Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBristol Bay Regional Power Plan Interim Feasibility Assessment Executive Summary 1982BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL POWER PLAN DETAILED FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SU MMARY Bristol Bay JULY 1982 & Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation ALASKA PC'WER AU'I'HC'RI'l'l' 1.---__ --' STONE S WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION DENVER OPERATIONS CENTER GREENWOOD PLAZA. DENVER. COLORADO A AOORESS AL.L. CORRESPONOENCE TO P.O. BOX '406. OENVER. COL.ORAOO 80217 eOSTON NEW YORK CHERRY HILL, N.J. DENVER CHICAGO HOUSTON PORTLAND. OREGON SAN OI£GO WASHINGTON. D.C Mr. Eric P. Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 At tn: Mr. Donald W. Baxter Project Manager Dear Mr. Baxter: INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL POWER PLAN TEL.EPHONE: 303-7'0-7100 W.U. TELE.IC:45-4.01 July 31, 1982 Submitted herewith is our Interim Feasibility Assessment for the Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan Detailed Feasibility Analysis. This 4-volume report summarizes our work to date under Phase I of the study. A 3-volume draft Interim Feasibility Assessment report was issued for review and comment in March 1982. Several revisions have been made to the draft report as a result of your review. Also, the following important additions are included: a) Summaries of the geotechnical and fisheries studies at the Newhalen site. b) A new scenario covering local and subregional power developments. c) Comments by agencies on the draft report and responses by the Power Authority. d) A suggested Scope of Work for Phase II. The underlying conclusion of the Interim Feasibility Assessment is that there are a number of economically attractive alternatives to continuation of the present practice of reliance on diesel systems for electrical power generation in the Bristol Bay region. Two of these alternatives, a regional run-of-river Newhalen River hydroelectric development and a scenario consisting of several subregional developments, are recommended for further study. The subregional alternative is a cost effective mix of disconnected power supply components which consists of a small run-of-river hydroelectriC development on the Tazimina River along with wind systems, waste heat recovery systems and continued diesel generation in various other subregions. Mr. Eric P. Yould July 31, 1982 Page 2 Our principal findings and conclusions are set forth in the Executive Summary of the report. Details of the energy demand forecasts, alternative evaluations, site investigations, engineering studies, economic evaluations, and environmental studies which support the conclusions are described in detail in subsequent sections of the report and in the Appendices. It has been a pleasure working with the Alaska Power Authority on this challenging study, and we look forward to continuing the effort in Phase II. DLM/cms Enclosures Very truly yours, D. L. Matchett Project Manager ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation and its subcontractors wish to acknowledge the important assistance given by many individuals and organizations to the project team in undertaking the Interim Feasibility Assessment. Chapter 8 of this report documents many of the contacts made with the people of Bristol Bay and with state and federal agencies concerned with energy development. Without the information and support received from these sources. satisfactory completion of Phase I of the Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan Study would have been much more difficult. if not impossible. Special acknowledgement is given to the following individuals for their help: Ted Angasan. Tom Hawkins. William Johnson, and Kay Larsen. Bristol Bay Native Association Representative Joe Chuckwuk and his aide, Paula Scavera David F. Bouker, Nushagak Electric Cooperative Gordon McCormick, Naknek Electric Association Trig Olsen and John Adcox, Iliamna-Newhalen Electric Cooperative Tom Arminski, Dick Russell. and Tina Cunning, State of Alaska. Department of Fish and Game Ann Rappaport, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rick Austin, State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources Jim Clark and Don Penner, Bristol Bay Borough Paul Haertel and Mike Tollefson, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve Don Anderson, JEVAD, Inc. The above list is far from complete. While it is not possible to recognize each participant individually, we wish to thank all those who attended the public meetings in the villages and the agency meetings in Anchorage. The questions, comments, and suggestions which resulted from these meetings were a great benefit to the study. CERTIFICATIONS BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL POWER PLAN DETAILED FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT The technical material and data contained in this report and its Appendices were prepared under the supe~vision of the following individuals and organizations: Volume 1 -Report Appendix A -Engineering/Technical Considerations Appendix B -Energy Supply Technolog~ Evaluation Appendix C -Energy De~and Forecast Appendix D -Wind Energy Analysis Apoendix E -Geotechnical Studies - Tazimina Appendix F -Geotechnical Studies - Newhalen Appendix G -Environmental Report Appendix H -Newhalen Smolt and Fry Studies Appendix I -Hydrologic Evaluations Theodore Critikos Project Engineer Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. O. Scott Goldsmith Principal Investigator Institute of Social and Economic Research University of Alaska Mark A. Newell President Wind Systems Engineering, Inc. Rohn D. Abbott Vice President Shannon & Wilson, Inc. James E. Hemming Project Manager Dames & Moore Manager, Alaska Operations Anand Prakash Chief Water Resources Engineer Dames & Moore This study was prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned whose seal as professional engineer is affixed below. Donald L. Matchett Project Manager Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1. 5.1 1.5.2 1.5.3 1.6 1. 6.1 1. 6. 2 1. 6.3 1.7 1. 7.1 1. 7.2 1. 7.3 1.8 1. 8.1 1. 8.2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECu"TlVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL POw~R PL&~ ENERGY DEMA~1) ENERGY SUPPLY TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY PLANS Data Collection Energy Production Concepts Selected Energy Scenarios EVALUATION OF SELECTED E~~RGY PLANS Technical Environmental Economic REGULATORY COORDINATION &~D PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Agency Communication Regulatory Requirements Public Participation CONCLUSIONS &~ RECOMME~1)ATIONS Conclusions Recommendations i PAGE 1-1 1-1 1-2 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-6 1-12 1-15 1-20 1-20 1-21 1-26 1-29 1-29 1-30 1-30 1-31 1-31 1-35 GENERAL OUTLINE BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL POWER PLAN DETAILED FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT VOLUME 1 -REPORT VOLUME 2 -APPENDICES VOLUME 3 - VOLUME 4 - APPENDIX A -ENGINEERING/TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS A. 1 ENERGY NEEDS A.2 HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECTS A.3 DIESEL POWER A.4 WASTE HEAT RECOVERY A.5 ENERGY CONSERVATION A.6 WIND ENERGY A.7 POWER TRANSMISSION A.8 FOSSIL-FUEL ALTERNATIVES A.9 ORGANIC RANKINE CYCLE A.10 LOAD MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX B -ENERGY SUPPLY TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION APPENDIX C -ENERGY DEMAND FORCAST APPENDICES APPENDIX D -WIND ENERGY ANALYSIS APPENDIX E -GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES -TAZIHINA RIVER APPENDIX F -GEOTECHNICAL STUDY -NEWHALEN RIVER APPENDICES APPENDIX G -ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX H -NEWHALEN SMOLT AND FRY STUDIES APPENDIX I -HYDROLOGIC EVALUATIONS -TAZIHINA RIVER Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan Detailed Feasibility Analysis INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared for ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY July 1982 STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION DENVER, COLORADO 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Executive Summary is intended to provide a concise review of the work performed to date by Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation and its subcontractors during Phase I of the Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan study. This phase of the study concludes with a milestone called the Interim Feasibility Assessment. The Executive Summary highlights the work accomplished in reaching this milestone and presents major results and conclusions. The report and its appendices which follow should be consulted for the detailed analysis which provides the basis for the summary. 1.1 INTRODUCTION Electric power cost and availability have been identified by the residents of the Bristol Bay region as important concerns. Fuel oil is currently the primary energy source in the Bristol Bay region, both for electrical generation and space heating. The cost of energy production is currently high and has increased rapidly in recent years, due not only to the world-wide price escalation of fuel oil, but also to regional factors. The cost of electrical energy production in remote villages primarily served by small, non-central diesel electric generators is many times that of larger, more efficient interconnected central systems in larger population centers of Alaska and in other parts of the United States. In recent years the state of Alaska has taken a number of steps to address the energy problems in remote regions of the state. Direct subsidies are in effect which substantially reduce the cost of electricity to consumers in certain villages. In addition, the state has undertaken studies to evaluate potential sources of electrical energy production other than by diesel generators. Hydroelectric power generation, a renewable energy source, has been identified as a source which in the future may provide reliable low cost electricity for the Bristol Bay region; wind energy is another renewable energy source which may have application. 