HomeMy WebLinkAboutConnelly Lake GrantApplication4
September 14, 2010
Alaska Energy Authority
Attn: Butch White, Grants Administrator
AEA-11-005-RE Fund Grant Application Round 4
813 West Northern Lights Blvd
Anchorage, AK 99503
RE: Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project Grant Application
AEA-11-005-RE Fund Grant Application Round 4
Dear AEA:
Enclosed in response to RFA AEA-11-005-RE Fund Grant Application Round 4
program, is an application requesting funding for the Connelly Lake Hydroelectric
Project. Enclosed with this letter are two hard copies and one CD with the document in
PDF format.
Enclosed as per the RFA,
o Grant Application Form
o Cost Worksheet (included in Section 10 – Appendices)
o Grant Budget (included in Section 10 – Appendices)
o Grant Budget Form Instructions
o Other pertinent information
If you have any questions, please call either Glen Martin (Resource Assessment &
Permits) 360-385-1733 x122, or Bob Grimm (President) 360-385-1733 x120.
Sincerely,
Glen D. Martin
Resource Assessment & Permits
Enc. (as stated)
Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
Grant Application
AEA 11-005 Application Page 1 of 19 7/21/2010
Application Forms and Instructions
The following forms and instructions are provided to assist you in preparing your application for
a Renewable Energy Fund Grant. An electronic version of the Request for Applications (RFA)
and the forms are available online at: http://www.akenergyauthority.org/RE_Fund-IV.html
Grant Application
Form
GrantApp4.doc Application form in MS Word that includes an outline
of information required to submit a complete
application. Applicants should use the form to assure
all information is provided and attach additional
information as required.
Application Cost
Worksheet
Costworksheet4.doc Summary of Cost information that should be
addressed by applicants in preparing their application.
Grant Budget Form GrantBudget4.doc A detailed grant budget that includes a breakdown of
costs by milestone and a summary of funds available
and requested to complete the work for which funds
are being requested.
Grant Budget Form
Instructions
GrantBudgetInstructions4.pdf Instructions for completing the above grant budget
form.
If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application
forms for each project.
Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application.
If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide
milestones and grant budget for completion of each phase.
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting
funding for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the
preceding phases are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with
your submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed.
REMINDER:
Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials
submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no
statutory exemptions apply.
All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final
recommendations are made to the legislature.
In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or
proprietary company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by the
Authority. If you want information is to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their
application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept
confidential. If the Authority determines it is not confidential it will be treated as a
public record in accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon
request.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 2 of 19 7/21/2010
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
ALASKA POWER COMPANY (a subsidiary of ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY)
Type of Entity:
Utility
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 3222, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Physical Address
193 Otto Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Telephone
360-385-1733
Fax
360-385-7538
Email
glen.m@aptalaska.com
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT / GRANTS MANAGER
Name
Glen Martin
Title
Permitting & Licensing Manager
Mailing Address
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
P.O. Box 3222
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Telephone
360-385-1733
x122
Fax
360-385-7538
Email
glen.m@aptalaska.com
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
A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Yes
1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its project by
its board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the
applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s
governing authority is necessary. (Indicate Yes or No in the box )
Yes
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.
Yes
1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the attached
grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the
application.)
Yes
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.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 3 of 19 7/21/2010
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
This is intended to be no more than a 1-2 page overview of your project.
2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 5 word title for your project)
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
2.2 Project Location –
Include the physical location of your project and name(s) of the community or communities that will
benefit from your project.
This project is located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of
Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway. Both communities were intertied by APC
in 1998 with a 15 mile, 34.5 kV submarine cable. This project would provide power to both
communities.
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
Wind Biomass or Biofuels
X Hydro, including run of river Transmission of Renewable Energy
Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas
Heat Recovery from existing sources Hydrokinetic
Solar Storage of Renewable
Other (Describe)
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Reconnaissance X Design and Permitting
X Feasibility Construction and Commissioning
X Conceptual Design
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska,
approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of
Skagway. Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake,
and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the
Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam
at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final
dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by APC to provide additional
generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 4 of 19 7/21/2010
2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT
Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this project, (such as reduced fuel
costs, lower energy costs, etc.)
This Project will provide additional hydroelectric generation to APC’s Upper Lynn Canal (ULC)
system, which includes Haines, Skagway, and other nearby communities. APC also supplies
power to Inland Passage Electric Cooperative from the ULC system. The Project will be a long-
term resource to offset diesel generation. Currently, diesel generation is necessary during low
water periods. Diesel generation during the last 8 years has averaged about 0.7 GWh, but was
double that average amount during two of the years. Continuing load growth will make diesel
generation more frequent. The potential generation of a 12.0 MW project is estimated to be 45
GWh, which should be sufficient to meet increasing loads for many years to come, although
generation during the early years of the Project’s life would likely be fairly limited. To provide
revenue in the early years of Project operation, APC will sell power during the summer months
to cruise ships docked at either Haines or Skagway. The estimated annual load from supplying
one ship is estimated to be 9,000 MWh, with a peak of 11 MW. APC estimates that a power sales
rate of $0.20/kWh would be attractive to the cruise lines, and that revenue would be sufficient to
offset APC’s debt service and O&M costs, assuming the construction is 80% grant funded by the
State. Any excess revenue could be assigned to the State to offset the cost of the grant funding
and provide an additional revenue source to the State. Installation of a larger capacity to supply
two cruise ships is possible, which would increase the revenue to the State at little additional
cost.
Another benefit of the Project would be an increase in reliability. Currently, the primary
hydroelectric generators in the ULC system are near Skagway, with only diesel generation and
two small run-of-river hydros located near Haines. If the submarine cable between Haines and
Skagway were to be damaged, nearly all generation for Haines would need to be from diesel
units. The Project will connect into the system near Haines, and so in the event of a submarine
cable outage Haines would still be fully supplied with hydro generation.
It should also be noted that the Project could supply power to new industrial loads if they
occurred. Currently, mineral explorations are being conducted in the Klukwan area, and there
is discussion that a mine on the order of the Greens Creek Mine near Juneau could be
developed.
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 total cost of the Project is estimated to be $33,235,000, not including costs incurred by
Haines Light & Power Co. (HL&P) in the 1990s for a preliminary design of the project. No
reconnaissance level studies (i.e. Phase I) are necessary because of the previous HL&P work,
however, APC proposes to conduct additional resource assessment/feasibility
analysis/conceptual design studies (Phase II) to update and possibly revise the HL&P work.
Also during Phase II, APC will contract with various entities to conduct environmental studies
and data collection as necessary for obtaining state and federal permits. Note that APC
purchased HL&P in 1998, including assets associated with the Project.
If the Phase II studies indicate a feasible project can be developed as expected, APC will
immediately begin the Phase III work to obtain the necessary permits and final design.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 5 of 19 7/21/2010
APC request with this application grant funding of $1,028,000 which is 80% of the estimated
costs of Phases II and III. APC will provide $257,000 in matching funds (20% match) from its
normal operating funds. The total estimated costs for each phase, including construction, are
shown below:
Phase II: Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design ....................................$585,000
Phase III: Final Design and Permitting ....................................................$715,000
Phase IV: Construction..........................................................................$32,000,000
2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY
Include a summary of grant request and your project’s total costs and benefits below.
Grant Costs
(Summary of funds requested)
2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $1,040,000
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $260,000
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $1,300,000
Project Costs & Benefits
(Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully
operational project)
2.7.4 Total Project Cost (Summary from Cost Worksheet
including estimates through construction)
$33,300,000
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $1,050,000,000 (1)
$187,000,000 (2)
2.7.6 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 your application
(Section 5.)
Other benefits due to
reduction in cruise
ship emissions.
(1) Potential savings in diesel fuel costs over 50 years with full utilization of Project output.
(2) Estimated revenue from sale of 9,000 MWh/year to cruise ships over 50 years.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 6 of 19 7/21/2010
SECTION 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Describe who will be responsible for managing the project and provide a plan for successfully
completing the project within the scope, schedule and budget proposed in the application.
3.1 Project Manager
Tell us who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information, a
resume and references for the manager(s). If the applicant does not have a project manager
indicate how you intend to solicit project management support. If the applicant expects project
management assistance from AEA or another government entity, state that in this section.
Vern Neitzer, APC’s Chief Engineer, will be the Project Manager. Mr. Neitzer is located in Skagway
near the Project location, and has extensive experience in managing hydroelectric development. A
resume for Mr. Neitzer is included in Section 10.
3.2 Project Schedule
Include a schedule for the proposed work that will be funded by this grant. (You may include a
chart or table attachment with a summary of dates below.)
A bar schedule of the expected design and construction sequence is provided in Section 10. The
following summarizes key activities and dates of the schedule including time and activities
related to a FERC preliminary permit application in Phase II and a FERC license application in
Phase III.
Phase II: Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design:
Stream gage installation...................................... October, 2011
FERC Preliminary Permit Application................. October 2011
Conceptual design/optimization.........................December 2011
Scoping Document 1, NOI to FERC .......................... May 2012
Scoping Document 2 ...................................................July 2012
Draft Study Plan, Agency Review ................................July 2012
Final Study Plan ...............................................September 2012
Geotechnical investigations.................................. October 2012
Environmental studies........................................... October 2012
Phase III: Permitting and Final Design:
Stream gaging (data collection for 2 years)......... October 2011
Penstock alignment survey.................................... October 2012
Permit application preparation and processing..... August 2013
Final design .......................................................December 2013
License Application to FERC ...........................December 2013
Phase IV: Construction: 2016 –2018
3.3 Project Milestones
Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. The
Milestones must also be included on your budget worksheet to demonstrate how you propose to
manage the project cash flow. (See Section 2 of the RFA or the Budget Form.)
The key tasks and decision points for Phases II and III are as follows:
Selection of an installed capacity and optimum project arrangement by the end of 2011,
so that a Preliminary Permit Application can be made to FERC in 2011 and
environmental and geotechnical studies to be conducted in 2012 can be focused
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 7 of 19 7/21/2010
appropriately.
Installation of stream gages in fall 2011 to provide at least 1-2 full water year of data for
analysis prior to filing for a license.
Submittal of permit applications by August 2013 so that FERC license application can be
submitted by December 2013 and construction can be authorized for 2016.
Completion of final design by the end of 2013 so that construction can proceed in 2016.
3.4 Project Resources
Describe the personnel, contractors, equipment, and services you will use to accomplish the
project. Include any partnerships or commitments with other entities you have or anticipate will
be needed to complete your project. Describe any existing contracts and the selection process
you may use for major equipment purchases or contracts. Include brief resumes and references
for known, key personnel, contractors, and suppliers as an attachment to your application.
Key APC involved in the project development and their roles will be:
Vern Neitzer, Project Manager
Bob Berreth, Electrical Design
Ben Beste, Mechanical Design
Larry Coupe, Civil Design
Glen Martin, Resource Assessment and Permits
Phase II: Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design
In this phase APC will conduct the environmental and engineering/conceptual design studies
listed below. A preliminary permit application to FERC will be submitted in 2011 to start
resource agency review to establish a study plan. Most of the environmental studies will be by
contractors; the contractors listed below are those APC has used on similar tasks. The actual
contractors used may vary from those shown, depending on workloads and proposed budgets.
Wetlands delineation - - HDR Alaska Inc.
Threatened and endangered plant species survey - - HDR Alaska Inc.
Fish surveys - - Romey Associates, Inc.
Water quality sampling - - Analytica Group, Inc.
Cultural resource surveys - - Browne Research;
Geotechnical investigations - - GeoEngineers, Inc.
Conceptual design - - APC staff engineers
Feasibility analysis - - APC staff engineers
Phase III: Final Design & Permitting
FERC will have jurisdiction over this project, per their 2010 determination, hence a license will
be required to construct this project. Besides the FERC license, the following permits will be
acquired during Phase III:
404 permit (Corps of Engineers)
Fish habitat permit (ADF&G)
Land leases or easements (ADNR, private landowners)
Coastal zone consistency review (ADNR)
Water right (ADNR)
SHPO review
APC permitting specialists will compile the environment information obtained in Phase II into
resource assessment documents as required by the various permitting agencies.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 8 of 19 7/21/2010
APC will prepare the final design documents in-house using its staff civil, mechanical, and
electrical engineers, who all have extensive experience in hydroelectric development. These
engineers designed APC’s South Fork Hydroelectric Project which entered service in 2005, as
well as APC’s Kasidaya Creek Hydroelectric Project which entered service in October 2008.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
During Phases II and III, APC proposes to provide quarterly reports to AEA regarding the status
of the work and use of the grant funds. APC has provided similar reports to AEA and other
grant funding agencies in the past several years on other projects, and has established the
necessary procedures for producing the reports expeditiously.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
Site Control – APC does not yet have development rights on land to be occupied by part of the
transmission line and access road. We are working with the private land owners to negotiate
leases, easements, or sales.
Seismic – Project components will be designed appropriately for seismic activity, since the
Project will be located in a moderate-risk seismic zone. Structures will be buried as much as
possible to minimize seismic impacts.
Underground Construction – The Project does not include a significant amount of underground
construction, which can be fraught with cost overrun potential. Geotechnical investigations will
be conducted at the dam and powerhouse areas to provide an adequate level of knowledge about
ground conditions at those sites.
Inclement Weather – Working conditions in the dam area are very harsh during the winter. The
proposed schedule assumes no work on the dam and upper portions of the penstock during the
December-March period.
Environmental Opposition – APC is aware that some Haines area resident may oppose Project
development, primarily because the proposed road could increase access into the Chilkoot
valley, and because of perceived impacts from the minor flow modifications that would occur in
the Chilkoot River. APC believes the environmental impacts will be insignificant or can be
prevented or adequately mitigated. APC will meet regularly with concerned citizens to address
any issues with the Project, with the intent of reaching a favorable concensus. In our meetings
to date, some Haines citizens have asked us to consider development of Schubee Lake as an
alternative; APC conducted a site visit to Schubee Lake in 2009, and will conduct a
reconnaissance study of that sites potential as indicated in a separate grant application.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 9 of 19 7/21/2010
SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of
the RFA.
The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to
undertake with grant funds.
If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project provide a
plan and grant budget form for completion of each phase.
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for
an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases
are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
4.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available.
Discuss the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be
available for the market to be served by your project.
Potential Energy Resource: HL&P’s investigations of the Project in the 1990s were for a
development to supply power only to Haines. They ultimately selected a preliminary design with
an installed capacity of 6 MW and a potential annual generation of 35 GWh.
