HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachments to SEAPA Round VIII Grant Application (Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project)A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
THE SOUTHEAST ALAS KA POWER AGENCY
pEtERSBURG � �
1900 First Avenue `���' �yO Phone: 907.228.2261
scarce sia �" S E A P A � Fa:: 9ozzzs zzs�
Ke(chikan, Alaska 9990'I oahvd ro 0
SouMeaf [ Alaf ka Puwec Agency
RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT — ROUND VI11
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
COSTS AND BENEFITS ANALYSIS
RESUMES
MAP SHOWING INTERCONNECTION OF PROJECTS
GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION AND MINUTES
RESOLUTIONS DEMONSTRATING LOCAL SUPPORT
n nni -
_.... ._. _�A�.y pm• ew
__.. ewe
� �
�. 5_
.�aa
j
nww. .
---
'
ow
r
_.»..
,.o.
1
N�
S E A P A -
So�iM1r_aai Alaska Oow« Agrseicy
COSTS AND BENEFITS
ANALYSIS FOR
INCREASING STORAGE
AT SWAN LAKE
1 Y06 Flrst Avatlue. Sulta 316, Kata4lkin. PlasKa 9890'1 P (HBT) 228-2281 F (909) 226-Z289
R A, 1114111E,) B II—EIN-11, Er F I K'SZ, A N A
WGRIHIASING STORAGE- A."If- IMAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page No.
Executive Summaol .... ........ ......... ........ ....... 5
1 Introduction.... ...... ................... ................. ......... ...... 7
2, Swan Project Description ..... ......... ...... ....... --- ............. 7
3. SEAPA System Characteristics .............. ........ ...... 9
4. Benefit (Value) Analysis .......... ...... .......... ...... 12
5. Cost Estimation and Schedules . ... .............. 21. 3
6. Costs, Benefits, and Recommendation... - - . ... ........ ...... ...... ....... ..... —.27
12:.
Southeast Aiaska Power Agency 2 Decembef 2012"
Flore Title Page o.
1 Swan Lake Ogee Spillway Slot 9
2 Warm Weather Example—KPU Load Decrease® CPU Generation Increase 10
3 Tyee Lake Reservoir Operation and Winter Load Timing 11
4 Swan Lake Reservoir Guide Curves for Reservoir Elevation 330 & 345 ft 14
5 Tyee Lake Reservoir Guide Curves for Case with & without SWL Increase 15
6 SEAPA System Load and Total Area Hydro Generation Capability 19
7 Future SEAPA System Excess Hydro Generation Available to Fill Large
Swan Reservoir 21
8 Swan Lake Project Land Boundary Map 23
9 Obermeyer Gates 25
Table Title 0.
Summary Table
5
Attribute Table
6
1
Simple Storage Benefit Comparison
13
2
Swan Generation for Case 330 ft and 345 ft
13
3
Tyee Winter & Summer Generation for Two Cases
15
4
Additional Generation Schedule at Tyee
16
5
Tyee Generation with Added Summer Component
16
6
Historic Generation and Precipitation for Swan Lake and KPU Hydro
17
7
SEAPA Area Hydro Conditions
18
8
Future Spill and Diesel Generation
20
9
30-Year Average Energy Available to Displace Diesel
22
10
Proposed Reservoir Full Pool Elevations and Corresponding PMF Elevations
24
11
License Amendment Schedule
24
12
Dam Elevations and PMF Elevations
25
13
Construction and Engineering Costs
26
14
Benefit and Cost Summary
27
15
Raise Option Attributes vs. Full Pool Levels
29
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 3 December 2012
Append'Ices and References
Appendix Title
Af
Swan Laka Hydraulic Model
A2
Tyee Lake Hyd rauifc Model
Bf
Swan Lak¢ USGS Gage &CAI Report Synthetic Inflows
62
Tyee Lake IECo Design Criteria
63
SEAPA Case Study Load- Resource Tablas
Ct
Swan Lake Survey Plat
C2
Boundary Map
References
Southeast Alaska Integrated Resource Plan
htt '//vwvw k th 't .orc/southaastlRP. html
McMillan Engineering Feasibility Study
http'//www saaoahvtlro-oro/current reports. htm
Swan Lake FERC License 29t'I
Katchikan Public Util[ties, Bailey Dispatch C¢nter Operating tlata, 1990 to 2022
Tyae Lake Operations Data, 2007 to 20'12
KPU Power Supply Planning Study, RW Beck, t996
Swan-Tyae Economic Analysis, Commonwealth Associates, Inc., March 2006
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Environm¢ntal Studies
htt '// 1 i w s i tes com/swanlak¢ html
Southeast Alaska Po war Agency 4 De camber 2022
SEAPA is a nonprofit Joint Action Agency that delivers wholesale power to the municipal utilities
of Petersburg, Wrangell, and Ketchikan in Alaska.
SEAPA has conducted preliminary engineering, license amendment, and system integration
studies in the pursuit of expanding the Swan Lake reservoir. After one year of effort and an
expense of SEAPA funds totaling $375,000, we continue to promote expanding the reservoir at
Swan Lake. The expanded reservoir will add additional water for winter hydro generation that
will displace up to 10,000 Mth of diesel generation on an average basis, during larger eater
years up to 12,000 MWh of diesel generation will be displaced.
The Swan Lake Storage Increase Project ('Project') is not meant as a complete solution to the
long-term diesel exposure forecasted for the SEAPA region, rather the Project is part of an
overall plan to integrate and enhance existing and proposed projects. This additional storage
will enhance future run -of -the -river and limited storage projects proposed for the region that
otherwise would not displace enough -future diesel generation to justify construction and
operating costs.
This report identifies the 15 ft raise option as the best alternative for increasing storage capacity
at Swan Lake. Within the analysis, a preliminary engineering review identifies a FERC factor of
safety limit relating to dam strength that curtails cost effective raise options above 23 ft, The
dam could be modified for more than 23 feet, but construction costs to accommodate the factor
of safety will greatly exceed the added generation benefit. As shown in the Summary Table
below, the analysis investigated three dam height increases, 10 ft, 15 ft, and 20 ft; these
increases would raise the full pool level from the existing 330 ft level to 340 ft, 345 ft, and 350 ft
respectively.
--------------------------------- = -------------------
Reservoir Full Pool Option
330
340
345
360
Active Storage (ac-ft)
86,000
100,500
107,600
114,600
% Increase in Storage
0%
17%
25%
33%
increased Generation (Annual average in MWh)
Case C-Whitman + 20 yr. limited Power Purchase
0
5,677
7,463
8,820
Case D- Whitman + PP+ 2030 Generic Hydro
0
6,613
9,955
12,871
Case E-Whitman + 2030 Generic
0
6,358
8,814
10,872
Case F-2030 Generic
0
5,298
7,397
9,677
Construction & Engineering Cost ($M)
0
6.00
10.60
16.50
License Amendment & Permitting ($M)
0
0.78
1.17
1.29
Total Project Cost ($M)
0
6.78
11.77
17.79
Value of Annual Displaced Diesel (15 kWh/gal $4/gal fuel
0
$1,120,000
$1,920,000
$1,973,333
cost)
Annual Financing Charge (50% of Total project Cost, 30
$0
$257,232
$446,526
$674,732
year term, 6.5%)
SEAPA Additional Sales, case C ($68/MWh)
0
$386,022
$507,5111
$599,736
en f, (SEAPA ale -Case Finance
0 t P s -C Cl
Vc s S
' 5
' '
_(360)
C) c
S m Table _ B nef t n C s r the ft 34�),
Ma 10
(34 and 2 raise
ft 0 f'
166
e ha K k ss 1
P tonPP an w r t e i
�e s Power
ao n
lulled
ree
re load b �l
of a 'I ,
ance case
: I ut ut
s s the �e ric V has a 01 annual ua P
tudle ne hydro ,
4V;� GWh
00 f Go 000% n 0 lyr).
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 5
December
2012
While the 10 ft raise option poses less financial risk to SEAPA because costs are lower, this
option displaces 60% less diesel generation than the 15 ft option. When all other Option
attributes (see Attribute Table) are considered, including cost, the III' ft option is the best
reservoir increase option,
Option Attribute
345
350
Refills with average inflow if drafted to El 272 ft using
excess generation of 2.7 aMW from June 15 to Nov 15
Yes
no
Relies on above average inflow to refill
No
yes
Dependent on case D and E to realize benefit over cost
No
yes
Provides flexibility to integrate future h dro projects
ves-better
es -beef
Attribute Table - Reservoir raise attributes vs. full pool levels of 345
ft (115 ft raise) and 350 ft (20 ft raise),
III! IIIIII ;I I !I IRIVIIII I I I I I I I I
0 25% increase in storage improves SEAPA system hydro operations flexibility
a Shifts between 7,000 111 to 10,000 MWh on an average basis of summer
excess hydro generation (spill) to winter generation over the course of a 30-year
period starting in 2016; the range represents future possible scenarios
0 Benefits just cover the costs if the State of Alaska assists all a level of 50%
funding for the construction, engineering, and licensing costs. Benefits assessed
by increased winter SEAPA sales at $68/MWh. if displaced diesel generation is
the measurement bar, the project has a benefit over total cost ratio of 2.1.
a SEAPA is currently in the license amendment process; filing of the amendment
initial Consultation Document is scheduled for March 2013; filing the license
amendment is scheduled for January 2014
0 Project is consistent with the major findings of the 2011 SEIRP
• Business plan for IPP - enhances hydro based IPP proposals
• SEAPA system has a storage deficit - key finding of SEIRP
• Enhances the already funded and partially complete Whitman
Project
-o Load forecasts include Kake and therefore this project assists with
the future integration of the kake-Petersburg intertie
SEAPA Staff Recommendation:
SEAPA staff recommends puirsuirig the 15 ft option under the following future scenario:
At least orre new hydro resource, in addition to Whitman, to be constructed by
2030: if this occurs, then adding storage at Swan will both displace future winter
diesel generation and increase SEAPA revenue such that the benefits outweigh
the costs. By the end of May 2013, agency feedback from the Initial Consultation
Document submittal will help us to better estimate forthcoming Project settlement
costs. Depending on the settlement costs, and from observing real progress on
Whitman, and from initial feedback regarding the SEAPA led RFO (Power
Purchase) initiative, we will be able make a final determination as to whether we
I
should proceed with the Project, If the Project is to proceed, then under most
a December 2012
Southeast Alaska Poilver Agency
forward conditions, the reservoir will be expanded to a new nominal full pool
elevation of 345 feet
SEAPA hydro generating stations, Swan Lake and Tyee Lake, supply the majority share of
electricity for the interconnected region: Ketchikan-to-Wrangell-to-Petersburg, Alaska. This
region is experiencing a significant shift in load type. Historically (pre-2005 for Ketchikan and
pre-2007 for Petersburg and Wrangell) winter loads were less than summer loads, as summer
loads included significant fish processing while winter loads were held low by relatively
inexpensive fuel oil - sourced space heating.
