HomeMy WebLinkAbout07182007 PACAB Packet
SEWARD PORT AND COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD
Regular Meeting
July 18, 2007
NOON
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Deborah Altermatt
Chair
Term Expires 2007
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Karl Van Buskirk
Vice Chair
Term Expires 2007
3.
ROLL CALL
Paul Schuldt
Board Member
Term Expires 2009
4.
SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND
REPORTS
A. ARRC Representative Louis Bencardino
Darryl Schaefermeyer
Board Member
Term Expires 2009
B. Chamber Director Laura Cloward
Ron Long
Board Member
Term Expires 2008
C. KPB/EDD - City Councilmember Valdatta
D. Administrative Report
Vacant
Board Member
Term Expires 2008
5. Citizens' comments on any subject except those items
scheduled for public hearing. [Those who have signed in will be
given the first opportunity to speak. Time is limited to 2 minutes
per speaker and 30 minutes total time for this agenda item.}
Theresa Butts
Board Member
Term Expires 2009
6. Approval of agenda and consent agenda [Approval of
Consent Agenda passes all routine items indicated by asterisk
Phillip Oates
City Manager
Scott A. Ransom
Harbormaster
7.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
i
Anne Bailey
Executive Liaison
A. Project Status List- On-Going........... .......... .Page 3
City of Seward, Alaska
July 18, 2007
PACABAgenda
Page 1
8. NEW BUSINESS
* A. April 4, 2007 Regular Meeting Minutes.......................................Page 4
B. Discuss Resolution 2007-02 providing a recommendation to Council for
pursuit of Andy Baker's YOURCLEANENERGY LLC, Lowell Creek and
Marathon Creek in-stream hydroelectric projects as a source of alternative
energy for the Seward Utility District................................ ...Page 10
9. CORRESPONDENCE, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS
(No action required)-
A. Alaska Coastal Management Program Seward Boat Harbor Travel Lift
Public Notice..................... ...... ......... ......................... ...Page 47
B. WTCAK's Trade Development Programs Focus on Alaska's Top Markets
and the Search for New, High-Potential Markets on the Future.. ....Page 49
C. Status ofSMIC Development Plan Update..............................Page 51
D. WTCAK's Passport to Profit Special Report.......................... . Page 52
11. BOARD COMMENTS
12. CITIZENS' COMMENTS [5 minutes per individual- Each individual has one
opportunity to speak. ]
13. BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS'
COMMENT
14. ADJOURNMENT
.
City o/Seward, Alaska
July 18, 2007
PACAB Agenda
Page 2
OJrn ~ m "1l z ~ ~ rn z ::J: 0 c: " rn )0 i1
:;am )0 :;a ~ ::J: 0 )0 ~ "1l Cii !!: :;a
~~ :;a rn Cii (") .... ;j ~ :;a 0 ::J: c; ~ :;a
OJ i 0 ;lIl: m r- OJ z ~ (")
~~ 0 w :;a ~ ::J: 0 ;a Z
Z U. 0 z .... m m m (") ....
:;a ~ c: ~ 0 :;a ~ rn =: g ~
~~ 0 )0 ~ 0 !E lD cl
m 0 :;a <: (") z 0 (") r- m
m;a " ~ :;a ~ ~ ;lIl: "1l )0 ~ 0 ~ en
:;a_ m m m ~ ~ :;a !I: ::J:
OZ :;a "1l " m 0 !I: (") ;j
mm :;a )0 j: z en < < ~ 6 F
rn(") m z m 6 m ~ m
-m 0 en )0 :;a !!: .... z ;a ~
Glz 6 ~ z m r- ::J: (")
z.... !I: ;a z ~ en m
om :!: z ~ rn .... ....
m :;a z 0 Z ;j
" .... 6
c; m c: " "1l
Z ~ ~ z ~
ffi )0
z m rn
z rn .... c...
(") (") m
-< m :;a (")
c: ....
(") en
....
c:
:;a
m
, " rn CIl (") (") m " .... 1J 1J (") s:: )> ::c Gl ::J )>
Q. 0 0 0 0 z 0 $! c ~ 0 c Z m $! ;:;: ;lJ
~ I: C Z Z (") , ;lJ z !:j z " iii. ;lJ
- , 0
::r .... j :::! 0 0 z CIl 1J :::! c z CD (") "tJ
J: ::c c rn c g :b )> ~ ....
~ z z ~ " z , II> m 0
C" ,., c $! m c 0 s:: ~
;'" Gl m )0 Gl ~ Co
II> , Z c )> Z 0 or ;:u
CIl ffil 0 0 Gl 1J ;lJ !:j , m ;lJ 0 )> ....
::J )> en Gl m 1J en Gl z ^ z c: z
$ '" .... :E =i m Q (") rn m CIl Q )>
S! en (") 0 ;lJ =i ;lJ ~ -< m -< CIl
Co c en 0 ~ z CIl en ;lJ o. z Z
III !!!. Z CIl (") (") ::c ~ (") z en m '" Gl C
Co 0 ....
o. CIl c ^ 1J ;lJ ::c c 1J B (") ~. 0
~ B en CIl ~ ^ <: m en > z d ~ 0 0
~. z CIl )> m (") en ~ (") ~ "tJ 0
CIl B , 1J ~ B z )> ,., ...
a - z m 0 m 0 Z Z CIl 0 lD r. ~" i:
< m sn en en , z ;lJ en Z h ;lJ ::J Z C. CD i:
111 Z )> )> !i:? .1J Gl :!! d: m ~ n
3 (") ;lJ , z Z 1J 8 ;lJ at Gl .. m
111 0 m CIl 0 m ;lJ CIl m 8 ~ ;:u
'" c 0 )> m e ~ c. t/) 0
!ii $! c en :!! ;:0 ^ .... at ~ ~ ..
Z Gl ~ AI m
() m z Z m Z CIl ..
Gl en m en Gl (") m Gl ::r B c )>
II> m .... J: .... Z ~. -
12. m m )> " Z 3 Z N III C
- , 0 0 m z en 0 III en 0 r- <
!!!. 0 m ~ 0 ~ ;lJ Gl '" ~ 0 iij"
(") )> 0 !ii ...... en
~ )> )> ,., ~ (") ..
.... c OJ m 6" =i 0
I: , m Z Il<> Z ::c
III m s:: 0 z ~ J: .... (") ~
!!l- s:: 1J Z 0 )> m 8 ~
:i" 1J 0 Gl Z 1J en ~
, $! Gl ;lJ ... m
0' 0 0 1J 5" m
... -< ~ c... m en Ii 0
c:5 s:: m Z s:: ~
(")
f.:! m 1J .... a C'5
z > m m C
.... CIl )>
z d
3
City of Seward, Alaska
April 4, 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume 3, Page 230
CALL TO ORDER
The regular April 4, 2007 meeting of the Seward Port and Commerce Advisory Board was
called to order at 12:00 pm by Board Member Long.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Board Member said the pledge of allegiance.
There were present:
Ron Long presiding, and
Theresa Butts
Darryl Schaefermeyer
Paul Schuldt
Absent: Deborah Altermatt
Karl Van Buskirk
Mike Banas
Comprising a quorum of the Board; and
Scott Ransom, Harbor Master
Christy Terry, Executive Liaison
ARRC Representative Louis Bencardino
Bencardino updated the Board about the coal dust problems that have occurred in Seward and
Healy. He stated that they began spraying water to control the dust but the railroad was looking for
other alternatives to avoid similar situations in the future. He noted that March was the most
productive March since he had been there and that there had been a lot of activity in the freight and
cruise ship docks.
Bencardino updated the Board on the status of the Tote freight through Seward.
In response to Butts, Bencardino stated the conveyor was built in 1985 and had been
continually maintained until the present.
KPBIEDD - City Councilmember Valdatta
.
Valdatta Campbell discussed the opening of Pollack season and stated he should receive a
letter from Jeremiah Campbell, a member of the Fisheries Board. Valdatta suggested ideas to
promote gray cod fisheries. He discussed ARRC, SMIC updates, the prison and economic
development items.
Parks and Recreation Director Karin Sturdy- Parks and Recreation Special Events Permit
y
City o/Seward, Alaska
April 4, 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume3, Page 231
Sturdy discussed how to speed up the process if a non-city government group wanted to hold
a special event. Sturdy separated out the forms Parks and Recreation used for special events and
discussed individual forms. She reminded them of the insurance requirements and discussed the
forms needed for parades. She continued to describe the process for events not found in the packets.
Sturdy stated the applicant filled out the application and then City Staff converted the application
into the actual permit.
Long stated that this was brought up by a certain individual to explore ways to meet a mutual
interest of protecting the City and inviting activities to generate income for business. He stated that
he would like to get the City to the point where there is a consistent application process to potential
vendors and others. Long stated for those who are locally based it may not be hard to get the extra
rider but for others it may not be an option. He continued to express his concerns and his desire to
move this process along without exposing the City to excessive risk. Long stated that there were
other cities with blanket permits. He stated he would like to reduce some of the steps but still provide
adequate coverage.
Sturdy responded those questions seem to be similar to Y oders.
Schaefermeyer stated that the City was in the process of developing a new website and
suggested the forms and guides should be incorporated.
Schuldt concurred.
Chamber Report Laura Cloward
Laura Cloward provided a laydown addressing information on starting a business in Seward.
She discussed the difficulties with this project and stressed that some of the problems were with
ownership of information. Cloward stated she would like to market what departments are doing to
encourage businesses to do business in Seward. She also provided information of what was
important for those who are interested in Seward as a potential investment.
Long stated that all agreed that economic development might not be ours to win but it was
ours to lose.
Administrative Report
Ransom gave an update on the South Harbor Project.
In response to Long, Ransom stated that the occupancy was full and yearly moorage had been
paid. He stated that there would be a pump out station and a floating fish cleaning facility.
In response to Schuldt and Butts, Ransom stated he did not know the amount of fish waste
that was dumped in deep water. He stated that he knew the cubic yards of the barge and how often
they were dumped and he would provide that information to the Board.
.5
City of Seward, Alaska
April 4, 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume 3, Page 232
In response to Schuldt, Ransom stated that the waste could not be taken to the meal plant
because it was not a controlled product.
Citizens' Comments on Any Subject except Those Items Scheduled For Public Hearing -
Kim Hughes, Old Exit Glacier Road, discussed her concerns with the coal dust in the
harbor. She requested help to find out what to do about the coal dust that had covered their boat at
E dock.
Ransom stated he would work with boat owners to clarify how the coal dust could be
cleaned off their boats.
Approval of agenda and consent agenda
Motion (SchaefermeyerlButts)
Approve the Agenda
Motion Passed
Unanimous Consent
The following items were approved under the Consent Agenda:
March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Minutes
New Business Items requiring a Public Hearing
Seward Marine Industrial Center Development Plan Updates
Notice of public hearing being posted and published as required by law was noted and the
public hearing was opened.
DJ Whitman, Seward Ships Dry Dock, stated the 3rd paragraph on page 1 needed some
work. He referred to pages 12 and 13 and stated that dumping used oil should be changed to all
liquids. Whitman noted that the Board had done a good job trying to keep it as a development plan.
Deputy Fire Chief Eddie Athey asked for support to re-implement item 5 on page 19. He
explained that area is difficult to respond to and the statement gave them the ability to encourage
sprinkler systems in construction phase to maintain ISO rating. He noted that he had a DVD which
showed the importance of sprinklers. He stated that it took 10 minutes to respond to two residential
fires in town and that it would take longer to respond at SMIC.
