately 16 feet wide and 4,300 feet long that connects to an existing off-road trail on the north side of the Fourth of July Industrial Park and then follows the topography on the north side of Godwin Creek. The access road would include a bridge, approximately 200-foot span length, that crosses Godwin Creek allowing the access road to tie into the Godwin Creek penstock route. The remainder of the project would be accessed by gravel roadways along the penstock route. 5.4.4.1 Proposed Power Generation Units Unit # Resource/ Fuel type Design capacity (kW) Make Model Expected capacity factor Expected life (years) Expected Availability TBD 5.4.5 Basic Operation of Proposed Energy System •To the best extent possible, describe how the proposed energy system will operate: When will the system operate, how will the system integrate with the existing system, how will the control systems be used, etc. •When and how will the backup system(s) be expected to be used See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance. The proposed project will be dispatched to meet a combination of baseload and regulating service. System regulation may be related to the increase of renewable energy sources on the Chugach system, including wind and solar. The particular operational characteristics will be investigated and reported as part of this feasibility and conceptual design phase. 5.4.3.1 Expected Capacity Factor % 5.4.5.2 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Proposed System) Month Generation (Proposed System) (kWh) Generation (Type 2) (kWh) Generation (Type 3) (kWh) Fuel Consumption (Diesel- Gallons) Fuel Consumption [Other] Secondary load (kWh) Storage (kWh) January TBD February March April May June July Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 22 of 32 10/04/2022 August September October November December Total 5.4.5.3 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Proposed System) Month Diesel (Gallons) Electricity Propane (Gallons) Coal (Tons) Wood (Cords, green tons, dry tons) Other January TBD February March April May June July August September October November December Total 5.4.6 Proposed System Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs O&M costs can be estimated in two ways for the standard application. Most proposed renewable energy projects will fall under Option 1 because the new resource will not allow for diesel generation to be turned off. Some projects may allow for diesel generation to be turned off for periods of time; these projects should choose Option 2 for estimating O&M. Option 1: Diesel generation ON For projects that do not result in shutting down diesel generation there is assumed to be no impact on the base case O&M. Please indicate the estimated annual O&M cost associated with the proposed renewable project. $250,000 (Subject to project concept finalization.) Option 2: Diesel generation OFF For projects that will result in shutting down diesel generation please estimate: 1.Annual non-fuel savings of shutting off diesel generation 2.Estimated hours that diesel generation will be off per year. 3.Annual O&M costs associated with the proposed renewable project. 1.$ 2. Hours diesel OFF/year: 3. $ Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 23 of 32 10/04/2022 5.4.7 Fuel Costs Estimate annual cost for all applicable fuel(s) needed to run the proposed system (Year 1 of operation) Diesel (Gallons) Electricity Propane (Gallons) Coal (Tons) Wood Other Unit cost ($) Annual Units Total Annual cost ($) 5.5 Performance and O&M Reporting For construction projects only 5.5.1 Metering Equipment Please provide a short narrative, and cost estimate, identifying the metering equipment that will be used to comply with the operations reporting requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the Request for Applications. As per regulation 3 AAC 107.685, a grantee’s obligation to report on certain project data/metrics, the conditions obligating, cadence and the duration of the reporting period shall be determined by AEA, and stated in the grant agreement. Metering for the plant would include a complement of power and water data communicated to the Chugach System Control Dispatch Center on a continuous basis. 5.5.2 O&M reporting Please provide a short narrative about the methods that will be used to gather and store reliable operations and maintenance data, including costs, to comply with the operations reporting requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the Request for Applications Chugach Electric is an established, well-functioning organization that tracks all generation expenses, including operations and maintenance expenses. Chugach financial records are audited on an annual basis. Performance in terms of energy generation, water measurement and other similar performance metrics are already in place and any additional measures will be incorporated into Chugach’s procedures. The metrics will be reported according to the grant agreement requirements. SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS 6.1 Economic Feasibility 6.1.1 Economic Benefit Annual Lifetime Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power Generation (gallons) TBD Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat (gallons) Total Fuel displaced (gallons) Electric costs to run communications and valves would be de minimis. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 24 of 32 10/04/2022 Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power Generation ($) Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat ($) Anticipated Power Generation O&M Cost Savings Anticipated Thermal Generation O&M Cost Savings Total Other costs savings (taxes, insurance, etc.) Total Fuel, O&M, and Other Cost Savings 6.1.2 Economic Benefit Explain the economic benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings and other economic benefits, and how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project. Note that additional revenue sources (such as tax credits or green tags) to pay for operations and/or financing, will not be included as economic benefits of the project. Where appropriate, describe the anticipated energy cost in the community, or whatever will be affected by the project, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and provide year-by-year forecasts The economic model used by AEA is available at https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We- Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy-Fund/2022-REF-Application. This economic model may be used by applicants but is not required. The final benefit/cost ratio used will be derived from the AEA model to ensure a level playing field for all applicants. If used, please submit the model with the application. The project will reduce direct energy cost to approximately half of Alaskans who live in communities served by Chugach Electric. The lower cost of energy in the Railbelt reduces costs to rural communities who purchase goods and services from the Railbelt region. The lower cost also helps rural residents and government/tribal organizations due to the Power Cost Equalization (PCE) formula. The PCE formula is based on equalizing certain rural electric costs to match the average electric cost in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau, cities that are past beneficiaries of State grants to develop low-cost hydro projects. The Dixon Diversion project will help lower the cost of electricity in both Anchorage and Fairbanks and therefore it will lower electric costs in PCE communities. Godwin is believed to be capable of up to 260,000 MWh energy production per year, although rough planning calculations take a more conservative figure at 125,000 MWh. With a power range between 70 and 80 MW, Godwin would be a significant contributor to the Railbelt system and to Chugach in particular. 6.1.3 Economic Risks Discuss potential issues that could make the project uneconomic to operate and how the project team will address the issues. Factors may include: • Low prices for diesel and/or heating oil • Other projects developed in community Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 25 of 32 10/04/2022 • Reductions in expected energy demand: Is there a risk of an insufficient market for energy produced over the life of the project. • Deferred and/or inadequate facility maintenance • Other factors Hydroelectric projects have a high initial cost. This project is also expected to have a high cost, but it uses existing generation and transmission sources with a short interconnection line, thereby significantly reducing the cost as compared to other hydroelectric projects. Once constructed, hydroelectric projects commonly operate for more than 100 years, although this project will be considered using the economic life of 50 years. Since the precipitation and glacial melt will continue at the Godwin basin, this project’s energy generation appears to be economic over its 50- year life. As natural gas prices rise the hydroelectric energy becomes relatively lower cost. As long as there is a Railbelt needing energy there will be a market for Godwin energy. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 26 of 32 10/04/2022 6.1.4 Public Benefit for Projects with Direct Private Sector Sales For projects that include direct sales of power to private sector businesses (sawmills, cruise ships, mines, etc.), please provide a brief description of the direct and indirect public benefits derived from the project as well as the private sector benefits and complete the table below. See Section 1.6 in the Request for Applications for more information. N/A Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month) Estimated direct sales to private sector businesses (kWh) Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($) Estimated sales for use by the Alaskan public (kWh) Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($) 6.2 Other Public Benefit Describe the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project. For the purpose of evaluating this criterion, public benefits are those benefits that would be considered unique to a given project and not generic to any renewable resource. For example, decreased greenhouse gas emission, stable pricing of fuel source, won’t be considered under this category. Some examples of other public benefits include: • The project will result in developing infrastructure (roads, trails, pipes, power lines, etc.) that can be used for other purposes • The project will result in a direct long-term increase in jobs (operating, supplying fuel, etc.) • The project will solve other problems for the community (waste disposal, food security, etc.) • The project will generate useful information that could be used by the public in other parts of the state • The project will promote or sustain long-term commercial economic development for the community • The project will reduce Alaska’s estimated greenhouse gas emissions. • The project will help Railbelt utilities move toward their renewable energy and carbon reduction goals without raising costs to ratepayers. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 27 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 7 – SUSTAINABILITY Describe your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable throughout its economic life. At a minimum for construction projects, a business and operations plan should be attached and the applicant should describe how it will be implemented. See Section 11. 7.1.1 Operation and Maintenance Demonstrate the capacity to provide for the long-term operation and maintenance of the proposed project for its expected life • Provide examples of success with similar or related long-term operations • Describe the key personnel that will be available for operating and maintaining the infrastructure. • Describe the training plan for existing and future employees to become proficient at operating and maintaining the proposed system. • Describe the systems that will be used to track necessary supplies • Describe the system will be used to ensure that scheduled maintenance is performed The project will be managed by Chugach which has managed many power plants, including operations and maintenance, since the late 1940’s. Specific to hydroelectric plants, insurance and special inspections by FERC find Cooper Lake has been maintained in good condition. 7.1.2 Financial Sustainability • Describe the process used (or propose to use) to account for operational and capital costs. • Describe how rates are determined (or will be determined). What process is required to set rates? • Describe how you ensure that revenue is collected. • If you will not be selling energy, explain how you will ensure that the completed project will be financially sustainable for its useful life. This will be determined as part of the Feasibility as Conceptual Design Phase. 7.1.2.1 Revenue Sources Briefly explain what if any effect your project will have on electrical rates in the proposed benefit area over the life of the project. If there is expected to be multiple rates for electricity, such as a separate rate for intermittent heat, explain what the rates will be and how they will be determined Collect sufficient revenue to cover operational and capital costs • What is the expected cost-based rate (as consistent with RFA requirements) • If you expect to have multiple rate classes, such as excess electricity for heat, explain what those rates are expected to be and how those rates account for the costs of delivering the energy (see AEA’s white paper on excess electricity for heat). • Annual customer revenue sufficient to cover costs • Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits) • Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or programs that might be available) This will be determined as part of the Feasibility as Conceptual Design Phase. Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 28 of 32 10/04/2022 7.1.2.2 Power Purchase/Sale The power purchase/sale information should include the following: • Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) • Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range (consistent with the Section 3.16 of the RFA) Identify the potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) and anticipated power purchase/sales price range. Indicate the proposed rate of return from the grant-funded project. Include letters of support or power purchase agreement from identified customers. This will be determined as part of the Feasibility as Conceptual Design Phase. SECTION 8 – PROJECT READINESS 8.1 Project Preparation Describe what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with work once your grant is approved. Specifically address your progress towards or readiness to begin, at a minimum, the following: • The phase(s) that must be completed prior to beginning the phase(s) proposed in this application • The phase(s) proposed in this application • Obtaining all necessary permits • Securing land access and use for the project • Procuring all necessary equipment and materials Refer to the RFA and/or the pre-requisite checklists for the required activities and deliverables for each project phase. Please describe below and attach any required documentation. Chugach completed the Reconnaissance Phase of the Project in 2014 and has contracted McMillen to conduct the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase. Since September 2022, McMillen has already obtained the necessary ADNR land use permit and equipment for installation of the stream gage in early 2023 and has reinitiated consultation with ADNR regarding water rights for the Project. Chugach intends to initiate this Phase of work in January 2023. 