Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKiseralik Chikuminuk Hydro App part 3YUKON-KUSKOKWIM HEALTH CORPORATION "Working Together to Achieve Excellent Health" November 7, 2008 Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Sirs/Madams, Thank you very much for providing an opportunity for agencies like AVCP Regional Housing Authority to apply for funds for renewal energy projects under the Alaska Energy Authority's Renewal Energy Fund grant program. We have worked with AVCP Housing in development of the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008-2010, which seeks the feasibility of development of renewal energy projects, such as Hydroelectric Power, Wind & Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, and even a Regional Utility Consolidation Plan and Development, for villages along the Kuskokwim River. Therefore, we are in full support of AVCP Housing's grant application for a feasibility study to facilitate development of a Hydroelectric Power Project in the Kuskokwim River region. We thank you very much for kindly considering AVCP Housing's grant application. We wholeheartedly believe we are beginning to make great progress toward providing cheaper and cleaner electricity for communities and people of the Y-K Delta in the near future. As a partner of AVCP Housing, we look forward to working with AEA on this and other renewable energy projects in the future. Again, thank you very much. Sincerely, YUKON KUSK9.WM HEALTH CORPORATION Peltola P.O. Box 528 • Bethel, Alaska 99559 + 907-543-6000 9 1-800-478-3321 r allsta Corporation 301 Calista Court, Suite A - Anchorage, Alaska 99518-3028 • (907) 279-5516 - Facsimile (907) 272-5060 • Website: www.calistacorp.com November 7, 2008 Alaska Energy Authority AEA-09-004 — Renewable Energy Grant Application ATTN: Butch White Grant Manager 813 West Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. White, This is a letter in support of the AVCP Regional Housing Authority grant application under AEA's Renewal Energy Fund grant program. This grant project attempts to begin implementation of the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008-2010 which we adopted last October as part of an coordinated regional effort to address the energy crisis facing our people. The proposed project includes a feasibility level analysis to be conducted by the AVCP Regional Housing Authority (Housing) for Renewal Energy Deployment for the Kuskokwim region involving Hydroelectric Power, Wind & Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, and Regional Utility Consolidation Plan and Development for Bethel and villages along the Kuskokwim River. More specifically, this grant project will be for a feasibility study to facilitate development of a Hydroelectric Power Project in the Kuskokwim River region. We are aware of several potential hydroelectric project locations that may provide up to 30 megawatts of power, which is enough electricity to displace diesel -generated power in as many as 13 villages along the Kuskokwim River, including Bethel. The project will cost $400,000. We are requesting $250,000 which we will match with in -kind funding of $150,000 from AVCP Housing and its regional partners, namely AVCP, Inc., Calista Corporation, and Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation. On behalf of Calista Corporation and its partners, thank you very much for kindly considering the AVCP Regional Housing Authority grant application. We look forward to working with AEA on this and many other renewable energy projects in the future. Sincerely, tCALISTA CORPORATION Matthew Nicolai President/CEO Raymond J. Watson, Chairperson Myron P. Naneng, Sr., President Phone (907)543-7300 Fax (907)543-3369 AVCP The Association of Village Council Presidents Office of Administration Pouch 219, Bethel, AK 99559 Akiachak Akiak Alakanak November 7, 2008 Andreafsky AWak Atmautluak Bethel Alaska Energy Authority Cn fornak sl. 813 West Northern Lights Blvd Chevak Anchorage, AK 99503 Chuathbaluk Chuloonawick Crooked Creek Dear Sirs/Madams, Eek EninionakThank you very much for providing an opportunity for agencies like AVCP Regional Georgetown Goodnews Bay Housing Authority to apply for funds for renewal energy projects under the Alaska Energy Hamilton Authority's Renewal Energy Fund grant program. Hooper Bay Lower Kalskag Upper Kalskag We have worked with AVCP Housing in development of the AVCP Calista Regional Kasluk Kipnuk Biennial Energy Plan 2008-2010, which seeks the feasibility of development of renewal Kongiganak energy projects, such as Hydroelectric Power, Wind & Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, Kotlik and even a Regional UtilityConsolidation Plan and Development, for villages along the Kwethluk g p g g