APC believes the arrangement proposed by HL&P could be undersized with regard to the
available water resource and the current load conditions. With the HL&P arrangement, there
would be a large amount of water spilled during the summer months. APC believes that it may be
economical to utilize the spilled water, either by a larger installed capacity, a larger reservoir, or
both. APC estimates the largest practical reservoir would have a storage capacity of 9,000 acre-
feet and a maximum water level at El 2,325, which could support an installed capacity of 15 MW
and an annual generation of about 50 GWh. APC proposes to conduct an economic sizing of the
project as part of its Phase II work. The Project construction cost indicated in this application is
based on an installed capacity of 12.0 MW.
Pros: This project has enough storage and head for a resource that will provide for future load
growth in ULC for many years to come. This would eliminate diesel use except for outages and
possibly shutdown for maintenance of the hydro project. Other potential hydro sites in the area
have much less generation potential. APC is not aware of any feasible wind, tidal, wave,
geothermal or other renewable energy sites in the area.
Compared to diesel generation, the Project will have the following advantages:
less expensive to operate than diesel (lower O&M);
no need to purchase fuel;
no air emissions;
fewer hazardous substances;
no particulate matter emissions;
can come on-line after a power outage almost immediately, but diesel can’t;
lower and more stable electric rates for customers
Cons: As with all hydroelectric projects, the initial cost of development is much higher than for
diesel generation. In addition, there may be environmental impacts associated with the Project,
such as the access and transmission route through a portion of the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve
and minor modifications of the flow in the Chilkoot River. The FERC licensing process will
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 10 of 19 7/21/2010
increase costs for this project.
4.2 Existing Energy System
4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Energy System
Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about
the number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation.
The existing ULC energy system configuration is as follows:
Unit Type Capacity, kW Efficiency, kWh/gal Age, years
Goat Lake Hydro (storage) 4,000 N.A. 11
Dewey Lakes Hydro (storage) 943 N.A. 106
Lutak Hydro (run of river)285 N.A. 9
10-Mile(1) Hydro (run of river)600 N.A. 8
Kasidaya Hydro (run of river)3,000 N.A. 0
Skagway #6 Diesel 855 14.69 22
Skagway #7 Diesel 1,100 14.80 12
Skagway #8 Diesel 500 14.89 17
Skagway #9 Diesel (refurbished)930 ? <1
Haines #1 Diesel 800 12.64 39
Haines #2 Diesel 1265 12.93 25
Haines #3 Diesel 1600 14.92 19
Haines #4 Diesel 2865 12.83 13
(1) APC purchased power from Southern Energy’s 10-Mile hydro project until 2002. Purchases resumed in 2008.
Haines and Skagway are interconnected by a 15-mile-long, 34.5-kV submarine cable with a
capacity of approximately 20 MW. Skagway and Dyea are connected by a 7.3-mile long 7.2-kV
distribution line, and Haines and the IPEC system are connected by a 10-mile long 12.47-kV
distribution line.
4.2.2 Existing Energy Resources Used
Briefly discuss your understanding of the existing energy resources. Include a brief discussion
of any impact the project may have on existing energy infrastructure and resources.
APC’s ULC system is primarily hydroelectric generation with diesel backup. In recent years
diesel has been needed for peaking operations and at the end of some long winters. APC is
evaluating another hydroelectric project near Haines (Connelly Lake Hydro) to supplement the
ULC resources to eliminate the current diesel generation. That project should also allow for
significant load growth in the ULC system.
The Project is intended to provide power to the cruise ships that visit Skagway each year from
May through September. This project would not have an impact on the existing energy (APC)
resources which are solely dedicated to providing power for the residential and commercial
customers of ULC. The existing energy resources can in no way handle even one cruise ship at
this time. The Project would not replace or share the load with any existing generating
resources. The Project could provide backup renewable energy for the ULC system in the
event of an emergency, e.g. an extended outage of the Goat Lake hydro project.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 11 of 19 7/21/2010
The Project will be able to supply loads in any of the interconnected communities in the ULC
system, as well as IPEC loads in the Chilkat valley. Currently, it is sometimes necessary for APC
to use diesel generation to supplement the hydro generation, either due to low streamflows or
outages. Load increases and expansion of the system have exacerbated this situation. When
diesel generation is required, electric rates increase and cause fluctuations in customer energy
bills that can be difficult to anticipate or adjust for. Adding more hydro capacity to the ULC grid
will alleviate fluctuating electric rates for customers.
If the Project is configured to provide shore power to cruise ships docked at Haines or Skagway,
the cruise lines would see their operating costs decrease, which would be beneficial for that
industry, which in turn would help the communities because the local economy is currently so
dependent on tourism.
The Project could provide in the near-term an incentive for additional economic development in
the Haines and Skagway areas because there would be a surplus of economical power available.
4.3 Proposed System
Include information necessary to describe the system you are intending to develop and address
potential system design, land ownership, permits, and environmental issues.
4.3.1 System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
Optimum installed capacity
Anticipated capacity factor
Anticipated annual generation
Anticipated barriers
Basic integration concept
Delivery methods
Renewable energy technology specific to location – The Project will be a conventional
hydroelectric project. Hydroelectric technology is well developed, and provides most of the
renewable energy generated in the world in general, and Southeast Alaska in particular. The
Project will utilize the abundant rainfall and steep topography afforded by the Connelly Lake
basin to generate renewable energy. Other hydro sites may exist in the area but are much
smaller than the Project and would have significantly less energy potential. Tidal generating
technology may be applicable to the area but is considered too experimental and expensive to
compete with the Project. Wind, biomass, wave, and other renewable technologies are not
suitable to the area.
Optimum installed capacity – The optimum installed capacity is estimated to be 6.0-15 MW. An
economic sizing of the installed capacity will be accomplished during the proposed Phase II
studies.
Anticipated capacity factor – The potential capacity factor is estimated to be from 38% (at 15
MW) to 67% (at 6.0 MW).
Anticipated annual generation – The potential annual generation is estimated to be from 35 GWh
(at 6.0 MW) to 50 GWh (at 15 MW).
Anticipated barriers – There are no known technological barriers to development of the Project.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 12 of 19 7/21/2010
Basic integration concept – The ULC system is already a hydro-based system with diesel backup.
Integrating another hydro project to the system will not present any difficulties. The run-of-river
hydros in the system (Lutak, Kasidaya) will be dispatched first, followed by storage hydros (Goat
Lake and Connelly Lake). Generally, the storage hydros will be dispatched based on their then-
current storage levels and operating characteristics. In addition, one or both of the storage
hydros will always be on-line to provide system stability.
Delivery methods – The Project will be interconnected to the ULC grid at Lutak Inlet by a 14-
mile long, 34.5 kV transmission line that is considered part of the Project and included in Project
costs.
4.3.2 Land Ownership
Identify potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the
project or how you intend to approach land ownership and access issues.
The project is primarily on State of Alaska Lands (Haines State Forest, Chilkat Bald Eagle
Preserve), with some small private landholdings along the access road/transmission line route. A
land lease has been applied for from DNR and from the Haines State Forest. Private land
owners are currently being negotiated with.
4.3.3 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address
outstanding permit issues.
List of applicable permits
Anticipated permitting timeline
Identify and discussion of potential barriers
Applicable Permits:
FERC Preliminary Permit
404 permit (Corps of Engineers)
Water right (ADNR)
State land easement (ADNR)
Coastal zone consistency review (ADNR-DCOM)
Fish habitat permit (ADF&G)
State Parks Permit
SHPO review.
Permitting Timeline: Permit applications will be filed with the various agencies in Phase III
after completion of the necessary resource assessments in Phase II (accept for the FERC
Preliminary Permit, which will be applied for in Phase II). We currently estimate that permits
applications and FERC license application (Phase III) will be filed in late 2013 and the permits
and FERC license will be received by winter 2015-2016.
Potential Permitting Barriers: APC is not currently aware of any permitting issues that would
preclude development of the Project. Permitting barriers may become known as the Phase II and
Phase III work progresses.
4.3.4 Environmental
Address whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will
be addressed:
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 13 of 19 7/21/2010
Threatened or Endangered species
Habitat issues
Wetlands and other protected areas
Archaeological and historical resources
Land development constraints
Telecommunications interference
Aviation considerations
Visual, aesthetics impacts
Identify and discuss other potential barriers
Threatened and endangered species: APC is not aware of any threatened and endangered species
in the Project area. APC expects to conduct field studies during Phase II regarding threatened
and endangered species, but impacts are not anticipated.
Habitat Issues: Habitat surveys were conducted by ADF&G in the 1990’s for fish in Connelly
Lake and in the Chilkoot River near the lake outlet stream’s confluence with the river. No fish
were found in the lake or using the outlet stream. The Chilkoot River provides anadromous
rearing and spawning habitat, and fish surveys and analyses are planned during Phase II to
assess any impacts from varying flows due to the project; APC believes the impacts will be minor
because the flow fluctuations in the summer will be small compared to the natural flow in the
Chilkoot River. In the winter, the project will likely increase the natural flow of the Chilkoot
River, which could be beneficial. Wildlife surveys during Phase II will be conducted to assess the
current use of the area, particularly by mountain goats; significant impacts are not expected.
Wetlands: The Project will affect some wetlands, including Connelly Lake and possibly small
muskeg areas along the penstock route. However, no significant impacts are expected.
Archaeological Resources: Archeological surveys will be conducted during Phase II. No
significant impacts to archeological or cultural resources are expected.
Land Development Constraints: No land development constraints are known at this time. Lease
agreements with the state will specify any necessary mitigation requirements for the Project
features. APC would expect to provide gates on the access road to limit unauthorized access.
Telecommunications Interference: The 34.5 kV transmission line will not create interference with
telecommunications.
Aviation Considerations: The project does not pass by an airport and the wood poles will only be
about 45 feet in height, well below any flight pattern. The ROW for the transmission line is
bordered by forest on both sides, and trees in the area are generally at least as tall as the poles.
Visual, Aesthetic Impacts: Wood poles will be placed approximately 300 feet apart. Much of the
route was cleared for a logging road (RS 2477) into the valley and can still be used after some
repairs and tree trimming. The area is not easily accessed so that the project would not be
visible from Chilkoot Lake or other publicly accessible areas. This project will not be in a
visually or aesthetically special viewshed.
Other Potential Barriers: No other potential barriers are known at this time.
4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 14 of 19 7/21/2010
(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
Anticipated Project costs:
Phase I...........................................$0
Phase II..............................$585,000
Phase III.............................$715,000
Phase IV........................$32,000,000
Total..............................$33,300,000
Requested Grant Funding: $1,040,000 (80% of total cost for Phase II and Phase III)
Applicant Matching Funds: $260,000 (20% of total cost for Phase II and Phase III)
Other Funding Sources: Other funding sources have not been identified at this time. APC will
provide the $260,000 in matching funds for Phase II and Phase III from its normal operating
funds.
Projected Capital Cost of Renewable Energy System: $32,000,000 (assumed to be the cost of
Phase IV Construction)
Projected Development Cost of Proposed Renewable Energy System: $1,285,000 (assumed to be
the sum of Phase I, II, and III costs).
These estimated costs, reflect the applicant’s knowledge and experience at building hydroelectric
projects.
Phase II: Project Costs for Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design
Conceptual Design and Optimization ....................................................... $125,000
FERC Licensing .......................................................................................... $50,000
Stream Gaging (Chilkoot River by USGS, Connelly Creek by AP&T) ....... $75,000
Geotechnical Investigations ...................................................................... $100,000
Fish Surveys & Analysis ............................................................................$125,000
Wildlife Surveys ............................................................................................$25,000
Botanical Survey ......................................................................................... $25,000
Wetland Survey .............................................................................................$20,000
Archaeological Survey .................................................................................$30,000
Water Quality Testing ................................................................................. $10,000
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 15 of 19 7/21/2010
Total For Phase II: ................................................................................... $585,000
Phase III: Project Costs for Final Design & Permitting
Permit Applications and Processing ........................................................... $50,000
Post-License Application Activity, Pre-License Issue ................................. $15,000
Stream Gaging (O&M for 2 years) ............................................................. $50,000
Penstock Alignment Survey ......................................................................... $50,000
Final Design Engineering ......................................................................... $550,000
Total For Phase III: .................................................................................$715,000
Phase IV: Project Costs for Construction
Construction Management ........................................................................ $500,000
Mobilization ........................................................................................... $1,000,000
Access Roads and Bridges ..................................................................... $1,500,000
Dam and Reservoir ................................................................................ $8,000,000
Penstock ................................................................................................. $9,000,000
Powerhouse ............................................................................................ $7,000,000
Transmission .......................................................................................... $5,000,000
Total For Phase IV: ........................................................................................$32,000,000
4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Include anticipated O&M costs for new facilities constructed and how these would be funded by
the applicant.
(Note: Operational costs are not eligible for grant funds however grantees are required to meet
ongoing reporting requirements for the purpose of reporting impacts of projects on the
communities they serve.)
The O&M cost for the Project is estimated to be approximately $500,000 per year (2009 cost
level). APC is not requesting grant funding for O&M costs.
4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
APC is developing this project to supply power to APC’s ULC system customers and to cruise
lines that visit Haines and Skagway during the summer tourist season. APC expects that the
rates to its commercial and residential customers would not increase due to Project development.
APC projects that a sales price of $0.20/kWh would be attractive to the cruise lines and the
revenue from those sales would provide a positive net income to APC and the State.
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
Please see the attached Cost Worksheet.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 16 of 19 7/21/2010
SECTION 5– PROJECT BENEFIT
Explain the economic and public benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings,
and how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project.
The benefits information should include the following:
Potential annual fuel displacement (gal and $) over the lifetime of the evaluated
renewable energy project
Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase Agreement price,
RCA tariff, or cost based rate)
Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits)
Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable
energy subsidies or programs that might be available)
Discuss the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project
Potential annual fuel displacement: The potential Project generation is about 45 GWh per year,
equivalent to 3,300,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually. Over a 50 year period the Project could
potentially save 165 million gallons of diesel fuel. Actual fuel displacement will depend on future
load growth. APC’s most recent purchase of diesel fuel for Haines was at a price of $2.69/gal,
with an additional $0.15/gal in taxes. Current fuel prices may be unusually low because of the
current global economic slowdown. APC’s economic analysis assumes that fuel prices will
escalate at 3.75% per year for the next 20 years, then hold constant, which results in an average
fuel price of $6.36/gal for the assumed 50 year life. Thus the potential lifetime fuel displacement
is valued at $1,050,000,000 (not discounted for inflation).