No one else requested to be heard and the public bearing was closed.
Long stated that this was a development plan and did not include policy.
l.o
City of Seward, Alaska
April 4. 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume 3. Page 233
Schaefermeyer stated the Fire Departments sprinkler requirement should be decided by
Council. He supported what Athey said but did not support this item in the Development Plan.
Butts noted her frustration with the parameters of the plan.
Schaefermeyer emphasized this was a development plan not a marketing plan. He suggested
that there be a broader document such as a SMIC Master Plan to consider the long range vision of
the facility.
Long stated Council had directed the Board to update the development plan.
Butts thought more could be done more could be done by the Board in regards to the SMIC
development plan.
Commission recessed from 1:15 to 1:20.
The Board discussed changes to the document.
The Board suspended the rules to allow Russ Maddox to speak.
Russ Maddox, 3385 Nash Road, stated he had discussed specific liquids which included
solvents, antifreezes and petroleum for the SMIC Development Plan. Maddox alleged that harbor
employees had dumped antifreeze near the City Shop and stated there needed to be a disposal plan
for antifreeze.
Ransom clarified that Harbor workers did not dispose of antifreeze in an illegal manner.
The Board was back under the rules of procedures.
The Board discussed what should be included in the plan with regards to liquid collection.
Ransom referred to the upland boat work policy stating the best management was included
there.
The Board suspended the rules to allow Russ Maddox to speak.
Maddox suggested providing a location for legal dumping of antifreeze.
The Board was back under the rules of procedure.
Long responded that there needed to be a disposal plan but not necessarily by the City.
Schaefermeyer pointed out that this had been accomplished in the first paragraph of the
section.
7
City ofSi!Ward, Alaska
April 4, 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume 3, Page 234
Motion (Butts/Schuldt)
Forward the SMIC Development
Plan to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for comments.
Motion Passed
Unanimous
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Project Status List- On-Going
NEW BUSINESS-
Resolution 2007-02, recommending Andy Baker's Lowell Creek Hydro Engineering Proposal
After Board discussion, Resolution 2007-02 was postponed until next Regular Meeting.
Set April 18, 2007 Work Session
Board set the work session topic as Resolution 2007-02 and Passenger Fees.
CORRESPONDENCE, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action required)-
Harbor Master Scott Ransom's update on South Harbor Fill Plans, including Corps of
Engineering requirements
City of Seward Facility Use and Event Permit Forms
City of Seward Building Permit Application Packets
BOARD COMMENTS-
Butts stated she spent time strengthening the language for the Andy Baker Resolution and
passed out her changes for discussion at the work session.
CITIZENS' COMMENTS [5 minutes per individual- Each individual has one opportunity to
speak. ]
Ransom noted that Christy Terry had taken the Engineering Executive Assistant position.
BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS- None.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 1 :55 pm.
8
City of Seward, Alaska
April 4, 2007
Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes
Volume 3, Page 235
Christy Terry
Executive Liaison
Ron Long
Board Member
(City Seal)
g
-
MEMORANDUM
Date:
July 5, 2007
From:
Phillip Oates, City Manager
Tim Barnum, Electric Utility Manager ~J)
To:
Subject:
Lowell Creek Hydro: Response to Theresa Butts statements.
Opinion:
>- Construction of a hydro electric project involves highly specialized contractors.
Some of the work could be accomplished by some of our talented local contractors
but, a large portion would probably go to outside (Seward) contractors.
>- It would not be cost effective to employee 2 maintenance employees' for a facility
that; in a years time only produces what we use in a month.
>- The fuel surcharge that we pay is the actual cost of fuel used by Chugach Electric to
produce our power. Their generators are large, between 60-140 KWeach. When
you have the load to run a generator at its peak efficiency, you get more power out
for the fuel you put in. They don't operate a generator just for the City Of Seward.
You can actually have the situation of using more fuel for less power.
>- The City Of Seward has previously paid a highly experienced, nationally known
Engineering firm to study flows at Lowell Creek. It was at their recommendation that
the study be stopped in the early stages, due to insufficient water flows.
>- Mr. Baker's proposal is an unsolicited proposal; he is not the first or only person to
have the ideal of hydro power from Lowell Creek. It is easy to be enthusiastic when
you need a job and it's not your money on the table. If it's such a great ideal, why
doesn't Mr. Baker put together investors and develop the project and sell it back to
the City, Chugach Electric, ML & P, Homer Electric or Matanuska Electric?
>- Mr. Baker's proposal also guarantees his a $90,000.00 per year salary as the
project manager.
>- It would be very fiscally irresponsible to spend $60,000.00 of our rate payer's money
on a project that is not eligible for grant funding because, it doesn't meet any of the
criteria. Example: 1) Hydro project needs to have a projected cost of S$0.05/kwh.
2) Does the project offset/replace existing hi-cost generation? No.
>- Glacial silt is detrimental to turbines. The only way, to my knowledge, that water
from glacial streams can be used in turbines is to build a dam and put the water
intake in the back water so that the silt can settle out of the water before it is taken
into the turbine.
>- Even with modern screens, how do you screen out the amount of material that
came out of the tunnel this last October? If the penstock or screening system gets
plugged, it could lead to a breach of Lowell Creek above the hospital, endangering
that facility and residents along Jefferson.
>- The tail race (out flow) of a hydro plant is loud. It is like sitting on the banks of a
It"'\
,
rushing river.
)> After the tsunami, the property east of Ballaine was considered unstable and not
appropriate for housing. That is why it is used for City parks and RVltent camping.
)> Our current energy cost is $O.0401/kwh. We also have a fuel surcharge that is a
straight pass thru to the customer, it ranges from about $O.02-$O.06/kwh. The
demand charge that is on our bill from Chugach Electric is covered by our rate
structure and is not an additional cost, such as the fuel surcharge.
)> The cost of power will be more from Lowell Creek Hydro than our existing sources
(see attached).
);> It is my recommendation that the City Of Seward NOT continue with this proposal,
at this time.
I \
,.
-l
:::r
iii'
"0
~
.Q,
CD
o
~
. ()
il;'r:::
'" l/l
c: -
3 0
-.3
.g ~
Dl r:::
=l/l
~ :i'
:::rco
11 ~
o 0
0-"
l'i ::;;:
CD :::r
0- _
III 3
-0
r:J
~ st
!t()
(;0
ii1 en
CD +
"r-
<0 0
lil ::;;:
'" ~
III
'"
"0
~
o
"0
o
'"
CD
c..
::;;:
o
c:
a:
o
III
r:::
'"
CD
-
:::r
CD
~
III
CD
'"
-
o
o
r:::
'"
o
3
CD
~
l/l
-
o ()
~ ~
5l CD
c:~
~ :c
e-.-<
III c..
~a
'" .
CD II
Cil
II ~
~9'
~O'I
. ~
.....~
~ :i"
:::rQ.
r:::
-c c..
CD CD
~ '"
3 0
o r:::
:l '"
:To
'iil3
< CD
CD ~
~
III '"
<0 CD
.e:<
c'l'
CD
o
:::r
III
~
co
CD
~
-
o
Z
()
;0
~
en
rn
()
r:::
'"
o
3
CD
~
r:::
'"
:;'
co
0'1
o
o
"
::;:
:::r
3'
o
:J
-
:::r
()
o
en
o
:J
'<
II
(ft
CD
~
<0
o
~
:;'
o
E
c..
CD
'"
o
r:::
l/l
o
3
CD
~
'"
CD
:<
o'
CD
o
:::r
III
~
co
.!E.
"'tl
r:::
~
o
:::r
III
'"
CD
o
-.
.01
rv
.....
w
w
o
o
~
:::r
-.
a
3
r
o
::;:
~
()
iil
CD
"
:c
~
~
o
o
o
'"
-
9'
CD
()
-<
(ft
01
o
CD
0'1
~
o
......
o
"'tl
r:::
~
o
:::r
III
'"
CD
o
-.
01
.rv
.....
w
w
o
o
"
::;:
:::r
-.
~
o
3
()
:::r
r:::
co
III
o
:::r
m
r0-
o
-
~
o'
o
o
l/l
-
-
:::r
CD
()
;::;:
'<
(ft
0'1
CD
.~
o
;t
N
W
~
:J
o
E
0-
CD
'"
-.
r:::
~
l/l
r:::
~
o
:::r
III
~
co
CD
~
Q
-<
~
:::r
o
o
l/l
-
~
o
o
CD
~
+
"TI
r:::
~
'"
r:::
~
o
:::r
III
~
co
CD
~
(ft
9
o
0'1
~
II
()
;::;:
'<
iil
'"
c.:
CD
:J
-
iii'
o
o
'"
-
"0
CD
~
"
::;;:
:::r
~
9
......
W
<0
~
-<
()
m
"
::;:
:::r
o
o
'"
-
~
(ft
9
o
<0
.....
~
()
ro-
III
:J
g~~~m
"'CD:::r:::rffi
~~=< ~
'<~CD co
CD '<
1Il!l1.1Il r
~s:~ r-
o ()
:J
- "'tl
:::r ~
o
"0
o
l/l
a!.
+
()
~
3
III
~
"
,
r:::
"0
~
(ft
9
o
~
~
II
r-
o
::;;:
~
()
~
CD
CD
"
:c
'<
0-
~
o
o
o
'"
-
(ft
01
o
OOC1lrv
- I\.l..... (ft
C1Irvwo
...J,. ~ w .
o.....wo
. ..... 0 <0
c;C1I0.....
.01
"0
CD
~
"
::;:
:::r
tR
9
~
w
~
\2
-<
o
r:::
~
()
~
o
-.
en
~
;0 "TI;o III
CDr:::CDo..
l/l CD '"
c.: - -. m
CDeng-ro-
~~~~
III :::r III -.
-Ill _0
0'" D3
CDco _
3 CD CD
III l/l
:J
0-
>
o
2'(ft
a!. 0
Z()(x)
001
:t;!e.~
~~
~s:
rvlll
3 *
o '
:J r:::
_ "0
:::r II
1Il(ft
c!!io
~~
001
o~
0'1
~
en
III
ro-
Cl"TIm'"
CD r::::J >
3~~co
III enco iil
:Jr:::'<CD
0-C:;()3
():::rOCD
:::r1ll"':J
0)..,....-
<Cco"'::;:
CD CD ::;: ;::;:
:::r:::r
~()
:::r
r:::
co
III
o
:::r
m
~
-
~
o'
>
o
C
Illtn
tn-O
CD () .
. 00
......"'.j>.
......_0
~
......
rv
3
o
:J
-
:::r
III
<
co
(ft
9
o
C1I
w
~
"'tl
~
CD
~
()
r:::
'"
-
o
3
CD
~
en
CD
:<
o'
CD
()
:::r
III
<C
CD
(ft
~
9'
o
o
'II:
()
r:::
'"
-
o
3
CD
iil
en
CD
::;:
III
0..
m
r0-
o
-
~
o'
Cl
CD
III
;:+
3
CD
:Jl-
rv
00
w
o
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Slack text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
MEMORANDUM
~-
Date:
June 18, 2007 (the very date of the Council M ~eting)
To:
Phillip Oates, City Manager
From:
Tim Barnum, Electric Utility Manager
Subject:
Lowell Creek Hydro Proposal by Andy Baker, YourCleanEnergy LLC.
Statement of Facts and Conclusions:
~ Construction and maintenance portions of this proposal may be underestimated.
o Agreed, please also note that the magnitude of this project will also provide
jobs for many local companies and individuals for several years. This
project also pays for two full time maintenance positions - all included in
the cost jkWh.