1-1 In 1980, a "Reconnaissance Study" by R. W. Retherford Associates for the Alaska Power Authority, evaluated the feasibility of potential hydroelectric developments in the Bristol Bay region. Projects were identified which were considered attractive for limited areas. The Retherford study also evaluated a hydro site on the Tazimina River about ten miles north of Iliamna Lake and east of Nondalton Village which was believed suitable for supplying regional needs through the year 2000. Retherford stated that "development of the Tazimina potential will result in the lowest power cost for all communities in an integrated, combined system." 1.2 BRISTOL BAY REGIONAL PO\vER PLAN Based on the Retherford recommendation, the Alaska Power Authority retained Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) in July 1981 to undertake a study called the "Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan and Detailed Feasibility Analysis". The purpose of this study is to assess the technical, economic, and environmental aspects of alternative electric power generation plans for the Bristol Bay region. A specific obj ective of the study is to evaluate in detail the feasibility of the Tazimina Hydroelectric Project and to compare it with the current practices of diesel generation and other promising alternatives. The Regional Power Plan addresses the needs of an 18-village study area within the region. The boundaries of the study area are the previously determined economic limits of the Tazimina Project market area. The villages included in the study area are Aleknagik, Clarks Point, Dillingham, Egegik, Ekuk, Ekwok, Igiugig, Iliamna, King Salmon, Levelock, Manokotak, Naknek, Newhalen, New Stuyahok, Nondalton, Portage Creek, and South Naknek. Figure 1.2-1 shows the Bristol Bay study region. The Work Plan for the study divides the work into called the IrInterim Feasibility Assessment lr , and two .phas es . 'Phas e I, the subject of this report, identifies numerous alternatives for energy production and compares them with respect to technical feasibility, environmental impact, and cost. 1-2 Based on the outcome of Phase I, the Work Plan calls for the continuation of the Study with Phase I I, when the most promis ing alternatives will be evaluated and compared in more detail and a recommendation made regarding project development. The central focus of Phase I of the Regional Power Plan is a thorough evaluation and comparison of the major energy options which are available for the Bristol Bay region. The following three hypothetical power plan cases were used as the framework for comparing various options: o Base Case, which represents the continuation of present practices of reliance on oil-fired (diesel) generation; o Alternative "A", which consists of the Tazimina River Hydroelectric Project as the required power supply; o Alternative "B", which consists of other energy sources, projects, or facilities, either alone or in combination. The primary purpose of the Phase I Report is to present information to the Power Authority and the people of the Bristol Bay region so that decisions can be made regarding the next step. The conclusions and recommendations which follow have taken into account a large body of information obtained from the residents of Bristol Bay and from State and Federal agencies interested in natural resource development and protection of the environment. However, the Phase I work should be viewed as a first step in the decision-making process. The emphasis is on engineering, environmental, and economic considerations, with the objective of screening out concepts which are impractical from these standpoints. A further evaluation of the most promising energy production scenarios, including more detailed environmental investigations, and a second level of engineering and economic comparisons between promising alternatives and the Base Plan, is planned for Phase II. 1-3 1 . 3 ENERGY DE HAND Levels of current energy use and predictions of future needs in the Bristol Bay study region are being evaluated by the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) of the University of Alaska. An interim report on future energy demand prepared by ISER is attached as c. The demand forecast contained in this report has be~n used to size and schedule the new electrical energy supply systems developed and evaluated during the Interim Feasibility Assessment. The forecast provided by ISER is based on the "Base Plan" electrical supply scenario, which is a continuation of the present practice of reliance on diesel generation . Although the requirements for other energy needs such as space heating were predicted, it was assumed that conversion from oil to electricity would not occur at this time under the Base Plan scenario because of a lack of economic incentive. ISER concludes that based on the present price of fuel, conversion to electrical space heating would not be significant unless the cost to the consumer approached $. OS/kWh in 1982 dollars. Such low electricity costs are unlikely for the scale of development needed for the Bristol Bay region. However, conversion could be attractive at much higher energy costs as the price of fuel oil rises in response to dwindling world supplies. The growth of electrical energy demand over the study period (1982 to 2002) used in developing the alternative power plans falls between the "high" and "low" demand scenarios predicted by Retherford, approaching the "low" scenario. This is due probably to an assumption by Retherford of some conversion from oil to electricity for space heating, resulting from a low cost hydroelectric system. The current assumption of no conversion should be conservative with respect to projected growth in regional energy usage; this assumption is also believed to be suitable for the first level comparison of a number of competing energy supply systems. The following tabulation shows energy and demand values used for power plan development. The methodology for developing these values, using the ISER forecast, is explained in Appendix A.l. 1-4 Annual Energy Peak Year Reguirements (H\.,!h/yr) Demand (MW) 1982 32,400 7.9 1987 38,700 8.9 1992 47,600 11.2 1997 58,900 12.2 2002 74,500 15.0 ISER has completed its examination of the relationship between the cost of electrical energy to the consumer and energy use. Sensitivity studies have been made to further quantify the economics of conversion to electrical energy for space and water heating. It is planned to address this subject in more detail during further evaluation of the most attractive alternative(s) in Phase II. 1.4 P;'ERGY STv'?P~Y TECH:mLOGY EVALUATION An energy supply technology evaluation was undertaken to review and evaluate proven and commercially available energy technologies and to select technologies appropriate for use as elements of alternative power plans. Twenty-five potential energy supply technologies were evaluated. The evaluation considered a number of factors related to application in the Bristol Bay study region. Factors considered for each technology were commercial availability; technical and regional restraints; environmental and regulatory considerations; and construction, operation, and maintenance. The 2S technologies were grouped into the following six basic categories: o Fossil fuels o Renewable resources o Nuclear o Advanced technologies o Non-generating alternatives o Hiscellaneous resources 1-5 Promising candidates Advanced technologies. and regulatory reasons. were found in each category except Nuclear and Nuclear was ruled out for a variety of technical All candidates in the Advanced technologies category (some of which were renewable resources) were either commercially unavailable or not technically viable for the remote Bristol Bay region. Nine energy supply technologies were found to be attractive for appJication in the Bristol Bay region. The selected systems were: Primary Sources o Diesel electric o Coal gasification (combined cycle) o Coal-, oil-, and natural gas-fired steam electric generation o Combined cycle (oil) o Hydroelectric Supplementary Sources o Wind o Energy conservation o Waste heat recovery o Organic Rankine Cycle The nine candidates receiving the "attractive" designation were used as elements of specific power plan systems for Bristol Bay. 1.5 DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY PLANS 1.5.1 Data Collection The objective of the data collection program as defined by the Work Plan is to collect and compile all technical, environmental, and sociocultural data necessary to assess project feasibility and to meet any licensing or permitting requirements of FERC and other federal, state, and local regulatory agencies. Phase I accomplished this obj ective with respect to data required to compare various alternatives. In addition, a much larger data base was collected as the first step in determining the feasibility of the regional Tazimina and Newhalen projects. be required in Phase II to fully satisfy project(s) finally proposed for development. 