Anticipated annual revenue: Revenues would be from 1) sales to residential and commercial
customers at APC’s regulated rates, and 2) sales to cruise ships docking in either Haines or
Skagway. Power purchase agreements with cruise lines would be negotiated that would provide
power to the cruise lines at a cost less than self-generation; sale of 9,000 MWh/year at a rate of
$0.20/kWh in the first year is assumed for APC’s economic analysis. Note that this sale volume is
much less than the potential generation. Even at that low volume, the cruise ship sales would
provide a positive revenue stream. Over the 50-year life of the Project, the total revenue from
sales to the cruise lines is estimated to be $187,000,000. Thus the Project has the potential to
provide a positive return to the State on its grant investment, and could even be viewed as a
revenue source for the State.
Potential additional annual incentives: Not estimated.
Potential additional revenue streams : Not estimated.
Non-economic public benefits to Alaskans: A main non-economic benefit of the Project is the
reduction of emissions from diesel generation by cruise ships while docked in Skagway. The
potential Project generation is equivalent to a reduction in emissions of about 37,000 tons per
year. These environmental benefits will maintain Haines and Skagway’s desirability as a cruise
ship destination, which will provide indirect economic benefits to the people of Alaska.
Another non-economic benefit is improving the reliability of the ULC system. Currently, Haines
is supplied primarily by generation near Skagway that is transmitted over a 12-year old
submarine cable. The cable is partially located in an area of loose marine sediment that is
known to be unstable during seismic events. The Project would provide hydro generation to
Haines in the event the submarine cable becomes unusable.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 17 of 19 7/21/2010
Other benefits: In the short term the local economy would benefit due to local hire for
construction labor, materials for construction, and lease or rental of equipment. In the long
term, there would be employment for O&M of the Project.
SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY
Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable.
Include at a minimum:
Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered.
How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations for the life of the project
Identification of operational issues that could arise.
A description of operational costs including on-going support for any back-up or existing
systems that may be require to continue operation
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits
APC operates and maintains all of the existing ULC generation, transmission, and distribution
system to provide a high degree of reliability. The Project will be integrated into the ULC system,
and will be operated and maintained in a similar manner.
With regular maintenance, a conventional hydroelectric project should have a minimum life of 50
years; there are many operating projects over 100 years old. Some components may need
replacement or refurbishment during that time, but replacement of major items resulting in
significant costs are not expected, since conventional hydroelectric equipment and materials are
robust and commercialized. O&M costs are expected to be about $500,000 per year (2009 cost
level). Operation and maintenance costs will be funded by revenues from the sale of power from
the project.
APC will provide whatever reporting of savings and benefits that AEA considers appropriate.
SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS
Discuss what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed
with work once your grant is approved.
Tell us what you may have already accomplished on the project to date and identify other grants
that may have been previously awarded for this project and the degree you have been able to
meet the requirements of previous grants.
APC has considered development of the Connelly Lake site for many years. In fact, it was the
main alternative to development of the Goat Lake site. Over the years, APC has conducted
several site visits to Connelly Lake and other nearby potential hydro sites in order to confirm the
technical and economic superiority of the Project. In the last couple of years, APC has been
holding public meetings and one-on-one communications with Haines residents to provide
information about the Project and develop local support.
In 2010, FERC made a jurisdictional determination that APC would need to file for a preliminary
permit and eventually file for a license on this project.
APC intends to proceed with the proposed Phase II work in 2011. There have been no State or
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 18 of 19 7/21/2010
Federal grants awarded to the Project after the Round III AEA funding that was awarded was
subsequently cancelled by the Governor.
SECTION 8– LOCAL SUPORT
Discuss what local support or possible opposition there may be regarding your project. Include
letters of support from the community that would benefit from this project.
APC has conducted a several public meetings in Haines to explain our intent with this project.
APC is aware that some Haines area resident may oppose Project development, primarily
because the proposed road could increase access into the Chilkoot valley, and because of
perceived impacts from the flow modifications that would occur in the Chilkoot River because of
Project operation. APC believes the environmental impacts will be minor or can be prevented or
adequately mitigated. APC will meet regularly with concerned citizens to address any issues with
the Project, with the intent of reaching a favorable consensus. In our meetings to date, some
Haines citizens have asked us to consider development of Schubee Lake as an alternative; APC
conducted a site visit to Schubee Lake in 2009, and will conduct a reconnaissance study of that
site’s potential as indicated in a separate grant application.
SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET
Tell us how much you want in grant funds Include any investments to date and funding sources,
how much is being requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an
applicant.
Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget3.doc
Investments to date: APC has conducted several sites visits over the years and has
reconsidered the conceptual design for the project. The total cost for that work is estimated to
be on the order of $10,000, paid out of APC’s general operating budget.
Amount requested in grant funds: $1,040,000 (for Phase II & III work)
Additional investment by APC: AP&T will provide matching funds in the amount of $260,000
for Phase II and III work (20% match).
See the attached GrantBudget3.doc for a breakdown of the costs by milestones.
APPENDICES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Cost Worksheet
2. Budget Form & Budget Instructions
3. Letters of Support
4. Authorized Signers Form
5. Corporate Resolution with Certificate of Good Standing and
Certificate of Public Convenience & Necessity
6. Resumes
7. Project Maps
8. Project Description
9. Project Schedule
10. Reconnaissance Information
11. Permit Applications and Coastal Zone Questionnaire
12. Photographs of Project Area
13. ULC Grid Infrastructure One-Line Diagrams
[COST WORKSHEET]
Renewable Energy Fund Round 4
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA11-005 Application Cost Worksheet Page 1 7-21-10
Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project
phases. The level of information detail varies according to phase requirements.
1. Renewable Energy Source
The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a
sustainable basis.
Annual average resource availability. 45 GWh maximum annual hydroelectric output
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel)
2. Existing Energy Generation and Usage
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt 1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 7 hydro units, 8 diesel
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 8,828 kW hydro, 9,915 kW diesel
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Hydro and diesel
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other Varies
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Varies
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $125,000 approx.
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $40,000 approx., excluding fuel
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] 27,440,000 kWh (2007)
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 100,000 gal/yr (avg.)
Other
iii. Peak Load 4,900 kW
iv. Average Load 2,800 kW
v. Minimum Load 1,500 kW
vi. Efficiency Varies
vii. Future trends Moderate growth
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
1 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 4
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA11-005 Application Cost Worksheet Page 2 7-21-10
3. 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]
12,000 kW
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 45,000,000 kWh max.
ii. Heat [MMBtu]
c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
iv. Other
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $32,000,000 (est. cost of Phase IV)
b) Development cost $1,300,000 (est. cost of Phase I, II, and III)
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $500,000 (2009 est.)
d) Annual fuel cost No fuel cost
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity 650,000 gal/yr (by cruise ships, increasing as ULC loads grow)
ii. Heat
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $3.00/gal (2009), 3.75% escalation for 20 years
c) Other economic benefits
d) Alaska public benefits Reduced diesel emissions; reduced PCE (not calculated)
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale $0.20/kWh (sales to cruise ships)
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio 1.9
Payback (years) Not calculated
[GRANT BUDGET FORM]
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round IV Grant Budget Form 7-21-10 Milestone or Task Phase II – Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Stream Gage Installation August-Sept. 2011 $60,000 $15,000 Cash, labor & benefits $75,000 FERC Preliminary Permit Application October 2011 $400 $100 $500 Conceptual Design and Optimization December 2011 $100,000 $25,000 Cash, labor & benefits $125,000 FERC Process: Scoping Document 1 & 2, NOI, Study Plan 1 & 2, License Application Spring 2012 thru Winter 2013-2014 $39,600 $9,900 $49,500 Geotechnical Investigations October 2012 $80,000 $20,000 Cash $100,000 Fish Surveys and Analysis Summer 2011 – Fall 2012 $100,000 $25,000 Cash $125,000 Wildlife Surveys Summer 2012 – Summer 2013 $20,000 $5,000 Cash $25,000 Botanical Surveys Summer 2012 $20,000 $5,000 Cash $25,000 Wetland Surveys Summer 2012 $16,000 $4,000 Cash $20,000 Heritage Resource Survey Summer 2012 $24,000 $6,000 Cash $30,000 Water Quality Testing Summer 2011 – Summer 2013 $8,000 $2,000 Cash $10,000 TOTALS $468,000 $117,000 $585,000 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $140,000 $35,000 Direct labor & benefits $175,000 Travel & Per Diem $8,000 $2,000 Cash $10,000 Equipment $ $ $ Materials & Supplies $ $ $ Contractual Services $320,000 $80,000 Cash $400,000 Construction Services $ $ $ Other $ $ $ TOTALS $468,000 $117,000 $585,000
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round IV Grant Budget Form 7-21-10 Milestone or Task Phase III – Permitting and Final Design Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Permit Applications Preparation and Processing August-Sept. 2013 $40,000 $10,000 Cash, labor & benefits $50,000 Post-License Application Activity, Pre-License Issue December 2015 $12,000 $3,000 Cash Labor & benefits $15,000 Stream Gaging (data collection for 2 years) October 2013 $40,000 $10,000 Cash, labor & benefits $50,000 Penstock Alignment Survey October 2012 $40,000 $10,000 Cash, labor & benefits $50,000 Final Design December 2013 $440,000 $110,000 Cash $550,000 TOTALS $572,000 $143,000 $715,000 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $432,000 $108,000 Direct labor & benefits $525,000 Travel & Per Diem $20,000 $5,000 Cash $25,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0 Contractual Services $120,000 $30,000 Cash $150,000 Construction Services $0 $0 $0 Other $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $572,000 $143,000 $715,000
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round IV Grant Budget Form 7-21-10 Project Milestones that should be addressed in Budget Proposal Reconnaissance Feasibility Design and Permitting Construction 1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation. 2. Resource identification and analysis 3. Land use, permitting, and environmental analysis 5. Preliminary design analysis and cost 4. Cost of energy and market analysis 5. Simple economic analysis 6. Final report and recommendations 1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation. 2. Detailed energy resource analysis 3. Identification of land and regulatory issues, 4. Permitting and environmental analysis 5. Detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets 6. Assessment of alternatives 7. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate 8. Detailed economic and financial analysis 9, Conceptual business and operations plans 10. Final report and recommendations 1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation for planning and design 2. Permit applications (as needed) 3. Final environmental assessment and mitigation plans (as needed) 4. Resolution of land use, right of way issues 5. Permit approvals 6. Final system design 7. Engineers cost estimate 8. Updated economic and financial analysis 9. Negotiated power sales agreements with approved rates 10. Final business and operational plan 1. Confirmation that all design and feasibility requirements are complete. 2. Completion of bid documents 3. Contractor/vendor selection and award 4. Construction Phases – Each project will have unique construction phases, limitations, and schedule constraints which should be identified by the grantee 5. Integration and testing 6. Decommissioning old systems 7. Final Acceptance, Commissioning and Start-up 8. Operations Reporting
Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
RFA AEA11-005 Grant Budget Instructions Page 1 of 5 7-21-10
Grant Budget Instructions
NOTICE TO GRANTEES
Reimbursement to a Grantee under this program is on a cost reimbursable basis. In
accordance with the terms of the grant a Grantee is required to submit certified requests
for reimbursements that document commitments and expenditures and demonstrate
meeting milestones identified in the grant.
A proposed reimbursement schedule tied to completion of milestones must be identified
in the applicant’s proposal. The Alaska Energy Authority (“AEA” or “Authority”) will n ot
approve a reimbursement schedule that does not reflect costs or commitments tied to
the accomplishment of milestones identified in the grant. The final reimbursement
schedule is subject to negotiation and will be incorporated into the grant agreement.
The Authority may authorize a percentage of grant funds, up to 20% depending on the
type of grant, as an advance reimbursement at the start up of the grant.
The Authority may also withhold up to 20% of the total grant subject to completion of the
project and submission of final reports and other documentation that may be required by
the grant.
A Grantee is required to account for and document all expenditures of grant and
matching funds including documentation of expenditures on any advanced
reimbursement. All requests for reimbursement are subject to audit by the Authority.
The Grantee is also required to comply with 2.AAC.45.010, the State Single Audit
regulations.
1. Budget Form
Information concerning the proposed grant budget needs to be provided on the Grant Budget
Form. The Grantee must tie their budget request to the proposed milestones they propose in
their application. Examples of milestones for each project phase are included with the
budget form and in Section 2 of the RFA.
For the purposes of determining potential cash-flow and a reimbursement schedule Grantees
should use the form to identify the proposed date that the milestone would be met, the
anticipated amount of grant funds to be expended to meet that milestone, and the amount
and type of matching resources they intend to apply to that milestone.
The bottom part of the form includes the allowable Budget Categories and is intended to be a
summary of types of cost for each phase of the grant.
2. Allowable Costs
Allowable costs for a grant include all reasonable and ordinary costs for direct labor and
benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual services, construction services, and other
direct costs identified that are necessary for and incurred as a direct result of the project.
Grant Budget Instructions Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
RFA AEA11-005 Grant Budget Instructions Page 2 of 5 7-21-10
A cost is reasonable and ordinary if, in its nature or amount, it does not exceed that which would
be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was
made to incur the costs.
Allowable costs under this grant include all reasonable and ordinary costs for direct labor &
benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual services, construction services, and other
direct costs identified and approved in the Project budget that are necessary for and incurred as
a direct result of the Project and are consistent with the requirements of the grant agreement.
A cost is reasonable and ordinary if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which
would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the
decision was made to incur the costs.
Allowable costs are only those costs that are directly related to activities authorized by the Grant
Agreement and necessary for the Project. The categories of costs and additional limits or
restrictions are listed below:
a. Direct Labor & Benefits
Include salaries, wages, and employee benefits of the Grantee’s employees for that portion
of those costs attributable to the time actually devoted by each employee to, and necessary
for the Project. Direct labor costs do not include bonuses, stock options, other payments
above base compensation and employee benefits, severance payments or other termination
allowances paid to the Grantee’s employees.
b. Travel, Meals, or Per Diem
Include reasonable travel expenses necessary for the Project. These include necessary
transportation and meal expenses or per diem of Grantee employees for which expenses
the employees are reimbursed under the Grantee’s standard written operating practice for
travel and per diem or the current State of Alaska Administrative Manual for employee
travel.
c. Equipment
Include costs of acquiring, transporting, leasing, installing, operating, and maintaining
equipment necessary for the Project, including sales and use taxes. Equipment owned by
the Grantee is to be charged to the project at the monthly rates contained in the Data Quest
Blue Book. The rates for equipment owned by the Grantee for less than a month’s duration
are to be computed on an hourly charge determined by dividing the monthly rate by 176.