~ Project feasibility hinges on flow analyses of creeks and other unknown factors.
o Agreed. Though in my opinion this is unlikely (see below), and, if flow
analysis started to look bad, the project would be tabled at that time.
~ PACAB recommends "sole sourcing" the entire project to Your Clean Energy LLC.
o Yes, P ACAB asked that of YCE. It did not seem wise to fragment leadership
of this project. It was Andy Baker's idea and enthusiasm that got us this far.
YCE's actual proposal provides for that option if you wish.
~ Proposal assumes total Capital Cost, of construction, will be funded by grants
totaling $6,000,000.00.
o Yes, if this does not seem possible, the project would be reevaluated at that
time. (The current status of the Energy bill looks rather good).
~ Flow analysis was conducted by CH2M Hill and concluded insufficient flow from
Lowell Creek to sustain a hydro project.
o On the contrary, as noted on page 2-1 of the CH2M study, "a substantial
amount of the total runoff could be lost to subterranean flow...." Based on
measurements of 100 ds at the old intake structure (up the canyon a bit),
and only 40 ds at the tunnel.
o The Y ourCleanEnergy plan is designed to capture most of that flow, which
may be 60% of the total flow, thereby doubling the flow rates documented
in 1978
o In addition, if currently popular models prove true, Seward will, on
average, be experiencing greater precipitation in the coming decades.
Page 1 of4
,~
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
o That was a completely different design, fragmenting the" drop" into 3
separate places, the modem proposal gathers all that energy into one
location and so is more efficient by nearly an order of magnitude
o Modem screens and penstock teclmology increase efficiency even further
and reduce wear such that the designs are not even comparable to each
other - especially in the areas of.
o (conclusion) - comparing the energy extraction and production of the two
designs is not appropriate, the CH2M plan is still a bad idea. The
Y ourCleanEnergy plan is an improvement by an order of magnitude.
);> Sighting new facility in campground area will introduce high noise levels into the
camping area
o No it will not. A properly built structure will not be any louder than the
generators already run at that location by the RVs and the RVs can all be
put on meters and their generators silenced to make up for it.
...and places the generation infrastructure in a Tsunami zone,\
o As is most of the town.
o Anywhere there is powerful drop (head) will be near the ocean.
.. .built on property that is unstable.
o This is the first I have heard of this. I do not know what Tim's source is. Of
course this should be evaluated as a part of the overall engineering and may
or may not have an impact.
);> Current energy cost is $0.0401 per KWH.
o No it is not. As Tim Barnum explained to me himself. See attached.
o I cannot fathom why this number is misrepresented in this way.
);> Projected energy cost from hydro Is $0.097 per KWH.
o Yes. The construction costs will probably be higher, but the generation will
also probably be greater (perhaps much greater), so in my opinion this
number is more than fair.
o
);> Total project cost is estimated at $10,277,600.00.
o This number is correct.
);> Total projected production of project is 6,273,300 KWH per year.
o This number is correct, though as I have said, this estimate is quite
conservative.
o This number is based on a high-flow rate of 50ds (based on the flow data
from 1979) and actual flow could be double or more, bringing the cost
much lower.
);> Current average monthly usage is 5,320,869 KWH.
o This number is almost the same as Mr. Barnum told me in April.
o Equals 63,850,428 kWh per year, so the project will contribute
approximately
Page 2 of 4
IL\
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
Opinion:
~ Lowell Creek has insufficient flow to sustain an affordable hydro project.
o Wrong. See above
~ A $10,000,000.00 hydro project with a projected $0.097 KWH cost is not a viable
candidate to receive grant funding, to be a viable project the KWH cost needs to be
in the $0.04-0.05 range and offset existing generation.
o 1 do not know what Tim's source is, mine disagree 100%
~ Lowell Creek hydro would not offset any of the generation used to supply power to
Seward.
o Would have offset its share of all the generation we have been using in
recent months.
o Minimum year-round generation wilI offset a minimum 240kW of any
Chugach interruption and a maximum of 2MW depending on flows at that
time and efficiency of turbines.
~ In fact, it could reduce the efficiency of CEA generation, causing our rates to
increase.
o Really.
o How, specifically? And in what ratio compared to the fuel price increases
that are likely certain in coming years and decades.
~ Our cost of the power generated by Lowell Creek hydro would be at least
$105,000.00 per year more than what we currently pay (including fuel surcharge)
for the same amount of power.
o This math does not add up. 1 would like to see the documentation for that.
See attached.
o What we currently pay is also largely irrelevant. What we wilI be paying
over the next 40 years is what is relevant.
~ Your Clean Energy LLC. Has no experience developing a hydro project.
o YCE is a new company. Andy Baker has extensive (15 years) experience
developing large and medium-sized water projects outside and in Alaska
o Andy Baker has been working in Alaska for nine years and so is familiar
with our special needs and challenges.
~ If the goal is to have more renewable energy for our customers, the City can enter
into negotiations with another buyer of the power produced by the Bradley Lake
hydro project and purchase more of the output.
o This project is not so much about renewable energy as it is about fiscal
responsibility, economic security, and risk management (I refer to
diversifying the actual supply of energy and working toward being
independent of fuel prices)
o Having access to your very own renewable energy source is simply by far
the most effective way of accomplishing those goals.
}- It is my recommendation that the City Of Seward NOT continue with this proposal,
at this time.
o ???
Page 3 of 4
I~
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
)> A turbine can produce efficient power at as little as 10ds flow.
? Because much of the flow will be coming from underground, it is entirely likely
that at least 10ds will flow all year.
? This will produce power (240kW) and keep the intake and penstock from freezing,
saving tons on maintenance.
? Every second this project produces power beyond the 40 term projected, the only
cost of that power is the cost of maintenance. This electricity will be virtually free
compared to what I can imagine fuel-based power will cost in 40 years when there
are about 10 billion people supplying the demand.
? YCE's information presentation was designed to show that even with documented
surface flows, this project is viable, and actual flows are likely to be much greater,
propelling this project from "viable" into the range of "lucky us!"
Page 4 of 4
11.0
"'.
MEMORANDUM
Date:
June 18, 2007
From:
Phillip Oates, City Manager
Tim Barnum, Electric Utility Manager ji)
To:
Subject:
Lowell Creek Hydro: Proposal by Andy Baker, Your Clean Energy LLC.
Statement of Facts:
~ Construction and maintenance portions of this proposal may be underestimated.
~ Project feasibility hinges on flow analyses of creeks and other unknown factors.
~ PACAB recommends "sole sourcing" the entire project to Your Clean Energy LLC.
~ Proposal assumes total Capital Cost, of construction, will be funded by grants
totaling $6,000,000.00.
~ Flow analysis was conducted by CH2M Hill and concluded insufficient flow from
Lowell Creek to sustain a hydro project.
~ Sighting new facility in campground area will introduce high noise levels into the
camping area and places the generation infrastructure in a Tsunami zone, built on
property that is unstable.
~ Current energy cost is $0.0401 per KWH.
~ Projected energy cost from hydro is $0.097 per KWH.
~ Total project cost is estimated at $10,277 ,600.00.
~ Total projected production of project is 6,273,300 KWH per year.
~ Current average monthly usage is 5,320,869 KWH.
Opinion:
)> Lowell Creek has insufficient flow to sustain an affordable hydro project.
~ A $10,000,000.00 hydro project with a projected $0.097 KWH cost is not a viable
candidate to receive grant funding, to be a viable project the KWH cost needs to be
in the $0.04-0.05 range and offset existing generation.
~ Lowell Creek hydro would not offset any of the generation used to supply power to
Seward. In fact, it could reduce the efficiency of CEA generation, causing our rates
to increase.
)> Our cost of the power generated by Lowell Creek hydro would be at least
$105,000.00 per year more than what we currently pay (including fuel surcharge)
for the same amount of power.
)> Your Clean Energy LLC. Has no experience developing a hydro project.
~ If the goal is to have more "renewable energy" for our customers, the City can enter
into negotiations with another buyer of the power produced by the Bradley Lake
hydro project and purchase more of the output.
)> It is my recommendation thaHhe City Of Seward NOT continue with this proposal,
at this time.
\1
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
MEMORANDUM
From:
June 18, 2007
Date:
To:
Phillip Oates, City Manager
Tim Barnum, Electric Utility Man
Subject:
Lowell Creek Hydro Proposal by A
Statement of Facts and Conclusions:
)>
)>
oposal e underestimated.
of this project will also provide
several years. This
ositions.
and other unknown factors.
ly (see below), if flows started
that time.
)>
o Th
mayb
in 1978
o . In addition, if currently popular models prove true, Seward will, on
average, be experiencing greater precipitation in the coming decades.
o That was a completely different design, fragmenting the" drop" into 3
separate places, the modern proposal gatl1ers all that energy into one
location and so is more efficient by nearly an order of magnitude
eem possible, the project would be reevaluated at that
tus of the Energy bill looks rather good).
d by CH2M Hill and concluded insufficient flow from
ydro project.
-1 of the CH2M study, "a substantial amount of the total
st to subterranean flow.. .."
Energy plan is designed to capture most of that flow, which
of the total flow, thereby doubling the flow rates documented
\8
Page 1 of3
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
o Modern screens and penstock tedmology increase efficiency even further
and reduce wear such that the designs are not even comparable to each
other - especially in the areas of.
o (conclusion) - comparing the energy ex
designs is not appropriate, the CH2M I
Y ourCleanEnergy plan is an imp en
);> Sighting new facility in campground ar ntr
camping area
o No it will not. A properly built
generators already run at that lac
put on meters and their generator
... and places the generation infrastru
o Yes, anywhere there is powerf
... built on property that is unst
o This is the first I have he
course this should be ev
);> Current energy cost is $0.040
o No it's not. As Tim
o r cannot fathom
);> Projected energy cost
o Yes. The co
also proba
);> Total pro'ect cost is
);> Tot ducti
);> C hly us
production of the two
. d idea. The
of magnitude.
'se levels into the
t flow to sustain an affordable hydro project.
o
);> Lowell Cr
Seward.
o It would 0 fset any generation that occurred during flow months (Apr-Oct),
i.e. the ones in recent months
~ In fact, it could reduce the efficiency of CEA generation, causing our rates to
increase.
o How, specifically? And in what ratio compared to the fuel price increases
that are H*ely certain in coming years and decades.
ject with a projected $0.097 KWH cost is not a viable
unding, to be a viable project the KWH cost needs to be
d offset eXisting generation.
lat Tim's source is, mine disagree 100%
ould not offset any of the generation used to supply power to
Page 2 of3
\9
Rebut to Tim Barnum's Memo as detailed below
By Theresa Butts as a private individual
Black text is the original memo, red (grey) text is added
~ Our cost of the power generated by Lowell Creek hydro would be at least
$105,000.00 per year more than what we currently pay (including fuel surcharge)
for the same amount of power.
o This math does not add up. I would like
See attached.
