Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIgiugig Village Council - AEA Round 8 Application-small fileRenewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 1 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal) Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company Type of Entity: Fiscal Year End: September 30, 2014 Electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05 Tax ID # 92-0072200 Tax Status: ☐ For-profit ☐ Non-profit X Government (check one) Date of last financial statement audit: Last financial statement audit dates from 2013. The 2013 audit has been completed and will be certified by the end of September 2014. 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 Ocean Renewable Power Company, Grants & Licensing Manager Mailing Address: Igiugig Village Council Ocean Renewable Power Company P.O. Box 4008 120 Exchange St, Suite 508 Igiugig, AK 99613 Portland, ME 04101 Telephone: Fax: Email: Igiugig: 907-533-3211 ORPC: 207-221-0961 907-533-3217 207-772-7708 alexannasalmon@gmail.com gmclean@orpc.co 1.1.1 APPLICANT ALTERNATE POINTS OF CONTACT Name Telephone: Fax: Email: Monty Worthington 207-772-7707 mworthington@orpc.co Doug Johnson 207-772-7707 djohnson@orpc.co Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 2 of 45 7/2/14 1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your application will be rejected. 1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box) X 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/REFund8.html. (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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 3 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY This section is intended to be no more than a 2-3 page overview of your project. 2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project). Type in space below. Igiugig RivGen® Power System Project 2.2 Project Location – 2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude, 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 U.S. 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 Put X in boxes 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 4 of 45 7/2/14 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Igiugig Village Council requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII program (RFA 15003) in the amount of $2,016,509 for Phase III Final Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a RivGen® Power System on the Kvichak River by Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (ORPC). As a remote village that has extremely high energy costs and relies on diesel fuel to meet their electricity and heating needs, the Igiugig Village Council seeks to lower energy costs by utilizing a local, renewable energy source. This Project will be the first commercial installation of a river hydrokinetic power system in the state of Alaska and follows the Igiugig Village Council’s successful completion of previous project phases – Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design, as well as ORPC’s successful demonstration of the RivGen® Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River in August 2014. 2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT This Project will stabilize the rising energy costs in Igiugig, support local jobs and continue the Village’s efforts to advance towards a sustainable, local economy. 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. During the 2014 Emerging Energy Technology Fund project, RivGen® Power System Demonstration in Igiugig (AEA 7310043), substantial 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, such as Illiamna Lake Contractors (ILC) and Igiugig Transport were utilized for the majority of terrestrial and marine operations, while the ILC-owned camp was used to accommodate contractors who worked on the project, supporting local food and hospitality jobs. Similarly, this Project will provide local work force development and help the community move towards economic sustainability by the creation of local jobs and reduction of expenditures on diesel fuel. The Project will also continue the community’s efforts toward environmental sustainability by producing power with zero carbon emissions. 2.6 PROJECT BUDGET OVERVIEW Briefly discuss the amount of funds needed, the anticipated sources of funds, and the nature and source of other contributions to the project. The project costs and therefore amount of funds needed are $2,313,009, and this AEA funding request will provide 87%, the remaining coming from a match from ORPC and Igiugig Village Council. The Igiugig Village Council is requesting $2,016,509. There are matching contributions totaling $296,500 consist of generator and turbine tooling, mooring system, power electronics, SCADA, power and data cables, as well as deployment and retrieval equipment. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 5 of 45 7/2/14 2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMMARY Include a summary of grant request and your project’s total costs and benefits below. Costs for the Current Phase Covered by this Grant (Summary of funds requested) 2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application $ 2,016,509 2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $ 170,000 2.7.3 In-kind match to be provided $ 126,500 2.7.4 Other grant funds to be provided $ 0 2.7.5 Total Costs for Requested Phase of Project (sum of 2.7.1 through 2.7.4) $ 2,313,009 Other items for consideration 2.7.6 Other grant applications not yet approved $ 0 Project Costs & Benefits (Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully operational project) 2.7.7 Total Project Cost Summary from Cost Worksheet, Section 4.4.4, including estimates through construction. $ 2,458,622 2.7.8 Additional Performance Monitoring Equipment not covered by the project but required