8.2 Demand- or Supply-Side Efficiency Upgrades If you have invested in energy efficiency projects that will have a positive impact on the proposed project, and have chosen to not include them in the economic analysis, applicants should provide as much documentation as possible including: 1. Explain how it will improve the success of the RE project 2. Energy efficiency pre and post audit reports, or other appropriate analysis, 3. Invoices for work completed, 4. Photos of the work performed, and/or 5. Any other available verification such as scopes of work, technical drawings, and payroll for work completed internally. N/A Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 29 of 32 10/04/2022 SECTION 9 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION Describe local support and opposition, known or anticipated, for the project. Include letters, resolutions, or other documentation of local support from the community that would benefit from this project. Provide letters of support, memorandum of understandings, cooperative agreements between the applicant, the utility, local government and project partners. The documentation of support must be dated within one year of the RFA date of October 4, 2022. Please note that letters of support from legislators will not count toward this criterion. Initial discussions with AEA staff indicate general support for the Project. Chugach has not obtained any formal letters of support to date; however, Chugach anticipates minimal, if any, opposition to the Project since it is unlikely to have any significant environmental impacts. Chugach is committed to working closely with agencies and stakeholders to identify any potential Project impacts and to develop the appropriate mitigation measures for those impacts. SECTION 10 – COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AWARDS Identify other grants that may have been previously awarded to the Applicant by AEA for this or any other project. Describe the degree you have been able to meet the requirements of previous grants including project deadlines, reporting, and information requests. N/A SECTION 11 – LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PRIOR PHASES In the space below, please provide a list of additional documents attached to support completion of prior phases. •Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Report (McMillen, July 2014) •Technical Memorandum 004 (McMillen, August 2014) •ADFG Anadromous Waters Catalog (accessed on November 29, 2022) •USFWS IPaC (accessed on November 29, 2022) •USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (accessed on November 29, 2022) •USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (accessed on November 29, 2022) •NMFS Critical Habitat Mapper (accessed on November 29, 2022) •NPS National Register of Historic Places (accessed on November 29, 2022) SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION In the space below, please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration. None Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application -Standard Form ~,~ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY SECTION 14-ADDITIG>NAL li>0Cl!JMEN iliATION AND CERTIFICATION StJBMl11 lJ1 HE fQ ~eiOWING D©CllMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION: A . Contact information and resumes of Applicant's Project Manager, Project Accountant(s), key staff, partners, consultants, and suppliers per application form Section 3.1, 3.4 and 3.6. Applicants are asked to provide resumes submitted with applications in separate electronic documents if the individuals do not want their resumes posted to the project web site. B. Letters or resolutions demonstrating local support per application form Section 9. C. For projects involving heat: Most recent invoice demonstrating the cost of heating fuel for the building(s) impacted by the project. D. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant's governing body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that: • Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the match amounts indicated in the application. • Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to commit the organization to the obligations under the grant. • Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this application. • Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local, laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations. E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD or other electronic media, per RFA Section 1.7. F. CERTIFICATION The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations and that they can indeed commit the entity to these obligations. Print Name Dustin Hig,rs Signature (}b?9t -I Title Vice President of Corporate Programs Date 12/5/2022 AEA 23046 Page 31 of32 10/04/2022 Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Grant Application – Standard Form AEA 23046 Page 32 of 32 10/04/2022 December 5, 2022 Alaska Energy Authority Attn: Grants Coordinator 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503 ··~~ CHUGACH -- POWERING ALASKA'S FUTURE Subject: Formal Approval and Endorsement of Proposed Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Dear Alaska Energy Authority: Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach), an electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, is submitting an application for a Renewable Energy Fund (REF) grant to conduct the Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase of the Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project). As the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for Chugach Electric, this letter serves as my formal approval and endorsement of the Project, and: Commits Chugach to providing the matching resources for the Project at the match amounts indicated in the application; Authorizes that the individual who signs the application has the authority to commit the organization to the obligations under the grant; and, Certifies that Chugach is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations. If you have any questions regarding the application, please contact Dustin Highers, Vice President of Corporate Programs, at (907) 762-4775 or dustin highers@chugachelectric.com . Sincerely, p.;v.U/4 Arthur W. Miller Chief Executive Officer Attachment Chugach Electric Association, Inc . 5 601 Electron Dr ive, P.O. Box 196300, Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 • (907) 563-7494 Fax (907) 562-0027 • {BOO) 4 78-74 94 www.ch ugachelect ric.com Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Prepared For: Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Prepared By: McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page i July 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 DESIGN CONCEPT .............................................................................................................. 1 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGIC INVESTIGATION ................................................................ 2 3.1 Fourth of July Creek Hydrology ......................................................................................... 2 3.2 Godwin Creek Hydrology ................................................................................................... 2 LAND OWNERSHIP ............................................................................................................. 3 ENERGY GENERATION MODEL ........................................................................................ 3 CONSTRUCTION APPROACH ............................................................................................. 3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Feature Overview Indicating Land Ownership. ................................................................ 5 Figure 2. Conceptual Project Design ........................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3. Locations Where Corresponding Photographs Were Taken......................................................... 7 APPENDICES Attachment A Fourth of July Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation Attachment B Godwin Creek Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation Attachment C Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydropower Site Evaluation Attachment D Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek Generation Models Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 1 July 2014 Introduction Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach) has requested the assistance of McMillen, LLC (McMillen) to determine a design concept for the proposed Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) in Seward, Alaska. A private energy developer had examined Fourth of July Creek in 2008-09 and conducted a feasibility study for a single run-of-river project. Based on available information and a reconnaissance site visit conducted on May 29, 2014 by Chugach and McMillen, this report describes a conceptual design for a run-of-river hydroelectric facility on Fourth of July Creek as well as the neighboring Godwin Creek. Design Concept The proposed Project would be a run-of-river hydroelectric generation project located on the east side of Resurrection Bay, across the bay from Seward, Alaska. It would utilize two watersheds which supply water to Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek and outflow to Resurrection Bay. Diversion structures would span Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek to direct water to separate turbine units housed in a single powerhouse building with a gross generation of 12.7 MW. The powerhouse would be located approximately 120 feet above mean sea level (MSL) upstream of the Fourth of July-Godwin confluence. The building will be constructed of metal with four-foot high concrete stem walls for structural stability. Tail water from the powerhouse will be conveyed into Fourth of July Creek and flow into Resurrection Bay. Tailrace construction will consist of a concrete drop box within the powerhouse and continue to a rip rap channel to dissipate water energy. A 69 kV transmission line would be constructed from the powerhouse to an existing substation approximately 10,900 feet west of the proposed powerhouse location. Fourth of July Creek Development The Fourth of July Creek watershed includes approximately 9.0 square miles upstream of the proposed Fourth of July Creek intake structure. The source water for Fourth of July Creek is the Godwin Glacial field located approximately two miles east of the proposed intake. Project features for the Fourth of July Creek Development of the Project are as follows:  Intake structure located approximately 876 feet above mean sea level (MSL) positioned across Fourth of July Creek and measuring approximately 110 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 18 feet tall.  Penstock approximately 5,200 feet long with a diameter of 54 inches with a capacity of 147 cfs.  3,460-foot long 16-foot diameter tunnel housing the penstock immediately downstream of the intake structure.  1,670-foot long penstock from the downstream tunnel portal to the powerhouse; buried where feasible.  6.6-MW horizontal Francis turbine/generator package housed in the powerhouse. Godwin Creek Development The Godwin Creek watershed includes approximately 13.3 square miles upstream of the proposed Godwin Creek intake structure. The source water for Godwin Creek is the Godwin Glacial field located approximately one mile east of the proposed intake. Project features for the Godwin Creek Development of the Project are as follows:  Intake structure located approximately 440 feet above mean sea level (MSL) positioned across Godwin Creek and measuring approximately 110 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 18 feet tall. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 2 July 2014  Penstock approximately 3,500 feet long with a diameter of 78 inches with a capacity of 308 cfs; buried where feasible.  6.1-MW horizontal Francis turbine/generator package housed in the powerhouse. A permanent access road is necessary to construct, maintain, and operate the Project. An existing off road trail is located northeast of the Fourth of July Industrial Park at the mouth of Fourth of July Creek. The 16-foot wide, 4,300-foot long project access road would be constructed by gravel and travel eastward from this road and follow the topography north of Godwin Creek. A bridge, approximately 200-foot span length, would cross Godwin Creek allowing the access road to tie into the Godwin Creek penstock route. The remainder of the project will be accessed by gravel roadways along the penstock/tunnel routes. Maps showing the general locations of the Project features are provided in Figures 1 and 2. Local vegetation and terrain are shown in Figure 3 and associated photos (taken at the May 29, 2014 reconnaissance site visit). Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation Available data were analyzed to estimate flows and discharge for both Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek. Attachments A and B provide details of each watershed and estimated average flows and discharges. 3.1 Fourth of July Creek Hydrology The Fourth of July Creek watershed is glacially fed with a mean annual precipitation of 120 inches. The creek experiences high rain events in the fall and transports heavy sediment loads and large debris. The watershed varies in elevation from 790-4,883 ft and is composed primarily of dense coniferous forest, rocky outcrops, and glaciers. The watershed upstream from the proposed intake location has an estimated area of 9.0 sq. mi. Glaciers are present in the watershed (40%) and runoff from rainfall, annual snowmelt, and glacial melt (primary) make up the water sources. Nearby USGS stream gages used in this analysis included the 30.5-year long record of the SPRUCE C NR SEWARD AK (#15238600) stream gage. The structure layout is based on Penstock Route A defined in the Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment (Independence Power LLC, 2009). The estimated unit discharge for the Fourth of July Creek watershed is 8.7 cfs/mi. while the 100-yr event is 2,400 cfs. The estimated nameplate of the turbine is 6.6 MW based on the 20% exceedance flow and estimated annual generation based on mean annual nameplate (using mean annual flow) is approximately 32,000 MW-hrs. Attachment A includes further detail on the Fourth of July Creek Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation. Stream gage installation on Fourth of July Creek near the proposed intake location is necessary to refine the Godwin Creek hydrology. 