HomeMy WebLinkAboutAkutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade App
10 November 2009
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA-10-015
City of Akutan
Grant Application
Akutan Hydroelectric System
Repair and Upgrade
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 1 of 84 10/7/2009
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
City of Akutan
Type of Entity:
Municipal Government – Second Class City
Mailing Address
3830 C Street, Suite 205 Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Physical Address
100 Windy Way, Akutan, Alaska 99553
Telephone
907.274.7565
Fax
907.274.1813
Email
jbereskin@gci.net and akutanadmin@gci.net
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT
Name
Joseph Bereskin
Title
Mayor
Mailing Address
3830 C Street Suite 205
Anchorage Alaska 99503
Telephone
907.274.7565
Fax
907.274.1813
Email
jbereskin@gci.net and adktanadmin@gci.net
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)
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
X 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 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 2 of 84 10/7/2009
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
Overview
The City of Akutan is located on Akutan Island in the eastern Aleutians, some 790 miles
southwest of Anchorage. It is an incorporated, second class city encompassing 13
square miles of land and 5 square miles of water. The City is currently preparing an
annexation request that would expand its area to 148 square miles. Population in the
2000 census was 112 Native and 713 total. Estimated population in 2007 was 859.
The economic base of Akutan is the Bering Sea fishery. The City is home to the largest
seafood processing plant in North America owned by Trident Seafoods, the fifth largest
employer in Alaska, with $1 billion in annual sales. There are nearly 900 workers
employed at the Akutan plant.
Expansion of the Bering Sea fishery and Akutan’s location 35 miles closer to the fis hing
grounds than Unalaska/Dutch Harbor have pointed to the need for improved
infrastructure at Akutan. Current projects include state construction of a $77 million
airport and transportation system, a $23 million Corps of Engineers harbor construction,
and a planned $8 million road to connect the harbor to the City. These projects are all
scheduled for completion in the next 2-3 years.
Like most of Alaska’s villages, Akutan, including the Trident plant, are entirely
dependent on diesel fuel imported int o the area for heat and power. Projected growth,
the steady rise of fuel costs, and the high level of carbon emissions make the
development of renewable energy resources a must for Akutan. Consequently, the City
has developed a renewable energy strategy that includes three projects:
Near-term: Upgrade the City’s existing 105 kW hydropower generation system to
improve reliability and efficiency with a goal of reducing diesel fuel consumption by 60
percent by FY 2010.
Mid-term: Develop the Loud Creek hydropower generation system with a goal of
reducing diesel fuel consumption 90 percent by FY 2012, provide power to the harbor,
and allow for power sharing with Trident Seafoods.
Long-term: Develop the Hot Springs Bay geothermal project to virtually elimi nate the
City’s use of diesel fuel, support the City’s expanded infrastructure, stimulate economic
development throughout the region, and allow power sales to Trident to reduce carbon
emissions and provide a source of revenue for the City and Native Corpor ations.
The City has submitted Renewable Energy Fund grant applications for each of the
above-described projects. This application is for Phase IV, the Akutan Hydroelectric
System Repair and Upgrade Project (“the project”).
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 3 of 84 10/7/2009
Project Background
The City of Akutan constructed a hydroelectric power generation system (“the system”)
in 1993 as the result of a joint venture with Alaska Power Systems , and took full
ownership of the system in February 1994. The system consists of a powerhouse
containing a 174 kVA hydro generator and a 125 kW diesel generator. A reservoir 800
feet above the powerhouse provides water to a Pelton wheel turbine through a 4 inch
plastic penstock. The powerhouse control system allows the hydro and diesel
generators to operate in parallel and to be remotely controlled. The hydro generator
has a peak capacity of 105 kW. The diesel generator has a peak capacity of 125 kW.
The City’s average peak load is in the range of 85-95 kW.
Since its construction, the system has undergone a variety of upgrades, to include
enlarging of the impound dam and several control system improvements. However, the
system has continued to experience a number of problems, including reduced water
flows from leakage and clogged intakes, inoperable shutoff valves, and various
switching and control problems. The system was rendered inoperable in 2007 when the
main line was cut during construction of the City’s new water treatment plant. Since then
the line has been repaired, but presently there are problems with the operation of the
control system, and the hydro generator will not engage.
In July 2008 the City was awarded an AEA grant under Round 2 application #24 9, in the
amount of $162,000 to fund the Phase III work. This included:
Phase III Data Collection/Analysis, Field Related Work/
Asbuilts, Dam Safety Assessment & Permitting
This work is currently being concluded, and is the basis for this Phase IV grant request,
with findings and recommendations included as part of this request. A preliminary field
report is provided in Appendix G of this application.
Project Description
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back
on line and to improve its long term efficiency, output, and sustainability . Therefore, this
grant application is requesting funds for:
Phase IV Final Design, Construction, Commissioning,
Operation
The tasks for this project are as defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application
instructions.
Project Team
The City has identified a project team consisting of three (3) engineering firms, Electric
Power Systems, Inc. (EPS), EES Consulting, and McMillen LLC, as qualified and
capable of performing the tasks outlined in the grant requirements for Phase III, which
is currently underway, and Phase IV as defined in this application. (Sections 2.5 and 2.6
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 4 of 84 10/7/2009
of the application instructions). All three companies have participated in the preparation
of task lists, cost estimates and background materials in support of this grant
application. All three companies are familiar with the existing system, and/or have
performed work on the system under contract to AEA and the City of Akutan, or are
currently engaged in Phase III activities.
2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 5 word title for your project)
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade
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.
Akutan Island, City of Akutan
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
Feasibility X Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
The Akutan hydroelectric power generation system has been in place for nearly 15
years. In FY 2008 the City applied for funding through the AEA Round 2 grant
application process to obtain funding for a complete site survey, asses sment, design,
and construction and rehabilitation program. The $162,000 grant funding allotted under
AEA Round 2 for Phase III provided for a site survey to update flow and capacity data,
document repair/upgrade requirements, assess dam stability, evaluate the power plant
and control systems, prepare a preliminary design and initiate application for permitting.
This work is in progress and the information provided will be used to prepare the
specifications needed for the final design and rehabilitation program. An analysis,
budget, and recommendations for proceeding with the Phase IV construction and
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 5 of 84 10/7/2009
rehabilitation as well as operation & sustainability are included with this application. The
City’s project management team will prepare the required bid documents and manage
the construction, commissioning, operation and reporting necessary for project
implementation. A copy of the Preliminary Field Report for the work being performed
under the Round 2 grant is provided in Appendix G of this application.
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.)
As the City prepares for the build-out of more than $160 million of infrastructure projects
and increased economic development, renewable energy development will provide
long-term sustainability for the City, tribal organizations and the local seafood industry.
This opportunity presents a broad range of economic and social benefits for the City,
the region and the State of Alaska, including employment, tax revenue, improved public
services, and substantial reduction of carbon emissions.
Placing the existing hydroelectric power generation system back in operation will have
an immediate impact on energy costs to the City and power users. Even at current fuel
prices, it is estimated the City will save more than $100,000 annually. This will provide
a minimum ten year savings from the repair and upgrade p roject of nearly $2 million.
However, rising fuel costs could make this savings substantially greater.
Aside from economic development and sustainability, there are other public benefits
such as reduced state subsidies and improved air quality. These are discussed in more
detail in Section 5 of this grant application.
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.