for the Grant Only applicable to construction phase projects $ 0 2.7.9 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) The economic model used by AEA is available at www.akenergyauthority.org/REFund8.html. This economic model may be used by applicants but is not required. Other economic models developed by the applicant may be used, however the final benefit/cost ratio used will be derived from the AEA model to ensure a level playing field for all applicants. $ 1,101,123 2.7.10 Other Public Benefit If you can calculate the benefit in terms of dollars please provide that number here and explain how you calculated that number in Section 5 below. $ Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 6 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN 3.1 Project Manager The Igiugig Village Council has selected Monty Worthington of Ocean Renewable Power Company (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 serve as Project Manager and report to the Igiugig Village Council under the leadership of AlexAnna Salmon. 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 with the Igiugig Village Council and AEA. An Assistant Project Manager (new hire TBD) will assist with these efforts. ORPC 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 micro-grid communities. The company has successfully installed, operated, monitored and retrieved the RivGen® Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River at the Village of Igiugig, Alaska in 2014. 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, Igiugig Village Council 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 7 of 45 7/2/14 3.2 Project Schedule and Milestones Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date Phase III Project scoping and contractor selection • Finalize site-specific system requirements • Perform competitive request for quote (RFQ) process to obtain component fabrication bids for all major system components including: o TGU component fabrication and assembly  Generator system  Turbines  Integrated chassis and support system  Driveline components o Support system (not included as part of integrated chassis) o Power electronics, SCADA, and power and data cables o Deployment and retrieval equipment • Finalize vendor selection and complete contractual requirements for fabrication • Develop contract with environmental monitoring contractor 7/1/2015 12/31/2015 Permit applications Draft permit applications for federal, state, and local agencies including: • FERC Final Pilot 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 11/1/2014 *At its own risk, ORPC will begin process for obtaining required permits prior to AEA award 1 12/31/2015 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 • Submit permit applications to federal, 7/1/2015 2/28/2016 1 Because of the Igiugig Village Council holds a FERC Preliminary Permit, they are required to submit a draft pilot project license application by April 1, 2015. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 8 of 45 7/2/14 state, and local agencies Resolution of land use, right of way issues • Determine land use and right of way issues • Obtain written permission for land and water use 7/1/2015 12/31/2015 Permitting, rights-of-way, site control Obtain permits and licenses from federal, state, and local regulatory agencies 9/30/2015 5/31/2016 Final system design Complete RivGen® Power System component fabrication designs and grid integration plan 7/1/2015 12/31/2015 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 9/1/2015 1/15/2016 Updated economic and financial analyses Update financial models based on final cost estimates and updated cost of power/avoided cost of fuel 12/15/201 5 1/31/2016 Power sale agreements in place Develop and execute an operational lease 11/1/2015 3/31/2016 Final business and operational plan • Finalize business plan based on final cost estimates and lease agreement • Finalize installation plans • Finalize operational and environmental monitoring plans • Finalize routine maintenance schedule and local operator training program • Develop complete system removal plan 2/15/2016 6/30/2016 Phase IV Design and feasibility requirements Completed in Phase III 7/1/2015 12/31/2015 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, AK via Homer • System assembly • System installation and startup • System operations, monitoring, and routine maintenance 2/15/2016 4/15/2016 Vendor selection and award Finalize contracts for fabrication and operations including: • Component fabrication • Component and device shipping • Assembly and installation • Operations and monitoring 3/15/2016 5/31/2016 Construction: component fabrication & TGU Fabrication of all major components including: 8/1/2015 4/30/2016 Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 9 of 45 7/2/14 assembly • Generator • Turbines • Integrated chassis & support system • Driveline components • Mooring system • Power Electronics, SCADA, & P&D cables • On-shore station • Deployment and retrieval equipment • TGU assembly Construction: shipping to Igiugig, AK Shipping of all RivGen® Power System components to Igiugig, AK 5/1/2016 6/30/2016 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 from power electronic station to on-shore station 7/1/2016 7/15/2016 Integration and testing • Connect power electronic station to Igiugig power grid • Confirm RivGen® Power System operational readiness with secondary load • Integrate RivGen® Power System output with Igiugig power grid • Perform operational system tests to confirm proper grid connection under various connection scenarios 7/15/2016 7/31/2016 Decommissioning of old system N/A Final acceptance, commissioning and start-up • Confirm RivGen® Power System performance metrics while integrated with the Igiugig power grid • Begin full system operations • Train