Winter loads have greatly increased and have surpassed the slowly growing summer loads,
while fuel oil prices have steadily climbed such that heating is now more cost effective using
hydro -sourced electricity. Diesel fuel generated electricity is now four times more expensive
than SEAPA wholesale energy. As winter loads continue to increase and exceed hydro
capacity, use of diesel generation for space heating compounds the problem as diesel fueled
generators are significantly less efficient than oil fired boilers. Winter demand has grown such
that even with the combined resources of Swan Lake and Tyee Lake, Ketchikan must rely or
supplemental diesel generation in late winter and early spring. Additionally, as Petersburg and
Wrangell winter loads increase, a capacity shortfall will occur, especially when temperatures
drop to near 0 'IF The projected trend is for increasing levels of winter and spring diesel
generation.
During the winter, shag p reservoir draw -down occurs because turbine discharges greatly exceed
reservoir inflows, Later in the spring and summer, snow melt recharges the reservoirs. Later in
the fall, Tyee and Swan Lake are subject to spill as wet season inflows exceed storage capacity
even though the reservoirs were essentially empty the previous spring. This cycle of diesel
generation followed by spill events will be the pattern for the foreseeable future. Increasing
reservoir storage is one way to "shift" excess hydro capacity as spill to displaced diesel
generation later the following winter. The Swan Lake reservoir was selected as a potential site
for construction of additional storage as it may provide a cost effective method to gain up to
33% in active storage.
Sec.tion 2
Swan Project Description
2A Project Characteristic and History
The Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project (FERC License No. 2911, referred to as 'Swan Lake' or
`11,3vvan' herein) is located on Revillagigedo Island at the head of Carrol[ Inlet, about 22 miles
northeast of the city of Ketchikan. Primary facilities include a 174-foot tall concrete thin arch
dam, a 2,217-foot long, I! -foot diameter power tunnel, and a powerhouse with two generating
units having a combined nominal generating capacity of 25 MVA. Swan Lake has an estimated
average output of 76,000 MWh', and 86,000 ac-ft of active storage if the entire operating range,
from reservoir elevation 271.5 feet to elevation 330.0 feet is utilized. Of principal interest in this
1 Simple average of 2001 to 2009 generation corresponds with the recent D. little evaluation.
Southeast Alaska., 'Dower Agency 7 Decor; fiber 20 Q
report are the dam' naservoir, and the hydraulic passage as increasing storage cdSwan Lake
affects +these project components.
Near the end of project construction, the State of Alaska under the department of the Alaska
Power Autkorbv, assumed ownership of the project from Kefchikan and began oornnm*sroia|
operation in June 1984. Ownership transferred from the State to he Four [)onn Pool Power
Agency in 2002, and SEAPA assumed ownership when the FDPPA was restructured in 2009.
During preliminary licensing, RVV Beek, considered the inclusion of Grace [eke into the project
but this was quickly dropped as the combined project (22.5 K8VV + 25 K8VV) was too large for
even long-term load forecasts. Atthat time, FERC expressed concern that the limited storage in
Swan Lake may necessitate future development VfGrace Lake. In issuing the license, FEFlC
disagreed with the [}epa�nnentofInterior regarding the risk of!|rm�ingthe capacity of Swan
Lake. FEF7C stated the small increase in captured inflow /5%\from o potentially larger licensed
capacity at Swan Lake vvuu/d not eliminate a future need for additional hydroelectric raoournea,
including those oJGrace Lake which increased project outpuibv7O'OOOMVVhu
In 1095, a KpU Power Planning study reviewed Grace Lake options but did not move forward
with this large expansion. Misty Fiords federal designation as a National Monument (197E)
precludes hydroelectric development within rnonunnent boundaries, aO KPU chose not tofurther
pursue Grace Lake options. Also, the postponement ofplans for the extraction ofmolybdenum
from Quartz Hill probably had an impact on the preliminary planning of Grace Lake.
To aurnrnahze, major Swan Lake attributes such as capacity and storage have always been
discussed within the context ofload characteristic and whether prnot Grace Lekewould be part
of the Swan oyahsnn, At this time it is quite uncertain 'that o lend exchange could be executed
that would allow the Grace Lake project to move forward. In light of that large legislative hmni1e,
this analysis anounnee no additional water will be available from Grace Lake. One thing vxe do
know is that a larger Swan Lake reservoir will make integration of e future Grace Lake project
easier re�her than more difficult.
2.2 Dam Right Abutment and Original Storage Increase Intent
Swan Lake darn is not synnrnnthc meaning the left and rightabutrnentodo not both have rook
extending above the dam. The dam height stops at elevation 344 ftvvhioh is grade level on the
right abutment. A parapet wall 3.5 ft higher than the dam completes the structure. The dam
to8N have been constructed higher, but this would require building Up a concrete abutment
block that would act much |ihS -the rook on the |e# e|Ue of the darn (looking doYvnctnaarn). We
have not reviewed original dam design !ntentoorrespondence. but i1ioeasy tospeculate that
dam height determination was impacted by: Ketohiken loads at the time had little to no heating
component, State capital oms{ curtailments of the 1983-84 time frame' and the faot that the
project was large for the long-term needs of Kntohikmn if diesel fuel costs did not escalate to a
high degree. As it turned out, diesel costs did not escalate but fell in real terms. Owen Lake
was not fully dispatched in front of diesel until the year 2000 as evidenced by the low annual
output and significant project spill up to 2000. Hindsight shows that RVVBeck sized the darn
well for the conditions nfthe period.
Now 32 years later as SEAPA staff reviewed storage options, one idea was to Increase storage
by adding a rubber dam to plug the existing open ogee spillway. This coat -effective option
vvoW|d not increase structural concrete nnthe right abutment, andvxoUld have B limited scope
Southeast! Alaska Power Agency 8 Deoanrber20,112
license amendment process. Passing high spill flows, which occur during the probable
maximum flood (PMF) ware thought tc be accomplished by deflating the dam. A prelim (nary
engineering review quickly dismissed th[s option as the rubber dam cannot pass the same PMF
flows fora given flood elevation, and rubber dams are prone to snagging large root -ball type
flood debris. Changing the rubber tlam to a traditional roller gat¢ configuration was not a
solution as too much water backed -up behind the dam during the PMF causing ov¢r-topping of
the existing parapet wall. The McMillen Engineering feasibilky report referenced in Section 5
suggests Obermeyer type control gates be placed in the existing ogee spillway to pass PMF
flows reliably. Figure f shows the spillway slot where the Obermeyer gates wculd be installed.
Figure t- Swan Lake Og¢¢ Spillway Slot
Section 3
SEAPA System CFtaracteristics
3.'1 Last In Olspatch Order
S EAPA's hydroelectric projects ar¢ dispatched last in the ragion's hydroelectric resource stack.
This is beta use the Power Sales Agreement (PSA) between SEAPA and the member utilities
stipulates that hydroelectric plants existing before the construction of the Tyee Lake and Swan
Lake projects should ba fully utilized (original municipal benefit preserved) before the members
are required to purchase SEAPA energy. The effect of this requirement is that shifts in weather
have a dual impact on SEAPA operations. As shown in Figures 2, suppose an unforeseen early
warm front hits the area in April, overall load decreases (Impact t), and KPU (as tloes PMPL
with Blind Slough) increases g¢neration because mor¢ water is availabl¢ (impact 2); this has a
double reduction effect in reducing the net load to SEAPA. if this warm front ware to occur
during th¢ November to January period, spill woultl occur because SEAPA fills reservoirs for the
winter heating season, and SEAPA has no outlet for the sudden surplus in hydroelectric energy.
Therefore, adtlitional storage provides greater operational flexibility that mitigates the combined
affects of inflow uncertainty coupled with the PSA directed dispatch order.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 9 Oacamber 2012
KPU Load Balance March 1 to May 1, 2012
zs
3
f z
zs
._. .� _ ._. � _ � .� _, c ;;�__� a �. � _ ���
�' �'`�'' �� �- M������� a m a a a a a a a a a a a
aa�SEAPAeKport Into 0a11eyeMVJ ®KW1 M/6o JMW �KpU-Loetl eMW
F lgure 2 - Warm, wet weather dee roasea KTN loatl and KPU
increases hydro genarotlon, a double roductlon In load to
SEAPA.
Southeast A/®sKa Power Agency tD � Oacambar 20t2
S.2 Load Not Golncldant with Inflows
Over the course of the year, inflows are not coincident with loads; larger inflows occur when
loads are low, and lower inflows occur when loads are high. Examples of coincidence and non -
coincidence:
Coincident -
a) Spring run-off and high, early summer irrigation pumping
b) Late season fish processing and eery fall precipitation
Not Coincidant—
a) Winter freeze-up antl space heating
Baca use our load profile is shifting towards winter space heating, our future loads will be even
less coincident with inflow. This means wa ar¢ likely to have surplus hydro in th¢ late fall for an
extended period. if a new hydroplant is constructed in the future, the spill and diesel cycle will
be repeatetl. Increasing storage at Swan Lak¢ allows SEAPA to "shift" wet season spilled water
to winter heating capability. Figure 3 shows the relationship of inflow to load for the Tyee Lake
Hydro Project. Historic average annual inflow is approximately 117,000 ac-ft, active reservoir
storage is 52,000 ac-ft, or in terms of numb¢r of tank -fills of fuel, Tyee receives on average 2%
tanks (52,000'2.25 = 117,000 ao—ft). Note that in th¢ model generat¢d graph, the full range of
res¢rvoir is usetl yet spill occurred in the October -to -November time frame. Even with future
load��g rowth, SEAPA expects to spill during the October -to -November period ai our Ty¢e facility.