~ Your Clean Energy LLC. Has no experie
o YCE is a new company. Andy B
projects exactly like these for h'
)> If the goal is to have more renewable
into negotiations with another buyer of t
hydro project and purchase more of the
o This project is not so much about
responsibility, economic securi an
diversifying the actual supp
independent of fuel price
~ It;s my recommendation that t
at this time.
o I think PACAB was wis
dro project.
rience developing
Page 3 00
20
Sponsored by: Board
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
PORT AND COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION 2007-02
RESOLUTION OF THE PORT AND COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD,
PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL FOR PURSUIT OF
ANDY BAKER'S YOURCLEANENERGY LLC, LOWELL CREEK AND
MARATHON CREEK IN-STREAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS AS A
SOURCE OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY FOR THE SEWARD UTILITY
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Seward City Council has tasked the Port and Commerce Advisory Board to
research possible sources of alternative energy for the community; and
WHEREAS, future costs of fuel-based electricity are uncertain and this project offers a
potential to sell fixed-cost hydroelectric power profitably over time; and
WHEREAS, a diverse, stable, fixed-price energy supply is becoming a vital component of
economic health and independence; and
WHEREAS, hydroelectric power generated from Lowell Creek may be feasible as
affordable, reliable and safe energy for Seward; and
WHEREAS, Andy Baker, P.E., d/b/a, YourCleanEnergy, LLC. has submitted a proposal
dated March 6, 2007 to perform a pre-design study of Lowell Creek to determine its feasibility to
support a hydroelectric generation facility; and
WHEREAS, the Port and Commerce Advisory Board finds sufficient merit in the proposal
to recommend it to the City Council for consideration and funding; and
WHEREAS, the Board acknowledges that the construction and maintenance portions of this
proposal may be underestimated; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project has the potential to be NOT feasible at all, it also has the
potential to be VERY beneficial to this community; and
WHEREAS, the engineering costs proposed are quite reasonable; and
WHEREAS, this project's feasibility hinges on the flow-analysis of the creeks and other
key factors; and
2\
Port and Commerce Advisory Board
Resolution 2007-02
Page 2 of2
WHEREAS, the City may be able to reduce the amount of money at stake by minimizing
or alternately re-structuring the proposed contract; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Seward Port and Commerce Advisory
Board that:
Section 1. The Board recommends the Seward City Council undertake the necessary steps to
make Seward's electrical future safe, secure, reliable and stable in cost.
Section 2. The Board Recommends that the Seward City Council authorize the
Administration to enter into fixed price contract negotiations with Y ourCleanEnergy LLC for
engineering services outlined in the proposal.
Section 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Port and Commerce Advisory Board this 6th day of
June 2007.
THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
::z:t1ffi ~V/~
Deborah Altermatt, Chair
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Jean Lewis,
City Clerk
(City Seal)
22
. Iii. Celebrate The Power Of Nature TM
with... YourCleanEnergy LlC
Port And Commerce Advisory Board
City Of Seward, Alaska
PO Box 167
Seward AK 99664
April 4, 2007
RE: Comments on Draft Resolution - Lowell Creek Hydro Project
Dear PACAB Members,
In review of the draft resolution forwarded to me by Christy Terry on March 30, 2007, I
respectfully respond to the following items:
PACAB - "the Board recommends the Seward City Council examine closely if the
proposal might be minimized into basic steps to verify feasibility" - I understand
this to mean "let's see how much flow we measure before we spend money on other
aspects of the pre-design study" - perhaps a lesson learned from the 1997 study.
It is true that this project is mostly about getting as much flow into the screen intake at
high elevation - this is where the power will come from that will make the project
economically feasible. Including the Marathon creek flow in the study is important
because this flow may supplement Lowell Creek flow year round and increase feasibility.
I do not think there is much question that there is enough flow to have a hydroelectric
facility, it's more a question of what the fixed cost of power will be once the project is
completed, given the flow characteristics. Aside from the flow characteristics, there are
other preliminary challenges that must be addressed, specifically:
Securing a preliminary FERC permit.
Securing cooperation and acceptance from other agencies, especially Army
Corps of Engineers.
Establishing base topo and geologic mapping of stream channel in area of
proposed intake - the flow monitoring points will have to be located strategically.
There is efficiency in addressing secondary considerations in the study scope parallel
with the flow monitoring exercise. This is because many of these tasks can be
addressed during the same site visits and these tasks may also have significant impacts
on construction costs. Further, completion of the pre-design study can be expedited as
soon as the one-year flow study matures. The sooner you complete the entire study, the
sooner you may apply for grant funding, moving ahead will give you some priority and
momentum that will work in favor of getting in line for revolving funds and appropriations.
PACAB - YourCleanEnergy LLC would supply all services including
subcontractors, and would provide a final product to include complete
engineering studies and permitting - this is a good idea, it will be most efficient to get
it all done in one year as the subcontractors can be coordinated more effectively.
In summary, I ask you to consider the above and I will be available for a conference call
during the meeting today if you would like to this discuss more.
Sincerely, Andy Baker, PE
YourCleanEnergy LLC
308 G Street #212, Anchorage, Alaska 99501
907-274-2007
23
. 0 IiiJ Celebrate The Power Of Nature 1M
with. YourCleanEnergy c
March 6, 2007
Port And Commerce Advisory Board
City Of Seward, Alaska
PO Box 167
Seward AK 99664
RE: Estimation Of Benefits And Financial Analysis - Lowell Creek Hydro
Project
Dear PACAB Members,
As presented to you at your February 21, 2007 workshop, the attached handout
outlines benefits to the City for a hydro project on Lowell Creek; an estimation of
probable design and construction costs; and a preliminary evaluation of financial
analysis for the same. The evaluation indicates that it may be possible to fix
hydroelectric power generated from Lowell Creek under $0.10/kwh for 40 years.
This evaluation is based on components that have been estimated with the best
information available to me at this time. Cost component assumptions
presented here in which I bring to your attention at this time are as follows:
Federal and state grants secured prior to final design for $6,000,000
Base construction cost of $6,000,000
Municipal Bond issued @4% interest for 40 year term
Annual O&M costs of $180,000 (two full time hydro operators)
Annual administration cost of $90,000 (one full time project administrator)
Annual Energy Cost = $0.097 per KWH produced from Lowell Creek
In view of rising electric grid costs, rising diesel fuel costs and the increasing
potential to sell fixed cost hydroelectric power profitably over time, the Lowell
Creek Hydro and Marathon Creek Hydro projects are worthy of consideration.
If you have any questions regarding the attached, please feel free to contact me.
Again I am willing to make one final summary presentation of this project
information to City Council, the City Manager and the Mayor if requested.
Sincerely,
Andy Baker, PE
andybaker@yourcleanenergy.us
YourCleanEnergy LLC
308 G Street #212, Anchorage, Alaska 99501
907~274~2007
2L\
03/01/2007 22:58 FAX 8073448770
FED EX KINKOS
I4J 0021001:1
. Ill. Celebrate The Power Of Nature 1M
with... YourCleanEnergy u.c
March 1, 2007
Port And Commerce Advisory Board
City Of Seward, Alaska
PO Box 167
Seward AK 99664
....\----~
RE: Scope, Schedule & Budget Proposal - Pre-Design Study. Lowell Creek
Hydro Project
Dear PACAB Members,
I have enjoyed the two presentations that we have had together discussing the potential
of Lowell Creek as an affordable, reliable and safe source of clean electrical energy for
the City of Seward. As I have disclosed in the presentations, the viability of developing
this Independent and fixed cost energy supply in Seward Is worthy of your consideration.
With more rising grid electricity and diesel fuel costs Inevitable in the near future, this
project will enable the City to apply for various grants and loans to significantly lower the
Initial capital costs of final design and construction. This Wlllln tum lower the fixed unit
cost of power generated over the 40 year design life of the hydro project
In order to secure permits and funding for this project, it will be necessary to condUct
stream flow monitoring for at least one year, and re-evaluate the design aspects covered
by previous studies as well as the new concepts presented. The intent of this proposal
is to pro\lide the City with the hard data and analysis required to undertake such a
project responsibly and profitably. "Further, the completed Pre-Oesigll,study will place
the City in a favorable position to secure funding to advance the hydro project to final
design and construction. I have included the option of a Rehabilition study of the
existing Marathon Creek Hydro Project which ca.n be done cost effectively in parallel with
the Lowell Creek Hydro Project Pre-Design Study as they are In the same project area.
I am pleased to submit the following items for your review and consideration for the
Lowell Creek Hydro Project Pre-Design Study: .
Exhibit A:
exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Scope of Content of Pre-Design Study (2 pages)
Schedule To complete Flow Monitoring & Study (1 Page)
Budget Estimate To complete Pre-DeSign Study (3 pages)
I trust that you will find the scope, budget and schedule reasonable and that you will
consider recommending them to City Council. If you have any questions regarding
these items. please feel free to contact me. I am willing to make one final summary
presentation of this proposal to City Council, City Manager and the Mayor, if requested.
Sincerely, I"'J J
a4r~
Andy Saker, PE
andybaker@yourcleanenergy.u9
~~'.~. .
YourCleanEnergy u.c
308 G street: #212, AnchOrclge, Alaska 99501
')t::..
907-274-2007
03/01/2001 22:58 FAX 8013448110
FEDEli KINKOS
III 003/008
. II. Celebrate The power Of Nature TM with... YourCleanEnergy ILC
LOWELL CREEK HYDRO PROJECT - PROJECT SCOPE - PAGE 1 OF 2 03101107
EXHIBIT A. SCOPE OF CONTENT FOR PRE-DESIGN STUDY REPORT
STUDY SCOPE;
1. INTRO
A.
B.
C.
D.
PROJECT HISTORY
EXISTING GENERATION FACILITIES
CURRENT PPA WITH CHUGACH
BASE MAPPING
.).>.
2. POTENTIAL HYDRO. ELECTRIC FACILITIES & POWER
A. PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY & SNOW FIELDS
B. SURFACE HYDROLOGY
C. SUB.SURFACE HYDROLOGY
D. ESTIMATE OF AVAILABLE HYDRO ENERGY
E. OPEAATIONS
1. INTAKE SCREENING OPTIONS
2. INFILTRATION GALLERY OPTIONS
3. PENSTOCK DESIGN OPTIONS
A. PIPE MATERIAL SELECTION
B. CORROSION CONTROL
C. THRUST RESTRAINT I SEISMIC DESIGN
D. FREEZE PROTECTION I INSULATION
E. POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS
F. ANCHORING! FLOOD EAOSION I FLOATING
G. ACCESS FOR INSPECTION I MAINTENANCE
4. SEASONAL FLOW TURBINE OPERATIONS
, 5. TURBINE WHEEL MAINTENANCE/REPAIR OPTIONS
6. NOISE MITIGATION ft-o>"
7. DOWNSTREAM GRAVEL DEPOSITION/REMOVAL
F. WATER RIGHTS
3. DESIGN ALTERNATIVES - INTAKE LOCATIONS & HYDRO-PLANT SITES
;/ ,
A.