Funding required for Town Creek Hydro Rehabilitation and Sustainability - Final Design,
Permitting, and Construction is as follows:
Task Cost Estimate
Project Startup $44,729
Mobilization/Demobilization 149,100
Dam Repairs & Improvements 486,790
Access Road 358,991
Maintenance Equipment and Storage
Building
191,810
Turbine Inspection and Maintenance 27,031
Control System Improvement 202,729
Documentation and Training 29,820
Total: $1,491,000
The cost of Project Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting is estimated
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 6 of 84 10/7/2009
at $1,491,000. The City of Akutan is providing matching funds of $10 0,000, and is
consequently asking that the remaining Phase IV of the project be funded by the Alaska
Renewable Energy Grant Fund in the amount of: $1,391,000. A detailed breakdown of
the engineers estimate for the project is provided with the Grant Budget Form in
Appendix C.
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. $1,391,000
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $100,000
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $1,491,000
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)
$1,491,000
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $2,000,000
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.)
$ 2,500,000
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 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.
The City of Akutan has limited staff resources for the management of large
infrastructure projects and programs such as renewable energy development.
Therefore, the City has engaged the services of RMA Consulting Group (RMA) as its
Program Management team. RMA has been working with the City since mid -2008 to
support a variety of infrastructure projects, including a regional airport, small boat
harbor, harbor access road, hydroelectric generation and electrical distribution, a s well
as the Akutan Geothermal Development Project. These projects have a combined
projected cost of development in excess of $160 million. The City’s planning and
management of these projects has provided the team with the development experience
and capacity needed to manage and administer the project.
RMA assists the City with the development of detailed scoping documents, project
plans, schedules and specifications necessary for issuing bids and requests for
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 7 of 84 10/7/2009
proposal. RMA also supports contractor selection and preparation of contract
documents, and acts as the owner’s representative and contract manager to ensure
effective performance of all contractors and consultants.
RMA is an Alaska company specializing in the planning and implementation of
infrastructure projects related to utilities, transportation, renewable energy and
community services. Mr. Raymond Mann, President and Senior Consultant, is the
City’s Program Manager. He is assisted by Mr. Robert Kirkman, Vice President of
Technical Support, who currently serves as Project Manager for Phase III of the Town
Creek project. Mr. Kirkman will serve as Project Manager for Phase IV, Construction,
Commissioning, Operation, and Reporting and he will be available throughout the
project period described in Section 3.2, below.
Résumés for Mr. Kirkman and Mr. Mann are provided in Appendix A of this application.
Upon approval of this grant application, RMA will provide all support and the
engineering and professional services necessary for the effective management and
administration of the grant. The Project Manager will work closely with the City and
AEA to develop the detailed scoping documents, project plans, schedules and
specifications for procurement of the resources needed to complete the tasks d efined in
the grant agreement. The project management team will also assist the City with the
procurement process, including proposal review, contractor selection and the
preparation of contract documents.
When contractors/providers are selected and approved, RMA will coordinate the
combined efforts of the project team and act as the primary interface with the AEA grant
manager. Mr. Kirkman will be responsible for progress reporting for identified project
milestones, and overall compliance with the project scope, schedule and budget as
defined in the grant agreement.
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.)
Phase III (Work Currently Funded & Underway)
Field Assessment Completed
2009
October
Recommendations/Costs Finalized 1 November
Application for Phase IV Funding 10 November
Final Field Report Including System
Mapping & Documentation
30 November
Permitting and Environmental Review
Complete
2010
March
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 8 of 84 10/7/2009
Phase IV (This Application)
Phase IV of this project will be completed within six months of project startup. A
generalized schedule for primary tasks is as follows:
Project Startup 6 Weeks
Mobilization Materials/Equipment/Crews 1 month
Hydro-Infrastructure Improvements 6 Weeks
Controls Modifications & Monitoring 1 month
Access Road Improvements 1 Month
Equipment Procurement/Delivery 2 Months
Demobilization 1 Week
Reporting/Documentation/Training 2 Weeks
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.)
Project Startup – Includes grant execution and setup for grant
management/administration.
Mobilization – Field crews’ materials and equipment arrive on-site.
Dam Repairs & Improvements - Complete dam repairs and
infrastructure improvements.
Turbine Inspection & Maintenance – Inspect, dismantle, repair, and
reassemble turbine.
Control System Improvement – Upgrade existing control system.
Operational monitoring, and performance testing.
Maintenance Equipment, and Storage Building – Provide City with
track excavator, tools, lighting, generator, and miscellaneous equipment
required for on-site maintenance at the impoundment locations. Includes
on-site storage building for equipment, and ATV with enclosed cab for
year round accessibility.
Access Road – Construct access road to service impoundment areas.
Provide As-Built Documentation, Systems Operational Manuals and
On-site Training - Contractor provided support and documentation
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 9 of 84 10/7/2009
adequate to ensure systems operation, and sustainability.
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.
The City believes it is important to use a team approach to implementing and managing
its renewable energy projects. The team will consist of selected City staff, the RMA
project management team, Electric Power Systems, Inc., and th e AEA grant manager.
Each of the tasks described in this application requires specialized knowledge and skills
that must be obtained from private sector consultants and service providers engaged in
or highly familiar with hydropower resource development. Electric Power Systems
(EPS), EES and MCM are highly qualified to perform the work described in this grant
application. These companies have prepared the task lists and cost estimates for this
grant application and are familiar with the existing hydroelectric power generation
system.
EPS will be the prime contractor for this project. EES and MCM will be sub -contracted
to perform the tasks related to powerhouse and control system repairs and upgrades.
The project management team organization is shown b elow:
Phase IV
Project Management Team
AEA Grant
Manager
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 10 of 84 10/7/2009
As described in Section 3.1, above, RMA Consulting Group will act as the City’s
representative and project management team. Having a project management team in
place prior to grant approval and the appropriation of funds will allow the City to
complete several pre-project activities such as coordination with AEA, refinement of the
City’s grant applications, preparation of contract documents, and review of proposed
grant agreements.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
The City has identified Mr. Kirkman as the project manager and primary point of contact
for communications with AEA and the grant manager. This will ensure an effective,
continuous flow of communication throughout the project. In addition, the project team
will use a suite of project management tools including web -based communications and
reporting, task and milestone tracking, work breakdown structure, schedu ling, document
control, budget control and risk management.
The project manager will coordinate with the AEA grant manager to develop a schedule
of reports. As a minimum, the City will conduct weekly status teleconferences and web -
based distribution of weekly reports on scope, schedule, budget and unresolved issues.
Trouble shooting reports and teleconferences will be provided on an as needed basis.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
This project is considered to be low risk. There are some risks associated with field
work and site surveys. The greatest risk in Akutan is unfavorable weather during field
operations. Delays of site work are possible, which would affect the overall project
schedule. EPS, the Contractor responsible for the assessment and preliminary design
is familiar with the hydropower system and potential weather impacts. These risks have
been considered in the development of milestones and the construction project
schedule.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 11 of 84 10/7/2009
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.
The resource is a stream at the east end of the City of Akutan town site. It was originally
identified as “No Name Creek”, and was later referred to as “School Creek”, but is now
known as “Town Creek”. Stream flows for the resource were measured several times in
the early and mid- 1980s. As a result, the stream was identified by the City as a
potential resource for hydroelectric power generation.
In 1993, Akutan formed a joint venture with Alaska Power Systems (APS) for the design,
construction, operation and maintenance of a hydroelectric power generation system
utilizing the Town Creek resource. The system was constructed and became
operational in October, 1993. The City purchased 100 percent ownership of the system
in February, 1994. The system is owned and operated by the City’s Akutan Electric
Utility, Inc., an unregulated public utility.
The proposed grant project will allow continued use of the Town Creek resource to
provide a peak power output of 105 kW and integrate the hydro project with the existing
diesel engines located in the remote diesel plant. This integration will allow the water
supply to be optimized for the City and utilize lower cost diesel fuel at the remote plant.
Since this is a repair and upgrade of an existing renewable energy system, there are no
reasonable alternatives available at this time.