Kwigillingok Kuskokwim River. Therefore, we are in full support of AVCP Housing's grant application Lime Village for a feasibility study to facilitate development of a Hydroelectric Power Project in the Marshall Mekoiyuk Kuskokwim River region. Mtn. Village napaimute We thank you very much for kindly considering AVCP Housin 's rant application. We i�apakiak Y rY Y g g g pP 1\apaskiak wholeheartedly believe we are beginning to make great progress toward providing cheaper Newtok and cleaner electricity for communities and people of the Y-K Delta in the near future. Nightmute 1\ unapitchuk Ohogamiut As a partner of AVCP Housing, we look forward to working with AEA on this and other Oscarville renewable energyprojects in the future. A thank you very much. Paimiut am p J g y ry Pilot Station Pitka's Point Sincerely, Platinum Quinhagak Red Devil ASSOCATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS Russian Mission Raymond J. Watson, Chairman Scarmnon Bay Nunam dqua Sleetmute St. Mary's Stony River fJ� Nunakanyak Myron P. Naneng, President & CEO Tuluksak Tuntutuliak Cc: Governor Sarah Palin Tnnnnak Julie Kika AFN Unilcmniut � Senator Lyman Hoffman Representative Bob Herron ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS P.O. Box 219 • BETHEL, ALASKA 99559 ® PHONE 543-3521 44T" ANNUAL CONVENTION BETHEL, ALASKA OCTOBER 7-9, 2008 RESOLUTION 08-10-05 TITLE: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE AVCP CALISTA REGION BIENNIAL ENERGY PLAN FOR 2008-2010 WHEREAS The Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP) is the recognized tribal organization and non-profit Alaska Native regional corporation for its. fifty-six member indigenous Native villages within Western Alaska and supports the endeavors of its member villages; and WHEREAS AVCP fully supports its member villages in all aspects of their self- determination, health and well-being; and WHEREAS The AVCP/Calista region is facing high and rising costs of energy; and WHEREAS The high and rising energy costs are contributing to increases in home heating prices, electricity, cost of air fare, cost of materials and supplies and consumer food products; and WHEREAS The high and rising costs are effecting every individual, business, organization, and agency in the villages and in the region; and WHEREAS The high and rising energy costs effect an individuals ability to provide heat, electricity and food to their homes and families and decrease an agency's and an organization's ability to provide the best possible service to the people of the region; and WHEREAS The high and rising energy costs demand the villages, the regional organizations and other stakeholders come together to discuss and plan a regional energy policy to address the energy crisis and to develop strategies that best fit the needs of the region, its villages and people; and WHEREAS The members of Nuvista Light and Electric Cooperative, the Association of Village Council Presidents, AVCP Regional Housing Authority, Calista Corporation, the Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Chaninik Wind Group, the City of Bethel, North Star Gas, Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association, and various other stakeholder groups and individuals have met and developed and drafted a regional energy policy and plan to develop a plan for sustainable energy for the region. RESOLUTION M} 10-05 -PAGE 2- Now THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Association of Village Council Presidents adopts the AVCP Calista Region Biennial Energy Plan for 2008-2010 accepted by the Nuvista. Light Electric Cooperative Inc.'s Board of Directors. ADOPTED by the Association of Village Council Presidents during its Forty-fourth Annual Convention held at Bethel, Alaska, this 9th day of October, 2008, with a duly constituted quorum of delegates. CERTIFIED: (:;;a5ym�_on_d J. Watson, hairman My r n P. Naneng, Sr., Pre ident Alaska power Authority Findings and Recommendations Bethel Area Power Plan December 20,1985 B E T H E L A R E A P 0 W E R P L A N FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS December 20, 1985 1916/485(1) MIRY r L J, At KA LIBI i 1 0 F L"k-ji N EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Bethel Power Plan analyzes alternative sources and/or configurations of electrical energy generation in the Bethel Region. Presently, Bethel and all of the twelve surrounding villages use diesel generation for their needs. Beyond just the econCmnic hardship that diesel power plant costs have on consumers, a number of other conditions are also commonly found: - Vacillating diesel fuel costs which limits reliability of economic comparisons for alternative generating sources. - Varying degrees of skill among village personnel in the maintenance