As explained later in the report, increasing storage at Swan will retluce spill events at Tyee.
ryM Lalta Hydro Opleatlons
-
1400
-
-
/�
"pia
1390
�
13H0
b•-kn:;— �z: 1.;t 1:enk
�
/oA t""n
1370
1/n Lank
1380
}
1350
6 l 360
Y¢ry
-
133D
�_"
Light
Heavy
1320
Loads
Winter
W 1310
Loads
� 1300
� 1290
Light to Moderate
Loads ���
� 12a0
K 1270
Heavy Winter Loads
1260
1250
ltl
tr31 32 �It 5ft
� t BI30
7130 aI29
9/2H 1�'2a 1V2] 12IT!
TY'� ut+asa.wwir
ae xb+�
Flgura 3 - 3ystam load filming and seasonal Inflows to Tyae Laka
Southeast A/asKa Power Agency t1 Oecambar2012
3.3 Plan consistent with the SMRP
The recently completed Southeast Alaska Integrated Resource Plan ('SEIR p,) 3 reviewed our
region's hydro capability, load profiles, economic activity, and population growth. This report,
which provides the foundation of future planning, emphasized reservoir storage as a critical
finding pointing to a regional storage capacity shortfall. This Project is consistent with that
report in calling for a cost-effective storage expansion at Swan Lake.
3.4 New Projects have a Stranded Portion of Output
Unless a new hydro project is offsetting existing thermal load (diesel), a portion of the output will
be underutilized. In Southeast Alaska this occurs during spring runoff or during the fall wet
season, or as with Tyee in the first 20 years of operation, may be underutilized for the entire
June through November period. The proposed additional storage at Swan would shift this
excess summer and fall output into the winter. The new Project would generate during the
summer and fall such that a reduced electrical output from Swan Lake would allow refilling the
larger reservoir. In the very near term, the new plant would be the Whitman project. As this
plant became fully utilized, then the next hydro plant would fulfill the roll of replacing the Swan
Lake "turn -down" thus avoiding stranding a portion of the under-utilized capacity of the newest
plant. At this time it is uncertain whether Whitman will be constructed, or if constructed, what
the generating capabilities will be. T his analysis used six case studies to cover various
continaencies that include:
A -No resource changes
B-Just Whitman
C-Whitman +.5-4 MW variable Power Purchase (PP)
D-Whitman + PP + New Generic Hydro
E-Whitman - Generic Hydro
F-Generic Hydro only
hese cases were analyzed for each raise option - 10 ft, 15 ft, and 20 ft.
I So- "o-ri, 4
Ber-tefit yahu!el Anallysis
'benefit (value) in this report means additional SEAPA sales at $68/MWh that result from
displacing future winter diesel generation. SEAPA expects to contribute 50% of the project
capital costs to license, design, and construct the dam modifications necessary to increase
reservoir storage, Benefits (SLEAPA sales) then must accrue over the year to pay for the 50%
capital financing.
4A Simple Value of Storage
If 15 or 20 extra feet of water were to magically appear behind the dam at Swan Lake, how
much electric output does this extra water volume represent? This extra water will be available
for aeneration at Swan Lake because Swan output will be reduced during the summer and fall
to allow the larger reservoir to refill. The reduced output will be replaced first by increased
output from Tyee Lake, then from any new hydro resources that are brought on-line. Put
3 Available from the Alaska Energy Authority website.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency -12 December2072
another way, the larger reservoir captures spill that would have occurred at Tyee Lake,,, or a
future new plant.
Plant
Reservoir
Model Curve
Additional
Additional
Efficiency
Full Pool
Storage
Storage
Energy
Value
Kf-kWJcfs
Elevation
ac-ft
ac-ft
MWh
$68/MWh
22.6
330
86,000
0
0
0
22.8
335
93,350
7,350
1;943
$132,098
23.1
340
100,500
14,500
3,905
$265,567
23.5
345
107,600
21,600
5,905
$401,567
23.9
350
114,600
28,600
7,925
$538,905
Table I - Simple Storage Benefit Comparison
There is much more to the story than the values of Table I This simplistic calculation does not
account for head benefits that accrue during the course of the year or show the benefits that
result from greater operational flexibility which absorb volatile Southeast Alaska infl
a. a occurred not only at Swan Lake, but at any of the region's interconnected hydro
projects. An assumption has been made that extra summer generation is available now and in
the future which allows normal inflows to refill the larger Swan reservoir, this assumption is
covered in the next sections.
4.2 Hydraulic Model Results
A case study was performed to understand the best reservoir increase option. Ten feet, fifteen
feet, and 20 feet raise options were compared to a base case where no modification to the dam
is undertaken (full pool of 330 ft.). Since each model case is laborious in explanation, the, 15 ft
raise option (full pool of 345 ft.) is explained fully.
A daily average generation and inflow model4 Was used to quantify the effects of raising the full
pool elevation of Swan Lake, The original condition case is a reservoir with a full pool elevation
of 330 ft; the second case is a full pool elevation of 345 ft. Both cases used the same inflow, a
synthetic series developed as an expected condition for the Swan Basin ; 5 each case had the
same reservoir operational constraints as listed immediately below:
a minimum operating level of 273 ft, (271.5 ft is the FERC license limit)
2. '
an end target level equal to the start level (could not use next years water
Swan Summer
Swan Winter
Swan
: Start & End
Comparison of
Generation
Generation
Total
Swan Cases, 345
May I to Nov 30
Dec 1 to April 30
Generation
Elevation
ft and 330 ft.
MWh
MWh
MWh
ft
345 Reservoir
20,130
51,149
71,280
335
330 Reservoir
29,454
40,769
70,223
318
Difference
-9,323
10,380
1,057
17
Table 2 - Swan Generation for Case 330 ft and Case 346 ft
' Written by D TIA in /2006 for FDPPA (Terror Lake); modified for Swan and Tyee, and verified with actual
perform ance-rn ode I comparisons. See, Appendix Al for details of the Swan Lake hydraulic model.
., Commonwealth Associates, Inc. Intertie Study 2006, synthetic inflow correlated to rain data.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 13 Decembar 201' 2
As shown in Table 2 above, Case 345 compared to Case 330 has a significant decrease in
summer generation (9,323 MWh), but a significant increase in winter generation (10,336 KAWh).
Overall Swan Lake annual generation is about the same (1.55% difference). Figure 4 shows
each reservoir guide curve (dotted line) that prioritizes generation in the winter months, yet
allows the reservoir to refill (same starting and ending elevations). These guide curves were
developed by repetitive simulations using a range of historic inflows from the Falls Creek USGS
gage.6 Historic floe were corrected for the difference in drainage area that resulted from
project construction. Recent inflows were calculated from Swan Lake operational data to
augment the historic data. From this inflow record we know the guide curve captures inflow
uncertainty to 1 5% below expected inflow (65% of the time generation will exceed the guide
curve generation value).
The key to the expanded reservoir option is that future Swan Lake generation is decreased ("a
turn down") from present operation (330 ft option) during the summer months to allovu the
proposed larger reservoir to refill, and it has been assured 9,323 MWh is available within the
system to allow refill during the summer. The extra winter generation (10,380 l' Wh) is then
available as a 100% diesel displacement. For the gain in winter generation, we must find
additional summer generation in the system. The first place to look is Tyee Lake, which has
been spilling every year during the summer and fall since 1934.
350 -
340— -
330
LU 320
0
310
300
290
280 -{ -
Swan lake Hydro Operations
Swan "turn -down"
allows refill of larger
345 f reservoir
270 ,
111 1/17 2/2 2118 3/6 3/22 4/7 4/23 519 5/25 6/10 6/26 7/12 7/28 8/13 8/29 9/14 9/3010/1611/11111712/312/19 114
.346 Reservoir Elev. 345 rule Curve 330 Reservoir Eiev. 330 rule Curve
Figure 4 m Swan make generation and inflow -storage model (daily
average). Dotted lines deviate from guide curves when inflows
deviate from historical average. Solid lines are for the inflow case
at 16% below expected. During love inflow years (up to 15% less
than expected conditions) the reservoir will refill for winter
operation with a 9323 MWh turn down.
A hydraulic -generation model was used to verify that additional summer generation; was
available at Tyee Lake. As with the Swan Labe model, both Tyee cases had to refill prior to the
6 USGS Gage 15070000, source details listed in Appendix B1.
Southeast AiaskaPower Agency 14 December 2012
winter heating season, and both cases drafted to the same elevation (1,270 ft). Table 3 lists
both cases, which more than refilled (above the January start elevation of 1,365 ft), ancf both
cases have nearly identical winter generation levels; the principal difference is that the Tyee
case with additional summer generation converts 11,400 ac ft of spill to over 11,700 M\A/h of
generation. This exceeds the 9,323 MWh requirement of the Swan model and verifies that
existing excess Tyee capacity would be available and coincident with the Swan Lake "turn-
down" requirement.
Modeled Tyee Generation and Water Levels
Tyee Cases, 2013 (Base) and
Winter
Summer
Total
Start
End
Spill
future year with additional
Generation
Generation
Generation
Elev.
Elev.
surnmer generation
MWh
M\(\/h
MWh
ft
ft
ac-ft
Base Case (2013 Expected)
73,136
46,421
119,557
1365.0
1378.5
11,632
2013 + Additional Summer
Gen.
73,136
58,133
131,269
1365.0
11376.7
224
difference
0
11,712
141,712
0
-2
-1 '11,408
Table 3 - Tyee winter and summer generation for base case and
base + additional summer generation
A plot of Tyee Lake reservoir elevations for both model cases is shown in Figure 5. The model
is constrained to prioritize winter generation and to refill for the next winter heating season. The
inflow case is based on the original generation estimate provided as the basis for construction.'
Spill in the model occurs at elevation 1396 (all additional storage lost); in reality spill seepage
starts at elevation 1,387 and increases to visual spill through a restrictive log jam.
Tyee Lake Hydro Opperations-Reserve i. Elevat,
4 0 -
J
E
10 �51
NL
----------------
i DID -
1290
Oy-
1 fa
12_
12 u
, 4
12 1
--E,
4 2 2 2 7 23 411 12' &20 9,1114 10' 11,
sl�se Bases .Adid'i Surnmer Gen.,
Sout,beast Alaska Power Agency 15 Decembei-2012
Figure 6 - Tyee Lake water levels for the two generation cases of Table 3
7 IECo Hydraulic Design Criteria lor Tyee Lake, see Appendix B2.
Table 4 below lists increased nominal monthly summer generation values which total to the
11,712 MWh and correspond to the dark trace for reservoir level shown in Figure 5.