Equipment rented by the Grantee can be charged to the grant at actual invoiced charge
rates, subject to a maximum amount equal to the hourly rates contained in the Data Quest
Blue Book. The Authority’s Project Manager must approve all equipment charge rates to be
used by the Grantee. The Data Quest Blue Book is available to the AEA Project Managers
and grantees may contact them for current allowable rates.
Grant Budget Instructions Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
RFA AEA11-005 Grant Budget Instructions Page 3 of 5 7-21-10
Subject to prior approval of the Authority’s Project Manager, costs or expenses necessary to
repair or replace equipment damage or losses incurred in performance of work under the
grant may be allowed. However, damage or losses that result from the Grantee’s
employees, officer’s, or contractor’s gross negligence, willful misconduct, or criminal conduct
will not be allowed.
d. Materials and Supplies
Include costs of material, office expenses, communications, computers, and supplies
purchased or leased by the Grantee necessary for the Project.
e. Contractual services
Include the Grantee’s cost of contract services necessary for the Project. Services may
include costs of contract feasibility studies, project management services, engineering and
design, environmental studies, field studies, and surveys for the project as well as costs
incurred to comply with ecological, environmental, and health and safety laws.
f. Construction Services
For construction projects this includes the Grantee’s cost for construction contracts, labor,
equipment, materials, insurance, bonding, and transportation necessary for the Project.
Work performed by the Grantee’s employees during construction may be budgeted under
direct labor and benefits. Contracted project management or engineering may be budgeted
under contractual services and major equipment purchases made by the Grantee may be
budgeted under equipment.
g. Other Direct Costs
In addition to the above the following expenses necessary for the Project may be allowed.
• Net insurance premiums paid for insurance required for the grant Project;
• Costs of permits and licenses for the grant Project;
• Non-l itigation legal costs for the Project directly relating to the activities; in this
paragraph, “non-litigation legal costs” includes expenses for the Grantee’s legal staff and
outside legal counsel performing non-litigation legal services;
• Office lease/rental payments;
• Other direct costs for the Project directly relating to the activities and identified in the
grant documents; and/or
• Land or other real property or reasonable and ordinary costs related to interests in land
including easements, right-of-ways, or other defined interests.
3. Specific Expenditures not allowed
Ineligible expenditures include costs for overhead, lobbying, entertainment , alcohol, litigation,
payments for civil or criminal restitution, judgments, interest on judgments, penalties, fines,
costs not necessary for and directly related to the grant Project, or any costs incurred before the
beginning date of the grant as indicated on the signature page.
Grant Budget Instructions Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
RFA AEA11-005 Grant Budget Instructions Page 4 of 5 7-21-10
Overhead costs described in this section include:
• salaries, wages, applicable employee benefits, and business-related expenses of the
Grantee’s employees performing functions not directly related to the grant Project;
• office and other expenses not directly related to the grant Project; and
• costs and expenses of administration, accounting, human resources, training, property
and income taxes, entertainment, self-insurance, and warehousing.
4. Match and Cost Sharing
If the Applicant is providing a match, it is should be detailed either as a specific dollar amount or
as a percentage of the total project budget. The type and amount of matching contributions
should be discussed in the application under section two.
Cost sharing or matching is that portion of the Project costs not borne by the Authority. The
Authority will accept all contributions, including cash and in-kind, as part of the Applicants’ cost
sharing or matching when such contributions meet the following criteria:
• Are provided for in the Project budget;
• Are verifiable from the Applicant’s records;
• Third party costing sharing contributions are verifiable (with a letter of intent or similar
document);
• Are not included as contributions for another state or federally assisted project or
program (i.e., the same funds cannot be counted as match for more than one program);
• Are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of the Project or
program objectives;
• Are allowable costs;
• Are not paid by the State or federal government under another award, except for
authorized by the State or federal statute to be used for cost sharing or matching;
• Must be incurred within the grant eligible time period.
Any match proposed with the application will be required in the Grant award and the Grantee will
be required to document the use of the proposed matching funds or in-kind contributions with
their request for reimbursement.
Previous Renewable Energy Fund grants will not be counted as match.
5. Valuing In-Kind Support as Match
If the Applicant chooses to use in-kind support as some; or, its entire match, the values of those
contributions will be reviewed by the Authority at the time the budget is approved. The values will
be determined as follows:
• The value of real property will be the current fair market value as determined by an
independent third party or a valuation that is mutually agreed to by the Authority and the
Applicant and approved in the grant budget.
• The value assessed to Applicant equipment or supplies will not exceed the approved
equipment rates or fair market value of the supplies at the time the grant is approved or
amended.
Grant Budget Instructions Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
RFA AEA11-005 Grant Budget Instructions Page 5 of 5 7-21-10
Equipment usage will be valued based on approved usage rates that are determined in accordance
with the item c. above. Rates paid will not exceed the fair market value of the equipment if
purchased.
Rates for donated personal services will be based on rates paid for similar work and skill level in the
recipient’s organization. If the required skills are not found in the recipient organization, rates will
be based on rates paid for similar work in the labor market. Fringe benefits that are reasonable,
allowable, and allocable may be included in the valuation.
Transportation and lodging provided by the Applicant for non-local labor will not exceed the
commercial rates that may be available within the community or region.
6. Grant Disbursements
Applicants are reminded that they must request disbursement of grant funds in the form and
format required by the Authority with appropriate back-up documentation and certifications.
This format will be provided by the Authority.
The back-up documentation must demonstrate the total costs incurred are allowable, and reflect
the amount being billed. Documentation must include:
• A summary of direct labor costs supported by timesheets or other valid time record to
document proof of payment;
• Travel and per diem reimbursement documentation;
• Contractor or vendor payment requests; and
• Invoices.
Payment of grant funds will be subject to the Applicant complying with its matching contribution
requirements of the proposed grant.
Payment of grant funds will be made by AEA to the Grantee within 30 days of receipt of a
properly completed, supported, and certified Reimbursement Request.
[LETTERS OF SUPPORT]
MUNICIPALI'IJ' O F SKAGWAY
GATEVVAY'TO TTIE GOLD RUSLI O}: "98"
POST OFFICE l]OX 415
SKAGVVAY, ALT\S KA 99S4tI
(907) 983-72e7 (PHONE)
(90?) 983-215i 0-'A,\)
I 3 .lune 2008
Steven I-i. Haagenson
Alaslia Energy A utlrori t.v
813 West Nor-tliem Lights Boulevald
Anchorage. Alaslca 9950-l
Subjcct: Munic:ipal supl)oi't of (lonnelly l.iii';r': I-lyclrol)o\\/cl Pr-oict't
Dear Mr. Haagenson,
The lVlunicipality of Slcagway suppor-ts Alasl<a Power'&'I'elepht.rrrc Conrpany's (r\l'&f) clesir.' to leusr'
or purchase land from the State o1'41aslca to develop a new hych-oelectt-ic gcneration pro.ject rrt
Connelly Lake.'l'his project is located in the Haines l3orough at a site founcl above Chill<oot l.,rl<c at
the lread of Lutal< Inlet.
As a Iicensed pLrblic Lltility in thc State o1'r\laska, AP&'l' provirics llower to the comnrunities in the
Upper Lynn Ca-nal thror-rgh an existing distlibution systum fed b-y hydr-oelcctlic ancl clir::sc) geirci'lrtiot.r
syslems. AP&'f has lead u successfirl effort in the lasl J3 years tr) r'ccluce tltc rcgiorr's titrpcndt'rtt on
diesel generated power. vvith sonrc 70% of power being ltroviderl to cltstonrcrs thloLrglr it-s
hydroel ectric lacil ities.
Development of the Connelly Lalce Hydropower Project rvould l'itt'ther reduce lJpper l.ynn (-;irnl's
dependence on fossil fuels forpowergeneration ancl ensure sr,r['{lcicnt enclg-y is availirirltr ii.rr'lrrtut'c
econonric growth within tlre regiou, AP&l is well lsrorvn in thc inclitstry lirr its innt,r'.rt.ir-tn irr
develcipmenl t-rl' small scule hydlopf)wer projt-cis.
Sincerely, .-,\
,-(tmau1!&L**
Thomas Cochr-an - Mayor'
Senatol Al berl I(ookesh
Representative lJill fhomas..tr.
Memo
To: Tom Bolen, Haines Borough Manager
From: Stephanie Scott, Energy & Sustainability Coordinator
Cc: Commissioners, Energy & Sustainability Commission
Date: January 21, 2009
Re : Recommendation to the Borough Assembly regarding the
Connelly Lake Hydro Electric Project proposal from Alaska
Power & Telephone (APT) before the Committee of the
Whole, January 21, 2009
The Energy & Sustainability Commission crafted the following recommendation
to the Assembly during its January 20, 2009 Commission meeting.
The Energy & Sustainability Commission recommends that the Assembly
support efforts by APT to secure funding to do additional design and data
gathering for hydro electric sources including but not limited to Connelly
Lake and Schubee Lake to help inform the public process prior to
permitting.
During debate following the making and seconding of the motion, “support” was
defined as “support for the grant and the uses of the grant.”
The motion carried 7 to 1. Commissioner Wackerman was absent, Commissioner
Holmes voted in the negative, and Commissioner Gonce accepted the Chairʼs
ruling that he had a conflict of interest and did not vote.
From: "Ady Milos" <a1milos@yahoo.com>
Date: January 29, 2009 3:23:10 PM AKST
To: <sscott@aptalaska.net>
Subject: Alaska Power & Telephone's Connelly Lake hydroelectric project
Dear Ms. Scott,
I am writing this to support Alaska Power & Telephone’s Connelly Lake hydroelectric
project.
AP&T has presented a plan they feel is feasible, environmentally sound, and will provide
Haines with more than three times the power it presently consumes during peak times in
winter. According to AP&T’s presentation to the Haines Energy Commission on
November 25th, 2008 the Connelly Lake site was chosen for its capacity, proximity to
Haines, and because it does not require an undersea cable – a link that, if broken, could
put Haines in the dark for several months. The project size is important so that AP&T can
sell excess power in other markets (i.e. Skagway, Canada, and cruise ships when docked,)
and therefore keep our power rates low.
You have already received some letters in opposition to this project. This vociferous
handful of opponents is ignoring a basic rule of economics – that every resource is
limited and has alternative uses. We can always wish for more wilderness, but by
developing this one low-impact hydroelectric project at Connelly Lake we can cut
hydrocarbon use in the Haines area by 30 to 50 percent. That’s less pollution in town, less
CO2 into the atmosphere, less oil burned, and therefore reduced chance of an oil spill as
less oil is transported in our marine environment. By constructing three miles of road, one
6300-foot penstock and a powerhouse we will realize an environmental net gain for the
Haines area.
And when Haines grows, or finds a new industry ( or port facility?) at its doorstep, the
existence of this ample source of power means cleaner, more energy-efficient growth.
The Chilkoot River Corridor is a beautiful and productive place, but not as untouched as
some folks would like to believe. Local loggers Don Turner and Duck Hess can both
testify that they helped log some large tracts of land at the upper end of the lake about 40
years ago, taking the logs out via a logging road along the north side of the lake – the
same roadbed that AP&T proposes repairing. That some folks are unaware of this is a
testament to the resiliency of the watershed.
During their presentation, AP&T explained how they met several environmental
challenges during construction of other projects in the Skagway area and on Prince of
Wales Island. It appears they are also ready to take every environmental precaution to
complete the Connelly Lake Project with a minimal impact. When completed it is likely
that none of the power project will be visible from the present DNR campground at the
lower end of Chilkoot Lake.
Therefore, I have no reservations about supporting AP&T as they work toward plentiful,
sustainable hydropower for Haines. And I’m convinced that after it is done, the Chilkoot
watershed will remain a beautiful and productive place.
Nearly everyone I speak with in Haines feels the same way.
Sincerely,
Stan & Ady Milos
Haines, Alaska.
From: "Marie DisBrow" <marie@wildernesswritings.com>
Date: January 31, 2009 12:03:05 PM AKST
To: <sscott@aptalaska.net>
Subject: re: Connelly Lake Project
Stephanie Scott, ESC Coordinator
Haines Borough
103 Third Avenue S.
P.O. Box1209
Haines, AK 99827
re: Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Dear Ms Scott:
As a resident of Lutak, I am writing to encourage you to support Alaska Power &
Telephone’s Connelly Lake hydroelectric project.
AP&T’s environmentally sound plan will provide Haines with over three times the power
presently consumed during winter peak times. According to AP&T’s presentation to the
Haines Energy Commission on November 25th, 2008, the Connelly Lake site was chosen
for its capacity, proximity to Haines, and because it does not require an undersea cable.
Just yesterday, both Skagway and Haines lost power when heavy snow caused trees to
contact the transmission line along the Klondike Highway. In spite of the Haines diesel-
fired generator, we were without electricity for several hours. If it becomes necessary to
use the diesel power plant for a long period of time, the rate could go from $0.07 per
kilowatt hour to over $0.23 per kilowatt hour—over three times the cost of hydroelectric
power, because of the high cost of fuel.
The project size is important so that AP&T can sell excess power in other markets (i.e.
Skagway, Canada, and cruise ships when docked) and therefore keep our power rates
low. It appears that AP&T is ready to take every environmental precaution to complete
the Connelly Lake Project with a minimal impact.
Sincerely,
Marie E. DisBrow
From: "Dave DisBrow" <dave@davedisbrow.com>
Date: February 2, 2009 12:30:37 AM AKST
To: <sscott@aptalaska.net>
Subject: Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Stephanie Scott, ESC Coordinator
Haines Borough
103 Third Avenue S.
P.O. Box1209
Haines, AK 99827
re: Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Dear Ms Scott:
I feel it is time to step to the plate and support Alaska Power & Telephone’s Connelly Lake hydroelectric
project. Being a resident of Lutak and doing without electric and or phone service until last year, I don't see
why anyone would want to go back to the dark side of living. Our present hydro power from AP&T's
undersea (Umbilical) cable from Skagway has a limited lifetime and regression is not a viable nor logical
option.
We now have a potential future for Haines, may I mention our deep harbor possibilities? Without a quality
and quantity source of clean electricity for the docks we would stand to lose this resource.