local technicians 8/1/2016 8/31/2016 Operations reporting • Obtain operation and environmental data as required by regulatory and funding agencies • Submit regular operational and environmental monitoring reports as required by regulatory and funding agencies 8/1/2016 7/31/2026 Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 10 of 45 7/2/14 3.3 Project Resources Project resources will be assembled to provide the experience, technical expertise, dedication, commitment and leadership to successfully complete the Project. In addition to the team members described above in Section 3.1 – Monty Worthington, Project Manager; AlexAnna Salmon, Point of Contact; and ORPC, Project Management—the following project resources will be assembled: Project Team The organizational structure of the Project Team is illustrated in Figure 1. Resumes of key personnel are attached. Figure 1. Project Team Organizational Structure Igiugig Village Council Igiugig Village Council 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, Igiugig Village Council 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. 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. Igiugig Village Council ORPC - Project Manager Consultants and Contractors LGL Marsh Creek Gray Stassel ILC Jim Tilly Iliamna Transp. Igiugi Transp. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 11 of 45 7/2/14 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 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. 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 U.S., as well as from the first renewable energy credits sold for tidal energy. ORPC also issued the first environmental monitoring report in the U.S. 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 12 of 45 7/2/14 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 -- $100,000 • USDA SBIR Phase II -- $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. Brenda LeMay—Vice President of Finance and Administrations and CFO Ms. LeMay manages all financial and administrative matters for ORPC. She has more than 15 years of development experience in the energy industry, including negotiating commercial transactions, permitting, structuring policy, financial analysis and management. Most recently Ms. LeMay held senior management positions at EDP Renewables, the third largest wind energy company in the world, where she was responsible for energy management across Europe and project development throughout the Pacific Southwest Region of the United States. 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 13 of 45 7/2/14 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 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, and sits on the ad hoc group establishing international standards for river resource assessment as a liaison to the power performance assessment group. 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 methods, such as 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. Abbey Manders—Director of Business Management Ms. Manders oversees ORPC’s internal budgeting and accounts payable and receivable. Manages employee and contractor business contracts and generates purchase orders for major company projects. She serves as a liaison between the company and its development partners, and facilitates ORPC’s fundraising efforts. 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 periodic report process. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 14 of 45 7/2/14 Consultants and 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. • Igiugig Transport, a locally owned and operated marine transport company, will provide marine assets for installation, routine maintenance, and removal. • Gray Stassel Engineering, Inc., a leading Alaskan power integration company, will provide grid integration expertise. • LGL Limited, one of North America’s leading ecological research companies, will provide third party environmental monitoring. • Iliamna Transportation Company, LLC., will ship the RivGen® Power System from Homer, AK to Igiugig, AK. • Jim Tilly, will provide marine assets for RivGen® device deployment and retrieval 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’ x 80’ x 4’ modular Flexifloat barge owned by the Igiugig Village Council • 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’ 420hp Chulyen (or similar), 18’ 250hp Seine Skiff, small skiffs of various size • The Marl T, 47’ 240hp landing craft operated by Jim Tilly 3.4 Project Communications 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 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 Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 15 of 45 7/2/14 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. Alternative Contact Person Doug Johnson Director – Business Development, Alaska ORPC 207-772-7707 djohnson@orpc.co Resume attached. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 16 of 45 7/2/14 3.5 Project Risk 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 3.4). 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, however, is experienced in these operations and has developed a protocol to mitigate a high degree of risk by working in pre-established stages. ORPC avoids having any boats working upstream of anchored equipment and makes sure that the tow bridle is long enough to leave time to react should something go awry. 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 Gray Stassel Engineering and Marsh Creek, two of the leading companies 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. Pre-testing before actual interconnection at Igiugig will ensure that the 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 and retrieving a RivGen® Power System in Igiugig in the summer of 2014 will greatly help reduce 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. 