of independent power systems. - Problems with voltage and frequency fluctuations. - Safety issues from poorly regulated installation of generation and distribution facilities. These conditions and the tentative nature of subsidies for electrical use necessitates a solution. Previous investigations have, therefore, grouped these common concerns by region in an attempt to develop comprehensive power supply plans. The Alaska Power Authority staff has conducted an analysis of several different power sources and different configurations of power centralization for the Bethel region. First, continuing to utilize diesel generation, distribution line interties were proposed to link Bethel to other villages. Next, two sizes of hydroelectric projects and two sizes of coal-fired steam plants using a Regional intertie system for distribution were evaluated. The continuation and centralization of diesel generation in Bethel appears to be the most viable near term option. Bethel has the largest organized utility in the Region with the capacity to serve the Regional electrical load and is also centrally located among the villages. The more capital intensive projects such as coal and hydroelectric generation have a much higher present worth cost over the len th of the study period than diesel generation with intertie s). In the long term, it is recommended that the applicability of the use of coal in the Bethel Region be periodically evaluated. The viability of this option will be sensitive to cost of coal and its BTU content and should be investigated in the context of development of the Deadfall Syncline project near Cape Beaufort or other indigenous coal mining projects. 1916/485(2) S '� 3 \�`{\/�� va10• �� 1cO -u 1 EXHIBIT 1 ' 1 to • t"� r. NO owAD o o w y p'ri : �iAl� . • S .i t S , .r ' +` •• e� v ° i wqe e•� '� Tuluksakav �. n+A!Y • 1► •F l { Ka sigluk , tchuk SIP 'A klachak Akiak �A .r Nunapi *+ r `• •° �' Atmautluaklb .e o �•• a,. - �(ir:'�+ F • Kwethluk .• v•« Oscarville) a • +� t • Napaskiak' • �. 'i : Napakiak 1 nJ� ® s ♦ �► '" tia d ` '•• • . t Eek • ®�i ke al• t p • V Tuntutuliak " a `T O to tt ,i ,w • t • a c River Eek *! • , B.k e - � 8 f I FAIRBANKS 1 ANCH A0E f JUNEAU ` KEY MAP SCALE IN MILES 0 4 8 12 16 20 L 1 1 1 1 1 SCALE 1:1,000,000 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT COMMUNITY LOCATION MAP 1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to determine the most economic electrical energy supply plan for the Bethel Region. The Region consists of Bethel and twelve surrounding villages: Atmautlauk Napakiak Napaskiak Oscarville Tuluksak Tuntutuliak Kasigluk Nunapitchuk Akiachak Kwethluk Eek Akiak At the present time, all of the villages meet their electrical energy needs through diesel generation in the individual village --except Kasigluk which receives electrical power through an intertie to Nunapitchuk, and Napakiak which is intertied to Bethel. A combination of escalating diesel fuel prices in the early 1980's and evidence of poor quality of electrical service and dependability prompted a search for feasible alternatives or improvements to the existing diesel electric generation. Under Alaska Power Authority's direction, Harza Engineering produced a draft preliminary feasibility report for a Bethel Power Plan in December 1982. Profiles of each village in the Bethel Region were formulated to provide data on historical and projected energy consumption, to review energy sources to meet those energy needs, to review corresponding environmental concerns and economic analyses, to determine public reaction to proposed solutions, and to make recommendations for the most viable plan. The consultant ultimately developed 10 hypothetical alternative cases to the Base Case, which is the continuation of diesel generation in the villages. The Base Case provides the control for costs which all other cases are compared against in the economic analysis. An Optimized Base Case was constructed utilizing diesel generated electricity augmented by wind turbines, waste heat recovery from diesel electric plants for space heating of larger centralized buildings, with direct coal combustion for residential space heating. Among the other base case alternatives developed were the Lake Chikuminuk Hydroelectric Projects of two different sizes (9.5 MW, and 24 MW), and five different thermal options with differing configurations. Table 1 provides a comprehensive list of the options studied. 