Increased Tyee Generation
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov total
n -
aMVk1 2 9 4 4 2 --
MWh 1,440 1,488 1,488 2,880 2,976 1,440 11 712--
Table 4 - Additional Generation Schedule at 'yes to Refill the Larger
Swan Lake Reservoir
If the additional Tyee summer generation values of Table 4 are added to expected 2013
generation levels at Tyee, the values of Table 5 result, which total to 131,269 MWh, Just shy of
the expected case modeled value of 133,020 MWh. Please see Appendix A2 for expected Tyee
generation details.
Expected 2013
Tyee Generation
aMW MWh
Expected + Summer
Generation
Summer Total Gen. Case
aMW aMW NAWh
Jan
18.5
13,764
0
18.5
13,764
Feb
18.5
12,432
0
18.5
12,432
Mar
18,5
13,764
0
18.5
13,764
Apr
17
12,240
0
17
12,240
May
9.64
7,172
0
9.64
7,172
Jun
7,35
5,292
2
9,35
61732
Jul
12 . 41
9,233
2
14A1
10,721
Aug
12.51
9,307
2
14,51
10,795
Sep
9.119
6,617
4
13,19
9,497
Oct
9,38
6,979
4
13.38
9,955
Nov
1149
8,993
2
14.49
10,433
Dec
18.5
13,764
0
18.5
133,764
119,557
131,269
Table 5 - 2013 Tyee Generation woutltl Added Summer Component to
Refill Swan Lake
Tyee Lake and Swan Lake, as mentioned before, dispatch last in the SEAPA system; spill at
these plants, therefore represents total system spM. The principal question is then, "How long
until summer load growth reduces SEAPA systern excess hydro, capability? Summer excess
hydro (spill) that would be used to refill the larger Swan Lake reservoir will be reduced in the
future due to load growth, but later in our planning window we expect new hydro resources to be
brought into the system, New hydro resources will bring a component of excess summer
generation that will then be used to refill the expanded Swan Lake reservoir. The preceding
sections explained how excess capability at one hydro station within the SEAPA system (Tyee
Lake) can be used to shift excess summer generation to winter generation using a larger Swan
Reservoir. T o estimate the long-term value of the Swan reservoir expansion, a System
approach is required. Our system approach will use monthly average hydro generation as
defined in section 4.3, and a reference case load forecast as defined in Section 4.4. These
Southeast Aiaska Power Agency 16 December 204 2
1
metrics will then be used to determine the extent of future excess hydro, available for rechearging
the expanded Swan Lake reservoir.
4.3 Average Generation Corrected to Average Precipitation
Swan Lake annual generation averaged for the period 1999 to 2011 was 74,964 MWh, bull
during this same period the average spill at Swan Lake was 55,544 ac ft, (64% of the total
storage)!, Converting the average spill volume to energy yields 14,435 MWh of under-utilized
water at Swan Lake; therefore the total available hydro, generation at Swan Lake from 1999 to
2011 was 89,400 MWh. A check of the weather for this period indicates the region was slightly
wetter than average; the average precipitation at the Ketchikan airport from 1999 to 2011 was
166.3 inches; the historic average is 153.5 inches. Indexing" Swan Lake generation and spill to
the historic average precipitation at the airport reduces the expected output of E"wan Lakc- from
89,400 MVVh to 82,506 MWh. KPU hydro generation was also indexed from the period average
of 77,167 MWh to 71,216 MWh.
Year
KPU Hydro
MWh
Swan Lake
Gen
(MVVh)
Swan Lake
spill (ac-ft)
Swan Lake
Spill (MWh)
Swan Lake
Total
(MWH)
PAKT
Rain
(inL
1999
74,575
62,615
104,406
26,939
89,554
187
2000
76,858
81,644
16,963
4,377
86,021
170
2001
77,999
81,079
64,974
17,105
98,184
184
2002
65,083
73,349
61,752
16,256
89,605
154
2003
76,970
77,311
58,267
15,339
92,650
155
2004
71,429
80,174
19,050
5,015
85,189
156
2005
79,680
74,488
92,061
24,697
99,185
196
2006
79,790
80,312
4,499
1,137
81,449
162
2007
793967
79,164
68,931
17,786
96,950
169
2008
83,681
65,625
113,079
29,177
94,802
165
2009
78,883
76,556
0
0
76,556
143
2010
75,839
74,345
33,530
8,471
82,816
150
2011
82,413
67,874
84,555
21,362
89,235
171
2012
11,338
Avg. 77,167
74,964
55,544
14,435
89,400
1663
min 65,083
62,615
0
0
76,556
143
max 83,681
81,644
113,079
29,177
99,185
196
Average period precip. for KTN Airport, (PAKT) inches => 166.3
Long term Historic average precip. for PAKT inches => 153.5
Table 6 - Historic Generation and precipitation data for Swfan Lake
and KPU Hydro
8 Historic average precipitation at Swan Lake is 166 inches/year; the assumption is that when drier years
occur in Ketchikan, these yea.rs will correspond to drier conditions at Swan Lake and at the Ketchikan
Lakes and Silvis basins.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 17 December- 20-12
Table 6 lists the region's expected hydro capability. Swan Lake average generation (322,506
MWh) is shown in Table 7' as two numbers: 70,716 MWh which represents an average output
consistent with both hydraulic models and Table 6 values, and 11,790 MWh which is an at-nount
that represents the spill portion, evident in Table 6 that could be captured by the proposed
expansion. Tyee is entered as 133,000 MWh consistent with IECo design and our mocJeling
work.
Existing and Proposed Hydro Resources (Capacity and Energy)
Capacity, Energy (MWh)
SEAPA Area Hydro Resources MW Low Expected
High
Existing KPU Hydro corrected for avg. at KAPT. 13 65,083 71,216
83,681
Existing Modeled SWIL Inflows and sys. Dispatch 24 62,615 70,716
817644
Existing Modeled Tyee Inflows and System Dispatch 24 111,500 133,020
135,000
Existing Blind Slough 2 10,956 12,285
13,530
Existing Transmission, Transformer, & Plant Losses 0 -10,447 -12,224
-12,999
_Existing........ . Net Hydro . ..... . 63 ... ... .. ... .
Energy currently available for refill of the
Proposed Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion 0 3,600 11,790
28,000'
Building Whitman 4 5,957 '11,629
17,500
2017 Net hydro 66.9 249,264 294,142
328,356
Notes:
KPU Hydro corrected to 20 yrs, of KAPT rain gage to represent an
average.
SVVL Lake output (70,716) is from a model to match the historic average output; the remaining resource
(spill) is
listed under Proposed - Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion. Only 7,500 MWh (future average available for
refill) is
included in the resource total for the expected inflow condition. Minimum Swan expansion is due to head benefit
(3,600 Mk/Vh).
Tyee generation based on hydraulic
model
Whitman Excess generation (spill) will be converted to displaced diesel if no spill from Tyee or Swan is available
Table 7 - SEAPA Area Hydro Conditions
4.4 Load Forecast and Total Hydro Capability
The SEIRP contained a reference case load -forecast for the, SEAPA region which was
developed by Black & Veatch (B&V). This reference case (between the high and low cases)
contained a steep rise in loads until 2015, then a constant .5% escalation until 2030; after 2030
an annual escalation of 25% was used. SEAPA modified the B&V load forecast for this
analysis to have a uniform .5% annual load increase until 2050. The modified load -forecast
includes Fake, but does not include Metlakatla. Load forecasts and hydro resources are shown
in Figure 6, which also includes the low and high regional hydro generation cases. The ramp in
hydro capability is due to the addition of the \Nhitman and Swan Lake Reservoir It
Projects.
9 28;000 MWh is the amount of energy that would be spilled during high water years at Swan Lake. This
value has been met or exceeded in the past, Fhis energy is a phantom value however as during very
high years there is simply too much water available at all the hydro prrqjects; this deluge overvkfhetms a
prudently sized hydro systern.
Southeast Alaska Pow( ar Agency is De--c-mber 2012
SEAPA GeMrol Area -Annual Rssaun:e-laced Balance '.
ascaoc
' 3 3rx1.Jo¢
= 3acZ.a6C �.
' +� .'.'_`8:_E.c .JK:Y-��I:-JI; YK-Yf Y;-JK-JK N:-�K.�JK
V��
'r` 3ffii L tl : 5. L8a
�1CLv.^SLt3-r_
�. EG-.-
J COG _ _ _. t .... _ _ ... ._
=C_.^. 2EII5 233C 2D'25 3t)3rl 2035 2U4O dU35 2US:
—Hda'V P.Ra.(1 "-Cd SG�6 [a �CE+C —>k— 6b1'J Ladd P41_ Fcs[
L;J,.v nx dra E rv� c[c d Hydr=
N jgh %pda � CRus'LnQd !MYTH)
F 19ura 6 -Loads and resources for the SEAPA re91on
As shown in Figure 6, SEAPA regional loads have reached the expected or nonnal condition
hydro capability poi of of 275.0'13 MWh. During the next few years diesel generation will ba
more antl more likely to occur and to occur in aver increasing amounts. Even after Whitman
and tYl¢ Swan LakEi Reservoir Increase Projects are added, the expected case falls well short of
projected Toads.
4.5 Future Exceas Hydro (spill) Available for Swan Lake Storage
Future excess hydro as spilletl en¢rgy depends on three factors:
f) Inflow volumes vary greatly depending on weather; this analysis uses
inflows that correspond to historical average generation.
2) Load Forecast —should reflect the ¢conomic trend which can deviate over
the long farm; this analysis uses a modified (in creasetl) 68V SEIRP
reference case loatl forecast.
3) A portion of the output from proposed (futur¢) hydro projects cannot be
fully utilized unless there is y¢ar-round thermal ganaraticn to displace.
The SEAPA system at the present time is 99% hydro sourced, thus
stra nd¢d generation has to wait for load growth unless new storage
sources are developed that shifts summer excess hydro to wint¢r
generation, This analysis uses the licensed but reduced Whitman plant
schetluled for 20f5 and a limited storage "9¢neric hydro" of 50 GWh
scheduled for 2030 as new resource additions.