ALTERNATIVE LAYOUTS
1. UPPER INTAKE + CAMPGROUND HYDRO PLANT SITE
2. UPPER INTAKE + ALTERNATE HYDRO PLANT SITE
3. LOWER INTAKE + CAMPGROUND HYDRO PLANT
4. LOWER INTAKE + ALTERNATE HYDRO PLANT SITE
YourCleanEnergy u.c
308 G Street "212, Anchorage, AlaSka 99501
') I^
907-274-2007
03/01/2007 22:58 FAX 9073448770
FEDEX KINKOS
~ 004/008
. g. Celebrate The Power Of Nature '!1/1 with... YourCleanEnergy LLC
fJ-"-~
LOWELL CREEK HYDRO PROJECT ~ PROJECT SCOPE - pAGE 2 OF 2 03101/07
EXHIBIT A. SCOPE OF CONTENT FOR PRE-DESIGN sroDY REPORT (CONT'D)
~""f.J
B. EQUIPMENT & FACILITY OPTIONS
,. IMPULSE TURBINE SELECTION
2. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT & CONTROLS
3. CONNECTION TO CITY uTILITY GRID
4. HYDRO SlDG DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
A. EQUIPMENT FOOTPRINT
8. OVERHEAD TRAVELING CRANE I lOADING BAY
C. NOISE & VIBRATION MITIGATION
D. FLOOD & TSUNAMI PROTECTION
E. SEISMIC DE:SIGN
F. OPERATION & MAINTENANCE REQ'TS
G. VISITOR ACCESS OPTIONS
H. TAILRACE TO RESURECTION BAY
I. SALMON RELEASE f RECREATIONAL QI:ITI0NS
,,.r':t
4. PROBABLE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
5. DAM SAFETY. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. REQUIRED PERMITS
A. DAM SAFETY
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
C. SEISMICITY
D. FISH & WILDLIFE
E. FORESTRY & MINING
F. RECREATION
G. PERMITS
6. POWER MARKET ANALYSIS
7. COST AND BENEFIT ANALYSIS
8. RECOMMENDED AL TEANATIVE
9. STRATEGIES FOA PROJECT FINAL DESIGN & CONSTAUCTION FUNDING
A. FEDERAL CLEAN ENERGY GRANTS (DOE. USDA)
" B. FE:DERAL CONGRESSIONAL APPROPRIATION
C. STATE OF ALASKA - RENEWABLE ENERGY GRANt"FUNDS
D. STATE OF ALASKA - ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY GRANT
E. DENALI COMMISSION GRANTS & LOANS
F. LOW IMPACT HYDRO Oe:SIGNATION
G. MUNICIPAL BONDS
H. GREEN TAGS
L CRUISE SHIP POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT
YourCleanEnergy LLC
308 G Street #212, ....nchorage, Alaska 99501
r'J,
907-274-2007
,.,~"
-.,~.'..~
"lJ "lJ 2
:tI
n ':1 m "'/'I
~ m c z j m ~
~ OJ m "'/'I ~ !Z = ::I:l
0 ~ j ~ 0 () ;:
~ 0 ~ i - 0 C5 ~ 8 "lJ
"D m !;2 ~ c F z 1ft F "'/'I :tI tIJ
..& Z C r 0 :D m ::lIii
C 8 ...... () - m
::! E ~ Cl C tIJ Z m a i: ~ c :u c i
m 'i!- ~ tfl. ::J: ~ m ::! ~ ~ z i ~ a M
m g i:
"11 ~ '0 ~ m "'/'I m c "D Z C z
i ~ ~ g; ;; ... < ~ -< z ~ ~ i ~
c ';ij -< m m c g I :e
~ z i: c c: ;lIC g G) :g ~ <
G) C "lJ -< ~ )10 m :D .. :D ~ ~
~ 0 z 0 ~ () ~ > iii g 0 z 0 I: i: ~
i G) ~ rn 0 ~ rn ::D c 'V C) C 0 0
~ . i: m C 0 i: 0 J z l; "U
tIJ ~ :D i: c: C m c z Z r- Z '::r
"'D 0 !: ;5! 0 Z )10 -t z: Z tIJ 0 :E =i a 1ft c; 8-
... c ~ ~ S 0 ::t c G) 0 z: ~
6 !!I :D 0 " ~ "U ::I:l m :g :D c:
~ 0 "U Z < :D r- 0
)10 0 0 ~ 0 z < ! m (g ~ ~ r- Z Z Ii 0 cP
i)S I}J -t m In G) Ii) z
Z tIJ Z (Ill tIJ "TI
~, ...
:a -U
! ~
_~r_lIj" 7' 0
CD
c.. ~
c:
z
Co.
c: ~
...
>
C
G)
en ....
m ~
"'D
0 9!.
~
..... ~
Cl
~ <
C
~
c..
~
,.. ii
'~:iJ"'
B:
~ ~ ~
~ 0 c
01 ~
:D
; ::J
i
c..
c 5
z
- c..
1:1 C Cl
~ r ~
~ -L
Ci
Ii) ~
28
""^^J,,,^^rib :;:n~Nn X3113.:! OLLBl1l1ELOB xv.:! Bg:~~ LOO~/~O/EO
03/01/2007 22:58 FAX 9073448770
FEDEX KINKOS
IgJ 006/008
. 1St . Celebrate The Power Of Nature '1M with... YourClaanEnergy Ll.C
EXHIBIT C: PROPOSED BUDGET OF PRE-DESIGN STUDY
lowell Creek Hydro Project
Page 1 of 3
03101107
The following is a summary of budget estimates to complete a Pre-Design Study
that will enable the City to seek grant funding for final design and construction of
this project. It will be economically efficient and recommended to Include the
Marathon Creek Hydro Project in this process as many tasks can be done during
site visits for the Lowell Creek Project A summary of the budget is as follows:
1. LOWELL CREI:K HYDRO PRE-DESIGN STUDY:
A. CONTRACT WITH YourCleanEnergy llC
PRE-DESIGN STUDY LABOR COSTS
DIRECT COSTS - TRAVEL EXPENSES
DIRECT COSTS - OFFICE EXPENSES
TOTAL BASE CONTRACT - YourCleanEnergy LlC
$29.800
~ ,< ~
$3,510
$1,040
----
$34,350
B. MINOR GOODS Be SERVICES PURCHASED DIRECTLY BY THE CITY
STREAM FLOW DATA COLLECTION
SUB-SURFACE TEST BORING AND MONITORING WELLS
BASE MAPPING TOPO SURVEY (RECOMMENDED)
TOTAL MINOR PURCHASE CONTRACTS
C. TOTAL TO COMPLETE PRE-DESIGN STUDY (A +8)
2. MARATHON CREEK HYDRQ PROJECT REHAB STUDY:.
PREPARE PRE-DESIGN STUDY - YourCleanEnergy LLC
STREAM FLOW DATA COLLECTION -Minor purchase
TotAL TO COMPLETE MARATHON CREEK HYDRO STUDY
yourCleanEnergy Ll.C
308 G Street #212, Anchorage, Alaska 99501
'7Q
$9,500
$9,600
$9.800
$28,900
---
$63.250
.'~,
$9,600
$ 6,000
$15,600
907-274-2007
03/01/2001 22:59 FAK 9013448110 FEDEX KINKOS
~ 001/008
L.owell Creek Hydro project Celebrate the power of nature,...
with... YourCleanEnergy LLC
EXHIBIT C: PROPOSED BUDGET - ITEMIZED - PRE-DESIGN STUDV
03101107
PaGe 2 of 3
TASK PERFORMED BV VourCleenEnerav LLC HOURS RATE COST
--- -
PREPARE'" SUBMrr FERC PREUMINARV APPUCATION 8 5100 $800
.-1t~...
NOTIFY & COORDINATE WITH FEDERAL & STATE AGENCIES
PREPARE LETTERS OF INTENT TO AGENCIES 8 $100 $800
CONDUCT SeOPING MEETINGS 20 $100 $2,000
BEGIN STREAM MONITORING PROGAM
SECURE STREAM MONITORING PERMIT 8 $100 $800
SECURE EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 8 5100 S800
SUPERVISE INSTALlATION OF DATA MONITORS 8 $100 $800
SUPERVISE DATA COLLECTION FOR FIRST SIX MONTHS 8 $100 $800
BEGIN SUBSURFACe FLOW MONITORING PROGRAM
SECURE SUB-SURFACE FLOW MONITORING PERMIT 8 5100 $800
SECURE GEe- TECH CONTRACTOR AND SUPPLIES 8 $100 $800
SUPERVISE FlEW WORK OF GEO-TECH CONTRACTOR 8 $100 $800
SUPERVISE DATA COLLECTION FOR FIRST SIX MONTHS a 5100 5800
BEGIN BASE MAPPING SURVEY
SECURE PERMISSION FROM DNR, caE 8 $100 $800
SECURE SERVICES OF LAND SURVEYOR 8 $100 $800
SUPERVISE SURVEYING ACTIVITIES 8 $100 $800
PREPARE PRE-De&IGN STUDV - LOWELL CREEK HVDRO PROJECT .
PROJECT HISTORY 6 $100 $600
EXISTING GENERATION FACILITIES 6 $100 $600
CURRENT POWER AGREEMENT WITH CHUGACH ELECTRIC 6 $100 5600
BASE MAPPING 8 $100 $800
PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY & SNOW FIELDS 8 $100 $BOO
SURFACE HYDROLOGY 8 $100 $800
SUB-SURFACE HYDROLOGY 8 $100 $800
ESTIMATE OF AVAILABLE HYDRO ENERGY 8 $100 $800
OPERATIONS 16 $100 51,600
WATER RIGHTS 2 $100 $200
ALTERNATIVE LAYOUTS B $100 $800
EQUIPMENT & FACILITY OPTIONS 20 $100 $2.000
PROBABLE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 6 $100 $600
DAM SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. REaUIRED PERMITS 16 $100 $1,600
POWER MARKET ANALYSIS 16 $100 $1,600
COSTS AND BENEFITS 16 $100 $1,600
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 8 $100 5800
STRATEGIES FOR PROJECT DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION FUNDING B $100 $800
TOTAL Tille EFFORT 298 $100 $29,800
"...'"
YourCleanEnergy LLC
308 G street /1212. Anchorage, AK 99501
~()
907-274-2007
03/01/2007 22:59 FAX 9073448770
FEDEX KINKOS
Lowell Creek Hydro Project
Celebrate the power of nature TN
III OOB/OOIl
_~1IJ__
oMlh... YourCleanEnergy LLC
EXHIBIT C: PROPOSED BUDGET. ITEMIZED. PRE-DESIGN STUDY 03101107
Paae 3 of 3
DIR~CT EXPENSes - YourCleflnEnergy LLC
TRAVEL EXPENSES (RECEIPTS REQUIRED)
TRAVEL - AlITO MILES - ANCHORAGE-SEWARD -10 ROUND TRIPS
TRAVEL - LODGING IN SEWARD
TRAVEL - MEALS IN SEWARD
SUB-TOTAL
OFFICE EXPI!NSES (RECeiPTS REQUIRED)
OFFICE EXPENSE. MAILING
OFFICE EXPENSE - COMPUTER TECH SUPPORT
OFFICE EXPENSE - PHOTOCOPYING & PRINTING REPORTS
SUB-TOTAL
LABOR (Page ') + DIRECT EXPENSES - YourCleanEnergy LLC
MINOR SERVICES TO BE PURCHASED DIRECTLY BY THE CITY'
STREAM FLOW DATA COLLECTION
STREAM MONITORING -INSTALL DATA LOGGERS
STREAM MONITORING -12 MONTH DATA LOGGING
SUB-TOTAL
SUB-SURFACE TEST BORING AND MONITORING WELLS
GEe-TECH CONTRACTOA SERVICE
GROUNDWATER TEST WELL - 12 MONTH DATA LOGGING
SUB-TOTAL
BASE MAPPING TOPO SURVEY (OPTIONAL BUT RECOMMENDED)
LAND SURVEYING CREW CONTRACT
CAD TECH SERVICE TO ASSEMBLE BASE MAPPING PLOTS
SUB-TOTAL
TOTAL MINOR GOODS & SERVICES COSTS
UNIT
QUANT UNITS COST TOTAL
2600 MILES
20 NIGHTS
40 MEALS
$0 $9'0
$100 $2,000
$16 $600
$3,510
120 ITEMS
4 HRS
1200 PAGES
$2 $240
$50 $200
$1 $600
$1,040
$34,350
-J>.