1916/485(3) 11 M 0 TABLE 1 Bethel Area Power Supply Options from Harza Title Base Case Optimized Base Casel Thermal Alternatives: 4 MW Base Load Plant 4 MW Plant w/Waste Recovery 10 MW Plant 10 MW Plant w/Waste Heat Recovery 10 MW Plant w/Waste Heat Recovery & Supplementary Boiler Hydroelectric Alternatives: 9.5 MW Chikuminuk Lake Project 24 MW Chikuminuk Lake Project Fuel Cell Alternatives: 9.0 MW Fuel Cell Plant 9.0 MW Fuel Cell Plant w/ Waste Heat Recovery Basic Components Diesel generation with normal retirement & replacement of equipment. Continued use of fuel oil for space heat. Diesel generation with waste heat recovery, wind turbines used in conjunction w/varying configurations of interties. A straight condensing coal-fired steam plant augmented by diesel generators for peaking. 25% of heat level to be met. A straight condensing coal-fired steam plant to meet total electric energy demand. 62% of heat load to be met. 80% of heat load to be met. 60 GWH per year energy production with 7% surplus for space heating. 120 GWH per year energy production with 27% surplus for space heating. Phosphoric acid electrolyte type using propane as a fuel source. 12% of heat load to be met. l the optimized base case and all other alternatives assumed the use of coal direct combustion for space heating needs not met by cogeneration. 1916/485(4) 0 I Mil I Other alternative sources of energy production (peat, solar, wood, geothermal, and natural gas) were discarded due to inadequate availability of relevant resource data, absence of commercially available technologies, cost considerations, or absence of an infrastructure for harvesting and/or distribution of the resource. Additionally, a total of twelve hydroelectric sites received reconnaissance level assessment including three sites along the Kisaralik River (Exhibit 2). Contrary to earlier reconnaissance work performed by Retherford & Associates, the Kisaralik sites were ultimately abandoned in favor of Chikuminuk Lake on the basis of lowest unit cost for the highest installed capacity (Exhibit 3). The consultant's chosen power sources were compared within varying intertie configurations --regional and subregional. A present worth analysis was done through the last year of economic life of the hydro projects (50 years) and a benefit/cost study completed. The consultant concluded that the Chikuminuk Lake hydroelectric projects were the most feasible because they had the highest benefit/cost ratios in relation to the base case. It should be noted that none of the alternatives presented benefits to cost sufficient to justify further feasibility studies for any single case to the exclusion of others. Concerns regarding the report and its proposed scenarios led to additional study by APA staff. These concerns included: ° building a $200 million dollar hydro project (Lake Chikuminuk 24 MW) to serve approximately 7000 people at a time when oil prices and state and federal revenues are declining. ° use of the excess energy from the 24MW Lake Chikuminuk Project for space heating without sufficient information concerning primary and secondary distribution systems. ° lack of confidence in both the design criteria and cost estimates for the interties ° the absence of complete sensitivity analyses to variations in fuel prices and BTU values for coal; lack of confidence in the design criteria for the 9MW Chikuminik project to overcome line losses and still meet the load. ° the absence of consideration for retirement cost of the privately owned Bethel Utility 1916/485(5) t JK a% ' Peawlw p?" aa� V m a� A.Aywae ` M m {�].1��n pb� ,� D — �,�,� • ` 1 TULUKSAK RIVERAk F — ik AISALMON RIVER ' FOG RIVER ' 3� (IPCHUK RIVER ce • ¢' "g"JYYL,S KISARALIK RIVER (GOLDEN GATE FALLS) "ti� ? I •� ^ 1 \�. �KISARZK RIVER (LOWER FALLS) d KiSARALIK RIVER (UPPER FAILS) lk ...tjk ,--�-•. '' �r \ 1 UPNUK LAKE ,yt''•i� 1 4444 ,� / ./C'''�n MILK CREEK (LOWER SITE) -i..., _ Q F 1� Lake MILK CREEK (UPPER SITE);eve� CHIKUMINUK LAKE Nyea YY + tto 0� ua• rake Ow+l IZAVICKNIK RIVER •t, G„� 6A " zt �N Yy EXHIBIT 2 t N FAIRBANK. I BETHEI ANCHORA, E l� UNEAU VICINITY MAP NOTE: Base mapping prepared by Me Arctic Enyitonmentst Information snd Data Canlet, UnirersitY Of Alaska. 0 20 40 L I • 1 SCALE IN MILES 0 1,000,000) ' ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT LOCATION MAP POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES HAAZA ENGINEERING COMPANY Daembet 1982 EXHIBIT 3 1 1 1. 