Governor Palin has set a goal..."This guide will help us move to a future where, ideally, 50 percent of
Alaska's electricity is generated from renewable resources by 2025,". This is twice the goal President
Barack Obama has called for by 2025. Alaska can set the pace for renewal resources for our nation! ...and
Haines could be leading the way. Lets not show them how stubborn we can be on this issue.
Win Win
Dave DisBrow
[AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES]
Grant Documents Authorized Signers
Please clearly print or type all sections of this form.
Community/Grantee Name: ALASKA POWER COMPANY
Regular Election is held: Annually / Board of Dir. IDate: September 14, 2010
Authorized Grant Si
Printed Name Title Term
Glen Martin Permitting I Lic.ensing / PermanenEnvlfonnfental KeVleW
Robert S. Grimm CEO I President Permanen
I authorize the above person(s) to sign Grant Documents:
(Highest ranking organization/community/municipal official)
Printed Name Title Term
Robert S. Grimm CEO I President Permanent
Grantee Contact Information' .
Mailing Address: P.o. Box 3222, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phone Number: (360) 385-1733 x122
Fax Number: (360) 385-7538
E-mail Address:
glen.m@aptalaska.com
Federal Tax 10 #: 92-0153693
Please submit an updated form whenever there is a change to the above information.
Please return the original completed form to:
Alaska Energy Authority
ALASKA813 W. Northern Lights Blvd. ENERGY AUTHORITYAnchorage, AK 99503
Attn: Butch White, Grants Adminjstrator
H:\GRANTSIAEA Round IV Renewable Energy Grants LOIO\Grant_Authorized_Signers4.doc
[CORPORATE RESOLUTION]
RESUME’S
[PROJECT MAPS]
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CONNELLY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Location
The Connelly Lake Project would be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14
miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Stream or other body of water: Connelly Lake (formerly Upper Chilkoot Lake) at
elevation 2272 feet above mean sea level, connected by an unnamed stream to the
Chilkoot River.
Affected land: State of Alaska land in Sections 22, 26, 27, 34, 35, and 36 withinT28S,
R57E and Sections 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 22, 23, 25, 26 within T29S, R58E (Copper River
Meridian).
Project Features
The following description of project features is based on a preliminary evaluation of the
site. The sizes and types of project features are subject to modification as further
evaluations are made.
Dam, Intake and Spillway
There will be a 48-foot-high rock fill dam located at the outlet of Connelly Lake, which
would raise the lake elevation from 2,280 to 2,312. The crest length would be
approximately 575 feet, the crest elevation would be approximately 2,318 feet, the crest
width would be approximately 12 feet, and the base width would be approximately 100
feet. If suitable impervious material can be found in the reservoir area, the dam would
have an impervious core, otherwise, the upstream face would have a concrete or
membrane lining.
The dam would increase the size of the lake from 90 acres to 160 acres and provide for an
active storage capacity of 4,700 acre-feet between El 2280 and El 2312. The reservoir
would be drawn down in the winter and early spring, and refill in the late spring and early
summer. The spillway would be located on a bench cut into the right abutment, and
would have an ungated concrete crest approximately 100 feet long, with the crest
elevation at El 2,312.
The intake would be situated on the left abutment of the dam, with the centerline at about
El 2,270 feet. The intake would be a free-standing concrete structure diverting flow into
a 48-inch-diameter conduit under the dam. An outlet works structure would be located at
the downstream end of the conduit, which would provide a transition to the penstock and
a branch to a 48-in discharge valve to provide for rapid drawdown of the reservoir.
Penstock
Project Description 1 Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
A 6,188-foot-long, 30-inch-diameter steel penstock would convey water from the
intake/outlet works to the powerhouse. The penstock would be aligned with a minimum
of horizontal bends to allow construction with a highline system. The penstock would be
exposed and located within a cleared corridor about __ feet wide. The pipe would be
coated with an appropriate color to blend it into the vegetation as much as possible.
Powerhouse
The powerhouse would be a prefabricated 40-foot by 60-foot metal building, located on
the west bank of the Chilkoot River at approximately 170 feet in elevation. The
powerhouse will be on a reinforced concrete foundation. The powerhouse will contain
one or two generating units with an installed capacity of 6,200 kW. Hydraulic capacity
would be approximately 45 cfs.
Tailrace
A tailrace would be a riprap-lined excavated channel extending a short distance from the
powerhouse to the Chilkoot River to conduct powerhouse discharges.
Access
Access to the powerhouse area would be via an existing road previously used for logging
that crosses both state and private land as well as construction of approximately 0.25
miles of new road and a bridge across the river. Access to the dam and the penstock
areas during construction would be by helicopter and the highline system. Access to the
highline system and powerhouse site would be by road. Access during operation would
be by road and helicopter during operation.
Transmission Line and Substation
A 14-mile-long, 34.5 kV, underground and overhead transmission line would
interconnect with Alaska Power & Telephone Company’s existing 34.5 kV transmission
system at Lutak inlet.
Project Generation
The powerhouse will contain one or two generating units with an installed capacity of
6,200 kW. The peak load capacity would be approximately 6.2 MW. The average annual
generation would be about 35 GWh (potential).
Lands of the United States
There are no federal lands within the project boundary, only state and private. The
project would run through the Chilkoot Eagle Preserve and is also in Haines State Forest.
Project Description 2 Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Project Description 3 Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Proposed Market
Current electrical demand of the Haines and Skagway Boroughs are expected to increase
as more consumers are placed on the power grid. Although, sufficient hydro generation
presently exists, it is reaching its capacity, requiring the occasional use of diesel for peak
load and late in the winter. It is anticipated that a need for additional hydroelectric power
will occur within the next five years and this storage project will take us well into the
future. Permitting and construction of this project will take about five years to complete
if started now.
Project Maps
The proposed project location is identified on Figure 1: Project Location, as well as
project features and the boundary of the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
Environment
This project will be within the Haines State Forest, Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve, and on
some private land along the access road / transmission line route. The Chilkoot River
above Chilkoot Lake has Coho, Sockeye, and Dolly Varden. Connelly Lake and its
outlet stream are above Chilkoot Lake and drain into the Chilkoot River. According to
ADF&G’s habitat maps, the outlet stream from Connelly Lake is not used by any fish.
ADF&G conducted fish surveys in 1995 in Connelly Lake, the outlet stream from
Connelly Lake, a stream approximately 0.25 miles south of the Connelly Lake outlet
stream from the river confluence, and seven other streams along the access road north of
Chilkoot Lake.
The fish studies were part of a cooperative agreement between ADF&G and Haines Light
and Power Company. ADF&G’s finding were:
1. Connelly Lake and its outlet stream do not appear to support fish populations;
2. The lower reaches of the stream approximately 0.25 miles south of the Connelly
Lake outlet stream confluence with the river provides rearing habitat for juvenile
coho and Dolly Varden; and,
3. Seven streams along the access road (north of Chilkoot Lake) support spawning
and/or rearing fish.
Permits
Although no permits have been acquired at this time, there is a water use reservation
number LAS14292 for AP&T from previous efforts to retain this site for hydro
development. Now we are going ahead with development and will acquire all permits
necessary to do so. A FERC preliminary permit will be needed initially and eventually a
FERC license will be applied for.
[PROJECT SCHEDULE]
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4PHASE II: Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual DesignConceptual DesignStream Gage InstallationGeotechnical InvestigationsEnvironmental StudiesFERC Preliminary Permit App.PHASE III: Final Design and PermittingPermit Application & ProcessingStream Gaging (data collection)Penstock Alignment SurveyFinal DesignPHASE IV: ConstructionMobilizationAccess RoadDamPenstockGenerating Equipment ProcurementPowerhouseTransmission LineTesting and Start-Up2017 20182016CONNELLY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTDESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
RECONNAISSANCE INFORMATION
PERMIT APPLICATIONS & COASTAL
ZONE QUESTIONNAIRE
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 1 of 18
Coastal Project Questionnaire and Certification Statement
The Coastal Project Questionnaire (CPQ) is a diagnostic tool that will identify the state and federal permit requirements for your
project that are subject to a consistency review. You must answer all questions. If you answer “Yes” to any of the questions, please
call that specific department for further instructions to avoid delay in processing your application. You can find an agency contact list
online at http://alaskacoast.state.ak.us/Contacts/PRCregcont.html.
A complete project packet includes accurate maps and plan drawings at scales large enough to show details, copies of your state and
federal permit applications, your answers to this questionnaire, and a complete consistency evaluation. DCOM will notify you within
21 days of receipt if the packet is incomplete and what information is still required.
For additional information or assistance, you may call or email the Juneau Project Review at (907) 465-2142, or the Anchorage Project
Review at (907) 269-7478. This CPQ document contains numerous hyperlinks (underlined text that has a connection to an internet web
page) and is best viewed on-line. Additional instructions are available at http://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us/Projects/pcpq.html
APPLICANT INFORMATION
1. Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Name of Applicant
P.O. Box 3222
Address
Port Townsend, WA 98368
City/State/Zip
360-385-1733 x122
Daytime Phone
360-385-7538 glen.m@aptalaska.com
Fax Number E-mail Address
2.
Agent (or responsible party if other than applicant)
Address
City/State/Zip
Daytime Phone
Fax Number E-mail Address
PROJECT INFORMATION Yes No
1. This activity is a: new project modification or addition to an existing project
2. If this is a modification or an addition, do you currently have any State, federal or local approvals for this activity?
NOTE: Approval means any form of authorization. If "yes," please list below:
Approval Type Approval # Issuance Date Expiration Date
3. If this is a modification, was this original project reviewed for consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management
Program? .............................................................................................................................................................................
Previous ACMP I.D. Number: (example: AK 0706-05AA or ID2004-0505JJ)
Previous Project Name: Previous Project Applicant:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Attach a complete and detailed narrative description of your new project or of your modification/addition including ALL
associated facilities and changes to the current land or water use (if not already attached as part of an agency application).
Clearly delineate the project boundaries and all property owners, including owners of adjacent land, on the site plan. The
scale of the maps and plan drawings must be large enough to show pertinent details. Identify your proposed footprint or
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 2 of 18
disturbed area. If this project is a modification to an approved project, identify existing facilities and proposed changes on
the site plan.
Proposed starting date for project: 2011 Proposed ending date for project: 2013
PROJECT LOCATION and LAND OWNERSHIP Yes No
4. Describe/identify the project location on a map (Including nearest community, the name of the nearest land feature or
body of water, and other legal description such as a survey or lot number.).
Township T28S, T29S Range R58E Section see attachment for full list Meridian CRM
Latitude/Longitude / (specify Decimal Degrees or Degrees, Minutes, Seconds)
USGS Quad Map Skagway (B-2)
5. The project is located on: State land or water* Federal land Private land Municipal land
(Check all that apply) Mental Health Trust land University of Alaska land
Contact the applicable landowner(s) to obtain necessary authorization. State land ownership can be verified using
Alaska Mapper. *State land can be uplands, tidelands or submerged lands to 3 miles offshore.
6. Is the project within or associated with the Trans Alaska Pipeline corridor? ......................................................................
COASTAL DISTRICT Yes No
7. Is the project located in a coastal district? ..........................................................................................................................
If yes, identify the applicable coastal district(s) and contact them to ensure your project
conforms with district policies and zoning requirements. Coastal districts are a municipality or borough, home rule or
first class city, second class municipality with planning powers, or coastal resource service area. A coastal district is
a participant in the State's consistency review process. Early interaction with the district can benefit you significantly;
please contact the district representative listed on the contact list at
http://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us/Contacts/PRCregcont.html
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) APPROVALS
DNR DIVISION OF MINING, LAND & WATER- LAND SECTION Yes No
1. Is the proposed project on State-owned land or water or will you need to cross State-owned land for access? (NOTE:
State land includes the land below the ordinary high water line of navigable streams, rivers and lakes, and in marine
waters, below the mean high tide line seaward for three miles. State land does not include Alaska Mental Health Trust
Land or University of Alaska Land.) ……………………………………………………………..………………………..
2. If you answered yes to the question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Mining,
Land and Water regional office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? .....................................................................................................
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR DIVISION OF MINING, LAND & WATER- MATERIALS SECTION Yes No
3. Do you plan to dredge or otherwise excavate or remove materials such as rock, sand, gravel, peat, or overburden from
any land regardless of ownership? ......................................................................................................................................
a) Location of excavation site if different than the project site:
Township Range Section Meridian
4. At any one site (regardless of land ownership), do you plan any of the following? ............................................................
Excavate five or more acres over a year’s time
Excavate 50,000 cubic yards or more of materials (rock, sand, gravel, soil, peat, overburden, etc.) over a year’s
time
Have a cumulative, un-reclaimed, excavated area of five or more acres
5. Do you plan to place fill or excavated material on State-owned land? ...............................................................................
a) Location of fill or material disposal site if different than the project site:
Township Range Section Meridian
6. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Mining,
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 3 of 18
Land and Water regional office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ....... Is covered under the Land Easement Application.................
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR DIVISION OF MINING, LAND & WATER- MINING SECTION Yes No
7. Do you plan to mine for locatable minerals such as silver, gold, or copper? .....................................................................
8. Do you plan to explore for or extract coal? ........................................................................................................................
9. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Mining,
Land and Water regional office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ......................................................................................................
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR DIVISION OF MINING, LAND & WATER- WATER SECTION Yes No
10. Will this project or development divert, impound, withdraw, or use any fresh water (regardless of land ownership)?
(NOTE: If you know of other water users who withdraw from the same source or any potential conflicts affecting this use
of water, contact the Water Section. If you are obtaining water exclusively from either an existing Public Water Supply or
from a rainwater catchment system, you are not required to contact the DNR Water Section regional office.) ......................
a) Check all points-of-withdrawal or water sources that apply:
Public Water system (name):
Stream or Lake (name): Connelly Lake
Well
Rain catchment system
Other:
b) Intended use(s) of water: Hydropower generation
c) Amount (maximum daily, not average, in gallons per day): 45 cfs
d) Is the point of water withdrawal on property you own? …………………………………………………………...........
11. Do you plan to build or alter a dam (regardless of land ownership)? ..................................................................................
12. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Mining,
Land and Water regional office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? .............................. LAS 14292; Priority already established........
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR DIVISION OF FORESTRY Yes No
13. Does your operation meet both of the following criteria on any land, regardless of ownership?
a) The project will commercially harvest timber on 10 or more acres, or commercially harvest timber that intersects,
encompasses, or borders on surface waters, and
b) The project involves one or more of the following: site preparation, thinning, slash treatment, construction and
maintenance of roads associated with a commercial timber harvest, or any other activity leading to or connected to a
commercial timber harvest operation…………………………........................................................................................
14. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Forestry
regional office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity?..Project within Haines State Forest; HSF says they will handle
through DNR easement..................................
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR DIVISION OF OIL & GAS Yes No
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 4 of 18
15. a) Will you be exploring for or producing oil and/or gas? ………………………………………………………………...
b) Will you conduct surface use activities on/within an oil and gas lease or unit? ……………………………………….
If yes, please specify:
16. Do you plan to drill a geothermal well (regardless of land ownership)? ………………………………………………….
17. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Division of Oil & Gas
office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? …………………………………………………………………...
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
Visit the Division of Oil & Gas website for application forms and additional information.
DNR OFFICE OF HISTORY & ARCHAEOLOGY Yes No
18. Will you investigate, remove, or impact historical, archaeological or paleontological resources (anything over 50 years
old) on State-owned land? …………………………………………………………………………………………………
19. If you answered yes to the question above, indicate the person you contacted at the State Historic Preservation Office
for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
DNR DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL & GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS Yes No
20. Is the proposed project located within a natural hazard area designated by a coastal district in the approved district
plan? (Refer to the district plan or contact the coastal district office.) …………………………………………………….
a) If “yes”, describe the measures you will take in the siting, design, construction, and operation of the proposed activity
to protect public safety, services, and the environment from potential damage caused by the designated natural
hazard(s) in the Natural Hazards portion of the attached Coastal Consistency Evaluation (11 AAC 112.210).
21. If you have contacted someone, please indicate the person you contacted at the Coastal District or the State for
information. The Division of Geological & Geophysical Survey may have additional information on hazards for the
area.
a) Name/date of Contact:
DNR DIVISION OF PARKS & OUTDOOR RECREATION Yes No
22. Is the proposed project located in a unit of the Alaska State Park System including navigable waters, tidelands or
submerged lands to three miles offshore? ………………………………………………………………………………….
23. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate DNR Division of Parks
& Recreation office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………Project in Chilkoot Bald Eagle Preserve; they are
reviewing to determine what steps we should take next…………...
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DNR APPROVALS
List the Department of Natural Resources permits or authorizations required for your project below:
Types of project approvals or permits needed. Date application submitted
DNR Land Use Permit 10/13/08
DNR Water Use Permit LAS 14292; priority has been
established;
DNR Div. of Forestry
DNR Div. of Parks & Outdoor Rec (Chilkoot Bald Eagle Preserve)
They are going to follow through
DNR easement process;
Parks is reviewing what steps to take;
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (DFG) APPROVALS
Yes
No
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 5 of 18
1. Is your project located in a designated State Game Refuge, Critical Habitat Area or State Game Sanctuary? …………...
2. Does your project include construction/operation of a salmon hatchery? …………………………………………………
3. Does your project affect, or is it related to, a previously permitted salmon hatchery? ……………………………………
4. Does your project include construction of an aquatic farm? ………………………………………………………………
5. Will you work in, remove water or material from, or place anything in, a stream, river or lake? (NOTE: This includes
work or activities below the ordinary high water mark or on ice, in the active flood plain, on islands, in or on the face
of the banks, or, for streams entering or flowing through tidelands, above the level of mean lower low tide. If the
proposed project is located within a special flood hazard area, a municipal floodplain development permit may be
required. Contact the affected city or borough planning department for additional information and a floodplain
determination.) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
a) If yes, name of waterbody: Connelly Lake
6. If you answered yes to any questions above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Department of Fish
and Game office for information. (For projects involving Hatcheries or Aquatic Farms, please contact the Division of
Commercial Fisheries. Other projects should contact the Division of Habitat.)
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ………………………………………………………………….
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DFG APPROVALS
List the Department of Fish and Game permits or authorizations required for your project below:
Types of project approvals or permits needed. Date application submitted
Habitat Permit 10/13/08
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC) APPROVALS
DEC DIVISION OF WATER Yes No
1 a) Will a discharge of non-domestic wastewater to lands, waters, or the subsurface of the state occur? (NOTE: Non-
domestic wastewater includes wastewater from commercial or industrial facilities, excavation projects, wastewater
from man-made containers or containment areas, or any other non-domestic wastewater disposal activities see 18
AAC 72.990 for definitions.) …………………………………………………………………………………………...
b) Will a discharge of domestic wastewater or septage to lands, waters or the subsurface of the state occur? (see 18 AAC
72.990 for definitions.) ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
c) Will the wastewater disposal activity require a mixing zone or zone of deposit to meet Water Quality Standards
(WQS)? (Many disposal activities require a mixing zone to meet WQS, contact DEC if unsure.) ……………………..
d) Will the project include a stormwater collection/discharge system? ……………………………………………………
e) Will the project include placing fill in wetlands? ……………………………………………………………………….
f) Is the surrounding area inundated with water at any time of the year? ………………………………………………….
g) Do you intend to construct, install, modify or use any part of a domestic or non-domestic wastewater treatment or
disposal system? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Does your project qualify for a general permit for wastewater? ...............................................................
3. If you answered yes to any questions above, indicate the person you contacted at the DEC-Division of Water for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ………………see attached e-mail from DEC…………………...
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 6 of 18
DEC DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Yes No
4 a) Will your project result in construction, modification, or operation of a facility for solid waste disposal? (NOTE:
Solid waste means drilling wastes, household garbage, refuse, sludge, construction or demolition wastes, industrial
solid waste, asbestos, and other discarded, abandoned, or unwanted solid or semi-solid material, whether or not
subject to decomposition, originating from any source. Disposal means placement of solid waste on land.) ……….
b) Will your project result in treatment of solid waste at the site? (Examples of treatment methods include, but are not
limited to: incineration, open burning, baling, and composting.) ………………………………………………………
c) Will your project result in storage or transfer of solid waste at the site? ……………………………………………….
d) Will the project result in storage of more than 50 tons of materials for reuse, recycling, or resource recovery? ………
e) Will any sewage solids or biosolids be disposed of or land-applied to the site? (NOTE: Sewage solids include wastes
that have been removed from a wastewater treatment plant system, such as a septic tank lagoon dredge, or
wastewater treatment sludge that contain no free liquids. Biosolids are the solid, semi- solid or liquid residues
produced during the treatment of domestic septage in a treatment works which are land applied for beneficial use.) ..
5. Will your project require application of oil, pesticides, and/or any other broadcast chemicals? ………………………….
6. Does your project qualify for a general permit for solid waste? ................................................................
7. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the DEC- Division of Environmental
Health for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? …………………………………………………………………...
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DEC DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY Yes No
8 a) Will you have an asphalt plant designed to process no less than five tons per hour of product? ………………………
b) Will you have a thermal remediation unit with a rated capacity of at least five tons per hours of untreated material? ..
c) Will you have a rock crusher with a rated capacity of at least five tons per hour? ……………………………………..
d) Will you have one or more incinerators with a cumulative rated capacity of 1,000 pounds or more per hour? ………..
e) Will you have a coal preparation plant? ………………………………………………………………………………...
f) Will you have a Port of Anchorage stationary source? ………………………………………………………………….
g) Will you have a facility with the potential to emit no less than 100 tons per year of any regulated air contaminant?.....
h) Will you have a facility with the potential to emit no less than 10 tons per year of any hazardous air contaminant or
25 tons per year of all hazardous air contaminants?........................................................................................................
i) Will you be constructing a new stationary source with a potential to emit greater than: ………………………………
15 tons per year (tpy) of PM-10
40 tpy of nitrogen oxides
40 tpy of sulfur dioxide
0.6 tpy of lead; or
100 tpy of CO within 10 km of a nonattainment area
j) Will you be commencing construction, or (if not already authorized under 18 AAC 50) relocating a portable oil and
gas operation? (answer “yes” unless you will comply with an existing operating permit developed for the portable oil
and gas operation at the permitted location; or you will operate as allowed under AS 46.14.275 without an operating
permit) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………....................
k) Will you be commencing construction or (if not already authorized under 18 AAC 50) relocating an emission unit
with a rated capacity of 10 million Btu or more per hour in a sulfur dioxide special protection area established under
18 AAC 50.025? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………
l) Will you be commencing a physical change to or a change in the method of construction of an existing stationary
source with a potential to emit an air pollutant greater than an amount listed in g) that will cause for that pollutant an
emission increase (calculated at your discretion) as either an increase in potential to emit that is greater than:
10 tpy of PM-10
10 tpy of sulfur dioxide
10 tpy of nitrogen oxides; or
100 tpy of CO within 10 km of a nonattainment area; or
actual emissions and a net emissions increase greater than:
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 7 of 18
10 tpy of PM-10
10 tpy of sulfur dioxide
10 tpy of nitrogen oxides; or
100 tpy of CO within 10 km of a nonattainment area
m) Will you be commencing construction or making a major modification of a Prevention of Significant Deterioration
stationary source under 18 AAC 50.306? ………………………………………………………………………………..
n) Will you be commencing construction or making a major modification of a nonattainment area major stationary
source under 18 AAC 50.311? …………………………………………………………………………………………...
o) Will you be commencing construction or reconstructing a major stationary source under 18 AAC 50.316, for
hazardous air pollutants? Definition of Regulated Air Pollutants can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5/memoranda/rapdef.pdf ..................................................................................................
9. If you answered yes to any questions above, indicate the person you contacted at the DEC- Division of Air Quality for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
DEC DIVISION OF SPILL PREVENTION AND RESPONSE Yes No
10 a) Will your project involve the operation of waterborne tank vessels or oil barges that carry crude or non crude oil as
bulk cargo, or the transfer of oil or other petroleum products to or from such a vessel or a pipeline system? ………….
b) Will your project require or include onshore or offshore oil facilities with an effective aggregate storage capacity of
greater than 5,000 barrels of crude oil or greater than 10,000 barrels of non-crude oil? ………………………………..
c) Will you operate facilities on land or water for exploration or production of hydrocarbons? ………………………….
11. If you answered yes to any questions above, indicate the person you contacted at the DEC-Division of Spill Prevention
and Response office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is a plan required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed Oil Discharge Prevention & Contingency Plan to the DCOM.
If “No”, explain why an application isn’t required. Explanation:
DEC APPROVALS
List the Department of Environmental Conservation permits or authorizations required for your project below:
Types of plan approvals or permits needed Date application submitted
FEDERAL APPROVALS
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE) Yes No
1. Will you discharge dredged and/or fill material or perform dredging activities in waters of the U.S? Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act requires that a Department of the Army permit be obtained for the placement or discharge of dredged
and/or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands (33 U.S.C. 1344). (Your application to the USACE would
also serve as application for DEC Water Quality Certification.) ………………………………….
2. Will you place fill or structures or perform work in waters of the U.S? Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899 requires that a Department of the Army permit be obtained for structures or work in or affecting navigable waters
of the U.S. (33 U.S.C. 403) (Waters of the U.S. include marine waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, rivers,
streams, lakes tributaries, and wetlands. If you are not certain whether your proposed project is located within a
wetland, contact the USACE Regulatory Division to request a wetlands determination. For additional information
about the Regulatory Program, visit www.poa.usace.army.mil/reg) ………………………………………..
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 8 of 18
3. If you answered yes to the question above, indicate the person you contacted at the US Army Corps of Engineers for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM) Yes No
4. Is the proposed project located on BLM land, or will you need to cross BLM land for access? ………………………….
5. If you answered yes to the question above, indicate the person you contacted at the Bureau of Land Management for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
U.S. COAST GUARD (USCG) Yes No
6 a) Do you plan to construct a bridge or causeway over tidal (ocean) waters, or navigable rivers, streams or lakes? ……...
b) Does your project involve building an access to an island? …………………………………………………………….
c) Do you plan to site, construct, or operate a deepwater port? ……………………………………………………………
7. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate US Coast Guard office
for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) Yes No
8 a) Will the proposed project have a discharge to any waters? ……………………………………………………………...
b) Will you dispose of sewage sludge? …………………………………………………………………………………….
c) Will construction of your project expose 1 or more acres of soil? (NOTE: This applies to the total amount of land
disturbed, even if disturbance is distributed over more than one season, and also applies to areas that are part of a
larger common plan of development or sale.) …………………………………………………………………………...
d) Is your project an industrial facility that will have stormwater discharge directly related to manufacturing, processing,
or raw materials storage areas at an industrial plant? If you answered yes to c) or d), your project may require an
NPDES Stormwater permit ………………………………………………………………………………………………
9. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the US Environmental Protection
Agency for information.
a) Name/date of Contact: 09/30/08; stated that we would just get the COE 404 Permit; COE will communicate with
them.
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) Yes No
10 a) Is your project located within five miles of any public airport? ………………………………………………………
b) Will you have a waste discharge that is likely to decay within 5,000 feet of any public airport? ……………………
11. If you answered yes to the question above, indicate the person you contacted at the Federal Aviation Administration
for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION (FERC) Yes No
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 9 of 18
12 a) Does the project include any of the following: …………………………………………………………………………
1) a non-federal hydroelectric project on any navigable body of water
2) locating a hydro project on federal land (including transmission lines)
3) using surplus water from any federal government dam for a hydro project
b) Does the project include construction and operation, or abandonment of interstate natural gas pipeline facilities
under sections 7 (b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA)? .....………………………………………………………
c) Does the project include construction and operation of natural gas or liquefied natural gas importation or exportation
facilities under section 3 of the NGA? .........................................................................................................
d) Does the project include construction for physical interconnection of electric transmission facilities under section
202 (b) of the FPA? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
13. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the appropriate Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission office for information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……A jurisdictional determination was requested from FERC on
October 28, 2008………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
U.S. FOREST SERVICE (USFS) Yes No
14 a) Does the proposed project involve construction on USFS land? ………………………………………………………..
b) Does the proposed project involve the crossing of USFS land with a water line? ……………………………………...
c) The current list of Forest Service permits that require ACMP consistency review are online at
http://alaskacoast.state.ak.us/Clawhome/handbook/pdf/11_AAC_110.pdf in Article 4, 11 AAC 110.400, pages 28-30.
Does your proposed project include any of Forest Service authorizations found on pages 28-30 of the ACMP
Handbook? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
15. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at United States Forest Service for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS) Yes No
16 a) Is your proposed project on land managed by the USFWS? …………………………………………………………….
b) Does your project require a Right of Way from the USFWS under 50 C.F.R. 29 and 50 C.F.R 36? ..............................