3.2 Godwin Creek Hydrology The Godwin Creek watershed is primarily glacially fed with a mean annual precipitation of 130 inches. The creek experiences high rain events in the fall and transports heavy sediment loads and large debris. The Godwin Creek watershed varies in elevation from 415-5,624 ft and is composed primarily of glaciers with minimal rocky outcrops located at the highest elevations. The watershed upstream from the proposed intake location has an estimated area of 13.3 sq. mi. There are significant glaciers present in the watershed (63%) and runoff from rainfall, annual snowmelt, and glacial melt (primary) make up the water sources. Nearby USGS stream gages used in this analysis included the 26-year long record of the WOLVERINE C Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 3 July 2014 NR LAWING AK (#15236900) stream gage. The WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK stream gage was chosen as the surrogate for developing flows out of Godwin Creek due the similar percentage of the watershed that is composed of glaciers (75% vs. 63%). The estimated unit discharge for the Godwin Creek watershed is 10.1 cfs/mi. while the 100-yr event is 3,720 cfs. The estimated nameplate of the turbine is 6.1 MW based on the 20% exceedance flow and estimated annual generation based on mean annual nameplate (using mean annual flow) is approximately 23,000 MW-hrs. Attachment B includes further detail on the Godwin Creek Preliminary Hydrologic Investigation. Stream gage installation on Godwin Creek near the proposed intake location is necessary to refine the Godwin Creek hydrology. Land Ownership The Project is located on land within Seward City Limits on lands owned by the City of Seward and State of Alaska [managed by Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR)]. Figure 1 illustrates land ownership as provided by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Flex Parcel Viewer (Kenai Peninsula Borough 2014). Confirmation of City of Seward property limits is pending. Energy Generation Model As presented in Attachment D, simplified generation models were developed for both the Fourth of July and Godwin Developments. Daily kilowatt hour values were calculated and annual revenue values were estimated for both developments using Chugach’s 2014 Large General Secondary Service Rate as the assumed avoided cost (Chugach 2014). These calculations are presented with a constant flow available throughout the year in the “Constant Flow” table. The State of Alaska’s Capacity Factor of 45 percent is considered in the “Capacity Factor” table and concludes an annual revenue (with maintenance costs considered) as approximately $1.9 million for the Fourth of July Creek Development and $1.8 million for the Godwin Creek Development. Construction Approach A preliminary description of the proposed construction of the Project is outlined below in tasks One through Five. The order of these tasks is interchangeable with some tasks being completed concurrently with other tasks depending on the final contractor’s schedule. Where possible, work will progress through the winter on major task items such as the tunnel, powerhouse fabrication, and penstock assembly. Major task elements of the combined hydroelectric project are as follows: Task One: Project access road construction, clearing and grubbing of the project footprint, Godwin Creek bridge construction, development of a laydown yard for the powerhouse, mobilization/stockpiling of aggregate for the road and penstock route, and building of a temporary two-year man camp (cost included in overhead) will be completed under Task One. Aggregate will be sourced from the City of Seward gravel pit operation located at the mouth of Fourth of July Creek. Road building will be completed on the north side of Godwin Creek at the transitional boundary between mature growth timber and new growth alder brush. This route was selected due to its topographic stability and elevation above the high water runoff mark associated with high flows of Godwin Creek. A bridge spanning approximately 200 feet will be placed perpendicular to the creek at a location where the channels of Godwin Creek are relatively narrow and do not have geomorphology indicating stream braiding. The Godwin Creek Bridge will be placed at an elevation that is well above historical high flows. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 4 July 2014 Task Two: Diversion of the creek and construction of a concrete intake box structure on Godwin Creek will be completed under Task Two. Concrete utilized for the intake structure and powerhouse will come from local sources. Concurrent activities include the start of tunneling operations to the Fourth of July Creek intake, clearing and aggregate in-filling of the Godwin Creek penstock route, clearing, and site preparation of the powerhouse site including the tail race channel. Task Three: Installation of the Godwin Creek penstock, completion of the tunnel to the Fourth of July Creek, fabrication of the powerhouse building, and installation of the turbines will be completed under Task Three. A laydown yard at the City of Seward gravel pit and at the powerhouse will be utilized for storing materials. Connection of the first turbine to Godwin Creek penstock will also be completed under this task. Start-up of the Godwin turbine may be completed prior to final installation of the Fourth of July turbine. Task Four: Completion of the Fourth of July intake and related penstock to the powerhouse and connection to the Fourth of July turbine will be completed under Task Four. Concurrent activities include electrical component work such as completing the switchyard, and related electrical infrastructure for the powerhouse. Task Five: Installation of a new 69 kV overhead power line from the powerhouse to the substation/intertie located in the Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park approximately 10,900 feet directly west of the proposed powerhouse. Demobilization of equipment and personnel off the site will be completed under Task 5. Start-up operations of the power plant will be initiated, with full generation of both turbine units. This approach is based on findings through the May 29, 2014 reconnaissance site visit. The Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydropower Site Evaluation (Attachment C) provides further detail of the specific project feature estimated costs. References Independence Power, LLC. 2009. Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment. November 2009. Kenai Peninsula Borough. 2014. Flex Parcel Viewer http://mapserver.borough.kenai.ak.us/flexviewer/. Accessed June 28, 2014. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. 2014. http://www.chugachelectric.com/rate-information. Accessed July 7, 2014. Figures Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 5 July 2014 Figure 1. Project Feature Overview Indicating Land Ownership. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 6 July 2014 Figure 2. Conceptual Project Design Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 7 July 2014 Figure 3. Locations Where Corresponding Photographs Were Taken. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 8 July 2014 001 Photo 001-A Looking upstream at Fourth of July Creek downstream of the Godwin confluence Photo 001-B Looking downstream at Fourth of July Creek downstream of the Godwin confluence Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 9 July 2014 002 Photo 002-A At Godwin confluence looking upstream Godwin Photo 002-B Looking south at Godwin/Fourth of July Creek confluence. Godwin Creek is in the foreground and Fourth of July Creek is in the background. Photo 002-C Looking downstream Fourth of July Creek while standing at the confluence with Godwin Creek. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 10 July 2014 003 Phtoo 003-A Godwin Creek upstream of confluen ce Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 11 July 2014 004 Photo 004-A Looking upstream at high flow channel of Godwin Creek. Photo 004-B Looking south at Godwin Creek while standing in abandoned high flow side channel. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 12 July 2014 005 Photo 005-A Immediately upstream of the high flow Godwin side channel, a side channel of Godwin Creek is in the foreground and main channel is in the background. Photo 005-B Looking downstream. Godwin Creek is on the left and high flow side channel on the right. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 13 July 2014 006 Photo 006-A Looking upstream Godwin Creek Photo 006-B Looking downstream Godwin Creek Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 14 July 2014 007 Photo 007-A Looking upstream Godwin Creek Photo 007-B Looking downstream Godwin Creek Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 15 July 2014 008 Photo 008-A Local vegetation Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 16 July 2014 009 Photo 009-A Looking upstream Fourth of July Creek Photo 009-B Looking downstream Fourth of July Creek towards Godwin confluence. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 17 July 2014 010 Photo 010-A Looking upstream Fourth of July Creek - hand cleared trail directly left of where the alder reach the creek’s edge Photo 010-B Looking downstream Fourth of July Creek. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 18 July 2014 011 – Start of hand cleared trail. No photo available. 012 Photo 012-A Standing on hill looking upstream Fourth of July Creek at lowest set of cascades Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 19 July 2014 013 Photo 013-A Looking down hillside at middle set of cascades on Fourth of July Creek 014 Photo 014-A Creek draining perpendicular to Fourth of July Creek into Fourth of July Creek Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 20 July 2014 015 Photo 015-A Looking downhill at upper set of cascades in Fourth of July Creek canyon. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 21 July 2014 016 Photo 016-A Looking upstream Fourth of July Creek at area of intake location. Photo 016-B Looking downstream Fourth of July Creek at area of intake structure. Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design Page 22 July 2014 017 Photo 017-A Grassy wetland meadow looking northwest. 018 Photo 018-A Pond . Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design July 2014 APPENDIX A FOURTH OF JULY CREEK PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGIC INVESTIGATION Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design July 2014 APPENDIX B GODWIN CREEK PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGIC INVESTIGATION Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design July 2014 APPENDIX C FOURTH OF JULY AND GODWIN CREEK HYDROPOWER SITE EVALUATION Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design July 2014 APPENDIX D FOURTH OF JULY CREEK AND GODWIN CREEK GENERATION MODELS Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Projectft.Net Head (95% of Ava.Head)ftft. AugSepOctNovDecMean Annual Flow (cfs)(1) General structure layout was based on the "Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment" (Independence Power LLC, 2009). (2) Estimated Nameplate was calculated based on the 20% exceedance flow, net available head, turbine efficiency (0.85), and generator efficiency (0.98). Annual Energy was calculated by multiplying the mean annual nameplate (determined using the mean annual flow) by the number of hours in a typical year (i.e. 24x365 = 8,760 hrs). (3) Watershed area, basin elevations, percent area of ponds, and percent area of glaciers were estimated using Google Earth ProTM. Mean annual precipitation was estimated utilizing a ESRI shapefile of Plate 2 of the Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4179 and obtained at http://agdc.usgs.gov/data/usgs/water/statewide.html. Mean January Temperature was estimated from Plate 1 of the Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4179 obtained from http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034188/.(4) Mean monthly flows were estimated by scaling the stream gage record (Mean Daily Discharge) of SPRUCE C NR SEWARD AK (#15238600) by the Fourth of July Creek watershed area. (5) Unit Discharge of the Fourth of July watershed was estimated by using the unit discharge of the SPRUCE C NR SEWARD AK (#15238600) stream gage.(6) Exceedance flows were obtained by using the estimated daily flows of the Fourth of July Creek watershed. Daily flow values of the Fourth of July Creek watershed were estimated using the SPRUCE C NR SEWARD AK (#15238600) daily discharge gage record.(7) Frequency event discharges were obtained by utilizing regression equations developed for Region 1 documented in Water-Resources Investigation Report 03-4188. (8) Previous hydrologic studies of Fourth of July Creek are documented in "Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment" (Independence Power LLC, 2009), USGS Water Resources Investigation 81-21 (investigated suitable water supply for industrial development), USGS Water Resources Investigation 87-4728 (analysis of October 1986 flood event), and feasibility study for the development of an industrial park (Arctic Engineers, 1979).References120Nameplate(2) (MW) 15.618.010.64.72.3JanFebMay42.220.8Available HeadWatershed Characteristics(3) 670406.6% Area Glaciers187.4140.61.31.2Fourth of July Creek Preliminary Hydrologic InvestigationClientProjectTaskChugach ElectricFourth of July Creek Permitting/Engineering SupportFourth of July Hydrologic InvestigationCR1Site CoordinatesSheetCreatedChecked9.317Task OrderDate6/6/2014LJDate6/6/2014637Long. -149.27771General Structure Layout(1)1Executive SummaryThe Fourth of July Creek watershed varies in elevation from 790-4,883 ft and is composed primarily of dense coniferous forest, rocky outcrops, and glaciers. The watershed upstream from the proposed intake location has an estimated area of 9.0 sq. mi. There are glaciers present in the watershed (40%) and runoff from rainfall, annual snowmelt, and glacial melt (primary) make up the water sources. Nearby USGS stream gages used in this analysis included the 30.5-year long record of the SPRUCE C NR SEWARD AK (#15238600) stream gage. The structure layout is based on Penstock Route A defined in the "Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Initial Feasibility Assessment" (Independence Power LLC, 2009). The estimated unit discharge for the Fourth of July Creek watershed is 8.7 cfs/mi. while the 100-yr event is 2,400 cfs. The estimated nameplate of the turbine is 6.6 MW.REV79031,984 120Proposed Power House ElevationProposed Intake Elevation Annual Energy(2) (MW-hrs)20.8ft.81Aug790Max. Basin Elevation (ft. NAVD88)Min. Basin Elevation (ft. NAVD88)Watershed Area (sq. mi.) Mean Annual Precipitation (in.)Mean January Temp (F)% Area Ponds or Lakes22.7Apr 1.5JulSepJanFebMar Mar 0.4Dec162.495.583.9204.6MayJun3.913.69.04,8832-yrEvent 5% CI 95% CI9651,4801,2601,160Q(cfs)25-yr10-yr1,9101,590100-yr50-yr500-yr5313,5102,8702,4001,7601,0408773,0102,160Watershed Map8.7HydrologyMean Monthly Flows (cfs)(4)Jul6,1204,5904,040130.3Exceedance Flows (cfs) (6)95% 0.1 40% 62.990% 1.8 30% 99.5Lat. 60.0958311.410.4Apr739OctNovMean Monthly Unit Discharge (cfs/mi.2)(5)5-yr 1,330Jun50% 35.580% 5.6 20% 147.270% 11.2 10% 208.160% 18.3 5% 277.1Mean Annual Unit Discharge (cfs/mi.2)Frequency Events (cfs)(7)2,400NTSWatershed BoundaryNDiversion LocationSeward DrydockConceptual DesignPage 1 of 1McMillen, LLCJuly 2014 Chugach Electric Association, IncAttachment BFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Projectft.Net Head (95% of Ava.Head)ftft. AugSepOctNovDecMean Annual Flow (cfs)80% 1.4 20% 307.770% 2.2 10% 446.113340% 42.090% 0.7 30% 155.295% 0.7Exceedance Flows (cfs) (6)Watershed Map10.1HydrologyMean Monthly Flows (cfs)(4)Jul8389,4207,1206,2805,4704,4903,7702,7801301,6201,3701160OctNovMean Monthly Unit Discharge (cfs/mi.2)(5)5-yr 2,090Jun1,5202,2701,9401,7904.0Q(cfs)25-yr10-yr2,9802,480500-yrMean Annual Unit Discharge (cfs/mi.2)Frequency Events (cfs)(7)Dec100-yr50-yr2-yrEvent 5% CI 95% CI17.250% 8.460% 3.1 5% 553.8Lat. 60.10392 Long. -149.28976Sheet3,7203,3504,620Jul2.21.4Apr301.176.253.7228.8MayJun6.1Executive SummaryThe Godwin Creek watershed varies in elevation from 415-5,624 ft and is composed primarily of glaciers with minimal rocky outcrops located at the highest elevations. The watershed upstream from the proposed intake location has an estimated area of 13.3 sq. mi.. There are significant glaciers present in the watershed (63%) and runoff from rainfall, annual snowmelt, and glacial melt (primary) make up the water sources. Nearby USGS stream gages used in this analysis included the 26-year long record of the WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK (#15236900) stream gage. The WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK stream gage was chosen as the surrogate for developing flows out of Godwin Creek due the similar percentage of the watershed that is composed of glaciers (75% vs. 63%). The estimated unit discharge for the Godwin Creek watershed is 10.1 cfs/mi. while the 100-yr event is 3,720 cfs. The estimated nameplate of the turbine is 6.1 MW.Godwin Creek Preliminary Hydrologic InvestigationClientProjectTaskChugach Electric4th of July Hydro, Phase II PermittingGodwin Creek Hydrologic Investigation17Task OrderDate6/6/2014LJDate6/6/2014280CR1Site CoordinatesREVProposed Power House ElevationProposed Intake Elevation General Structure Layout(1)1415CreatedChecked(1) General structure layout was based on the intake structure being located at the junction where the two streams draining Godwin Glacier converge. The powerhouse is located at an elevation of 120 feet and is at same location as the powerhouse for Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project. (2) Estimated Nameplate was calculated based on the 20% exceedance flow, net available head, turbine efficiency (0.85), and generator efficiency (0.98). Annual Energy was calculated by multiplying the mean annual nameplate (determined using the mean annual flow) by the number of hours in a typical year (i.e. 24x365 = 8,760 hrs). (3) Watershed area, basin elevations, percent area of ponds, and percent area of glaciers were estimated using Google Earth ProTM. Mean annual precipitation was estimated utilizing a ESRI shapefile of Plate 2 of the Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4179 and obtained at http://agdc.usgs.gov/data/usgs/water/statewide.html. Mean January Temperature was estimated from Plate 1 of the Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4179 obtained from http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034188/.