HomeMy WebLinkAboutIVC_AEA REF Round IX_09142015Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 1 of 50 9/11/15
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)
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
Type of Entity: Fiscal Year End:
Electric utility holding a certificate of public
convenience and necessity under AS 42.05
September 30, 2015
Tax ID #
Tax Status: ☐ For-profit ☐ Non-profit X Government (check one)
Date of last financial statement audit: Last financial statement audit dates from 2014. The 2014
audit has been completed and will be certified by the end of September 2015.
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
Igiugig Village Council Same
P.O. Box 4008
Igiugig, Alaska 99613
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-533-3211 907-533-3217 alexannasalmon@gmail.com
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Manager
Name: Title:
Point of Contact: AlexAnna Salmon Igiugig Village Council, President
Grants Manager: Genetta McLean Grants Manager
Mailing Address:
Igiugig Village Council
P.O. Box 4008
Igiugig, AK 99613
Telephone: Fax: Email:
Igiugig: 907-533-3211 907-533-3217 alexannasalmon@gmail.com
1.1.1 APPLICANT SIGNATORY AUTHORITY CONTACT INFORMATION
Name: Title:
AlexAnna Salmon President, Igiugig Village Council
Mailing Address:
Igiugig Village Council
P.O. Box 4008
Igiugig, AK 99613
Telephone: Fax: Email:
Igiugig: 907-533-3211 907-533-3217 alexannasalmon@gmail.com
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Monty Worthington 207-772-7707 mworthington@orpc.co
Genetta McLean 207-772-6251 gmclean@orpc.co
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 2 of 50 9/11/15
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, or
☐ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
☐ A local government, or
X A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (continued)
Please check as appropriate.
X 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 by checking the box)
X 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 by checking the box)
X 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
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/Renewable-Energy-Fund/Rounds#round9. (Any
exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) (Indicate by
checking the box)
X 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 IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 3 of 50 9/11/15
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Title
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
2.2 Project Location
2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude (preferred), street address, or
community name.
Igiugig, AK, at the mouth of the Kvichak River as it drains out of Lake Iliamna.
Latitude: 59° 19’44”, Longitude 155° 53’57”
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
The Village of Igiugig is the beneficiary of this Project. It has a year round population of 50,
comprised of 40% Alaskan Native—Yupik, Aleut, and Athabascan (2010 US Census), rising to
about 75 people in the summer. Igiugig also provides goods and services to six area tourism
lodges and their respective clients and workforce of approximately 90 additional persons per week.
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 X 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 X Final Design and Permitting
☐ Feasibility and Conceptual Design X Construction
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 4 of 50 9/11/15
2.4 Project Description
Igiugig Village Council (IVC) requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX program (RFA 16012) in the amount of $1,490,077 for the
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project (Project), which includes Phase III Final
Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a 20-kilowatt RivGen® Power System by
ORPC Alaska, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company (collectively
ORPC). As a remote village that has extremely high energy costs and relies on diesel fuel to meet
our electricity and heating needs, IVC seeks to lower energy costs by utilizing the Kvichak River as
a local, clean, renewable energy source. This Project will be the first commercial installation of a
hydrokinetic power system (of any type) in the state of Alaska and is a key part of our quest for
sustainability. Research and demonstrations conducted by IVC and our project partners have
advanced the RivGen® Power System to a mature technology and have significantly minimized
economic and technical risk. The Project follows IVC’s successful completion of previous project
phases funded by AEA, i.e., Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual
Design. The Project also follows ORPC’s successful demonstration of the RivGen® Power System,
which generated electricity from the Kvichak River in August 2014, and of the optimized system,
which provided over 2 MWh of clean power to Igiugig’s local grid during the 2015 demonstration,
also funded in part by AEA (Figure 1). On April 1, 2015, IVC also submitted a draft Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission pilot license application, significantly advancing the permitting and
licensing of the Project. This proposed AEA Project works synergistically with our proposal
submitted to the US Department of Energy (DOE) in July 2015 (EE1310-1517), which will provide
matching construction funds.
Figure 1. The RivGen® device prepared for deployment, Igiugig, Alaska, July 2015. Source: Staff.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 5 of 50 9/11/15
2.5 Scope of Work
IVC, along with our sub-recipient ORPC and local subcontractors will complete final site specific
design and permitting and install and commission ORPC’s RivGen® 20 kW Power System version
2.0 RivGen® Power System in the Kvichak River at Igiugig in 2017. This power system will supply
one third to one half of the community’s power requirements. This project will build on the
successful demonstration projects IVC completed in partnership with ORPC in 2014 and 2015
utilizing the prototype RivGen® Power System. This project will utilize the fully commercialized
RivGen® Power System to supply energy to the Igiugig grid. In order to accomplish this project the
following tasks will be completed:
PHASE III
1.0 Engineering and Final design
1.1. Finalize site-specific system requirements and engineering
1.2. Complete RivGen® Power System site specific component designs
1.3. Complete grid integration plan
2.0 Permitting
2.1. Develop contract with environmental monitoring contractor
2.2. Draft permit applications for federal, state and local agencies, including:
2.2.1. FERC Final Pilot License
2.2.2. Alaska Department of Fish and Game Fish Habitat Permit
2.2.3. Alaska Department of Natural Resources Land and Water Use Permits
2.2.4. US Coast Guard Navigation Safety Plan
2.3. Determine any additional required baseline data or environmental assessment
2.4. Identify any land use or right of way issues
2.5. Conduct additional baseline data collection or environmental assessment
2.6. Develop adaptive management program for environmental monitoring and risk
mitigation
2.7. Finalize Biological Assessment
2.8. Obtain written permission for cable route and on-shore station location if outside of
ADNR Land use permits
2.9. Submit permit applications to federal, state and local agencies
2.10. Track applications until permits are received
3.0 Economic Analysis
3.1. Finalize cost estimate
3.1.1. Obtain preliminary quotes for RivGen® Power system, and components
based on RFQ process
3.1.2. Finalize environmental monitoring costs and contractor costs
3.1.3. Obtain updated rate sheets and/or estimates for shipping, assembly,
installation, operation, and removal
3.1.4. Finalize cost of RivGen® Power System and arrangement and cost for first
5 years of ongoing maintenance
3.2. Update financial and economic Analysis
3.2.1. Update financial models based on final cost estimates and updated cost of
power/avoided cost of fuel
3.2.2. Update project proforma
4.0 Update Business Plan
4.1. Finalize business plan based on final cost estimates and maintenance and
operations contract(s)
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 6 of 50 9/11/15
4.2. Finalize installation plans
4.3. Finalize operational and environmental monitoring plans
4.4. Finalize routine maintenance schedule and local operator training program
4.5. Develop complete system removal plan
PHASE IV
5.0 Complete bid process, contractor selection and contract execution
5.1. Perform RFQ process to obtain quotes for fabrication, procurement and construction
Operations, including:
5.1.1. Final cost for RivGen® Power system
5.1.2. RivGen® Power System component shipping to Igiugig via Homer
5.1.3. System assembly
5.1.4. Environmental monitoring
5.1.5. System installation and startup
5.1.6. System operations, monitoring, and routine maintenance
5.2. Finalize contracts for fabrication procurement and operations, including:
5.2.1. RivGen® device procurement including subsystem fabrication
5.2.2. Component and device shipping
5.2.3. Assembly and installation
5.2.4. Environmental monitoring
5.2.5. Operations and monitoring
6.0 Procure RivGen® Power System and ancillary components and ship to Igiugig
6.1. Procurement and fabrication of all major components including:
6.1.1. RivGen® device
6.1.2. Power Electronics and transmission cables
6.1.3. Mooring System
6.1.4. Deployment and retrieval equipment
6.2. Ship Power system and all components to Homer, transload and ship to Igiugig
7.0 Construction, assembly and installation
7.1. Assemble RivGen® device in Igiugig
7.2. Install On-shore station in Igiugig
7.3. Assemble and install RivGen® mooring system
7.4. Install RivGen® device
7.5. Install Power and data cables
8.0 Commissioning, integration and testing
8.1. Commission environmental monitoring equipment and begin data collection
8.2. Confirm RivGen® Power System operational readiness with secondary load
8.3. Integrate RivGen® Power System output with Igiugig power grid
8.4. Perform operational system tests with local control to confirm proper grid connection
through daytime and nighttime load scenarios
8.5. Exercise remote monitoring and operations capability
9.0 Final acceptance, commissioning, and start up
9.1. Confirm RivGen® Power System performance metrics while integrated with the
Igiugig power grid
9.2. Begin full system 24/7 operations
9.3. Train local technicians
10.0 Operations and final reporting
10.1. Obtain operation and environmental data as required by regulatory and funding
agencies
10.2. Collect performance and cost of power data
0.3. Submit regular operational and environmental monitoring reports as required by
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 7 of 50 9/11/15
regulatory and funding agencies
10.4. Compile final report to AEA and closeout project
SECTION 3 – Project Management, Development, and Operation
3.1 Schedule and Milestones
Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date Deliverables
Phase III
1. Project
scoping and
contractor
selection
• Finalize site-specific
system requirements
• Develop contract with
environmental monitoring
contractor
7/1/2016 12/31/2016 Project scoping
and contractor
selection
2. Permit
applications
Draft permit applications for
federal, state, and local
agencies including:
• FERC final pilot project
license
• Alaska Department of
Fish and Game Fish
Habitat Permit
• Alaska Department of
Natural Resources Land
and Water Use Permits
• US Coast Guard
Navigation Safety Plan
Submit permit applications
to federal, state, and local
agencies
1/1/2015
*At its own
risk, ORPC
will begin
process for
obtaining
required
permits prior
to AEA
award 1
2/28/2017
Permit
applications
3. Final
environmental
assessment
and mitigation
plans
• Determine additional
baseline environmental
assessment required
• Conduct additional baseline
environmental assessment
• Develop adaptive
management program for
environmental monitoring
and risk mitigation
• Finalize Biologic
Assessment
7/1/2016 2/28/2017 Final
environmental
assessment
and mitigation
plans
4. Resolution of
land use, right
of way issues
• Identify any land use or
right of way issues
outside of ADNR Land
use permits
7/1/2016 12/31/2016 Resolution of
land use, right
of way issues
5. Permitting,
rights of way,
• Submit permit
applications to federal,
1 Igiugig Village Council holds the FERC Preliminary Permit and is required to submit the final pilot project
license application by November 2, 2015.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 8 of 50 9/11/15
site control state, and local agencies
including:
o FERC final pilot
project license
(includes site
control)
o Alaska
Department of
Fish and Game
Fish Habitat
Permit
o Alaska
Department of
Natural
Resources Land
and Water Use
Permits
o US Coast Guard
Navigation Safety
Plan
o Submit permit
applications to
federal, state, and
local agencies
• Track permit applications
and provide information
to permitting agencies as
needed.
• Obtain written permission
for cable route and on-
shore station location if
outside of ADNR Land
use permits
6. Final system
design
Complete RivGen® Power
System site specific
component designs
Complete grid integration
plan
7/1/2016 12/31/2016 Final system
design
7. Final cost
estimate
• Obtain fabrication quotes
for all major components
based on RFQ process
• Finalize environmental
monitoring costs and
contractor contract(s)
• Obtain updated rate sheets
and/or estimates for
shipping, assembly,
installation, operation, and
removal
9/1/2016 1/15/2017 Final cost
estimate
8. Updated
economic and
Update financial models
based on final cost estimates
12/15/2016 1/31/2017 Updated
economic and
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 9 of 50 9/11/15
financial
analyses
and updated cost of
power/avoided cost of fuel
financial
analyses
9. Power sale
agreements in
place
Finalize agreement on
RivGen® Power System
purchase and 5 year
maintenance contract
11/1/2016 3/31/2017 Sales and
maintenance
contract
developed
10. Final business
and
operational
plan
• Finalize business plan
based on final cost
estimates and maintenance
agreement
• Finalize installation plans
• Finalize operational and
environmental monitoring
plans
• Finalize routine
maintenance schedule and
local operator training
program
• Develop complete system
removal plan
2/15/2017 5/30/2017 Final business
and operational
plan
Phase IV Phase IV
1. Design and
feasibility
requirements
Completed in Phase III 7/1/2016 12/31/2016 Design and
feasibility
documentation
from Phase 3
2. Bid documents Perform RFQ process to
obtain quotes for
construction, operations and
fabrication (not included in
Phase III) including:
• RivGen® Power System
component shipping to
Igiugig via Homer
• Environmental monitoring
• System assembly
• System installation and
startup
• System operations,
monitoring, and routine
maintenance
1/15/2017 4/15/2017 Bid documents
3. Vendor
selection and
award
Finalize contracts for
fabrication and operations
including:
• RivGen® Power System
procurement including
Subsystem fabrication
• Component and RivGen®
device shipping
• Assembly and installation
• Environmental monitoring
2/15/2017 5/31/2017 Completed
contracts with
major sub
contractors
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 10 of 50 9/11/15
• Operations and monitoring
4. Construction:
RivGen®
Power System
procurement
sub-system
fabrication and
shipment
Procurement and fabrication
of all major components
including:
• RivGen® device
• Power electronics
• Mooring System
• Deployment and retrieval
equipment
8/1/2016 4/30/2017 Construction:
component
fabrication &
TGU assembly
5. Construction:
shipping to
Igiugig
Shipping of all RivGen®
Power System components
and equipment to Igiugig
5/1/2017 6/30/2017 Construction:
shipping to
Igiugig
6. Construction:
assembly and
installation
• Power system assembly
• Environmental monitoring
equipment assembly and
installation
• Power system installation
• On-shore station
installation
• Power and data cable
installation
7/1/2017 7/15/2017 Construction:
assembly and
installation
7. Integration and
testing
• Commission
environmental
monitoring equipment
and begin data collection
• Confirm RivGen® Power
System operational
readiness with
secondary load
• Integrate RivGen®
Power System output
with Igiugig power grid
• Perform operational
system tests with local
control to confirm proper
grid connection through
daytime and nighttime
load scenarios
• Exercise remote
monitoring and
operations capability
7/15/2016 7/31/2016 Integration and
testing
8. Final
acceptance,
commissioning
and start-up
• Confirm RivGen® Power
System performance
metrics while integrated
with the Igiugig power grid
• Begin full system 24/7
operations
• Train local technicians
8/1/2016 8/31/2016 Final
acceptance,
commissioning
and
start-up
9. Operations
and final
• Obtain operation and
environmental data as
8/1/2016 7/31/2026 Operations
reporting
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 11 of 50 9/11/15
reporting required by regulatory and
funding agencies
• Collect data on
performance and cost of
delivered power
• Submit regular operational
and environmental
monitoring reports as
required by regulatory and
funding agencies
• Compile final report and
submit to AEA and closeout
project
3.2 Budget
3.2.1 Budget Overview
The total estimated project cost is $2,131,740. IVC is requesting $1,490,077. There are matching
contributions totaling $641,663 consisting of federal grant funds and contribution of existing
equipment from ORPC that includes components of mooring system, power electronics, SCADA,
power and data cables, as well as deployment and retrieval equipment. These funds will cover
Phases III and IV of this project through completion.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 12 of 50 9/11/15
3.2.2 Budget Forms
Milestone or Task
Phase III
Final Design and Permitting
RE- Fund
Grant Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
1. Project scoping and
contractor selection $21,294 $1,294 Federal grants $22,587
2. Permit applications $64,194 $1,294 Federal grants $65,487
3. Final environmental
assessment and mitigation
plans $59,881 $1,294 Federal grants $61,175
4. Resolution of land use, right
of way issues $5,294 $1,294 Federal grants $6,587
5. Permitting, rights of way, site
control $68,069 $1,294 Federal grants $69,362
6. Final system design $89,188 $100,703 Federal grants $189,890
7. Final cost estimate $48,044 $1,294 Federal grants $49,337
8. Updated economic and
financial analyses $10,644 $1,294 Federal grants $11,937
9. Power sale agreements in
place $27,294 $1,294 Federal grants $28,587
10. Final business and
operational plan $145,087 $15,158 Federal grants $160,245
TOTALS $538,985 $126,209 $665,194
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $538,985 $126,209 Federal grants $665,194
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $538,985 $126,209 $665,194
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 13 of 50 9/11/15
Milestone or Task
Phase IV
Construction
RE- Fund
Grant Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
1. Design and feasibility
requirements $0 $0 $0
2. Bid documents $10,294 $1,294 Federal grants $11,587
3. Vendor selection and award $57,837 $2,587 Federal grants $60,424
4. Construction: RivGen® Power
System procurement sub-
system fabrication and
shipment $658,440
$241,606
$130,625
Federal grants
ORPC in-kind cost share $1,030,671
5. Construction: shipping to
Igiugig $107,814 $12,814 Federal grants $120,627
6. Construction: assembly and
installation $66,072 $78,643 Federal grants $144,715
7. Integration and testing $25,681 $25,681 Federal grants $51,362
8. Final acceptance,
commissioning and start-up $22,369 $19,619 Federal grants $41,987
9. Operations and Final
reporting $2,587 $2,587 Federal grants $5,174
$ $ $
$ $ $
TOTALS $951,092 $515,455 $1,466,547
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $951,092 $515,455
Federal grants +
ORPC in-kind cost share $1,466,547
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $951,092 $515,455 $1,466,547
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 14 of 50 9/11/15
3.2.3 Cost Justification
The cost estimates in this budget are based on contractor and vendor quotes when possible and
on rates from previous work when quotes are not available.
3.2.4 Funding Sources
Grant funds requested in this application $1,490,077
Cash match to be provided (DOE Grant) $511,038
In-kind match to be provided $130,625
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of above) $2,131,740
3.2.5 Total Project Costs
Reconnaissance $
Feasibility and Conceptual Design $
Final Design and Permitting $665,194
Construction $1,466,547
Total Project Costs (sum of above) $2,131,740
3.2.6 Operating and Maintenance Costs
Options O&M Impact of proposed RE project
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.
$50,000
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 IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 15 of 50 9/11/15
3.3 Project Communications
ORPC will serve as Project Manager and will lead the communications effort for the Project Team.
ORPC will monitor the Project through a detailed Project Management Plan with status and
general project management tools. ORPC’s project management practices are geared towards
carefully monitoring scope, schedule and budget to ensure the Project is tracking as planned and
will include the following:
1. Gantt Chart
2. Risks Log (Failure Mode Effects Analysis-based and is a live document)
3. Milestones Log (will be used for the quarterly reports and are easier to read than the Gantt)
4. Issues Log (major issues impacting schedule, budget and technical objectives, showing
action plans and status)
5. Actions Log (an internal tool for overall actions not accounted for in the Gantt or in addition
to the Gantt).
To ensure that the Project Team and AEA are thoroughly informed on the Project’s progress,
ORPC will use the tools created in the Project Management Plan. ORPC will hold weekly meetings
with the Project Team to provide updates with the project manager, contractors, and key ORPC
personnel, which is the standard procedure for other state and federally projects. All members of
the Project Team have an established working relationship with each other on other federal and
state funded projects and will continue best efforts to maintain their excellent communications.
The Project Manager will submit regular quarterly progress reports to AEA after the Igiugig Village
Council’s review and approval. The Project Team will schedule meetings with AEA as necessary or
as requested to update AEA on the Project. Any significant changes to any aspect of the Project
will be reported promptly to AEA.
If the Project falls behind, the Project Team will inform AEA and propose solutions for managing
any problems and correcting schedule lapses.
3.4 Operational Logistics
IVC will own operate and maintain the RivGen® Power System in Igiugig. IVC as the owner of
Igiugig Electric Company will utilize the power generated from the RivGen® Power system to offset
diesel fuel use. The cost savings from reduced diesel use will help IVC to stabilize energy costs to
the community of Igiugig by reducing the required annual purchase of diesel fuel, which must be
flown into the community and is thus extremely costly.
As the RivGen® Power System is a state of the art cutting edge technology IVC will contract with
ORPC and Marsh Creek to provide ongoing maintenance of the RivGen® Power System for the
first five years of operations. During this time IVC will work to achieve complete technology transfer
at the local level to allow the community to complete ongoing operations and routine annual
maintenance through the remainder of the life of the project. Once IVC achieves this level of
capacity cost savings from the project will further increase with less dependence on outside
contractors for annual operations and maintenance costs.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 16 of 50 9/11/15
SECTION 4 – QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
4.1 Project Team
4.1.1 Project Manager
IVC has selected Monty Worthington of ORPC to be the Project Manager.
Monty Worthington
Director – Project Development, Alaska
Ocean Renewable Power Company
c/o Professional Growth Systems
911 West 8th Avenue, Suite 205
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
207-772-7707
mworthington@orpc.co
(Resume attached)
Monty Worthington will report to IVC under the leadership of AlexAnna Salmon, President of IVC.
Mr. Worthington will be responsible for maintaining the quality of work produced by the Project
Team. He will oversee and review all milestones and provide supervision on all project phases. He
will ensure proper communications between IVC and AEA. An Assistant Project Manager (new hire
TBD) will assist with these efforts.
ORPC, Project Management, will provide project management support and all grant, accounting,
contractual and administrative activities, and will work at the direction of Mr. Worthington and Ms.
Salmon. ORPC offers extensive project development and strategic management services, and is
staffed by a highly skilled team of professionals with an extended network of top technical and
scientific experts. ORPC is pioneering river hydrokinetic power systems for remote off-grid and
microgrid communities. The company has successfully installed, operated, monitored and retrieved
the RivGen® Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River and provided
power to the local microgrid at the Village of Igiugig, Alaska in 2015. ORPC also provided project
development and permitting services to a wave energy demonstration project in Yakutat. Among
their prestigious awards, ORPC was named one of the World’s Top 10 Most Innovative Energy
Companies by Fast Company in 2013.
AlexAnna Salmon, IVC President, will serve as the Project’s Point of Contact. Ms. Salmon
graduated from Dartmouth College with a dual Bachelor’s degree in Native American Studies and
Anthropology in 2008. After graduating, she returned to Igiugig and serves as president and acting
administrator of the Igiugig Tribal Village Council. She also serves as a board member of the
Igiugig Native Corporation and the Lake and Peninsula Borough’s Planning Commission.
4.1.2 Expertise and Resources
Project resources will provide the experience, technical expertise, dedication, commitment and
leadership to successfully complete the Project. In addition to the team members described above
in Section 4.1 – Monty Worthington, Project Manager; AlexAnna Salmon, Point of Contact; and
ORPC, Project Management—the following project resources will be assembled:
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 17 of 50 9/11/15
Project Team
The organizational structure of the Project Team is illustrated in Figure 2. Resumes of key
personnel are separately attached.
Figure 2. Project Team Organizational Structure
Igiugig Village Council
IVC has extensive infrastructure to complete this Project. The village has a 3,300-ft airport runway
with AWOS and GPS approaches. Barge service via Bristol Bay is usually available from August
through September. The village is barge-accessible from Anchorage/Kenai/Homer from May
through October via the Pile Bay/Williamsport Road, and across Lake Iliamna. The Igiugig Village
Council owns a 30 ft x 80 ft FlexiFloat flat deck barge capable of carrying 225,000 lb and
distributes 90% of non fuel-related goods for all the communities and businesses of the Lake
Iliamna region. Local residents have multiple 32 ft x 13 ft aluminum 450HP plus diesel-powered
fishing boats that pull or push the FlexiFloat when needed. Many power skiffs ranging from 18 ft to
24 ft and 80HP to 150Hp are available as well to assist in any installation and/or operational
activities. AlexAnna Salmon, IVC President, is the Point of Contact for this project.
ORPC
ORPC was selected for Project management because of its demonstrated ability to successfully
execute a hydrokinetic project at Igiugig and experience in working with rural Alaskan communities.
ORPC is the only company in the world to have designed, built, installed, operated and delivered
power to shore from both a hydrokinetic tidal and hydrokinetic river project. The company offers
project development and strategic management services founded on their commitment to
innovation and results, and fueled by a highly skilled team of professionals and extended network
of top technical and scientific experts. Starting in a project's conceptual stage and continuing
through development, installation, and operation, ORPC engages community and regulatory
stakeholders in a collaborative approach that results in significant cost savings and reduced risk,
while delivering projects of which everyone can be proud.
ORPC approaches projects with an ownership mindset and works to reduce risk and increase
certainty from the outset for their clients. They efficiently and effectively develop and execute
Igiugig Village Council
ORPC - Project Manager
Consultants and Contractors
LGL Marsh
Creek ILC Marl T
Enterprises
Iliamna
Transp.
Igiugi
Transp.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 18 of 50 9/11/15
complex, first-of-a-kind projects and present a realistic and comprehensive view of the
development pathway to your ownership team to manage expectations.