1-6 However, additional data will licensing requirements of the The data collection program was divided into the following subtasks: o Geotechnical o Hydrologic o Environmental and Sociocultural 1.5.1.1 Geotechnical The geotechnical data collection program analyzed the Bristol Bay regional geologic setting, investigated in considerable detail geotechnical conditions at various sites previously proposed for major features of the regional Tazimina and Newhalcn hydroelectric developments, and collected geotechnical data for other sites considered as promising hydroelectric alternatives. These latter sites were near Kukaklek Lake, on the Newhalen River (local project), Kontrashibuna on the Tanalian River, and the Chikuminuk Lake site. Information gathered on these sites was limited to literature searches, supplemented in some cases by helicopter overflights and ground visits. The detailed geotechnical investigations at the Tazimina and Newhalen sites were undertaken by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., and are fully reported in Appendices E and F, respectively, to this report. The Tazimina field studies were undertaken in the summer and fall of 1981 as part of the original plan to investigate that site because of the favorable Retherford recommendation. The Newhalen field studies were undertaken in the spring of 1982 in response to preliminary findings by Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation that the technical feasibility and economics of a hydroelectric development on the Newhalen River might be more favorable than Tazimina. Detailed geotechnical field studies were required to test the assumptions upon which the preliminary des ign of the proposed Newhalen canal diversion concept was based. The Tazimina valley, six investigations seismic lines included geologic mapping along the river across the valley at possible locations for structures, four borings to obtain profiles of soil and rock materials, 1-7 hand dug test pits, and laboratory tests. the previously proposed dam site at the A seismic survey and a boring at out let of Lower Tazimina Lake indicated depths of up to 180 feet of highly pervious sand and gravel over bedrock. An impervious cutoff about 1.2 miles long would be required in this material to provide an effective storage dam. Because of the difficulty and cost of constructing such a cutoff, this location is not recommended for further consideration. In addition, seismic surveys and a boring at the previous ly identified Roadhouse Dam Site indicated pervious outwash material and bedrock sloping downward into the right abutment. It would be extremely expensive, or perhaps impossible, to provide a water-tight storage reservoir at this location. Because of the disappointing results of the investigation at the above sites, a further search was initiated for a suitable location for a dam and reservoir. A location about four miles downstream of the outlet of Lower Tazimina Lake was found which appears to offer the best prospects for a regulating dam site .. At this location, bedrock outcrops appear in both abutment areas and seismic refraction surveying has defined the continuous bedrock surface beneath the valley. HOI"ever, overburden is up to 170 feet thick, and requires a positive cutoff to rock to ensure dam stability and eliminate excessive seepage losses. Suitable locations were identified for a forebay dam, penstock, and powerhouse. The locations as presently proposed for these features are shown in Appendix A.2. For the regional Newhalen River concept, investigations included eight borings, and seven electrical resistivity profile probes to obtain profiles of soil and rock materials, installation of four observation wells for groundwater data, laboratory testing of selected soil samples from borings, and limited surface geologic observations. The geologic investigations were performed along the proposed water conveyance canal. Seismic survey and indicated depths of rock varying from about from about alignment of the resistivity probes 15 feet below the surface near the canal intake, to about 60 to 80 feet near the canal outlet area in the vicinity of the scarp. 1-8 The depth to bedrock is a factor in the design of the canal. Although some of the canal would be excavated in rock, a large portion would be constructed in the soil strata which have been identified as clean sands and gravels. Because of the existence of these permeable materials, the canal invert and sides will be lined with roller compacted concrete as a protective measure against erosion, seepage, and freeze-thaw conditions. Excavation of the soil material is not anticipated to pose any difficulty other than that associated with control of groundwater inflows. Special provisions have to be made for groundwater control, particularly as the canal approaches its terminus near the older erosional scarp of the Newhalen River. In this vicinity, and for a distance of about 300 feet along the canal, special external drainage control systems will be needed to collect and safely handle seepage flows. Such drainage systems would preclude seepage outflow from the canal, retaining its stability. The canal concept and general arrangements considered for the regional Newhalen River project(s) are shown in Appendix A.2. Geotechnical hydroelectric investigations for sites at Kukaklek, the other technically promising Newhalen (local), Kontrashibuna, and Chikuminuk were of a very preliminary nature. However, based on the data analyzed, no major adverse geotechnical conditions were identified. 1.5.1.2 Hydrologic Reasonably accurate predictions of river flows are necessary to determine the capacity of potential hydroelectric generating sites. Available data from several sources were collected and analyzed to make such predictions. The principal sources of data for the hydroelectric sites considered were water resources atlas, gaging station data from nearby drainage areas, and in several cases, gaging stations on the river being studied. Using various techniques, depending upon data availability, storage capacities and design flows were selected for hydroelectric project development and comparison. 1-9 USGS flow data for the Kontrashibuna and Newhalen River sites provided sufficient data for preliminary hydrologic predictions. Because only limited data were available at the Chikuminuk site, analysis required a correlation with the USGS gaging data on the Nuyakuk River to develop sufficient information. Kukaklek Lake has virtually no hydrologic data available, therefore, discharge estimates were made based on adjustments of other gaging records in the area. A gaging station was installed by the USGS on the Tazimina River near the proposed regulating dam site in the summer of 1981. Hmvever, it was necessary to use simulation methods to predict long-term Tazimina River flows for use in estimating power generation potential. The predictive procedures used by Dames & Moore and the results of the simulation are presented in detail in Appendix I of this report. The current predictions of flow in the Tazimina River at the proposed hydroelectric site are about 18 percent lower on an annual basis than previous predictions by Retherford.· More importantly from the standpoint of the site's generating capacity, the current predictions for November through April, the low flow season, are only about one-third of the previous estimates. This result has a very important effect on the development potential and economic attractiveness of Tazimina. In comparison with previous development concepts, cons iderably more storage capacity would have to be provided in order to have the regulated flows needed to produce the same electrical output in the winter months. The Newhalen River generating concept is a run-of-river power project. Studies of the 16 year streamflow gage data show that there exists sufficient flow to generate the power needs of the region through the year 2002. Because of the large drainage area involved, there is sufficient flow throughout the year to maintain channel flow condition and still satisfy generating flow needs. 1.5.1.3 Environmental and Sociocultural The environmental data collection program was undertaken to obtain baseline data for comparing alternative plans, including transmission systems, to 1-10 perform a detailed analysis of the proposed Tazimina project, and to address on a preliminary basis the question of fish protection at the intake to the Ne~halen Canal. A special effort was made. to collec~ sociocultural information. Sociocultural data, collected on a regional basis, provided useful input for defining energy supply concepts which would be most compatible with local values. The major elements of the environmental and sociocultural data collection program Ivere: o Water use and quality o Terrestrial ecology, including vegetation, birds, and mammals o Aquatic ecology o Historical, archeological, and recreational resources o Air quality o Population and demography o Socioeconomics o Land use o Community attitudes Special emphasis was placed on the collection of d'it:a related to the fisheries within the Tazimina River drainage; an eva1 113tion of the sockeye salmon fishery and spawning locations below the Tazimina Falls was particularly emphasized. If a decision is made to proceed in Phase II with a detailed analysis of the Tazimina hydroelectric concept, further detailed studies, including an instream flow modeling program, will be required. Appendix G presents, in detail, the environmental and sociocultural field data collected for the region in Phase I, and in particular, for Tazimina. This baseline data and other information, obtained largely from literature searches and limited field reconnaissance, provided the basis for power plan scenario development and evaluation. Additionally, the data base collected at Tazimina is believed sufficient in detail to satisfy the environmental requirements of a FERC license application for a run-of-river concept. 