(4) Mean monthly flows were estimated by scaling the stream gage record (Mean Daily Discharge) of WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK (#15236900) by the Godwin Creek watershed area. (5) Unit Discharge of the Godwin Creek watershed was estimated by using the unit discharge of the WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK (#15236900) stream gage.(6) Exceedance flows were obtained by using the estimated daily flows of the Godwin Creek watershed. Daily flow values of the Godwin Creek watershed were estimated using the WOLVERINE C NR LAWING AK (#15236900) daily discharge gage record.(7) Frequency event discharges were obtained by utilizing regression equations developed for Region 1 documented in Water-Resources Investigation Report 03-4188. The Frequency Estimates do not account for peak flows caused from glacial-outburst floods caused when ice dams ponding water suddenly burst. (8) This hydrologic investigation did not find any prior studies completed for Godwin Creek.References120 Nameplate(2) (MW) 35.922.65.71.00.3JanFebMay12.83.6Available HeadWatershed Characteristics(3) 13.35,624ft.476.80.20.1% Area GlaciersAug63415Max. Basin Elevation (ft. NAVD88)Min. Basin Elevation (ft. NAVD88)Watershed Area (sq. mi.)Annual Energy(2) (MW-hrs)23,028 130295Mean Annual Precipitation (in.)Mean January Temp (F)% Area Ponds or LakesJanFebMar Mar 0.132.8Apr 0.3436.01.23.4SepNTSWatershed BoundaryNDiversion LocationSeward DrydockFourth of JulyCreekConceptual DesignPage 1 of 1McMillen, LLCJuly 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectTunnel/R of RProject History/Description:Engineer's EstimateProject Details:NTSMobilize: Mobilization of equipment, materials and labor to Seward from either Anchorage or Seattle (via barge).Overhead Items:Temporary man‐camp and related ancillary support equipment, fuel, etc for 3 years.Access to Site:Approximately 4,300 feet of new road from east of the State prison to Powerhouse location above alder brush. New bridge to cross Godwin Creek, ~200 feet in length, located above high water mark to avoid debris flows.Tunnel & Dam:No dam on either Fourth of July or Godwin Creek due to high intermittent debris loads in stream(s).Tunnel will extend from July intake. Tunnel will be approximately 16 feet diameter (horseshoe portal).Penstock: Fourth July ‐ 147 CFS (20% exceedance) through 4.5' diameter steel penstock ‐ 5,100 feet lengthGodwin ‐ 308 CFS (20% exceedance) through 6.5' diameter steel/HDPE penstock ‐ 2,800 feet lengthIntake: Concrete Intake on Fourth July Creek / Intake on Godwin Creek with silt traps. Submit FERC application to reflect new applicantTrash rack on intakes to by‐pass large diameter rocks, and woody debris. Powerhouse:Godwin ‐ Net head of 280 feet by 308 CFS ‐ 6.1 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine from Fourth of July.Standard for design with limited site informationSwitch Yard:Switchyard for 69 kV. Switch yard located at the Power plant site.Tail Race: Discharge tail water into the Fourth of July Creek at elevation of 120 feet. Discharge channel is 130 feet in lengthName Plate of New MW: 12.7 MWTransmission & Interconnection:Overhead transmission line from power plant 10,900 feet to Substation.Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15%$11,423,297Lat. 60.098543 Long. -149.299714Task Order 14005Fourth of Julyand Godwin CreekHydropower Site EvaluationConstruction Schematic Site CoordinatesClientChugach Electric CreatedLJDate7/7/2014CheckedMEDateTaskCivil Engineering & Construction Review Sheet1REVProjectFourth of July Creek Permitting/Engineering SupportThis site was originally examined by a private energy developer in 2008‐09. Per that feasibility study, only the Fourth of July Creek was considered for hydropower development (Godwin Creek was not included in this feasibility study). Key parameters from that study included an intake structure at the head waters of the Fourth of July Creek at 790 feet m.s.l. The 2009 feasibility study design included the intake as part of either a 14 or 40 foot high dam (final dam height was not determined). Two ‐ 48” diameter penstock routes were identified. Routing options were based on topography constraints & bedrock. A 5.4 MW powerhouse was proposed at a final elevation of 120 feet m.s.l. net head is 676 feet, flow of 120 cfs. Tail water was to be directed to the Fourth of July streambed. [Ref: Independence Power LLC, November 2009, “Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment”]. Per the 2014 McMillen site investigation, observed features of both Godwin and Fourth of July Creek included high sediment/silt loads, large diameter woody debris in the stream bed, and a wide braiding channel geomorphology. Hydrology records from 2008‐09 indicates five (5) flooding events exceeding 350+ cfs flow and one event over 500 cfs. In 2014, construction access to this site is proposed along the northern side of Godwin Creek (through mature vegetation), with one bridge crossing Godwin Creek. Transmission is directly routed down the center of the Fourth of July valley to the Industrial Park substation. A McMillen design includes intakes on both Godwin and Fourth of July Creek, for a combined 12.7 MW powerhouse design. 1Construction ItemConstruction Estimate June 2014Mobilize$770,903CommentsStandard Mob from Anchorage/barge materials to Seward from SeattleAccess Roads$1,363,891Dam and Spillway$0Demobilize$247,467The 2014 cost estimate is based on routing water from both Godwin and Fourth of July Creek(s) through a common powerhouse, via two separate turbines. In November 2009, a Fourth of July option was estimate to have a capital cost of $10 to $21.6 Million dollars. This estimate is based on hydropower design elements from the May 2014 site investigation and is based on McMillen hydropower experience at other locations in Alaska. This estimate assumes a 2 to 3 year construction cycle. Work will continue through the winter (tunnel & powerhouse). Major task items for this project include new road construction and bridge; two intakes, tunneling, powerhouse construction, transmission, switchyard, and installing two overland penstocks. Overheads$12,796,584Tunnel from Intake to above powerhouse$22,246,630Powerhouse$20,049,480Switch Yard$2,090,000Penstock from Godwin Creek$6,648,500Intakes on Fourth of July/Godwin Creek$1,960,000Penstock from Fourth of July Creek$5,319,100Tail Race$204,750Estimate 69 kV line to existing substation located SW of PrisonInterconnection$592,000Warehouse & Shop$0Transmission$1,866,006Tail race diverted back into Fourth of July Creek Warehouse and Shop building at Powerhouse Site under mobilization10,900 feet or ~ 2 miles of 69.5 kV line from Powerhouse to existing SubstationConnection at Substation at Seward Industrial Yard/SW from PrisonRegulatory & Agency Consultation 5%$3,807,766Subtotal $76,155,311Alaska RatesContractor Profit ‐ 15%$11,423,297Standard for Alaska Fourth July ‐ Net head of 637 feet by 147 CFS ‐ 6.6 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine Concept Level Contingency ‐ 30%$22,846,593Total:$125,656,263Existing Substation located at Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park near salt water. Equipment/Rentals/Temp laydown for 2 to 3 years of workStandard demobolization off site4,300 feet with one overhead bridge 165 feetNo dams or storage at the Fourth of July Creek ComplexTunnel ~3460 feet 16' diameter/horse shoe/becomes road to intake on Fourth 5,200 feet of 4.5' diameter steel penstock from Creek to Powerhouse3,500 feet of 6.5' diameter of above stee ground penstock Concrete Intakes at both creeks with silt control and trash racks. Common Buildinw with two turbines rated at 6.6 MW for July at 6.1 MW at Godwin NConceptual DesignPage 1McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment C Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Construction Estimate Construction Item McMillen Est. July 2014 Comments Mobilize $770,903 Overheads $12,796,584 Demobilize $247,467 Access Roads $1,363,891 Tunnel $22,246,630 Pressure Shaft $0 Penstock $11,967,600 $5,319,100 $5.3M for 4th of July Creek Penstock Intake $1,960,000 $6,648,500 $6.6M for Godwin Creek Penstock Powerhouse $20,049,480 $11,967,600 Switch Yard $2,090,000 Tail Race $204,750 Housing $0 Transmission $1,866,006 Interconnection $592,000 Subtotal $76,155,311 Regulatory (5%)$3,807,766 Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15%$11,423,297 Contract Profit ‐ 15% $11,423,297 Conceptual Level Contingency ‐ 30%$22,846,593 Total $125,656,262 Conceptual Design Page 2 McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsEa $7,763 1 $7,763Ea $3,792 1 $3,792Ea $5,706 2 $11,413Ea $5,175 2 $10,350Ea $1,380 4 $5,520Ea $1,118 4 $4,471Ea $2,933 2 $5,865Ea $1,208 2 $2,415Ea $5,175 1 $5,175Ea $5,175 6 $31,050Ea$863 1 $863Ea $3,145 2 $6,289Ea $3,278 1 $3,278Ea $1,553 1 $1,553Ea $1,553 1 $1,553Ea $10,200$0Ea $1,553$0Ea $1,380 1 $1,380Ea $1,208 6 $7,245Ea$932 1 $932Ea$863 1 $863Ea $12,600$0Ea $8,970 1 $8,970$149,746Hr $52.57 240 $12,617Labor Change $85 to $52.57 Laborer, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $3,600 2 $7,200Sub Total$19,817Hr $52.57 90 $4,731Labor Change $85 to $52.57 Laborer, using the Alaska Department of Labor ChartSub Total$4,731Hr $52.57 540 $28,388Labor Change $85 to $52.57 Laborer, using the Alaska Department of Labor ChartSub Total$46,440$28,388ea $35,000 1$35,000Shipping and Handling4th of July & Godwin Creek MobilizationTruck ‐ FlatbedBackhoe Cat 420ETruck ‐ BoomBatch PlantConcrete TruckContainers 20,000 lbsTruck ServiceForkliftRock CrusherFuel SurchargeSet Up ShopSub TotalFuel & Misc ExpenseDescriptionFront End Loader Cat 966HTruck ‐ SemiExcavator Cat 345CEquipment ShippingMobile Crane 120 TonMobile Crane 45 TonDump truckPickupAir Track DrillCompressor ‐ Stationary 1000cfmOffice TrailerDozer D8TGrader Cat 14MCrew QuartersSet Up Office TrailerMove Equipment To SiteLaborBuilding Purcahse 40x60Set up Crew QuartersConceptual DesignPage 3McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1 McMillen Tot.Comments4th of July & Godwin Creek MobilizationDescriptionHr $54.25 40 $2,170$922 Labor Change $85 to $54.25 Concrete/Finsher, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200lb$0.52 4525 $2,353$2,353lump $13,100 1 $13,100$13,100Hr $59.18 270 $15,979$15,979 Labor Change $85 to $59.18 Carpenter, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $3,600 1 $3,600$3,600lump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200Lump $15,800 1 $15,800$15,800Lump $21,000 1 $21,000$21,000Sub Total$120,154ea $35,000 1 $35,000$35,000Shipping and HandlingHr $54.25 24 $1,302$922 Labor Change $85 to $54.25 Concrete/Finisher, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200lb$0.52 4525 $2,353$2,353lump $21,000 1 $21,000$21,000Hr $59.18 270 $15,979$15,979 Labor Change $85 to $59.18 Carpenter, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump$3,6001$3,600$3,600lump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200Lump $15,800 1 $15,800$15,800Lump $21,000 1 $21,000$21,000Sub Total$128,054Hr $54.25 24 $1,302$922 Labor Change $85 to $54.25 Concrete/Finisher, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200lb$0.52 4525 $2,353$2,353Fuel & Misc ExpenseSet up compressorsForms ‐ Labor and MaterialRebarWire Building ‐ Labor and MaterialSet Up WarehousePour Concrete Footer and FloorLevel siteFinish Interior ‐ Labor and MaterialPour Concrete Footer and FloorBuilding Purcahse 40x60Set Up Compressor BuildingLevel siteForms ‐ Labor and MaterialRebarPlace Concrete ‐ Labor and MaterialErect BuildingFinish Interior ‐ Labor and MaterialLaborFuel & Misc ExpenseInsulate Building ‐ Labor and MaterialInsulate Building ‐ Labor and MaterialWire Building ‐ Labor and MaterialLaborRebarLevel siteForms ‐ Labor and MaterialPour Concrete Footer and FloorPlace Concrete ‐ Labor and MaterialErect BuildingConceptual DesignPage 4McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1 McMillen Tot.Comments4th of July & Godwin Creek MobilizationDescriptionlump $21,000 1 $21,000$21,000ea $35,000 1 $35,000$35,00015% $35,000 $5,250$5,250Hr $59.18 270 $15,979$15,979 Labor Change $85 to $59.18 Carpenter, using the Alaska Department of Labor Chartlump $3,600 1 $3,600$3,600lump $6,200 1 $6,200$6,200Lump $15,800 1 $15,800$15,800Lump $21,000 1 $21,000$21,000lump $50,000 1 $50,000$50,000Sub Total$183,304Lump $100,000 1 $100,000Sub Total$100,000Total$770,903 The Mobe Rate for Estimate 1 Includes DemobSewage SystemInsulate Building ‐ Labor and MaterialWire Building ‐ Labor and MaterialFinish Interior ‐ Labor and MaterialSet Compressors and WiringFuel & Misc ExpensePlace Concrete ‐ Labor and MaterialErect BuildingPurchase BuildingShipping and HandlingLaborConceptual DesignPage 5McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Rent(1 Mon.) Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsEa $600,0001 $600,000$16,000$192,000Bigge Crane RentalEa $216,0001 $216,000$6,000$144,000Bigge Crane RentalEa $188,0002 $376,000$9,750$468,000Cesco RatesEa $168,0002 $336,000$16,500$792,000Cesco RatesEa $52,0004 $208,000$4,250$408,000Cesco RatesEa $35,0004 $140,000$140,000Depends on Make and Model of Trucks, It could go up or down from $35KEa $125,0002 $250,000$5,000$180,000Brokk out of Seattle, WAEa $225,0002 $450,000$6,600$316,800United Rentals, purchased price $140K+Ea $16,0001 $16,000$800$19,200Mobile Mini Rates, without DeliveryCrew QuartersEa $64,0005 $320,000$64,000$1,536,000Lodging in Seward Alaska or at Gravel Pit owned by CityEa $144,0001 $144,000$7,200$172,800CescoEa $132,0002 $264,000$9,500$456,000CescoEa $45,0001 $45,000$3,800$91,200CescoEa $40,0001 $40,000$3,800$91,200CescoEa $75,0001 $75,000$5,000$120,000Bigge CraneEa $500,000$0$0 Mobilization of a Batch Plant is $100K to the Lower 48. The cost of a Barged in Batch Plant will icrease by $50K. Reference‐Ft. Randall ProjectEa $80,000$0$0 Need to purchase a Concrete Truck as it is alomost impossible to find one for Rent. Purchase Price for a Concrete Truck is $75K+Ea $50,0001 $50,000$5,500$132,000Add another $4500 for a Manned TruckEa $125,0001 $125,000$2,800$67,200Cesco RatesEa $1,025 1 $1,025 $3,400$81,600Cesco RatesEa $750,000$0$69,000$0 This is for a Jaw to do initial Break $29K, and Impact to crush into 3/4" to 1 1/4" aggregate for Concrete $29K, and a Screen $13K.Light PlantEA4$850$81,6001 Month Total Rental Rates 174,900(12mos.) = $2,098,800 + Batch Plant $500K + $80K Concrete Truck + $500K Floating Man Camp =Tracked Skid SteerEA3$2,925$210,600CescoGenerator 70 KVAEA2$2,000$96,000Will need some kind of Generator to start the Jobsite as well as working in different areas, the size can be reduced to smaller portable gens.Welder Miler 250 AMP EA2$650$31,200Machinery TraderNote: All Sub Totals for Equipment = 18 Month Rental x the number of pieces, Mobe and Demobe are SeparateFuel For The Entire JobHR $769 2190$1,684,110$1,684,110Need to discuss usage of Machines, Cost is for Machines running 1/4 of the time on jobsite4805 Horse Power All Machines x .04 Fuel Factor hr. x $4 Gallon = $769 Hr for all Machines730 Days x 12 Hrs =8760 Hrs., Machines running 1/4 Time =2190 hrs x $769 =$1,439,568SkiffEA $10,0000 $0$0 Skiff to get around on WaterSub Total$7,511,510The Cost using the different Rates we found, with Bigge Crane, Cesco, Winter Inc. Batch Plants, RasmussenDay $550 4160 $2,288,000$2,288,000The Cost of 2 Full Time Mechanics, 1 Greaser, and 1 Mechanic, $50 an hour x 2 men x 12hr. Day = $1200 in just Man Hours, add another Sub Total$0$2,288,00053 Pieces of Equipment x 12hrs/day x 1.36$ per hr = Parts/Maintenance $865 per Day + $1200 = 2065hr $50 8320 $416,000$416,000Rate from $86 to $50 for Labor DOL Alaskahr $61 $0 $0 Rate from $86 to $60 took an avarage of all rates from DOL Alaska, Not sure what this is for and if we are Double DippingInternet,Phone, SateliteMos. $800$0$0 Sat Phone $500 Month, Hughes Internet $200 Month, Direct TV Cable $100 MonthSub Total$416,000Reduced $86 Hr. to $50 Hr. using theAlsaska Department of Labor HoursCamplump $1,2001095 $1,314,000$1,314,000At this Rate 15 Men would eat for $80 a Dayhr $52.57 12480 $656,074$656,074Rate from $86 to $50, Not sure what a cook would go for so I used a Laborer Rate of $52.57lump $150,0001 $150,000$150,000Plane Tickets From Boise to Anchorage, 15 Men x 1 Plane Ticket a Month Round Trip $886 x 18 Mos. = $2392204 Man Kubotaslump $20,0002 $40,000$40,0002‐ 4 Man Kubotas 4x4 for hauling guys back and forthATVlump $7,0003 $21,000$21,0003 Four Wheelers to run partsSub Total$2,181,074Daily Helicopter Usehr $2,500$0$0Sub Total$0Barge Expenseslump $400,0002 $800,000$800,000Sub Total$400,000Total$12,796,584Overhead is the Same as MahoneyCrew Transportation ‐ To Town and BackTruck ‐ FlatbedGrader Cat 14MField PersonnelPersonnelOffice Personnel ‐ Home OfficeEquipment MaintenanceTruck ‐ Boom 17 TonConcrete TruckTruck ServiceBackhoe Cat 420ERock CrusherBatch PlantDump TruckPickupCompressor ‐ Stationary 1000cfmFoodMess Hall LaborOfficeTrailerFront End Loader Cat 966HTruck ‐ SemiAir Track DrillForklift (Extended Reach)4th of July & Godwin Creek Construction OverheadDescriptionEquipment purchase and rentalMobile Crane 120 TonDozer D8TMobile Crane 45 TonExcivator Cat 345CConceptual DesignPage 6McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsEa $7,763 1 $7,763Ea $3,792 1 $3,792Ea $5,706 2 $11,413Ea $5,175 2 $10,350Ea $1,380 4 $5,520Ea $1,118 4 $4,471Ea $2,933 2 $5,865Ea $1,208 2 $2,415Ea $5,175 1 $5,175Ea $5,175 6 $31,050Ea $863 1 $863Ea $3,145 2 $6,289Ea $3,278 1 $3,278Ea $1,553 1 $1,553Ea $1,553 1 $1,553Ea $10,200$0Ea $1,553$0Concrete from City of Seward AlaskaEa $1,380 1 $1,380Ea $1,208 6 $7,245Ea $932 1 $932Ea $863 1 $863Ea $12,600$0Ea $8,970 1 $8,970$120,736 $120,736Hr $52.57 120 $6,308$6,308 Reduced $86 Hr. to $52.57 Laoborer rate using the Alsaska Department of Labor Hourslump $3,600 1 $3,600$3,600Sub Total$9,908 Labor ChangeHr $52.57 80 $4,206$4,206 Reduced $86 Hr. to $52.57 Laoborer rate using the Alsaska Department of Labor HoursSub Total$4,206 Labor ChangeHr $52.57 240 $12,617$12,617 Reduced $86 Hr. to $52.57 Laoborer rate using the Alsaska Department of Labor HoursSub Total$12,617Labor Changelump $30,000 1 $30,000$35,000 2 $70,000Sub Total$100,000 $100,000Total$247,467Remove compressorsRemove Compressor BuildingRemove Office TrailerRemove Crew QuartersRock CrusherFuel SurchargeSub TotalMove Equipment Away From SiteLaborFuel & Misc ExpenseRemove CompressorsForkliftCrew QuartersGrader Cat 14MFront End Loader Cat 966HTruck ‐ SemiTruck ‐ FlatbedTruck ‐ BoomBatch PlantConcrete TruckTruck ServiceContainers 20,000 lbsBackhoe Cat 420E4th of July & Godwin Creek DemobilizationOffice TrailerDescriptionEquipment ShippingMobile Crane 120 TonMobile Crane 45 TonExcavator Cat 345CDozer D8TDump truckPickupAir Track DrillCompressor ‐ Stationary 1000cfmConceptual DesignPage 7McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost McMillenCommentsMile $787,884.001$787,884At least one bridge based on Maps cy $150$0$0 Change from $50 CY to $150 CY,Alaska Blue Lake Numbersmi $25,000$0$0cy $20 15000 $300,000 $300,000 Change from $57 CY to $20 CY, Seward provide gravel from local pitmi $25,000$0$0Sub total$1,087,884cy $20 200 $4,000 $4,000 Change from $70 to $20 CY, Mass Excavation $5‐$10 CY, Doubled Rate Due to Possible Conditionsf$8 400 $3,200 $3,200 Changed from $12 to $8, Forms are between $4 and $6 a SF, $8 due to the location lb $2 5040 $7,560 $7,560 Change from $7 lb. to $2 , usually $.40 ‐ $.50 Lbscy $190 120 $22,800 $22,800lb $4 35820 $143,280 $143,280 Changed from $.42 lb. to $4 lb. Current Rates fro Structural Steel $2‐$4hr $59.08 960 $56,717 $56,717 Rate from $86 to $59.08 Ironworker for Labor DOL Alaskasf$12 2300 $27,600 $27,600hr $54.25 200 $10,850 $10,850 Rate from $86 to $54.25 Concrete/Finsher for Labor DOL AlaskaSub total$276,007cy $20$0Change from $70 to $20 CY, Mass Excavation $5‐$10 CY, Doubled Rate Due to Possible Conditionsf$8$0Changed from $12 to $8, Forms are between $4 and $6 a SF, $8 due to the location lb $2$0Change from $7 lb. to $2 , usually $.40 ‐ $.50 Lbscy $190$0lb $4.00$0Changed from $.70 lbs. to $4 lbs.hr $59.08$0Rate from $86 to $59.08 Ironworker for Labor DOL Alaskasf$12$0hr $54.25$0Rate from $86 to $54.25 Concrete/Finsher for Labor DOL AlaskaSub totalTotal$1,363,891InstallationBridge Construction 30 Foot Abutment ExcavationAbutment ConcreteFormsRebarConcrete ‐ Material and LaborSteelMaterialLaborDeckPrecast Concrete DeckingRoad Base GravelFinish GradeInstallationBridge Construction 180 Foot Abutment ExcavationAbutment ConcreteFormsRebarConcrete ‐ Material andLaborSteelMaterialLaborDeckPrecast Concrete Decking4th of July & Godwin Creek Road ConstructionDescriptionRoad Construction 1 mileDrill and BlastSub Grade Fill and ExcavationConceptual DesignPage 8McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost 1Unit Cost McMillenQty Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsLF $1,042 $6,356 3500$22,246,630Change was $3,294 a LF Blue Lake Alaska, March 2014The $3294 is all in and the $1040.30 is a Drill and BlastChange tunnel cost to match Allison Creek 16 foot diameter horse shoe at $6,356.18/LN‐FtCY $70817952CWT $11127202700 feet = 4960 unit //17952 =127202ReinforcementLB $169600Rock Bolts (1" x 10')LF $423600Sub Total$0The total on the left is all the cost addewd up for the 90's estimateTotal$0 $22,246,630CementTunnel Lining 1' (700Lf)4th of July Creek TunnelDescriptionDrill and Blast Lower TunnelFinished Tunnel Size 10' x 10' HorseshoeConcreteConceptual DesignPage 9McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1 McMillen Tot.Commentscy $850$0 $1,509,600Change was Blue Lake Shaft Price of $3130 Ft.Sub Total$0$0lin Ft $735 500$367,500Blue Lake is $4261 a Set spaced at 2 Feet. , 1370ft/2ft= 685 SetsSub Total$0cf $83 3500$290,500Grout Runs $10‐$80 a Bag, Depending on the Bag this number will change, Used old numbers from a Job in Seattle, $47 CFSub Total$0Total$0$0Vent and Air LineConcrete Tunnel SupportGroutingNo Pressure Shaft ConstructionDescriptionDrill and Blast Presssure ShaftExcavated Size ‐5' x 7' x 1370' LongIncludes All Labor and Material ‐ Including Conceptual DesignPage 10McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost 1Unit Cost McMillenQty Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsAC $5,000 $8,500$0Sub Total$0Earthen DamCY $57 $150$0CY $14 $20$0LF $85 $173$0LF $64 $120$0Concrete MassCY $142 $190$0Sheet pile 677 x 12 = 8,124 sfUnit $481 $3,848$0$4,200 Hesco wall DF4836 Erosion Barrier cost $481 per 12 feet or $3,848/100 feetCWT $11 $22$0LB $1 $2$0Gates (Outlet works)(2 ea 4' x 4' ) 17,000 LB LS $85,000$136,000$0Trashrack 4,000 LBLS $11,000$24,000$0$0CY $57 $150$0Estimate 1000CY $14 $20$0LF $85 $173$0LF $64 $120$0CY $142 $190$0CY $708 $1,200$0Guess based on smaller spillway designCWT $11 $22.00$0LB $1 $2 $0$0Total $0 $0Concrete StructuralCementReinforcementSub TotalConcrete MassDrilling and GroutingDrain HolesHesco block wallCementReinforcing Steel Sub TotalSpillwayRock ExcavationCommon ExcavationDrilling and GroutingDrain HolesCommon ExcavationNo Dam DescriptionReservoir ClearingRock ExcavationConceptual DesignPage 11McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost 1Unit Cost McMillenQty Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsLF$1,003 5200$5,215,600 4th of July unit cost based on rate sheetPenstock (6.5' x 3500')LF$1,871 3500$6,548,500 Godwin Creek unit cost based on rate sheetLB $3595000LB $341700Concrete Anchor Blocks (20CY)EA $11,0003EA $6,39018CWT $11830Reinforcement LB $14400Clearing (30')AC $1,400 $1,400 5 $7,000 $7,000 4400 LN.feet x 30' W = 132,000 = ~5 acres ‐ Logging of siteGravel for foundationCY $20 $20 10000 $200,000 $200,000 4400 x 2 x 30 = ~ 10,000 yards of gravel ‐ Seward provides?Sub Total Total$207,000 $11,771,100$5,319,100$6,648,500Concrete Supports (9 CY EA)4th of July & Godwin Creek PenstocksCementDescriptionPenstock (4.5' x 5200')Steel (A537)Steel (A‐36) Ring StiffenersExp. Anchors, Anchor, Supports, Etc.Conceptual DesignPage 12McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost qty Cost McMillen CommentsLS $980,000 2$1,960,000 2014 Sullivan Lake Washington T‐Screen bottom of Triangle Lake designed for 160 cfs through 54" pipeSub TotalLS $ 295,000 $0 RW Beck 1998 estimate moved 15 years forward at 5% per yearFloating Intake on Triangle Lakehr $60.19$0$0lump $10,000$0$0cy $950$0$0Sub Total$0Total$1,960,000 Need to further define intakes once we have survey information of locations4th of July and Godwin Creek IntakeSiphon cost (unit cost for Sunrise Lake) DescriptionInstrumentationLaborMaterialGodwin & 4th of July Creek Drill and BlastIntake Break ThroughConceptual DesignPage 13McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment C Fourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Unit Unit Cost Qty Cost McMillen Comments Loren to follow up on sizing of building cy $20 500 $10,000 $10,000 Estimate only Sub Total $10,000 Changed from $125 to $20 a CY as most mass Excavation is closure to $10 CY, Doubled it due to Conditions hr $59.18 1296 $76,697 $76,697 Rate from $86 to $59.18 Carpenter for Labor DOL Alaska sf $7.00 3240 $22,680 $22,680 Changed from $4.20 SF to $7 SF hr $59.18 1296 $76,697 $76,697 Rate from $86 to $59.18 Carpenter for Labor DOL Alaska sf $7.00 3240 $22,680 $22,680 Changed from $4.20 SF to $7 SF hr $59.18 4500 $266,310 $266,310 Rate from $86 to $59.18 Carpenter for Labor DOL Alaska sf $7.00 11250 $78,750 $78,750 Changed from $4.20 SF to $7 SF hr $59.18 5400 $319,572 $319,572 Rate from $86 to $59.18 Carpenter for Labor DOL Alaska sf $7.00 13500 $94,500 $94,500 Changed from $4.20 SF to $7 SF hr $59.08 2800 $165,424 $165,424 Rate from $86 to $59.08 Ironworker for Labor DOL Alaska lb $2.00 280000 $560,000 $560,000 Changed from $4.20 SF to $7 SF hr $54.25 550 $29,838 $29,838 Rate from $86 to $54.25 Concrete/Finisher for Labor DOL Alaska cy $115 2100 $241,500 $241,500 Sub Total $1,954,648 Lump hr $62.19 400 $24,876 $24,876 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska ft $5.50 5000 $27,500 $27,500 hr $62.19 960 $59,702 $59,702 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska lump $35,000 1 $35,000 $35,000 hr $62.19 1030 $64,056 $64,056 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska lump $150,000 1 $150,000 $150,000 hr $62.19 1050 $65,300 $65,300 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska lump $260,000 1 $260,000 $260,000 ea $90,000 1 $90,000 $90,000 hr $62.19 400 $24,876 $24,876 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska lump $60,000 1 $60,000 $60,000 $0 Ea $70,000 1 $70,000 $70,000 hr $62.19 120 $7,463 $7,463 Rate from $86 to $62.18 Electrician for Labor DOL Alaska Sub Total $938,772 Lump $500,000 1 $500,000 Sub Total $500,000 Lump hr $52.57 1500 $78,860 $78,860 Rate from $86 to $52.57 Laborer for Labor DOL Alaska lump $70,000 1 $70,000 $70,000 Sub Total $148,860 ea $1,170,000 12.7 $14,859,000 $14,859,000 Email from Canyon Hydro on March 13, 2014 ea $250,000 2 $500,000 $500,000 hr $62.19 4000 $248,760 $248,760 Rate from $86 to $62.19 Electrcian for Labor DOL Alaska lump $100,000 1 $100,000 $100,000 Sub Total $15,707,760 Gantry crane ea $135,000 1 $135,000 $135,000 hr $59.08 1250 $73,850 $73,850 Rate from $86 to $59.08 Iron Worker Wage for Labor DOL Alaska lb $1.15 9000 $10,350 $10,350 lb $4.00 79200 $316,800 $316,800 Changed from $.80 lbs. to $4 as in other activities lb $4.00 63360 $253,440 $253,440 Changed from $.80 lbs. to $4 as in other activities Sub Total $789,440 Total $20,049,480 Communications and Surge Arrestor Shipping Install ‐ Labor Piping Install All Piping ‐ Installation and Material Labor Material Turbine and Generator Package 12.7MW Secondary Communication on Fiber fail Material DC System Labor Material ‐ BatteryRoom Wide Flange 24x11.75 Purchase Install CraneRail Wide Flange 40x11.75 Miscellaneous Material Local Service Battery & Charger Switches and Eqipment Labor Includes Turbine, Generator, Turbine Inlet Valve, Governor, Exciter, Voltage Regulator Material Switch Board w/ Components Medium and High Voltage ‐ Installation & Mat. Control Room Labor Deck Labor Material Walls Labor Labor Material Beams Labor Material 4th of July & Godwin Creek (Two turbines under one combined building) Powerhouse Description Powerhouse Size 40x60 Columns Excavation Concrete Forms ‐ Install and Strip ‐ Labor and Material Labor Material Reforcing Steel ‐ Labor and Material Labor Material Place Concrete ‐Labor and Material Labor Material Labor Material Conduit ‐ Installation and Material Labor Material Low Voltage Wiring ‐ Installation and Fixtures Electrical Conceptual Design Page 14 McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsLS $2,090,000 1$2,090,000REF: Jan 2011 ‐ Connelly Lake 12, $1,900,000 Haines AlaskaLS $282,000 1Groundmat,Disconnect, Switch and Ground, Swicth BusLS $21,000 1Surge ArrestorsEA $5,660 4Excavation RockCY $57 4600Taleoff TowerLB $3.20 29000Sub Total$0$0Total$2,090,000 Chugach may have a line item for a typcial switch yard 4th of July and Godwin Creek Switchyard (singular unit)Description69.5 kV Switch yard at the Powerhouse Power Transformer Conceptual DesignPage 15McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost McMillen Commentscy $65 500 $32,500350'L x 8' W x 4' D = 420 CYSub Total$32,500What Size Pipe with Cost in Sreadsheet this would be a 60" PipeMaterialft $165$0InstalationLump $56,000$0Sub Total$0Rip Rapsy $65 2500 $162,500Sub Total$162,500Total$204,750 Excavate a channel to 4th of July Creek in native soils, utilize rip rap to slow velocity4th of July and Godwin Creek TailraceDescriptionExcavate ChannelLay RCP PipeConceptual DesignPage 16McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost Total 1Commentsea $175,000$0$0 Green Earth Global Inc., House made of Foam, Steel and Concrete, Mold, Fire, and Insect Resistant, 200 MPH Wind Rating, Energy EfficientShipping and Handlinglump 15% $0 $0$0 Shipping Cost would be 4 Semi Loads, Enclosed in 10hrs. OnsiteSub Total$0ea$2,600$0$0Foundationea$10,200$0$0Sub Total$0Set Up Houseea $10,300$0$0Powerea $5,000$0$0Sub Total$0Total$0 Savings in House and ShippingNo Housing (Live in Seward)DescriptionPrefabricated HouseSite PrepConceptual DesignPage 17McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Cost McMillenCommentsmi $3,500,000$0mi $279,166$0Transmission cost for 69 kV line mi $905,828 2.06 $1,866,006Kake‐Petersburg Intertie costs ‐ Feb 2012$1,866,006Fibermi $12,000$0$0Total$1,866,006 Wag cost based on other Transmission costs ‐ Chugach may have an internal number they utilizeSub Total4th of July & Godwin Creek TransmissionDescriptionSubmarine TransmissionOverhead TransmissionConceptual DesignPage 18McMillen, LLC July 2014 Chugach Electric Association, Inc.Attachment CFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectUnit Unit Cost Qty Total 1 McMillen Tot.CommentsLS $71,000 1 $71,000From original Grace Lake Estimate on 3 MW connectionLS $309,000 1 $309,000Scaled up to 19.1 MW 592 = 3 MW then 19.1 MW = $3.7 millionCarrier Communications EquipmentLS $212,000 1 $212,000Total$592,000 $592,000.00 Substation Conditions need to be defined by ChugachSub Total4th of July & Godwin Creek InterconnectionDescriptionSite Prep/EquipmentSwitchgear and SwitchyardConceptual DesignPage 19McMillen, LLC July 2014 Godwin Creek Generation Model, Seward AlaskaProposed Design (Simplified Method)Given:Gross Head 295 feet Based on McMillen 2014 DesignNet Head 284 feet Powerhouse located at approximately 120 m.s.lFlow (best) 308 cfs Estimated from Gaging station at Wolverine Creek (20% exceedance)Average flow 133 cfs Average flow per 12 month calendar cycle Avoided cost 0.090$ Per kw/Hour - Industrial Rate for Chugach 2014 Hydropower Est. Head Flow Eff. Name plate Graph ConversionEstimate 284 308 0.07 6123 kW 5500 kW 1 M3/sec = 35 CFS1 Meter = 3.28 FeetGraph bywww.vatech-hydro.comSummary:The name plate for this system would range from 5.5 MW to 6.1 MW. Name plate unit size around 6.1 MW Per the VA TECH graph, this proposed turbine will be a horizontal Francis Unit. This estimate does not include capital cost to build a power plant or cost of transmission to a interconnect.Statement: Information in this spreadsheet is based on given values as provided by the references. Data has not been confirmed. Revised: Loren Jalbert Date: 7/8/2014Constant Flow cfsFlow m3/sHead ft.Head mρ kg/m3g m/sec2η % efficientP wattsP kilowattsKilowatt Hours DailyMW-hrs/YearRate Est. Cent/KwhDaily Revenue Yearly RevenueMaintenance Factor 90%3088.7195 284 86.56 1000 9.81 75 5553339 5,553 133,280 48,647 0.090$11,995 $4,378,252 $3,940,427Capacity Factor*Capacity *Kilowatt Hours DailyKilowatt Hour Daily/W Capacity FactorRate Est. Cent/KwhDaily Revenue Yearly RevenueMaintenance Factor 90%Estimate of hydropower generation for Godwin Creek based on Capacity Factor 0.45133,280 59,976 0.090$5,398 $1,970,213 $1,773,192*Average Capacity factor is 0.45 for the State of Alaska - Per Alaska Business Monthly January 2014http://www.akbizmag.com/Alaska-Business-Monthly/January-2014/New-tables-show-monthly-generator-capacity-factor-data-by-fuel-and-technologyChugach Electric Association, Inc McMillen, LLCAttachment DFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectConceptual DesignPage 1July 2014 4th of July Generation Model, Seward AlaskaCurrent Design (Simplified Method)Given:Gross Head 670 feet Based on McMillen 2014 DesignNet Head 637 feet Powerhouse located at approximately 120 m.s.lFlow (best) 147 cfs Estimated from Gaging station at Spruce Creek (20% exceedance)Average flow 81 cfs Average flow per 12 month calendar cycle Avoided cost 0.090$ Per kw/Hour - Industrial Rate for Chugach 2014 Hydropower Est. Head Flow Eff. Name plate Graph ConversionEstimate 637 147 0.07 6555 kW 5945 MW 1 M3/sec = 35 CFS1 Meter = 3.28 FeetGraph bywww.vatech-hydro.comSummary:The name plate for this system would range from 5.9 MW to 6.5 MW. Name Plate unit size around 6.6 MW Per the VA TECH graph, this proposed turbine will be a horizontal Francis Unit. This estimate does not include capital cost to build a power plant or cost of transmission to a interconnect.Statement: Information in this spreadsheet is based on given values as provided by the references. Data has not been confirmed. Revised:Loren JalbertDate:7/8/2014Constant Flow cfsFlow m3/sHead ft.Head mρ kg/m3g m/sec2η % efficientP wattsP kilowattsKilowatt Hours DailyMW-hrs/YearRate Est. Cent/KwhDaily Revenue Yearly RevenueMaintenance Factor 90%1474.1616 637 194.2 1000 9.81 75 5944863 5,945 142,677 52,077 0.090$12,841 $4,686,930 $4,218,237Capacity Factor*Capacity *Kilowatt Hours DailyKilowatt Hour Daily/W Capacity FactorRate Est. Cent/KwhDaily Revenue Yearly RevenueMaintenance Factor 90%Estimate of hydropower generation for 4th of July Creek based on Capacity Factor 0.45142,677 64,205 0.090$5,778 $2,109,119 $1,898,207*Average Capacity factor is 0.45 for the State of Alaska - Per Alaska Business Monthly January 2014http://www.akbizmag.com/Alaska-Business-Monthly/January-2014/New-tables-show-monthly-generator-capacity-factor-data-by-fuel-and-technology/Chugach Electric Association, Inc McMillen, LLCAttachment DFourth of July and Godwin Creek Hydroelectric ProjectConceptual DesignPage 2July 2014 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 004 McMillen, LLC Page 1 Chugach Electric August 29, 2014 To: Dustin Highers Chugach Electric Association Project: Fourth of July Hydro, Phase II Permitting From: Kathryn Peltier McMillen, LLC Cc: Steve Padula, Loren Jalbert, Chris Runyan - McMillen, LLC Paul Risse, Kathryn Linn – Chugach Electric Association Date: August 29, 2014 Contract: PO No: 52181 53448 Subject: McMillen’s responses to Chugach’s requests on the 8/19/2014 conference call. Introduction The proposed conceptual engineering approach to construct the Fourth of July Creek Project (Project) is based on the May 29, 2014 site reconnaissance; completed by Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach) and McMillen, LLC personnel. A Conceptual Design Report and associated cost estimate outlining the major features for the Project was submitted to Chugach on July 9, 2014. The Project includes the development of two independent hydropower systems utilizing water from Godwin Creek and Fourth of July Creek each of which is composed of a separate intake, penstock, and turbine package. The penstock transporting water from Fourth of July Creek will require a tunnel to provide access through terrain that has significant access issues due to topography and snow. Common features of the Project include a common access road and bridge (4,300 feet in length, with 200 foot span bridge length) from a location south of the neighboring Spring Creek Correctional Center, approximately 10,900 feet transmission line (rated 69 kV) with switchyard and substation interconnection; and a single powerhouse building with tailrace. Based on its review of the Conceptual Design Report, Chugach has requested an additional cost estimate for constructing the Project in two major phases; constructing Fourth of July Creek development first and Godwin Creek development at a later date, and constructing Godwin Creek development first and Fourth of July Creek development at a later date. Chugach also requested rationale for why it would not be feasible to join the independent penstocks into a single source of generation water prior to entering the powerhouse. Constructing in Two Major Phases Cost estimates to construct the Project in two major phases are included in Attachments A and B. Attachment A reflects constructing the Fourth of July Creek development prior to the Godwin Creek development. Attachment B reflects constructing the Godwin Creek development prior to the Fourth of July Creek development. The first phase in each scenario includes the construction McMillen, LLC Page 2 Chugach Electric August 29, 2014 of access roads and the bridge over Godwin Creek, the powerhouse, the switchyard, and the transmission line. The table below compares cost related to each option. Constructing Fourth of July Development First Constructing Godwin Development First Concurrent Development Construction Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 1 Phase 2 Fourth of July Development Godwin Development Godwin Development Fourth of July Development $90,281,952 $43,508,977 $53,601,445 $80,189,484 $125,656,263 Project Total $133,790,929 $133,790,929 The estimated cost of constructing the Project in two distinct phases is $8,134,666 more than constructing the entire project at one time. This increase in cost primarily reflects the need for two separate site mobilizations, demobilizations, and overhead. Joining the Penstocks Under the current design concept the Project will include two penstocks diverting flow from Fourth of July Creek and Godwin Creek and continuing the separation of water into a single powerhouse. Chugach has requested McMillen to provide information supporting the need for two separate penstocks extending from the separate intakes all the way to the powerhouse rather than joining them upstream of the powerhouse into a single conduit. The primary reason that the penstocks cannot be combined into a single water conduit is due to the differing hydraulic and hydrology characteristics of each creek. Each creek has a unique elevation, location and relative size of proposed intake, diameter and overland routing of the penstock, and the final configuration of the turbine generator package as designed for the net elevation head and flow conditions. At the powerhouse each turbine will have a different configuration, shaft diameter, and RPM rating. Keeping the penstocks separate allows for a wider operational range across the two turbines. This includes generating electricity from one turbine while the other turbine is down for maintenance; shutting down one turbine when electrical demand load is low; ramping up both units to meet peak loads; and allowing for a greater utilization range that reduces cavitation for two units versus a single unit with a common penstock. . Attachment A: Summary estimates for constructing the Fourth of July Creek development prior to the Godwin Creek development. Tunnel/R of R4th of July 4th of July Creek Project History & Description:Engineer's EstimateFourth of July Creek ‐ 2014 New Project Details:NTSMobilize: Mobilization of equipment, materials and labor to Seward from either Anchorage or Seattle (via barge).Overhead Items:Temporary man‐camp, rental on heavy and support equipment, fuel, maintenance, etc for 3 years.Access to Site:Approximately 4,300 feet of new road from east of the State prison to Powerhouse location above alder brush. New bridge to cross Godwin Creek, ~200 feet in length, located above high water mark to avoid debris flows.Tunnel & Dam:No dam on either 4th of July or Godwin Creek due to high intermittent debris loads in stream(s).Tunnel will extend from July intake. Tunnel will be approximately 16 feet in diameter (horseshoe portal).Penstock: 4th July ‐ 147 CFS (20% exceedance) through 4.5' diameter steel penstock ‐ 5,100 feet lengthIntake: Concrete Intake on 4th July Creek with silt traps. Submit FERC application to reflect new applicantTrash rack on intakes to by‐pass large diameter rocks, and woody debris. Powerhouse:Standard for design with limited site informationSwitch Yard:Switchyard for 69 kV. Switch yard located at the Power plant site.Tail Race: Discharge tail water into the Fourth of July Creek at elevation of 120 feet. Discharge channel is 130 feet in lengthName Plate of New MW: 6.8 MWTransmission & Interconnection:Overhead transmission line from power plant 10,900 feet to Substation.4th of July Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15% $8,207,450Lat. 60.098543 Long. -149.299714 Task Order 14005Construction Schematic Site CoordinatesClientChugach Electric CreatedLJDate9/3/2014CheckedMEDateTaskCivil Engineering & Construction Review Sheet1REVProject4th of July Creek Hydropower Site EvaluationThis site was originally examined by a private energy developer in 2008‐09. Per the 2009 feasibility study, only the 4th of July Creek was considered for hydropower development (Godwin Creek was not included in this feasibility study). Key parameters from the 2009 study included an intake structure on the 4th of July Creek at 790 feet m.s.l. The 2009 feasibility study design included the intake as part of a 14 to 40 foot high dam (final dam height was not determined in 2009). Two separate 48” diameter penstock routes were identified. Routing options were based on topography constraints & bedrock. A 5.4 MW powerhouse was proposed at a final elevation of 120 feet m.s.l. with a net head of 676 feet based on a flow of 120 cfs. Tail water was to be directed to the 4th of July streambed. [Ref: Independence Power LLC, November 2009, “Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment”]. Per the 2014 McMillen site investigation, observed features of both Godwin and 4th of July Creek included high sediment/silt loads, large diameter woody debris in the stream bed, and a wide braiding channel geomorphology. Hydrology records from 2008‐09 indicates five (5) flooding events exceeding 350+ cfs flow and one event over 500 cfs. In 2014, construction access to this site is proposed along the northern side of Godwin Creek (through mature vegetation), with one high elevation bridge crossing Godwin Creek. Transmission is directly routed down the center of the 4th of July valley to the City of Seward Industrial Park substation. A McMillen design includes intakes on both Godwin and 4th of July Creek, for a combined 12.8 MW powerhouse design. 