Southeast A/asKa Powa�Agency t 9 Oecambar 2012
Futu r¢ system spill was calculated by subtracting future loads from the expected case Flytlro
value. Monthly tabulations of hydro resources ar¢ based on computer models and have been
veri£ad with actual operations data. On a monthly basis, hydro raso urces, less loads, either
result in a surplus or a deficit. Winter surpluses were summ¢d into the summer and then spilled
if summer loatls did not consume the surplus; this is consistent with our actual reservoir storage
constraints. Winter deficits era counted as diesel generation. Presently our reservoirs are
empty by late Spring and spilling by late fall.
.Ian
Fab Mar
Rpr
54ay
Ju[x
Jte1
Auy
5cV
20Y,'
4•
_
l
a�:
..
-
2U tL
_
,Aa:
-
-.pCc
2c
298E
znsa
_
___
_
_ _
_
__
_
_ _.
pnza
.. -_
..,
..
...
e
_r .
- �-
., ,..
Table 8 — Futu
ra Spill
and Dlasal Generation (red
text Is
diesel
®aneratlon; black taxi
{s spill).
Whitman
Protect projected
to be
online In 2015.
A modeling period of 39 years was used to correspond with a 30-year financing plan. Figure 7
shows actual 2011 and 20t2 SEAPA system spilled energy compared to the expected case
analysis spilled energy <solid black line). For 20t 1, the model projected a spill value of 26,3t2
MWh but actual spilled energy totaled 45,454 MWh. Actual 20t2 spill was 53,796 MWh while
the expected case spilled energy for 2012 is 19,272 MWh; 20>2 was a vary high Inflow years
This comparison confirms the high case hydro capability previously listed in Tables 7, and also
intlicatas the difficulty in predicting spill just one year into the future. Both traces (solid and
dotted) use the SEAPA modified reference case load forecast and average inflow hydro
conditions. The difference is the dotted line has Whitman and the generic hydro project
included; Wh[tman starts in 20t 5, the generic project starts in 2030. The result of this analysis
indicates there will be insufficient excess hydro to refill raise options t5 ft and greater if no new
hydro projects are brought on-line. If new projects are constructed, then system spill will ba
available antl than offset winter diesel. Tha generic hydro plant �O used in this analysis has an
annual output of 50 GWh from arun-of river conftguration, comes on-line In 2030, and during
the first year displaces t6,052 MWh of diesel generation without the Swan Lake expansion. An
additional t0,000 MWh of diesel generation is displaced when the affects of the expantled Swan
Lake reservoir are taken into account.
1O Consistent with SEIRP antl the recant Dapartm ent of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development Grant Process to tletartnine the best hydro alternative for Southeast Alaska.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 20 Oecembar 20>2
A�ue1 a..d Fueer� SFJ�tYa SpOawr Split-Er�enFGY (MWHj
ao am
3
__
�
i h- N S4 a^a abS
- �Y =5.�25
E-Y„ a,b 239R Gmcic Hy -Ora
W
is -0QL
_
-
� .S�i+Ji.:£t FaG $v': � fNFF?Pa
a
� -. •,
Q
zoom
_
_... "--
'
_s
...
•oom
- .__.
_ ._.. .
.a+
o
q��
� � w � �
�
_
� a ¢ � � Q S $ -.
..� kS
= = -.
Figure 7 —Future SEAPA System Excess Hydro Capability
Available to RaFlll Largo Swan Reservoir
4.6 Head benefit of increasetl storage capacity
Head (ft, m) is energy par cubic toot of water, the higher the dam, the more head. Power is the
pros uct of head and flow. If there is no excess hytlro generation in the system, the increase in
storage allows the Swan Project to experience greater head at the plant than would occur
without the increase in storage. To estimate the value of the head benefit, the same hydraulic
model of Section 4.2 was utilized. Inflow sequences that represent a range in Swan Lake
generation from 57,000 MWh to 86,000 MWh ware entered into a hydraulic modal for the 330 ft
cos¢. These same inflows were then entered into a modal with 345 ft as the maximum
elevation. Tha average gain in generation for the 345 case over the 330 ft cos¢ was 3,600
MWh.
4.7 Valua Summary
Five system configuration cases that coultl represent the future ware analyzed. Each case used
the modified B8V load forecast antl expected hydra conditions.
Case A
No new h dro assets adtlatl to the s stem
Casa B
A reduced Whitman Project atltled, t 7,629 MWh instead of the
ravio us desi n value Hatch -Acres of t6 300 MWh
Casa C
a reduced Whitman and a short term (25 year) power purchase
from an existin or ro deed h dro ro'ect
Cage �
Case C lus a future 50 GWh h dro asset commissioned 2030
Casa E
Reduced Whitman plus the future 50 GWh hydro project, no RFO
Power Purchase
Case F
Generic Hydro as the only r¢sourca addkion in year 2030, no
Whitman or RFO
Southeast AlasKa Power Agency 2t Oacambar 20t2
F
2016 to 2046 SpillIed Energy -Available for Swan. Lake refill, by Case i
(Mwh)
Raise Option
Case A
Case B
Case C
Case,D
Case E
Case F
10 ft-340 El
2,940
41, 196
51677
6,6-13
6,358
"
598
15 ft-345 Ell
3,897
5,411
7,463
9,955
81814
7,397
20 ft-350 Ell
5,022
6,342
8,820
12,871
110,872
9,677
Table 9 — 30-year average energy available to displace diesel
generation (benefit) using an expanded. Swan Lake
reservoir.
The SEAPA business plan at this time calls for either adding a new hydro project by the 2030
time frame, or entering into a power purchase agreement. Perhaps both options may occur
where the new project supersedes the purchase agreement (Case D). At this time a reduced
Whitman Project is still planned for construction and commissioning by the end of 2015.
Therefore it is rnost likely that Case C, or D, or E, will occur, and less likely Case A, status quo,
or Case B i(just Whitman) will occur. Under these assumptions the minimum average annual
additional generation value for the 10 ft raise option is 4,414 MWh (Case C) and the maXin'lurn
average value is 12,251 MVVh which is the estimated benefit for Case D if the 20 ft option is
constructed. Section 6 contains a discussion of raise options and applicable case studies.
Supporting data for the average values is listed in, Appendix B3.
[The remainder of this page intentionally left blank]
Southe,ast Alalska Pom,Ner Agency 2 12. December 20 12'
Section 5
Cost Estimation a
Thera are two major categories of effort t�
license amentlment. and actual construction.
5.9 License Amendment- Lar9elY a Land Ownership Issue
This amendment will be a non -capacity amendment as no changes to powerhouse equipment
or hydraulic conveyance (pen-
stocks, tunnels) are plan nad.
Therefore amendment efforts
will be centered on land use
changes around the reservoir.
Around the reservoir, the
FERC boundary currently fol-
lows the 350 ft. elevation
contour; however the State
Lands boundary follows the
metes and bound courses
described in the Projact's Ex-
hibit K drawings. The approxi-
mate boundary of States and
Federal Lands is shown as
shaded in Figure 8. In 7997
[ha US Forest Sarvica (US FS)
lands around the Protect were
conveyed To the State of
Alaska pursuant to the Alaska
Statehood Act of 7958. Two
parcels (U. S. Survey No.
77630) were conveyed as
described under Patent
Number 50-9�-0286. Parcel 7
encompasses land below the F19ura 8 -Parcel 2 of State Conveyance
powerhouse and Parcel 2 des-
cribes lands surrounding the
reservoir. The proposed reservoir increase only affects Parcel 2, which is listed in Appa ndix C
for further reference. At this time it is assumed the entire FE RC Project boundary Ices within the
State Lands area. Te verify that the 350 ft option is contained within State Lands, a land survey
was conducted to verify where and to what eMent elevation 3517 ft falls outside of State Lands.
Results of the R&M land survey conducted during the summer of 2072 did indeed find project
lands outside of the existing DNR boundary. A map of this survey is listed in Appendix C. Even
though there will now be Project lands on the Tongass National Forest (25.8 acres), this parcel
is small and may not require a special use permit for project operations. A timber cruise and
sale will be required for inundated trees on USFS lands, and a cruise, sale, and harvest will
have to be carried out on inundated DNR lands. We do not expect to harvest trees in the zone
above full pool but below the probable maximum flood (PMF) elevation. Full pool and probable
maximum flood levels for the two options are list in Tables t g.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 23 Oocember 20f2
Reservoir Elevations
Full
PMF
Pool
Elay.
ft
ft
Existing Reservoir
330.0
343.3
'IS ft Raise Option
345.0
348.3
20 ft Raise Option
350.0
355.0
Tablo t0 - Proposetl reservoir full pool antl PMF elevations
"Pm-Innnnl" ultntlnn
>uv+'Jv u�B lnnnnvy 2033
d lnft.r.nnam+v�
d.. olnCmv-nl
191c Irn6nl l.lansaJlnlioa
h'luvclu 31113
Ch R•bt��2U32 (nuPPlcmamval
r)n� ammm IICT)
n Innum'" with 2il'1? atud)'
u115J
IoinlMwUnA.
APr113A13
Xm'«a+.brr 2012
S lc \'Irll
Alaeil 2b'3J
Vlivi-�cpacmL i2(Yl2
n]Cn anal
P�IIA-Jvor?Ul3
Vid-M.m'P
, n r"L a,inYormnUam
Ik.`cloF`In]'eamnaiun leca
2U13
\/AI-+[n+ nnl sauce
��. znl2>
«-a,.,.a.
d,-.-.-Inr.-a
I)a,riTmcnd ni„nl
IJvca.nvbc,. �tl'ii
hm,. ]11113
�unl /vumndmrni
1•+Iv 2015
Inmm n"2Uli
1111':\CnnnuUnUen(l GltO
lulu 2V13-3eyaaviv\v-„
Iumv,�y2lTN-1'aFn,ury -aYl2
2010
/v n+a ncl. �ilea�mc¢tlNwe
Ina-201ry
APr'03013
Table tt - Lieenea Amendment Schedule
The bast cas¢ for the amendment process is shown in the right column of Tables tt; a more
traditional cas¢ is shown in the left column. SEAPA hosted an Agency Meeting in May 2072 in
Katchikan and asked for feedback as Far as executing the SEAPA option. Agency response
was positive, as long as study plans could be submitted quickly. Study plans w¢re submitted
quickly and a Tongass NF special use permit was issued such that environmental and cultural
surveys could ba undertaken during the summer of 2012. These summer studies (Aquatic
(fish), invasive species, rare plants, wildlife, cultural) are now complete and the reports that will
make up the Initial Consultation �ocu ment are being pr¢pared through January 20t 3. SEAPA
expects to submit the ICE by late February or at the latest mid -March of 20t3.