ORPC has a proven ability to manage the gamut of project development activities, from technical
site assessment to community outreach, and construction management to governmental affairs,
which allows them to create an executable project plan that brings the appropriate level of
expertise to your project at the right time. They bring the following resources to the Project:
• Project management
• Resource and site assessment
• Permitting and licensing
• Grant management
• Grid interconnection and integration analysis
• Management of device operations, inspection and maintenance
• Strategic planning services
• Environmental monitoring strategies
• Community and stakeholder outreach
• Supply chain development and management
• Equipment for measuring hydrokinetic resources
• Marketing and communications
ORPC is committed to recruiting and retaining Alaska contractors and partners for projects and
advancing the industry through executed contracts with technical and project support resources.
ORPC employs local companies and contracts whenever the required work capacity is available or
can be developed within a local organization. ORPC has worked with Alaskan private companies
and public institutions to build the capacity to support tidal and river energy project development in
Alaska, including Marsh Creek, TerraSond, LGL Alaska Research Associates, HDR, Benthic
GeoScience, Illiamna Lake Contractors, ASRC Energy Services, Metal Magic, Aquacousitics, PND
Engineering, Stephen Braund and Associates, University of Alaska Anchorage, University of
Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska Center for Energy and Power, and many others.
In addition to selecting ORPC for project management, the Igiugig Village Council will acquire
ORPC’s commercial-ready RivGen® Power System, which was successfully installed, operated
and monitored at Igiugig in 2014 and microgrid-connected in 2015. This selection was made
following testing of other river hydrokinetic devices in 2014.
ORPC’s development of the RivGen® Power System follows their historic building and delivering
power to the grid with the TidGen® Power System, the first commercial, federally-licensed, grid-
connected hydrokinetic tidal energy project in North America in 2012. The project was installed in
Cobscook Bay, Maine, at a site near the U.S./Canadian border at the mouth of the Bay of Fundy,
about 300 miles northeast of Boston. This was the first ocean energy project of any type, other
than one using a dam, to deliver power to a utility grid in North, Central and South America. ORPC
generated revenues from sales of electricity through the first power purchase agreement for tidal
energy issued in the US, as well as from the first renewable energy credits sold for tidal energy.
ORPC also issued the first environmental monitoring report in the US on the effects of a
hydrokinetic device on the marine environment to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The
first and subsequent reports, reviewed and approved by all relevant federal and state regulatory
agencies, conclude that there are no known adverse environmental impacts from ORPC’s tidal
energy project. This is a significant achievement for the worldwide tidal energy industry.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 19 of 50 9/11/15
ORPC’s development of the RivGen® Power System was funded in part by the following state and
federal grants:
• AEA Emerging Energy Technology Grant (FP11769) -- $830,325
• AEA Emerging Energy Technology Fund (7310043) -- $1,491,750
• USDA SBIR Phase I (2013-33610-21033) -- $100,000
• USDA SBIR Phase II (2104-33610-2218) -- $450,000
• DOE (DE-EE0006397) -- $1,727,670
ORPC personnel include the following:
Christopher R. Sauer, P.E.—President & CEO
Mr. Sauer provides overall management and leadership in all of ORPC’s technical and commercial
activities. Mr. Sauer is a professional engineer, energy entrepreneur, and strategic development
consultant with more than 40 years of experience in executive management, engineering,
construction, project development, marketing, financing, and startup company formation in the
electricity, cogeneration, renewable energy and energy efficiency industries. Involved in the energy
transaction business since 1977, Mr. Sauer has played an instrumental role in the development of
more than $2 billion in energy assets and companies. Mr. Sauer is a founding member of ORPC.
Jarlath McEntee, P.E.—Vice President of Engineering and CTO
Mr. McEntee leads the development of the company’s proprietary hydrokinetic energy technology.
He earned his Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering at University College in Dublin,
Ireland in 1986 and his Master of Science at Dartmouth College in 1989. He comes to ORPC after
spending more than 25 years in engineering and project management, having developed technical
expertise in tidal power turbines, combined heat and power systems, Stirling engine and
refrigeration systems, control system design and analysis, micro-mechanical structures, and
marine engineering systems. Mr. McEntee has taught courses in engineering at the Maine
Maritime Academy, holds multiple engineering-related patents, and has submitted numerous
patents on behalf of ORPC. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Maine.
John Ferland—Vice President of Project Development
Mr. Ferland leads ORPC’s project development, environmental permitting and project licensing
activities, as well as subsidiary companies focused on international business development and
providing strategic and tactical expertise and support to other ocean energy developers and related
parties. He draws on over 30 years of experience encompassing technology commercialization,
renewable energy development, port emergency response operations and coastal resources
management. He has served as CEO of an oil spill response company, mentored numerous
startups as director of a technology entrepreneur assistance program, and was the founding
president of the Environmental & Energy Technology Council of Maine, now the leading industry
association for clean technology companies in northern New England.
Abbey Manders—Vice President of Finance and Administration
Ms. Manders manages all financial and administrative matters for ORPC, including accounting,
contracts, insurance, strategic planning, financial analysis, treasury, and budgetary control. With
more than six years at ORPC, she has been involved in all financial and administrative aspects of
company operations, including grant compliance, human resources, purchasing, inventory control,
accounts payable, and accounts receivable, and currently oversees these functions.
Monty Worthington—Director of Project Development, Alaska and Project Manager
Mr. Worthington oversees the implementation of ORPC’s projects in Alaska, including two riverine
hydrokinetic projects at Igiugig funded by AEA and U.S. Department of Agriculture. He has
extensive experience managing project development, permitting, and marine logistical efforts. His
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 20 of 50 9/11/15
rural development experience also includes designing, installing and maintaining solar and wind
electric systems in rural Cambodia and traveling to remote areas of the country to work with and
train local Khmer people. Mr. Worthington is a member of an International Electrical Commission
ITC114 ad-hoc group establishing international standards for electricity producing river energy
converters -- power performance assessment.
D. Douglas Johnson—Director of Business Development, Alaska
Mr. Johnson coordinates early-stage business development and growth strategies in Alaska and
the Pacific Northwest; supervises ORPC’s projects in Alaska; cultivates key relationships with
government agencies, regulatory bodies, development partners and new staff; and works closely
with the ORPC senior executive team.
Ryan Tyler—Project Engineer
Mr. Tyler supports the engineering of ORPC's power system. He provides field engineering and
project management for the deployment of the RivGen® System in Igiugig, Alaska. A registered
Engineer-in-Training in the state of Washington, he has four years experience as a project
engineer and researcher in the marine hydrokinetics field, and one-and-a-half years experience as
a business strategy consultant.
Nathan Johnson—Director of Environmental Affairs
Mr. Johnson is responsible for creating solutions to deploy ORPC technology in an environmentally
responsible and cost effective manner. He addresses permitting and licensing market barriers
through innovative environmental monitoring technologies and implementation of an adaptive
management approach. Mr. Johnson also contributes to ORPC’s strategic development by
identifying partnerships, emerging technologies, and projects to accelerate the marine renewable
industry and contribute to the sustainability of global communities. A native of Long Island, Maine,
Nathan has a diverse background that includes commercial fishing, construction management,
groundwater exploration and more than ten years in environmental engineering.
Genetta McLean, Ph.D.—Grants and Licensing Manager
Dr. McLean negotiates with government agencies to secure grants and loans for ORPC technology
and project development. She works directly with project management, development, engineering,
finance and writing teams to gather and organize materials, prepare reports, conduct analyses and
generate budgets. She oversees and contributes to applications for new loans and grants. Dr.
McLean also plays a similar role in ORPC’s licensing efforts and is responsible for aspects of
licensing or permitting applications, as well as managing the post-licensing and permit reporting.
Sybille Cyr—Manager of Human Resources and Grants Accounting
Ms. Cyr is responsible for all aspects of day to day accounting, maintains grant budgets and
completes quarterly and yearend reports. She has more than three years bookkeeping experience
especially related to grant accounting.
Consultants and sub-contractors
• Marsh Creek, LLC, an Alaskan Native Company specializing in energy services and
construction, will provide design and fabrication of grid interconnection power electronics and
SCADA system integration. Marsh Creek will also provide personnel resources for device
installation and maintenance.
• Iliamna Lake Contractors, LLC (ILC) an Alaska Native Company and a primary construction
company for the lake Iliamna region, will provide on-site equipment and operators for device
assembly, installation, and required maintenance.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 21 of 50 9/11/15
• Igiugig Transport, a locally owned and operated marine transport company, will provide
marine assets for installation, routine maintenance, and removal.
• Iliamna Transportation Company, LLC., will ship the RivGen® Power System from Homer,
AK to Igiugig, AK.
• Marl-T will provide marine assets for RivGen® device deployment and retrieval.
• LGL Alaska Research Associates, one of North America’s leading ecological research
companies, will provide third party environmental monitoring.
Note: additional RivGen® Power System component vendors will be determined through a
competitive bid process
Other Project Resources
• Heavy equipment operated by ILC including: CAT 330B excavator, CAT 966 loader, CAT 320B
excavator
• 30 ft x 80 ft x 4 ft modular Flexifloat barge owned by IVC
• Laydown and staging area: beach staging area with immediate access to Lake Iliamna and the
Kvichak river
• Marine assets operated by Iliamna Transport including: 32 ft 420hp Chulyen (or similar), 18 ft
250hp Seine Skiff, small skiffs of various size
• The Marl T, 47 ft 240hp landing craft operated by Jim Tilly
4.1.3 Project Accountant(s)
Project accounting will be performed on behalf of IVC by the following ORPC team member:
Sybille Cyr
Manager - Grants Accounting
ORPC
207-772-7707
scyr@orpc.co
(Resume attached.)
4.1.4 Financial Accounting System
ORPC will perform the accounting of this Project. ORPC maintains a financial management and
accounting system that conforms to generally accepted accounting principles. The accounting
system includes a job cost ledger that identifies costs by project. The accounting system provides
for the following:
• Proper segregation of direct costs from indirect costs
• Identification and accumulation of direct costs by contract
• Accumulation of costs under general ledger control
• A labor distribution system that charges direct and indirect labor to appropriate cost
objectives
• Exclusion from costs charged to government contracts of amounts which are not allowable
• Identification of costs by contract line item
• Financial information required to support requests for progress payments
ORPC’s Manager of Grants Accounting and accountant will be the primary users of the accounting
system.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 22 of 50 9/11/15
4.2 Local Workforce
The Project Team is committed to training and using local contractors to perform on-site
construction and operation, as demonstrated in the 2014 and 2015 testing of the RivGen® Power
System at Igiugig. The Project will create numerous jobs with the installation, continued operation
and periodic maintenance of RivGen® Power Systems and elsewhere in Alaska as the market for
them expands.
Local contractors used in this Project include Marl-T, Iliamna Lake Contractors, Igiugig Transport,
and Iliamna Transportation Company.
See Section 6.3 Other Public Benefit.
SECTION 5 – TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
5.1 Resource Availability
5.1.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Description of Available Energy Resource
The Kvichak River current, which flows past Igiugig, has been described as one of Alaska’s prime
renewable energy sites for river hydrokinetic projects. It has an energy density that ranges
between 4.5 and 7.8kW/m2.
Phase 1: Reconnaissance (Completed, 2008)
Assessment of Igiugig’s available hydrokinetic energy resource, i.e., Phase I Reconnaissance, was
completed in 2008 by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), which determined that the
discharge rates and related power-densities at Igiugig are more consistent year-round than the
typical summer peak found in other rivers.2 The EPRI report utilized historical data from the US
Geological Survey (USGS), which maintained a stream gauging station on the Kvichak River at
Igiugig (Station #15300500) and collected 21 years of daily discharge records between 1966 and
1987 (Table 1). This report established a data set for evaluating the available energy resource for
hydrokinetic projects. First, a relationship between discharge rate and velocity was established;
that relation function was then applied to the full data set to determine the statistical parameters for
each transect of interest (Table 2).3
Table 1. USGS Station Summary
2 Electronic Power Research Institute. (2008). River in-stream energy conversion (RISEC) characterization of
Alaska sites. By Previsic, M. & Bedard, R. Retrieved from
http://oceanenergy.epri.com/attachments/risec/reports/Alaska_Site_Survey_Report_Final.pdf 3 EPRI 2008, 65-66.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 23 of 50 9/11/15
Table 2. Resource data overview
Phase II: Feasibility and Conceptual Design (Completed – 2014)
As follow-on to the EPRI report (Phase I Reconnaissance), IVC received AEA Renewable Energy
Fund Round 2 funding for Phase II Feasibility to further profile the Kvichak River (No. 265,
$718,175).
TerraSond Ltd performed a hydrological resource assessment of the Kvichak River at Igiugig in
2011 (Figure 3).4
Measurements were taken at ten transects for velocity, depth and power density.
Additionally, high-density bathymetric survey of the river bottom in the project area was completed.
The short-term ADCP measurements supported the extrapolation of the historical USGC data,
which provided an annual flow profile at the Project site without the need for multiple years of local
velocity measurements. Based on the analysis of the Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)
data, TerraSond concluded that the river had several sites that offered potential for development of
a hydrokinetic facility. These sites are well defined and stable zone of high energy density the
ranges between 4.5 and 7.8 kW/m2.
4 TerraSond (2011). Kvichak River RISEC Project; Resource Reconnaissance and Physical Characterization,
Final Report. Attached in Section 11.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 24 of 50 9/11/15
Figure 3. Igiugig site characterization (Source: TerraSond 2011).
An additional EPRI study was completed in 2012 by University of Alaska Anchorage, University of
Alaska Fairbanks and National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which measured the current
velocities and bathymetry and used computer-modeling techniques combined with historical USGS
data on river levels used to estimate the resource strength. Table 3 provides the results from the
Kvichak River and shows the annual average flow rate.5
5 Jacobson, P., Ravens, T., Cunningham K., and Scott, G. 2012. Assessment and Mapping of the Riverine
Hydrokinetic Resource of the Continental United States. EPRI Technical Report. Retrieved from
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/water/pdfs/riverine_hydrokinetic_resource_assessment_and_mapping.pdf
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 25 of 50 9/11/15
Table 3. Theoretical in-stream hydrokinetic power in the Kvichak River, in which the annual
average flow rate exceeds 10,000 cfs (283 m3/s). Source: UAA 2012.
Based on these studies, a Project site was selected with optimum high current velocity, depth of
water and optimum power output (Figure 4). The site is located at the southwest corner of the first
island, approximately 0.6 miles downstream of the IVC power plant. The channel is large and can
thus accommodate a turbine while leaving ample room for navigation. ADCP measurements
conducted by TerraSond at the site in 2011 showed current velocities peaking at 2.5 m/s and field
measurements during testing of ORPC’s prototype RivGen® device in 2014 confirmed that currents
at the site were 2.5 m/s during August flows and reached 2.7 m/s just upstream of the device,
making this an optimal site for power production (Figure 4).
Figure 4: Velocity & Energy Density at RivGen® location (Site 10)
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 26 of 50 9/11/15
Pile Bay Road, and barged across Lake Illiamna, or else flown in, both relatively expensive
options. The volatility of the costs of diesel fuel also led to difficulty in forecasting energy costs.
Transportation of diesel on the Kvichak River and Lake Illiamna as well as storage of it adjacent to
the river pose potential risks of fuel spills and harm to the salmon population, an essential
commercial and subsistence resource to the community. This volatility as well as wider
environmental concerns has motivated the community of Igiugig to move towards renewable
energy generation to reduce the environmental risks of continuing to derive power solely from
diesel fuel.
Regarding other renewable energy options, wind energy supplements local power generation with
at five horizontal axis turbines, three of which provide heat and light to our greenhouses to extend
the growing season and enhance food security. IVC is also collaborating with California Institute of
Technology on a vertical-axis wind turbine project. Community acceptance of wind turbines has
been somewhat reserved based on perception of their actual performance. Currently,
approximately half of the turbines are operational. While wind power appears to be viable, it is not
a robust resource at Igiugig by Alaskan standards and lacks the advantage of producing
continuous power that hydrokinetic technologies offer. Photovoltaic systems have not been
investigated at a community scale in Igiugig and may offer seasonal applications, but would not
replace the near year round potential power source offered by hydrokinetics. As for traditional
hydropower that has the baseload power potential of hydrokinetic power, the topography of the
Igiugig area is relatively flat precluding the possibility of a traditional hydro opportunity within
reasonable transmission distance of the community.
Design and permitting documents are included in IVC’s FERC draft pilot project license application
(P-13511-002). This is a 1,000 page document, so we are providing this link to the FERC docket:
http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?document_id=14320043
5.1.2 Permits
Applicable Permits
The Igiugig Village Council holds a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) preliminary
permit for the project site and submitted a draft pilot license application on April 1, 2015 (P-13511-
001). We will file the final pilot license application on November 1, 2015, and anticipate that the
pilot license application will be ready for FERC decision by March 16, 2016.
IVC holds the following permits for ORPC’s 2015 RivGen® device demonstration project, which will
need to be updated for this Project:
• AK Department of Natural Resources – Land Use Permit
• AK Department of Natural Resources – Temporary Water Use
• AK Department of Fish & Game – Fish Habitat Permit
• U.S. Coast Guard Consultation – Navigational Safety Plan Approval
IVC has also consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act. FWS found that no threatened or endangered species under FWS’s
jurisdiction commonly occur in the vicinity of the 2014 ORPC project. IVC commissioned a bald
eagle Survey for the 2014 ORPC project and found no eagle’s nest within 660 ft of any portion of
the project. As such, it is not expected that a permit will be required according to FWS National
Bald Eagle Management Guidelines.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 27 of 50 9/11/15
Anticipated Permitting Timeline
• FERC Final Pilot License Application: Fall 2015
• Applicable State Permit Applications: Spring 2016
• FERC Pilot License Obtained: Spring 2016
Potential Barriers
Site characteristics and weather can create challenging conditions for collecting field data.
However, significant ecological data collected in the Kvichak River by researchers over the past
decade as well as environmental interaction data collected during 2014 and 2015 demonstration
testing will continue to build the knowledge base that informs the permitting process.
5.2 Project Site
This Project site is available and not encumbered by potential land ownership issues. IVC is
responsible for all site control (Figure 5). The RivGen® Power System will be connected to the
Village of Igiugig’s microgrid. The power plant site is entirely contained within Tract H-2, Igiugig
Community Facilities Subdivision, and is owned by the state of Alaska, Department of Community,
Commerce and economic Development. The Village of Igiugig has a long-term lease from the
State for the power plant and is authorized to provide power to the community of Igiugig under
certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (No. 681), issued by the Regulatory Commission
of Alaska.
The RivGen® Power System will be installed in the Kvichak River, approximately 0.6 miles south of
the Igiugig Electric Power Plant at the southwest tip of the first island of the Kvichak River. The
installation will occur at the same location where ORPC installed the RivGen® device for testing in
the summer of 2014 and 2015.
Figure 5. Location map of the RivGen® Power System at Igiugig, AK
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 28 of 50 9/11/15
5.3 Project Risk
5.3.1 Technical Risk
Through the prototype RivGen® Power System demonstration at Igiugig in 2014 and 2015 IVC an
ORPC have retired a significant number of technical risks these include:
• Assembling the prototype RivGen® Power system with locally available equipment and labor
• Deploying the RivGen® Mooring System including 13,000 lb anchors without a crane, relying on
locally available equipment, vessels, and personnel.
• Verifying the “self deploying” aspect of the RivGen® device through multiple deployments and
retrievals
• Successfully launching and attaching the RivGen® device to its mooring
• Achieving stable reliable grid interconnection and remote monitoring and operations capability
through the SCADA system
• Achieving enhanced device efficiency with the addition of a fairing to validate that target
extraction efficiencies for the commercial RivGen® are achievable.
While these significant technical risks have been retired, others remain or will arise as the Project
continues. In order to proactively address this, the Project Team will manage Project risk through
the Project Management Plan, which will include a Risks Log that is Failure Mode Effects Analysis-
based (described in Section 3.3). This process is a valuable tool to address complicated issues
and ensure front end engineering anticipates and addresses these concerns before they became
an issue. Potential problems and how they will be addressed, include the following:
Performing reliable and safe deployment and retrieval operations of the RivGen® device in a high
velocity river current
Deploying and retrieving the RivGen® device in high velocity river current is challenging. ORPC has
now worked at Igiugig for two seasons and successfully deployed and retrieved the RivGen®
device multiple times. ORPC has continued to make advances in deployment and retrieval
operations and has greatly simplified hooking the RivGen® device onto its mooring system and
deploying ad retrieving it from the riverbed over the course of field work in Igiugig in 2014 and
2015. As evidence of this, the 2015 deployment of the RivGen® required only a single vessel
operating with the RivGen® device, while 2014 operations required the use of two tow vessels, two
excavators, and a barge. ORPC avoids having any boats working upstream of anchored
equipment. In addition, safety and operational briefings are conducted prior to any on-water
operations, approved safety equipment is worn at all times, and all major on-water operations
include at least one safety response vessel to assist in man-overboard or other emergency
situations.
Successful integration of the electricity provided by the RivGen® Power System into an isolated
diesel electric grid
To mitigate risk associated with integration, the Project Team will partner with Marsh Creek, a
leading company working on isolated grid projects in Alaska. Marsh Creek will be the lead sub-
contractor installing the RivGen® power electronics. Prior to installation rigorous testing will be
completed to ensure that a wide range of isolated grid conditions are simulated, including
interconnection to a diesel generator and relatively large variations in load creating associated
voltage and frequency swings in the system. ORPC and Marsh Creek utilized this approach in
2015 and achieved successful grid interconnection of the RivGen® Power system on the first day of
operations in Igiugig. Pre-testing before actual interconnection at Igiugig will ensure that the
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 29 of 50 9/11/15
RivGen® Power System has a much higher chance of successful interconnection with minimal field
time to achieve reliable operation on Igiugig’s grid.
Increased project costs and timeline delays
There is a risk that Project costs will increase by the time that installation occurs and/or that
component fabrication could experience delays that interfere with the overall project schedule. To
help mitigate these risks, the Project Manager will have fully executed contracts in place with all
vendors. ORPC’s prior experience and lessons learned in deploying operating, and retrieving a
RivGen® Power System in Igiugig in the summer of 2014 and 2015 has greatly reduced these
risks.
Environmental monitoring
To ensure protection of marine life, environmental monitoring has been included among the
milestones, and the Project Team will work in concert with regulatory agencies to ensure that all
operations comply with policies that mitigate any potential adverse impact to the environment.
Data gathered during the sockeye salmon run in 2015 will be analyzed and utilized to better define
any areas of concern and focus environmental monitoring on those specific areas of concerns to
reduce cost of this monitoring while answering any necessary questions and addressing concerns
about potential effects on the environment.
5.3.2 Environmental Risk
The environmental factors listed below have been addressed in the FERC pilot licensing process.
Permitting and environmental monitoring associated the successful demonstration testing that
occurred in August and September 2014 at the project site, in addition to significant existing
ecological data related to the Kvichak River, has contributed to a knowledge base that is
anticipated to minimize power system effects on the environment. The 2014 and 2015
demonstration testing included video monitoring for fisheries interactions, hydraulic and acoustic
measurements, as well as visual observations of wildlife interactions.
• Threatened or endangered species
Previous Section 7 consultation has indicated no threatened or endangered species at the
project location. If necessary and appropriate, the FERC Environmental Assessment (EA) will
also serve as the Commission’s biological assessment for the purpose of section 7 consultation
under the Endangered Species Act.
• Habitat issues
The 2014 demonstration project included environmental monitoring to assess environmental
interaction, anticipate collaborating with state and federal regulators to develop environmental
monitoring plans that are appropriate for longer tern installation.
• Wetlands and other protected areas
Data and transmission cables may transverse wetland areas between the RivGen® TGU and
the shore station. The project will be designed to minimize disturbance to potential wetlands
and will be in accordance with state and federal guidelines for protected areas.
• Archaeological and historical resources
If necessary and appropriate, the FERC Environmental Assessment (EA) will also serve as the
Commission’s biological assessment for consultation under section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
• Land development constraints
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 30 of 50 9/11/15
As described in Section 4.3.2, the Project is not encumbered by potential land ownership
issues, and the Igiugig Village Council will be responsible for all site control.
• Telecommunications interference
Not anticipated
• Aviation considerations
The proposed project is not anticipated to impact local aviation. However, for the 2014
demonstration project ORPC issued a notice to mariners and aviators to make them aware of
the project’s location, which may be necessary for float planes to consider.
• Visual, aesthetics impacts
Visual and aesthetic impacts are not anticipated as a result of the RivGen® Power System. The
system will be submerged and only surface marker buoys will be visible. The shore station will
be sited and designed to minimize aesthetic impacts.