1Construction ItemConstruction Estimate Sept 2014Mobilize$385,452Fourth of July Creek 2014 Project Features Only with the intent to build Godwin Creek Project features at a later dateStandard Mob from Anchorage/barge materials to Seward from SeattleAccess Roads $1,363,891Dam and Spillway$0Demobilize $123,734The Fourth of July Creek cost estimate assumes construction of the Fourth of July Creek hydropower plant as a separate construction effort from a future Godwin Creek Hydropower Plant. This estimate assumes two years of construction, with possible shut down in winter, however features such as the tunnel and powerhouse can continue. Common features that would be built for both hydropower projects include the access road, bridge, oversized powerhouse (for second generator), tail race, switchyard, transmission, and substation. Specific features to the Fourth of July will include the tunnel, intake, penstock routing, and a Pelton generator. Overheads$6,398,292Tunnel from Intake to above powerhouse$22,246,630Powerhouse $13,146,480Switch Yard$2,090,000Penstock from Godwin Creek$0Intakes on 4th of July Creek$980,000Penstock from 4th of July Creek $5,319,100Tail Race$204,750Estimate 69 kV line to existing substation located SW of PrisonInterconnection $592,000Warehouse & Shop $0Transmission$1,866,006Tail race diverted back into Fourth of July Creek Warehouse and Shop building at Powerhouse Site under mobilization10,900 feet or ~ 2 miles of 69.5 kV line from Powerhouse to existing SubstationConnection at Substation at Seward Industrial Yard/SW from PrisonRegulatory & Agency Consultation 5% $2,735,817Subtotal $54,716,334Alaska RatesContractor Profit ‐ 15% $8,207,450Standard for Alaska 4th July ‐ Net head of 668 feet by 147 CFS ‐ 6.8 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine Concept Level Contingency ‐ 30% $16,414,900Total:$90,281,951Existing Substation located at Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park near salt water. Equipment/Rentals/Temp laydown for 2 to 3 years of workStandard demobolization off site4,300 feet with one overhead bridge 165 feetNo dams or storage at the Fourth of July Creek ComplexTunnel ~3,460 feet 16' diameter/horseshoe/becomes permanent road to intake 5,200 feet of 4.5' diameter steel penstock from Creek to PowerhouseIntake on 4th of July Creek Common Building with two turbines rated at 6.8 MW for July at 6.0 MW at Godwin N Run of RiverGodwin Creek 4th of July Creek Project History & Description:Engineer's EstimateGodwin Creek ‐ 2014 New Project Details:NTSMobilize: Mobilization of equipment, materials and labor to Seward from either Anchorage or Seattle (via barge).Overhead Items:Temporary man‐camp, rental on heavy and support equipment, fuel, maintenance, etc for 3 years.Access to Site:Approximately 4,300 feet of new road from east of the State prison to Powerhouse location above alder brush. New bridge to cross Godwin Creek, ~200 feet in length, located above high water mark to avoid debris flows.Tunnel & Dam:No dam on either 4th of July or Godwin Creek due to high intermittent debris loads in stream(s).Penstock: Godwin ‐ 308 CFS (20% exceedance) through 6.5' diameter steel/HDPE penstock ‐ 3,500 feet lengthIntake: Concrete Intake on Godwin Creek with silt traps. Submit FERC application to reflect new applicantTrash rack on intakes to by‐pass large diameter rocks, and woody debris. Powerhouse:Standard for design with limited site informationSwitch Yard:Switchyard for 69 kV. Switch yard located at the Power plant site.Tail Race: Discharge tail water into the Fourth of July Creek at elevation of 120 feet. Discharge channel is 130 feet in lengthName Plate of New MW: 6.0 MWTransmission & Interconnection:Overhead transmission line from power plant 10,900 feet to Substation.4th of July Equipment/Rentals/Temp laydown for 2 to 3 years of workStandard demobolization off site4,300 feet with one overhead bridge 165 feetNo dams or storage at the Fourth of July Creek ComplexNo tunnel at Godwin CreekNo Penstock from 4th of July3,500 feet of 6.5' diameter of above ground steel penstock to powerhouse Intake on Godwin CreekAccess Roads $0Dam and Spillway$0ClientChugach Electric DateTotal:$43,508,977Existing Substation located at Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park near salt water. Concept Level Contingency ‐ 30% $7,910,723Contractor Profit ‐ 15% $3,955,362Standard for Alaska Godwin ‐ Net head of 280 feet by 308 CFS ‐ 6.0 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine from 4th of July.Alaska RatesRegulatory & Agency Consultation 5% $1,318,454Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15% $3,955,362Connection at Substation at Seward Industrial Yard/SW from PrisonInterconnection $0Subtotal $26,369,077Tail Race$0Estimate 69 kV line to existing substation located SW of PrisonWarehouse & Shop $0Transmission$0Tail race diverted back into Fourth of July Creek Warehouse and Shop building at Powerhouse Site under mobilization10,900 feet or ~ 2 miles of 69.5 kV line from Powerhouse to existing SubstationPowerhouse $11,833,100Switch Yard$0Penstock from Godwin Creek$6,648,500Intakes on Godwin Creek$980,000Penstock from 4th of July Creek $0Common Building with two turbines rated at 6.8 MW for July at 6.0 MW at Godwin Demobilize $123,734The Godwin Creek cost estimate assumes construction of the Godwin Creek hydropower plant as a separate effort from the construction of a future Fourth of July Creek Hydropower Plant. This estimate assumes two years of construction, with possible shut down in winter. Common features that would be built for both hydropower projects include the access road, bridge, oversized powerhouse (for second generator), tail race, switchyard, transmission, and substation. Specific features to the Godwin Creek hydropower project include the intake, penstock routing, and a Francis generator. Overheads$6,398,292Tunnel from Intake to above powerhouse$0Mobilize$385,452Godwin Creek 2014 Project Features Only;AFTER Fourth of July Creek Project Features are constructedStandard Mob from Anchorage/barge materials to Seward from SeattleConstruction ItemConstruction Estimate Sept 2014This site was originally examined by a private energy developer in 2008‐09. Per the 2009 feasibility study, only the 4th of July Creek was considered for hydropower development (Godwin Creek was not included in this feasibility study). Key parameters from the 2009 study included an intake structure on the 4th of July Creek at 790 feet m.s.l. The 2009 feasibility study design included the intake as part of a 14 to 40 foot high dam (final dam height was not determined in 2009). Two separate 48” diameter penstock routes were identified. Routing options were based on topography constraints & bedrock. A 5.4 MW powerhouse was proposed at a final elevation of 120 feet m.s.l. with a net head of 676 feet based on a flow of 120 cfs. Tail water was to be directed to the 4th of July streambed. [Ref: Independence Power LLC, November 2009, “Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment”]. Per the 2014 McMillen site investigation, observed features of both Godwin and 4th of July Creek included high sediment/silt loads, large diameter woody debris in the stream bed, and a wide braiding channel geomorphology. Hydrology records from 2008‐09 indicates five (5) flooding events exceeding 350+ cfs flow and one event over 500 cfs. In 2014, construction access to this site is proposed along the northern side of Godwin Creek (through mature vegetation), with one high elevation bridge crossing Godwin Creek. Transmission is directly routed down the center of the 4th of July valley to the City of Seward Industrial Park substation. A McMillen design includes intakes on both Godwin and 4th of July Creek, for a combined 12.8 MW powerhouse design. 1TaskCivil Engineering & Construction Review Sheet1REVProjectGodwin Creek Hydropower Site EvaluationLat. 60.098543 Long. -149.299714 Task Order 14005CheckedMEConstruction Schematic Site CoordinatesCreatedLJDate9/3/2014N Attachment B: Summary estimate for constructing the Godwin Creek development prior to the Fourth of July Creek development Run of RiverGodwin Creek 4th of July Creek Project History & Description:Engineer's EstimateGodwin Creek ‐ 2014 New Project Details:NTSMobilize: Mobilization of equipment, materials and labor to Seward from either Anchorage or Seattle (via barge).Overhead Items:Temporary man‐camp, rental on heavy and support equipment, fuel, maintenance, etc for 3 years.Access to Site:Approximately 4,300 feet of new road from east of the State prison to Powerhouse location above alder brush. New bridge to cross Godwin Creek, ~200 feet in length, located above high water mark to avoid debris flows.Tunnel & Dam:No dam on either 4th of July or Godwin Creek due to high intermittent debris loads in stream(s).Penstock: Godwin ‐ 308 CFS (20% exceedance) through 6.5' diameter steel/HDPE penstock ‐ 3,500 feet lengthIntake: Concrete Intake on Godwin Creek with silt traps. Submit FERC application to reflect new applicantTrash rack on intakes to by‐pass large diameter rocks, and woody debris. Powerhouse:Standard for design with limited site informationSwitch Yard:Switchyard for 69 kV. Switch yard located at the Power plant site.Tail Race: Discharge tail water into the Fourth of July Creek at elevation of 120 feet. Discharge channel is 130 feet in lengthName Plate of New MW: 6.0 MWTransmission & Interconnection:Overhead transmission line from power plant 10,900 feet to Substation.Construction Schematic Site CoordinatesCreatedLJDate9/3/2014Lat. 60.098543 Long. -149.299714 Task Order 14005CheckedMETaskCivil Engineering & Construction Review Sheet1REVProjectGodwin Creek Hydropower Site EvaluationThis site was originally examined by a private energy developer in 2008‐09. Per the 2009 feasibility study, only the 4th of July Creek was considered for hydropower development (Godwin Creek was not included in this feasibility study). Key parameters from the 2009 study included an intake structure on the 4th of July Creek at 790 feet m.s.l. The 2009 feasibility study design included the intake as part of a 14 to 40 foot high dam (final dam height was not determined in 2009). Two separate 48” diameter penstock routes were identified. Routing options were based on topography constraints & bedrock. A 5.4 MW powerhouse was proposed at a final elevation of 120 feet m.s.l. with a net head of 676 feet based on a flow of 120 cfs. Tail water was to be directed to the 4th of July streambed. [Ref: Independence Power LLC, November 2009, “Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment”]. Per the 2014 McMillen site investigation, observed features of both Godwin and 4th of July Creek included high sediment/silt loads, large diameter woody debris in the stream bed, and a wide braiding channel geomorphology. Hydrology records from 2008‐09 indicates five (5) flooding events exceeding 350+ cfs flow and one event over 500 cfs. In 2014, construction access to this site is proposed along the northern side of Godwin Creek (through mature vegetation), with one high elevation bridge crossing Godwin Creek. Transmission is directly routed down the center of the 4th of July valley to the City of Seward Industrial Park substation. A McMillen design includes intakes on both Godwin and 4th of July Creek, for a combined 12.8 MW powerhouse design. 1Construction ItemConstruction Estimate Sept 2014Mobilize$385,452Godwin Creek 2014 Project Features Only with the intent to build Fourth of July Creek Project features at a later dateStandard Mob from Anchorage/barge materials to Seward from SeattleDemobilize $123,734The Godwin Creek cost estimate assumes construction of the Godwin Creek hydropower plant as a separate effort from the construction of a future Fourth of July Creek Hydropower Plant. This estimate assumes two years of construction, with possible shut down in winter. Common features that would be built for both hydropower projects include the access road, bridge, oversized powerhouse (for second generator), tail race, switchyard, transmission, and substation. Specific features to the Godwin Creek hydropower project include the intake, penstock routing, and a Francis generator. Overheads$6,398,292Tunnel from Intake to above powerhouse$0Powerhouse $11,833,100Switch Yard$2,090,000Penstock from Godwin Creek$6,648,500Intakes on Godwin Creek$980,000Penstock from 4th of July Creek $0Common Building with two turbines rated at 6.8 MW for July at 6.0 MW at Godwin Tail Race$204,750Estimate 69 kV line to existing substation located SW of PrisonWarehouse & Shop $0Transmission$1,866,006Tail race diverted back into Fourth of July Creek Warehouse and Shop building at Powerhouse Site under mobilization10,900 feet or ~ 2 miles of 69.5 kV line from Powerhouse to existing SubstationConnection at Substation at Seward Industrial Yard/SW from PrisonInterconnection $592,000Subtotal $32,485,724Alaska RatesRegulatory & Agency Consultation 5% $1,624,286Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15% $4,872,859Contractor Profit ‐ 15% $4,872,859Standard for Alaska Godwin ‐ Net head of 280 feet by 308 CFS ‐ 6.0 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine from 4th of July.Concept Level Contingency ‐ 30% $9,745,717Total:$53,601,445Existing Substation located at Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park near salt water. 4th of July Equipment/Rentals/Temp laydown for 2 to 3 years of workStandard demobolization off site4,300 feet with one overhead bridge 165 feetNo dams or storage at the Fourth of July Creek ComplexNo tunnel at Godwin CreekNo Penstock from 4th of July3,500 feet of 6.5' diameter of above ground steel penstock to powerhouse Intake on Godwin CreekAccess Roads $1,363,891Dam and Spillway$0ClientChugach Electric DateN Tunnel/R of R4th of July 4th of July Creek Project History & Description:Engineer's EstimateFourth of July Creek ‐ 2014 New Project Details:NTSMobilize: Mobilization of equipment, materials and labor to Seward from either Anchorage or Seattle (via barge).Overhead Items:Temporary man‐camp, rental on heavy and support equipment, fuel, maintenance, etc for 3 years.Access to Site:Approximately 4,300 feet of new road from east of the State prison to Powerhouse location above alder brush. New bridge to cross Godwin Creek, ~200 feet in length, located above high water mark to avoid debris flows.Tunnel & Dam:No dam on either 4th of July or Godwin Creek due to high intermittent debris loads in stream(s).Tunnel will extend from July intake. Tunnel will be approximately 16 feet in diameter (horseshoe portal).Penstock: 4th July ‐ 147 CFS (20% exceedance) through 4.5' diameter steel penstock ‐ 5,100 feet lengthIntake: Concrete Intake on 4th July Creek with silt traps. Submit FERC application to reflect new applicantTrash rack on intakes to by‐pass large diameter rocks, and woody debris. Powerhouse:Standard for design with limited site informationSwitch Yard:Switchyard for 69 kV. Switch yard located at the Power plant site.Tail Race: Discharge tail water into the Fourth of July Creek at elevation of 120 feet. Discharge channel is 130 feet in lengthName Plate of New MW: 6.8 MWTransmission & Interconnection:Overhead transmission line from power plant 10,900 feet to Substation.Equipment/Rentals/Temp laydown for 2 to 3 years of workStandard demobolization off site4,300 feet with one overhead bridge 165 feetNo dams or storage at the Fourth of July Creek ComplexTunnel ~3,460 feet 16' diameter/horseshoe/becomes permanent road to intake 5,200 feet of 4.5' diameter steel penstock from Creek to PowerhouseIntake on 4th of July Creek Common Building with two turbines rated at 6.8 MW for July at 6.0 MW at Godwin Total:$80,189,484Existing Substation located at Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park near salt water. Concept Level Contingency ‐ 30% $14,579,906Contractor Profit ‐ 15% $7,289,953Standard for Alaska 4th July ‐ Net head of 668 feet by 147 CFS ‐ 6.8 MW Nameplate ‐ Separate turbine Alaska RatesRegulatory & Agency Consultation 5% $2,429,984Subtotal $48,599,687Interconnection $0Warehouse & Shop $0Transmission$0Tail race diverted back into Fourth of July Creek Warehouse and Shop building at Powerhouse Site under mobilization10,900 feet or ~ 2 miles of 69.5 kV line from Powerhouse to existing SubstationConnection at Substation at Seward Industrial Yard/SW from PrisonTail Race$0Estimate 69 kV line to existing substation located SW of PrisonPowerhouse $13,146,480Switch Yard$0Penstock from Godwin Creek$0Intakes on 4th of July Creek$980,000Penstock from 4th of July Creek $5,319,100Access Roads $0Dam and Spillway$0Demobilize $123,734The Fourth of July Creek cost estimate assumes construction of the Fourth of July Creek hydropower plant as a separate construction effort from a future Godwin Creek Hydropower Plant. This estimate assumes two years of construction, with possible shut down in winter, however features such as the tunnel and powerhouse can continue. Common features that would be built for both hydropower projects include the access road, bridge, oversized powerhouse (for second generator), tail race, switchyard, transmission, and substation. Specific features to the Fourth of July will include the tunnel, intake, penstock routing, and a Pelton generator. Overheads$6,398,292Tunnel from Intake to above powerhouse$22,246,630Mobilize$385,452Fourth of July Creek 2014 Project Features Only; AFTER Godwin Creek Project Features have been constructedStandard Mob from Anchorage/barge materials to Seward from SeattleConstruction ItemConstruction Estimate Sept 2014This site was originally examined by a private energy developer in 2008‐09. Per the 2009 feasibility study, only the 4th of July Creek was considered for hydropower development (Godwin Creek was not included in this feasibility study). Key parameters from the 2009 study included an intake structure on the 4th of July Creek at 790 feet m.s.l. The 2009 feasibility study design included the intake as part of a 14 to 40 foot high dam (final dam height was not determined in 2009). Two separate 48” diameter penstock routes were identified. Routing options were based on topography constraints & bedrock. A 5.4 MW powerhouse was proposed at a final elevation of 120 feet m.s.l. with a net head of 676 feet based on a flow of 120 cfs. Tail water was to be directed to the 4th of July streambed. [Ref: Independence Power LLC, November 2009, “Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study and Feasibility Assessment”]. Per the 2014 McMillen site investigation, observed features of both Godwin and 4th of July Creek included high sediment/silt loads, large diameter woody debris in the stream bed, and a wide braiding channel geomorphology. Hydrology records from 2008‐09 indicates five (5) flooding events exceeding 350+ cfs flow and one event over 500 cfs. In 2014, construction access to this site is proposed along the northern side of Godwin Creek (through mature vegetation), with one high elevation bridge crossing Godwin Creek. Transmission is directly routed down the center of the 4th of July valley to the City of Seward Industrial Park substation. A McMillen design includes intakes on both Godwin and 4th of July Creek, for a combined 12.8 MW powerhouse design. 