5.2 Canstructlon Cost
SEAPA contracted with McMillen Engineering to determine the cost and feasibiVity of 90 Ft, 'IS ft,
and 20 ft reservoir raise options. Their analysis indicated that the dam cannot ba modified past
a 23-ft increase without infringement upon FERC mandated factors of safiety. Review of the
spillway and computation of the probable maximum flood (PMF) for each option became a
limiting factor as wall. The new structure however modified must pass the PMF. This
requirement eliminated most gate, and rubber dam options. The best option for reliable, cost
Southeast A/asKe Power Agency 24 Oacamber 2012
effective, safe operation during flooding is an Obermayer gate con£g uration. The seq uen cs of
construction for Obarmeyer gates is shown in Figure 9.
Sfart of Instal/atbn — In sfallio:;> '=:eta Pana1 — Compfafod GaOa
Figure 9 - Oberrnayar Gate Construction Sequence
Review of the intake gate house and associated mechanical and electrical works indicated that
the gate house equipment room must ba raised by the equivalent full pool raise amount (t0 ft,
t 5 ft, or 20 ft).
Top of
Raaarvblr Elevations
Full
PMF
Top of
Parapet
Pool
Elev.
Dam
wa II
ft
ft
ft
ft
Existing Reservoir
330.0
343.3
344.0
347.5
t5 ft Ralsa Oprion
345.0
348.3
350.0
353.5
20 R Raise O tlon
350.0
355.0
358.0
35t.5
Table t2 -Dam and PMF Elevations
Additionally, the problematic right abutment must be built-up and a retaining wall constructed for
the t5 ft and 20 R options. Powerhouse and penstock equipment will not need modifications.
The report is available from the SEAPA website www.saaoahvtlro. org. McMillen estimated
cc nstruction and engineering costs for each option; these are listed in Table t3.
Southeast Alaska Power ASency 25 December 2092
C'.xavtnr_v�ev t_ixzt
Si.[_-E.iu=s
S e_?,6p,369
S 31.3i 3..�
A *aan C'.ax :.. �eavcr fIIC3e<{
T�ii"_,+£1V
S P';.4.iTiJ
'S. f..P 3#_3'_
Cv+u4n-.;.:.muar Yarss Sx+lamc l
'r-#.'� i5.-_:A'�
S �_95G.3Jv5
5 i-.33']_ �#-
F'i.-.ld is}aquae Ordu'G:usac ,_c'{5'si
-
i_'viC:=15�
Ss'e.3_033
S SG:_i63
r«.l c „awt,.ctiaa ere
s s_�zrzs
s wu
s 1. ;.�
F'iacecnaea. £av naeerula ani nesfkcc {P 5^4i
� ✓K'��'r��'
S ].i9'?,9Cn1
S i..x"31_6 i>
Enx_vneKrvvc S�av�iw�-s, Dor:u¢_ s_.3usntr�5xon t.•:�e;,
"5.3->e
S 3�t±S_}*p
S "_.i_5]]
l Jt[RfRit 89pae $'fY [:Y4IJSL A95d'.."Eit66WtYK'd[L148{$�-v,f
C3`9,{I,
$/$6�9i#
tj E_t'13 .8'.J
rotas C- Cal Cost
5 f_O±9,Mt
S 1a.61i.�tf
S 16S9a ^9±
Tablet 3 - Conatmctlon and EnglnaarinB Costs
Costs for construction were based on:
Material costs located in Katchikan and barged to sits
Engineering Naws record for construction cost indexes
Davis -Bacon wages
+ 50%, -30% uncertainty with the median cost listed and
based on responsible bidding
Costs include crew camp construction, mobilization, de-
mobilization, site clean-up, and gate commissioning
5.3 Construction Scholl ule
Soothaest AlasKa Power Agency 26 Oacambar 2012
x.
Costs and benefits for increasing reservoir storage by 16 ft, 15 ft, or 26 ft are listed in Table 13
of this section. The option that overcomes cast and displaces the most diesel generation is the
nominal 15 ft raise option. Raising the reservoir 10 'fit would be more financially conservative
because total project casts are lower, but the benefit is lower as well. The 16 ft raise option
carries minimal license amendment risk, which also shortens project schedule and reduces
project casts. All options require future system summer excess generation (spill) to allmNl refill
of the larger reservoir. The 10 ft option requires the least simmer excess generation and
therefore carries the lowest risk that this excess generation will not be available. The 20 ft
option carries the most risk of refill failure because water in excess of average infiomis is
required to meet the end of summer full pool operating constraint. The 26 ft option carries the
greatest benefit if the Lake Grace project were constructed.
Reservoir Full Pool Option
330
340
345
350
Active Storage (ac-ft)
86,000
166,500
167,666
114,600 l
% Increase in Storage
0%
17%
25%
33%
Increased Generation (MWh)
Case C-Whitman + 26 yr. limited RFO (PP)
6
5,677
7,463
3,326
Case C- Whitman + RFO (PP) + 2036 Generic
6
6,613
9;955
12,871 l
Case E-Whitman + 2636 Generic Hydro
0
6,358
8,614
10,872 �
Case F-2636 Generic Hydro only
6
5,293
7,397
9,677
Construction & Engineering Cost. ( M)
6
6,00
10.66
16.56
License Amendment & Permitting ( )
6
0.76
1.17
1.29
Total Project Cost (M)
0
6.76
1 1.77
".7.79
Value of Annual Displaced Diesel (15 kWhlgai
6
$1,120,000
$1,920,000
$1,973,3133
41gai fuel cosh
Annual Financing Charge (56% of dotal project
6
$257,232
$446,526
67 ;732
Cost, 30 year term, 6.5%11
S APA Additional Sales, case C ($66lMil`tlh)
0
$366,022
$567,511
$599,736
i Benefit/cost ® (SEAPA Sales -Case C/ inance)
1.5
1. E
6.9
agile 14 - Benefits and Costs for T'hree Reservolir R 1se Options. 10 ft, 1 -t. and 20 ft
Notes:
Timber harvest cost included in license amendment costs. 50% of total project coasts assumed
reimbursed by the State of Alaska, Case A m no resource expansion, and Case B - just Whitman, do not
overcome casts for any raise option. Power Purchase (PP) option is price dependent and may not be
executed. Generic is a SEIRP term for an unnamed hydro project that fits system needs rather than
describes a specific resource. Increased generation uncertainty, -0% +5%, Construction cost uncertainty
is -30% to +50% on a portion of the $1 G.6M value.
Sovutheasp' Alaska Power Agency L,
The 15 ft raise option strikes a balance between the main risk components that jeopardize a
ruccessful Project; these risks are now summarized:
License Amendment Risk. At this time only Kokanee Salmon are an
environmental issue; land use and boundary issues will be overcome. If
reservoir restrictions are included as a mitigation measure, these restrictions
must not restrict generation flexibility to the extent project benefits are
significantly reduced. A project go/no-go decision regarding environmental
impacts will be made during the late spring of 2013. SEAPA may or may not
need a special use permit for Tongass National Forest lands that would be
inundated; minimal areas would be inundated with the 10 ft option; the 20 ft
option would inundate approximately 25 acres. Each option will require DNR
timber harvesting with the costs of the harvest yet undetermined, the greater the
reservoir raise, the greater the harvest cost.
2Design Risk. Dam and intake modifications become more complex and more
costly as the reservoir raise height increases. The lower the raise option the less
risk SEAPA carries with regard to a costly design and FERC approval process,
The right abutment, where rock does not continue above the existing top of dam
elevation becomes problematic and increasingly more costly for raise elevations
that continue above 15 ft.
3. Inflow Risk. This analysis used inflows that correspond to average generation
records and then indexed these recent 1999-2011 values down using an average
precipitation record from the Ketchikan airport. The 10 ft option refills with
inflows less than average, the 15 ft option uses the average to attain full pool
before the winter, and the 20 ft option cannot refill with average inflows.
4. Winter Delivery Risk. If excess summer generation is not available, then extra
winter storage will not be available and project benefits will not be realized. The
uncovered finance costs will add to pressures to raise SEAPA's wholesale power
rate. SEAPA is confident that 3 aMW will be available from June to November if
any of the cases (C, D, E, or F) of the previous Benefits Section occur. These
cases are consistent with previous regional planning initiatives.
The reduced Whitman Project which is licensed and funded and the
SEIRP Business Plan, which is a Request for Offers (RFO) of power
Case C and energy. The business plan initiates a request for offers of power
and energy to be delivered to SEAPA from potential IPP sources. A
recent Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development grant funds this initiative.
A reduced Whitman and a limited 10 yr. to 15 yr. low capacity (I to 4
MW) power purchase and construction of the 2030 generic hydro
project. This case was analyzed to ensure the Swan reservoir
Case D increase project is complementary to, instead of detracting from, the
combined benefits of proposed projects. The generic hydro project
for this analysis was a run -of river configuration with an annual
avera e output of 50 GWh.
Whitman and the Generic Hydro. The 10 ft and 15 ft raise options
c c v
over costs if the generic hydro project is constructed with the
c
clusio
inclusion of the reduced Whitman project.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 28 December 2012
2,030 Generic Hydro but no Whitman Project. If for some reason the
reduced output Whitman project is not constructed, then under this
s scenario the 10 ft and 15 ft raise options will have enough excess
�
summer generation to refill the larger reservoir. The term of the
-1 C construction bond ends in 2046, the generic plant would bit
onstructed in 2030. Only the 10 ft option covers costs if only the
c(
d
ro
euced Whitman project is constructed (no other new generatin e sources or power purchase agreements).
A summary of option attributes vs. reservoir full pool levels is listed in Table 15. The present
day Swan project full pool level is 330 ft.