3.6 Project Accountant(s) Project accounting will be performed on behalf of the Igiugig Village Council by the following person with ORPC: Abbey Manders Director – Business Management ORPC 207-772-7707 amanders@orpc.co (Resume attached.) Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 17 of 45 7/2/14 3.7 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 CFO, Director of Business Management, and Bookkeeper will be the primary users of the accounting system. 3.8 Financial Management Controls It is the policy of ORPC that all transactions are properly recorded, accounted for and executed in compliance with the laws, regulations, and program requirements of the Company’s various contracts and grant agreements. All contracts are closely monitored to ensure the separation of allowable and unallowable costs and activities. ORPC has a Contracting, Purchasing and Payment Policy that outlines the procedures for contracting, purchasing/procurement, receiving, invoice processing, payment, project hours tracking, and funding requests for all expenses under projects that qualify for reimbursement or match funding under ORPC’s contracts with various funding agencies. An independent auditor tests ORPC’s controls during an annual compliance audit for the purpose of ensuring proper federal grant accounting. All costs are identified as direct allowable, indirect, or unallowable. Direct Allowable costs include all costs that are 100% dedicated to a project and not unallowable per government regulations and grant/contract terms and conditions. Overhead expenses are not charged directly to projects as they are necessary for operating a company but not 100% dedicated to a single project. These costs are accounted for in the general ledger under specific account codes at the point of entry. On a monthly basis these accounts are reviewed post entry to verify no indirect costs were improperly coded to a direct account, and to ensure proper identification of unallowable costs. These controls ensure that no expenses for overhead or any other unallowable costs will be requested for reimbursement from the Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 18 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS 4.1 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 7.8 kW/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 U.S. 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 19 of 45 7/2/14 Table 2. Resource data overview Phase II: Feasibility and Conceptual Design (Completed – 2014) As follow-on to the EPRI report (Phase I Reconnaissance), the Igiugig Village Council 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 2011.4 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 20 of 45 7/2/14 Figure 2. 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 21 of 45 7/2/14 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 3). The site is located at the southwest corner of the first island, approximately 0.6 miles downstream of the Igiugig Village Council 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 3: Velocity & Energy Density at RivGen® location (Site 10) Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 22 of 45 7/2/14 The Phase II: Conceptual Design effort was completed in 2014 when two river hydrokinetic devices were tested in Kvichak River 2014; both projects were funded by AEA’s 2012 Emerging Energy Technology Fund: • ORPC, RivGen® Power System Commercialization Project (7310043) • Boschma Research, Inc., BRI Cyclo-turbine™ for Energy Production At the time of this proposal submittal (September 22, 2014), ORPC has successfully demonstrated the RivGen® Power System by producing electricity in August and September 2014 (described in Section 4.3.1.) (Figure 4). Figure 4. Location of RivGen® Demonstration Project (Site 10 in TerraSond report) Pros and Cons of Proposed Energy Resource versus Other Alternatives Considering that Igiugig, located at the mouth of the Kvichak River, has been identified as Alaska’s premier riverine hydrokinetic site, there are no known comparable alternatives. Although the costs of installing a river hydrokinetic power system are relatively high, the continuous power output and near year round resource (operations should be possible all but 4-6 weeks of the calendar year) more than offset these costs. Furthermore, the implementation costs of the commercial installation are anticipated to be relatively low at Igiugig, since the community’s powerhouse and electric distribution system are located adjacent to the river energy resource minimizing transmission costs. The community has also been actively involved in the demonstration phase of the project developing capacity to operate and maintain a hydrokinetic system in a cost effective manner. Currently Igiugig relies on diesel electrical generation to produce most of its power. While this fuel source is reliable, fuel costs are quite high in Igiugig. There have been no recent barge deliveries up the Kvichak River from the Bristol Bay region, and currently no companies plan to utilize this Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 23 of 45 7/2/14 shipping route, which means that all fuel must either be shipped across Cook Inlet driven up the 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 lead 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 has been experimented with on the homeowner scale with at least five horizontal axis turbines and two vertical axis turbines installed. Community acceptance of these has been somewhat reserved based on perception of their actual performance. Currently less than 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. 4.2 Existing Energy System 4.2.1 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. 