1-11 The Newhalen River regional hydroelectric concept diverts on the average about 1000 cfs through a canal to the power plant. The most important environmental concern related to this concept is protection of the Newhalen River sockeye salmon escapement. Downstream migrating smolt and fry would have to be diverted from the canal intake or collected and returned to the river to ensure safe passage around the project. Studies at other water intakes indicate that such diversion can be satisfactorily accomplished. However, to properly design the diversion facilities and to predict their effectiveness on the Newhalen River, a field program was undertaken in the spring of 1982 to characterize the downstream smolt and fry migration. Appendix H presents the results of field data collected in Phase I on the Newhalen smolt and fry studies. If a decision is made to proceed in Phase II with a detailed analysis of the Newhalen regional hydroelectric concept, further detailed studies, including testing of methods for diverting and/or collecting downstream migrants, will be required. Also, studies relating to resident fish within that portion of the Newhalen River, that may be affected by the canal diversion would need to be made. 1.5.2 Energy Production Concepts The development of candidate energy plans for the Bristol Bay study region followed a systematic approach which began with the identification of a fairly large number of ideas or concepts. These concepts were then screened and reduced to a manageable number of scenarios for eventual comparison and evaluation. The details of the program to develop candidate energy plans are presented in Chapter 6 of this report. A summary follows of the methodology employed. 1.5.2.1 Identification The basic factors used in identifying energy concepts that might be applicable to the Bristol Bay region included the following: 1-12 o Energy demand forecasts o Applicable energy supply technology o Experience in designing electrical supply systems o Community attitudes o Institutional restraints The initial step was to identify all potentially practical electrical generating concepts applicable to the Bristol Bay region. The first part of this step involved a preliminary evaluation of previously identified hydroelectric sites in Bristol Bay to identify those sites considered suitable for inclusion in the concepts. Thirty-six hydro sites were evaluated with respect to economic feasibility. Eight environmental, socioeconomic, technical, of these sites were initially selected and as being "promising". Comments were solicited from a wide group of state and federal agencies during the hydro site screening and selection process. Following this, 48 potential energy supply systems were identified utilizing the eight selected hydro sites and other applicable energy supply technologies discussed in Section 1.4. The 48 systems represented numerous combinations of the basic energy system components. Finally, a matrix was developed to identify reasonable applications of each supply system for either the whole Bristol Bay region or one or more subregions. The matrix revealed more than 100 concepts which were considered suitable for further evaluation. 1.5.2.2 Screening The next step required reducing the more than 100 concepts to a manageable number for further evaluation. Engineering judgement, supplemented by the subjective consideration of environmental factors, was employed to reduce the number of concepts to approximately 18. At this point a meeting was held in Anchorage on November 17, 1981 for the benefit of State and Federal agencies that had expressed interest in the screening process and identification of alternatives. At the meeting, the approach to power system alternatives evaluation was described by the project team, and the process leading to the identification of the concepts was presented. The 1-13 basic characteristics of the concepts, called II • • II prlmary scenarlos were described. As a result of this meeting and from further evaluations of new data, a s late of 20 primary scenarios was selected for further evaluation and comparison with the Base Plan and Alternative Plan A scenarios. Conceptual engineering and economic analyses of the selected scenarios proceeded to a point where quantitative comparisons could be made. With the exception of Tazimina and Newhalen, environmental assessments were generally of a preliminary and qualitative nature. The approach taken was that it would be most cost effective to initially eliminate concepts on an engineering or economic basis. Subsequently detailed environmental analyses would be performed on the remaining most promising scenarios. However, during this evaluation process, the development of the King Salmon River hydroelectric potential was determined infeasible due to environmental factors. Accordingly, no cost evaluation was made of concepts which involved this site. Similarly, local opposition to development of Kukaklek Lake was voiced. Since development of this concept had proceeded further, it was decided to continue cost evaluation for comparative purposes. In the draft Interim Feasibility Assessment report issued in March 1982, 18 primary scenarios were presented as being applicable to Alternative Plan B. Subsequent to the draft report, another alternative scenario (B-19) was added which evaluated a number of subregional concepts consisting of cost effective mixes of diesel, wind, waste heat recovery and small hydro. This total of 19 Alternative B scenarios represented many more alternatives than had been expected when the study began. However, because the Power Authority, governmental agencies, and the project team all agreed that a thorough examination of alternatives should be completed before the second phase of the power plan study went forward, all 19 Alternative B scenarios are retained in the Interim Feasibility Assessment. Further, as the economic studies progressed, several variations and combinations of energy sources were studied as sub-scenarios. This resulted in adding nine more energy plans to the overall study effort, as Alternative Plan B scenarios. Considering the Base Plan, Alternative Plan A, and the primary and sub-scenarios under Alternative Plan B, a total of 30 energy plans were eventually evaluated. 1-14 1.5.3 Selected Energy Scenarios The 30 energy scenarios selected for evaluation and comparison represent a variety of electrical generating systems combined in a number of ways. Bas ically, the energy scenarios are grouped according to the three main hypothetical cases previously described. This summary gives only an overview of the make-up of the scenarios. Reference should be made to Chapter 6 and Appendix A for detailed descriptions of the individual elements of the scenarios. Scenario BP-1, the Base Plan, assumes the continued use of diesel systems currently in place with the addition of central diesel generation systems at individual villages as required in the future, but without any waste heat recovery units. No new transmission interties are assumed. Scenario A-1, Alternative Plan A, assumes a 16 MW development at Tazimina to meet regional needs within the study area. To supply this electrical capacity, a 65-ft rockfill storage dam would be constructed on the Tazimina River about 4 miles downstream of the outlet from LOI<.'er Tazimina Lake. The water surface in Lower Tazimina Lake would be raised about 35 ft above its present level. Main transmission lines would be run to larger population areas with feeder lines to all villages. The Alternative Plan B scenarios cons ider 19 other potential electrical generating systems with nine variations to some of these scenarios, for a total of 28. Several of the concepts envision a completely intertied transmission system similar to Alternative A. However, the majority of the systems are subregional. Special emphasis was given to the consideration of subregional systems because some Bristol Bay residents believe that such systems might be more compatible with regional attitudes and values. The elements of the Alternative B systems include seven' potential hydro developments and several non-hydro sources. Non-hydro sources, consisting of the technologies identified in the energy supply technology evaluation, include fossil systems, diesel systems on an intertied regional and subregional basis, outside electrical energy generation brought to the 1-15 region by a transmission system, and supplemental wind energy for some diesel systems. A brief summary of the components which make up the Alternative B scenarios is provided below. The letter designation after· each component name and Table 1.5-1 show how these components have been assembled into scenarios. Kukaklek-Iliamna (B-2, B-S) This is a 16 MW hydroelectric power plant located at Iliamna Lake. Regulated flows from Kukaklek Lake, the headwater reservoir, are used for generation. A transmission line grid would interconnect all study communities located west and south of Kukaklek Lake. Newhalen River (B-2, B-3, B-4, B-7, B~ll, B-12, B-13, B-14) Three hydroelectric concepts were considered for the Newhalen River. Two are for regional power development and one is for local power needs. An are run-of-river partial diversion plans. The regional concepts use a 2.5-mile long diversion canal coupled with a 16 HW power plant installation. One of the divers ion canal concepts allows for bypassing high river flows around a section of the Newhalen River which has severe rapids. The flow bypass would reduce river velocities during periods of high flow for upstream migrant fish. The other diversion canal concept allows for diverting water needed only for power generation. The local concept is a low flow diversion scheme. This uses a channel-tunnel waterway system to bypass a portion of the flow around a small section of the Newhalen River. The bypassed flow is used in generating energy in a 1.2 MW plant. Either regional project would serve all study area communities through a transmission line grid. The local project would serve only Iliamna, Newhalen, and Nondalton. 