Other Potential Barriers
As mentioned in Section 5.1.2, site characteristics and the short field season make environmental
data collection challenging. In addition, RivGen® demonstrations have not aligned with the yearly
salmon smolt migration which typically occurs in May or June. ORPC anticipates collaborating with
the IVC as well as state and federal regulatory agencies to implement an adaptive management
approach that minimizes risk to the local environment.
5.4 Existing and Proposed Energy System
5.4.1 Basic Configuration of Existing Energy System
The Village of Igiugig existing energy system is comprised of three diesel generators, each with 65
kW prime power capacity, that are equipped with marine manifolds to enhance heat recovery. The
system has automatic paralleling switchgear, which is designed for fully automatic operation
including auto start and stop of individual generators. Multiple generators can be operated in
parallel to meet high peak loads that exceed the capacity of an individual generator. The
switchgear is controlled by a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) with open architecture that
allows modification to accommodate control of future alternative energy systems. The system also
includes a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, which allows remote access
for monitoring of all critical systems in the plant. It also allows technicians to have remote access
for programming changes of the PLC through password protection. The SCADA system also
utilizes open architecture that will allow future expansion to monitor alternative energy.
The IEC diesel power plant is the sole source of power generation for Igiugig. The existing system
was installed in 2011 by AEA through a Rural Power System Upgrade project, following an Existing
Energy Assessment in 2008, which was also conducted through a Rural Power System Upgrade.
The RivGen® Power System has been designed to utilize existing infrastructure, including
transportation of power system components and installation equipment to remote sites. RivGen®
power electronics are adaptable to a wide variety of isolated grid conditions and are designed to
interface with diesel generators and controls requiring minimal upgrades to the existing grid. In
2014 and 2015 ORPC has demonstrated that the RivGen® Power System can reliably produce and
deliver energy as planned.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 31 of 50 9/11/15
Existing Energy Generation and Usage
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt 6
i. Number of generators/boilers/other: 3
grid, leave this section blank)
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other:
65 kW
iii. Generator/boilers/other type: John Deere
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other: 2011
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other:
12.2kW per gallon for generators
vi. Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes
estimated annual displaced heating fuel (gallons): N
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $25,000
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $17,000
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal]
Other
iii. Peak Load
iv. Average Load
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency
vii. Future trends
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
6 The Railbelt grid connects all customers of Chugach Electric Association, Homer Electric Association,
Golden Valley Electric Association, the City of Seward Electric Department, Matanuska Electric Association
and Anchorage Municipal Light and Power.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 32 of 50 9/11/15
5.4.2 Future Trends
Igiugig is a thriving eco-conscious community that anticipates growth through sustainable
management of its resources. As the community and local commercial enterprises grow it is likely
the electrical load will grow. The community of Igiugig, therefore, is pro active in continuing to
pursue energy efficiency measures to continue to reduce the energy requirements and mitigate
load growth. Igiugig is committed to using renewable energy whenever practicable to meet these
future energy market needs. Over the course of the next 20 years Igiugig anticipates a potential
2% growth rate in the community and a similar growth rate in electrical demands. At this growth
rate over the course of these 20 years, we will see an average nominal load of 50kW increase to
an average load of 75kW . IVC will strongly consider adding additional RivGen® Power Systems to
meet the complete load at present and to add additional devices as its load continues to increase.
5.4.3 Impact on Rates
This Project will stabilize power costs in Igiugig in the short term and help to bring down costs over
the long term. Initially, during the first 1-5 years of the Project, O&M costs will be more costly as
environmental monitoring will likely be required and the community and local contractors will be
learning to operate and maintain the system. During this stage of the Project, it is not anticipated
that power produced from the RivGen® Power System will be significantly more economical than
diesel generation; however, it will serve to stabilize energy costs as it is not dependent on fossil
fuels and their associated price volatility. After five years of project operations, it is anticipated that
power produced from the Project will begin to realize savings over diesel generation as
environmental concerns become understood and require little or no monitoring and the community
has learned to operate and maintain the system efficiently and economically. At this point in the
lifecycle of the project and through its 20-year lifetime, the community will realize cost savings over
the avoided cost of diesel generation. It is unknown how the pre- and post-PCE costs will affect the
project economics as PCE policy five years from now may or may not recognize and incentivize the
benefits of renewable generation in rural Alaska.
5.4.4 Proposed System Design
The proposed renewable energy system that IVC will installation in the Kvichak River is the ORPC
RivGen® Power System (Figure 6).
1. Description of Renewable Energy Technology Specific to Project Location
The RivGen® Power System was designed by ORPC to generate electricity from river and tidal
currents, either with direct power grid connection or in remote communities with isolated power
grids. Igiugig, like many remote communities, relies on local power distribution grids connected to
diesel generators, which leave a huge carbon footprint and are growing increasingly expensive to
fuel and operate. The RivGen® Power System is designed to connect directly into existing diesel-
electric grids, operating in parallel with diesel generators to offset diesel power generation and fuel
use. An important and unique feature of the RivGen® Power System is that it is essentially self-
deploying, as demonstrated in the 2014 demonstration project, requiring only small- to medium-
size vessels that are commonly available, even in remote river or coastal communities.
RivGen® Power System components include the following (Note: dimensions are based on 2015
prototype RivGen® Power System):
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 33 of 50 9/11/15
• Turbine generator unit (TGU) consisting of two turbines connected through a single driveline to
an underwater generator (34 ft x 4.9 ft x 4.9 ft)
• Pontoon support structure which supports the TGU (42 ft x 64 ft x 5.5 ft)
• Power electronics and SCADA control system
• Underwater power and data cabling
• Mooring system consisting of two anchors connected by a self-adjusting chain block
Figure 6. RivGen® Power System
RivGen® TGU: Prototype Testing
ORPC has utilized a phased approach to develop the RivGen® Power System. In 2011, a prototype
pontoon support structure was built and successfully tested in Nikiski, Alaska. Subsequently, a full-
scale prototype of the RivGen® TGU, with associated power electronics, was built and successfully
operated at ORPC’s marine center in Eastport-Lubec, Maine in 2012 (Figure 6).7
Testing results
included the following:
• Underwater power electronics function and reliability verified
• Composite carbon fiber foils tested
• Turbine ruggedness verified with 95 RPM freewheel test
• TGU output verified down to 1.7 knots
• TGU output verified through 5 knots current
• TGU self-starting capability verified at 4.5 knots
• Automated kick-start implemented to allow the TGU to be kick-started either manually or
automatically when currents exceed 2 knots.
• New one-sided TGU chassis design verified
In addition, ORPC built and tested a mechanical debris detection device for the RivGen® Power
System on the Nenana River in partnership with the Alaska Hydrokinetic Energy Research Center
7 ORPC’s work was funded in part by an Emerging Energy Technology Grant from the Denali Commission,
“Nenana, Alaska Hydrokinetic RivGen® Power System,” (UAF 11-0017). Final Report April 16, 2012.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 34 of 50 9/11/15
(AHERC) at University of Alaska Fairbanks. AHERC verified this system’s ability to log data on
underwater debris impacts and tested the system while attached to a prototype RivGen® anchor.
ORPC also verified that the anchor exceeded the rated holding power at the Nenana site and
verified deployment and retrieval loads in heavy sediment conditions.
In 2013, ORPC implemented improvements to the RivGen® TGU based on results of the 2011
testing. This included improvements to the driveline system to reduce friction in the bearings and
improve alignment as well as installing redundant seals. Performance testing of the refurbished
TGU was completed in February 2014 at ORPC’s Eastport test site. These results included:
• TGU self starting improved allowing self start down to 1.5 m/s
• Modest improvement in TGU efficiency
Figure 7. RivGen® TGU aboard the Energy Tide 2
RivGen® Power System: Demonstration
In 2014, ORPC built, tested and demonstrated the commercial viability of the RivGen® Power
System in partnership with the Village of Igiugig, Alaska (Figure 7).8
This project has proved that
the RivGen® Power System can be successfully installed and operated in remote communities.
The demonstration project is proceeding successfully, and the RivGen® Power System began
generating electricity on August 14, 2014, 3:16 pm AKDST (Figure 8).
8 This RivGen® Power System demonstration project was funded in part by AEA Emerging Energy
Technology Fund, no. 7310043.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 35 of 50 9/11/15
Figure 8. ORPC’s RivGen® device during installation on the Kvichak River, August 12, 2014.
Concurrent with ORPC’s demonstration of the RivGen® Power System, University of Washington
(UW), as part of a DOE-funded project to study advanced controls of in-stream turbines, collected
flow data upstream of ORPC’s RivGen® turbine deployed in the Kvichak River in the summer of
2014.9
The goal was to understand the short-range predictability of turbulence approaching the
turbine and the subsequent effects on turbine performance. In addition, UW team collected flow
data downstream of the turbine, to determine wake production, and acoustic data surrounding the
turbine, to determine noise production. Analysis of UW’s findings is ongoing. Initial results showed
that improvements in TGU efficiency when deployed in the river environment are likely due to the
more constrained nature of the flow in the river as opposed to the more open Eastport tidal site.
Through the testing of the RivGen® device in Eastport and Alaska, ORPC has documented over
400 hours of runtime with the RivGen® TGU spinning. This includes 265 hours of freewheeling time
and 135 hours of time producing power. At Igiugig over the deployment time in 2014 the RivGen®
generated 794 kWh of power over 72 hours producing power.
In 2015 ORPC completed improvements to the RivGen® TGU, the pontoon support structure and
the RivGen® power electronics. The improvements to the pontoon support structure greatly
simplified deployment and retrieval logistics by lengthening the pontoons and removing any
underwater cross members, thus allowing the RivGen® device to be easily towed to the mooring
system with a single vessel. Improvements to the RivGen® TGU included the addition of a fairing to
enhance current velocities at crucial points in the turbine’s rotation and increase extraction
efficiency by 30%. The improvements to the RivGen® power electronics enabled successful and
stable interconnection of the power produced from the RivGen® device to the Igiugig grid,
enhanced control of the RivGen® turbine to further maximize extraction efficiency, enhanced data
collection, and further development of reliable remote operations and monitoring through the
9 Ocean Renewable Power Company, Advanced Energy Harvesting Control Schemes for Marine
Renewable Energy Devices, funded by DOE, 2014-2015, DE-EE0006397.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 36 of 50 9/11/15
SCADA system. Together these technological improvements validated the necessary system
improvements needed to make ORPC’s RivGen® Power system commercially viable and
economically competitive with diesel generated electricity in Igiugig.
Through the testing of the RivGen® device in Eastport and Alaska, ORPC has documented over
800 hours of runtime with the RivGen® TGU spinning. This includes approximately 300 hours of
freewheeling time and 500 hours of time producing power. At Igiugig over the deployment time in
2014 the RivGen® generated 794 kWh of power over 72 hours producing power. In 2015 over 2
MWh of electricity was put onto the Igiugig grid.
Optimization: RivGen® Power System Version 2.0
Concurrent with ORPC’s demonstration of the RivGen® Power System, the company is completing
design enhancements to optimize the next iteration of the RivGen® Power System — Version 2.0.
Working with the Village of Igiugig, ORPC tested the most significant of these enhancements
(described above) on the Kvichak River in 2015, where it conducted performance testing,
performed environmental monitoring, and gathered economic data on RivGen® Power System.
This work was funded in part by three federal grants – U.S. Department of Agriculture SBIR Phase
I (2013) and Phase II (2014), “RivGen® Commercialization Project,” (2014-02567), and DOE grant,
“Advanced Energy Harvesting Control Schemes for Marine Renewable Energy Devices,” (DE-
EE0006397).
Phase III: Final Design and Permitting
A. Final site specific design
Tasks
Utilizing the designs created during the RivGen® optimization studies, ORPC and IVC will complete
specific designs based on the final RivGen® Power Systems designs completed by ORPC. While it
is not anticipated that any additional site specific data will be required, any additional field data
collection needed to complete these site specific designs will be identified, gathered and integrated
into the final design.
B. Permitting
The Igiugig Village Council was issued the following permits for the 2014 and 2015 hydrokinetic
demonstration projects on the Kvichak River:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nationwide Permit 52
Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Fish Habitat Permit
Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Land and Water Use Permits
In addition, the Village of Igiugig completed a FERC draft pilot license application in April 2015 and
anticipates filing a final license application in November 2015 to be received by July 2016.
Additional permitting tasks required for this proposed Project are described in Section 3.1.
Phase IV: Construction
The following tasks are required to complete the Phase IV Construction:
• Fabricate RivGen® Power System components, including:
- Generator System
- Turbines
- Integrated chassis and support system
- Mooring system
- Power Electronics, SCADA, and P&D Cables
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 37 of 50 9/11/15
- Driveline components
- On-shore station
- Deployment and retrieval equipment
• Assemble and align the RivGen® TGU
• Ship all RivGen® Power System components to Igiugig
• Assemble the RivGen® Power System
• Assemble and install environmental monitoring equipment
• Install and connect the on-shore station to the Village of Igiugig power grid
• Install power and data cables from the power electronic module to the come-ashore location
• Install the mooring system
• Install the RivGen® device and P&D cables to shore
• Deploy the RivGen® device
• Perform commissioning operations with secondary load
• Integrate with Village of Igiugig power grid and complete power system commissioning
Phase IV construction tasks are described in Section 3.1.
2. Optimum Installed Capacity
Power output of a single RivGen® device varies with water current speed but in a 6.75 foot-per-
second river current (approximately 4 knots or 2 meters per second), it will generate 20kilowatts.
3. Anticipated Capacity Factor
The anticipated capacity factor for the RivGen® Power System is 96%. This is based on average
power at the site as determined during the site characterization work conducted as part of Phase II:
Feasibility and Conceptual Design.
4. Anticipated Annual Generation
While the Kvichak River remains ice free the majority of the year, the RivGen® device will be
removed each spring when the ice in Lake Iliamna breaks up. Regular scheduled maintenance will
also occur during the 4-6 weeks when the RivGen® is removed from the river. While this is the
largest anticipated down-time the overall availability of the RivGen® Power System in Igiugig is
predicted to be 90%. Based on this availability and the anticipated capacity factor, the anticipated
annual output of the RivGen® Power System is 204,752 kWh.
5. Anticipated Barriers
See Project Risks described in Section 5.3
6. Basic Integration Concept
At Igiugig, the device will be installed in the Kvichak River and fitted with power electronics and
underwater power and data cables to shore, creating a complete RivGen® Power System that will
be connected to the village’s micro-grid. In 2011 the AEA completed a Rural Power System
Upgrade project on behalf of the Village of Igiugig that will facilitate integration.
The RivGen® power electronics are adaptable to a wide variety of isolated grid conditions and are
designed to interface with diesel generators and controls requiring minimal upgrades to the existing
grid. ORPC has utilized local expertise in the design of the RivGen® Power System’s power
electronics and will continue to partner with Marsh Creek, LLC, to ensure that grid integration is
successful. This successful grid interconnection was verified in 2015 using several modalities,
including:
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 38 of 50 9/11/15
• Successful integration of the power from the RivGen® Power System into the Igiugig grid
using an SMA inverter designed for solar applications
• Successful interconnection of the power from the RivGen® Power System into the Igiugig
grid using a Satcon inverter that also enabled active control of the RivGen® generator
• Successful integration of an ABB Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) to pre condition the
power from the RivGen® device before delivery to the inverters and to allow precise active control
of the RivGen® device using several control algorithms
Based on these successful tests ORPC will further refine the RivGen® power electronics to ensure
reliable and efficient energy transport to the Igiugig grid.
The RivGen® Power System components are designed to be shippable via standard intermodal
shipping methods and will utilize the existing transportation infrastructure used for the current
energy market. The RivGen® Power System can be assembled with equipment readily available in
remote communities, such as loaders and other heavy equipment utilized for existing energy
infrastructure installations. RivGen® Power Systems will be deployed within one mile of the existing
grid to minimize power transmission upgrades. The RivGen® Project will therefore not require a
major investment to integrate the RivGen® Power System into Alaska’s current energy market.
7. Delivery Methods
All RivGen® Power System components are shipped in intermodal shipping containers to staging
areas near a project site and arrive ready for final assembly. Transport to Igiugig wil include
overland transport to Homer, where the components will be transoladed onto a vessel for transit
across Cook Inlet to Williamsport. From there they will be hauled overland to Pile Bay and again
transloaded onto a barge for transit across Lake Illiamna to Igiugig. The landing where the
RivGen® device will be delivered is also the staging area for RivGen® device assembly. When
assembled, the RivGen® device will be towed to the project site where the mooring system is
deployed. The device will be held in place in the river by the mooring system and then submerged
(ballasted) into position on the river bed. An underwater power and data cable will run along the
river bottom to an on-shore interconnection point.
Documents
As a construction project requesting funding for Final Design and Permitting and Construction, the
following documents are attached:
• Feasibility Documents
TerraSond. (2011). Kvichak River RISEC Project; Resource Reconnaissance and
Physical Characterization, Final Report to IVC.
• Design Documents
Design documents for the RivGen® device are included in IVC’s FERC draft pilot
project license application (P-13511-002), which can be found at this link:
http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?document_id=14320043
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 39 of 50 9/11/15
Proposed System Design Capacity and Fuel Usage
(Include any projections for continued use of non-renewable fuels)
a) Proposed renewable capacity (Wind,
Hydro, Biomass, other)
[kW or MMBtu/hr]
20 kW
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 204,752 kWh
ii. Heat [MMBtu]
c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood or pellets [cords, green tons,
dry tons]
iv. Other
d) i. Estimate number of hours renewable
will allow powerhouse to turn diesel engines
off (fill in as applicable)
5.4.5 Metering Equipment
The SCADA system, an integral part of the RivGen® Power System, includes monitoring of the
power produced by the RivGen® and that is put onto the grid after conditioning through the power
electronics system. The power electronics system that will be included as a cost share to this
Project already includes a Shark-brand power meter that is dedicated to providing information on
the power delivered to the grid. When testing the demonstration RivGen® device, ORPC provided
AEA access to this Shark meter via the internet to allow monitoring and auditing of power delivered
to the grid. The same access will be provided during the commercial phase of this Project. The
SCADA system also allows logging of any data required for project reporting.
SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS
6.1 Economic Feasibility
6.1.1 Economic Benefit
Potential Annual and Lifetime Fuel Displacement
The proposed Project will significantly impact the existing energy resource by displacing diesel fuel
at Igiugig, where the estimated annual output from a 20kW project is 204,752 kWh. According to
the Alaska Energy Authority 2013 PCE report, Igiugig Electric produces 353,535kWh per year
using a total of 30,323 gallons of diesel. Based on the resulting 11.65kWh per gallon of diesel; the
corresponding annual fuel displacement of the power from the Project would be 17,561 gallons per
year.10
10 AEA, 2013. Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization Program.
This equates to roughly 351,220 gallons over a twenty-year anticipated useful life of the
Project. The anticipated cost savings to the electric utility based on avoided cost of fuel published
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 40 of 50 9/11/15
in the PCE report amounts to $133,118 per year. These numbers clearly demonstrate the
compelling economics of a hydrokinetic project at Igiugig
RivGen® Power Systems provide power that is not dependent on the unstable and increasingly
high costs associated with fossil fuels; moreover, the cost of producing power from river currents
will decrease over time as the technology matures. Cost savings created by RivGen® Power
Systems will ultimately reduce the State’s currently increasing burden of subsidizing the high
power costs in rural Alaskan communities.11
Since the Project Team is committed to training and
local contractors to perform on-site construction and operation, numerous jobs will also be created
with the installation, continued operation and periodic maintenance of RivGen® Power Systems in
Alaska and elsewhere as the market for them expands.
Anticipated Annual and Lifetime Revenue
None – this would be a transfer of electrons
Potential Additional Annual Incentives
None
Potential Additional Revenue Streams
None
6.1.2 Power Purchase/Sale
Not applicable for this Project.
6.1.3 Public Benefit for Projects with Private Sector Sales
Not applicable for this Project.
Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month) NA
Estimated sales (kWh) NA
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($) NA
Estimated sales (kWh) NA
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($) NA
11 In 2009, the state of Alaska spent $37 million on the Power Cost Equalization Program, an increase of
31.6% from 2008.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 41 of 50 9/11/15
6.2 Financing Plan
6.2.1 Additional Funds
Matching funds are required for this Project (Table 4). IVC has submitted the following proposal to
DOE for the match: Next Generation MHK River Power System Optimized for Performance,
Durability and Survivability, (DE-FOA-0001310: Next Generation MHK River Power System
Optimized for Performance, Durability and Survivability, 1310-1517), requesting $1,540,341. Of
this funding $641,663 would be a direct match to this project. Notification of this award will occur in
October 2015.
IF DOE and AEA funds are awarded, Bristol Bay Development Corporation will invest $500,000 in
the Project, completing the required project budget total.
Table 4. Additional Project Funds
Funding Source Amount
AEA $1,490,077
DOE, FOA-0001310 $641,663
Bristol Bay Development Corporation $500,000 (on-going operations)
Project Total $2,631,740 (note this includes BBDC funding
for first 10 years of on-going operations and
monitoring not included in project total for
this grant)
6.2.2 Financing opportunities/limitations
If the proposed project includes final design or construction phases, what are your opportunities
and/or limitations to fund this project with a loan, bonds, or other financing options?
As a federally recognized tribe, IVC will be eligible for federal funding opportunities or able to
leverage private grants. Our tribe is the majority owner of an 8(a) contracting company that has
invested in a large rock quarry, to quarry rock for the next 30+ years. In order to purchase the
property, we took out a large loan from the Small Business Administration, which imposes certain
restrictions that prevents IVC from borrowing without prior permission.
IVC works closely with Igiugig Native Corporation for smaller loans and financing for village
projects when needed. In the past we borrowed from the native corporation to purchase houses.
The regional corporation, Bristol Bay Development Fund, is supportive of this project, and willing to
invest if needed.
6.2.3 Cost Overruns
IVC and ORPC have already worked in partnership through the demonstration phase of this project
to manage a finite budget and complete the project scope on schedule and within the budget
constraints. During the demonstration phase of the project careful coordination between IVC’s REF
funds and ORPC’s EETF, USDA, and DOE funding sources was required to ensure that all project
costs were covered and that all project goals were achieved within the funding limitations. Over two
seasons of operations the project team was successful in executing the project within budget. IVC
and ORPC will continue to work in this manner through the Project proposed here. Should any cost
overruns occur, IVC will work with ORPC and the other project partners to minimize these overruns
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 42 of 50 9/11/15
and bring the Project back within budget before these overruns threaten the Project’s successful
execution. Should cost overruns become inevitable, IVC will pursue additional funding through
investors in the project, additional grant funds and low interest loans to make up any project deficit.
6.2.4 Subsequent Phases
Subsequent phases are not required beyond Phase IV Construction.
6.3 Other Public Benefit
Job Creation
Other public benefits include job creation. During the 2014 and 2015 demonstration of the RivGen®
Power System in Igiugig, local job support was realized for local contractors who gained
experience in the assembly, deployment, operation, inspection and removal of the RivGen® Power
System. Local contracting companies, including Alaska native companies, were utilized for the
majority of terrestrial and marine operations, while a local, contractor-owned camp was used to
accommodate contractors who worked on the project, supporting local food and hospitality jobs.
IVC will continue to employ local contractors, including Alaska Native companies, for the Project.
This will provide companies with additional customer opportunities, and some of them may add
jobs as a result. The experience will also help them with workforce development by offering
expansion of skills brought about by working with a new hydrokinetic energy technology. The types
of jobs that will be utilized during the Project include the following:
■ Design and fabrication of grid interconnection power electronics and SCADA system
integration
■ On-site equipment and operators for device assembly, installation, and required
maintenance
■ Marine assets and personnel for installation, routine maintenance, and removal
■ Third party environmental monitoring
■ Fabricators to construct RivGen® Power System components and provide repairs or
modifications to these components and installation, maintenance, and removal equipment
over the lifetime of the project
The workforce development opportunity is an important aspect of the Project as project benefits
are greatly enhanced by successful transfer of the technology expertise to the local community.
Not only will this have greater financial benefit to IVC, but the creation of stable, desirable work will
enhance overall socioeconomic health. IVC is committed to this aspect of the Project and will seek
additional funds to support workforce development and technology transfer to the community level.
Educational Benefits
Preparation for the Project has already brought significant educational benefits to universities and
national laboratories and includes the following:
■ Alaska Hydrokinetic Energy Research Center (AHERC) completed a debris diversion
literature survey in 2011.
■ Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) study was completed in 2012 by University of
Alaska Anchorage, University of Alaska Fairbanks and National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
which measured the current velocities and bathymetry and used computer-modeling techniques
combined with historical USGS data on river levels used to estimate the resource strength.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 43 of 50 9/11/15
■ University of Washington, as part of a DOE-funded project to study advanced controls of in-
stream turbines, collected flow data upstream of ORPC’s RivGen® turbine deployed in the Kvichak
River in the summer of 2014.
■ University of Washington, funded by the National Science Foundation through a Northwest
National Marine Renewable Energy Center grant and by DOE though the Sustainability of Tidal
Energy grant, collected wake and acoustic measurements associated with ORPC’s RivGen®
turbine deployed in the Kvichak River in the summer of 2014.
As the Project develops, it will continue to bring significant educational benefits to university
students and national laboratories. In addition to triggering an increase in research and
development spending, it will create numerous opportunities for students, educators and
researchers. At the university level, the Project will continue to mature University of Alaska
Anchorage hydrokinetic research, which is leading projects that assess the in-stream hydrokinetic
potential for the state of Alaska and the contiguous United States.
The Project will also provide publishing opportunities in the field of hydrokinetics and open the door
to increased collaborative efforts between university and private sector researchers. This in turn
will enhance educational opportunities for students, and position them more strongly for future
employment in academic and ocean energy industry settings. The Project also stands to create
valuable internship opportunities for young people in marine and hydrokinetic energy and related
fields.
Research and development activities associated with the continuing improvement of ORPC’s
turbine design and manufacturing processes enable collaboration with a range of university
partners and national laboratories. IVC has relationships with University of Alaska Anchorage,
University of Alaska Fairbanks, University of Washington and National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, which all contribute to the development of key technologies for hydrokinetic devices.
Continued collaboration with these and other research institutions will foster the growth of
academic centers of excellence related to marine and hydrokinetic energy.
Environmental Benefits
Diesel fuel is currently shipped to Igiugig by barge up the Kvichak River or by plane. Both of these
delivery methods could result in a spill, which could detrimentally impact the Village’s natural
resources and vital subsistence culture. Once on site the fuel is stored in a tank farm where there
is risk of slow leakage or catastrophic tank failures that could lead to localized diesel spills
impacting the environment in the vicinity of the village and eventually finding its way into the river.
The RivGen® Power System will significant reduce the volume and frequency of fuel deliveries
required and the necessary volume of fuel that is stored on site and the associated potential risk to
the environment.
Scientific Benefits
The project will result in numerous scientific benefits. Most immediately, it will contribute to the
advancement in marine and hydrokinetic technologies by incorporating significant advances in
hydrokinetic engineering that will impact the future of the industry worldwide. These advances
include successful integration of the electricity provided by the RivGen® Power System into an
isolated diesel electric grid.
In addition, the Project will continue to build the knowledge base of environmental interactions with
hydrokinetic technologies which will contribute to best available science for future projects.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 44 of 50 9/11/15
This project has already demonstrated this advancement through the collaboration of researchers
from the University of Washington in the demonstration phase of this project. This has resulted in
the following papers published by the University of Washington:
Cavagnaro, R. & Polagye, B. (submitted) Field performance assessment of a hydrokinetic turbine,
International Journal of Marine Energy.
Hall, T., A. Niblick, B. Polagye, & Aliseda, A. (revision submitted) Characterizing the hydrodynamic
performance of a helical, cross-flow turbine, Renewable Energy.
Electric Power Benefits
Output from the RivGen® Power System will directly offset the use of diesel fuel for electrical
generation, providing a stably priced alternative renewable energy source. The Project will also
continue the community’s efforts toward environmental sustainability by producing power with zero
carbon emissions.
A successful commercial Project and corresponding decrease in local electricity rates could
potentially encourage both public and private facilities to increase the use of electric heat pumps in
the future, which would subsequently increase peak demand and further increasing annual
generation requirements.
Electric Infrastructure Benefits
The Project will not require a major investment to integrate the RivGen® Power System into IVC’s
existing electric generation infrastructure, which was installed in 2011 by AEA through a Rural
Power System Upgrade project, following an Existing Energy Assessment in 2008, also conducted
through a Rural Power System Upgrade. In 2014 an extension of the Igiugig grid to the vicinity of
the shore station, necessary to allow transmission of the power generated by the Project was
completed under a Renewable Energy Fund Grant from AEA to the IVC. The RivGen® Power
System has been designed to utilize existing infrastructure, including transportation of power
system components and installation equipment to remote sites. RivGen® power electronics are
adaptable to a wide variety of isolated grid conditions and are designed to interface with diesel
generators and controls requiring minimal upgrades to the existing grid.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 45 of 50 9/11/15
SECTION 7 – SUSTAINABILITY
Business Structure
IVC will own and operate the RivGen® Power System. The Village owns, operates and maintains
the Igiugig Electric Company power plant and distribution system, and therefore has experience
sustaining a utility and its attendant systems.
Financing the Maintenance and Operations for the Life of the Project
IVC will prepare a Business Operating Plan for the Project that identifies long-term operations and
maintenance as well as repair and replacement costs for the useful life of the Project. The Village
prepared a Business Operating Plan for its powerhouse upgrade project and therefore has the
resources and ability to develop a viable business plan for RivGen® Power System operations and
maintenance.
For the first five years of the Project IVC will enter into a contract with ORPC to provide operations
and maintenance support for the RivGen® Power System. Over the course of this maintenance
contract, IVC and ORPC will work together to transfer the capacity to maintain the system to
resources within the community of Igiugig, while at the same time working to reduce the costs of
operations and maintenance overall. It is anticipated that by the end of the first five years of
operation, the costs of operations and maintenance will be below the cost of fuel saved. Future
operations and maintenance work therefore will be paid for by the savings realized in offset diesel
fuel use. Over the lifetime of the Project there will be significant cost savings by the reduction in
diesel fuel use that will allow the Project to pay back any debt incurred in the early years of Project
operations.
Vessel availability and mobilization costs for non-local vessels could be an operational issue for
this Project. As the Project Team begins year round operation of the RivGen® Power System
vessel availability for wintertime maintenance or springtime RivGen® device removal and
reinstallation could be especially challenging. ILC, however, plans to purchase a vessel for its
transportation business that would be stationed in Igiugig. Igiugig Village Council and ORPC have
already begun discussions to ensure that the vessel is selected with RivGen® deployment
capability in mind and that the RivGen® Power System Version 2.0 is also designed with the
capacity of this locally available vessel in mind.
Operational costs will be most dramatically affected by the cost of on water operations. This local
vessel availability would not only ensure operations are possible year round, but would serve to
dramatically reduce operational costs over time. Other ongoing costs will include ensuring that on
shore power electronics are maintained in a functional state. Due to the highly technical nature of
these components, it will likely be necessary that specially trained technicians and certified
electricians perform maintenance and troubleshooting of these systems. Most of this can be done
remotely saving travel costs. Some fieldwork, however, is inevitable. ORPC will continue
technology development to ensure the most reliable components are chosen to reduce the high
cost of bringing in outside technicians for this maintenance work.
IVC will report on the savings and benefits from this Project to AEA for the first ten years of
operations. This will include the effective cost of power produced from the system based on the
amount of diesel offset and associated costs of maintaining the system. IVC will also report on the
amount of operations and maintenance funds that are spent locally rather than outside the
community to provide a metric of how much job creation and enhancement occurs as a result of
the on-going RivGen® operations.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 46 of 50 9/11/15
This workforce development is an important aspect of the project as Project benefits are greatly
enhanced by successful transfer of the technology expertise to the local community. Not only will
this have greater financial benefit to the community, but the creation of stable, desirable work will
enhance overall socioeconomic health of the community. IVC is committed to this aspect of the
Project and will seek additional funds to support workforce development and technology transfer to
the community level.
SECTION 8 – PROJECT READINESS
IVC completed Phase I Reconnaissance in 2008 and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design in
2012. They have selected a power system – ORPC’s RivGen® Power System, which has been
successfully demonstrated in 2014 and 2-15. With Round IX funding, IVC will proceed quickly with
the commercial installation by 2016.
Table 4 identifies the studies and grants that have been completed in preparation for the Phase III
and Phase IV.
Table 4. Completed studies and grants for the Igiugig hydrokinetic project on the Kvichak River.
Igiugig Village
Council
Study EPRI River in-stream energy conversion
characterization of Alaska sites,
by Previsic, M. & Bedard
2008
Study TerraSond Kvichak River RISEC Project;
Resource Reconnaissance and
Physical Characterization, Final
Report.
2011
Grant AEA, Renewable Energy
Fund Round 2, no. 265
Phase II, Feasibility Study of a
RISEC Project on the Kvichak
River
2011
Study EPRI Assessment and Mapping of the
Riverine Hydrokinetic Resource of
the Continental United States, by
Jacobson, P., Ravens, T.,
Cunningham K., and Scott, G.
2012
Boschma
Research, Inc.
Grant AEA, Emerging Energy
Technology Fund
BRI Cyclo-turbine™ for Energy
Production
2012
ORPC Grant Denali Commission,
Emerging Energy
Technology Grant (UAF
11-0017)
Nenana, Alaska Hydrokinetic
RivGen® Power System
2010
Grant AEA, Emerging Energy
Technology Fund
(7310043)
RivGen® Power System
Commercialization Project
2012
Grant USDA, SBIR Phase I,
2013-33610-21033
RivGen® Power System
Commercialization Project
2013
Grant USDA, SBIR Phase II,
2014-02567
RivGen® Power System
Commercialization Project
2014
Grant DOE Advanced Energy Harvesting 2014
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 47 of 50 9/11/15
Control Schemes for Marine
Renewable Energy Devices
University of
Washington
Study DOE Turbulence Study, under ORPC’s
DOE Controls Grant
2014
As described in Section 5.1.2, IVC holds a FERC preliminary permit for the Project site and
submitted a draft pilot license application on April 1, 2015 and will submit the final pilot project
license on November 2, 2015. IVC holds all necessary permits for the Project.
As described in Section 5.2, the Project site is available and not encumbered by potential land
ownership issues.
IVC has the ability to procure all necessary equipment through this funding request.
SECTION 9 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION
There is considerable local support in Igiugig to develop a hydrokinetic energy source that will
reduce the dependency on diesel fuel, and lower and stabilize long-term electric rates.
The following entities have provided letters of support for this Project:
• ORPC
• Iliamna Transportation Company
• LGL Alaska Research Associates
• Iliamna Lake Contractors
SECTION 10 – COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AWARDS
IVC was awarded the following grants by AEA. All requirements were met including project
deadlines, reporting and information requests.
AEA, Renewable Energy Fund
Round 2, no. 265
Phase II, Feasibility Study of a RISEC Project on the
Kvichak River
2011
AEA, Renewable Energy
Fund, Round 7, #7071072
Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility Conceptual
Design" Grant
July 1,
2014 to
September
30, 2016,
pending
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 16012 Page 48 of 50 9/11/15
SECTION 11 – LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PRIOR PHASES
In the space below please provide a list additional documents attached to support completion of
prior phases.
Phase I
• TerraSond. 2011. Kvichak River RISEC Project, Resource, Reconnaissance and Site
Characterization, 2011
Phase II
• FERC draft pilot license application:
http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?document_id=14320043
SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
In the space below please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration.
•ORPC Alaska. 2012. Nenana, Alaska Hydrokinetic RivGen® Power System. Denali Final Report,
UAF 11-0017. http://acep.uaf.edu/media/62483/ORPC-Final-Project-Report.pdf
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY, RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND
Round IX Application: Pre-Construction – Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Igiugig Village Council: Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
SECTION 14.B. LETTERS OF SUPPORT
Iliamna Transportation Company, LLC
Ray Williams
PO Box 1029
Anchor Point, AK 99556
907-235-8360 Nov-Apr
907-399-4477 cell Nov-Apr
907-571-1596 May-Oct
888-243-6676 fax
pilebay1@hotmail.com
September 10, 2015
AlexAnna Salmon
Igiugig Village Council
P.O. Box 4008
Igiugig, AK 99613
RE: Letter of Support, AEA funding request, “Igiugig RivGen® Power System
Commercial Project”
Dear Ms. Salmon,
Iliamna Transportation Company is pleased to provide this letter of support for the
funding request “Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project,” (REF Round
IX), by Igiugig Village Council (IVC) to the Alaska Energy Authority.
IVC, in collaboration with Ocean Renewable Power Company and other partners,
propose to design and install the next generation RivGen® Turbine Generator Unit
(TGU) to demonstrate increased availability and to reduce uncertainty around the cost of
installation, operations, and maintenance. The Project will implement, test and validate
system improvements which have been identified through ORPC’s prior experience of
constructing, installing, operating and maintaining the RivGen® Power System in the
Kvichak River at Igiugig, Alaska.
Iliamna Transportation Company, LLC, will ship the RivGen® Power System from its
fabrication location in Alaska to Igiugig.
Iliamna Transportation Company, LLC gives our full support of your proposed project.
We look forward to our continued involvement with your projects.
Sincerely,
Raymond L Williams
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY, RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND
Round IX Application: Pre-Construction – Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Igiugig Village Council: Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
SECTION 14.D. RESOLUTION
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY, RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND
Round IX Application: Pre-Construction – Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Igiugig Village Council: Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
SECTION 11. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
KVICHAK RIVER RISEC PROJECT
Resource Reconnaissance &
Physical Characterization
Final Report
Kvichak River, Vicinity of Igiugig, Alaska
December 9, 2011
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
TerraSond Ltd.
1617 S. Industrial Way, Suite 3
Palmer, AK 99645
Phone: (907) 745-7215
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 SYNOPSIS OF FINDINGS ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2.1 Control ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2.2 Bathymetry ................................................................................................................ 2
1.2.3 Hydrokinetic Energy ................................................................................................. 2
1.2.4 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 2
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 3
2.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 KVICHAK RIVER ............................................................................................................... 4
2.2 INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................................................................. 5
3.0 SURVEY ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................................... 7
3.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 7
3.2 LITERATURE RESEARCH ................................................................................................... 7
3.3 FIELD EXPEDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 8
3.3.1 Field Expedition I ..................................................................................................... 8
3.3.2 Field Expedition II .................................................................................................... 9
3.3.3 Field Expedition III .................................................................................................. 9
3.3.4 Field Expedition IV................................................................................................... 9
4.0 SURVEY CONTROL ........................................................................................................ 10
4.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 10
4.2 CONTROL NETWORK ESTABLISHMENT ........................................................................... 10
4.3 NETWORK ADJUSTMENT................................................................................................. 17
4.4 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PROJECT WATER LEVEL DATUM ............................................. 18
5.0 MONUMENT RECOVERY ............................................................................................. 21
5.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 21
5.2 USGS GAGE 15300500 REFERENCE MONUMENTS ........................................................ 21
5.3 NGS CONTROL MONUMENTS ......................................................................................... 22
6.0 MULTIBEAM HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY ................................................................ 23
6.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 23
6.2 INSTRUMENTATION ......................................................................................................... 23
6.2 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION ............................................................................................ 23
6.3 HYDROGRAPHIC DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING ................................................. 23
7.0 ACOUSTIC DOPPLER CURRENT PROFILING ........................................................ 26
7.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 26
7.2 ADCP METHODS ............................................................................................................ 26
7.2.1 Instrumentation....................................................................................................... 26
7.2.2 Instrument Calibration ........................................................................................... 26
7.2.3 Moving Bed Test ..................................................................................................... 27
7.2.4 Discharge Measurements ....................................................................................... 27
7.2.5 ADCP Velocity Transects ....................................................................................... 27
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page ii
8.0 RIVER SLOPE ESTIMATE ............................................................................................ 29
8.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 29
8.2 WATER SURFACE LEVEL SLOPE ESTIMATE ........................................................ 29
9.0 RIVER BED MATERIALS .............................................................................................. 30
9.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 30
9.2 BED SAMPLES ................................................................................................................. 30
10.0 FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................... 32
10.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 32
10.2 ADCP FINDINGS .......................................................................................................... 32
10.2.1 Discharge Measurements ..................................................................................... 34
10.2.2 Moving Bed Tests ................................................................................................. 37
10.2.3 Energy Density ..................................................................................................... 37
10.2.3.1 Station 5 ......................................................................................................... 39
10.2.3 Station 6 ................................................................................................................ 42
10.2.3.1 Site 6 .............................................................................................................. 45
10.2.3.2 Station 9 ......................................................................................................... 56
10.2.3.3 Site 9 .............................................................................................................. 59
10.2.3.4 Sites 10 and 11 ............................................................................................... 63
10.2.3.5 Top Section Flow Velocity ............................................................................ 69
10.3 RIVER BED FINDINGS ................................................................................................... 70
10.4 TIE OF CURRENT SURVEY DATA TO USGS GAGE ........................................................ 71
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 84
11.1 TURBINE SITE RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 84
11.1.2 RISEC Site Six ...................................................................................................... 84
11.1.3 RISEC Site Nine .................................................................................................... 86
11.1.4 RISEC Site Ten ..................................................................................................... 87
11.2 FUTURE STUDIES .......................................................................................................... 89
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Igiugig project location map. ........................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 2 – Aerial view of the project site from the west. ............................................................................................... 4
Figure 3 – Flexibarge on the Kvichak River near the Fish and Game boat landing. ..................................................... 6
Figure 4 – FAA weather station with webcams. ............................................................................................................ 6
Figure 5 – Monument HK-1. ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 6 – View across the Kvichak River from HK-1. .............................................................................................. 11
Figure 7 – Monument HK-V. ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 8 – View from HK-V. ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 9 – Monument HK-2. ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 10 – View to the northwest across the Kvichak River from HK-2. .................................................................. 14
Figure 11 – Monument HK-3. ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 12 – View toward downstream witness tree from HK-3. ................................................................................. 15
Figure 13 – Monument HK-4. ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 14 – View of upstream bearing tree from monument HK-4. ............................................................................ 17
Figure 15 – Relationships of the KRIGIPVD11 datum. .............................................................................................. 20
Figure 16 – Minor data gaps depicted in white. ........................................................................................................... 25
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page iii
Figure 17 – Linear regression of water level slope. ..................................................................................................... 29
Figure 18 – USGS Site 15300500 daily discharge. ..................................................................................................... 35
Figure 19 – USGS Site 15300500 annual maximum and minimum discharge............................................................ 36
Figure 20 – Omitted zones of ADCP profiles. ............................................................................................................. 39
Figure 21 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition II. ................................................................................................ 40
Figure 22 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition III. .............................................................................................. 41
Figure 23 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition IV. .............................................................................................. 42
Figure 24 – ADCP transect at Station 6 Expedition II. ................................................................................................ 43
Figure 25 – ADCP transect at Station 6 Expedition III. .............................................................................................. 44
Figure 26 – ADCP transect at Station 6, (Site 6-6) Expedition IV. ............................................................................. 45
Figure 27 – ADCP transect Site 6-1. ........................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 28 – ADCP transect Site 6-7. ........................................................................................................................... 47
Figure 29 – ADCP Transect Site 6-3. .......................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 30 – ADCP transect Site 6-4. ........................................................................................................................... 49
Figure 31 – ADCP transect Site 6-5. ........................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 32 – ADCP transect Site 6-6. ........................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 33 – ADCP transect 6-7. .................................................................................................................................. 52
Figure 34 – ADCP transect 6-8. .................................................................................................................................. 53
Figure 35 – ADCP Transect Site 6-10. ........................................................................................................................ 54
Figure 36 – ADCP transect Site 6-10. ......................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 37 – ADCP transect Site 6-11. ......................................................................................................................... 56
Figure 38 – ADCP transect Station 9 Expedition II. ................................................................................................... 57
Figure 39 – Station 9 Expedition III. ........................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 40 – ADCP Transect Station 9 Expedition IV. ................................................................................................. 59
Figure 41 – ADCP transect Site 9-1. ........................................................................................................................... 60
Figure 42 – ADCP transect Site 9-7. ........................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 43 – ADCP transect Site 9-8. ........................................................................................................................... 62
Figure 44 – ADCP transect Site 9-10. ......................................................................................................................... 63
Figure 45 – ADCP transect Site 10-1. ......................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 46 – ADCP transect Site 10-3. ......................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 47 – ADCP transect Site 10-7. ......................................................................................................................... 66
Figure 48 – ADCP transect Site 10-8. ......................................................................................................................... 67
Figure 49 – ADCP transect Site 10-8. ......................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 50 – ADCP transect Site 11-1. ......................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 51 – USGS discharge versus gage height with respective regressions. ............................................................ 72
Figure 52 – Regression of USGS discharge measurements. ........................................................................................ 74
Figure 53 – Regression of combined and transformed USGS discharge measurements. ............................................ 74
Figure 54 – Regression of discharge with respect to water surface height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum. .............. 75
Figure 55 – Regression USGS discharge with respect to average cross section flow velocity. ................................... 76
Figure 56 – Regression of flow velocity with respect to height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum. .............................. 76
Figure 57 – Full record plot of USGS discharge as a function of mean flow velocity. ............................................... 77
Figure 58 – Full record plot of USGS flow velocity and a function of height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum. ........ 77
Figure 59 – Plot of discharge return period for the Kvichak River at Igiugig. ............................................................ 78
Figure 60 – Plot of return period for height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum the Kvichak River at Igiugig. .............. 79
Figure 61 – Plot of the return period for mean flow velocity for the Kvichak River at Igiugig. ................................. 79
Figure 62 – Daily flow velocities. ............................................................................................................................... 80
Figure 63 – Average Daily height above KRIGIPVD11 Datum. ................................................................................ 80
Figure 64 – Site 6 candidate site. ................................................................................................................................. 85
Figure 65 – Candidate Site 9. ...................................................................................................................................... 86
Figure 66 – RISEC Site 10. ......................................................................................................................................... 88
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 – CORS used for Kvichak River control network adjustment. ....................................................................... 17
Table 2 – Final adjusted values for Kvichak River RISEC local control network. ..................................................... 18
Table 3 – NGS control monuments recorded in the project area. ................................................................................ 22
Table 4 – Expedition II ADCP discharge. ................................................................................................................... 34
Table 5 – Expedition III ADCP discharge. .................................................................................................................. 34
Table 6 – Expedition IV ADCP discharge. .................................................................................................................. 34
Table 7 – Summary discharge statistics. ...................................................................................................................... 37
Table 8 – Summary of annual minimum discharge. .................................................................................................... 82
Table 9 – Summary of minimum discharge return periods.......................................................................................... 82
Table 10 – Summary of annual maximum discharge. ................................................................................................. 83
Table 11 – Summary of maximum discharge return periods. ...................................................................................... 83
LIST OF APPENDICES (Included on CD and FTP Site)
Appendix 1 – Map Sheets and CAD Files
Appendix 2 – ADCP Profiles and Data
Appendix 3 – USGS Gage Data
Appendix 4 – Bathymetric Data Products
Appendix 5 – Survey Control
Appendix 6 – Prior Surveys
Appendix 7 – Fledermaus Scene
Appendix 8 – Manufacturer’s Specification Sheets
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction
During the summer and fall of 2011 TerraSond Ltd. (TerraSond) completed a bathymetric survey
and hydrokinetic energy assessment of the Kvichak River at Igiugig, Alaska. The purpose of this
work was to characterize the initial site conditions for the design and installation of a
hydrokinetic turbine to provide electric power for the village.
There were six distinct phases of work for this project. The first was a literature review and
investigation of prior surveys and hydrologic studies done in the area. This included collection of
Alaska State Land Surveys, data sheets for existing National Geodetic Survey, (NGS) control,
and Alaska Community Development Maps. The primary source for surface water hydrology
was the USGS Water Resources Office in Anchorage, Alaska. The USGS operated a gaging
station on the Kvichak River at Igiugig from 1967 to 1987. They provided copies of the
discharge measurement field notes, rating curves, and original descriptions of the gage site.
There was also a hydrologist on staff at the Anchorage office that operated and maintained the
original USGS gage. He was generous with his time and was able to provide excellent firsthand
accounts of the gage operations methods.
The second, third, fourth, and fifth phases consisted of four field expeditions conducted over the
summer and fall of 2011. The first expedition was from 9 to 13 June 2011. The purpose of this
trip was to do an initial area reconnaissance for future hydrographic surveys, establish a local
control network, and attempt to recover existing monumentation that might be useful for the
planned hydrographic surveys. The second expedition spanned 17 to 26 June 2011. During this
trip the field crew completed the first multibeam bathymetric survey, 10 flow velocity
measurements, one discharge measurement, and a survey of water levels along the river to
determine the water surface slope. The third expedition was from 26 August to 2 September
2011. During this trip the crew did a second bathymetric survey, completed 11 flow velocity
measurements, and a discharge measurement. They also collected 10 sediment samples from the
river bed. The fourth expedition was from 11 to 14 October 2011. The main purpose of
Expedition IV was to complete detailed flow velocity studies. The field crew completed 35
velocity profiles and one discharge measurement. The final phase of the project was complete
data reduction, and preparation of this report with its accompanying map sheets and data
packages.