12
LS $3,500 $3,500
MO 5500 $6,000
$9,500
4 WELLS $900 $3,600
12 MO 5500 $6,000
$9,600
LS $8,000 $8,000
24 HOURS $75 $1,800
59,800
$28,900
(ITEMS BELOW ARE FOR MARATHON CREEK HYDRO PLANT REHAB STUDY QPTION)
PREPARE PRE.DESIGN STUDY - MARATHON HYDRO REHAB
HISTORV, HYDROLOGY, ENERGY ESTIMATES
OPERATIONS, WATER RIGHTS, REHAB AL. TERNATIVES
PERMITS, SCHEDUL.E, POWER MARKET ANAL VSIS
COSTJElENEFITS, RECOMMENDATIONS, FUNDING STRATEGIES
TOTAL TIME EFFORT - YourCleanEnergy LLC
MARATHON CREEK STREAM FLOW DATA COLLECTION
STREAM MONITORING - 12 MONTH DATA LOGGING
YourCleanEnergy LLC
308 G Stl'eet #212, Anchorage. AK 9950'
~\
HOURS
24
24
24
24
MR~
$100 52,400
$100 $2,400
$100 $2,400
$100 $2,400
96 $100 $9,600
UNIT
QUANT UNITS COST TOTAL
12 MO $500 $6,000
907-274-2007
ESTIMATION OF BENEFITS AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
AS PRESENTED TO PACAB FEBRUARY 21, 2007
Lowell Creek Hydro Project
Affordable, Reliable, & Safe Energy for Seward
Wanner temperatures and heavy rains
will increase flood melt from the snow
fields - a 2"" conduit Is needed to
supplement capacity of existing tunnel
Project concept that allows maximum hydro power to be harnessed
32
BENEFITS TO CITY FROM LOWELL CREEK HYDRO PROJECT
_ Additional flood capacity of 100 cfs is made available in 48 inch penstock
_ Maintenance costs from tunnel damage, dredging, flooding are reduced
_ Public safety is increased in uncertain future of climate change and floods
_ Seward develops its own source of affordable, reliable and safe electrical
power to hedge off increasing cost of grid power from fossil fuel sources
_ Marathon Creek Hydro Project can be rehabilitated when Lowell Creek
project is constructed to reduce costs of study, permits, & flow monitoring
_ Electrical costs in Seward will be reduced and stabilized over the 40 year
project life with local hydro power, especially if capital costs funded by grants
_ Reduced cost in emergency power generation when hydro is available,
every unit of hydro power produced from Lowell Creek will offset expensive
fuel consumption by City's back up diesel generators
_ Hydro project will create several new permanent year round jobs in Seward,
and seasonal work to perform routine maintenance
BENEFITS TO CITY FROM LOWELL CREEK HYDRO PROJECT
_ Hydro power does not have the liabilities of pollution, and low impact hydro
projects like Lowell Creek are favorable to the public & agencies
_ City may be eligible for congressional appropriations/grants for clean energy
_ State of Alaska will soon establish a Renewable Energy Fund to be
administired by the Alaska Energy Authority, fund will start with $10 million
_ City will generate the most power when population is highest in summer
months and cruise ships are in Seward harbor
_ City can negotiate agreements with cruise ship companies to supply clean
power for retail rates while ships are in port, as done successfully in Juneau
_ Lowell Creek Waterfall can retain minimum flow even when hydro is
operating, this will keep its historic and scenic character preserved
_ Hydro plant tail race outfall can create a new salmon release area and
increase recreation value of waterfront
_ Hydro turbine building could create additional revenue as a visitors center
by presenting clean energy science and technology displays, gift shop, etc.
~~
PROJECTED FLOWS BASED ON EXISTING DATA
Duration curve of 1979 study was based on flow
measured at tunnel entrance, not at higher elevations
(guaging of stream flows was not done at upper intake
locations proposed in the study)
1979 Study observed that 60% of flow is lost to
underground gravel aquifer before it ever reaches the
tunnel entrance, some of this underground flow can be
intercepted year round with an infiltration gallery
It appears possible to collect @50 cfs at least half the
year (6 months), with normal rainfall and snow melt
flows allowing @75 cfs for up to 2 months in summer
PROJECTED FLOWS BASED ON EXISTING DATA
Initial turbine sizing would be two pelton wheels, each
rated for 50 cfs flow (1.2 MW capacity each turbine)
During low flow periods in winter, a single turbine can be
run as low as 20% capacity and still produce efficient
power (10 cfs = 0.24 MW = 240 KW)
Groundwater infiltration gallery at stream intake may
allow continuous minimum winter flows of 10 cfs, enough
to keep one turbine running from December through
March and keep intake and penstock from freezing
oY
Hvdro Power = Elevation Drop x Flow Thru Turbine
specifically:
Theoretical Power (kW) = HEAD (feet) x FLOW ~
11.81
Actual power must account for:
Energy losses thru screen intake & collection channel
Energy losses thru penstock, bends, valves, nozzles
Energy losses in turbine, shaft, drives, generator, wiring
ESTIMATED POWER BASED ON PROJECTED FLOWS
Net head available at turbine = 360 ft elevation
minus screen intake loss (5 ft). minus pipe friction (35ft).
minus tailrace drop to MSL (20ft) = @300ft net head
Hydro mechanicaVelectrical system efficiency (turbine to grid)
= 85% (turbine) x 90% (alternator) x 90% (grid tie) = @70%
For 6 months avg flow @ 50cts
For 4 winter months, avg flow @10cts
For remaining two months. avg flow @75cts
= 3,840,800kwh
= 512,100kwh
= 1,920,400kwh
---------------------
TOTAL ANNUAL HYDRO POWER
= 6,273.300kwh
Market value of this power @ $0.12/kwh = $752,800/year
~~
EV ALUA TING HYDRO PROJECT COSTS vs BENEFITS
Hydroelectric projects can be evaluated two ways:
A. Life cycle cost (how many years to fully pay back initial
capital investment?)
B. Annual energy costs ($ per kwh over project life)
Typically, once a hydro power resource is developed, they
are run as long as the community can maintain them!
What is most important is keeping the annual enerav costs
as low as possible to stabilize overall grid power costs.
Use 40 year project life to evaluate annual energy costs
ESTIMATE PROBABLE CAPITAL COSTS
Land and land rights $0
Access road to new intake site $100,000
Intake screens and collection channel $350,000
Groundwater Infiltration gallery piping and collection $200,000
Penstock (6,400ft x 48 inch diameter), inc utility relocation and road resurfacing $2,560,000
Power plant building $1,500,000
Turbine and generator equipment $600,000
Electrical control equipment $400,000
Misc power plant equipment $100,000
Substation equipment $60,000
Poles and fixtures $20,000
Overhead conductors and devices $30,000
Communications equipment $20,000
Tailrace and jetty structure $50,000
CONSTRUCTION SUB TOTAL @ $6,000,000
~tD
ESTIMATION OF PROBABLE CAPITAL COSTS (cont.l
CONSTRUCTION COST SUB-TOTAL
$6,000,000
CONTINGENCY AND UNLISTED ITEMS (20%)
$1,200,000
----
TOTAL DIRECT COST
$7,200,000
INDIRECT COSTS: TEMP FACILITIES, BOND, INSURANCE, OHEAD (17%)
$1,224,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
$8,424,000
ENGINEERING,LEGAL, ADMINISTRATION (15%)
NET INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION (7%)
LESS STATE (@$2 MILLION) AND FEDERAL (@$4 MILLION) GRANT FUNDS
$1,263,600
$590,000
($6,000,000)
TOTAL INVESTMENT
$4,277,600
BOND ISSUE (110% OF TOTAL INVESTMENT)
$4,705,360
ESTIMATION OF PROBABLE ANNUAL COSTS
BOND ISSUE (110% OF TOTAL INVESTMENT)
$4,705.360
INTEREST & AMORTIZA nON (40 YEARS @ 4% INTEREST RATE)
INTERIM REPLACEMENTS (1.0% OF TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS)
INSURANCE (0.4% OF TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL (60% OF O&M COSTS)
LESS INTEREST EARNED ON RESERVE FUNDS (@ 6%)
$237,600
$84,000
$34,000
$180,000
$90,000
($14,200)
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
$611,400
TOTAL KWH PRODUCED PER YEAR (FROM PREVIOUS SLIDE)
6,273,300 KWH
ANNUAL ENERGY COSTS = TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS' KWH PER YEAR $0.097 per KWH
~I
HOW TO GET YOUR HYDRO PROJECT MOVING AHEAD
SUGGESTED PLAN OF ACTION FOR HYDRO PROJECT
Secure services of professional energy consultant to prepare permit
applications, coordinate with agencies, supervise flow data collection
and prepare pre-design report.
Include rehabilitation of the City's existing 200kw Marathon Creek
Hydro system in this scope to increase efficiency of permitting & flow
monitoring and eligibility for small hydro grant funds.
Prepare and submit Preliminary Applications with Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission
Schedule scoping and coordination meeting(s) with state and federal
agencies that may be involved in the hydro permitting process
Once Preliminary FERC permit is issued, begin stream flow and
underground flow monitoring program to collect data
~B
COORDINATION WITH AGENCIES IS CRITICAL
Federal Aaencies:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Environmental Protection Agency
Army Corps Of Engineers
National Marine Fisheries Service
Interior Department Environmental Division
National Park Service
COORDINATION WITH AGENCIES IS CRITICAL
State Of Alaska:
Department Of Environmental Conservation (DEC) -
master permit application/stream discharge
Department Of Natural Resources (DNR)- water rights &
dam protection
Department Of Fish & Game - habitat protection
Office Of Management & Budget - coastal management
Alaska Public Utilities Commission - utility interconnection
Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) - power
purchase agreement with Chugach Electric Association
o~
Proposal For Professional Engineering Services from
YourCleanEnergy LiC
.0.
.0.
Andy Baker, PE - Independent Clean Energy Consultant
Committed and motivated to achieve a successful project for the City
Extensive experience in municipal projects and project management
Organizing and communicating with agencies, other disciplines
Independent, creative and efficient approach to work
Office based in downtown Anchorage, easy travel to Seward
Close to most federal and state agency offices
Cost advantage over medium and large size consulting firms - lower
management costs and overhead - Base rate of $100/hour +
expenses
Proposal For Professional Engineering Services from
YourCleanEnergy LLC
.0.
.0.
Andy Baker, PE - Independent Clean Energy Consultant
Scope. Schedule & Budaet - submitted to City on March 1. 2007
Scope of engineering services to the City will begin from present
pOint and continue through completion of a pre-design report
The intent is to provide documentation and planning so that grant
and/or loan funds for final design & construction can be secured by the City
Coordination with other specialty consultants and City departments
Coordination with local, state and federal agencies on behalf of the City
Consulting services could begin in April so that FERC Preliminary Permit
and flow monitoring can be started this summer
Flow monitoring will require one year so that flow data can be fully utilized
YO
City of Seward, Alaska
June 25. 2007
City Council Minutes
Volume 37, Page
OTHER NEW BUSINESS
A work session for the Library/Museum Project was not deemed urgent and scheduled on
September 24, 2007 at 6:30 p.m.
Discussion ensued on the Lowell Canyon Tunnel Hydro Project.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action
.
Oates agreed to make sure PACAB had all of the same information
and Tim Barnum would add actual kilowatt hour costs.