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 configuration of the existing hydropower generation system is as follows:
Two feeder stream impoundments with 8 foot tall dams and 4000 feet of 6
inch polyethylene pipe.
Town Creek central impoundment with a 10 foot tall dam and 3000 feet of
10 inch polyethylene pipe.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 12 of 84 10/7/2009
400 feet of transmission line.
A combined hydro-diesel generation powerhouse.
A standalone diesel power plant located remote from the hydro/diesel
plant.
A survey of the system was conducted in 2007 as part of an AEA study (see State of
Alaska, Alaska Energy Authority, Rural Energy group, “Conc eptual Design Report,
Akutan Rural Power System Upgrades”, April 2007, prepared by LCMF, hereafter “the
LCMF Report”). The report provides the following description:
The hydroelectric powerhouse is located at the east end of the city. It is a
stand-alone generation facility consisting of a self – contained 175 kVA
(105 kW peak capacity) Canyon Industries hydro generator, backed by a
125 kW Perkins diesel generator in the same module. The facility features
a 4-inch plastic penstock, which provides water to a Pelton wheel turbine
from a reservoir 800 feet above the powerhouse. The hydro plant has a
PLC based control system that allows for the hydro generator to be
paralleled with the local diesel generator. The controls also provide remote
monitoring and control of the powerhouse.
The hydro plant is not currently operational. The ANTHC cut the main line
during the construction of the water treatment plant. The process for
repairing the line was completed, but subsequent problems, including the
inability to properly synch the hydro with the diesel generator have
continued to plague the system.
During the month of October 2009, representatives from EPS conducted a survey and
subsequent evaluation of the entire system including impoundments, penstock, val ves,
turbine unit, power systems and control modules. This work is funded under AEA Round
2 grant application #249 awarded in the amount of $162,000.
The resulting evaluation and assessment of the condition and efficiency of the
hydropower generation system, including dams, impoundments, penstock, and the
power plant has been conducted and a final report including geo -referenced schematics,
and documentation will be published by the end of November 2009. The preliminary
findings are attached in Appendix G of this application. In addition to the known
deficiencies of the system, this assessment will define the repairs and upgrades needed
to create optimum efficiency and output. This information is reflected in the design and
construction tasks outlined in this application.
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.
Electrical power for Akutan is provided by diesel generators located at the power plant
on the west side of the village. These are remote from the hydro plant. They are
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 13 of 84 10/7/2009
operated by Akutan Electric Utility, Inc., a non-regulated utility. The best available
information regarding energy resource utilization comes from the Power Cost
Equalization (PCE) Reports filed with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The City’s
PCE annual report for July 2008 to June 2009 shows the consumption of 43,797 gallons
of #2 diesel fuel at an average $4.00/gallon cost of fuel. With an annual generation of
over 548,000 kWh, the cost of power is $0.32/kWh.
In the past, the Akutan hydropower generation system has provided up to 50 percent of
the peak load requirements of the City on an annu alized basis. The repair and upgrade
will return the system to operation with the capability of providing 60 percent of current
peak load. The most recent evaluation of Akutan’s energy data and the continued rise in
fuel prices, show that the hydropower system repair and upgrade project can produce
immediate fuel cost savings of more than $100,000 per year at a $4.00/gallon cost of
diesel. Increasing hydropower production to the peak capacity of 105 kW, could
substantially increase this savings.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
Power for Akutan is provided by the Akutan Electric Utility, Inc., an unregulated utility.
The Annual Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Report for Nonregulated Utilities filed with
the Alaska Regulatory Commission for the period July 2007 to June 2008 provides the
following market data:
Sales Revenue
Class Customers Revenue
Residential 37 $70,441
Commercial 17 $67,775
Community Facilities 12 $41,709
Total: $179,925
Total utility operating expense: $358,167
City subsidy to electric utility: $178,242
Cost of power related to fuel: $0.25 kWh
Total cost of power: $0.54 kWh
City subsidy to customers: $0.27 kWh
Completion of the hydropower system upgrade and repair will reduce Akutan Electric
operating expense by nearly 30 percent. The most immediate impact of this reduction
will be a corresponding reduction in the City’s general fund contributions to utility
operations. In the alternative, this savings could be used to further reduce the cost of
power to utility customers as an offset to the increasing cost of diesel fuel for heating.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 14 of 84 10/7/2009
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
The Phase III project described in this grant application will provide the information and
field data required for a preliminary system design including recommended upgrades for
operation, safety, sustainability and costs. Phase III also includes application for permits,
so that Phase IV construction work can commence immediately following receipt of
funding. Specifications and cost estimates are provided to AEA for review and approval
as part of this Phase IV grant application along with a schedule for completion.
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 Town Creek drainage area required for this project is owned by the City of Akutan.
This includes all land necessary for access to the entire hydropower generation system
and rights of way or sites required for construction, material storage, and staging.
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
Phase III of the project required a field inspection of the impoundment dam for stability
and capacity. Any significant modification to the dam will require compliance with the
State of Alaska dam safety program. There are no anticipated problems associated with
the dam permitting process.
RMA has contacted the State Department of Natural Resources and confirmed that the
City of Akutan has been granted water rights to Town Creek.
Submittal of permit applications will be initiated under Phase III during December 2009.
Permits are intended to be available by Spring 2010. Following are a list of agencies
from which permits are anticipated:
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 15 of 84 10/7/2009
State of Alaska DNR - Dam Safety Division
State of Alaska DNR, Div. of Mining Land & Water – Water Section
There are no other identified permitting issues related to this project that could be
barriers to project completion.
4.3.4 Environmental
Address whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will
be addressed:
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
This project involves the repair and upgrade of an existing hydropower generation
system and certain existing access road improvements required to service existing
facilities. There are no identified environmental or land use issues that are considered
barriers to project completion. The field inspection and data collection tasks of Phase III
have determined that there are no environmental issues to be considered prior to
construction.
4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues
(Total Estimated Costs and Projected Revenues)
The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding r equested 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
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 16 of 84 10/7/2009
Total anticipated project costs are as follows:
Phase III (Funded July 2008 Under AEA Grant Application #249)
Task Funds Provided
Data Collection/Analysis $14,000
Field Related Work/As-builts 38,500
Dam Safety Assessment and
Permitting
2,500
Final Report 43,000
Other 64,000
Total: $162,000
Phase IV: Construction, Commissioning, Operation and
Reporting – This Grant Application
Project Startup $44,729
Mobilization/Demobilization 149,100
Dam Repairs & Improvements 486,790
Access Road 358,991
Maintenance Equipment and Storage
Building
191,810
Turbine Inspection and Maintenance 27,031
Control System Improvement 202,729
Documentation and Training 29,820
Total: $1,491,000
The City is requesting funding for phases IV of this project in the amount of $1,390,000
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.)
This information will be identified during Phase IV of the project, based on the final
design and operating specifications. The full cost of operation and maintenance of the
upgraded system will be borne by the Akutan Electric Utility, Inc.
4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 17 of 84 10/7/2009
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
Completion of this hydropower system upgrade and repair will not present an opportunity
for power sales to any customers beyond the exist ing customer base. There may be a
slight increase in demand until the harbor and airport projects come online. Any
increase in demand thereafter should be met by the development of the Loud Creek
hydropower project. The proposed feasibility study for th e Loud Creek resource will
determine if there is a future opportunity for power sales to Trident Seafoods
Corporation.
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
Download the form, complete it, and submit it as an attachment. Document any conditions or
sources your numbers are based on here.
The completed Project Cost Worksheet is attached in Appendix B.
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
The State of Alaska, including AEA, continues to make significant investment in Akutan’s
energy and transportation infrastructure. Federal appropriations administered by the
FAA, Denali Commission and the Corp of Engineers have added significant funding for
development in Akutan. These funds are in large measure a recognition of the
importance of the Bering Sea fishery and Akutan’s potential for economic development.