29 27 i UPNUK LAKE I _. KISARALIK (UPPER FALLS) RIVER 25 I KIPCHUK RIVER I t3 I t1 KISARALIK RIVER (GOLDEN GATE FALLS) 9 RIVER FALLS) f KISARALIK (LOWER 7 CHIKUMINUK LAKE i i 28 30 32 34 36 38 An REGIONAL ENERGY REQUIREMENT SUPPLIED — MWh x 103 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT ANNUAL ECONOMIC COST OF AVERAGE ENERGY HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 1902 2.0 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The Power Authority analysis investigated a variety of configurations for linking the villages and their power supplies. Also, different types of power sources were evaluated for their applicability in the Bethel Region. The centralized power sources were variations of power projects developed by the consultant with the exception that waste heat components were not considered. It was assumed that heat credits would be approximately equal for comparative sizes of the thermal options. Cost and dependability are the major concerns in developing a long term electrical supply plan for the Bethel Region. Electrical costs in all of the villages except Oscarville are now subsidized by the State of Alaska Power Cost Equalization Program. In addition, many of the villages have received grants and low cost loans to update and replace their generation systems. Three villages are served by the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative which borrows funds from the Rural Electricification Administration and provides energy based on a pooled rate for its thirty odd member villages. The 1985 cost of diesel fuel delivered to the various villages averages $1.24 per gallon. The diesel efficiency rate of village generation systems ranges from 4-10 KWH per gallon, at Bethel from 12-13 KWH per gallon. The wholesale bulk cost of power at Bethel is 13t per KWH at the bulbar and the average cost to a Bethel Utility customer is approximately 20t per KWH after fuel surcharges. Wholesale cost to Napakiak across the single wire ground return line is 17d KWH. The per average cost per KWH in the villages is 40 to 50e per KWH. Efficiencies of scale achieved through a centralized generation source in Bethel would appear to be attractive for the Region. Examination of costs associated with intertie construction and operation and maintenance of the interties and secondary distribution lines require a high level of reliability to support this strategy. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS This analysis is centered on electric energy generation needs for the Bethel Region. The analysis utilizes real 1985 dollars. The study period encompasses the years 1986 through 2041--the last year of the economic life of the hydroelectric optioti. APA's economic analysis includes an ex anded diesel base case, two project sizes of a thermal (coal option, and two project sizes of the Lake Chikuminuk option, all chosen for comparison with the Base Case. 1916/485(6) Due to the intermittent nature of wind generated electricity, the absence of proven methods of system integration, and problems related to comparative fuel cost savings from diesel displacement, wind turbines were not considered in the economic analysis. Fuel cell options were also not evaluated, because they are not expected to be commercially available until the mid 1990's. 3.1 Diesel Base Case The diesel base case is the actual situation in the villages carried through the study period. The majority of the villages provide their own electricity through diesel generators in place in the villages. The Lower Kuskokwim School District (LKSD) also has generators in place in most of the villages, either in a primary or standby capacity due to the lack of dependability of the village power resources. TABLE 2 Electric Generation Profiles Utility Capacity LKSD 8IA Peak* Ca Energy Vi11a4e Utility (KW) acit Site (KW) (M61H) Akiachak Akiachak 785 175 Prime 165 124 451 Ltd. Akiak Kokarmuit 2.50 250 Prime 65 279 Corp. Atmautluak Atmautluak 430 305 Standby 70 Q70 Utii. 2ethei Bethel 9,400 Utii. 4,600 25,000** Eek AVEC 300 75 Standby 108 374 Kasigluk AVEC Intertie 105 Standby135 See Kwethluk Kwethluk 500 125 Standhv 155api Nan83itchuk Inc. 108 Napakiak Napakiak- Intertie 150 140 See Bethel Ircinraq Hapaskiak Napaskiak 260 75 Prime 65 92 396 Inc. Nunapitchuk AVEC 875 75 Standby 135 86 1,373 Oscarville Unorganized 130 65 Prime 22 123 Tuluksak Tuikisarmute 155 170 Prime 125 81 306 Inc. Tuntutuliak Tuntutaliak 325 175 Standby 75 59 534 Inc. * Estimate from Harza 1982 * Includes Napakiak 1916/485(7) Fix Bethel provides power for itself and Napakiak through a single wire ground return (SWGR) transmission line; Kasigluk receives power through an AVEC tie line from Nunapitchuk. Replacement and additions to existing capacity would occur when load growth or economic life warranted. The base case provides the standard for comparison for all of the alternative options' costs in the present worth analysis --the process through which all of the costs for each alternative over the study period are discounted back to 1985 dollars. In the present worth ratio analysis, the base case value is 1.0 or the break even point for comparison of any alternative. If the value is greater than 1, then the alternative is considered a potentially acceptable project; if the value is less than 1, the project is considered unacceptable. 