1-16 Kukaklek Lake (B-3, B-4, B-6) This is a 7 MW capacity local hydroelectric power proj ect us ing regulated flows from Kukaklek Lake. The plant would be located at the shore of a group of unnamed lakes found northwest of Kukaklek Lake. Power project would serve only the Kvichak River com~unities, not Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton. The concept of U~111z1ng Kukaklek from this including Lake for providing power to the communities of Igiugig and Levelock only Ivas not developed. Chikuminuk Lake (B-3, B-4, B-S, B-6, B-7, B-8, B-13) Two hydroelectric concepts to develop Chikuminuk Lake were considered. Both require regulation of Allen River flows, near the outlet of Chikuminuk Lake. The regional concept would dam the lake outlet, raising the present lake by some 21 feet. This requires the construction of a 100-ft high dam about one mile do,,-nstream of the lake outlet. Reguli.1ted flows would be conveyed to a power plant through a tunnel to generate 16 H\v of peak capaci ty. The local concept ,,-QuId have a capacity of 8 ~1W and only raise the lake by 4 feet. The regional project \"ould serve the region through a transmission line grid, except for the communities of Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton. The local project would serve only those communities located with the Nushagak River basin, including Manokotak. King Salmon (B-4, B-6, B-7) The development of the King Salmon River would require the construction of a dam across the river within the boundaries of the Becharof National Wildlife Refuge. Concepts utilizing the hydroelectric potential of the King Salmon site were not developed due to potential environmental impacts. Tazimina River (Local) (B-S, B-6, B-8, B-13, B-18, and B-19) Three hydroelectric power than regional basis. A concepts were cons idered for Tazimina on a less concept producing 8 ~1W to serve only the 1-17 communities in the Kvichak River area (B-8) would require a 3D-ft high regulating dam which would raise the Lower Tazimina Lake by 5 feet. Two run-of-river concepts were also considered. One concept would use a 16 NW installation on a regional basis, but without a regulating dam (B-18A). The other run-of-river concept would use a small 1.2 MW installation to serve the Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton communities only (B-5, B-6, B-13A, and B-19E). Transmission line grids would be constructed, as required, by each type of development. Kontrashibuna (B-18) This hydroelectric development involves a regulating dam on the Tanalian River with an installed capacity of 16 tN. The project requires a 90-ft high d2m to raise the Kontrashibuna Lake by about 65 feet. Power from the project would serve the entire study region through a transmission line grid. Sc.e.nario B-18A combines Kontrashibuna with a 16 ~fW run-of-river Tazimina development, while B-18B is a regional Kontrashibuna development. Outside Source, Beluga Area (B-1) This concept considers the construction of a 138 kV transmission line from the Beluga area to the study region. A transmission grid would be used to serve the communities of the study area. The generation source has not been identified. Fossil Fuel-Fired Plant at Dillingham or Naknek (B-9, B-10, B-11, B-12) Under this concept, a 16 MW fossil fuel-fired steam electric power plant would be developed at either Dillingham or Naknek, but not both. The plant would supply power to the study area through a transmission line grid. Three types of plants were considered for Scenario B-9: B-9A, a conventional coal-fired steam electric plant; B-9B, an oil-fired combined cycle plant; and B-9C, a coal gasification combined cycle plant. The 1-18 latter system would utilize gas turbines, a waste heat recovery boiler, and a conventional steam electric generating plant. Diesel Power (B-15, B-16, B-17) In addition to the Base Plan, the continuation of diesel power was considered in several alternative scenarios. These scenarios considered central diesel installations capable of serving all communities wi~hin the study region by using clustered central installations serving a small number of communities, or groups of communities. Diesel installed capacity varied, depending on the power needs and the scenario. Transmission line grids were developed, as needed, for each specific scenario. Waste Heat, Wind, and Organic Rankine Cycle ( B-15, B-16, B-17, B-19) Waste heat recovery (B-19A, B-19C, B-19E), wind generation (B-19B, B-19C, . B-19E), and the organic Rankine cycle (B-19D) were evaluated for use with the scenarios which utilize diesel generation. The organic Rankine cycle was considered only for the Dillingham and Naknek communities. Vlind generation was included in the scenarios only for specific communities or regions where wind sources are considered most reliable. Detailed information on wind energy potential is found in Appendices A.6 and D. All of the Alternative B scenarios selected for evaluation were retained throughout Phase I to better document the extensive effort given to the consideration of alternatives. As the Phase I work proceeded, several of the potential hydro sites became less attractive due to institutional or environmental concerns. However, these sites were not eliminated from the evaluation in order to present a basis for comparison with the more attractive sites. 1-19 B-1* B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 0-7 0-8 B-9A* 0-913* 0-9C* l)-lU* 0-11 U-12 1.l-13A 0-13B 13-15 B-16 U-17* B-18AIt 0-16U* U-19A 0-19B B-19C 0-190 B-19£ KlIkaklek- lli~~ x x Newhalen River x X X X X X X X X TABLE 1. 5-1 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE B SCENARIOS Hydro Developments KIII(a k I ek La,-,-k~e~_ X X X Chlkumlnuk King Lake Sa Imon X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Kontrash- Ibun_a __ X X *Completcly Intertled transmission sysLem Non-Hydro Sources Outside Source Beluga Area Fossl I-Dillingham (Convent/al Coal) Foss/I-Dillingham (Combined Cyclo) Fossl 1-0/ Illngham (Coal Gasification, Combined Cycle) Foss I I-Naknek Fossll-Dillinghan Foss I I-Naknek Diesel -4 subregions Diesel -3 subregions DIesel -All Connected Diesel -local Waste Heat Dlese I -Loca I Wi nd Diesel -Local Wind and Waste ileaL Diesel -Local Organic Rankine Cycle Diesel -Local Waste Ueat Hnd/or Wind 1.6 EVALUATION OF SELECTED ENERGY PLANS The energy plan scenarios described in the previous section were compared and evaluated with respect to a variety of technical, environmental, and economic indicators specified in the Alaska POIver Authority requirements for feasibility studies (3AAC94. 060). Several were removed from further consideration due to environmental factors (B-4, B-6, and B-7), or because of similar economic characteristics (B-10 and B-12). The result was a slate of 25 scenarios selected for final comparison. 1.6.1 Technical Technical indicators used in the evaluation were: o Safety o Reliability o Availability o Constructability Constructibility, although not specified in the regulations, was added to further define technical differences between scenarios. In addition, each indicator was considered with repect to both energy production facilities and transmission lines. Section 7.2 presents scenario electrical details supply of the evaluation components with of various energy plan respect to technical indicators. The evaluation of indicators was qualitative, and no attempt was made to rank scenarios. However, certain energy supply components have lower ratings than others from the standpoint of technical indicators as shown on the next page. 1-20 Supply Component Diesel Hydro Wind Foss il Transmission Lower Rating Reliability Constructibility Reliability and Availability Commercial Development (coal gasification combined cycle only) Safety and Constructibility In general, all scenarios considered in the evaluation were found to be acceptable with respect to all of the above technical indicators. Those preliminary concepts which would have been technically unacceptable for Bristol Bay, or which represent a non-commercial technology, were screened out prior to selection of the final 25 scenarios. Accordingly, technical indicators are not a significant factor in comparing the selected scenarios during Phase I. Further technical comparisons of the most promising scenarios will be made in Phase II. Special attention will be given to protection against ice problems for hydroelectric projects, particularly for run-of-river plants. 