Council Member Thomas had a concern for bed loading go'
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Amberg stated the Senior Center was 100 g
attending the LTCF meeting on Friday and tonight's public
stressed funding for schools
cess with the Borough and thought
Valdatta co
Touchstone.
randing which was mentioned in the AML
by. andie Roach' on school bus budget cuts wer.e disturbing.
ding since educational opportunities for children were less
lllingim had passed away in Seattle and services would be July
they met with a congressional staffer to explore grant money options on
were too many big projects out there to compete with. She felt they had
great meetings, met John Katz, and spoke of economic development projects and how education
funding was affecting our community.
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
Theresa Butts said P ACAB had been concentrating on giving good information to the city
council. A lot of issues brought up had already been looked at. She encouraged department heads to
attend their meetings. She stated those invitations had been politely declined in the past. Butts
agreed the more infonnation they had the better and she emphasized the engineers portion of the bid
y\ 78
rY'
,..,..,,, ,',,--,
, .-'. ,"',',--,
......,+0......0. ..... . ". ,5 ~.\^\.^...<.~...........:..i.:::.,.).;.?:........; ...... "',
.;01>1 .. . F . E "lJ\Ru.,.,. ':"... . .......... .....
" RfNcE;,1.1ER~R)\i;;.::~Seward;,;.i;
'. "D' .......0.. "'>N" .,.0.::.....:17. ....DE.:{A.O~~:':\~JE;:'>...<::.,.'- :,".::: ~<;
'. ...'.> '.' .:.,',:" :IVl, '/,:v;: .:.<.~: i:-:::,'~ "'.,,;;::,::)::'.~ <:',T,':";','.
...... ....-..:...1..,,\ '~.'..;...'; '. .:. ...:;:...... :..;;:> ....,'.. '. ....... .... ,. .,.. .,' ......:...
..:,~.L_.. :,....:;,.'_'>.-,':..;..:. "';'""-:-_"-'-.':.' "f,--'-"
" --,.-..,.
.---_.~.-_.--,.,.
E2
ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964
ganizations and individuals, gave un-
stintinglY of their time and facilities.
Within a few days, there was tem-
porary restoration of water, sewerage,
and electrical facilities.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
was authorized to select sites and con-
struct a new dock for the Alaska Rail-
road, a new small-boat basin, and re-
lated facilities. The firm of Shannon
and Wilson, Inc., under contract to the
Corps of Engineers, investigated sub-
surface soils extensively to determine
the factors responsible for the sliding
along the Seward waterfront and to.
ussist in site selection for reconstruction
of the destroyed harbor facilities. Bor-
ings were made along the Seward water-
front and at the head of the bay, and
laboratory tests were conducted on per-
tinent samples. These studies were
augmented by geophysical studies botb
on land and in the bay. In addition,
the Corps of Engineers made shallow
borings on the intertidal fiats at the
head of the bay and performed pile-
driving and load tests. Borings also
were drilled and test pits were dug in
tbe subdivision of Forest Acres.
Sliding along the Seward waterfront
markedly deepened the water along the~
form e l' shoreline. postearthquakel\'
slopes of the bay fioor immediately of!'-
shore also are steeper in places thlln
before the earthquake. The strong
ground motion of the earthquake trig-
gered the landsliding, but several fac-
tors may have contributed to the magni-
tude and characteristics of the slides.
These factors are: (1) the long duration
of strong ground motion, (2) the grain
size and texture of the material in-
volved in the sliding, (3) the proba-
bility that the finer grained materials
liquefied and flowed seaward, and (4)
the added load of manmade facilities
built on the edge of the sMre. Sec-
ondary effects of the slides themselves-
sudden drawdown of water, followed
by the weight of returning waves-also
may have contributed to the destruction.
Submarine sliding at the nortbwest
corner of the bay occurred in fine.
grained deltaic deposits whose frontal
slOpes probably were in ,metastable
equilibrium under static conditions.
Uplift pressures from aquifers under
hydrostatic head, coinbined with the
prolJable liquefaction characteristics of
the sediments when vibrated by strong
ground motion, probably caused the ma-
terial to slide and flow seaward as a
heavy slurry.
Under static conditions, no major
shoreline or submarine landsliding is ex.
pected in the Seward area; in the
event of another severe earthquake,
however, additional sliding is likely
along the Seward waterfront and also
in the deltaic deposits at the northwest
corner of the bay. Fractured ground
in back of the present shoreline along
the Seward waterfront is an area of
incipient landslides that would be un-
stable under strong shaking. For this
reason the Scientific and Engineering
Task Force placed the area in a high.
risk classification and recommended no
repair, rehabilitation, or new construc-
tion in this area involving use of Fed-
eral funds; it was further recommended
that the area should be reserved for
parle or other uses that do not involve
large congregations of people. The
deltaic deposits at the head of the lJaY
probably also would be susceptible to
sliding during another large earthquake.
This sliding would result in further
landward retreat of the present shore-
line toward the new railroad dock.
Specifications for the new dock, whose
seaward end is now approximately 1,100
feet from the back scarp of the sub-
aqueoUS landsliue, require design pro-
visions to withstand seismic shock up
to certain limits.
Earthquake-induced fracturing of the
ground in the subdivision of Forest
Acres was confined to the lower part of
a broad alluvial fan. There, sewer and
water lines were ruptured and the
foundations of some homes were heavily
dama~d. Landsliding, such as oc-
curred along the shoreline of the bay,
was not a contributing cause of the
fracturing. Two hypotheses are of-
fered to explain the fracturing:
1. Seismic energy was transformed
into visible surface waves of such
amplltude that the strength of
surface layer was exceeded and
rupturing occurred; tensional and
compressional stresses alternately
opened and closed the fractures
and forced out water and mud.
2. Compaction by vibration of the fine-
grained deposits of the fan caused
ground settlement and fracturing;
ground water under temporary
hydrostatic head was forced to
the surface as fountains and
carried the 1I.ne1' material with it.
Water waves that crashed onto shore,
while shaking was still continuing, were
generated chiefty by onshore and oll'.
shore landsllding. Waves that overran
the shores about 25 minutes after shak-
ing stopped and that continued to ar-
rive for the next several hours are be.
lieved to be seismic sea waves
(tsunamis) that originated in an up-
lifted area in the Gulf of Alaska. Dur-
ing the time of seismic sea-wave activity
and perhaps preceding it, seiche waves
also may have been generated within
Resurrection Bay and complicated the
wave ef!'ects along the shoreline.
INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Seward was one of the cities
most heavily damaged by the great
Alaska earthquake of March 27,
1964. The city is near the head of
Resurrection Bay, on the southeast
coast of the Kenai Peninsula, and
about 75 airline miles south of
A11chorage (fig. 1; pI. 1). The
climate is mild and humid because
of the influence of the Gulf of
Alaska, and Seward is one of. the
few ports in south-central Alaska
that is ice free the entire year.
n therefore provides yel1r-round
access from the coast by rl1ilrol1d
and highwl1Y to Anchorage and
the interior of All1ska.
Yb
Before the earthquake of March~27, 19M, the economy of Seward
was based mostly on shipping.
Freighters, barges, tankers, and
fishing boats docked regularly in
the hl1rbor. Most of the freight
,vas transhipped to other com-
munities boy road or rail. Texaco,
Inc., and the Standl1rd Oil Co. of
E8
ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964
3. Aeri1l1 view of the southern llart of the Se\Yard \Y",terf,.ont sho\Ying extent of ground fracture anc1 earthquake damage. r,
44
EFFECTS AT SE~ARD
E9
IJ)c U.S. Army; mosaicked by U.S. Geological Survey. See figure 4 (next page) for view of northern waterfront and Index map.
232-728 0-67~3
Y5
E32
occur under static conditians.
The same statement probably
holds true for the area ta the east.
Deltaic and marine deposits will
gradually accumulate to establish
profiles similar ta those that ex-
isted be f a I' e the earthquake.
Whether the 3 : 1 slape formed by
dredging at the end of the new
railraad dock (pI. 2) will be stable
under static conditions is un-
knawn. There is' little doubt,
however, that periodic dredging .
will be necessary in the area in
front af the dock and at the en-
trance to the small-boat basin.
Sediment brought in by the Resur-
rection River and by creeks will
continue to accumulate in this area
as it has in the past. Tides and
offshore currents will tend to
spread .this material into the
dredged areas.
DYNAMIC CONDITIONS
In the event of anather large
earthquake, additional onshore
and submarine landsliding can be
expected along that part of the
Seward waterfront that slid dur-
ing the earthquake af 1964:. As
discussed previously (p. E29) the
area of fractured graund back of
the present shoreline (figs. 3,4) is
believed to represent incipient
landslides. Had shaking con-
tinued longer during the 1964
earthquake, a large part of this
area wauld have slid into the bay.
Thus, sliding af similar extent can
he expected during a future large
earthquake.
Because of the potential insta-
!Jilit,y af the Seward waterfront
111'1311, the Scientific and Engineer-
ing Task Force of the Reconstruc-
tion Cammission, ,,,hich based its
decisian upon the investigations af
Shannon and Wilson, Inc., the
Corps of Engineers, and the U.S.
Geological Survey, placed a large
part of this area in a high-risk
elassification. A. map depicting
ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964
the extent of this area is shown by
Eckel and Schaem (1966). In
general, the limits af the area
shown as high risk include the area
of fractured ground (figs. 3, 4).
The Task Force recommended that
the high-risk part af the water-
frant area should be reserved for
park or other uses that da not in-
valve large cangregatians af pea-
pIe. Shannan and Wilsan (1964,
p. 23) further stated that "The
stability af the waterfrant could
be impraved by flattening the un-
derwater slopes and buttressing
the tae af the slide with fill. Haw-
ever, due t() the great depth we
daubt that slape flattening and
toe buttressing are practicable."
The writer concurs in both
statements.
The remaining part af dawn-
town Seward was classified by the
Task Force as nominal risk-risk
na greater than is narmally ex-
pected in the constructian indus-
try. However, ane must consider
whether fracturing wauld extend
into the eastern part af the nom-
inal-risk area if an additional strip
af shoreline shauld slide into the
bay. This possibility calmat be
discounted, but the geologic en-
vironment indicates that it wauld,
at most, be of small extent. The
thickest part of the fan deposits
lllld probably all the intertangued
marine sediments lie between
Seventh Avenue and the bay (sec-
tion 0-0', pI. 2). West, fram
Seventh Avenue toward the busi-
ness district, the fan depasits be-
came progressively caarser, are
prabably anly 100-150 feet thick,
are nearly horizontally bedded,
and lie on a fairly flat platfarm af
compact stable till. It is there-
fore prabable that fracturing, at
least west of Sixth Avenue, would
be minor.
The earthquake triggered small-
scale landsliding offshore from the
old milraad dock, and anather
Ylo
severe earthquake could cause
additional sliding. The relatively
shallow depth to bedrock and the
possibility that only thin deposits
of fluvial material rest on a stable
platform of till probably explain
why this area was less susceptible
to sliding than other parts af the
waterfront.
Additional submarine landslid-
ing can be expected along the
present face of the deltaic deposits
in the northwest corner of the bay
in the event of another large earth-
quake. The present landslide
scarp has about the same slope as
the preearthquake foreset bedding.
The material back of the scarp has
virtually tIle same physical prop-
erties as that involved in the slid-
ing, and landward retreat of tIle
landslide scarp can be expected.