The City’s renewable energy strategy will support this significant public investment by
providing long-term, cost effective power for both public and private expansion in the
Eastern Aleutians.
The repair and upgrade of the existing hydroelectric power generation system is an
important first step in preparing for more than $160 million of public investment. In
addition, the project will provide immediate b enefits by reducing dependence on diesel
fuel and improving air quality relative to climate change. Other benefits include:
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 18 of 84 10/7/2009
Protects previous state investment in the existing hydroelectric power
generation system.
Decreases State subsidy for Power Cost Equalization related to diesel fuel
consumption.
Potential annual fuel displacement is estimated at 40,000 gallons, an
annual cost savings of at least $100,000, nearly $2 million over the life of
the project.
Takes advantage of a $1.2 million Denali Co mmission funded project to
upgrade the City of Akutan electric distribution system.
Promotes the sustainability of the City, tribal organizations and the local
seafood industry.
Allows for the near-term use of a renewable energy resource while the City
implements longer term renewable energy solutions.
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
This project represents upgrades and improvements to an existing
hydroelectric system. Consequently, existing business structures and
revenue streams are sufficient to support a sustainable system once the
required modifications are in-place.
The City of Akutan will directly fund maintenance and operational expenses.
Location, climatic conditions, and limited equipment and technical
resources are significant operational issues for Akutan. The recommended
approach to this project will provide the resources required to routinely
access and maintain the system for sustainability. Light equipment, tools,
improved access, and additional training will ensure that City Technicians
are able to maintain operation with minimal outside support.
The City of Akutan is committed to providing dedicated staff for systems maintenance
and operation. Additionally, the City will schedule and fund routine annual inspections,
maintenance, and operational oversight by hydroelectric professionals from outside
Akutan.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 19 of 84 10/7/2009
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.
The City of Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade Project Team is prepared
to proceed with the tasking and milestones outlined in this grant application immediately
following availability of funds.
The $162,000 in previous grant funds provided to the City by AEA du ring FY 2010 are
currently being utilized by the City to develop the necessary tasks and scope of work
required to get the City’s Town Creek Hydroelectric system fully operational and
sustainable. The recent field assessment, systems evaluation, repair, up grade, and
rehabilitation recommendations work prepared by the City’s Contractors EPS, EES, and
MCM, means the project is ready for implementation during FY 2011, and will provide
adequate documentation to immediately proceed with permitting, so that work will not be
delayed.
The City has designated staff to receive technical training on systems operations and
maintenance. This same staff will be part of the City provided construction and
rehabilitation team.
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.
The residents of the City of Akutan are dependent on the existing diesel electric and
hydroelectric systems for their power needs. Continued problems with the hydroelectric
system have contributed to a significant increase in fuel consumption, and placed an
excessive demand on the diesel electric plant. Outages and fluctuations in power cycles
are damaging to motors and electronic devices throughout the City, and are detrimental
to the growth, well being, and safety of the community as a whole. Consequently the
City of Akutan Electric Utility, City Administration, Council, and residents of Akutan are
all in agreement that the hydroelectric system repairs, rehabilitation, and sustainability
measures applied for under this grant are considered a priority.
The City Council has formally approved the award of the Phase III contract work funded
by the AEA Round 2 grant to Electric Power Systems (EPS) and authorized the submittal
of this funding application through resolution No. 10 -06 (Appendix F).
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 20 of 84 10/7/2009
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
The City of Akutan has effectively utilized the $162,000 of grant funding for Phase III to
complete the field survey, assessment, and recommendations required to support
Phase IV work. In accordance with the design, specifications and cost estimates
developed in Phase III, the City is requesting grant funding for Phase IV Construction,
Commissioning, Operation, and Reporting, of $1,39 1,000. The City will contribute
$100,000 in matching funds to support this effort.
In addition to a contribution of funds towards this project the City continues to provide
direct subsidies to power generation and heating. Without the development of
renewable energy resources these subsidies will total more than $1 million over the next
24-36 months.
The attached Grant Budget Form provides a task and funding source brea kdown.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 21 of 84 10/7/2009
SECTION 9 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and
suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4.
B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4.
C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 9.
D. Letters demonstrating local support per application form Section 8.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD per RFA Section 1.6.
F. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
- Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
- Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to
commit the organization to the obligations under the grant.
- Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
- Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 22 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners,
consultants, and suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and
3.4.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 36 of 84 10/7/2009
Professional Qualifications
Electric Power Systems Inc.
Power systems engineering, project management and construction is Electric Power Systems,
Inc.’s (EPS) core business. Our owners, principals and senior staff are all practicing engineers
with considerable experience focused on electric utility infrastructure. EPS specializes in the
design, study, testing and troubleshooting of power generation, power distribution, power
transmission systems, and protective relays.
EPS has been managing multi-discipline projects successfully for over 13 years and the
proposed team for this project is a cohesive group of professionals with complementing project
experience. EPS maintains a full-time staff of approximately 120 in its Juneau and Anchorage,
Alaska; and Tacoma, Vancouver and Redmond, Washington locations. Our staff consists of
seasoned planners, electrical and mechanical engineers, drafters, electricians and technicians,
and support personnel. We have the depth and capability to reassign our professional and
production staff to meet the needs of this project.
For this project, EPS will utilize EES Consulting (EES) and McMillen LLC (MCM) as
subconsultants. The following is a brief overview of each of these firms:
EES Consulting (EES)
EES is a multidisciplinary consulting firm with emphasis in engineering, environmental and
regulatory services to clients involved in energy and natural resource related businesses
throughout the Northwest including British Columbia and Alaska. Formed in 1978, EES has a
staff of 26 engineers, scientists, analysts and support staff. They are a firm of professionals
headquartered in Kirkland, Washington with offices in Bellingham, Washington; Portland,
Oregon; and Indio, California. A large majority of their project work is associated with
hydropower and fishery enhancement that is a natural byproduct of this industry. Their staff has
extensive experience in the environmental, engineering, and regulatory fields, with backgrounds
in civil, mechanical, electrical and structural engineering, operations, fisheries, water quality and
hydrology. EES has registered professional electrical, civil and mechanical engineers in the
state of Alaska. Their engineering staff includes senior engineers with many years of
experience working on all types of hydropower and fishery related projects. They have
completed final design on a variety of hydropower projects in the past five years and are
currently completing design of a 7.5MW hydro project for Snohomish County Public Utility
District, and working on rehabilitation and replacement of four 22MW vertical Kaplan hydro
turbine/generators for the Pend Oreille Public Utility District.