1.2 Synopsis of Findings
1.2.1 Control
During the first expedition a local control network consisting of five monuments was established.
Three Continuously Observed Reference Stations, (CORS) were included in the final network
adjustment. This network was the basis of control for all of the future survey activities.
TerraSond also developed a provisional water level datum for this project based on current
discharge measurements, Global Positioning System, (GPS) water level surveys, and the USGS
stage and discharge record. The new datum is called the Kvichak River Igiugig Provisional
Datum of 2011, (KRIGIPVD11).
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 2
An attempt was made to recover any existing NGS monuments in the area. These monuments
were placed in1946. After an extensive search using GPS and a magnetometer the crew was
unable to locate any of these monuments. The crew also tried to locate remnants of the USGS
gage station and reference monuments. No confirmed remains of the gage station could be found.
1.2.2 Bathymetry
The data from the first bathymetric survey was not satisfactory. Therefore, it was discarded and
the data acquired on Expedition III was used for preparation of the bathymetric surface and
analysis of the river bed.
The Kvichak River bed is comprised mainly of gravel and cobbles. There is little sand or silt.
There are also occasional boulders with a volume of one cubic meter or greater. Inspection of the
bathymetric surface reveals 44 dangers to navigation and 10 hazards for construction in the
project area. There are also a few areas of shoaling that pose a danger to navigation. The
locations and coordinates of these features are given in the accompanying map sheets in
Appendix 1. The river bathymetry varies considerably from the mouth to the downstream extent
of the project area. At the mouth there is a small field of sand waves to the left and a shoal on the
right. The shoal continues downstream to the vicinity of the Fish and Game Boat Landing. Over
this same stretch the main channel forms a well defined thalweg in the middle. About half way
downstream in the project site by the Fish and Game Boat Landing the channel bifurcates around
the first island. The right channel narrows and forms a sharp central thalweg as part of an
inverted triangular profile. The bed drops rapidly through this area. Then the central part of the
channel fills and a trapezoidal profile emerges. This profile continues for the remainder of the
project area. Consideration of the moving bed tests and the sampled bed materials indicate that
the river bed is quite stable. Nonetheless it should not be considered immutable. Movement of
small material below the limit of instrument detection as well as localized scour patterns that
develop around various fixed objects can cause some bed load transport.
1.2.3 Hydrokinetic Energy
Analysis of the Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler, (ADCP) data from Expeditions II and III
indicates that there are three areas of the river that offer the most potential for development of a
hydrokinetic facility. These areas are designated as Site 6, 9, and 10. Their locations are depicted
on the accompanying map sheets in Appendix 1. All three locations have a well defined and
stable zone of high energy density the ranges between 4.5 to 7 kW/ m 2. Site 6 has shown the
most promise for immediate development. This site has a good zone of energy density. The
channel is large and can thus accommodate a turbine while leaving ample room for navigation. It
is also close to the current generator facility. This reduces the cost and effort required to connect
to the power grid. Sites 9 and 10 have excellent energy density characteristics. However, the
channel at site 9 is less accommodating to a turbine and navigation. Further, they are up to 1 km
downstream from the electric power facility and nearly 150 meters from the village side shore.
1.2.4 Recommendations
Site 6, 9, and 10 show the most promise for future hydrokinetic development. Presently Site 6
offers the best constellation of features. There is good energy density. The site is close the power
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 3
generation facility. The channel dimensions are generous and the zone of high energy density is
offset from the thalweg. However, there appears to be more seasonal variability of energy
density at this site compared to the other sites. Its proximity to the river mouth also makes it
susceptible to problem with floating debris and ice. Site 9 has a very high energy density that
appears more stable. However, the channel is smaller and the high energy density zone is
centered in the thalweg. The channel morphology may also be more dynamic at this site. It is
further away from the power generation facility. Thus connection to the existing power
infrastructure is more difficult and expensive. Site 10 has a large and deep channel. This site
could accommodate multiple turbines on the surface as well as the bottom. The energy
characteristics of the river are very favorable. The only drawback to this site is its distance from
the existing power infrastructure.
The work presented in this report is the first detailed field investigation for a future hydrokinetic
facility in Igiugig. More investigation is required to help ensure the success of this effort. There
is a need for more detailed studies of flow dynamics. These studies would increase the
knowledge of temporal and spatial flow patterns in the river. They would also determine the
stability of the flow patterns and determine if there is migration of the thalweg. Installation of a
new gage station is crucial to future planning and design of a turbine system for this river.
Quality gage data will provide timely information of flow velocities and discharge. It will be
invaluable for assessment, and operation of any turbine system. A gage station should be
established in the vicinity of the planned turbine trial site. It should be installed before the
turbine is placed in the river.
A good qualitative and quantitative assessment of the ice condition on the river is crucial to the
future success of this endeavor. Currently there are only limited anecdotal accounts of ice
conditions. Every effort should be made to establish an ice observation system in Igiugig as soon
as possible.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Introduction
Igiugig, Alaska is located on the left bank of the Kvichak River, (N59o 19’, W155o 54’). It is
situated at the mouth of the river, Figures 1, 2. The year round population is about 50 people. It
is not on the road system. Normal access is by plane or boat. There is no rail service. Goods and
fuel are brought to the village by barge and plane.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 4
Figure 1 – Igiugig project location map.
Figure 2 – Aerial view of the project site from the west.
2.2 Kvichak River
The main source for the Kvichak River is drainage from Iliamna Lake. In the vicinity of Igiugig
there are no other significant tributaries or diversions to the river. The river flows past Igiugig
Iliamna Lake
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 5
and continues on for 110 km to its outlet in Kvichak Bay. The total drainage basin for the river is
16,835 km2 and it has a mean elevation of 546 meters. Approximately 20% of the basin is
storage in the form of lakes and ponds. Transitional forest comprises about 64% of the basin, and
the remainder it primarily wetlands. The average annual precipitation is 101.6 cm. Average
annual snowfall in the basin is 178 cm. The record high and low temperatures for Igiugig are 31o
C and -42o C. The average annual high and low temperatures are 26o C and -33o C. Typical
summer temperatures range from -1o C to19o C. Winter temperatures are between -16o C and -1o
C.
The average flow velocity is 1.37 m/s ( = 0.26 m/s). In some particularly fast reaches the
surface velocity can approach 3.0 m/s in the central channel. The river level can rise and fall over
a range of two meters. The average annual range of water levels is 1.1 meters. The smallest and
larges annual ranges are 0.59 and 1.48 meters. Peak stages and discharges occur in the fall during
September and October. The lowest stages and discharges are in the spring during April and
May. The average annual high discharge rate in the USGS gage data for this site is 815 m3 /s, (
= 213 m3 / s). And the average reported low discharge is 293 m3 /s, ( = 81 m3 / s). The daily
average discharge rate from the USGS data is 500 m3 /s, ( = 201 m3 / s).
The water is extremely clear. During most of the year the bed can be seen at depths to 5 meters.
However, there are some times when the sediment load increases and visibility drops. This is
typically during periods of high wind from the east and extended duration rain. The surrounding
area is transitional forest and tundra. There are few large trees. Thus there is rarely any
substantial amount of drifting materials in the water. The river usually does not experience a
major freeze. However, some ice may form from November to February. The mild climate and
rapid flow normally prevent persistence of the ice. During break up in March to May ice from
the lake is driven into the river by wind. This ice is typically about 1 meter thick. It can be
present in the river for two to three weeks.
2.2 Infrastructure
Igiugig may be reached by boat and plane. There is no rail or road access. The village has a good
local network of improved dirt and gravel roads. The state of Alaska maintains a 3000 foot x 75
foot gravel runway. Adjacent to the runway is a generous apron and a hangar with three large
bay doors. The Federal Aviation Administration maintains a weather station with two web
cameras at the airport. The lake and river offer ample opportunities for float plane operations.
Large goods including construction equipment and materials can be brought to the village by
cargo planes and barges, Figure 3, 4. There is regular air taxi service from Anchorage.
Full service lodging for work crews is available at a work camp that is owned and operated by
Iliamna Lake Contractors, (ILC). ILC can also provide four-wheelers, Jon boats, pickup trucks,
gasoline, and diesel fuel, an assortment of heavy construction equipment, barge service, and
basic mechanic support.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 6
Figure 3 – Flexibarge on the Kvichak River near the Fish and Game boat landing.
Figure 4 – FAA weather station with webcams.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 7
3.0 SURVEY ACTIVITIES
3.1 Introduction
Prior to commencing field activities TerraSond completed a detailed study of existing land
survey data, USGS stream gage records, prior hydrokinetic energy assessments and the
community profile. This preparatory research was used to plan the subsequent field expeditions.
These expeditions took place on 9 to 13 June 2011, 17 to 26 June 2011, 26 August to 2
September 2011, and 11 to 14 October 2011.
3.2 Literature Research
Several literature resources were obtained by TerraSond for the purpose of planning and
executing the survey activities presented in this report. The land survey data assembled consisted
of Alaska State Land Surveys, (ASLS), and Easement Vacations, (EV), National Geodetic
Survey, (NGS) control monuments, GPS sites in the NGS Continuously Observed Reference
Stations, (CORS), system, Alaska State Community Development Maps, USGS 15 minute
topographic maps, and a site specific digital orthorectified image. Stream gage data was
collected by the USGS in the vicinity of the project site from 1967 to 1987. Prior hydrokinetic
assessments were published by the Electric Power Research Institute, (EPRI), and the Alaska
Center for Energy and Power, (ACEP).
TerraSond obtained digital copies of ASLS AS91-111, AS91-111A, and EV EV - 2-541. These
documents were used to identify property boundary lines and status as well existing monuments
in the area. These surveys were not used for any of the hydrographic analysis in this report.
Digital copies of these surveys were placed in Appendix 6 of this report.
The NGS online database was searched for control monuments within a radius of five miles, (8
km) from the approximate center of the project site. Three records were returned. The PID’s
were UV7630, UV7631, and UV 7632. Horizontal orders for these monuments were First, Third,
and Second respectively. No vertical order was reported for these monuments in the NGS
database. An attempt was made to recover these monuments during Expedition I. Unfortunately
they could not be located. All of these monuments were set in1946. In light of their age and the
manner of placement it is believed that they have been lost. Current copies of the NGS
datasheets for the monuments were placed in Appendix 5 of this report.
Three Continuously Observed Reference Stations (CORS) stations were identified within 100
km of the project site. The CORS ID’s for these stations were AB22, AC24, and AC27. The sites
were located in the vicinity of Iliamna, King Salmon, and the McNeil River Game Refuge
respectively. These stations were used as fixed control for the adjustment of the local control
network established by TerraSond for this project. The data sheets for these CORS sites wer e
placed in Appendix 5 of this report.
Digital copies of the Alaska State Community Development Maps were obtained from the
Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development Community and
Regional Affairs. These maps were used to gain an initial impression of the river dynamics on a
decadal scale. They were also used to identify land status and village infrastructure. Copies of
these maps are in Appendix 6 of this report.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 8
A USGS digital raster graphic of the Iliamna B-8 15 minute topographic map and a site specific
orthorectified image were used to do the initial planning of survey efforts. Comparison of the
USGS map and the orthorectified image was also used to gain an indication of river
morphodynamics on a decadal scale. The digital orthorectified image was used as a background
in final map sheets.
An extensive investigation of the USGS historical gage data for this site was completed. This
included a visit to the USGS Water Resources Office in Anchorage, Alaska. Copies of the
original USGS records for the station were obtained. The following documents were obtained:
USGS Gage Station Descriptions, USGS Discharge Measurement Notes, Rating Curve Plots. All
of the online gage data for the gaging site was downloaded from the USGS web page. Personal
interviews were also conducted with a member of the USGS staff that operated the gage site for
a portion of the time that it was active. This data was used to assess historic discharge, flow
velocities, and approximate times of peak and minimum discharge. The collected data items
were placed in Appendix 3 of this report.
The Electric Power Research Institute, (EPRI) completed two assessments of the hydrokinetic
potential for the Kvichak River. The first was System Level Design, Performance, Cost and
Economic Assessment – Alaska In-Stream Power Plants, and the other was River In-Stream
Energy Conversion (RISEC) Characterization of Alaska Sites. These reports were used for an
initial estimate of the river’s potential for development of a hydrokinetic power generation
facility. Their assessment was based on the historical record from USGS Gage Site 15300500 .
The information contained in these reports was one source of guidance for the planning of the
field surveys completed this year.
3.3 Field Expeditions
Four field survey expeditions were completed for this project. The goals of the first expedition
were to complete an initial site reconnaissance and establish a local control network. The three
subsequent expeditions were used to complete a multibeam bathymetric survey, and
progressively develop a detailed assessment of hydrokinetic energy potential.
3.3.1 Field Expedition I
Expedition I spanned 9 to 13 June 2001. During this expedition five control monuments were set
and surveyed with multiple static GPS sessions. The static GPS session data was then post
processed and adjusted with a precise ephemeris to determine the final adjusted coordinates for
the control network. In addition to the GPS survey a detailed site reconnaissance was completed.
This included a general tour of the village and introductions to members of the village council
and the village corporation. The field team also dedicated approximately 1 ½ days to locating
USGS reference monuments, and NGS control monuments. The team searched using the
available descriptions from the respective agencies, GPS coordinates, and local inquiries. None
of the monuments could be recovered. During this field expedition the team also completed an
initial boat transit of the proposed hydrographic study area.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 9
3.3.2 Field Expedition II
Expedition II was conducted on 17 to 26 June 2011. The primary activity during this trip was the
completion of the first hydrographic surveys. These included a multibeam bathymetric survey,
10 ADCP transects, an ADCP discharge measurement, four ADCP moving bed tests, and a water
line survey with RTK GPS to estimate the water surface slope of the river.
3.3.3 Field Expedition III
Expedition III spanned 26 August to 2 September 2011. During this trip the crew completed one
ADCP moving bed test, an ADCP discharge measurement, 10 ADCP transects, and collected 10
bottom grab samples. They also completed a second multibeam survey. Six of the ADCP
transects were completed in the extended project area. This expanded area reached down stream
an additional 1.3 km beyond the original proposed project boundary. Near surface flow velocity
measurements were made at select points along each of the ADCP transects.
3.3.4 Field Expedition IV
Expedition IV started on 11 October 2011 and ended on 14 October 2011. During this time 34
ADCP transects, an ADCP discharge measurement, and four moving bed tests were completed.
Near surface flow velocity measurements were made at select points along each of the ADCP
transects. The ADCP transects were positioned to develop detailed estimates of energy density at
Sites 5, 6, 9, and 10. An additional transect was also run on Station 17.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 10
4.0 SURVEY CONTROL
4.1 Introduction
During Expedition I TerraSond established a control network for the project site. This network
consisted of five monuments that were set and surveyed using static GPS methods. Several
redundant occupations were made using Leica 1200+ series dual frequency GPS GNSS units.
The collected occupation data for the network was then adjusted using Trimble Geomatics Office
Version 1.63. Three CORS stations were included in the network adjustment. All monuments
were set on the left bank of the river. The monument locations and coordinates have been
depicted on the accompanying map sheets in Appendix 1.
ADCP river discharge measures and RTK GPS Surveys of the water level collected during
Expedition II, III, and IV were used to determine the water level datum. The discharge
measurements were referenced to the USGS rating curves for the site. This provided a coarse
basis for comparison of the current river stage with the historical record. This was then used to
estimate where the current stage was compared to the recorded lowest stage. The water surface
ellipsoid height that was slightly below the corresponding ellipsoid height of the estimated
historical low ellipsoid height was selected. This chosen value was 25.00 meters.
4.2 Control Network Establishment
After assessing the field site the survey crew determined that the best location for the primary
control monument was in the vicinity of the Fish and Game Boat Landing. This location was
selected because of its central location in the project area, ease of access, good line of site for
broadcast of RTK correction signals, and stable soils. Two monuments were set at this location.
The first monument was designated “HK-1.” It was a 36 inch x ¾ inch piece of rebar with a
domed 3 ¼ inch aluminum cap stamped “IGIUGIG HK-1 TERRASOND 2011.” The selected
location was a grassy section on the side of a knoll between the upper parking area and the boat
landing. The final set was 0.4 feet below grade. Figures 5, 6. The second monument was set for
vertical reference. It has been designated as “HK-V”. It was comprised of four sections of ½ inch
x 4 foot steel drive rod with a bullet head center threaded at the top. The rod was driven until met
with refusal at approximately 16 feet. This monument was set 0.2 feet below grade at the top of
the hill on the east shoulder of the road leading from the school to the boat landing, Figure 7, 8.
A group of small sized cobbles with one large cobble were set around and over both monuments
for protection.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 11
Figure 5 – Monument HK-1.
3 ¼ inch aluminum cap on rebar.
Figure 6 – View across the Kvichak River from HK-1.
Fish & Game Landing
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 12
Figure 7 – Monument HK-V.
Figure 8 – View from HK-V.
View to the northwest across the road toward the Fish and Game boat landing and HK – 1.
HK - 1
Kvichak River Lodge
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 13
Three additional monuments were set for the purpose of monitoring the river water level and as
possible base station locations. Monument “HK-2” was established with a 3¼ inch domed
aluminum cap marked “IGIUGIG HK-2 TERRASOND 2011” on 36 inch x ¾ inch rebar. It was
set three quarters of the way down the bank from the west fence corner of the fuel tank
containment by the electric generation plant, Figures 9, 10. Sloughing of the bank that occurred
between 2 September and 11 October 2011 has destroyed this monument.
Figure 9 – Monument HK-2.
3 ¼ inch aluminum cap on rebar. (Destroyed.)
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 14
Figure 10 – View to the northwest across the Kvichak River from HK-2.
(HK-2 was Destroyed.)
Monument “HK-3” was placed on a level spot at the base of a 3 meter bluff of moderate repose
on the left bank in the vicinity of the Kvichak River mouth. It was topped with a 3 ¼ inch
aluminum cap that was stamped “IGIUGIG HK-3 TERRASOND 2011” The final placement was
0.4 feet below grade. It was concealed under several medium cobbles, Figures 11, 12.
Old Trading Post
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 15
Figure 11 – Monument HK-3.
3 ¼ inch aluminum cap on rebar.
Figure 12 – View toward downstream witness tree from HK-3.
Flagging and blaze
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 16
The final monument was placed near the downstream extent of the initial project area. Two
pieces of ½ inch x 4 foot drive rod were driven and topped with a bullet head. It has been
designated “HK-4”. The monument was established in a small level clearing approximately 35
feet shoreward of the left bank. Figure 13, 14.
Figure 13 – Monument HK-4.
½ inch x 8 foot steel rod with bullet top.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 17
Figure 14 – View of upstream bearing tree from monument HK-4.
4.3 Network Adjustment
Trimble Geomatics Office (TGO) version 1.63 was used to process the static GPS data and
adjust the control network. Three CORS sites were included in the network adjustment, Table 1.
These stations were held fixed and the newly placed control monument locations were adjusted
horizontally and vertically.
CORS
ID PID Latitude Longitude
Ellipsoid
Ht. (m) Geoid Ht. (m)
AB22 DL6678 N 59o 53' 57.55673" W 154o 41' 53.64393" 199.318 13.03
AC24 DL7656 N 58o 40 53.66665 W 156o 39' 09.83425" 35.814 13.72
AC27 DM7487 N 59o 15' 09.03078" W 154o 09' 46.28667" 417.006 12.36
Datum NAD 83 Geoid heights based on the NGS 2009 geoid model GEOID09 AK
Table 1 – CORS used for Kvichak River control network adjustment.
Preliminary processing was done in June 2011. Final coordinate processing with precise
ephemeris files was completed in October 2011. The TGO project coordinate system was set to
UTM AK Zone5 NAD 83 and used the NGS 2009 Geoid model for Alaska, (GEOID09 AK).
Final project coordinates were transformed to Alaska State Plane Coordinate System Zone 5.
(Note: The horizontal datum for this system is NAD 83, and the horizontal units are U.S. Survey
Feet). The final adjusted coordinates have been given on the included map sheet and in Table 2.
Flagging and blaze
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 18
Monument Latitude Longitude Northing Easting
Ellipsoid
Ht.
Orthometric
Ht.
HK-1 N 59o 19' 40.20931" W 155o 54' 06.65546" 1951306.55 1285272.68 102.46 57.58
HK-V N 59o 19' 39.97861" W 155o 54' 05.33396" 1951281.18 1285340.55 107.15 62.28
HK-2* N 59o 19' 38.96916" W 155o 53' 53.47837" 1951161.19 1285952.49 93.14 48.27
HK-3 N 59o 19' 42.64454" W 155o 53' 12.33824" 1951473.56 1288096.69 95.14 50.26
HK-4 N 59o 19' 10.74202" W 155o 55' 00.87362" 1948396.64 1282374.74 93.96 49.08
Datum NAD 83, Alaska State Plan Coordinate System Zone 5 US Survey feet. Orthometric height is based on
NGS geoid model of 2009 GEOID09 AK *HK-2 was destroyed
Table 2 – Final adjusted values for Kvichak River RISEC local control network.
4.4 Establishment of the Project Water Level Datum
Water levels are constantly changing. Therefore, establishment of a water level datum can be
problematic. Nonetheless it is necessary to establish a reasonable and useful datum from which
water depth may be reckoned. The choice of a water level datum is particularly difficult for
inland waters. These water bodies lack the stabilizing influence of the ocean reservoir with its
regular and predictable tide cycles. A three month water level record at a coastal tide station is
typically sufficient to obtain the requisite knowledge of water level extremes and sinusoidal
constituents for the determination of the station datum and prediction of future water levels.
Water level fluctuations on inland water bodies do not behave in a manner that is sufficiently
regular and predictable for the development of dependable water level models analogous to those
used for tide predictions. Inland waters levels are subject to any manner of seasonal and secular
fluctuations. In some cases years of observation may be required to determine a suitable datum
level for a particular river or lake.
For non-tidal water the vertical datum, should be selected such that at least 95% of the time the
water is above this level. Ideally no single daily mean water level should ever fall more than
about 0.2 meters below the datum level. Further, the water level datum for a river must recognize
that the surface of the water is sloped. Therefore, a series of water levels must be measured along
the many reaches of the river to determine an appropriate water surface level slope. Then the
datum level is adjusted with respect to this slope along the course of the river. In this manner the
water level datum will always appropriately reflect the state of the river during its usual low
stages.
A fully developed water level datum has not been established for the Kvichak River. TerraSond
has created a provisional water level datum to meet the needs of this project. The Kvichak River
Igiugig Provisional Datum of 2011 has been designated as KRIGIPVD11. The datum definition
and description given in this report and its accompanying map sheets supersede all other datum
descriptions previously issued for this project. In particular it supersedes the description given
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 19
for 11 RISECVD that was issued in the interim report dated 3 October 2011and its associated
documents and map sheets.
TerraSond did not have a long term river gage record that was tied to a true vertical datum. The
USGS gage data record was referenced to an arbitrary height. It was not determined with respect
to any accepted vertical reference. All of the RM’s for the USGS gage station have been lost.
Therefore, it was impossible to make a physical tie of the current water level data to the USGS
record. However, it was possible to make some coarse but reasonable assumptions in the pursuit
of a suitable selection for the KRIGIPVD11 water level datum.
The datum level for the KRIGIPVD11 datum was established by referencing a current discharge
measurement and RTK GPS water level measurement to the original USGS rating curve. The
USGS gage data for this site indicated that the lowest annual river stages typically occur between
the second week of March and the second week of April. Using their rating curve the USGS
estimated that the lowest discharge for the recorded history was 181 m 3/s (6400 ft3/s). This
discharge corresponded to a USGS gage height of 15.10 ft. (4.60 m). On 21 June 2011 an ADCP
discharge measurement was made in the approximate location of the previous USGS discharge
measurements. The total discharge was 335 m3/s, (11,830 ft3/s). This discharge would
correspond with a USGS gage height of 16.95 ft. (5.17 m). The river water level at the Fish and
Game Boat Landing, (the origin of the KRIGIPVD11 datum) was measured using RTK GPS at
about the same time that the discharge measurement was made. The water level ellipsoid height
was found to be 25.90 m, (84.97 ft.). Using the USGS rating curve as a basis for comparison
reveals that the difference in gage height for these two discharges would have been about 1.85
feet, (0.56m). Thus a rough assumption could be made that the corresponding ellipsoid height of
the water surface at the origin of KRIGIPVD11 for the USGS’s historical low discharge would
have been about 25.34 meters, (83.14 ft). Based on this rough correspondence between the
USGS gage height and the measured ellipsoid height, it was determined that an ellipsoid height
of 25.00 meters would be a reasonable value for the provisional datum. This value makes
allowance for some extra range in the water levels to ensure that the river does not drop to a
stage that is below the established datum for determining water depth, Figure 15.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 20
Figure 15 – Relationships of the KRIGIPVD11 datum.