1.6.2 Environmental The environmental evaluation of the selected energy plan scenarios addresses the ten evaluation indicators specified by the feasibility study requirements. These indicators are: o Community preferences o Impact on community infrastructure o Timing in relation to other capital projects o Air quality o Water quality o Fish and wildlife impact o Land use impact and ownership status o Terrestrial impact o Recreational resource value o Visual impact 1-21 Environmental concerns most often associated with power project development by residents of the Bristol Bay region were: o Effect on commercial and sport fishing o Effect on established subsistence practices o In-migration of people resulting from project construction or subsequent industrial development o Easier access to subsistence areas as a result of project road construction Details of the environmental evaluation are presented in Section 7.3, which draws upon Appendix G, the Environmental Report. An evaluation matrix, which is provided in tabular form in Section 7.3, subjectively rates each scenario with respect to the indicators listed above. The subjective evaluation criteria used to evaluate environmental indicators were: A = Small impact B = Moderate impact, but believed acceptable with mitigation measures C = Major impact, possible resulting in a "fatal flaw" The scenarios were not numerically ranked according to environmental preference due to the difficulty in integrating the highly subjective indicators considered. However, the scenarios were grouped using the same evaluation criteria used for the indicators; scenarios were not ranked within a group. 1-22 The following tabulation shows the environmental evaluation of the scenarios by group: Group A Group B Group C Scenario BP-1 Scenario ."1.-1 Scenario B-1 Scenario B-15 Scenario B-8 Scenario B-2 Scenario B-16 Scenario B-9A Scenario B-3 Scenario B-17 Scenario B-9B Scenario B-4 Scenario B-19A Scenario B-9C Scenario B-5 Scenario B-19B Scenario B-10 Scenario B-6 Scenario B-19C Scenario B-ll Scenario B-7 Scenario B-19D Scenario B-12 Scenario B-13A Scenario B-13B Scenario B-14A Scenario B-14B Scenario B-18A Scenario B-19B Scenario B-19E Refer to Table 1.5-1 or 1.6-3 for scenario descriptions. Upon applying the above ten environmental indicators to the scenarios, the following was found: o The Group A scenarios, involving diesel-electric generation, exhibit relatively small environmental and sociocultural impacts. o The hydroelectric scenar ios in Group C, which include the Kukaklek and/or King Salmon concepts and generation from an outside source (Beluga), exhibit major environmental and sociocultural impacts. o Other hydroelectric concepts exhibit moderate environmental and sociocultural impacts. o The coal-fired, steam electric scenarios exhibit moderate environmental and sociocultural impacts. 1-23 The Tazimina (A-I) and Newhalen (B-14A and B-14B) regional hydroelectric concepts, are of special environmental interest because they are also attractive from a technical and economic basis. These, unlike other Group B hydroelectric concepts, do not require the combination of smaller developments to meet the entire study region's needs. The development of the Tazimina River regional hydroelectric concept would create a storage reservoir behind a dam below the outlet of Lower Tazimina Lake. The following would result from reservoir construction and operation: o The reservoir would inundate up to 4,100 acres of land around Lower Tazimina Lake o Animal habitat would be displaced by creation of the reservoir o Lake surface area would nearly double when the reservoir is full, suggesting increased carrying capacity for lake dweiling species o \vater level fluctuation could adversely affect permanent establishment of shoreline habitats o Resident and anadromous fish habitat in the Tazimina River below the falls may be affected positively or negatively from changes in river flows and temperatures Other effects from project development would include: o Access to the river for sport fishermen due to the construction of an access road o Changes in nearby community infrastructure during construction For Tazimina, the major concern is that changes in stream flows downstream of the project could adversely affect sockeye salmon spawning. Because the falls are impassable to upstream fish migration, no salmon spawning occurs in the Tazimina Lakes, or the upper Tazimina River, above the falls. 1-24 Considerable study regarding the nature of the aquatic habitat in the Tazimina River is reported in Appendix G. This information, combined with future instream flow studies, would be used to develop necessary mitigation plans for project design and operation. Flow control or augmentation would be considered for potential benefits to spawning areas. The Newhalen River regional hydroelectric concept would divert water from the Newhalen Ri~er at River Mile 7 into a canal leading to a hydroelectric plant. Diverted flow would be returned to the river at River Mile 1, just below the first set of rapids. The following changes would result from development of this facility: o Flow reduction in the Newhalen River between the intake and discharge of the hydroelectric plant. Two concepts were evaluated: (a) flow diversions averaging about 1000 cfs for power generation only,· or (b) large flow diversions for the purpose of both power generation and by-pass ing high Newhalen River flows to aid upstream salmon migration. o Elimination of approximately 150 acres of high brush ecosystem at the location of the canal and ancillary road o Possible minor displacement of some brown and grizzly bear population o Changes in nearby community infrastructure Since no regulating dam would be constructed on the Newhalen River, natural river flows would not be changed except between the intake and discharge of the plant. The most important fisheries concern would be to avoid unacceptable hazards to migrants as they pass the plant site. Two important requirements would be to: 1) insure adequate flow over the rapids for upstream fish passage and for resident fish, and 2) avoid unacceptable hazards at the plant intake for smolt and fry during downstream migration. 1-25 The first requirement is easily accommodated by allowing sufficient flow to bypass the plant intake at all times. The second might require the installation of a fish diversion or screening system to exclude small fish from the plant intake during downstream migration. A major environmental benefit might be realized as a result of the Newhalen River development concept. It has been reported that extreme flows over the rapids in the lower Newhalen River have caused a blockage at the river's mouth to upstream fish passage, a problem which on infrequent occasions has caused extensive mortality in mature adult sockeye salmon as they move in early summer to freshwater spawning areas in the Newhalen River-Lake Clark system. The concept mentioned above which could provide controlled bypass of water around the rapids by means of the large power intake canal would reduce excessive flows over the rapids, thereby improving conditions for upstream fish migration. 1.6.3 Economic A common basis was used to compare and evaluate power supply scenarios in accordance with Power Authority guidelines. A calculation of the present worth of all costs and benefits associated with each scenario was the basis for economic comparisons. The economic parameters and assumptions used in the calculations were the same for all scenarios evaluated in this study. Thus, the scenarios can be compared with each other and ranked in terms of their ability to supply power to the Bristol Bay region at the lowest cost by comparing present worth cost; the lowest present worth represents the least costly alternative. Further details on the· economic evaluation are presented in Chapter 7. The major steps involved in determining present worth values for each scenario included the following: Develop conceptual designs for all systems and equipment included in the scenario Determine the installed cost, annual operat ing and maintenance costs, fuel costs, etc., for all equipment 1-26 Develop the total annual cost (minus any benefits) for each year of the economic analysis period Evaluate the present worth of the annual costs Since detailed designs were not performed for this initial study phase, the cost estimates are order-of-magnitude prices (± 20 to 25 percent) which were developed from conceptual designs. The costs for major equipment items were obtained from vendors, when possible, or from published material. Additional allowances were made for freight from the factory to the jobsite. Other cost factors, including those special factors related to construction costs in Alaska, were determined with the assistance of Green Construction Company of Anchorage. Finally, allowances were made for system engineering and design, construction management and on allowance of about 15% for indeterminants. Interest during construction was also included. The economic parameters and assumptions used in calculating present worths were in conformance with Power Authority guidelines, except for the economic lifetimes of certain items of equipment. Summaries of the economic parameters and equipment lifetimes are shown in Tables 1.6-1 and 1.6-2, respectively. In the cases involving diesel generators, transmission lines, coal gasification, and waste heat recovery equipment, the economic lifetimes shown in Table 1.6-2 are greater than the values in the Power Authority's guidelines. These economic lifetime values were reviewed by the Power Authority, and were considered acceptable for use in the study. The base year for the economic analysis was 1982, with a 21-year planning period (i. e., Bristol Bay electric demand proj ections for 1982 through 2002) and a 56-year analysis period. The analysis period resulted from the assumed installation of hydroelectric plants in 1988 which, when combined with a 50-year hydroelectric lifetime, extended the analysis period from the base year of 1982 through the year 2037. The costs occurring in the years following the planning period from 2003 through 2037 were assigned, as required, by the Power Authority economic 1-27 guidelines. It was assumed that no further load growth or petroleum fuel cost escalation occurred after 2002. Thus, the costs occurring in 2002 were repeated for each following year to 2037, and the present worth was calculated based on