Option Attribute
346
350
Refills with average inflow if drafted to El 272 ft using
excess generation of 2.7 aMW from June 15 to Nov 15
Yes
no
Relies on above avg. inflow to refill
No
yes
Dependent on case D and E to realize benefit over cost
No
yes --t
Provides flexibility o integrate Lake Grace Options___
___y�es-4�atte ___y�s-best
Table 15 =Raise Option Attributes vs. Full Pool Levels of 346 ft (15 ft
raise) and 350 ft (20 ft raise).
region (TWiffm-an, Power fwurcna,5e ^yfeUtilelil., dilA Ult:-; Y011tilli.; Hjuiv)
Since the SEAPA business plan is to pursue the RFO and the generic hydro, and at this time
Ketchikan continues forward progress with the reduced Whitman Project, our best option is then
narrowed to the 15 ft increase. Table 15 lists attributes vs. full pool levels in a qualitative
manner with the only standout attribute of the 20 ft option being a greater flexibility in
conjunction with the proposed Lake Grace project. Lake Grace, as stated in Section 2, may
ultimately be constructed, but SEAPA cannot justify selecting a 20 ft option on this very
uncertain outcome over the more concrete scenarios associated with the 15 ft option.
At least one new hydro resource to be constructed by 2030 in addition to Whitman; if this
occurs, and there is no significant summer load growth such as the proposed Niblack Mine that
would wholly consume the ♦new summer generation, then adding storage at Swan will both
displace future winter diesel generation and increase SEAPA revenue such that the benefits
outweigh the costs. By the end of May 20131, agency feedback from the Initial Consultation
Document submittal will help us to better estimate forthcoming project settlement costs.
Depending on the settlement costs, and from observing real progress on Whitman, and from
initial feedback regarding our Power Purchase initiative, we will be able make a finaI
determination as to whether we should proceed with the project. If the project is to proceed,
then under most forward conditions, the reservoir will be expanded to a new nominal full pool
elevation of 345 feet.
XlPlantsfswan Lake/Swan Lake Storage Increase Project)2013 0129 Cost and Benefit Report for BI— Lake Storage Increase Project - FINALA..
Southeast Alaska Power Agency 29 December 2012
rxm���
\ � 'i S � .. .. 'L _
��P t^ bvr8 � !1.` � fI 3�
S ti✓t t
� s � � British Co/amble, Canada
tee. __ �.
e
e r P � +� 4 r� � `$,
-
o i --
� a ,.
` �rw� a. -' i. a ..- ..,j,_
_ _
r
_. � _ `
1. i3 i �� 1 � D � ♦¢
� " A
t
A_i � � ..�0�� �Yy _.� � V � TY LaKF� p � .ti.
� 11
' l `� a 9 �l �'� �l _ � � _ _ — � � � i r .. � a
t
LL �' t -� Y.
[
4
f
.- �.
C- f�`
� �r-- Y
�t
.,
�� q � �
x'1' 4 r ....e. S LaX�.. __
I S i` � j � � ��y� tt.y �� '� � —�' � � � �r t � �. i F�fYO 9 to .p
rctC VfY' f 1�
`� ~ m %/ ti ��� ithl _.� wA,�\~ �C � J S��F"' t
o I
a
Y +y I ` SubstrH!
s
4 � Y _{' ♦ �
\ m
f\J
' �- ! w e.
�> Ka[obll[an -Swan Laha Ty P nburp
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency is a Joint Action Agency organized
pursuant to State Statute; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency owns the Tyee Lake and Swan Lake
Hydroelectric Projects in Southeast Alaska, which provide renewable hydroelectric
power to Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency recognizes that additional renewable
resources will be needed in the future to meet loads in Petersburg, Wrangell, and
Ketchikan; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency recognizes that wind power is a
renewable resource and desires to determine the feasibility of utilizing wind turbines to
supplement existing hydro, resources that provide power and energy to the communities
of Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency also recognizes that additional
interties may be built to serve communities, including Kake and Metlakatla, and
additional generation resources may also be required to serve those loads; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency's Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion
Project is projected to add 25% additional active storage for winter hydro generation,
displacing up to 12,000 MWhrs of diesel generation annually; and,
WHEREAS, the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development appropriated $3,320,000 to provide funding for use towards the Swan
Lake Reservoir Expansion Project to complete Phase III of the project, final design and
permitting, and to begin Phase IV, construction and commissioning.
WHEREAS, the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development appropriated $3 million dollars for Hydroelectric Storage, Generation,
Transmission & Business Analysis, of which funds of $578,000 were allocated to the
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project; and,
WHEREAS, final amendment of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
license for the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project was submitted to FERC on July
21, 2014; and,
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency will request Fiscal Year 2016 State of
Alaska Capital Project funding of $2,797,935 for the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion
Project; and,
Resolution No. 2015-055 1 Page 1 of 2 pages.
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Power Agency is in compliance with all federal, state,
and local laws including credit and federal tax obligations;
RESOLVED, that the Southeast Alaska Power Agency Board of Directors approves the
application for project, funding froound Vill of the, Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Grant Program in thelamount of $88,741.50 of which the Southeast
Alaska Power Agency will propose a fifty percent (50%) match for a Wind Resource
Analysis; and,
RESOLV I ED, that the Southeast Alaska Power Agency Board of Directors approves the
application for project funding from Round Vill of the Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Grant Program in the amount of $2,797,935.00 for Phase IV,
construction and commissioning, of the Swan Lake Reservoir, Expansion Project; and,
RESOLVED, that the Southeast Alaska Power Agency Board of Directors authorizes
Trey Acteson, its Chief Executive Officer, to sign the two stated grant applications,
commit to the obligations under the grants, and to act as an established point of contact
to represent the Southeast Alaska Power Agency for purposes of the stated grant
applications.
ob '�Sjver senm
-Ch 'iran of the Board
ATTEST:
Zn—dy Donato, Secretary/Tre—asurer
Resolution 2013-046
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Support For Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
WHEREAS, the three member communities of Petersburg, Ke[chikan,. and
Wrangell, and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough have formally adopted Resolufions in
support of The Southeast Alaska Power Agency's (SEAPA) Swan Lake Reservoir
Expansion Project (Project); and,
WHEREAS, during the 2013 Alaska legislative session, a funding request of
$12.3 million dollars was submitted by SEAPA to the Alaska Legislature for direct
legislative funding consideration to fund the Project to completion; and,
WHEREAS, funds were not awarded to SEAPA from the 2013 Alaska legislative
session and a cost and benefit analysis has established the benefits of the Project; and,
WHEREAS, the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community 8c Economic
Development appropriated $3 million dollars for a Hydroelectric Storage, Generation,
Transmission Rc Business Analysis, of which funds of $595,000 were allocated to the
Swan Lake Project; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Consultation Document for the license amendment
process to increase storage at the Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project has been filed with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; and,
WHEREAS, staff is preparing to initiate a license amendment with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission for the Project;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of The
Southeast Alaska Power Agency formally supports a commitment to proceeding with
development of the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project and in parallel continue to
seek funding support fiom the State of Alaska.
Approved this 25th day of April 2013.
SOUTHEAST ALASKA POWER AGENCY
����Q_
AA h"'S-O
������jjjjjj /� v Chairman of the Board ,
ATT� / j
ergj'e(r/on(,LpS ecretary/Treasurer
THE SOUTHEAST ALASKA POWER AGENCY
va-tensavacs _ 4-p
1900 Frst Avenue
Lg'��' -yc Phanet 907228228i
Suite 31fl ,�` S E A P A � Fax- 9w.2zs.zza�
Kelchikan. Alaska 99901 __,_. �_.-.hy hp
Sontl,aaet AIaY® Powwr Agency
SOUTHEAST ALASKA POWER AGENCY
BOARD MEETING MINUTES (SE PTEM BER 3, 20'14)
Approval of R¢sol ution 20t5-O55 authorizing SEAPA staff to submit two (2) AEA
R¢n¢wabl¢ Grant Applications to the Alas Ka Energy Authority R¢n¢wabi¢ Energy Grant
Program, authorizing CEO to sign grant applications, commit to obligations, and act as
an ¢sta blis had point of contact.
charlas Frsaman
I_aw wurama �/
atlopt Resolution 20"I S-O55 autM1orizing SEAPA
T
mit Ywc renewable energy grants to IM1e Alaska
Andy Donato
Bob Slvertsan
tM1ori[y fOf ROuntl VIII of the Alaska EnErgy
2enewable Energy Gran< Program, autM1orizing
John Jenson
Joe Nelson
q CEO. to sign [he gran[ applicaflons, c mi[
3ations untler the grants, and to act as an
pon MCConachie
CFtrvslia Jamieson �J
tl point of contact for tM1e'glra nts.
—�
'S-1 (i��("�j�N./
LIB I L L I A-'YY1 G
Clay Hammer
Brlan Ashton
T
FINAL VOTE'
AYES:
NgYS: Q
lk
mf.�ia
city cir 4r. '
lKetchikan
August 14, 2014
Mr. Shawn Calfa
Grants Administrator
Alaska Energy Authority
813 West Northem Lights Boulevard
Anchorage, AK 99503
Swan Lake Rese �X ansion Project
Dear Mr. Calfa:
On behalf of the City of Ketchikan. I would like to express the City's continued support for
Southeast Alaska Power Agency's ('SEAPA") grant application for its Swan Lake Reservoir
Expansion Project.
Attached is a copy of the City of Ketchikan's Resolution No. 13-2498 endorsing the project
during SEAPA's funding endeavors in 2013. This letter is affirmation that the City of Ketchikan
continues its strong support of SEAPA's efforts to enhance hydro storage capacity in the region
and urges the Alaska Energy Authority to favorably consider a Renewable Energy Fund Grant
(Round VHD for this purpose.