(NOT TO SCALE)
Mean annual high water height (1.86 m above KRIGIPVD11)
Mean daily water height (1.27 m above KRIGIPCD11)
Mean annual low water height (0.79 m above KRIGIPVD11)
The KRIGIPVD11 datum is used for the bathymetric surface presented in this report. The depths
represented on this surface are the distance in feet from the level of the KRIGIPVD11 datum to
the river bed. Because KRIGIPVD11 was selected to be slightly below an estimated extreme of
low water, the given depths should be a rather conservative estimate. Further, the water depths
given on this surface have not been adjusted for the slope of the river surface. Given the close
proximity of the project area to the origin of the KRIGIPVD11 datum, and the provisional status
of this datum it was determined that such a fine adjustment was premature.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 21
It is important to remember that the KRIGIPVD11 datum was selected to represent a water level
that is extreme for the river. This level was chosen because it is unlikely that the river stage
would drop below this datum. Therefore, water depths that are referenced to this datum can be
considered a worst case shallow water situation. This convention for depth determination gives a
conservative view with respect to navigational considerations.
Water depth must never be confused with river stage. River stage refers to the vertical movement
of the water surface. The river stage is continuously changing. The established datum is fixed
and by implication the surveyed depth of the river is also fixed. Further, the river stage can be
given with respect to any reference. The reference may have specific physical significance or it
can be arbitrary. The river stage is the basis for discharge estimates, and flood potential. Ideally
the river should not drop to a stage that is below the level of KRIGIPVD11. It is also prudent to
bear in mind that the KRIGIPVD11 datum is provisional. The depths referenced to this datum
should not be considered definitive for purposes of navigation.
Levels and values for Mean Annual High water level, Mean Daily Water Level, and Mean
Annual Low Water Level are given in Figure 15. The methods used to establish these values are
given in section 10.4.
5.0 MONUMENT RECOVERY
5.1 Introduction
Approximately 1½ days of Expedition I were dedicated to locating existing monuments. There
was particular interest in locating USGS reference monuments, (RM) that were associated with
the gage station. An effort was also made to recover NGS survey monuments that were located
on the right bank of the river.
5.2 USGS Gage 15300500 Reference Monuments
The USGS operated a gaging station on the Kvichak River from June 1967 to September 1987. It
was designated as USGS Gage Site 15300500. The associated RM’s were referenced to an
arbitrary datum. The USGS determined water level with respect to this datum by leveling from
the RM to the water. Recovery of these RM’s was necessary to establish a physical tie from the
current survey to the historical USGS gage record. An attempt was made to locate the RM’s and
any other items associated with this gaging station. TerraSond obtained the online record for this
gage from the USGS web site. A visit was also made to the USGS Water Resources Office in
Anchorage, Alaska. During this visit the USGS provided copies of the original gage descriptions,
discharge notes and the rating curves. There was also a hydrologist on staff at this office that was
responsible for operation and maintenance of the gage when it was active. He was able to answer
questions about the gage’s operational methods, and the locations of its associated RM’s.
The field crew used the USGS descriptions and coordinates to locate any features of the original
USGS gage that might have remained at the site. Inquiries were also made with local people in
Igiugig. The local people had little recollection of the gage. No reference monuments were
located by the field crew. The crew found some items that they thought may have been
associated with the gage’s bubbler system. However, after consultation with the USGS it was
determined that the items found were not associated with the gage. After this investigation it was
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 22
concluded that any items from the gage station that could be used to establish a sound physical
tie to the original gaging data have been lost.
The documents copied from the USGS and the data obtained from the USGS web sites are
included in Appendix 3 of this report.
5.3 NGS Control Monuments
There were three NGS monuments recorded within a radius of five miles from the approximate
center of the project site, Table 3, the current NGS data sheets for these monuments were
included in Appendix 5 of this report.
PID Designation Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83)
UV7631 IGIUGIG POST OFFICE E GABLE N 59o 19’ 46.49301” W 155o 54’ 00.67627”
UV7630 IGIUGIG N 59o 19’ 58.06078” W 155o 53’ 13.86006”
UV7632 IGIUGIG 1946 AZ MK N 59o 19’ 50.43518” W 155o 53’ 13.88539”
Table 3 – NGS control monuments recorded in the project area.
The monuments were set in 1946. The field crew made an attempt to locate all of these
monuments. They used GPS positioning, in conjunction with a magnetometer. They were able to
get to the reported locations and identify many of the references given in the NGS data sheets.
However, none of the monuments were recovered. It would have been good to occupy one or
more of these monuments with static GPS sessions and tie the project control network to existing
monumentation. However, the lack of ability to do this was not deleterious to the final accuracy
and precision of the surveys completed for the project.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 23
6.0 MULTIBEAM HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY
6.1 Introduction
TerraSond performed two multibeam echosounder (MBES) surveys for this project. The first one
was completed during Expedition II. When the data from this survey was analyzed and processed
in the office it was found to be unsatisfactory. Therefore, it was decided to discard this data and
conduct a second survey during Expedition III. The second survey was conducted over 27 to 29
August 2011. The area of coverage started on Iliamna Lake about 0.12 km prior the mouth of the
Kvichak River and extended downstream about 2.7 km of reach distance. The total area covered
was approximately 0.8 km2. The cleaned survey data was used to create two interpolated
bathymetric surfaces with 0.5 and 1.0 meter cell size.
6.2 Instrumentation
All bathymetric data was acquired with an R2Sonic 2024 MBES equipped with a Valeport
acoustic velocimeter to measure the speed of sound at the sonar face. An Odom Digibar Pro
acoustic velocimeter was used to measure the speed of sound throughout the water column.
Vessel position and attitude were determined with a Coda Octopus F-180 inertial motion unit,
(IMU). The F-180 received RTK GPS correction messages from a Leica GPS 1200+ series base
station located on HK-1. Bathymetric data acquisition, vessel position and navigation were
managed with HYPACK MAX 2011. All software for the bathymetric survey was running on a
Panasonic Toughbook model CF 30 field computer with Windows XP Professional. The survey
platform for the bathymetric surveys was an 18 foot Lowe Jon boat with a 25 hp outboard
engine. The MBES was mounted on a vertical pole off the port side of the boat The F-180 and its
GPS antennas were mounted on the same pole directly above the MBES. The draft of the MBES
head was 0.44 meters.
6.2 Instrument Calibration
All calibrations and checks were done according the specifications provided in the respective
manufacturer’s technical manuals. The detailed steps required for each procedure may be
obtained from the appropriate manuals. The MBES and the F-180 were calibrated on Iliamna
Lake. Two sets of MBES calibration data (commonly called a “Patch Test”) were acquired for
this survey. One patch test was done on 27 August 2011 and the other on 29 August 2011. The
data was processed with the Caris HIPS and SIPS calibration routines. The calibration results
were then applied to the vessel configuration file. Comparison of the two patch test results
confirmed that the MBES head position remained constant throughout the survey.
6.3 Hydrographic Data Acquisition and Processing
Hydrographic data acquisition was managed with HYPACK MAX 2011. HYPACK received
data streams from the F-180 and the MBES. The sound velocity at the MBES head was supplied
by the Valeport velocimeter. Daily sound velocity profiles were collected with the Odom
DigiBar Pro. Vessel navigation was also managed with HYPACK MAX. Raw survey data was
then post processed using Caris HIPS and SIPS 7.1.
The Expedition III MBES acquisition was accomplished on 27 to 29 August 2011. TerraSond
acquired a precise high density bathymetric data set that could be used as a base DEM surface
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 24
for multiple products. The project goals for the MBES data set were to determine the
geomorphology of the riverbed, a reference baseline surface for future comparisons, a surface for
1D - 3D numerical modeling, and an obstruction detection program. Geologic interpretation was
beyond the scope of this project, however, the data set is informative for geologic interpretation
and the dataset should be referenced when this interpretation is required.
MBES data was acquired in all locations of the project area that permitted safe operation of the
vessel and equipment. The MBES physical dimensions, sensor capabilities and boat
maneuverability were the main factors that determined which areas of the river could be safely
surveyed. The combination of instrument draft and minimum sensor range dictated a minimum
operational water depth of at least 1.5 meters. At this depth the river bed was about 1 meter
below the MBES head. The survey lines were run such that there was always significant swath
overlap with the adjacent line. This overlap increases point density and ensures full coverage of
the river bed. HYPACK displayed the swath coverage on the navigation monitor in real time.
The real time display allowed the survey crew to verify full bottom coverage while still on the
water.
During post processing Caris HIPS and SIPS is used to apply vessel offsets, sound velocity,
vessel position and attitude to the raw MBES data. Application of these values orthorectifies the
sounding to water surface. Because of the high data rate and constant vessel movement there is a
large amount of noise in all of the data streams. The data streams are inspected and cleaned of
noise and spurious values. Then the soundings are adjusted to the project vertical datum. The
final step is to inspect the corrected sounding that will be used to create the base surface. In this
step the entire set of soundings is carefully checked to insure that they are actually bottom
soundings. Spurious values that resulted from noise or environmental interference with the
MBES beam are removed from the final data set. The average horizontal and vertical total
propagated uncertainty of the soundings used to prepare the final surface is 0.25, and 0.1 meters
respectively. This cleaned data set is then used to interpolate a final bathymetric surface with a
cell size of 0.5 meters.
Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy and precision of the bathymetric data products
for this report. However, the purpose of this survey was to prepare a data product for use in the
design and placement of an in stream turbine. It was not prepared to be a navigation product. It
should not be used for vessel navigation.
There were a few locations where small gaps exist in the sounding data. None of them posed a
critical problem for the overall quality of the bathymetric surface. The interpolation functions of
Caris HIPS and SIPS were used to fill the gaps. The locations of these gaps have been depicted
as white polygons in Figure 16.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 25
Figure 16 – Minor data gaps depicted in white.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 26
7.0 ACOUSTIC DOPPLER CURRENT PROFILING
7.1 Introduction
The principle aim of this study was to characterize the hydrokinetic energy of the Kvichak River.
TerraSond used a Workhorse Sentinel 1200kHz acoustic Doppler current profiler, (ADCP) to
survey flow velocities and estimate discharge. The instrument was manufactured by Teledyne
RD Instruments, (TRDI) of San Diego, California. ADCP studies were completed during
Expedition II, III, and IV. On each of these expeditions the ADCP was used to test for a moving
bed, estimate river discharge, and survey flow velocity across select transects.
7.2 ADCP Methods
7.2.1 Instrumentation
All ADCP measurements were done with a Teledyne RD Instruments 1200 kHz Workhorse
Sentinel. It was equipped with a thermistor to measure water temperature, a flux gate compass
tilt sensor, and Doppler bottom tracking. The same instrument was used for the entire study.
ADCP data was collected using TRDI WinRiver II Version 2.07 running on a Dell Latitude
E6400 XFR laptop computer with Windows XP professional operating system. The ADCP was
powered by an external AC power source. Real time horizontal position and heading were
supplied to WinRiver II by a Coda Octopus F-180 inertial motion unit. The F-180 received RTK
GPS correction messages from a Leica 1200+ series base station located on monument HK-1.
WinRiver II received the instrument’s roll and pitch from the ADCP’s internal flux gate compass
tilt sensor. HYPACK MAX 2011 was used to manage boat navigation and mark key target
points. HYPACK MAX received its horizontal positions from the F-180. The survey platform
for the ADCP system was an 18 foot Lowe Jon boat. The ADCP was mounted vertically on the
port side of the boat using a pole mount. The F-180 and its GPS antennas were mounted on the
same pole directly above the ADCP. The transducer head of the ADCP was 0.5 meters below the
water line. The instrument was programmed with a 25 cm blanking distance and 25 cm bins. The
ping rate was 1 Hz and each ensemble consisted of a single ping. Flow data was collected using
GPS and bottom tracking simultaneously. The speed of sound in water was computed by
WinRiver II using the ADCP measured water temperature and a salinity of 0 ppt.
7.2.2 Instrument Calibration
All calibrations and checks were done according the specifications provided in the respective
manufacturer’s technical manuals. The detailed steps required for each procedure may be
obtained from the appropriate manuals.
Prior to starting the ADCP surveys the instrument’s flux gate compass was calibrated for hard
and soft iron on shore in the vicinity of the project site. The ADCP was then installed on the boat
pole mount. The boat transited to the lake and the remaining calibrations and checks were
completed. On the lake the ADCP compass calibration was verified, and the head misalignment
was determined. The F-180 was also calibrated on the lake. Prior to each survey session on the
river the compass calibration was verified, head misalignment was determined, and the F-180
was calibrated.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 27
7.2.3 Moving Bed Test
Moving bed tests were done at several locations in the project site. All of the tests were done
using the stationary method as outlined in the USGS and TRDI methods. For each test the boat
was held for a minimum of 10 minutes as close to a single point as possible using visual
references and HYPACK MAX positioning. The boat movement as determined by bottom
tracking was recorded during the session. The boat position and indicated upstream progress
were then evaluated to assess the potential for the existence of a moving bed. Over the three
expeditions a total of nine moving bed tests were completed. One moving bed test was done in
conjunction with each of the discharge measurements. The additional tests were located at select
points of interest in the study area. These locations were chosen based on their proximity to
prospective turbine sites as well as changes in bed morphology and water flow that indicated a
potential for the existence of a moving bed. All of the moving bed tests indicated that any bed
movement that might be present was below the limit of detection for the instrument and method.
Further, the use of RTK GPS for positioning of the ADCP obviated any potential bias in the
discharge measurement that would have been introduced by a moving bed if bottom tracking was
used. The locations of all moving bed tests have been depicted on the accompanying map sheets
in Appendix 1.
7.2.4 Discharge Measurements
A discharge measurement was completed on Expeditions II, III, and IV. These measurements
were done at Station 5. This location was selected for several reasons. First, it was in the same
area that the USGS did their discharge measurements. This would allow the current discharge to
have a reasonable basis for comparison to the USGS’s data collection. Station 5 is located
upstream from the first bifurcation in the river channel. There were no significant tributaries
upstream of Station 5. Thus there was no division of flow or addition of flow associated with this
station. Therefore, the discharge measurements represent the river flow that is received from the
lake. Station 5 was also close to the current electric power generation facility. It was also thought
to be a location with high energy density.
Discharge measurements were completed using the protocols recommended by the USGS and
TRDI. A minimum of four transects consisting of two matched left - right pairs were run for each
discharge measurement. The discharge values were computed by WinRiver II. The discharge of
the individual transects was compared to the mean discharge for the set. None of the individual
discharge values differed from the mean discharge by more than 5%.
7.2.5 ADCP Velocity Transects
Single transect velocity measurements were made at numerous locations on Expeditions II, III,
and IV. There was a total of 54 transects completed over the three expeditions. Single transects
were run at stations 1 to 4, and 6 to 12 on Expedition II. On Expedition III single transects were
run at stations 6, 9 to 11, and 13 to 18. After evaluating the data from Expeditions II and III it
was determined that the ADCP transects for Expedition IV should focus on areas in the vicinity
of Stations 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 17. These areas were then designated as sites 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and
17. The discharge measurement at Site 5 was used to fulfill the requirement for the single Site 5
velocity transect. Eleven transects were completed at Site 6. The first transect was located
approximately 30 meters downstream of Station 5. The remaining 10 transects were the spaced at
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 28
20 meter intervals downstream. The eleventh transect was located about 120 meters downstream
of Station 6. The Site 9 transects started about 90 meters upstream of Station 9. From this point a
total of 10 transects were placed at approximately 20 meter intervals downstream. The Site 10
transects started about 20 meters downstream of the last transect of Site 9. The remaining 10
transects were then placed at successive 30 meter intervals downstream. Single transects were
run at Site 11 and 17. Both of them were located at the respective stations. The locations of these
transects have been depicted on the map sheets in Appendix 1.
Because of the instrument draft and blanking distance the first measurement bin spanned a zone
that was between 75 and 100 cm below the surface. WinRiver II used an extrapolation algorithm
to estimate the velocity and flow in the zone between the first bin and the surface. Nonetheless it
was determined that there would be some value to measuring the flow speed in the zone above
the first bin. A Marsh-McBirney FlowMate 2000 portable velocity flow meter was used to make
a series of water speed measurement in this zone on all of the transects surveyed during
Expeditions III and IV. The flow mate was placed on a vertical pole and fixed at a depth of 61
cm. The boat was held at select points on the transects by means of visual reference and GPS
positioning using HYPAK MAX and the F-180. The positions and water speeds were compiled
in a spreadsheet. The Marsh-McBirney sample positions and velocities collected during
Expedition IV were depicted on the map sheets in Appendix 1. A spreadsheet with the measured
velocities and positions was places in Appendix 2.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 29
8.0 RIVER SLOPE ESTIMATE
8.1 Introduction
On 18 June 2011 a set of water level measurements were made using a Leica 1200+ series RTK
GPS rover unit. The water levels and horizontal positions were placed in an Excel 2010 spread
sheet and the ellipsoid heights were regressed to a line with respect to reach distance, Figure 17.
Figure 17 – Linear regression of water level slope.
8.2 Water Surface Level Slope Estimate
Corresponding left and right bank water levels were measured on 18 June 2011. These
measurements were done using a Leica 1200+ series RTK GPS rover unit that was receiving
correction messages from an RTK GPS base station set on HK-1. Measurements were made in
the vicinity of Stations 1,3,5,8,9, and 12. The reach distance along each bank between points was
computed. The ellipsoid heights with respect to the computed reach distances were then
regressed to a line using Microsoft Excel 2010. This regression gave an estimated water surface
slope of -0.0005 for both banks. The R2 regression coefficients were 0.91 and 0.96 for the left
and right banks respectively, Figure 17.
EQN 8.1 Ht = SWL * D + b
Where: Ht = Ellipsoid height of the water surface in meters
SWL = Water level slope
b = Height of the vertical intercept of the regression line at the putative river
mouth
Ht = -0.0005 * D + 26.32
R2 = 0.96 Ht = -0.0005 * D + 26.40
R2 = 0.91
24.80
25.00
25.20
25.40
25.60
25.80
26.00
26.20
26.40
26.60
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500Ellipsoid Height (m) Reach Distance (m)
Right Bank Water Level Left Bank Water Level
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 30
9.0 RIVER BED MATERIALS
9.1 Introduction
During the third expedition to Igiugig ten sediment samples were collected from the Kvichak
River bed and Iliamna Lake. The collection dates were 27 and 30 August 2011. These samples
were collected by dragging a cylindrical bed sampler several meters on the bottom. One drag was
made for each sample. This yielded approximately four liters of bed material per sample. The
sampled materials were classified by size using the scheme of Lane et. al as presented in
Sediment Transport Theory and Practice by Yang (1996). This was a coarse characterization of
materials based on simple inspection and measurement using calipers and the American
Association of Petroleum Geologist’s sedimentary size graph by George V. Chilingar. It was not
intended to replace a more rigorous analysis using appropriate methods with standard sieves and
hydrometry. The locations of the bed samples are depicted on the accompanying map sheets in
Appendix 1.
9.2 Bed Samples
Sample Description
A. The material is exclusively sand. The majority is coarse sand. The remainder consist s
of medium and fine sand. There is no frank presentation of gravel, cobbles, silt or
clay.
B. There are some small cobbles. The predominant material is gravel. The full spectrum
of gravel sizes is present. However, most of it is in the medium and fine range. Some
sand is present in sizes from 0.25 to 2 mm. The majority of the sand is 0.5 to 1.0 mm.
(coarse sand). There is a minor amount of clay/silt material. The sample has a
pronounced odor of organic decay.
C. This material is substantially dominated by small cobbles. The small remainder
consists of gravel and sand. The majority of the gravel is coarse and medium with a
very small amount of fine gravel. The sand is mostly coarse. There are trace amounts
of fine and very fine sand. There is no frank evidence of silt or clay. The sample has a
mild aroma of organic decay.
D. This material is predominantly small cobbles and gravel. There is some very coarse
and coarse gravel. The sample is dominated by medium and fine gravel. A small
amount of very coarse sand is present. There is no obvious presence of material
smaller than coarse sand.
E. The bed is predominantly gravel. The full spectrum of gravel sizes is present. There
are some small cobbles. The minimal amount of sand present is primarily very coarse
and coarse.
F. This sample is primarily medium and fine gravel. However, the full spectrum of
gravel sizes is present. There are some small cobbles. The small amount of sand
present is primarily coarse and very coarse. There is no clear evidence of finer sands,
silt or clay.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 31
G. The bed material is small cobbles and very coarse gravel. There are no significant
amounts of any smaller materials.
H. The majority of material is small cobbles and very coarse gravel. The small remainder
is coarse, medium and fine gravel. There is no evidence of finer material.
I. There are some small cobbles. The primary gravel is very coarse, and coarse. Some
medium, fine, and very fine gravel is present. Finer material does not appear.
J. The material is small cobbles with very coarse, coarse, and medium gravel. There are
no significant amounts of finer material.
Iliamna Lake and the Kvichak river waters are exceptionally clear. On the lake the bottom can be
easily seen to a depth of five meters. In the general vicinity of the river mouth the lake bottom
appears to be scattered cobbles, and small boulders on top of coarse sand. The river the bed is
visible in almost all of the study area. The central part of the channel appears to be small to large
cobbles and the occasional small boulder. At the water line by the mouth of the river the gravel
and cobbles diminish and the beach consists primarily of fine and medium sands. There are
occasional small areas with substantial silt or clay material. Further downstream the shore line
presents infrequent small and medium boulders. The primary materials are large and small
cobbles, with an assortment of gravel, and sand. There is relatively little organic material in the
shoreline bed.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 32
10.0 FINDINGS
10.1 Introduction
ADCP surveys were completed on Expeditions II, III, and IV. The effort had three primary
goals. The first goal was to obtain discharge measurements at low medium and high stages. The
second goal was to determine if there was a detectable moving bed at select points in the river.
The final goal was to develop a detailed picture of the flow velocities and distribution of
hydrokinetic energy density in the river.
A multibeam bathymetric survey was completed on Expedition II and III. The data from
Expedition II was not satisfactory. It was discarded and a second survey was completed on
Expedition III. The results of the second survey were the only ones included in this report. The
purpose of the multibeam survey was to develop a detailed digital elevation model (DEM) of the
river bed. Second, it established a baseline state of river bathymetry. It created a detailed 3-D
data set suitable for future modeling requirements. Finally, the bathymetric survey was also used
to identify dangers to navigation, and hazards for construction.
Ten bed samples were collected on Expedition III. These samples were intended to give a
preliminary view of the typical bed material in the project site. They were not intended to be
suitable for a detailed sediment study for the purpose of making a definitive assessment of bed
stability and bed load transport.
None of the RM’s from the USGS gaging station were recovered. Nonetheless some coarse
relationships were established. This was done by referencing current discharge measurements to
the original USGS rating curve and then relating the gage heights to an ellipsoid height. This was
then used to make some estimates of return even parameters, and extremes of flow and height
conditions. These findings should be accepted with great caution. The river has changed over the
decades since the USGS operated its gaging station. No physical tie to the USGS RM’s was
possible. Therefore, the relationships established are based only on a rough estimate of water
levels using a rating curve that is over two decades old.
10.2 ADCP Findings
TerraSond did ADCP surveys on Expeditions II, III, and IV. On each expedition a discharge
measurement was completed at Station 5 in the vicinity of the electric power generator facility. A
moving bed test was done in conjunction with each of these discharge measurements. On each
occasion no moving bed was detected. Over the three expeditions a total of eight more moving
bed tests were completed at other locations in the river. No moving bed was detected at any of
these locations. The locations of the moving bed tests have been depicted on the accompanying
map sheets. Fifty four single transects were completed over the course of the three expeditions.
Nine single transects were done on Expedition II. The first of these was at the mouth of the river
and the last was in the vicinity of the downstream extent of the original proposed survey area.
This was about 2.5 km downstream. On Expedition III ten single transects were completed The
first was at Station 5 and last was at Station 18. The transect at Station 18 was about 1.5 km
downstream from Station 12. The total downstream extent of ADCP surveys was nearly 4 km of
reach distance. After examination of the ADCP transects from Expeditions II and III it was
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 33
decided that the best areas for further study were in the vicinity of Stations 5, 6, 9, 10, and 17.
The area surrounding each of these stations was expanded to a study site. The sites were given a
numerical designation that corresponded with the station that was the basis of the expanded area.