4.2.2 Existing Energy Resources Used Existing Energy Resources Used Diesel fuel is the existing energy resource, which is delivered to Igiugig via air transportation or barge in summer and stored in bulk at a tank farm adjacent to the power plant. There are also five 1.5 kW wind turbines at Igiugig in various states of functionality, that deliver power to the grid during times of adequate wind. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 24 of 45 7/2/14 Project’s Impact on Existing Energy Infrastructure and Resources The proposed Project will significantly impact the existing energy resource by displacing diesel fuel at Igiugig, where the estimated annual output from a 25 kW project is 187,880 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 16,127 gallons per year.6 This equates to roughly 323,000 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 in the PCE report amounts to $116,486 per year. These numbers clearly demonstrate the compelling economics of a hydrokinetic project at Igiugig 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Existing Energy Use and its Market According to the PCE report and local Igiugig electrical plan monitoring, the average annual generation from the Igiugig power plant is just over 40kW with average peaks of 65kW throughout the year. Growth in Igiugig’s summer peak load and annual generation has steadily increased with the addition of a clinic, water treatment plant and subdivision development and is likely to continue increasing due to tourism. During the summer of 2014 load monitoring conducted by Marsh Creek and ORPC, the average summer load was found to range from 25-30 kW at night to 50-71 kW during the day. Project’s Impact on Energy Customers A successful commercial Project and corresponding decrease in local electricity rates would encourage both public and private facilities to increase the use of electric space heating in the future, potentially increasing peak demand and further increasing annual generation requirements. 4.3 Proposed System 4.3.1 System Design The Igiugig Village Council requests funding for Phase III Final Design and Permitting, and Phase IV Construction for the installation of ORPC’s RivGen® Power System. This will be the first commercial installation of a river hydrokinetic power system (Figure 4). Significant work has been completed in preparation for these next phases. The Igiugig Village Council has engaged state agencies, private companies, utilities and university research scientists, and brought together considerable expertise and funding to complete all necessary preliminary work (see Section 4.1 and Section 4.2). The RivGen® Power System has completed prototype testing and has been successfully demonstrated at Igiugig. The Igiugig Village Council is now ready to bring the Project to completion. 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 6 AEA, 2013. Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization Program. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 25 of 45 7/2/14 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 the RivGen® prototype device demonstrated in Igiugig in 2014): • 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 38 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 4. 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 5). 7 Testing results included the following: • Underwater power electronics function and reliability verified • Composite carbon fiber foils tested 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 26 of 45 7/2/14 • 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 (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 5. 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 6).8 8 This RivGen® Power System demonstration project was funded in part by AEA Emerging Energy Technology Fund, no. 7310043. 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 7). Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 27 of 45 7/2/14 Figure 6. ORPC’s RivGen® device during installation on the Kvichak River, August 12, 2014. Figure 7. Location map of the RivGen® Power System at Igiugig, AK Concurrent with ORPC’s demonstration of the RivGen® Power System, University of Washington (UW), as part of a U.S. Department of Energy funded project to study advanced controls of in- stream turbines, collected flow data upstream of ORPC’s RivGen® turbine deployed in the Kvichak Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 28 of 45 7/2/14 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. 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 will test the most significant of these enhancements on the Kvichak River, where it will conduct performance testing, perform environmental monitoring, and gather 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 U.S. Department of Energy grant, “Advanced Energy Harvesting Control Schemes for Marine Renewable Energy Devices,” (DE- EE0006397). Phase III: Final Design and Permitting A. Final Design Tasks Utilizing the designs created during the RivGen® optimization studies (described above, Section 4.3.1), ORPC will conduct final design reviews and enhancements of all major components along with generate final fabrication designs. Phase III Final Design tasks are described in Section 3.2. B. Permitting The Igiugig Village Council gathered the following permits for the 2014 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 ORPC anticipates obtaining the same permits for 2015 demonstration testing (U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture) as those required for 2014 testing. The permitting tasks for this proposed AEA REF Round 8 Project are described in Section 3.2 and Section 4.3.3. Phase IV: Construction The following tasks are required to complete the Phase IV Construction: • Fabricate RivGen® Power System components, including: - Generator System 9 Ocean Renewable Power Company, Advanced Energy Harvesting Control Schemes for Marine Renewable Energy Devices, funded by U.S. Department of Energy, 2014-2015, DE-EE0006397. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 29 of 45 7/2/14 - Turbines - Integrated chassis and support system - Mooring system - Power Electronics, SCADA, and P&D Cables - Driveline components - On-shore station - Deployment and retrieval equipment • Assemble and align the RivGen® TGU • Ship all RivGen® Power System components to Igiugig, AK • 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 operational tests with secondary load • Integrate with Village of Igiugig power grid Phase IV construction tasks are described in Section 3.2. 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 25 kilowatts. 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 (described in Section 4.1 above). 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 86%. Based on this availability and the anticipated capacity factor, the anticipated annual output of the RivGen® Power System is 181,000 kWh. 5. Anticipated Barriers See Project Risks described in Section 3.5 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 System has been designed to utilize existing infrastructure for everything from transportation of power system components and installation equipment to remote sites to integration with isolated grids. RivGen® power electronics are adaptable to a wide variety of Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 30 of 45 7/2/14 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 two of Alaska’s leading power generation companies, Marsh Creek, LLC. and Gray Stassel Engineering to help ensure that grid integration is successful. 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. When assembled, the RivGen® device is towed to the project site where the anchor is deployed. The device is 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 runs 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 (Section 11.G.): • Feasibility Documents TerraSond (2011). Kvichak River RISEC Project; Resource Reconnaissance and Physical Characterization, Final Report • Design Documents There are no design documents for RivGen® version 2.0. Prototype documents are Provided (Section 11.G.). 4.3.2 Land Ownership This Project is not encumbered by potential land ownership issues, and the Igiugig Village Council will be responsible for all site control. The RivGen® Power System will be connected to the Village of Igiugig’s micro-grid. 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 if 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 31 of 45 7/2/14 4.3.3 Permits Applicable Permits The Igiugig Village Council holds a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) preliminary permit for the project site (P-13511). To facilitate getting devices in the water, FERC has implemented an expedited hydrokinetic permitting system through its pilot license program as an alternative to the traditional full long-term hydropower licensing process. This pilot project process is intended to give projects that are small scale and shorter term an expedited licensing process, provided they are intensively monitored for environmental effects and able to be shut down on short notice if unacceptable environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated are encountered. State permits which the Igiugig Village Council holds for ORPC’s 2014 RivGen® device testing project will need updating and a FERC Pilot License obtained based on the scope of work described in this Project proposal: • FERC Pilot Project License • 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 The Igiugig Village Council has also consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. FWS finds that no threatened or endangered species under FWS’s jurisdiction commonly occur in the vicinity of the 2014 ORPC project. The Igiugig Village Council 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. Anticipated Permitting Timeline • FERC Draft Pilot License Application: Spring 2015 (not in the scope of this application) • FERC Final Pilot License Application: Fall 2015 • Applicable State Permit Applications: Fall 2015 • 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 32 of 45 7/2/14 4.3.4 Environmental The environmental factors listed below will be 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 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 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 4.3.3, 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 Igiugig Village Council as well as state and federal regulatory agencies to implement an adaptive management approach that minimizes risk to the local environment. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 33 of 45 7/2/14 4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues (Total Estimated Costs and Projected Revenues) The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding requested and any previous work the applicant may have done on the project. Applicants must reference the source of their cost data. For example: Applicants records or analysis, industry standards, consultant or manufacturer’s estimates. 4.4.1 Project Development Cost Provide detailed project cost information based on your current knowledge and understanding of the project. Cost information should include the following: • Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase • Requested grant funding • Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in-kind • Identification of other funding sources • Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system • Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system Total anticipated project cost, grant funding and match are: $2,313,009, $2,016,509 and $296,500 4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs The anticipated Operating and Maintenance costs for the new facility are budgeted to be $50k/year and would be funded out of the cost savings from the project. 