McMillen LLC (MCM)
MCM is a woman owned 8(a) firm based in Boise, Idaho providing a unique business
organization that maintains engineering, environmental and natural resources, and construction
services within one firm. Since their inception, Mc Millen, LLC has strived to build their design
capabilities in multiple market sectors. From their roots in the water resources and fisheries
engineering market, they have expanded to serve the hydropower, transportation, agriculture,
environmental, and water/wastewater markets. For PacifiCorp, for example, their projects have
expanded from water resource and fisheries engineering to include work at their powerhouse
facilities (Lemolo, Prospect Dam Powerhouse 1 & 2, Yale Dam, and Toketee). They are a full
service consulting firm with project experience extending from the planning phase through
construction and project startup. Their staff members have hands on experience in building the
projects they designed bringing a unique understanding of constructability issues to their design
process. Their design packages are developed with an eye on construction, resulting in lower
construction bids and streamlined construction. They are currently working for Puget Sound
Energy, Idaho Power Company, Portland General Electric, PacifiCorp, Seattle City Light,
USACE Portland District, USACE Walla Walla District, USACE Sacramento District, and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 37 of 84 10/7/2009
Key Personnel
The following are brief overviews of the key personnel proposed for this project:
Dave Buss, PE, Project Manager
Mr. Buss has over 13 years of electrical engineering experience throughout Alaska and the
Pacific Northwest. As the manager of the EPS Juneau office, he has considerable experience
with planning, scheduling and coordinating projects. Mr. Buss took part in the initial inspection
of the Akutan Town Creek Hydro plant and was part of the design team for upgrading the hydro
plant controls. His expertise includes system coordination, relay settings, power generation
controls, switchgear controls, motor controls, system start-ups, troubleshooting and
maintenance and design engineering. He possesses the ability to work independently on
projects that require close attention to sequence of events in order to prevent down time and or
outages to client’s electrical systems. Mr. Buss provided protective relaying and control design
for a six generator, double bus power plant and acted as the staff engineer for the City of Sitka
Electric Department where his duties included troubleshooting outages, system performance
issues, control problems and protective relaying settings. Mr. Buss also provides engineering
support to the communities of Angoon, Kake, Hoonah, Sitka, Metlakatla, Yakutat, Wrangell and
Petersburg along with the Alaska Marine Highway vessels. The engineering support for these
clients involves assisting with troubleshooting of generation and distribution problems, design of
upgrades, and installation assistance of upgrades and relay settings. Before joining EPS, Mr.
Buss worked for Alaska Electric Light and Power as the Assistant Generation Engineer.
Jack Anderson, PE, Senior Transmission Engineer
Mr. Anderson has spent 26 years in the electrical engineering field with emphasis in both the
technical and management aspects of electric utilities. He joined EPS/Dryden & LaRue in 1990
as an associate engineer and lends considerable system expertise to the staff. A resident of
Alaska since 1983, he has served as project manager/engineer for numerous projects
throughout the State of Alaska. He has completed the design and construction of a 115 kV
transmission line for the City of Seward, 69 kV transmission lines on the north slope of Alaska,
distribution lines for most of the major utilities in the State of Alaska, and numerous substations,
up to 230 kV, for utilities throughout the State of Alaska including Chugach Electric Association,
Copper Valley Electric Association, Kodiak Electric Association, Homer Electric Association,
City of Unalaska, Healy Clean Coal Facility, Fairbanks Goldmine and the City of Seward. As
the City of Seward's Utility Engineer for six years, Mr. Anderson was responsible for the
management support, planning, engineering, operation and maintenance of 20 miles 115 kV
transmission, 24 miles 69 kV transmission, 10 miles 24.9 kV distribution, 100 miles 12.5 kV
distribution, 10.5 MW diesel generation and 2,450-customer municipal electric system for 1.5
years.
Don Jarrett, PE, Mechanical Engineer
Mr. Jarrett is a mechanical engineer with over 30 years of experience in the design,
operation/maintenance, licensing/permitting and project management of power generation
facilities. Don offers a wide range of experience in hydropower generating projects, including
feasibility studies and concept development, water conveyance systems, power piping and
valves, hydraulic turbines, induction and synchronous generators, controls design, fish passage
facilities, and plant operations/maintenance planning and management.
Morton McMillian, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
Mr. McMillen has a broad background in water resources and fisheries engineering with project
experience in fish trapping and holding facilities, fish ladders, fish screens, surface collectors at
hydroelectric facilities, hatcheries, and acclimation facilities. He is a founding partner of
McMillen, LLC. Mort’s project experience extends across the Pacific Northwest, Alaska, and
Northern California. Throughout his career, Mort has led coordination activities with the
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 38 of 84 10/7/2009
resource agencies including NOAA Fisheries, USFWS, IDFG, ODFW, WDFW, and state and
local regulator groups.
Pete Rittmueller, Hydrologist/Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Rittmueller has extensive experience installing and operating stream gauging stations in
Alaska, Washington and Canada. In addition to installing and monitoring more than 50 stations,
Mr. Rittmueller generates hydrological records and synthesizes long periods of record for water
supply, energy projects and fisheries analyses. He has managed and participated in
environmental studies and assessments for more than 40 hydroelectric projects since 1984. He
has managed and co-managed all phases of projects including scoping, study development and
implementation, budget preparation, technical report writing, and submittal of FERC license
applications. Mr. Rittmueller's primary role has been project management of critical hydrology
and instream flow issues for projects in the Pacific Northwest. His participation in negotiations
on several projects has resulted in obtaining flow agreements that have improved the feasibility
of projects.
Chris Boyd, PE, Structural Engineer
Mr. Boyd brings more than ten years of experience as a structural engineer on numerous
hydroelectric, fisheries, water resources, and transportation projects through out the Northwest.
He has extensive experience in structural design and construction, including structural design
for the Elk Creek Dam removal near Medford, Oregon, structural design of a new fish hatchery
near the Upper Baker dam, and design of the fish evaluation station and transport system for
the Upper Baker Lake Floating Surface Collector. Mr. Boyd is also currently under contract to
PacifiCorp to complete the design modifications to the existing Burrows Ponds Banks 1 & 2 at
the Speelyai Hatchery.
Dan Axeness, PE, Civil Engineer
Mr. Axness is a registered professional engineer specializing in water resources. He brings
more than eighteen years of specialized expertise in roadway drainage, hydraulic modeling,
pipeline and pump station design, erosion control, construction management, irrigation planning
and design, and bridge scour evaluation. Dan’s work for the last 15 years has been on large
multi-discipline projects including: water and wastewater treatment plants, sanitary sewer lines
and force mains, water transmission pipelines, pump stations, and reservoirs, fish screens and
barriers, fish hatcheries, dams and spillways, dikes, and transportation facilities, and have often
included major environmental analysis for ESA listed species.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 39 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 40 of 84 10/7/2009
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade Project
Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project
phases. 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. Year-round flow with low flows February - April
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomass fuel)
2. Existing Energy Generation
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 1 hydropower; 3 diesel
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other Hydro: 105 kW; Diesel: 70 kW, 125 kW, 150 kW
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Hydro Plant: 1 Canon Industries hydro, 1 Perkins
Diesel
Diesel Plant: 1 Caterpillar diesel, 1 John Deere
diesel
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 1 Canyon hydro, 15 years; 2 Perkins diesel, 10
years; 1 John Deere diesel, 2 years.
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 70% - 80%
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor FY 08 - $79,697
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor FY 08 - $281,118 (including 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] 692,000 kWh generated; 560,000 kWh sold
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] FY 08: 48,000 gallons #2 diesel
Other
iii. Peak Load 108 kW
iv. Average Load 84 kW
v. Minimum Load 50 kW
vi. Efficiency 14.14 kWh/gallon
vii. Future trends Increasing demand over next 24-36 months related to harbor and airport
projects.
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] 42,870 gallons #1 and #2 diesel
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.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 41 of 84 10/7/2009
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
3. Proposed System Design
a) Installed capacity 125 kW hydro generation
b) Annual renewable electricity generation
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 420,000 kWh from hydro generation
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system
b) Development cost $1,653,000 Including Phase III Grant Award of
$162,000 for Survey/Assessment& Preliminary
Design.
c) Annual O&M cost of new system
d) Annual fuel cost
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity 40,000 gallons #2 diesel
ii. Heat
iii. Transportation
b) Price of displaced fuel FY 08: $3.26/gallon FY 09: $4.00/gallon (estimated)
c) Other economic benefits
d) Amount of Alaska public benefits $2.5 million estimated reduction of State PCE and City
subsidies over 10-year life of project.
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale FY 08: $0.54/kWh, after construction $0.25 kWh (estimate)
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 42 of 84 10/7/2009
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio
Payback Estimated $2 million over 10 years.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 43 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 9 and supporting
documents.