1TaskCivil Engineering & Construction Review Sheet1REVProject4th of July Creek Hydropower Site EvaluationCheckedMEDate4th of July Engineering & Permitting ‐ 15% $7,289,953Lat. 60.098543 Long. -149.299714 Task Order 14005Construction Schematic Site CoordinatesClientChugach Electric CreatedLJDate9/3/2014N 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 1/15 IPaC resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section. Location Kenai Peninsula County, Alaska Local oce Anchorage Fish & Wildlife Field Oce  (907) 271-2888  (907) 271-2786 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service IPaC 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 2/15 4700 Blm Road Anchorage, AK 99507 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 3/15 Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts. The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly. For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following: 1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE. 2. Click DEFINE PROJECT. 3. Log in (if directed to do so). 4. Provide a name and description for your project. 5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST. Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ). Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction. 1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ). 1 2 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 4/15 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location: Birds Critical habitats Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves. There are no critical habitats at this location. Migratory birds NAME STATUS Short-tailed Albatross Phoebastria (=Diomedea) albatrus Wherever found No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/433 Endangered Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below. There are migratory birds in your project area. Please refer to Alaska's Bird Nesting Season for recommendations to minimize impacts to migratory birds, including eagles. 1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. Additional information can be found using the following links: Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take- migratory-birds 1 2 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 5/15 The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below. For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. BREEDING SEASON Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/les/documents/nationwide-standard-conservation- measures.pdf NAME Aleutian Tern Sterna aleutica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9599 Breeds May 1 to Aug 31 Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Breeds Jan 1 to Sep 30 Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591 Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31 Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Breeds elsewhere 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 6/15 California Gull Larus californicus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31 Cassin's Auklet Ptychoramphus aleuticus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6967 Breeds Mar 21 to Sep 21 Cassin's Finch Carpodacus cassinii This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9462 Breeds May 15 to Jul 15 Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680 Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31 Kittlitz's Murrelet Brachyramphus brevirostris This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1633 Breeds May 15 to Aug 31 Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa avipes This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 Breeds elsewhere Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481 Breeds elsewhere Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914 Breeds May 20 to Aug 31 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 7/15 Probability of Presence Summary The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high. How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps: 1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25. 2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2. Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002 Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 15 Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 10 Tufted Pun Fratercula cirrhata This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/430 Breeds May 5 to Oct 5 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 8/15 no data survey eort breeding season probability of presence 3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score. To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar. Breeding Season () Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area. Survey Eort () Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys. To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. Survey Timeframe Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Aleutian Tern BCC Rangewide (CON) Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Black Oystercatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) Black Turnstone BCC Rangewide (CON) California Gull BCC Rangewide (CON) Cassin's Auklet BCC - BCR 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 9/15 Cassin's Finch BCC Rangewide (CON) Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Kittlitz's Murrelet BCC Rangewide (CON) Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON) Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON) Olive-sided Flycatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Rufous Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) Short-billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) Tufted Pun BCC - BCR Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site. What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specied location? 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 10/15 The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC)and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location. The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development. Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool. What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location? The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets. Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link. How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the proles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area. What are the levels of concern for migratory birds? Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern: 1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing). Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 11/15 minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics. Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage. Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring. What if I have eagles on my list? If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page. 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 12/15 Marine mammals Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Some are also protected under the Endangered Species Act and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora . The responsibilities for the protection, conservation, and management of marine mammals are shared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [responsible for otters, walruses, polar bears, manatees, and dugongs] and NOAA Fisheries [responsible for seals, sea lions, whales, dolphins, and porpoises]. Marine mammals under the responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list; for additional information on those species please visit the Marine Mammals page of the NOAA Fisheries website. The Marine Mammal Protection Act prohibits the take (to harass, hunt, capture, kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture or kill) of marine mammals and further coordination may be necessary for project evaluation. Please contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Oce shown. 1. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. 2. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a treaty to ensure that international trade in plants and animals does not threaten their survival in the wild. 3. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. The following marine mammals under the responsibility of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are potentially aected by activities in this location: Coastal Barrier Resources System Projects within the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) may be subject to the restrictions on Federal expenditures and nancial assistance and the consultation requirements of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) (16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). For more information, please contact the local Ecological Services Field Oce or visit the CBRA 1 2 3 NAME Northern Sea Otter Enhydra lutris kenyoni https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2884 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 13/15 Consultations website. The CBRA website provides tools such as a ow chart to help determine whether consultation is required and a template to facilitate the consultation process. There are no known coastal barriers at this location. Data limitations The CBRS boundaries used in IPaC are representations of the controlling boundaries, which are depicted on the ocial CBRS maps. The boundaries depicted in this layer are not to be considered authoritative for in/out determinations close to a CBRS boundary (i.e., within the "CBRS Buer Zone" that appears as a hatched area on either side of the boundary). For projects that are very close to a CBRS boundary but do not clearly intersect a unit, you may contact the Service for an ocial determination by following the instructions here: https://www.fws.gov/service/coastal-barrier-resources-system-property-documentation Data exclusions CBRS units extend seaward out to either the 20- or 30-foot bathymetric contour (depending on the location of the unit). The true seaward extent of the units is not shown in the CBRS data, therefore projects in the oshore areas of units (e.g., dredging, breakwaters, oshore wind energy or oil and gas projects) may be subject to CBRA even if they do not intersect the CBRS data. For additional information, please contact CBRA@fws.gov. Facilities National Wildlife Refuge lands Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. There are no refuge lands at this location. Fish hatcheries There are no sh hatcheries at this location. 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 14/15 Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site. This location overlaps the following wetlands: NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below. Data limitations The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A ESTUARINE AND MARINE DEEPWATER E1UBL ESTUARINE AND MARINE WETLAND E2USN E2EM1P E2USP FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND PSS1A PFO1/SS1A PSS1/EM1C RIVERINE R3USC R3UBH R5UBH A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website 11/29/22, 12:44 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/WPAFBAKXQZCEVE7LNGBPIQXESI/resources#wetlands 15/15 margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis. The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems. Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site. Data exclusions Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery. Data precautions Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities. 11/29/22, 12:35 PM about:blank about:blank 1/2 NMFS Critical Habitat Report Area of Interest (AOI) Information Area : 26.33 km² Nov 29 2022 12:32:38 Pacific Standard Time 11/29/22, 12:28 PM Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species [USFWS] https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service | Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, METI/NASA, EPA, USDA Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species [USFWS] A specific geographic area(s) that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Final Polygon Features Final Linear Features Proposed Polygon Features Proposed Linear Features 0.3mi Nas h Rd Jellison Av e Bette Cato Dr M ustang Ave DelphinStOlgaStMorr is A v e God w in CreekF ou r thofJ ulyCreek Godw in C reekFourth of J uly C re ek AWC Map Kenai Peninsula Borough, State of Alaska, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, Esri, USGS, FEMA AWC 2022 Layer - Anadromous points LOWER MID End UPPER AWC 2022 Layer - Anadromous streams PLSS - PLS TOWNSHIP PY PLSS - PLS SECTION PY 11/29/2022, 12:12:21 PM 0 0.45 0.90.23 mi 0 0.7 1.40.35 km 1:36,112 ADF&G Sources: Esri, USGS | Kenai Peninsula Borough, State of Alaska, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA | Esri, USGS, FEMA | ADF&G | ADFG SF GIS | ADFG SF Region 2 | slrepetto | ADF&G Sport Fish RTS | Alaska Division of Forestry | Alaska Department of Godwin Creek U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.gov Wetlands Estuarine an d Marin e D eepwa ter Estuarine an d Marin e Wetlan d Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub We tla nd Freshwater Pond Lake Other Riverine November 2 9, 202 2 0 1 20.5 mi 0 1.5 30.75 km 1:60,187 This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.