this cash flow. Fo~ those diesel systems which include waste heat recovery equipment, a benefit was ass igned each year for the waste heat recovered. Calculations were performed to determine the fraction of the recoverable waste heat that could be used for space heating. A credit was applied each year for the space heating supplied, assuming that diesel was the fuel normally burned in homes for space heat. Lastly, the costs developed in this study represent bus bar costs and do not include costs such as distribution within the villages, administration, taxes, insurance, depreciation, etc. The present worth of consumer costs would be significantly higher. Table 1.6-3 is a summary of present worth costs for the Bristol Bay regional power scenarios. It is apparent that a ,,-ide variation in costs results from the several power supply options that were considered. Overall, the hydroelectric scenarios generally had lower present worth costs than other power supply technology options. The Newhalen regional power only concept (B-14A) was lowest, followed by the Tazimina regional concept (A-1) and the Newhalen regional power and river divers ion concept (B-14B). The regional Kontrashibuna (B-18B) and a plan consisting of a smaller development of Tazimina combined with local diesel energy suplemented with waste heat and wind generation were the next most cost-effective options. By comparison, the Base Plan (BP-1) ranks number 20. Additional special studies were undertaken to: 1) investigate the economic benefits of supplemental wind systems and waste heat recovery for diesel scenarios; 2) determine the most economic local hydro development for specific subregions; and 3) evaluate the viability of the organic Rankine cycle for Naknek or Dillingham. In general, the addition of waste heat and wind to the diesel scenarios results in cost savings as evidenced in the fifth ranking scenario B-19E. The results of these studies are reported in Chapter 7. 1-28 1.7 REGULATORY COORDINATION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A program of regulatory coordination and public participation was undertaken with the following objectives: o to ensure the adequate and timely involvement of Federal, State, and local governmental agencies interested in the study o to identify regulatory requirements for the licensing of proposed power plans o to keep the public fully informed and to provide a means whereby the public can influence the work effort A chronological list of significant meetings, communications, and other events is included in Chapter 8 of this report . .. 1.7.1 Agency Communication With respect to the first objective, several formal meetings were held in Anchorage between August 19, 1981 and June 15, 1982, to explain work obj ectives and progress to interested governmental agencies. These meetings appeared to be beneficial to agency personnel in obtaining a better understanding of the proj ect ; without question these meetings were beneficial to the project team. At some meetings, packets of preliminary information were handed out for review and comment. In addition to progress reporting, items discussed included the approach being taken by the proj ect team to select alternative energy sources and sites, environmental concerns of various agencies with respect to specific plan proposals, and possible ways to cooperate and exchange information between the project and various agencies who are interested in resource development. Interested personnel in a number of agencies (.,ere routinely sent copies of the Project Report. Special meetings were held with fisheries related agencies on the more promising hydro developments, particularly Tazimina and Newhalen concepts. Comments received from these communication exchanges were considered during the development and evaluation of power plan alternatives. 1-29 1.7.2 Regulatory Requirements The range of laws and regulations considered during the Interim Feasibility Assessment was broad because of the large number of alternatives evaluated. Some of the important regulatory issues considered during Phase I included land status, land ownership, agency management respons ibility within designated parks and preserves, and provisions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. Transmission line routing, with respect to land status, was another important consideration. Because the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act would be brought into effect if a proposed project required federal licensing, compare These alternatives from data also will be much data was collected which was used to the regulatory and environmental standpoint. useful in further evaluation of licensing requirements for the most promising alternativeCs) in Phase II. 1.7.3 Public Participation Public participation, particularly involving the residents of the Bristol Bay region, was recognized early by the project as a key element of the study. The Power Authority and the project team have gone on record with a commitment to determine, and be guided by, local attitudes with respect to development of electrical power in the region. The inherent difficulty in any public participation program is the problem of sorting out the wide range of interests and expectations; the Bristol Bay public participation program was no exception. Several steps were taken during the Interim Feasibility Assessment to provide a chance for Bristol Bay residents to learn about the study. An initial step was a series of village meetings in September and October 1981, when practically every village in the region was visited by the Project team to explain the purpose of the power plan study and to request comments on matters of interest or concern. The many comments and suggestions received either during the meetings or sent later by mail on special forms were compiled and considered. In some cases, these comments resulted in significant changes in plan concepts. Also, community meetings 1-30 were repeated in March 1982 to· present the results of the Interim Feasibility Assessment. Other steps taken to enhance communication with Bristol Bay residents included the distribution of project reports to community leaders, radio and press releases on the study, and numerous informal meetings and discuss ions with local res idents as proj ect team members collected necessary field data. Although the special communications and transportation in the Bristol Bay region are less than ideal for maximum public participation, it is believed that a credible effort has been made to recognize local concerns. The fundamental community issue appears to be concern about conflict between accelerated energy resource development and the existing lifestyle in the Bristol Bay region. Most residents welcome less costly and more abundant sources of electrical power, if their current lifestyle is not adversely affected. The most commonly expressed concern relates to the effect of power projects on the fisheries, both from the commercial and subsistence standpoint. Decreases in game, areas, and influx of outsiders are also seen However, attitudes differ throughout the benefits and costs of more energy. These increased access to remote as poss ible harmful effects. region regarding perceived differences from a regional standpoint may represent unresolvable conflicts. However, understanding them may permit elements of the study to be tailored somewhat to local preferences. More information on the public participation program is presented in Section 8.2. 1.8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1.8.1 Conclusions The general conclusion of the Interim Feasibility Assessment is that there are a number of promising alternatives to the current use of diesel electric generation in the Bristol Bay region. This conclusion is based on 1-31 an analysis of the technical, environmental, and economic characteristics of 25 power development scenarios. These scenarios utilize a variety of commercially available power generation systems considered technically suitable for use in the Bristol Bay region during the planning period from 1982 to 2002. The economic evaluation in Section 1.6.3 (Table 1.6-3) shows a significant variation between the scenarios on a present worth basis. The four least costly alternatives are regional hydroelectric developments: 1) on the Newhalen River (B-14A), 2) on the Tazimina River (A-I), and 3) on the Newhalen River (B-14B), and 4) on the Tanalian River near Kontrashibuna Lake (B-18A). The next alternative in order of economic preference is the development of subregional diesel systems, including utilization of waste heat recovery and wind supplemental energy, coupled with the development of a local Tazimina River hydroelectric project (B-19E). A comparison of the top five scenarios and the Base Plan by present worth ratios shows the following economic ranking: Economic Rank 1 2 3 4 20 Description Scenario No. Newhalen Regional -Power Only B-14A Tazimina Regional A-I Newhalen Regional -Power and River Diversion B-14B Kontrashibuna Regional B-18B Local Diesel, Waste Heat, wind, and Local Taziminina B-19E Base Plan (Continued Diesel) BP-1 Present Worth Ratio 1. 54 1. 36 1. 31 1. 29 1. 20 1. 