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 44 of 84 10/7/2009
Milestone or Task Anticipated
Completion Date
RE- Fund
Grant Funds
Grantee Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
Project Startup $41,729 $3,000 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $44,729
Mobilization/ Demobilization (Local
logistical support) $139,100 $10,000 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $149,100
Dam Repairs and Improvements $454,141 $32,649 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $486,790
Access Road $334,914 $24,077 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $358,991
Maintenance Equipment and Storage
Building $178,945 $12,865 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $191,810
Turbine Inspection and Maintenance $25,218 $1,813 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $27,031
Control System Improvement $189,133 $13,596 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $202,729
Documentation & Training $27,820 $2,000 City of Akutan Cash/In Kind $29,820
TOTALS 1,391,000 100,000 $1,491,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $73,500 City of Akutan – In kind $73,500
Travel & Per Diem $ $15,000 City of Akutan - Cash $15,000
Equipment $191,787 $7,500 City of Akutan – In Kind $199,287
Materials & Supplies $1,000 $4,000 City of Akutan – In Kind $5000
Contractual Services $1,198,213 $ $1,198,213
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $1,391,000 $100,000 $1,491,000
Applications should include a separate worksheet for each project phase (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Design and Permitting, and
Construction)-
Add additional pages as needed
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 45 of 84 10/7/2009
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 46 of 84 10/7/2009
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 47 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 48 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 49 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 50 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix D. Letters demonstrating local support per application form
Section 8.
(No letters of support are attached to this grant application.)
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 51 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD per RFA
Section 1.6.
(Disc provided separately.)
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 52 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix F. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
- Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
- Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to
commit the organization to the obligations under the grant.
- Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
- Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 53 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 54 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 55 of 84 10/7/2009
F. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.*
Print Name Joe Bereskin
Signature
Title Mayor, City of Akutan
Date 10 November 2009
*The City of Akutan is currently resolving its compliance obligations with the State of Alaska
Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) with respect to certain employee enrollment
dates and classifications. To the best of my knowledge, the City is in compliance with all other
federal and State laws.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 56 of 84 10/7/2009
Appendix G. Town Creek Hydroelectric Field Trip Report- October 2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 57 of 84 10/7/2009
TOWN CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FIELD TRIP REPORT
EES CONSULTING, INC.
MCMILLEN, LLC.
NOVEMBER 2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 56 of 84 10/7/2009
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
Mobilization ................................................................................................................................. 1
Document/Data Review ................................................................................................................ 1
Background Information .................................................................................................... 2
Civil Construction Information .......................................................................................... 2
Powerhouse Construction Information .............................................................................. 2
Historical Energy Production Information ......................................................................... 2
Streamflow Information ..................................................................................................... 2
Interviews....................................................................................................................................... 4
Site Review ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Dams .................................................................................................................................... 5
Powerhouse .......................................................................................................................... 5
Penstock Headlosses...................................................................................................................... 6
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 7
Dam Repairs/Modifications ................................................................................................. 7
Upper Watershed Access Road ............................................................................................ 7
Control System Replacement ............................................................................................... 8
Turbine Inspection ............................................................................................................... 8
Cost Estimates ............................................................................................................................... 8
Dam Repairs/Modifications ................................................................................................. 8
Upper Watershed Access Road ............................................................................................ 8
Control System Replacement ............................................................................................... 8
Turbine Inspection ............................................................................................................... 8
List of Figures
1 Town Creek Diesel-Hydro Generation ................................................................................ 3
2 Town Creek Site Plan .......................................................................................................... 9
3 Penstock Route and Powerhouse Location ........................................................................ 10
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 57 of 84 10/7/2009
4 Main Impoundment Dam ................................................................................................... 11
5 Powerhouse ........................................................................................................................ 12
Photographs
Diversion Dam #1 .............................................................................................................. 13
Main Impoundment Dam ................................................................................................... 14
Main Dam Spillway ........................................................................................................... 15
Main Dam (from downstream) .......................................................................................... 16
Diversion Dam #2 .............................................................................................................. 17
Diversion Dam #3 .............................................................................................................. 18
Powerhouse ........................................................................................................................ 19
Turbine Hydraulics and Load Bank ................................................................................... 20
Turbine Control Panel ........................................................................................................ 21
Turbine Load Bank Controls ............................................................................................. 22
Turbine Runner .................................................................................................................. 23
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 58 of 84 10/7/2009
Town Creek Hydro—Field Report
Introduction
Electric Power Systems contracted with EES Consulting to provide a field review and
recommendations for repairs/upgrades to the City of Akutan, Alaska Town Creek Hydroelectric
Project. The EES Consulting (EES) engineering team includes McMillen LLC (MCM)
engineers.
Mobilization
On October 25, 2009, Don Jarrett (EES) and Dan Axness (MCM) joined Robert Kirkman (RCM)
in Akutan to perform the field work and develop a preliminary report with rep air/improvement
recommendations and cost estimates. This team had to spend two nights in Unalaska due to
weather delay prior to getting a flight to Akutan.
While in Akutan the team hiked into the Town Creek watershed on October 24, 2009 and saw
the main impoundment dam and diversion dams. The upper part of the watershed had up to 18
inches of snow so it was not possible to completely assess the condition of all aspects of the
dams. On October 25, 2009 we had Demetri take us across the bay so we could hike up into the
Loud Creek watershed. Again there was snow cover on the upper part of the watershed, but we
were able see the locations of previously identified dam sites and the powerhouse location.
Document/Data Review
We reviewed the following information relative to the Town Creek Project.
Electric Power Systems, City of Akutan Hydro Inspection Report & Upgrade Cost Estimates,
May 2003
Grant Application of Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair, City of Akutan, Renewable
Energy Fund Grant Application, AEA-09-004, September 3, 2008
Alaska Power Systems, ASTF Grant Agreement 92-4-277, Unitized Village Scale Hydro-
diesel Generation System, April 1994
Akutan Hydropower Feasibility Study, HDR/Ott Water Engineers and Dryen & LaRue, 1989
Akutan Hydropower, Preliminary Design Report, Ott Water Engineers, 1980
Egor Eispov, LCMF Inc., Alaska Energy Authority, Akutan Rural Power System Upgrade,
2007
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 59 of 84 10/7/2009
Background Information
The City of Akutan entered into an agreement with a developer for the construction and operation of the
Town Creek Project. The developer, Alaska Power Systems (APS), packaged the powerhouse equipment
and performed construction of the project at Akutan in 1990. Three small diversion dams were
constructed to divert water to a main impoundment dam in the watershed above Akutan. The small
diversion dams used 6 inch PE pipe to run water from the small drainages to the main dam. From the
main dam at elevation 800 feet above MSL a 10 inch PE pipe (penstock) was installed to bring water to
the powerhouse. The powerhouse located at 26 feet above MSL, had a unique hydro turbine-generator
with a drive train that would allow a small diesel to connect to the turbine-generator through a clutch.
Civil Construction Information
There is very limited documentation of the construction of the main dam, diversion dams and
penstock in the above documents. The ASTF Grant Agreement has good information on the
powerhouse equipment (which does not reflect the current equipment arrangement). This
documentation includes dam design information performed by Shannon & Wilson, but is more
schematic in nature with respect to the dams and does not show the locations of the intake
screens, penstock and valves, etc.
Powerhouse Construction Information
There is good information on the powerhouse and generating equipment which was installed by
APS. Information from the Electric Power Systems report indicates that significant issues have
existed with the diesel-hydro system control. The hydro turbine generator has a rating of 160
kW; however, it is connected to a load bank which may consume 50 kW or more for the purpose
of providing frequency regulation. The original connected diesel had a rating of 150 kW.