17. If you answered yes to any question above, indicate the person you contacted at the US Fish and Wildlife Service for
information.
a) Name/date of Contact:
b) Is an application required for the proposed activity? ……………………………………………………………………
c) If “YES” then submit a signed copy of the completed application to the DCOM. If “No”, explain why an application
isn’t required. Explanation:
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY APPROVALS Yes No
18 a) Other Federal agencies with authorizations reviewable under the Alaska Coastal Management Program are posted
online at http://alaskacoast.state.ak.us/Clawhome/handbook/pdf/11_AAC_110.pdf in Article 4, 11 AAC 110.400,
pages 28-30. Does your proposed project include any of the Federal agency authorizations found on pages 28-30 of
the ACMP Handbook? …………………………………………………………………………………………………...
b) If yes, which federal authorizations? COE permit
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
CPQ Revised 8/15/2008 Page 10 of 18
19. Have you applied for any other federal permits or authorizations? ………………………………………………………..
Agency Approval Type Date Submitted
COE permit 404 Certification or Individual Permit 11/03/08
FERC Jurisdictional Determination 10/28/08
Note: The Coastal Project Questionnaire (CPQ) identifies state and federal permits subject to a consistency review. You may
need additional permits from other agencies or the affected city and borough government to proceed with your activity. Attach
the documentation requested under the Project Description.
ACMP Consistency Evaluation & Certification Statement
Pursuant to 11 AAC 110.215 (a)(1)(c), the applicant shall submit an evaluation of how the proposed project is consistent with the
statewide standards at 11 AAC 112.200 - 11 AAC 112.990 and with the applicable district enforceable policies, sufficient to support
the consistency certification. Evaluate your project against each section of the state standards and applicable district enforceable
policies using the template below or by submitting a narrative description in letter or report form. District enforceable policies are
available on the ACMP website at http://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us. Definitions of key terms can be found at: 11 AAC 110.990, 11
AAC 112.990 and 11 AAC 114.990.
If you need more space for an adequate explanation of any of the applicable standards, please attach additional pages to the end of this
document. Be sure to include references to the specific sections and subsections that you are evaluating.
STATEWIDE STANDARDS
11 AAC 112.200. Coastal Development
Standard:
(a) In planning for and approving development in or adjacent to coastal waters, districts and state agencies shall manage
coastal land and water uses in such a manner that those uses that are economically or physically dependent on a coastal
location are given higher priority when compared to uses that do not economically or physically require a coastal
location.
(b) Districts and state agencies shall give, in the following order, priority to
(1) water-dependent uses and activities;
(2) water-related uses and activities; and
(3) uses and activities that are neither water-dependent nor water-related for which there is no practicable inland
alternative to meet the public need for the use or activity.
(c) The placement of structures and the discharge of dredged or fill material into coastal water must, at a minimum,
comply with the standards contained in 33 CFR Parts 320 - 323, revised as of July 1, 2003.
Evaluation:
(a) How is your project economically or physically dependent on a coastal location? Why are you proposing to place
the project at the selected location? Connelly Lake offers a very good storage type of hydroelectric project and
these sites are only available at certain locations based on certain criteria, such as how much elevation change
there is between lake and powerhouse, fish in lake or not (in this case no fish), and how much storage can be
made at the lake by installing a dam and how far is it to market for the power, which isn’t all that far
considering that there is power out to the community of Lutak now, and an old road corridor exists (RS2477).
This project is not on the coast or shoreline, but is in land within the coastal district of Haines.
(b) Evaluation of development priority.
(1) How is the proposed project water-dependent? Explain.
(2) How is the proposed project water-related? Explain.
(3) If the proposed project is neither water-dependent nor water-related, please explain why there is not a practicable
inland alternative that meets the public need for the use or activity. Explain. This project is water dependant and
related because it is a hydroelectric project that is within a coastal district and because it is near the market for
power. This project will not impact coastal waters because it is well in land.
(c) DCOM defers to the United States Corps of Engineers (USACE) to interpret compliance with the referenced
standards. If you plan to discharge or fill waters of the US, have you applied to the Corps of Engineers for the
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 11 of 18
appropriate authorization?
We are planning on applying to the COE for a permit.
11 AAC 112.210. Natural hazard areas.
Standard:
(a) In addition to those identified in 11 AAC 112.990, the department, or a district in a district plan, may designate other
natural processes or adverse conditions that present a threat to life or property in the coastal area as natural hazards. Such
designations must provide the scientific basis for designating the natural process or adverse condition as a natural hazard
in the coastal area, along with supporting scientific evidence for the designation.
(b) Areas likely to be affected by the occurrence of a natural hazard may be designated as natural hazard areas by a state
agency or, under 11 AAC 114.250(b), by a district.
(c) Development in a natural hazard area may not be found consistent unless the applicant has taken appropriate
measures in the siting, design, construction, and operation of the proposed activity to protect public safety, services, and
the environment from potential damage caused by known natural hazards.
(d) For purposes of (c) of this section, "appropriate measures in the siting, design, construction, and operation of the
proposed activity" means those measures that, in the judgment of the coordinating agency, in consultation with the
department’s division of geological and geophysical surveys, the Department of Community and Economic Development
as state coordinating agency for the National Flood Insurance Program under 44 C.F.R. 60.25, and other local and state
agencies with expertise,
(1) satisfy relevant codes and safety standards; or
(2) in the absence of such codes and standards;
(A) the project plans are approved by an engineer who is registered in the state and has engineering experience
concerning the specific natural hazard; or
(B) the level of risk presented by the design of the project is low and appropriately addressed by the project plans.
Evaluation:
(a) Describe the natural hazards designated in the district plan as they affect this site.
(b) Describe how the proposed project is designed to accommodate the designated hazards. How will you use site design
and operate the proposed activity to protect public safety, services and the environment from potential damaged caused
by known natural hazards? No natural hazards are identified in the district plan that relate to this site.
(d)(1) Describe the measures you will take to meet relevant codes and safety standards in the siting, design, construction
and operation of the proposed activity.
(d)(2)(A) If your project is located in an area without codes and safety standards, how is your project engineered for the
specific natural hazard? Give the name of the appropriately qualified registered engineer who will approve the plans for
protecting public safety, services, and the environment from damage caused by hazards OR
(d)(2)(B) If the level of risk presented by the design of the project is low, how do the project plans and project design
address the potential natural hazard?
11 AAC 112.220. Coastal access.
Standard:
Districts and state agencies shall ensure that projects maintain and, where appropriate, increase public access to, from,
and along coastal water.
Evaluation:
Please explain how the proposed project will maintain and, where appropriate, increase public access to, from and along
coastal water. This project will not impact coastal waters as it is approximately 16 miles in land from Lutak
Inlet.
11 AAC 112.230. Energy facilities.
Standard:
(a) The siting and approval of major energy facilities by districts and state agencies must be based, to the extent
practicable, on the following standards:
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 12 of 18
(1) site facilities so as to minimize adverse environmental and social effects while satisfying industrial requirements;
(2) site facilities so as to be compatible with existing and subsequent adjacent uses and projected community needs;
(3) consolidate facilities;
(4) consider the concurrent use of facilities for public or economic reasons;
(5) cooperate with landowners, developers, and federal agencies in the development of facilities;
(6) select sites with sufficient acreage to allow for reasonable expansion of facilities;
(7) site facilities where existing infrastructure, including roads, docks, and airstrips, is capable of satisfying industrial
requirements;
(8) select harbors and shipping routes with least exposure to reefs, shoals, drift ice, and other obstructions;
(9) encourage the use of vessel traffic control and collision avoidance systems;
(10) select sites where development will require minimal site clearing, dredging, and construction;
(11) site facilities so as to minimize the probability, along shipping routes, of spills or other forms of contamination that
would affect fishing grounds, spawning grounds, and other biologically productive or vulnerable habitats, including
marine mammal rookeries and hauling out grounds and waterfowl nesting areas;
(12) site facilities so that design and construction of those facilities and support infrastructures in coastal areas will allow
for the free passage and movement of fish and wildlife with due consideration for historic migratory patterns;
(13) site facilities so that areas of particular scenic, recreational, environmental, or cultural value, identified in district
plans, will be protected;
(14) site facilities in areas of least biological productivity, diversity, and vulnerability and where effluents and spills can
be controlled or contained;
(15) site facilities where winds and air currents disperse airborne emissions that cannot be captured before escape into
the atmosphere;
(16) site facilities so that associated vessel operations or activities will not result in overcrowded harbors or interfere
with fishing operations and equipment.
(b) The uses authorized by the issuance of state and federal leases, easements, contracts, rights-of-way, or permits for
mineral and petroleum resource extraction are uses of state concern.
Evaluation:
(a) If this standard applies to your project, please describe in detail how the proposed project is designed to meet each
applicable section of this standard:
(1) Project is being sited to use an existing road corridor (RS2477) and to minimize clearing needed. One
such solution is to use an aerial tramway to move materials up the slope for placing the penstock and to
transport materials to the lake. Helicopters will also be used to transport materials and equipment to the
lake rather than build a road. Not constructing a road up to the lake will significantly reduce the
environmental impacts.
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) Project will use the existing RS2477 corridor as an access route and transmission line route to limit
impacts to the environment.
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)This project site will use the existing RS2477 ROW so as to limit scenic and environmental impacts along
the west side of Chilkoot Lake.
(14)
(15)
(16)
(b) List the authorizations for state and federal leases, easements, contracts, rights-of-way, water rights, or permits for
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 13 of 18
mineral and petroleum resource extraction you have applied for or received.
11 AAC 112.240. Utility routes and facilities.
Standard:
(a) Utility routes and facilities must be sited inland from beaches and shorelines unless
(1) the route or facility is water-dependent or water related; or
(2) no practicable inland alternative exists to meet the public need for the route or facility.
(b) Utility routes and facilities along the coast must avoid, minimize, or mitigate
(1) alterations in surface and ground water drainage patterns;
(2) disruption in known or reasonably foreseeable wildlife transit;
(3) blockage of existing or traditional access.
Evaluation:
(a) If the proposed utility route or facility is sited adjacent to beaches or shorelines, explain how the route or facility
is water dependent water related or why no practical inland alternative exits.
This project is not near beaches or shorelines.
(b) If the proposed utility route or facility is sited along the coast, explain how you will avoid, minimize or mitigate:
(1) alterations in surface and ground water drainage patterns;
(2) disruption in known or reasonably foreseeable wildlife transit;
(3) blockage of existing or traditional access.
11 AAC 112.250. Timber harvest and processing.
Standard:
AS 41.17 (Forest Resources and Practices Act) and the regulations adopted under that chapter with respect to the harvest
and processing of timber are incorporated into the program and constitute the components of the program with respect to
those purposes.
Evaluation:
Does your activity involve harvesting or processing of timber? Yes No X
If yes, please explain how your proposed project meets the standards of the State Forest Resources and Practices Act.
11 AAC 112.260. Sand and gravel extraction.
Standard:
Sand and gravel may be extracted from coastal waters, intertidal areas, barrier islands, and spits if there is no practicable
alternative to coastal extraction that will meet the public need for the sand or gravel.
Evaluation:
If your proposed project includes extracting sand or gravel from coastal waters, intertidal areas, barrier islands or spits,
please explain why there is no practicable alternative to coastal extraction that meets the public need for sand or gravel.
N/A
11 AAC 112.270. Subsistence.
Standard:
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 14 of 18
(a) A project within a subsistence use area designated by the department or under 11 AAC 114.250(g) must avoid or
minimize impacts to subsistence uses of coastal resources.
(b) For a project within a subsistence use area designated under 11 AAC 114.250(g), the applicant shall submit an
analysis or evaluation of reasonably foreseeable adverse impacts of the project on subsistence use as part of
(1) a consistency review packet submitted under 11 AAC 110.215; and
(2) a consistency evaluation under 15 C.F.R. 930.39, 15 C.F.R. 930.58, or 15 C.F.R. 930.76.
(c) Repealed 10/29//2004, Register 172.
(d) Except in nonsubsistence areas identified under AS 16.05.258, the department may, after consultation with the
appropriate district, federally recognized Indian tribes, Native corporations, and other appropriate persons or groups,
designate areas in which a subsistence use is an important use of coastal resources as demonstrated by local usage.
(e) For purposes of this section, "federally recognized Indian tribe," "local usage", and "Native corporation" have the
meanings given in 11 AAC 114.990.
Evaluation:
(a) Is your proposed project located within a subsistence use area designated by a coastal district?
Yes No X
If yes, please describe how the proposed project is designed to “avoid or minimize impacts to subsistence uses of coastal
resources:”
(b) If your project is located in a subsistence use area designated by the coastal district, provide an analysis or evaluation
of its reasonably foreseeable adverse impacts to the subsistence uses.
(c) No response required.
(d) If your project is not located in a designated subsistence use area, please describe any subsistence uses of coastal
resources within the project area. Please be advised that subsistence use areas may be designated by the department
during a review. There is subsistence use of fish resouces in Chilkoot Lake and Chilkoot River below Chilkoot
Lake.
(e) No response required.
11 AAC 112.280. Transportation routes and facilities.
Standard:
Transportation routes and facilities must avoid, minimize, or mitigate
(1) alterations in surface and ground water drainage patterns;
(2) disruption in known or reasonably foreseeable wildlife transit; and
(3) blockage of existing or traditional access.
Evaluation:
If your proposed project includes transportation routes or facilities, describe how it avoids, minimizes, or mitigates
(1) alterations in surface and ground water drainage patterns; The transportation route will be using the existing
RS2477 that will need some improvements such as new culverts, some bridges to cross streams, brushing, and
tree limbing to put the old road back into serviceable condition. Culverts and bridges will be used to avoid
and minimize impacts to fish species using creeks that cross through this road corridor. There should be no
alterations as these actions will be to replace existing and previously existing features.
(2) disruption in known or reasonably foreseeable wildlife transit; and These activities should not impact wildlife
transit other than to provide the occasional motorized disturbance from a maintenance vehicle passing through
to the project site.
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 15 of 18
(3) blockage of existing or traditional access. N/A
11 AAC 112.300. Habitats.
Standard:
(a) Habitats in the coastal area that are subject to the program are
(1) offshore areas;
(2) estuaries;
(3) wetlands;
(4) tideflats;
(5) rocky islands and sea cliffs;
(6) barrier islands and lagoons;
(7) exposed high-energy coasts;
(8) rivers, streams, and lakes and the active floodplains and riparian management areas of those rivers, streams, and
lakes; and
(9) important habitat.