ADCP efforts for Expedition IV aimed to develop a more detailed picture of the flow
characteristics in these sites. The locations of the sites and the individual transects surveyed at
each of these sites are depicted in the accompanying map sheets.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 34
10.2.1 Discharge Measurements
A discharge measurement was done at Station 5 during each expedition. TerraSond attempted to
time the discharge measurements to coincide with a low, medium, and high discharge. The first
measurement was done on 21 June 2011. The second and third measurements were done on 27
August and 12 October 2011. The results of these measurements are in tables 4, 5, and 6.
21-Jun-11
Expedition II Discharge at Station 5
Transect
Total
Q
Delta
Q Width
Total
Area Q/Area
Flow
Speed
m³/s % m m² m/s m/s
PH3C002 334 -0.18 123 225 1.5 1.6
PH3C003 334 -0.13 124 222 1.5 1.6
PH3C004 337 0.78 127 227 1.5 1.6
PH3C005 333 -0.47 126 225 1.5 1.5
Average 335 0 125 225 1.5 1.6
Std Dev. 2 0.54 2 2 0.0 0.0
Table 4 – Expedition II ADCP discharge.
29-Aug-11
Expedition III Discharge at Electric Power Station
Transect
Total
Q
Delta
Q Width
Total
Area Q/Area
Flow
Speed
m³/s % m m² m/s m/s
PWRHSEDIS002 548 0.72 156 327 1.7 1.8
PWRHSEDIS003 540 -0.79 159 330 1.6 1.8
PWRHSEDIS004 544 -0.04 158 326 1.7 1.7
PWRHSEDIS005 545 0.11 158 327 1.7 1.8
Average 544 0 158 327 1.7 1.8
Std Dev. 3 0.62 2 2 0.0 0.0
Table 5 – Expedition III ADCP discharge.
12-Oct-11
Expedition IV Discharge at Electric Power Station
Transect
Total
Q
Delta
Q Width
Total
Area Q/Area
Flow
Speed
m³/s % m m² m/s m/s
SITE5-1001 548 0.47 170 334 1.6 1.7
SITE5-1002 548 0.55 167 330 1.7 1.7
SITE5-1003 552 1.24 170 333 1.7 1.8
SITE5-1004 533 -2.26 166 329 1.6 1.6
Average 545 0 168 332 1.6 1.7
Std Dev. 8 1.55 2 2 0.0 0.0
Table 6 – Expedition IV ADCP discharge.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 35
The USGS operated a gaging station on the Kvichak River at this location from 1967 to 1987. It
was designated Site 15300500. During this time they completed 39 discharge measurements and
developed two rating curves. This rating curves were used by the USGS to make daily estimates
of discharge. The USGS published these estimates from 1 January 1967 to 1 January 1987.
Unfortunately the original RM’s for the gaging station have been lost. Further, the river channel
has experienced some changes in dimension and flow pattern over the last 24 years. Nonetheless
the USGS gaging data has been of some utility in characterizing the current discharge. This data
set shows that the typical low discharges have occurred between the middle of March and the
middle of April, Figure 18. The high discharges have usually occurred between late August and
early October.
Figure 18 – USGS Site 15300500 daily discharge.
The USGS normally used a river year that corresponds with the U.S. fiscal year to define the
period for selecting annual descriptive statistics. This approach was not useful for current
analysis because it resulted in annual extremes being designated within weeks of each other in
the same calendar year. Therefore it was decided to use the calendar year for river analysis in this
report. The annual peak and minimum discharges that have been presented in Figure 19 were
determined from the USGS gage data for the respective calendar years.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Discharge (m3 / s) Mean Annual High Discharge Mean Daily Discharge Mean Annual Low Discharge
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 36
Figure 19 – USGS Site 15300500 annual maximum and minimum discharge.
The average daily discharge for the USGS record was 500 m3/s (201 m3/s). The maximum
and minimum daily discharges reported were 1277 m3/s and 181 m3/s respectively. The average
annual minimum and peak reported discharges were 293 m3/s, (81 m3/s), and 813 m3/s,
(212 m3/s). The ADCP measured discharge on 21 June 2011 was 335 m3/s. This value would
have fallen in the 21st percentile of the USGS data set. The other two discharges measured on 27
August and 12 October 2011 were 544 and 545 m3/s. These measurements fell into the 65th
percentile of the USGS record. The USGS reported mean discharge for all of the June months
was 405 m3/s, (90 m3/s). The minimum and maximum discharges reported in the USGS data
set for the June months were 394 m3/s and 524 m3/s. The USGS reported daily mean discharge
for all of the August months was 693 m3/s, (199 m3/s). The reported mean discharge for the
October months was 699 m3/s, (181 m3/s). The minimum and maximum USGS discharge
values October were 510 m3 / s and 1189 m3 /s. These parameters have been summarized in table
7. Several community members observed that this year seemed to have some of the lowest water
levels that had been seen in the last 15 years. Comparison of the current ADCP discharge
measurement to the USGS record has corroborated these observations.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Discharge (m3 / s) Calandar Year
Peak Annual Discharge Minimum Annual Discharge
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 37
Characteristic Discharge (m3/s) Standard Deviation (1 m3/s)
USGS Mean Daily Discharge 500 201
USGS Maximum Daily Discharge 1277 ****
USGS Minimum Daily Discharge 181 ****
USGS Mean Annual Minimum
Discharge 293 81
USGS Mean Annual Maximum
Discharge 813 212
USGS Mean Daily Discharge June 405 90
USGS Maximum Discharge June 524 ****
USGS Minimum Discharge June 394 ****
USGS Mean Daily Discharge August 693 199
USGS Maximum Discharge August 1277 ****
USGS Minimum Discharge August 413 ****
USGS Mean Daily Discharge October 699 181
USGS Minimum Discharge October 510 ****
USGS Maximum Discharge October 1189 ****
RISEC Expedition II Discharge 335 2
RISEC Expedition III Discharge 544 3
RISEC Expedition IV Discharge 545 8
Table 7 – Summary discharge statistics.
10.2.2 Moving Bed Tests
Nine moving bed tests were done over the course of the three expeditions. One was done in
conjunction with each of the discharge measurements at Station 5. The remaining ones were
done at select points of interest in the river. None of these tests detected a moving bed.
The lack of a positive result for a moving bed does not mean that the bed is completely stable.
There may be enough movement of the bed at rates below the instrument detection level to cause
long term changes in the bed morphology. Further, modifications to flow patterns caused by
objects place on the bed may cause substantial localized changes in the bed morphology.
10.2.3 Energy Density
ADCP velocity magnitude values were exported from WinRiver II for further evaluation using
MatLAB Version 2008b. The velocity magnitude values were smoothed with a 3 x 3 ensemble
average over the entire profile. The total hydrokinetic power density was computed by the
following.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 38
EQN 10.1 P = 0.5 * V3
Where: P = Power density
= Density of fresh water
V = water velocity magnitude
Images depicting the distribution of flow and hydrokinetic power were produced for every
transect. The full collect has been placed in Appendix 2 of this report. The highlights of transects
collected at Sites 5, 6 9 and 10 have been selected for discussion because they show the most
promise for future development.
The depth shown in all of the ADCP transect graphics are those measured by the ADCP at the
time of the survey. They have not been adjusted to the KRIGIPVD11 datum. The physical
dimensions and acoustic properties of the ADCP prevent direct measurement of the entire
channel. The TRDI WinRiver II software applies a series of extrapolation algorithms to estimate
current velocities and discharge in the omitted areas. The results of these extrapolations are then
added to the actual measured portion of the channel to determine the total discharge of the
channel.
The TRDI WorkHorse Sentinel 1200 kHz ADCP used for this project was mounted vertically on
a pole with the transducer head 0.5 meters below the water surface. When the transducers ping
the sound is emitted in all directions. Thus there is a simultaneous return from the water column
and the instrument housing. Because of this the instrument cannot distinguish between returns in
the first 0.25 meters in front of the transducer head and the returns from the housing. Therefore
no measurements are recorded for the region that extends from the transducer head to a point
0.25 meters distant. This distance is known as the blanking distance. The combined draft and
blanking distance for the data presented here is 0.75 meters, (2.46 ft.). Therefore there are no
direct measurements of current velocity recorded for the first 0.75 meters of the water column. A
small portion of the bottom of the water column does not have direct current velocity
measurements. This is due to issues with backscatter from the bottom and the need to use bottom
tracking to determine vessel movement. In the data presented here the bottom gap is 0.75 m,
(2.46). However, the ADCP does measure the actual depth to the river bed. Due to the instrument
draft and blanking distance the ADCP cannot be maneuvered all the way to the shore. There
must always be at least 0.75m (2.46) between the transducer heads and the river bed. Therefore,
the profiles presented in this report represent the portion of the channel that was surveyed
directly by the ADCP. There is a small sliver on each side of the channel that is omitted. In order
to make an extrapolation to compute the discharge in the side slivers the ADCP is held in
position for about 10 seconds as close as possible to the bank while also maintaining at least two
good measurement bins below the instrument. Thus the shallowest water that this instrument
configuration can measure is 1.30 m (4.26 ft). While holding position near the bank the distance
from the instrument to the bank is measured and recorded in the data record. The sampled bins
and the bank distance are used to extrapolate a value for discharge in the omitted sliver at each
bank, Figure 20.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 39
Figure 20 – Omitted zones of ADCP profiles.
10.2.3.1 Station 5
The June ADCP transect at Station 5 exhibits a zone of low to moderate power density that is
centrally located in the channel. Its left extent is offset to the right of the thalweg by about 10
meters. From there it extends to the right of the channel such that it ultimately occupies the
central two thirds of the river. The overall distribution of power at this station appears to remain
the same at the higher discharge rates. Average velocity magnitude at Station 5 was 1.6 m/s on
21 June 2011, 1.8 m/s on 27 August 2011, and 1.7 on 12 October 2011. At the lower discharge
the power density ranges from about 2 to 4 kW/m2. At the higher discharge the range energy
density in this zone is from approximately 4 to 6 kW/m2 Figures 21, 22, 23.
Instrument draft + Blanking distance = 0.75m
End of measured profile
Bottom tracking zone 0.75 m
Measured bottom
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 40
Figure 21 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition II.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 41
Figure 22 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition III.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 42
Figure 23 – ADCP transect at Station 5 Expedition IV.
10.2.3 Station 6
The energy is concentrated in the left half of the river at Station 6. In June it is at a moderate
level of about 3.5 to 4.5 kW/m2 Figure 22. The power increases considerably in August and
October. At this higher discharge the power range in the left half of the channel is 5 to 7 kW/m 2,
Figures 24, 25, 26. The average velocity magnitude at Station 6 for Expeditions II, III, and IV
was 1.3, 1.6, and 1.9 m/s respectively. The overall distribution of power remains consistent
through the seasons. At this station the power zone is wide. The thalweg is broad and less
pronounced compared to other reaches. This location offers a wide high power zone while
maintaining good depth and breadth for navigation.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 43
Figure 24 – ADCP transect at Station 6 Expedition II.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 44
Figure 25 – ADCP transect at Station 6 Expedition III.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 45
Figure 26 – ADCP transect at Station 6, (Site 6-6) Expedition IV.
10.2.3.1 Site 6
The initial ADCP data from Station 6 indicated that it would be one of the more favorable
locations for a turbine. Therefore the scope of investigation was expended about this station. The
expanded zone was designated as Site 6. A total of 11 ADCP transects were completed at this
site during Expedition IV. The first was placed about 120 meters upstream of the original
transect for Station 6. The remaining 10 transected were placed at 20 meter intervals
downstream.
At Site 6 the power density distribution changes with the river morphology. From Site 6-1 to 6-2
the thalweg is expanded to the left and becomes less pronounced Figures 26, 27. Two zones of
slightly elevated power density start to form at Site 6-2. At Site 6-3 some of the material returns
to the left side of the thalweg and the right side is extended and widened, Figure 29.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 46
Figure 27 – ADCP transect Site 6-1.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 47
Figure 28 – ADCP transect Site 6-7.
A second zone of elevated energy density develops to the right of the thalweg.
Loss of material on left side of channel
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 48
Figure 29 – ADCP Transect Site 6-3.
Some material returns on the left side and the right side continues to expand.
From Site 6-3 to Site 6-6 the thalweg expands to the right and the channel starts to develop a
profile that has a steep slope from the left to a low point at 15 meters from the left bank. Then
there is a gradual slope up to the right bank. A zone of elevated energy density develops on the
left side of the river, Figures 29, 30, 31.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 49
Figure 30 – ADCP transect Site 6-4.
The channel expansion continues and a zone of higher energy density develops in the vicinity of
the thalweg.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 50
Figure 31 – ADCP transect Site 6-5.
Channel expansion continues and the zone of higher energy density consolidates in the vicinity
of the thalweg.
At Site 6-6 the channel expands on the left and right side. The high energy density increases
intensity and expands to occupy the majority of the left half of the channel. At Site 6-7 the
channel is filled in on the left and continues to excavate on the right. The zone of elevated energy
density remains largely the same as in the upstream transect. At Site 6-8 the left side is excavated
again and the right side continues to be excavated. The overall profile has moderately steep
slopes on the left and right with a flat bottom that comprises the central half of the channel. The
elevated energy density persists to the left half of the channel, Figures 32, 33, 34.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 51
Figure 32 – ADCP transect Site 6-6.
The channel expansion continues and the zone of higher energy density expands to occupy the
left half of the channel.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 52
Figure 33 – ADCP transect 6-7.
At Site 6-7 the channel is filled in on the left and continues to be excavated on the right.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 53
Figure 34 – ADCP transect 6-8.
At Site 6-8 the left side is excavated again and the right side continues to be excavated.
At Site 6-9 the left portion of the channel is filled again and the right side is still excavated. The
flat portion of the channel is shifted slightly to right. The elevated energy density still trends to
the left of the channel. However it has moved slightly to the right in response to the fill on the
left, Figure 35.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 54
Figure 35 – ADCP Transect Site 6-10.
At Site 6-9 a trapezoidal profile starts to emerge.
The profile at Site 6-10 exhibits a reversal of the previous excavation and fill trend. The left side
is substantially excavated and has a very short steep profile. The right side is filled in slightly.
The channel profile is dominated by a broad flat section that favors the left side and has a slight
dip to the right side. The high energy density zone is expanded over the majority of this broad
flat portion of the channel, Figure 36.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 55
Figure 36 – ADCP transect Site 6-10.
The left side of the channel continues to fill at site 6-11. The channel is developing a profile that
has a gradual slope from the left to a low point about 75 m from the left bank. Then there is a
steep slope up to the left bank. A more clearly defined thalweg is starting to form on the right
side. The elevated energy density zone is in the center of the channel. It appears to be less dense
than it was in the upstream profiles, Figure 37.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 56
Figure 37 – ADCP transect Site 6-11.
At Site 6-11 the left side starts to fill. This is a harbinger to the inverted profile that emerges in
Site 9.
Overall Site 6 offers a stable zone of elevated energy density. The channel is primarily broad and
deep. It is close to the current power generation facility and the Fish and Game Boat landing. All
three of these features make it a prime candidate site for an electric turbine.
10.2.3.2 Station 9
Station 9 exhibits a stable zone of high energy density that is located in the center of the channel.
Even at the lower discharge rate the energy density is between 5 and 7 kW/m 2. The average flow
velocities for Station 9 are 1.9, 1.4, 2.0 m/s for each of the successive expeditions, Figures 38,
39, 40.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 57
Figure 38 – ADCP transect Station 9 Expedition II.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 58
Figure 39 – Station 9 Expedition III.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 59
Figure 40 – ADCP Transect Station 9 Expedition IV.
10.2.3.3 Site 9
The reach in the vicinity of Station 9 exhibited a very high energy density at its downstream end.
Therefore it was also selected for more detailed ADCP profiling on Expedition IV.
At the upstream end of the reach the thalweg is well defined and roughly centered in the channel.
The overall profile of the channel is an inverted triangle, Figures 41, 42, 43. At site 9-1 there is a
small elevation of energy density slightly to the right of the thalweg. The channel is
progressively excavated on both sides as it goes down stream.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 60
Figure 41 – ADCP transect Site 9-1.
The inverted triangular profile with a central well defined thalweg continues for the first portion
of Site 9.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 61
Figure 42 – ADCP transect Site 9-7.
At Site 9-7 the channel begins to open up and move toward a trapezoidal profile.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 62
Figure 43 – ADCP transect Site 9-8.
By Site 9-8 the well defined central thalweg starts to give way to a broad flat bottom that rises
with steep slopes to the left and right banks, Figure 43. With further progress downstream this
zone tends to align with the thalweg and the energy density rises. As the thalweg becomes wider
the high energy density zone expands and becomes more intense, Figure 44. By Site 9-10 the
high energy zone dominates the right side of the channel. The energy density in the zone is
between 5.5 kW/m2 to 7 kW/m2, Figure 44.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 63
Figure 44 – ADCP transect Site 9-10.
The downstream end of Site nine presents a well-defined zone of high energy density. This zone
favors the right bank. The channel is moderately broad. However, it is not as spacious as Site 6.
10.2.3.4 Sites 10 and 11
Site 10 is immediately downstream of Site 9. The first transect of Site 10 is 20 meters
downstream of the last transect for Site 9. The transect spacing at Site 10 is 30 meters. There are
11 transects at this site. There is only one transect at Site 11. The characteristics of this transect
are not very different from the last transects of Site 10. Indeed it appears to be an additional
increment of a trend that started at the end of Site 9 and continues through Site 10.
The morphodynamic and hydrokinetic trends that started at the end of Site 9 continue at Site 10.
The channel becomes progressively wider and develops a more open parabolic form. Likewise
the zone of high energy density remains in the center and continues to increase, Figures 45, 46.
The central zone of high energy density appears to peak between Site 10-3 and 10-5, Figure 46,
47 At Site 10-7 the channel begins to change shape. For the rest of the reach it starts to form a
trapezoidal profile.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 64
Figure 45 – ADCP transect Site 10-1.
At Site 10-1 the trapezoidal profile is frank.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 65
Figure 46 – ADCP transect Site 10-3.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 66
Figure 47 – ADCP transect Site 10-7.
From Site 10-7 to 11-1 there is a gradual filling of the channel coupled with a flattening of the
center. At Site 10-8 a trapezoidal profile begins to emerge, Figure 48. By Site 10-10 the channel
is a well formed trapezoid, Figure 49. This profile remains to Site 11-1 figure 50. Along this
extent of the river the zone of elevated energy density remains in the center of the channel.
However, it is diminished.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 67
Figure 48 – ADCP transect Site 10-8.
At Site 10-8 the trapezoidal profile remains, however the zone of high energy density is waning.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 68
Figure 49 – ADCP transect Site 10-10.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 69
Figure 50 – ADCP transect Site 11-1.
10.2.3.5 Top Section Flow Velocity
The first ADCP measurement bin starts at 75 cm below the surface. This leaves a gap to the
surface from the first bin where no velocity data is collected. TRDI’s WinRiver II software uses
an extrapolation algorithm to estimate the velocity in this area for the purpose of measuring
discharger. However, it does not report an estimated flow velocity.
Therefore it was decided to make some measurement of flow velocity in this area with a Marsh-
McBirney Flowmate 2000 flow meter. The flow meter was pole mounted on the port side of the
boat. The sensor head was placed 61 cm below the water. The boat was navigated across the
ADCP transects and held at select positions across the river. Four to five measurements were
taken at even spacing across the channel.
The measurements taken during expedition IV are depicted on the map sheets in Appendix 1.
The surface velocities were typical for this type of river. Near the banks the velocities tended to
be slower than in the middle channel. The values that were reported are roughly the same as
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 70
those observed in the top bins of the ADCP profile. On some of the transects at Site 10 there is a
back eddy by the right bank. At these locations the river flow is reversed. These velocities are
reported on the map sheets as (-) values.
10.3 River Bed Findings
An R2Sonic 2024 MBES was used to do a bathymetric survey from about 0.12 km above the
mouth to a downstream extend of about 2.7 km. This survey was used to identify dangers to
navigation, hazards for construction, and give a detailed picture of the shape of the river bed. The
surveyed has been depicted on the included map sheets in Appendix 1
Immediately before the mouth of the river there is a small field of sand waves that tend toward
the left bank. On the right a shoal extends from shore into the lake and then continues along the
right bank downstream to the vicinity of the Fish and Game Boat Landing. The thalweg develops
quickly at the mouth and descends to a depth of about 14 feet. About 1000 feet downstream there
is an abrupt rise to 8 feet which is followed a quick drop to 12 feet. The bed slowly rises again to
5 feet in the vicinity of Station 5. Then the river starts a bend to the right and the bed drops once
more near Station 6. This time it forms a 10 foot deep thalweg on the right side and there is a
shoal that forms on the left by the Fish and Game Boat Landing. The shoal remains on the left
and extends into the channel on the left side of the first island. On the right side the bed rises
again to 2 feet and starts to curve left. At the approach to Site 9 the river narrows and a sharp
central thalweg forms. In the downstream half of Site 9 there is rapid drop to 18 feet. This feature
has come to be called “The Chute.” The Chute opens into Site 10. Here the channel fills and
takes on a trapezoidal profile. It continues downstream with the same profile as the bed slowly
rises to 10 feet just beyond Site 11.
Numerous dangers to navigation, (DtoN) and hazards for construction, (HforC) have been
identified in the bathymetric surface. In this report a DtoN is defined as any object with a volume
greater than 1 m3 that rises to within 4 feet, (1.22 m) of the water surface. The DtoN’s in the
Kvichak River include numerous boulders and the various shoals. The DtoN’s are depicted on
the accompanying map sheet in Appendix 1. The map sheet also has a table of coordinates for all
of the DtoN’s. The HforC’s are presented on the accompanying map sheets. There is also a table
of coordinates for the HforC’s. In this report a HforC is defined as any bottom object that is
greater than 1 m3, and extends more than 3.3 feet, (1 m) feet above the bed.
The bed materials of the Kvichak River appear to be quite stable with respect to the short term.
No moving bed was detected with the ADCP. The collected bed samples consisted primarily of
larger forms that were predominantly in the range of gravel and cobbles. Nonetheless this does
not obviate the fact that the river is very energetic. It also has a constant source of material in the
lake and along the banks. Further, ice enters the river from the lake each year. This ice could
dislodge bed material and create strong localized areas of scour. Therefore, while the river bed
may appear more stable than many other rivers, it is still important to keep all manners of
sediment transport in mind when considering construction designs for the banks and the river
bed.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 71
The river morphology of the Kvichak was well characterized by the 2011 bathymetric survey.
The upper Kvichak River along the Village of Igiugig has a significant bend (approximating a
90º bend) in the river with a non-uniform alveus for most of the range along the project area.
Statements from village residents and evaluation of historical maps and aerial photographs
indicate that the Kvichak River has experienced significant change within recent recorded
history. Of particular note, the zone constituting the bend in the river across from the Fish and
Game Boat Landing has changed dominant flow regimes several times within the last 70 years.
The cross-sectional peak flow within the river may also shift significantly throughout this portion
of the river. TerraSond interprets that the thalweg is not stable, particularly distinct, nor well
confined geomorphologic body within this river structure. Persistent geologic formations are not
constraining this river, and it is believed that the Kvichak River can be expected to demonstrate
change over time. Several areas of the river appear to be more static and persistent than the bend
noted above. In particular, the opening to Lake Iliamna and the stretch after the bend appear to
demonstrate more persistent behavior.
10.4 Tie of Current Survey Data to USGS Gage
The field crew could not locate any of the USGS gaging station RM’s or associated equipment.
Given the field search, and consultation with the USGS and the local community it is highly
probable that all of these items have been lost. Therefore, it is not possible to make a sound
physical tie to the original USGS gaging station. Nonetheless a coarse relationship has been
established using current ADCP discharge measurements, RTK GPS water level observations,
and the USGS rating curves. The USGS data is several decades old. However, it is the best data
record available for this site. The river dimensions and climatology have changed. The
relationships that are developed in the following sections are at best tenuous extrapolations.
These relationships are not intended to replace a current and complete hydrologic study. They
are an attempt to use past data as a means to gain insight into the hydrologic characteristics of the
river. Great care should be exercised if this data is used for any design development and analysis.