4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale NA Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 34 of 45 7/2/14 4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet Renewable Energy Source The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a sustainable basis. Annual average resource availability. 86% Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomass fuel) Existing Energy Generation and Usage a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt 10 i. Number of generators/boilers/other grid, leave this section blank) 3 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 12.2 kW per gallon for generators b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Annual O&M cost for labor $17,000 ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $25,000 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] 10 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 VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 35 of 45 7/2/14 vi. Other 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] 25 kW b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable) i. Electricity [kWh] 181,000 kWh/year 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 None Project Cost a) Total capital cost of new system $2,458,622 b) Development cost Included above c) Annual O&M cost of new system $46,951.60 d) Annual fuel cost None Project Benefits a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity 14,480 gallons per year ii. Heat iii. Transportation b) Current price of displaced fuel $7.33/gallon c) Other economic benefits d) Alaska public benefits Power Purchase/Sales Price a) Price for power purchase/sale N/A; Village to own equipment Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 36 of 45 7/2/14 Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio 0.41 Payback (years) N/A 4.4.5 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 37 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 5– PROJECT BENEFIT Potential Annual 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 25 kW project is 187,880 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 16,127 gallons per year.11 This equates to roughly 323,000 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 in the PCE report amounts to $116,486 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.12 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 Revenue None – this would be a transfer of electrons Potential Additional Annual Incentives None Potential Additional Annual Revenue Streams None Non-economic Public Benefits: Environment The Project also has environmental benefits. Fuel for Igiugig’s diesel-powered generation can only arrive at the village after being shipped up the Kvichak River. This river is home to the world’s largest sockeye salmon population, on which many villagers rely for their subsistence and livelihood. Shipping diesel fuel along the river creates the very real risk of fuel spills, which would be devastating to both the vital salmon population and the people of Igiugig. Another risk of shipping diesel up the Kvichak River is that due to seasonal weather and high water conditions, fuel shipments can only take place in August and September. Because this window is so brief, unforeseen circumstances have a significant chance of interfering with shipments, leaving the Igiugig literally powerless during its extremely harsh winters. The reliance of Igiugig and similar communities on such expensive, environmentally volatile diesel- fuel also leads to a particularly large carbon footprint per capita. Because RivGen® Power Systems produce no gas or emissions: a modest 2% penetration into Alaska’s rural markets would eliminate 11 AEA, 2013. Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization Program. 12 In 2009, the state of Alaska spent $37 million on the Power Cost Equalization Program, an increase of 31.6% from 2008. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 38 of 45 7/2/14 the use of almost 560,000 gallons of diesel annually and would result in a corresponding annual reduction of 12.4 million pounds of carbon dioxide emissions.13 5.1 Public Benefit for Projects with Private Sector Sales Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month) NA Estimated sales (kWh) NA Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($) NA Estimated sales (kWh) NA Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($) NA 13 Pounds (6211 tons) of CO2 emissions per year. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 39 of 45 7/2/14 SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY Business Structure Igiugig Village Council 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 Igiugig Village Council 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 Igiugig Village Council 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, Igiugig Village Council 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. Igiugig Village Council 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. Igiugig Village Council will also report on the amount of operations and maintenance funds that are spent Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 40 of 45 7/2/14 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. 