Historical Energy Production Information
Filings and other data for the Alaska Energy Authority power cost equalization (PCE) program
were obtained from 1999 to 2009. Earlier studies for the City of Akutan include energy
production in the late 1980’s. Power plant log sheets were also reviewed. This review indicates
that there has been very limited hydro operation the last 10 years. Figure 1 presents monthly
generation for both diesel and hydro. As can be seen from the figure annual energy production
has been increasing over the last 10 years. Average annual production over the ten year period
was 538,000 kWh. Production in FY2009 was 566,000 kWh. In 1989 the City’s energy
production was 305,000 kWh so energy consumption has nearly doubled in the last twenty years.
As can be seen from the historical production hydroelectric production never amounted to any
significant portion of the City’s needs.
Streamflow Information
While APS apparently did streamflow measurements in the tributaries which come out of the
watershed there is little documentation of the studies. According to APS the hydro project would
be able to generate 2,000,000 kWh annually. Based on studies done on North Creek and Loud
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 60 of 84 10/7/2009
Creek hydroelectric production from a watershed of this size would be expected to be less. For
example, Loud Creek has a drainage area estimated at 1.1 square miles with 10.8 CFS average
discharge and Ott Engineers estimated 1,820,000 kWh annually. The Town Creek drainage
intercepted by the dams was estimated by APS at 0.63 square miles, correcting for head
production might be expected to be on the order of 1,700,000 kWh. Unfortunately no further
hydrology studies have been performed to correlate the small amount of streamflows to a longer
record to obtain a better estimate of average annual production. Given the variability of monthly
average flows energy production from Town Creek will be unlikely to be able to supply all needs
of the City.
Figure 1—Town Creek Diesel-Hydro Generation
Town Creek Hydroelectric Generation Potential
We were unable to find any hydrologic information for Town Creek from the APS
documentation. A review was made of the available hydrologic information for adjacent
watersheds. Based on information from the HDR/OTT Report on Loud Creek and North Creek a
simple analysis of generation was performed. The average monthly flows for Loud Creek were
factored for Town Creek and used to calculated generation based on the installed capacity at
the Town Creek Hydro Project. Figure 2 presents the average monthly discharges for both
creeks.
Generation analysis based on average monthly data typically overstates the amount of
generation potential. Furthermore the Loud Creek data was only measured at the mouth and
was corrected to the diversion location based on a drainage area correction. Additionally the
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 61 of 84 10/7/2009
average monthly flows that were reported for Loud Creek were based on very limited gage
information. Finally, during the winter months it is likely that more of the discharge is from lower
elevation run-off.
Figure 2 – Town Creek and Loud Creek Hydrology
Using the average monthly flow data and installed capacity to calculate monthly energy
production and additionally taking 50% of the calculated value (to reflect the issues discussed
above) it is estimated that monthly energy production could be as high as 54,000 kWh for an
annual total of 648,000 kWh annually. Annual energy consumption varies in the City, but in the
most recent full fiscal year use was 538,000 kWh. It is doubtfull that hydroelectric generation
can fully replace diesel. It is likely that some diesel generation will be required for acceptable
frequency regulation. For all of these reasons it is estimated that hydroelectric generation will
displace about 75% of the typical energy generation.
Based on the above analysis and assumptions hydroelectric generation is estimated to be
approximately 404,000 kWh. This hydroelectric generation will displace the use of diesel
generation. Based on the assumption that diesel generation efficiency is approximately 13
kWh/gallon, hydroelectric generation would displace 31,080 gallons of diesel annually. In 2008
diesel fuel cost was reported as $3.96 per gallon, thus the hydroelectric generation would offset
$123,000 of fuel cost annually.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 62 of 84 10/7/2009
Interviews
We meet with Mayor Joe Bereskin and Demetri Tcheripanoff to better understand some of the
project history and problems. As we had read the original Town Creek project was conceived by
Alaska Power Systems (APS). Apparently APS went bankrupt and the City was not able to
obtain any project documentation aside from that contained in the final report for ASTF grant
and some O&M manuals which were provided by APS. According to the Mayor APS gear was
“home-made” and not very reliable.
We asked about issues associated with the main impound dam and the diversion dams. The City
has experienced problems with the intakes in the diversion dams (which feed water to the main
dam). These small diversion dams have become clogged with sediment and there is not any way
to easily clean these out. There are screens of some type which become clogged with organic
debris. According to City staff the main dam has similar problems.
According to City staff the hydro turbine runs well but is not presently being used because of the
failure of the main impound dam level sensor. The Mayor noted that the control system seems
overly complex and is difficult for them to troubleshoot and problems. The recent improvements
by EPS was helpful as new components are off the shelf as opposed to custom built equipment as
was originally supplied by APS. The Mayor noted the difficulty for the City to properly operate a
hydro project with local residents.
We asked about the construction of the main dam and diversion dams. The City staff was not
very knowledgeable about the construction. They did not that the contractor had brought in a
dozer and backhoe for construction and had been able to get the equipment up to the upper
watershed. City staff noted that the intake screen on the dams clog with weeds and it is difficult
to clean them as they are underwater.
We asked about the City water supply system. The City water supply system diverts water into a
separate system and runs directly to the City water treatment plant. There is no interconnection
between the Town Creek hydro and the City water supply system.
We asked about the status of the Town Creek Hydro Project and the Alaska Department of Dam
Safety. The Mayor noted that a dam safety person had been to the site and concluded that the
main dam is subject to regulation due to its height.
We asked about construction of an access road to facilitate operation and maintenance of the
dams. The Mayor noted that the soils are very erodible and the residents would not want to see
an ugly road from below.
We asked about the second diesel generator power plant which the City maintains as a backup t o
the diesel-hydro system. The Mayor stated that there is no reason to install any monitoring of this
facility or interconnect it in any way to the diesel-hydro plant.
The regular hydro operator was out of town so we were not able to interview that person. We
asked for his contact information.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 63 of 84 10/7/2009
Site Review
Figures and photographs of the watershed, dams and powerhouse are included in the Appendix.
Figure 1 illustrates the Town Creek site showing the main impoundment dam and diversion dams
located in the upper watershed. Figure 2 shows the penstock route and powerhouse location.
Figure 3 illustrates the main impoundment design. Figure 4 illustrates the powerhouse as
originally supplied by APS.
Dams
The team hiked into the upper water shed along the penstock route and visited the main
impoundment dam and the three diversion dams (see photographs in the Appendix). The upper
watershed has up to 18-inches of snow so inspection was difficult. Due to snow and ice on the
ponds we were not able to see much more than the dams and the spillways.
It was noted that the spillways are pipes on the crest of the dam and there is concern about the
potential for overtopping if the pipes get frozen due the snow/ice. Should there be a rain on snow
event while these pipes are obstructed the dams would be overtopped and likely fail.
At the main dam we were unable to operate the penstock shutoff valve or the sluice valve; they
are apparently jammed. We could not see the screen on the penstock intake. The screen may be
damaged or have large openings as evidenced by the amount of debris found in the needle
(spear) valves.
The diversion dams all appear to be silted in. Diversion dam #3 is damaged and sheet piling has
been washed out or frost jacked. In addition, the wooden cap protecting the upper end of the
vinyl sheet piling has deteriorated.
Powerhouse
The hydro-diesel powerhouse was visually inspected (see photographs in the Appendix). The
original powerhouse configuration had a diesel engine directly connected to the hydro turbine
through a clutch arrangement. It is not known when this arrangement was changed; however, the
arrangement now has a separate diesel gen-set.