The USGS Gaging Site 15300500 was established at Igiugig on the Kvichak River on 15 June
1967. It was operational until 1987. The methods used at the time were published in Techniques
of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey, Chapter A8,
Discharge Measurements at Gaging Stations, Book 3, Applications of Hydraulics, 1969. During
this time they did 39 discharge measurements. The USGS used these measurements to establish a
set of rating curves for the site. There were two sets of RM’s used for the river gage height. Both
sets of RM’s originated from an assumed arbitrary value. By coincidence the values selected for
both references were close. The first set was used for measurements 1 to 16. Measurements 17 to
39 were completed using the second set of RM’s. The exact date that the USGS switched RM’s
is not certain. It was most likely sometime between discharge measurement 16 and 17. These
measurements took place on 28 September 1970, and 24 March 1971. There was no mention in
the USGS station records of a level loop being done to tie the two sets of RM’s together.
Nonetheless the USGS appears to have adjusted the gage heights for discharge measurements 8
to 16 and carried them forward to the later rating curves, Figure 51.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 72
Figure 51 – USGS discharge versus gage height with respective regressions.
A relationship between the KRIGIPVD11 datum and the original USGS rating curve was
established using two current river levels and ADCP discharge measurements. Three ADCP
discharge measurements were completed for this project. RTK GPS observations were made in
close temporal proximity to the ADCP discharge measurements. The timing of these
measurements was sufficiently close to allow a reasonable assumption to be made that the river
level was not significantly changed from the level at the exact time of the ADCP discharge
measurements. The first ADCP discharge that was used for establishing the relationship to the
USGS rating curve was done on 21 June 2011, and the second was done on 12 October 2011.
The measured discharge on 21 June was 335 m3/s and the observed ellipsoid height of the water
surface was 25.90 m. On 12 October the measured discharge was 545 m3/s, and the ellipsoid
height of the water surface was 26.44 m. These discharges were plotted on the original USGS
rating curve to determine the corresponding USGS gage heights. The USGS gage heights for the
two discharge values were 16.95 feet, (5.17 m), and 18.50 feet, (5.64 m). The offsets between the
report USGS stages and the ellipsoid height of the water were 20.73 meters, and 20.78 meters ,
respectively. The average of these two values was taken to be a standard offset between a given
ellipsoid height and the USGS gage height for the original set of RM’s. This value was 20.76
meters. Thus the corresponding current ellipsoid height for any given USGS gage height value
on the original curve was estimated by adding 20.76 meters to the gage height. This sum was
compared to 25.00 meters to determine where the particular stage was with respect to the
KRIGIPVD11 datum. For example, an original USGS gage height of 6.00 m would correspond
to a water surface ellipsoid height of 26.76 m. The water surface level would be 1.76 m above
the KRIGIPVD11 datum.
Discharge measurements 1 to 16 tended to cover the lower discharge values. The higher
discharges were covered by the later measurements that used the second set of RM’s. Slightly
less than 1/5 of the USGS measured discharges overlapped. These values were clustered around
Q = 400.84*GHo - 1704.7
R² = 0.98 Q = 548.89*GHn - 2804
R² = 0.97
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00Discharge (m3 / s) Gage Height (m)
Original Reference Monuments Second Reference Monuments
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 73
the overall average measured discharge, Figure 51. Therefore, if the analysis of stage and
discharge required for this report was going to be based on a complete range of reported
discharges a means of referencing the two sets of measurements had to be developed. This was
done by applying a conformal transformation to map gage heights from the domain used for the
second set of measurements to the domain used for the original set of measurements.
Six of the USGS discharge measurements were omitted from the calculations to reference the
two sets of measurements. Measurement two was removed because the USGS did not use it for
the development of their original rating curve. This measurement appeared to be an erroneous
outlier. Measurement three was also an apparent outlier. Measurements 23, 24, 35, and 39 did
not have complete information in the USGS field notes. The remaining measurements were used
as reported by the USGS.
The second set of gage heights were transformed to correspond with the first set. This was done
by first determining a linear regression model for each set of values. Then the two regression
models were set equal to each other, Figure 51, equations 10.1a, b, c.
EQN 10.1a Qo = Mo GHo + Io
EQN 10.1b Qn = Mn GHn + In
EQN 10.1c
Where: Qo and Qn = respective river discharges in m3/s.
Mo and Mn = the slope of the regression line for the original gage and the second
gage heights.
GHo and GHn = the original and second reported gage heights in meters.
Io and In = the intercept values for the original and second gage heights.
Equation 10.1c was manipulated to derive an expression that transposed the second set of gage
heights to the regression of the original gage heights, equation 10.1d.
EQN 10.1d
Where: GHi = the ith gage height shift from the second set of gage heights to the gage
heights with respect to the regression equation for the original set of gage heights.
The slopes of the two regression lines are not parallel. It was desirable to retain the full character
of the second set of discharge measurements after they were transformed. Simply applying
Equation 10.1d would not have accomplished this. It would have only expressed the transformed
gage heights as dictated by the regression equation of the original discharge data. In order to
preserve the full character of the second set of discharge measurements the mean of all values
given by Equation 10.1d was computed. This mean shift was applied to the gage heights reported
for the second set of discharge measurements. Thus the gage heights were transformed
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 74
conformally. This is confirmed by demonstrating that the slope of the regression for the
transformed discharge data is parallel to the first regression, Figure 52.
Figure 52 – Regression of USGS discharge measurements.
The USGS gage heights of the first discharge measurements and transformed gage heights were
unioned to form a single set. This set was then regressed with respect to the gage heights, Figures
52, 53.
Figure 53 – Regression of combined and transformed USGS discharge measurements.
The combined data was regressed to several forms. The best fit was achieved with a third order
polynomial, Equation 10.2.
EQN 10.2 Q = -44.675*GH3 + 870.6*GH2 – 5048.2*GH + 9332.4.
Q = 400.84*GHo - 1704.7
R² = 0.98
Q = 548.89*GHn - 2804
R² = 0.97
Q = 548.89*GHt - 2557
R² = 0.97
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00Discharge (m3 / s) Gage Height (m)
Original Gage Heights Second Gage Heights Transformed Gage Heights
Q = -44.675*GH3 + 870.6*GH2 - 5048.2*GH + 9332.4
R² = 0.98
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00Discharge (m3 / s) USGS Gage Height (m)
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 75
The relationship between the USGS gage height and the KRIGIPVD11 datum was derived from
the comparison of discharge measurements and the USGS original rating curve. This was applied
to the combined gage height data set to develop a regression of discharge as a function of height
above the KRIGIPVD11 datum, Figure 54.
Figure 54 – Regression of discharge with respect to water surface height above the
KRIGIPVD11 datum.
This regression gave the following polynomial equation.
EQN10.3 Q = -44.675*DH3 + 302.34*DH2 – 74.9*DH+ 174.19
Where: DH = water surface height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum
The USGS estimated the average flow velocity for the channel cross section as part of their
discharge measurements. This data was regressed to an exponential form that expressed
discharge as a function of velocity, Figure 55 Equation 10.4.
Q = -44.675DH3 + 302.34DH2 - 74.9DH + 174.19
R² = 0.98
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50Discharge (m3 / s) Water Surface Heght Above KRIGIPVD11 (m)
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 76
Figure 55 – Regression USGS discharge with respect to average cross section flow velocity.
EQN 10.4 Q = 66.249*e1.4213*V
Where: e = base of the natural logarithm
V = average cross sectional flow velocity in m/s
The relationship between height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum and discharge was used for a
regression to a power law equation to express average flow velocity as a function of height above
the datum, Figure 56, Equation 10.5.
Figure 56 – Regression of flow velocity with respect to height above the KRIGIPVD11
datum.
Q = 66.249e1.4213*V
R² = 0.95
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00Discharge (m3 / s) Average Flow Velocity (m/s)
V = 1.2167DH0.5505
R² = 0.94
0.50
0.70
0.90
1.10
1.30
1.50
1.70
1.90
2.10
2.30
2.50
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50Average Flow Velocity (m/s) Height Above KRIGIPVD11 Datum (m)
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 77
EQN 10.5 V = 1.216*DH0.5505
The USGS used their rating curve and gage height to produce daily estimates of discharge. They
issued values for everyday from 1 January 1968 to 1 January 1987. The above regression
equations were applied to this data to produce plots of discharge versus flow velocity, and height
above the KRIGIPVD11 datum, Figures 57, 58.
Figure 57 – Full record plot of USGS discharge as a function of mean flow velocity.
Figure 58 – Full record plot of USGS flow velocity and a function of height above the
KRIGIPVD11 datum.
The published USGS discharge data was used to complete a return period analysis using the
Log-Pearson Type III distribution as outlined in Guidelines For Determining Flood Flow
Frequency, Bulletin #17B of the Hydrology Subcommittee, Interagency Advisory Committee on
Water Data, USGS, 1982. Once the discharge return events were determined the relationships
between discharge, and flow velocity and height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum developed for
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1Discharge (m3/s) Average Flow Velocity (m/s)
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60Velocity (m/s) Ht. Above KRIGIPVD11 (m)
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 78
this report were used to create an expression for the corresponding return periods with respect to
these parameters, Figure59, Equations 10.6a, 10.6b.
Figure 59 – Plot of discharge return period for the Kvichak River at Igiugig.
Equation 10.6a and 10.6b give an empirical expression for the discharge as a function of return
period.
EQN 10.6a Return period for annual maximum discharge
Qmx = 187.16*Ln(Tr) + 661.35
EQN10.6b Return period for annual minimum discharge
Qmn = 72.83Ln(Tr) + 229.64
Where: Qmx = annual maximum discharge for a given return period
Qmn = annual minimum discharge for a given return period
Tr = return period in years
A return frequency analysis was developed for height above the KRIGIPVD11datum and
average flow velocity. These were computed by applying the previously developed relationships
to the discharge return analysis, Figures 60, 61.
Qmx = 187.16*Ln(Tr) + 661.35
R² = 0.99
Qmn = 72.83Ln(Tr) + 229.64
R² = 0.99
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210Discharge (m3 / s) Return Period (Years)
Peak Discharge Minimum Discharge
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 79
Figure 60 – Plot of return period for height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum the Kvichak
River at Igiugig.
Figure 61 – Plot of the return period for mean flow velocity for the Kvichak River at
Igiugig.
The following regression equations give an expression height above the KRIGIPVD11 datum
and flow velocities for a given return period.
EQN 10.7a DHh = 0.216*Ln(Tr) + 1.7439
EQN 10.7b DHl = 0.1703*Ln(Tr) + 0.6775
DH = 0.216ln(Tr) + 1.7439
R² = 0.99
DH = 0.1703ln(Tr) + 0.6775
R² = 0.99
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210Height Aboe KRIGIPVD11 (m) Return Period (Years)
Peak Height Minimum Height
Vh = 0.1064Ln(Tr) + 1.6817
R² = 0.98
Vl = 0.1131Ln(Tr) + 0.987
R² = 0.98
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210Flow Velocity (m/s) Return Period (Years)
Peak Flow Velocity Minimum Flow Velocity
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 80
EQN 10.7c Vh = 0.1064*Ln(Tr) + 1.6817
EQN 10.7d Vl = 0.1131*Ln(Tr) + 0.987
Where: The subscripts h and l refer to the respective high or low of the given parameter.
Figures 62 and 63 depict the flow velocities and height above datum as determined by
applications of the respective regressions to the full record of USGS daily discharge values.
Figure 62 – Daily flow velocities.
Figure 63 – Average Daily height above KRIGIPVD11 Datum.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Flow Velocity (m/s) 0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Height Above KRIGIPVD11 (m) Mean Annual High Flow Velocity Mean Daily Flow Velocity Mean Annual Low Flow Velocity
Mean Annual High Water Heights Mean Daily Water Heights Mean Annual Low Water Heights
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 81
Some key parameters that were determined from the preceding regressions are summarized in
the following tables.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 82
Year Date Q (m3/s) V (m/s) Ht. (m) Rank Exceedance Probability
1981 2/21/1981 510 1.43 1.35 1 0.05
1977 4/26/1977 399 1.27 1.09 2 0.10
1980 4/19/1980 371 1.22 1.02 3 0.15
1972 4/21/1972 368 1.22 1.01 4 0.20
1970 5/27/1970 362 1.21 1.00 5 0.25
1979 4/23/1979 314 1.11 0.87 6 0.30
1968 4/14/1968 311 1.11 0.86 7 0.35
1983 4/2/1983 309 1.10 0.85 8 0.40
1984 5/4/1984 271 1.01 0.74 9 0.45
1978 4/25/1978 269 1.01 0.73 10 0.50
1973 5/9/1973 256 0.97 0.69 11 0.55
1975 4/9/1975 255 0.97 0.69 12 0.60
1986 5/17/1986 249 0.96 0.67 13 0.65
1971 4/22/1971 244 0.94 0.65 14 0.70
1982 5/15/1982 244 0.94 0.65 15 0.75
1976 5/1/1976 227 0.89 0.59 16 0.80
1985 5/14/1985 222 0.88 0.58 17 0.85
1974 4/27/1974 198 0.80 0.50 18 0.90
1969 4/21/1969 181 0.74 0.43 19 0.95
Mean 293 1.04 0.79
Std Dev 1 81 0.17 0.23
Median 269 1.01 0.73
Table 8 – Summary of annual minimum discharge.
Summary of USGS annual minimum discharge and computed flow velocity, Water level height
above KRIGIPVD11, and exceedance probabilities. Q = discharge, V = mean flow velocity, Ht =
height above KRIGIPVD11 datum.
Return Period (Years) Q (m3 / s) V (m/s) Ht (m)
2 278 1.03 0.76
5 350 1.18 0.97
10 399 1.27 1.09
25 463 1.37 1.24
50 513 1.44 1.35
100 564 1.50 1.46
200 617 1.56 1.56
Table 9 – Summary of minimum discharge return periods.
Summary of return periods for annual minimums for Kvichak River at Igiugig. Q = discharge, V
= mean flow velocity, Ht = height above KRIGIPVD11 datum.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 83
Year Date Q (m3/s) V (m/s) Ht (m) Rank Exceedence Probability
1980 9/12/1980 1277 2.05 2.48 1 0.05
1971 8/27/1971 1192 2.00 2.39 2 0.10
1977 8/27/1977 1104 1.95 2.28 3 0.15
1981 8/24/1981 963 1.86 2.10 4 0.20
1982 9/24/1982 963 1.86 2.10 5 0.25
1985 10/12/1985 929 1.84 2.06 6 0.30
1972 9/23/1972 912 1.82 2.03 7 0.35
1979 8/31/1979 833 1.76 1.92 8 0.40
1986 11/8/1986 799 1.74 1.87 9 0.45
1968 8/29/1968 770 1.71 1.82 10 0.50
1975 9/17/1975 731 1.68 1.76 11 0.55
1970 9/15/1970 714 1.66 1.73 12 0.60
1969 10/17/1969 663 1.61 1.64 13 0.65
1973 9/14/1973 663 1.61 1.64 14 0.70
1976 9/30/1976 651 1.60 1.62 15 0.75
1978 9/17/1978 626 1.57 1.57 16 0.80
1984 9/7/1984 578 1.52 1.48 17 0.85
1974 10/4/1974 566 1.51 1.46 18 0.90
1983 8/24/1983 555 1.49 1.44 19 0.95
Mean 815 1.73 1.86
Std Dev 1 213 0.17 0.31
Median 770 1.71 1.82
Table 10 – Summary of annual maximum discharge.
Summary of USGS annual maximum discharge and computed flow velocity, Water level height
above KRIGIPVD11, and exceedance probabilities. Q = discharge, V = mean flow velocity, Ht =
height above KRIGIPVD11 datum.
Return Period (Years) Q (m3/s) V (m/s) Ht (m)
2 778 1.72 1.83
5 971 1.87 2.11
10 1101 1.95 2.28
25 1266 2.04 2.47
50 1392 2.11 2.60
100 1520 2.17 2.73
200 1651 2.22 2.85
Table 11 – Summary of maximum discharge return periods.
Summary of return periods for annual maximums for Kvichak River at Igiugig. Q = discharge, V
= mean flow velocity, Ht = height above KRIGIPVD11 datum.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 84
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1 Turbine Site Recommendations
TerraSond has analyzed the collected data during the four Expeditions in 2011. These
recommendations are based on interpretation of the alveus, bathymetry, the power density
magnitude, the power density stability, and knowledge of the vessel traffic requirements.
Specific bathymetry requirements were unavailable during this site selection due to still
undetermined project plans. The candidate site recommendation were based on criteria provided
by AEA, AE&E. and turbine designs which were under consideration for this project at the time
of this report.
No specific turbine design and installation method have been selected this time. Therefore it is
important to recognize that all recommended candidate sites presented here may not be
appropriate for all turbine configurations and design methodologies. However, all candidate sites
presented within this report are appropriate for at least one construction methodology or turbine
configuration.
This study has identified several locations that may be well suited for power conversion. Three
candidate site areas are recommended for perspective RISEC development. The sites are
designated as Site 6, Site 9, and Site 10. These designations are based on the proximity to the
original ADCP transect station determined during Expeditions II and III. The exact turbine
location is not recommended in this report. These site recommendations are only intended to
provide guidance for the direction of future studies of a more detailed nature.
11.1.2 RISEC Site Six
The area of Site 6 is recommended as the best suited for power production using shallow water
power conversion systems. This is the closest site to the village power generation facility. It
presents the lowest cost and effort for connection to the existing grid. The peak power density is
most frequently located outside the thalweg. Thus the site is well suited to simultaneous use for
power generation and vessel navigation. It has not been determined if this site offers a longer
power production season or a larger diesel offset, however, the potential for less operational
maintenance effort from offline turbine moves is a possibility for this site, Figure 46.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 85
Figure 64 – Site 6 candidate site.
Several items must be considered prior to construction of an in water turbine system at this site.
1. Is the power cross sectional regime stable enough during peak discharge periods?
2. This area is likely to offer little opportunity for debris shedding. The river may guide
debris directly into the turbine and create an accumulation point between the turbine and
the left bank. Debris will need to be directed into the thalweg by engineering efforts.
3. The bathymetry for this site is shallower than other sites recommended within this study.
Also, there is a naturally occurring sandbar directly below this site. Future operations will
need to monitor the development of this accretion zone to insure that it does not interfere
with turbine performance or significantly alter river flow.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 86
11.1.3 RISEC Site Nine
Site 9 is also well suited for in water turbine construction Figure 65. It exhibits a peak power
regime that should be more stable through the season that the one at Site 6. The alveus appears to
be constant with slow cycles for change. This portion of the river appears to contain the most
significant gradient along the thalweg. The flow is predictable and consistent through the Chute.
The power density reaches deep into the water column and offers the ability to product power at
deeper levels within the river than at Site 6. This site may offer the ability for surface and
subsurface power production.
Figure 65 – Candidate Site 9.
Site 9 is a narrow channel. Navigability needs to be carefully considered at this site. The river,
particularly at lower river stages, will experience significant spatial constraint. It is not known at
this time if any turbine design modifications will be required to satisfy the navigational
constraints it this site. Comments from the community and discussions with AE&E indicate that
vessel traffic may not require many shutdown periods during a season. Although currently
uncalculated, this site may require the highest transmission infrastructure cost.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 87
Significant considerations still remain prior to construction at Site 9.
1. Cost for connection to the grid is potentially very expensive compared to Site 6.
2. Sediment transport issues may exist for this site based upon alveus morphology and
should be monitored through time. Property issues will need to be sorted out for this site
prior to construction.
3. A Vessel traffic plan will need to be established for total operation and maintenance costs
to be well understood.
4. Debris and hazard evaluations will be required prior to project construction. This area is
likely to offer little opportunity for debris shedding during low river stages due to the
horizontal constraint of the channel. The river is likely to direct debris into the vicinity of
the turbine. Detailed understanding of debris episodes, debris momentum, and the general
path of debris through this channel will be needed to develop mitigation options.
11.1.4 RISEC Site Ten
The third potential location is Site 10 This site offers the best location for deployment of multiple
turbines. This site is attractive as an adaptable and expansive project site that offers opportunity
to produce a substantial portion of the power for the Igiugig. This site has the deepest bathymetry
of the candidate sites. This stretch of river could accommodate an array of turbines to be placed
on the bed or floating. The high energy density zone is long and stable.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 88
Figure 66 – RISEC Site 10.
RISEC Site 10 has a channel that is broad and deep. This gives the site 10 the best potential for
power generation while minimizing interference with navigation. However, the distance from the
generation facility and the left bank increases the cost and effort required to connect to the power
grid.
Significant considerations still remain prior to construction at Site 10.
1. Can the cost for transmission infrastructure to Site 10 be offset by increased power
production from multiple turbines?
2. The length of river appropriate for construction will require additional measurements
which have not been accomplished in this study. If bottom mounted turbine
configurations are considered, detailed bethymetry will be required to identify suitable
bed locations. The extent of the area presented in this report has not been identified at this
time and it should not be assumed that the entire length of river presented in the figure is
appropriate for turbine installation.
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 89
3. A Vessel traffic plan will need to be established for proper estimation of operation and
maintenance cost.
4. This site demonstrates significant power low in the water column which appears to result
from the significant drop in elevation from RISEC Site 9. This could indicate that an area
of increased turbulence may exist throughout RISEC Site 10 and may affect the range for
potential construction.
5. Debris and hazard evaluations will be required prior to construction. The river is likely to
bring debris into the turbine. Debris will need to be directed away from the turbines.
11.2 Future Studies
The results reported in this document represent the first field investigation for the design and
construction of an in water turbine facility in the Kvichak River at Igiugig. The prior assessments
presented have relied on historical data. The bulk of the site characterization was based on USGS
gage data from Site 15300500. This data was 24 years old. Even a cursory inspection of USGS
topographic maps, Community Development Maps, and aerial photography revealed that the
river has experienced significant changes over the past three decades.
The MBES survey completed this year is thought to be the only one of its kind done in this area
of the river. It has given a tremendous view of the current river bed condition. However, it is
only a baseline study. Future MBES surveys should be done at locations considered favorable for
a turbine site. These surveys should be scheduled for a high flow river state. This would offer an
opportunity to maximize bottom coverage. Detailed MBES surveys should be done at any
turbine location before and after placement. These studied should be planned with consideration
for detection of changes in bed morphology.
The ADCP data collected to date gives a good initial description of the flow velocities and
energy density in the river. However, they only represent three limited views in time. True high
and low flow conditions have not been captured. Further, the stability of flow could not be
adequately assessed with the three data sets. There is a need for long term current monitoring at
the potential turbine sites. This is the best way to determine the nature of the flow regime. In
particular it is important to assess the level of turbulence in the river and determine the long term
stability of the thalweg and the zones of high energy density. The most suitable means of doing
this would be an ADCP moored on the bottom of the river for up to one year.
In spite of the fact that it was over 24 years old the USGS gage data was still of some use for the
present work. However, in the decades since this gage was operational there have been changes
in the river climatology and morphology. Further there are no features remaining from the
original USGS installation that may be used to establish a physical tie to their data set. Any
relationships between current observations and the USGS record presented in this report are
tenuous and should be used with caution. Long term automated monitoring of the river’s water
level is important for the future success of any turbine project. Even though the results of this
year’s efforts are considered successful, they would have been better if a gaging station had been
placed at the start of the work. This station would have provided a continuous record of water
level. It would have made it easier to estimate the right time to do discharge measurements for
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Resource Reconnaissance & Physical Characterization
TerraSond Limited December 9, 2011
Page 90
peak flows. And the initial data for the creation of a new rating curve could have been obtained.
The gage could have been left in place for the foreseeable future. Thus there would be a
dependable record of river stage leading up to the placement of a pilot project. With regard to the
hydrologic aspects of this project a solid record of river stage is of paramount importance. Every
effort should be made to establish a new gaging station at Igiugig and develop a current rating
curve. A good record of river stage and discharge will be invaluable for the monitoring and
assessment of turbine operation and performance.
The stability of the river bed is only given light consideration if this report. Prior to any turbine
placement the prospective site should receive a detailed assessment. This assessment should
include determination of sub bottom conditions, and proper sieve analysis of bed material. Near
bottom flow velocities should be measured and used to determine the threshold for insipient
movement of the bed materials. ADCP profiles and channel profiles should be used to optimize
Manning’s equation for the select section of river.
There is no detailed knowledge of ice conditions on the river. Numerous accounts of ice
conditions have been received from the USGS and the community. However, there is no solid
quantitative data on ice dimension, composition, disposition and seasonality. Such information is
crucial to the construction and operation of a turbine in this river. The collection of a solid data
record for the river ice should be started as soon as possible. An excellent first step would be to
start a local observer program that involves the local school. This could be augmented with the
installation of game cameras to capture regular images of river ice. These first steps are simple
and inexpensive. With respect to data quality they offer an excellent value.
TerraSond looks forward to assisting with these studies and remains available to AEA, AE&E,
and the Village of Igiugig as they develop the industry capability, instrumentation,
methodologies, and future techniques needed by the emerging in - stream hydrokinetic industry.