00 (Base) Refering again to Table 1.6-3, there are several other scenarios within a relatively close grouping which show lower costs than the Base Plan. Many of these employ disconnected subregional systems. Also, it should be noted that three scenarios in this grouping, utilizing coal in centralized power plants, are also slightly less costly than the Base Plan. 1-32 With respect to environmental considerations, the ranking is different than for economics. Continued electrical generation by diesel systems was judged to result in the least environmental effect to the Bristol Bay region. The four other most attractive alternatives on a present worth economic basis all fall within the intermediate environmental category (Group B), having moderate impacts that are believed to be acceptable with mitigation measures. In making choices between power plan candidates on the basis of the data available at the Interim Feasibility Assessment, a third factor must be considered: the level of confidence in the information, or assumptions used in the evaluation, of individual scenarios. Al though an effort was made to evaluate all scenarios on a consistent level, considerable differences exist in the quality and quantity of data available. Considering the top five candidates from the economic evaluation, the best data on which to make an evaluation is available for the Tazimina and Newhalen scenarios, due to collection of considerable detailed physical and environmental data. For Kontrashibuna, because it is a more remote site, there is a lack of specific data about its environmental setting, and there are questions concerning the compatible use between the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and the site for power generation. These factors combine to reduce the level of confidence in the assumptions used in the development of the Kontrashibuna concept. For the local diesel, waste heat, wind, and local Tazimina scenario (B-19E) the assumptions relative to the practical levels of wind and waste heat utilization may be questioned. Confidence in the diesel and hydroelectric components, however, is high. Considering the above factors, the following conclusions were reached with respect to the top five candidates: Technical - Economic - All are feasible. All present attractive cost advantages over the Base Plan, the continuation of present diesel generation practices. 1-33 Environmental -Subregional diesel power in combination with wind, waste heat, and the run-of-river Tazimina has the least impact on the Brist:ol Bay region; the other four candidates, although exhibiting varvin o _ 0 potent:ial environmental eff2cts, are believed to be acceptable with mitigation. Confidence is highest for the sub-regional diesel/waste- heat/wind/Local Tazimina concept, reasonably high for the Newhalen concept:s, and lower for the Tazimina and Kontrashibuna regional plans. These above conclusions lead to the following subjective order of candidates with respect to economic, environmental, and confidence factors: Economic Environmental Ne\'lhalen Subregion Diesel w/wast~ (Power Only) heat/wind/Local Tazimina Tazimina Newhalen (Regional) (Power and River Diversion) Newhalen Newhalen (Power and (Power Only) River Diversion) Konst:rashibuna Tazimina (Regional) (Regional) Subregional Diesel Kontrashibuna w/waste heat/ wind/Local Tazimina (Regional) Confidence Subregion Diesel w/w~s~~ heat/Wind/Local Tazimina Nelvhalen (Power Only) Newhalen (Power and River Diversion) Tazimina (Regional) Kontrashibuna (Regional) The intent is not to imply equal weight to the three evaluation factors or suggest that the ranking is linear from top to bottom of the list. 1-34 Furthermore, the ranking of environmental and confidence factors is highly subjective. Thus, based on a subjective evaluation of the above lists, it is concluded that the ranking of alternatives for a completely intertied regional power plan is in the same order as shown above in the economic listing. However, since local preferences may favor subregional developments, we suggest further consideration should be given to the subregional diesel/waste heat/ wind/Local Tazimina Scenario (B-19E). With respect to regional hydroelectric power developments, it may be technically and economically feasible to develop some of these projects for higher capacity and energy. Such proj ects might be increased in size to provide electrical energy requirements of not only the Bristol Bay region, but adjacent areas such as Bethel and Togiak. The merits of such developments could be considered for study under the Phase II efforts, if the Power Authority so desires. 1.8.2 Recommendations Based on the stated conclusions, and in consideration of presently known factors, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation makes the following recommendations for Phase II efforts of the Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan: a. Continue detailed development of the Base Plan scenario to form a base for comparison; b. Continue detailed feas ibility analysis of the regional Newhalen River hydroelectric power concept (B-14A); c. Undertake detailed feasibility analysis of the diesel/waste heat/wind/Local Tazimina scenario (B-19E); sub-regional d. Through a public participation program, obtain a better understanding of attitudes of the people of Bristol Bay regarding a regional power plan. 1-35 The recommendation to continue studies on the Newhalen River concept sterns from the preliminary conclusion that the project is economically attractive, technically feasible, and is likely to be environmentally acceptable with proper mitigative measures. To this end, the following steps are suggested for early implementation in Phase II efforts: a. Undertake resident and anadromous fisheries studies to satisfactorily demonstrate the environmental acceptability of the B-14A concept. b. Continue geotechnical investigations and surveys at the proposed site to better define site conditions revealed by initial investigations and to obtain additional geologic data in the vicinity of the power plant. The following conclusions further support the recommendation to undertake further evaluation of the Newhalen River regional concept in Phase II: a. The Newhalen regional concept appears more a~tractive economically than Tazimina, based on presently available data; b. The engineering and construction uncertainties relating to this project appear to be fewer because of its location and nature of the concept; c. There may be some significant mitigative fisheries benefits relating to upstream migrants that could be implemented and made part of proj ect development; and d. Because of high Newhalen River flo,,'s during the summer, there exists the potential for additional electrical energy development during that period of time coinciding with fish processing energy needs. This should benefit processors within the region. We recommend that a decision be made to evaluate the Newhalen concept and the sub-regional diesel/waste heat/wind/Local Tazimina concept in Phase II, and to perform those investigations and studies that are necessary for the Detailed Feasibility report and, as applicable, for the preparation of a FERC license application. 1-36 Based on the above recommendations, the scope of work believed necessary for the Phase II efforts is outlined in detail in Chapter 10 of this report. 1-37 • VILLAGES INCLUDED IN STUDY A 0 LOCATIONS OF MAJOR NON D DIESEL POWER SOURCES 6. = HYDRO 0 = COAL-FIRED OR OTHER .& NEWHALEN &TAZIMINA &. KONTRASHIBUNA A CHIKUMINUK &. KUKAKLEK &. KING SALMON (2] LINE FROM BELUGA [!] DILLINGHAM o NAKNEK SCALE o 10 20 30 40 50 MILES BRISTOL BAY REGION FIGURE 1.2-1 A TABLE 1.6-1 SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS PARAMETERS ·Base Year Planning Period Economic Analysis Period Inflation Rate Real Discount Rate Real Petroleum Fuel Escalation Rate Interest Rate 1982 21 years, 1982 -2002 56 years,1982 -2037 0% (all costs expressed in 1982 dollars) 3% 2.6% 3% TABLE 1.6-2 ECONOMIC LIFETIMES FOR MAJOR EQUIPMENT Equipment Item Diesel Generators Electric Transmission Lines Waste Heat Recovery Equipment Wind Generators Organic Rankine Cycle Systems Hydroelectric Plants Steam Turbines Combined Cycle Plants Coal Gasification Equipment Lifetime, Years 30 30 15 15 25 50 30 30 30 TABLE 1. 6-3 SUMMARY OF PRESENT WORTH COSTS All Values in 1982 Dollars Scenario Description Present Worth, (Sl,OOO) Ranking Bas e P I an ( B P -1 ) Alternative A (A-1) Alternative B-1 Alternative B-2 Alternative B-3 Alternative B-5 Alternative B-8 Alternative B-9A Alternative B-9B Alternative B-9C Alternative B-11 Alternative B-13A Alternative B-13B Alternative B-14A Alternative B-14B Alternative B-15 Alternative B-16 Alternative B-17 Alternative B-18A Alternative B-18B Alternative B-19A Alternative B-19B Alternative B-19C Alternative B-19D Alternative B-19E Diesel Only Tazimina Regional Beluga Transmission Newhalen and Large Kukaklek Newhalen and Medium Kukaklek Tazimina Run-of-River, Medium Chikuminuk and Medium Kukaklek Medium Chikuminuk and Medium Tazblina 16 MW Coal-Fired 16 MW Oil-Fired 16 MW Coal Gasification Coal-fired at Dillingham and Newhalen Large Chikuminuk and Tazimina Run-of-River Large Chikuminuk and local Newhalen Newhalen Regional -Power Only Newhalen Regional Power and River Diversion Diesel Clusters Diesel Clusters and Transmission Diesel Regional Transmission Interconnected Tazimina Run-of-River and Kontrashibuna Kontrashibuna Diesel Local and Waste Heat Diesel Local and Wind Diesel Local -Waste Heat and Wind Diesel Local and Organic Cycle Tazimina Local, Diesel Local, Waste Heat + Wind 291,700 213,700 279,600 301,000 276,300 270,700 266,000 281,000 388,500 269,300 281,300 261,500 267,100 189,900 222,200 340,400 338,900 367,900 270,200 226,800 249,500 287,900 249,200 283,900 242,500 1. No cost evaluations were made for scenarios B-4, B-6, and B-7, which included the development of King Salmon. 2. Alternative B-10, a coal-fired plant at Naknek, has the same present worth as B-9A. 20 2 15 21 14 13 9 16 25 11 17 8 10 1 3 23 22 24 12 4 7 19 6 18 5 3. Alternative B-12, a coal-fired plant at Naknek with a subregional Newhalen hydroelectric development, has the same present worth as B-11.