The hydro turbine is a two-jet impulse machine manufactured by Canyon Hydro in Deming,
Washington. This is a compact horizontal unit which is rated for 150 kW with a net head of 685
feet and 3.5 CFS discharge. The deflectors are hydraulically operated with a counter weight for
emergency operation. The needles are also hydraulically operated and have limit switch es for
open/closed position indication. A visual inspection was made of the turbine runner was made
and the runner appears to be in excellent condition. The general condition of the turbine appears
good. The turbine shutoff valve (8 inch 300# gate valve) is outside of the powerhouse and is
hand operated. The condition of this valve is not known. For typical hydro projects this shutoff
valve would be located indoors and be protected from the elements.
The hydro turbine is connected through a flexible coupling to an 1800 RPM synchronous
generator rated at 140 kW, 0.8 power factor which produces power at 480 V.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 64 of 84 10/7/2009
The hydro turbine-generator uses a Thomson & Howe control system. This system utilizes a load
bank for regulation of frequency, allowing rapid response to changes in system load. Impulse
turbines do not regulate frequency well (due to slow needle closure timing) so generally either
deflector control or a variable load bank must be used. Thomson & Howe also supplied small
hydraulic power units for the needles and deflectors.
While we were there the Mayor attempted to put the hydro unit online. The unit began to spin,
came up to synchronous speed, closed in and loaded up to 10 kW. Shortly thereafter the unit
tripped off. According to the HMI there was no alarm which indicated why the unit tripped off
line. It was not clear what the issue was with putting the hydro unit online. The HMI indicated a
penstock pressure of 331 psi when the unit was off-line. As noted previously the main dam level
sensor is not functioning so there is no way to monitor the amount of water in the main dam.
The HMI system for control and monitoring of the diesel-hydro powerhouse was inspected. The
Mayor demonstrated the HMI system which uses a desktop PC in the City Hall. This is t he new
HMI system which was developed and installed by EPS. The diesel gen-set was producing 80
kW at 490 V on October 26, 2009 at 17:00.
The diesel in the powerhouse is a relatively new John Deere with a generator rating of 150 kW.
The controls for the diesel are using the Thomson & Howe original equipment which has been
modified by EPS. While there we observed that the diesel was operating satisfactorily and
system frequency looked stable.
Penstock Headlosses
The frictional losses in the penstock have been estimated based on the following:
Main impound dam water surface elevation 800 FT above MSL
Turbine runner elevation 26 FT above MSL
Penstock length 3000 FT
Penstock diameter 10 IN
Penstock material Polyethylene (PE) pipe
Turbine maximum discharge 3.5 CFS
There is no documentation about the penstock that we were able obtain, other than statements in
the data reviewed that 10 inch PE pipe was used. We were able to confirm the 10 inch diameter
PE pipe at the powerhouse just upstream of the outdoor 8 inch isolation valve. Standard IPS PE
pipe comes in different pressure ratings. The gross static head is 776 feet which is 335 psi. A PE
pipe with a diameter to wall thickness ratio of 7.3 has a pressure rating of 320 psi, so this is
likely what was used. They may have used a combination of lighter wall thickness pipe further
up the penstock. None-the-less based on the assumptions above the estimated headloss due to
friction at full load is 64 feet. Thus the net head at the turbine would be 710 feet of head. This is
consistent with information obtained from Canyon Hydro (the turbine manufacturer) that the
turbine was designed for 685 feet net head and 3.5 CFS.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 65 of 84 10/7/2009
Recommendations
Dam Repairs/Modifications
Modifications and repairs to the dams in the upper watershed are needed for maximizing the
capture of water in the watershed.
The modifications recommended for the main impoundment include:
1. Replace all three valves. (2) 10" valves at the dam and (1) 8" valve at the powerhouse
near the harbor
2. Provide insulated valve vaults for all three valves (6' dia. Cmp)
3. Move the air vent downstream to fit the valve vault around the upper valve
4. Install an 8-ft wide by 20-ft tall trash rack that consists of a vertical 8' dia. CMP with the
face cutoff at an angle
5. Extend the 3- 12" over flow pipes 80-ft into the pool to provide overflow protection when
the pool is frozen
6. Provide air vents for the three overflow pipes to prevent siphoning
7. Re locate level sensor into trash rack in a stilling well.
Modifications recommended for the smaller impoundments include:
1. Excavate small ponds (~ 50 cy each)
2. Provide small trash racks for the three small ponds (8-ft x 3-ft horizontal trash racks)
3. Install sediment sluice pipes through the vinyl sheet piling on the three small dams.
Backfill and replace slope protection.
Upper Watershed Access Road
1. To properly operate the dams in the upper watershed reasonable access must be provided
so the staff can safely travel to these locations and inspect and maintain the dams. An
access road with reasonable grades would allow ATV access in the summer and
snowmobile access in the winter.
2. Provide an access trail for 4-wheeler/gator/snowmobile
a. Use some gravel from the harbor
b. Use cellular confinement material (grid) or geotextile to form a base and sides
where the trail cuts through ridges
c. Reestablish vegetation to maintain low visibility of trail
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 66 of 84 10/7/2009
Control System Replacement
Given the difficulty of City operations staff to get unit to properly parallel with the diesel it is
recommended that the control system be replaced. Electric Power System will address this
recommendation and the associated estimated cost in their report.
Turbine Inspection
It is recommended that a service technician from Canyon be brought to site to perform a full
inspection of the unit. While the unit has not had a lot of hours of operation it is nearly 20 years
old and inspection and servicing is recommended by a factory technician.
Cost Estimates
Dam Repairs/Modifications
The three small impoundments will be excavated to remove sediment, have fill compacted
around the scoured areas at the dam crest, be fitted with 3-ft by 8-ft trash racks, and have the
pressure treated wood sheet pile protection replaced.
The main impoundment will have the overflow pipes extended into the reservoir to provide ice
free overflow protection. In addition, the main penstock will have the outlet valve, the sluice
valve and the powerhouse valve replaced. All of these valves will be protected in 5 to 6-ft
diameter corrugated metal pipe valve vaults. The cost for these repairs is estimated at
approximately $297,000, which includes surveying, design, permitting, construction
management, materials, and labor.
Upper Watershed Access Road
The access to the impoundments will be improved with a new ATV road. The low-visibility
road will use a geotextile base in places to stabilize the surface and reduce erosion. Finally,
vegetation will be established along the road and construction areas. Estimated cost for the road
construction is approximately $266,000, which includes surveying, design, permitting,
construction management, materials, and labor.
Control System Replacement
To be estimated by Electric Power Systems.
Turbine Inspection
Cost for a Canyon factory technician to travel to Akutan and inspect the turbine is estimated at
$11,000. An allowance for repairs (bearings and packing, etc.) of $5,000 is recommended.
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 67 of 84 10/7/2009
Figure 2—Town Creek Site Plan
Figure 3 – Penstock Route and Powerhouse Location
Main Impoundment
Dam
Diversion Dam
1
Diversion Dam
2
Diversion Dam
3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 68 of 84 10/7/2009
Figure 4—Main Impoundment Dam
Penstock
Powerhous
e
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 69 of 84 10/7/2009
Figure 5 – Powerhouse
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 70 of 84 10/7/2009
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 71 of 84 10/7/2009
Photographs
Diversion Dam #1
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 72 of 84 10/7/2009
Main Impoundment Dam
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 73 of 84 10/7/2009
Main Dam Spillway
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 74 of 84 10/7/2009
Main Dam (from downstream)
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 75 of 84 10/7/2009
Diversion Dam #2
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 76 of 84 10/7/2009
Diversion Dam #3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 77 of 84 10/7/2009
Powerhouse
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 78 of 84 10/7/2009
Turbine Hydraulics and Load Bank
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 79 of 84 10/7/2009
Turbine Control Panel
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 80 of 84 10/7/2009
Turbine Load Bank Controls
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 81 of 84 10/7/2009
Turbine Runner