Sincerely,
Lew Williams III
Mayor
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KETCHIKAN,
ALASKA ENDORSING AND URGING STATE FUNDING FOR THE SWAN
LAKE RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DtTE
WHEREAS, the Ketchikan Pulp Mill closed in 1997, resulting in significant losses of jobs,
population, and school enrollment, from which the community has yet to recover; and
WHEREAS, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough presently suffers a higher rate of unemployment
than the statewide average; and
WHEREAS, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and City of Ketchikan are presently pursuing
economic development opportunities such as the construction of a mill on Gravina, Island for the
processing of ore from the prospective Niblack Mine; and
WHEREAS, economic development opportunities such as the prospective Niblack mill require a
reliable source of energy at reasonable cost; and
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Integrated Resources Plan notes that there is a shortage of
hydroelectric storage capacity in Southeast Alaska and that potential hydroelectric projects with storage
capacity are more valuable than potential run -of -the -river hydroelectric projects; and
WHEREAS, Southeast Alaska Power Agency's (SEAPA) proposed expansion of the Swan Lake
Reservoir (the Project) would directly contribute to increasing regional hydroelectric storage and
maximizes the value of an existing hydroelectric project; and
WHEREAS, the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project enhances the already funded Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project; and
WHEREAS, the additional storage created by the project adds operational flexibility that
benefits the entire region, and shifts summer spill from the new Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project or
the existing Lake Tyee Hydroelectric Project to much needed winter hydroelectric generation; and
WHEREAS, the Project would displace up to 12,000 MW hours of winter diesel generation,
which equates to a reduction of 800,000 gallons of diesel fael annually;
WHEREAS, another significant advantage of the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion project is that
it needs no additional infrastructure (e.g., transmission facilities) to bring the additional power to the
existing power grid; the project adds capacity at an existing dam that is currently connected to an
existing power distribution grid;
Resolution No. 13-2498
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Ketchikan, Alaska as
follows:
Section 1: The Ketchikan City Council endorses SEAPA's proposed expansion of the Swan
Lake Reservoir.
Section 2: The Ketchikan City Council urges the State to provide $12.3 funding for the Project
in its FY 2014 Capital budget.
Section 3: A copy of this resolution shall be provided to Governor Parnell, Senator Stedman,
Representative Peggy Wilson and Alaska Energy Authority Executive Director Sara Fisher -Goad.
Section 4: This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND APPROVED by a duly constituted quorum of the City Council for the City of
Ketchikan on this 21 st day of February, 2013.
Lew Williams HI, Mayor
ATTEST:
� la,
Katherine M. Suiter, City Clerk MMC
Resolution No. 13-2498
Grants Administrator Shawn Calfa
Alaska Energy Authority
813 West Northern Lights Bouleva-r(-.,,
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
c i ke Resery ALr_Lx
%606� Ma_M&Ion Pro'ect
I am writing to you on behalf of the Petersburg Borough. It is my
understanding that the Southeast Alaska Power Agency ("'SEAPA") is
preparing a grant application for the completion of SEAPA's Swan Lake
Reservoir Expansion Project.
Attached is a copy of the Petersburg Borough's Resolution No. 2013-8
endorsing the project during SEAPA's funding endeavors in 2013. This letter
is affirmation that the Petersburg Borough continues its strong support of
the project and SEAPA"s efforts to enhance hydro storage capacity in the
region.
WMMM�Mllu MOM
Mark Jensen, Mayor
Attachment:
Petersburg Borough Resolution No. 2013-8
Borough Administration
PO Box 329, Petersburg, AK 99833 — Phone (907) 772-4519 Fax (907)772-3759
www.petersburqak.gov
4 � � �
Mar Jenson, Mayor
Rm 2013-8 Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Page 2 of 2 3/4J2013
w,�
August 19, 2014
Grants Administrator Shawn Calfa
Alaska Energy Authority
613 West Northern Lights Boulevard
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Dear Mr. Calfa_
KETCHIKAN GATEWAY BOROUGH
1900 First Avenue, Suite 115, Katchikan, Alaska 99901
� Telephone: (907) 228-6605 � Faz (907) 228-6697
Office of the Borough Mayor
Letter of Su000rt for Renewable Enerev Fund Grant (Round VIM
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
This letter is affirmation that the Ketchikan Gateway Borough continues its strong support of the
project and the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) efforts to enhance hydro storage capacity
in the region.
On August 18, 2014, the Borough Assembly adopted Resolution 2554-A, identifying and prioritizing
the FY 2016 Borough and Community of Ketchikan capital project funding requests. The Borough
Assembly selected the SEAPA Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project as the community's number
one priority capital project.
Sinc e ,
e Kiffer
Mayor, Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Enclosure: Assembly Resolution 2554-A
KETCHIKAN GATEWAY BOROUGH
RESOLUTION NO. 2554-AMEN UEU
A Resolution of the Assembly of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough,
Identifying and Prioritizing the Fiscal Year 2016 Borough and Community
of Ketchikan Requests for State Funding
RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, the taxpayers of the Ketchikan pay approximately $17 million in
taxes to the Borough annually (in addition to millions of dollars of additional
taxes paid to. the City of Ketchikan); and
B. WHEREAS, the citizens of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough pay several millions
of dollars in fees to the Borough annually (in addition to millions of dollars of
additional fees paid to the City of Ketchikan); and
C_ WHEREAS, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough has identified a number of projects
of a critical nature that have no immediate funding source; and
�. WHEREAS, the Assembly desires to include capital project requests from FY
2015 which did not receive full funding from the 2014 legislature and projects of
outside agencies in addition to those of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough for a
comprehensive capital project list for the Community of Ketchikan; and
E_ WHEREAS, the Borough Clerk solicited FY 2016 project funding requests from
outside agencies for consideration in the Community Capital Project Priority list,
and responses were received from the City of Ketchikan, Southeast Alaska
Power Agency (SEAPA), and the Ketchikan Performing Arts Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, IT IS RESOLVED
BY THE A55EM BLV OF THE KETCHIKAN GATEWAY BOROUGH as follows -
Section 1. The Assembly hereby identifies and prioritizes the Fiscal Year 2016
Ketchikan Gateway Borough municipal requests for State funding as follows:
1
Airport Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
$3,258,720
2-A
South Tongass Water Extension —Shoup Street to Forest Park
$1,855,303
2-B
South Tongass Sewer EMension, Shoup Street to Forest Park
$2,858,053
3
North Tongass Water Storage Tanks for Fire Suppression: Phase I
$182,600
4
South Tongass Water Distribution, Phase VI, Storage Tank and Booster
Station
$1,569,300
Resolution No. 2554-Amended
Page 2
Section 2. The Assembly hereby identifies and prioritizes the Fiscal Year 2016
Community of Ketchikan list of capital project priority requests for State funding as
follows:
Section 3. The Assembly hereby authorizes the Borough Manager to submit these
priorities as appropriation requests to the Governor of the State of Alaska and to the
Alaska State Legislature.
Section 4. The Assembly authorizes the Borough Clerk to continue to solicit capital
project funding requests from community agencies for inclusion in the FY 2016
Community of Ketchikan Priority and Community Project booklet for submission to the
Governor of the State of Alaska and to the Alaska State Legislature.
Section S. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon adoption
Resolution No. 2554-Amended Page 3
AOOPTE� this 18`� day of August, 2014.
Oave Killer, Borough Mayor
ATTEST.
Kacie Paxton, Borough Clerk
APPRAS TO FQR 5/�
E /�J��L
Scott A. Brandt-Erichsen, Borough Attorney
CtTY AND BOROUGH OF WRANG ELL
/NCOHPoRATED MAY 30. 2HOH
Dire of [be OorouBh Mayo„
P.O. Box 531 907-8742361
Wrangell, AK 99929 907-874-3952
August 26, 2014
Grants Administrator Shawn Caifa
Alaska Energy Authority
813 West Northern Lights Boulevard
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Re: Letter of Support for Renewable Energy Fund Grant (Round VIII)
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
Dear Mr. Cai Fa:
I am writing to you on behalf of the City and Borough of Wrangell. It is my
understanding that the Southeast Alaska Power Agency ["SEAPA") is preparing a
grant application for the completion of SEAPA's Swan Lalce Reservoir Expansion
Project.
Attached is a copy of the City and Borough of Wrangeli's Resolution No. 03-13-1272
endorsing the project during SEAPA's funding endeavors in 2013. This letter is
affirmation that the City and Borough of Wrangell continues its strong support of
the project and SEAPA's efforts to enhance hydro storage capacity in the region.
Sincerely,
V
David Jack, Mayor
City and Borough of Wrangell
Attachment:
City and Borough of Wrangell Resolution No. 03-13-1272
CITY AND BOROUGH OF WRANGEL L, ALASKA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-13-1272
WHEREAS, the City & Borough of Wrangell anticipates continued growth in the
sea food, timber processing, marines service repair center and health care facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City & Borough of Wrangell continues to embrace electric heat
as a practical alternative to non-renewable based fuel sources; and
WHEREAS, all local economic 'development opportunities require a reliable source of
energy at reasonable cost; and
WHEREAS, the Southeast Alaska Integrated Resources Plan notes that there is a
shortage of hydroelectric storage capacity in Southeast Alaska and that potential
hydroelectric projects with storage capacity are more valuable than potential run -of -the -
river hydroelectric projects; and
WHEREAS, Southeast Alaska Power Agency's (SEAPA) proposed expansion of
the Swan Lake Reservoir (the Project) would directly contribute to increasing regional
hydroelectric storage and maximizes the value of an existing hydroelectric project; and
'KHEREAS, the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project enhances the already
funded Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project; and
WHEREAS, the additional storage created by the project adds operational
flexibility that benefits the entire region, and shifts summer spill from the new Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project or the existing Lake Tyee Hydroelectric Project to much
needed winter hydroelectric generation; and
WHEREAS, the Project would displace up to 12,000 MW hours of winter diesel
generation, which equates to a reduction of 800,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually; and
WHEREAS, another significant advantage of the Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion
project is that it needs no additional infrastructure (e.g., transmission facilities) to bring
the additional power to the existing power grid; the project adds capacity at an existing
dam that is currently connected to an existing power distribution grid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE CITY
AND BOROUGH OF WRANGELL, ALASKA:
Section 1, That the City and Borouch of Wr-,1111-,A] urges the State to provide $12.3
ill'on Funding fog ect in FY 2014 Capital BuAlget.
i- the ProJ
provided to Govem-or Parriell, Senator
sect].02,1.12/ A copy of this resolutiI oll shall be provi
Stednuan, Representative Peggy Wilson and Alaska. Energy Authority Executive Director
Sara F1 sher-Goad.
sect,ml This resolution shall become efrective 1.11,11jedlately upon adoption.
ADOP-I'ED: M.�Irch 26, 2013
David L Jack, Mayor
ATTEST:
LI a
lores Borou,-
fri ),h Clerk
J-0.
s