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. Igiugig Village Council 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 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS The Igiugig Village Council completed Phase I Reconnaissance in 2008 and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design in 2012, as described in Section 4.1. They have selected a power system – ORPC’s RivGen® Power System, which has been successfully demonstrated in 2014, (see Section 4.3.1). With Round VIII funding, the Igiugig Village Council 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, RivGen® Power System 2013 Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 41 of 45 7/2/14 2013-33610-21033 Commercialization Project Grant USDA, SBIR Phase II, 2014-02567 RivGen® Power System Commercialization Project 2014 Grant DOE Advanced Energy Harvesting Control Schemes for Marine Renewable Energy Devices 2014 University of Washington Study DOE Turbulence Study, under ORPC’s DOE Controls Grant 2014 SECTION 8 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION The Village of Igiugig is eager 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 (see Section 11.B.): Igiugig Village Council Ocean Renewable Power Company SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET 9.1 Funding sources and Financial Commitment The total estimated project cost is $2,458,622. The Igiugig Village Council is requesting $2,016,509. There are matching contributions totaling $296,500 consisting of generator system and turbine tooling, mooring system, power electronics, SCADA, power and data cables, as well as deployment and retrieval equipment. 9.2 Cost Estimate for 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. If a redundant utility power meter is required that is capable of logging both power flow in both directions, it will need to be added to the Project cost. The estimated installed cost for this meter would be $500. Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 42 of 45 7/2/14 Milestone or Task III. Final Design and Permitting Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In- kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Project scoping and contractor selection 12/31/2015 $107,950 $0 $107,950 Permit applications 12/31/2015 $72,025 $0 $72,025 Final environmental assessment and mitigation plans 2/28/2016 $74,587 $0 $74,587 Resolution of land use, right of way issues 12/31/2015 $14,750 $0 $14,750 Permitting, rights-of-way, site control 5/31/2016 $66,775 $0 $66,775 Final system design 12/31/2015 $190,875 $0 $190,875 Final cost estimate 1/15/2016 $32,250 $0 $32,250 Updated economic and financial analyses 1/31/2016 $5,100 $0 $5,100 Power sale agreements in place 3/31/2016 $24,750 $0 $24,750 Final business and operational plan 6/30/2016 $155,125 $0 $155,125 TOTALS $744,187 $0 $744,187 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $0 $0 $0 Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0 Contractual Services $744,187 $0 $744,187 Construction Services $0 $0 $0 Other $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $744,187 $0 $744,187 Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII Grant Application - Standard Form AEA 15003 Page 43 of 45 7/2/14 Milestone or Task IV. Construction and Commissioning Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In- kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Design and feasibility requirements 12/31/2015 $0 $0 $0 Bid documents 4/15/2016 $7,500 $0 $7,500 Vendor selection and award 5/31/2016 $56,875 $0 $56,875 Construction: component fabrication & TGU assembly 4/30/2016 $820,822 $296,500 ORPC, cash & in-kind $1,117,322 Construction: shipping to Igiugig, AK 6/30/2016 $115,040 $0 $115,040 Construction: assembly and installation 7/15/2016 $185,835 $0 $185,835 Integration and testing 7/31/2016 $37,475 $0 $37,475 Decommissioning of old system N/A $0 $0 $0 Final acceptance, commissioning and start-up 8/31/2016 $48,775 $0 $48,775 Operations reporting 7/31/2026 $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $1,272,322 $296,500 $1,568,822 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $0 $0 $0 Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0 Contractual Services $1,272,322 $296,500 $1,568,822 Construction Services $0 $0 $0 Other $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $1,272,322 $296,500 $1,568,822 SECTION 11.B LETTERS OF SUPPORT IGIUGIG VILLAGE COUNCIL A.K.A. Igiugig Village Council P.O. Box 4008 Igiugig, AK 99613 Phone: (907) 533-3211 Fax: (907) 533-3217 www.igiugig.com e-mail: igiugig.vc@gmail.com September 10, 2014 Alaska Energy Authority Re: Letter of Support for the Igiugig RivGen® Construction Project To Whom It May Concern: This is a letter of support for Igiugig’s grant application to Round VIII of the Renewable Energy Fund: the Kvichak RivGen® Project, a collaborative effort of Igiugig Village Council and Ocean Renewable Power Company (ORPC) Alaska. Due to the remoteness of Igiugig, the community has extremely high energy costs and relies on diesel fuel to meet electricity and heating needs. The Igiugig Village Council seeks to lower energy costs by utilizing a local, renewable energy source. ORPC Alaska’s RivGen® project is such a project, harnessing the powerful currents of the Kvichak River. The RivGen® project has successfully completed two phases and ORPC Alaska successfully demonstrated RivGen’s® ability to generate electricity for the micro-grid. With Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design completed, Igiugig Village Council is excited to support Phase III and Phase IV: final permitting, design, and construction of a RivGen® Power System which would provide 25kwh of power. Igiugig Village Council considers this project as a worthwhile investment and fully endorses ORPC Alaska and the RivGen® project to create a renewable, more sustainable source of energy for the growing community of Igiugig. Respectfully, AlexAnna Salmon, President, Igiugig Village Council SECTION 11.D. GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION SECTION 11.G. ATTACHMENTS 1. Feasibility Document TerraSond (2011). Kvichak River RISEC Project; Resource Reconnaissance and Physical Characterization, Final Report 2. Design Document RivGen® Prototype 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.