(b) The following standards apply to the management of the habitats identified in (a) of this section:
(1) offshore areas must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to competing uses such
as commercial, recreational, or subsistence fishing, to the extent that those uses are determined to be in competition with
the proposed use;
(2) estuaries must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to
(A) adequate water flow and natural water circulation patterns; and
(B) competing uses such as commercial, recreational, or subsistence fishing, to the extent that those uses are determined
to be in competition with the proposed use;
(3) wetlands must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to water flow and natural
drainage patterns;
(4) tideflats must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to
(A) water flow and natural drainage patterns; and
(B) competing uses such as commercial, recreational, or subsistence uses, to the extent that those uses are determined to
be in competition with the proposed use;
(5) rocky islands and sea cliffs must be managed to
(A) avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to habitat used by coastal species; and
(B) avoid the introduction of competing or destructive species and predators;
(6) barrier islands and lagoons must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts (A) to flows
of sediments and water;
(B) from the alteration or redirection of wave energy or marine currents that would lead to the filling in of lagoons or the
erosion of barrier islands; and
(C) from activities that would decrease the use of barrier islands by coastal species, including polar bears and nesting
birds;
(7) exposed high-energy coasts must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts
(A) to the mix and transport of sediments; and
(B) from redirection of transport processes and wave energy;
(8) rivers, streams, and lakes must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to
(A) natural water flow;
(B) active floodplains; and
(C) natural vegetation within riparian management areas; and
(9) important habitat
(A) designated under 11 AAC 114.250(h) must be managed for the special productivity of the habitat in accordance with
district enforceable policies adopted under 11 AAC 114.270(g); or
(B) identified under (c)(1)(B) or
(C) of this section must be managed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant adverse impacts to the special productivity
of the habitat.
(c) For purposes of this section,
(1) "important habitat" means habitats listed in (a)(1) – (8) of this section and other habitats in the coastal area that are
(A) designated under 11 AAC 114.250(h);
(B) identified by the department as a habitat
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 16 of 18
(i) the use of which has a direct and significant impact on coastal water; and
(ii) that is shown by written scientific evidence to be biologically and significantly productive; or
(C) identified as state game refuges, state game sanctuaries, state range areas, or fish and game critical habitat areas
under AS 16.20;
(2) "riparian management area" means the area along or around a waterbody within the following distances, measured
from the outermost extent of the ordinary high water mark of the waterbody:
(A) for the braided portions of a river or stream, 500 feet on either side of the waterbody;
(B) for split channel portions of a river or stream, 200 feet on either side of the waterbody;
(C) for single channel portions of a river or stream, 100 feet on either side of the waterbody;
(D) for a lake, 100 feet of the waterbody.
Evaluation:
(a) List the habitats from (a) above that are within your proposed project area or that could be affected by your proposed
project.
Wetlands, river, stream, lake, important habitat (Chilkoot Bald Eagle Preserve),
(b) Describe how the proposed project avoids, minimizes, or mitigates impacts to each of the identified habitat(s) in
section (a) above. Wetlands: this project will minimize impacts to wetlands by keeping the cleared ROW
corridor as narrow as possible, keep buffers between activity and wetlands when possible, and use effective
erosion & sedimentation control methods to prevent same. River, Stream, and Lake: this project will
minimize impacts to these features by keeping vegetation buffers between them and project activities, where
possible, and using erosion & sedimentation control methods to prevent and minimize impacts to these
waterbodies. Important Habitat: the site will be surveyed for bald eagle nests and the removal of trees and
clearing will be kept to a minimum. In addition, construction activity will be geared to avoid important eagle
breeding or rearing periods, as practical.
(c) No response required.
11 AAC 112.310. Air, land and water quality
Standard:
Not withstanding any other provision of this chapter, the statutes and regulations of the Department of Environmental
Conservation with respect to the protection of air, land, and water quality identified in AS 46.40.040(b) are incorporated
into the program and, as administered by that department, constitute the exclusive components of the program with
respect to those purposes.
Evaluation: No response required.
11 AAC 112.320. Historic, prehistoric, and archeological resources.
Standard:
(a) The department will designate areas of the coastal zone that are important to the study, understanding, or
illustration of national, state, or local history or prehistory, including natural processes.
(b) A project within an area designated under (a) of this section shall comply with the applicable requirements of
AS 41.35.010 – 41.35.240 and 11 AAC 16.010 – 11 AAC 16.900.
Evaluation:
(a) Have you contacted the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to see if your project is in a designated area
of the coastal zone that is important to the study, understanding, or illustration of national, state, or local history or
prehistory, including natural processes?
Not yet, but plan to consult with them.
(b) If your project is within an area designated under (a) of this section, how will you comply with the applicable
requirements in the statutes and regulations listed in (b)?
We will consult with SHPO as to how they want to accomplish compliance.
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 17 of 18
Affected Coastal District Enforceable Policies
Evaluate each applicable district enforceable policy using a format similar to the one you completed above for the
State Standards. District enforceable policies are available at 6http://alaskacoast.state.ak.us/. If you need more space
for an adequate explanation of any of the applicable district enforceable policies, please attach additional pages to the end
of this document.
Applicable District Plan(s) Haines District Plan
Enforceable Policy: N/A
Evaluation:
Enforceable Policy:
Evaluation:
Enforceable Policy:
Evaluation:
Certification Statement
The information contained herein is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I certify that the proposed
activity complies with, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with, the Alaska Coastal Management
Program.
_________________________________________________11/03/08__ ____________________________
Signature of Applicant or Agent Date
Note: Federal agencies conducting an activity that will affect the coastal zone are required to submit a federal
consistency determination, per 15 CFR 930, Subpart C, rather than this certification statement.
ACMP has developed a guide to assist federal agencies with this requirement. Contact ACMP to obtain a copy.
This certification statement will not be complete until all required State and federal authorization requests have
been submitted to the appropriate agencies.
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Coastal & Ocean Management
Consistency Evaluation 8/15/2008 Page 18 of 18
Project Description: Please provide or attach a brief description of your project including the planned
work, any effects to coastal uses and resources and how your project is being designed to avoid, minimize
and mitigate those effects.
Please see the attached project description.
Project Area: Please provide or attach a map of your project location and your proposed work. (Including nearest
community, the name of the nearest land feature or body of water, and other legal description such as a survey or lot
number.)
Nearest Community: Lutak & Haines
Nearest Waterbody: Connelly Lake, Chilkoot River, Chilkoot Lake, Lutak Inlet
Legal Survey Description: Please see the attached maps.
BLANK PAGE
Glen Martin
From: Ashton, William S (DEC) [william.ashton@alaska.gov]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 12:47 PM
To: glen.m@aptalaska.com
Subject: RE: Connelly Lake Hydro
Page 1 of 2
10/30/2008
Yes, We use the COE individual permit Public Notice as our application to the 401 certificate.
From: Glen Martin [mailto:glen.m@aptalaska.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 7:50 AM
To: Ashton, William S (DEC)
Subject: RE: Connelly Lake Hydro
William,
Does your response below mean that even if FERC is not involved you would wait for COE to include you in their
permitting process?
Glen
From: Glen Martin [mailto:glen.m@aptalaska.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:43 PM
To: 'Ashton, William S (DEC)'
Subject: RE: Connelly Lake Hydro
William,
This is likely not going to be a FERC project, which is why we filed for a jurisdictional determination. This project
doesn't fit the criteria FERC has for needing their license. We expect them to say this is a non-jurisdictional
project and they would not be involved.
Glen
From: Ashton, William S (DEC) [mailto:william.ashton@alaska.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:34 PM
To: glen.m@aptalaska.com
Subject: RE: Connelly Lake Hydro
Hi,
ADEC does not issue a 401 certificate for FERC permits. We do issue 401 certificates for Corps of Engineers 404
dredge and fill permits. ADEC does not have any specific permit requirements for FERC projects.
William Ashton
Ph 269‐6283
From: Glen Martin [mailto:glen.m@aptalaska.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 1:13 PM
To: Ashton, William S (DEC)
Subject: Connelly Lake Hydro
William,
We are starting the permitting for the Connelly Lake Hydro project near Haines, Alaska. We are also seeking a
non-jurisdictional determination from FERC. What permit application do we need to fill out for DEC, or will you
have the Corp. of Engineers handle water quality?
Regards,
Glen
Glen D. Martin
Project Manager
Alaska Power & Telephone Co.
P.O. Box 3222
Port Townsend, WA 98368
(360) 385-1733 x122
Page 2 of 2
10/30/2008
BLANK PAGE
Glen Martin
From: Palmieri, Greg J (DNR) [greg.palmieri@alaska.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:03 PM
To: glen.m@aptalaska.com
Subject: RE: ADL 107601: Connelly Lake Public Easement Application
Page 1 of 3
10/23/2008
Glen,
Reference the map I sent earlier; the property along the access RS2477 is owned by native allotee’s as well as
other individuals.
At the roads beginning from the south it passes through the Sam Dennis allotment (BLM # J10001) USS 974.
Just north of the lake, in section 4, the road passes through the old Reeve’s homestead which was subdivided
into 5 acre lots which are found on both sides of the road. In sections 34 and 35, the road passes through the
Eva L. Pardee allotment (BLM # AA6542). These are the three private owners that may impact development.
The RS2477 designation does not apply in the native allotments as they are settlement land returned from
Federal title to individuals at which point any federal rights were relinquished. The RS2477 does apply across all
remaining lands. I believe a right of way was designated for the existing road location in the subdivision of the
Reeves homestead.
Just a correction on the map in reference I created for you back in October. The township and range info is
incorrect. I used a template map and failed to check that before I sent it to you. There are two townships and
ranges covering the length of you project. Connelly Lake sits in 28s57e and the road passes through 29s58e to
the south. Sorry for the error.
From: Glen Martin [mailto:glen.m@aptalaska.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 12:25 PM
To: Palmieri, Greg J (DNR)
Subject: RE: ADL 107601: Connelly Lake Public Easement Application
Greg,
Thanks again for the map of Chilkoot Lake and the surrounding land ownership. Regarding the RS2477 route, do
you know if any of the land ownership predates the creation of RS2477? From what I can understand, if RS2477
predates any land ownership, public access is guaranteed, or is that an inaccurate interpretation? Would you be
able to identify for me who the land owners are you mention below and show on the map?
Thanks,
Glen
Glen D. Martin
Project Manager
AP&T
(360) 385-1733 x122
From: Palmieri, Greg J (DNR) [mailto:greg.palmieri@alaska.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:12 PM
To: Glen Martin
Cc: Josephson, Roy M (DNR); Derr, Chiska C (DNR)
Subject: RE: ADL 107601: Connelly Lake Public Easement Application
Glen,
Your project area is within the Haines State Forest boundary and specifically management unit 8; identified in the
Haines State Forest Management plan which is available at the Division of Lands (or Forestry) office in Juneau for
your review. As you are aware, the project area also includes development in the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
Your permitting process should continue through the Lands office and we will review your application once the
agency comment period has begun.
The potentially complicated issue, as I see it, will be development access. You may have already considered this,
but here are a few facts that may be of interest.
z Legal road access does not currently exist due to private property holding at the junction of the Lutak
Road.
z The existing Chilkoot Lake Road, identified as a RS2477 route, is in poor condition requiring reconstruction
in many places with several stream crossings required.
z There are private property holdings adjacent to the current road location to the north of the lake between
your project area and the lake head.
Please see the attached map for a land status illustration.
From: Glen Martin [mailto:glen.m@aptalaska.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 10:15 AM
To: Palmieri, Greg J (DNR)
Subject: RE: ADL 107601: Connelly Lake Public Easement Application
Greg,
Based on Chiska Derr’s e-mail below you evidently work for the Haines State Forest. It appears part of our
proposed project may be within Haines State Forest land, although I don’t have a map delineating the current land
ownership, which I would sure like to have. I have attached a map showing the project boundaries. This project,
the Connolly Lake Hydroelectric Project is not expected to be constructed for a number of years, but it is
important to get some of the permitting in place, particularly a lease of state land.
I would appreciate information on what we would need to do to lease land from the Haines State Forest if indeed
this project is within its boundary.
Regards,
Glen
Glen D. Martin
Project Manager
AP&T
(360) 385-1733 x122
From: Derr, Chiska C (DNR) [mailto:chiska.derr@alaska.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 11:38 AM
To: glen.m@aptalaska.com
Cc: Dugaqua, Alexandria R (DNR); Anderson, James W (DNR); Palmieri, Greg J (DNR); Eberhardt, Michael W
(DNR); Scott, Brady A (DNR)
Subject: ADL 107601: Connelly Lake Public Easement Application
Hello Glen,
I got your message asking about the status of the application you submitted in July for a hydro utility
easement near Haines, Alaska. I left a voice message yesterday, but Valerie DeLaune in our water section
Page 2 of 3
10/23/2008
said that sometimes you have problems with your voice mail?
I do have your application, but before we can process it I need:
-$100.00 application fee (I apologize if you already sent it however our records indicate we did not
receive it.)
-Completed Coastal Project Questionaire (CPQ). You can download a blank questionnaire at ACMP’s web
site: http://alaskacoast.state.ak.us/
Please note that I’ve assigned ADL 107601 to your casefile. Please use this number on subsequent
correspondence. I’ve also spoken with our water section, who have assigned water permit LAS 14292
several years ago. It would be helpful if you included that number with your CPQ as well.
Our preliminary research shows that there is a complex mixture of land ownerships and interests within
your project area. It appears you may also need to work with State Parks because of the Chilkat Bald Eagle
Preserve (Mike Eberhardt) and Haines State Forest (Roy Josephson or Greg Palmieri). I’m sending this
message to them as well.
I will be leaving this position soon; this Thursday 25 October is my last day. Please send the application fee
to us, the CPQ to the ACMP office (address is on questionnaire), and your case will be prioritized among our
remaining staff. Unfortunately we are extremely short staffed, so thanks for your patience and
understanding. Please call me if I can help with something in the next few days.
Chiska Derr
Land Adjudicator
Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources
Division of Mining, Land & Water
Southeast Regional Office
400 Willoughby Ave., 4th Floor
P.O. Box 111020
Juneau, Alaska 99801
phone: 907.465.3442
FAX: 907.586.2954
email: chiska.derr@alaska.gov
Page 3 of 3
10/23/2008
PHOTOGRAPHS OF PROJECT AREA
ULC GRID INFRASTRUCTURE
ONE-LINE DIAGRAMS