3.2 Expanded Diesel Case The first hypothetical case is the expanded diesel case which features the continuation of diesel generation with various configurations of interties linking Bethel and selected villages (Exhibit 4). Bethel presently is largest generation facility in the Region with the an installed capacity of 9.4 MW and peaks in the range of 4.5-4.8 MW. With some additional capacity, it has the capability of meeting the load requirements of the village network in addition to servicing its own load and that of Napakiak. Annual electrical energy demand for the twelve villages is estimated at 3 GWH with peak demand at 845 KW. Bethel is the interties for generation center for all of the selected the study. The existing diesel generation facilities in Bethel include four 2100 KW and one 1000 KW generators. 1984 electrical production was 24.8 GWH or approximately 2831 KW average load. Night time loads generally remain at about the average for the winter months. Bethel's central location in relation to the other villages would also reduce the capital costs of linking the villages. The proposed Regional intertie links all 12 outlying villages to Bethel. The smaller intertie options are (1) Bethel to Oscarville or Bethel to Oscarville and Napaskiak, (2) Bethel to Athmautlauk, Nunapitchuk, and Kasigluk, and (3) Bethel to Akiachak and Akiak or Bethel to Akiachak, Akiak, and Kwethluk. 1916/485(9) A ui 3t 0 V) ell aCO to U) m m m m ow = Elm = m = 4W m m M M SM TABLE 3 Distribution Interties from Bethel Length Village (Miles) Bethel To: Oscarville 4.65 Oscarville To: Napaskiak 1.25 Bethel To: Atmautluak 26.06 Atmautluak Jkt. To: Nunapitchuk Bethel To: Akiachak Akiachak To: Akiak Akiachak To: Kwethluk 1916/485(10) River Crossings 1 3 5.3 -- 15.62 1 7.15 7.58 Length & Method Of Crossing .5 Miles Kuskokwim Submarine Cable 320' Kongeruk River Overhead 790' Johnson River Submarine Cable 530' Johnson River Overhead 635' Kuskokwim Submarine Cable 1050' Kuskokwim 3 Submarine Cable 792' Kuskokwim Overhead 250' Kwethluk Slough Overhead These villages were chosen for the intertie study because of their proximity to Bethel and size of loads required to justify the capital cost investment. Segments with and without river crossings were selected, because of uncertainty of exact cost figures for such crossings and to demonstrate the effect of the cost of river crossings versus the amount of load. The transmission interties consist of 34.5 kv, three Phase lines to ensure that the school loads will be serviced. Overhead lines would be supported by 40 foot embedded wood poles. River crossing design would vary according to span length and height requirements. Navigable waterways would require 75 foot, class 3 poles in H frame structures for clearances up to 40 feet above water level. where 40 foot clearance is not sufficient or whenever physical conditions permit, submarine cable is proposed. Construction completion of an intertie alternative was estimated to be one building season so that a project on line date is 1987 for the first segment. Problems affecting the construction and costs of an intertie system between the villages and Bethel are numerous but are technically manageable within the framework of local support for the concept and of local, state, and federal coordination in providing rights -of -way for its implementation. Specific concerns which would require further consideration in a feasibility level study include: 1. Kuskokwim River Crossings. The Kuskokwim is navle y arge from its mouth to McGrath. Barge container heights can reach 24 feet, draft 10 feet and booms 30 feet. Assuming that 40 feet is the maximum achievable clearance (after sag) from 75 foot poles, submarine cable is recommended. Design consideration will include bank stability, ice conditions, protection from anchors and dredging, and redundancy requirements for dependability. 2. Ice lenses and innumerable lakes in the terrain. --with e state has experimented two lines using gravity -stabilized A frame structures. Both facilities have demonstrated design deficiencies and • cost on the magnitude of conventional designs. While the theory behind gravity type structures is attractive, a conventional embedded pole with minor modifications is envisioned. 3. Ownership, operations and maintenance. Currently, the privately owned BethelBithel Ut ity is the only entity capable of providing the local infrastructure I916/485(11) 9 for management of an comprehensive intertie system. A subregional cooperative utility has never been previously discussed but would provide an ideal institutional entity to resolve the issue. Villages would loose local powerhouse operators to a more centralized, Bethel based utility. In the absence of this type of infrastructure, other pre -construction arrangements are essential so that institutional responsibilities keep pace with electrical distribution facilities. 4. Comprehensive R.O.W. Easements Agencies affected include: Bureau of Indian Affairs - Native allotments U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - game refuge areas & allotments Bureau of Land Management - federal holdings & allotments Department of Natural Resources - State lands Department of Transportation & Public Facilities - State lands Village Corporations - Native holdings The widely scattered system layout will require a comprehensive rights -of -way strategy to promote cooperative project implementations. It is important to note that the villages located within the region are highly scattered with average loads below 100 KW in many cases. The cost of integrating more distant, isolated communities rises significantly. 3.3 Lake Chikuminuk Hydroelectric Cases The next proposed cases are the Lake Chikuminuk Hydroelectric Projects (9.5 and 24 MW capacity) which would be located approximately 130 miles southeast of Bethel on the Allen River near the outlet of Lake Chikuminuk. The projects would be connected via a 138 KV transmission line to a new Bethel substation which would step the power down to 34.5 KV for distri- bution. The 9.5 MW project would have a rated net head of 85 -feet, normal maximum reservoir elevation of 610 feet, with a dependable capacity of 9 MW at a minimum head of 80 feet. The average annual energy production would be 60 Gigawatt hours (GWH), with 39 GWH of firm annual energy. The 24 MW project would have a rated head of 126 feet capable of producing 113.5 GWH on a firm basis and an average annual energy production of 120 GWH. 1916/485(12) I I M I 3.4 Thermal Options The thermal cases chosen for analysis were the 4 MW and the 10 MW coal fired turbine plant. Each plant was assumed to be situated on the bank of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel. The 4 MW plant would provide a peak of 4000 KW of which approximately 3500 KW would be available for distribution. The 10 MW plant would provide a maximum peak of 10,000 KW of which 9000 would be available for distribution. 4.0 ANALYSIS DATA The Power Authority analysis is based on the following assumptions. Data utilized from the Harza preliminary feasibility study is noted. 4.1 Analysis Parameters Load Information - "Load" refers to the electrical generation consumption, in entirety, for each village. These figures were derived from Power Cost Equalization data and from the Lower Kuskokwim School District records for the period 7/84-6/85. Using a year's consumption data encompasses all of the seasonal variations in demand. Akiachak 451,196 Kwh Akiak 279,313 Kwh Athmautlauk 470,046 Kwh Bethel/Napakiak 24,769,626 Kwh Eek 373,489 Kwh Kasigluk/Nunapitchuk 1,372,887 Kwh Kwethluk 831,381 Kwh Napaskiak 396,125 Kwh Oscarville 122,998 Kwh Tuluksak 306,109 Kwh Tuntutuliak 533,741 Kwh Total Regional Load Z9,906,911 KwF Load Growth - 1.5% through 2002. The consultant projectedthe most likely average annual Bethel Region load growth rate as 2.11 through 2022. This figure was developed in 1982 when oil prices were higher and, reciprocally, state revenue projections were correspondingly high. Now with decreasing state oil revenues and decreasing federal program investment in Bush projects, growth is estimated to be more conservative as villages shoulder more of the burden of constructing capital projects. In addition, population growth in the Region is projected to remain at a low rate of increase. 1916/485(13) 7 Power Authority guidelines for economic analysis include: - The fuel escalation rate is projected to be -4% for 1985, 0% for two years, then 2% for 17 years. - Cost of debt is 9% - Real discount rate is 3.5% - Inflation is held to 0 for purposes of the economic analysis - Economic Life of projects: Hydroelectric = 50 Years ° Diesel Generator = 20 Years (Primary) 30 Years (Standby) ° Coal Plant = 25 Years ° Transmission Line = 25 Years 4.2 Cost Data 4.2.1 Diesel - Installed cost per KW: $750 in the villages $800 in Bethel 0&M - $0.054 per Kwh Standby (secondary) capacity cost - $0.10 load (KWH). This cost represents the cost of maintaining equipment e.g, diesel generators which must be maintained in the event of project downtime, which is estimated at 5%. Interties Overhead 40 foot wood pole* Material & Labor $63,968 Overhead & Profit @ 25% 12,794 Right -Of -Way 2,000 per mile Engineering @ 6% 3,838 Contingency @15% 9 595 2,195 Submarine Cable $39 per foot for three phase** * APA modification of Harza's estimate ** APA data from Diversified Constructors '84 costs estimate for Tyee-Katie intertie. 00 costs estimated at $1000 per mile per year. Terminal costs are $5886 at Bethel and $19,426 4.2.2 1916/485(14)