Shannon and Wilson, Inc. (1964,
p. 25), estimated that "additional
sliding may be expected to envelop
an area to the north of the present
scarp for a distance of some 600
feet." They further stated that
"It would be prudent in our opin-
ion ta site the proposed improve-
ments [new Alaska Railroad
dock] so that an adequate set-back
from this zone of potential sliding
is maintained." The end af the
new railroad dock is approxi-
mately 1,100 feet from the edge of
the scarp (pI. 2). In the writer's
opinion, the amount of scarp re-
treat will depend in part on tIle
intensity of sllaking, but even more
on the duration of future shaking.
St.rong ground motion during t.he
1964 earthquake lasted approxi-
mately 4 minutes. During this
period, there was a landward re-
treat of the delta face of 400-500
feet.. If the materials are lique-
fied during shaking, as believed,
then the accumulation of debris at
the toe of the slide will not be a
deterrent to further sliding. Pro-
vided there is no change in the
characteristics of the materials in-
Public Notice
Alaska Coastal Management Program
Dated June 29, 2007
1-.11
ALASKA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Seward Boat Harbor Travel Lift
Your Opportunity to Comment
Project Title/State 10#:
Seward Boat Harbor Travel Lift! AK0706-12AA
Applicant! Agent:
City of Sewardffryck Nyman Hayes Inc.
Location:
Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal District. The
project is located on the north shore of the Seward
Small Boat Harbor; within Section 3, Township 1
South, Range 1 West, Seward Meridian; Latitude
60.12060 North, Longitude 149.43750 West.
Review ScheduJe (50 days):
. Day 1 ............................................ 06/29/07
. Comments due on or before.......07/28/07
. Final determination issued by.......08/13/07
How you can participate:
This project is being reviewed for consistency with
the Alaska Coastal Management Program. Your
comments on the proposed project's consistency
must be submitted in writing to the Office of Project
Management and Permitting (OPMP). Comments
about inconsistency must identify the relevant
enforceable policy and explain how the project is
not consistent with that policy.
Deadline for written comments:
5:00 PM on July 28, 2007
Contact:
Jim Renkert, Project Review Coordinator
Alaska Coastal Management Program, OPMP
550 W. 7111 Ave, Suite 705, Anchorage, AK 99501
Phone: 907-269-0029 Fax: 907-269-3981
Email: jim.renkert@alaska.gov
Web site: htto://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us/
47
Project Description:
The proposed project is to construct a new boat travel
lift facility and also to repair and upgrade existing
docks at the Seward boat harbor. The project would
be constructed in two phases or stages.
Phase/Stage I would include construction of a pile-
supported dock and a sheetpile bulkhead to support a
new boat travel lift. The dock would be located on
the east side of the proposed boat lift berth and would
consist of a 4' x 60' pre-cast concrete box girder
supported by 24" diameter, Yo" thick galvanized steel
pipe piles. On the west side ofthe proposed boat lift
berth, a cast-in-place concrete grade beam would be
fIxed to the top of a sheetpile bulkhead. Additional
sheetpile bulkhead would be installed on both sides
of the travel lift to facilitate dredging and to allow
larger vessels to access the area. A total of 280 linear
feet of sheetpile bulkhead would be installed.
To provide vessel access to the facility, dredging to-
12' MLL W would be necessary. To prevent
liquefaction of soils at the base of the sheetpile wall
during seismic events, existing soils would be
dredged to a depth of -24' MLL W and replaced with
structural fill to a finish elevation of -12' MLLW.
Total volume dredged would be 9,660 cubic yards.
The area behind the sheetpile bulkhead would be
backfilled with 9,675 cubic yards of clean gravel fill.
This may include suitable clean gravel fIll that is
dredged during the project. Area fIlled below the
high tide line (HTL) would be approximately 0.10
acre, of which 0.06 acre would be below mean high
water (MHW).
Phase/Stage I would also include repairs and
upgrades to the existing "f' and "T" docks. This
would consist of replacing all decking, bullrails,
fender chocks, safety ladders and select
broken/damaged timber fender piling and electrical
and water system components. Any removed timbers
containing creosote would be properly disposed of at
a permitted landfill facility.
Phase/Stage II would consist of installing an
additional 224 linear feet of sheetpile wall and 11,325
cubic yards of backfill. It also would include an
additional 340 cubic yards of dredging, using the
same procedures as in Phase/Stage I. Area filled
below the HTL would be 0.28 acre, of which 0.26
acre would be below MHW.
Scooe ofProiect to be Reviewed
The project subject to this consistency review
consists of all the above described work with the
exception ofthe repairs and upgrades to the "P' and
"T" docks above the HTL.
For your information:
Individuals with disabilities who may need auxiliary aids,
services, or special modifications to participate in this
review may contact the OPMP review staff at the above
address.
Public notice posted in Seward at City Hall, the U.S. Post
Office, the Harbormasters Office and on the ACMP web
site. A complete copy of the project packet is available for
review and copying at the Kenai Peninsula Borough
offices at 144 N. Binkley, Soldotna, AK 99669.
~~
AMBASSADOR CIRCLE AWARD
1997 - John McCleLlan
i998 - Bilan Brundin
1999. Pete Nelson
2000 . Bel' Barerra
2002 - Dennis B:rd
2006 . Joseph Heilri
WORLD TRADE CENTER
ALASKA
29 June 2007
WTCAK's Trade Development Proe:rams Focus on Alaska's Top Markets and the
Search for New. Hil!h-Potential Markets of the Future
Dear Members and Friends of the Center:
Over the past several years, World Trade Center Alaska (WTCAK) has put into motion a
number of trade development programs that seek to expand exports and other business
activities with Alaska's top trading partners. The latest of these focused programs is the
Canada: Opportunities Next Door program that was announced earlier this month.
The Canadian program joins WTCAK's trade development portfolio that also includes
programs involving Japan, Korea and China, the state's top three markets, respectively. In
addition to these four country-focused efforts, WTCAK also has a program that endeavors to
identify emerging new markets for Alaskan exporters. The New Markets-New Customers
program has begun its search for high-potential opportunities in places like Singapore,
Vietnam and India. This is a forward-looking effort to expand Alaska's exports by finding
new customers and then helping Alaskans to pursue these opportunities. (Please see attached
page listing the five programs)
I should point out that WTCAK provides information and assistance to our members and
community partners wherever in the world they seek to do business. However, with nearly
70 percent of Alaska's overseas business taking place in these top four markets, it happens
that many of our members are seeking to initiate or expand business in these particular
countries. OW'trade development programs are geared towards helping Alaskans: learn more
about these markets, make contacts with business and government officials, and to find
customers.
To find out more about any of these programs, please visit our website www.\\1cak.org or
contact World Trade Center Alaska at 278-7233 or by email: inforCihvtcak.Orl.!.
Best Regards,
Greg Wolf
Executive Director
431 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 108, Anchorage, Alaska 99501.3511, USA
Phone 907.278.7233 Fax 907.278.2982
email info@wtcak.org http://www.wtcak.org
~
ALASKA
ftcreldll-i/t:(( I:;
LJq
~~..,..,..",
. '"'t'
.'
For more information
on these programs and other
activities please visit our web site:
www.wtcak.org
WORLD TRADE CENTER
ALASKA
TRADE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS:
Japan
:; ~ /{ /'
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
Through:
From:
Subject:
July 18, 2007 ~
Port and Commerce Advisory Board
Harbor Master Scott Ransom
Enginoering Ex"",,"ve A"imant CbMy Torry ·
SMIC Development Plan Update
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a work session on the SMIC Development Plan on June
19,2007. The Commission's Regular Meeting was cancelled for July. Approving their comments to
send back to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board is an item on the agenda for their August 7,
2007 Regular Meeting.
The SMIC Development Plan will then return to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board for their
review of the Planning Commission's comments.
~\
Special Report on Canada:
Opportunities Next Door
Welcome to World Trade Center Alaska's Passport to Profit series ofspe-
cial reports. Published periodically, ther are designed to provide members and
community partners with a time~y overview of a particular export market or
trade opportunity. This edition is focused on Canada, one of the state's major
trading partners. We hope you find these reports to be an informative tool as
you explore and pursue international business opportunities.
Neiahbors and Partners
Alaska's relationship with its next-door neighbor, Canada, is one of the state's
most important international partnerships. Approximately 1,500 miles of com-
mon border and many shared interests drive this long-standing, multi-
dimensional connection. This report is focused primarily on the extensive com-
mercial ties that exist between Alaska and Canada; however, there are also
many cultural exchanges that provided depth to the overall relationship. Several aspects of these ties are noted in the
report as well.
Alaska's 4th Laraest EXDort Market
Trailing only Japan and South Korea, Canada has traditionally been the state's third largest export market. Two
years ago, it fell to the fourth position as Alaska's business with a rapidly developing China propelled that country
into the third ranking. In 2006, shipments from Alaska to Canada totaled $445 million, a dramatic 100 percent in-
crease over the previous year. This represents 11 percent of the state's total worldwide commodity exports. The in-
crease was fueled primarily by the higher prices received for minerals exports rather than a substantial increase in
quantities shipped. Last year, minerals accounted for 72 percent of the state's exports to Canada. The two other ma-
jor export categories were seafood at 15 percent and energy products at 4 percent.
Not Onlv Customers. Investors Too
Canadian companies are not only customers of Alaskan re-
source exports, they are, in many cases, investors in the very
projects that produce the exports, whether they are ultimately
destined for Canada or markets elsewhere around the world.
Alaska's mining industry, in particular, has attracted consid-
erable Canadian participation.
There is sizable Canadian investment in the state's minerals
and metals sector. Teck Cominco, Ltd., a Canadian firm,
owns Red Dog Mine, the world's largest producer of zinc
concentrate, located near Kotzebue in Northwest Alaska. To
date, the company has invested more than $700 million in
facilities at the mine. The company employs nearly 500
(continued on next page)
World Trade Center Alaska 431 W. 7th Ave., Suite 108 Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Phone: (907) 278-7233 Fax: (907) 278-2982 e-mail: info@wtcak.org
~?
Special Report - Canada
2
June 2007
Fort Knox, Photo Courtesy of the Government of Canada
workers, and more than half of these are'shareholders of
NANA Regional Corp., the landholder where the mine is
located.
Toronto-based Kinross Corp. owns Fort Knox, a gold
mine just north of Fairbanks. The Fort Knox Mine oper-
ates year-round and employs some 425 workers. Another
example is the Canadian-Japanese joint venture develop-
ment of the Pogo Gold Mine. A partnership between
Teck Cominco and Sumitomo Metal Mining, the mine
poured its first gold in February last year and production
is expected to average400,000 ounces per year.
In addition to owning and operating mines, Canadian
companies are leaders in the exploration of new mineral
and metal deposits in Alaska. In a recent McDowell
Group study of the economic impact of Alaska's mining
industry, it was noted that since 1981 mining and explo-
ration companies have spent $1 billion on mineral explo-
ration programs. The bulk of these expenditures can be
attributed to Canadian firms. In 2005, for example, 72%
of the record $103 million in exploration spending was
derived from Canadian sources. Canadian firms engaged
in exploration programs included Nova Gold Resources,
Northern Dynasty and St. Andrews Gold Fields, Ltd.
More Than Minina
It is not just mining that has brought Canadian enter-
prises to Alaska. Calgary-based Agrium Inc. bought the
former Unocal fertilizer plant in Nikiski on the Kenai
Peninsula in 2000. The plant produces urea and ammo-
nia for agricultural and industrial customers. The com-
pany then exports these products to buyers in Asia,
Mexico, and the Lower 48. In the state's oil and gas
sector, the Canadians also have a presence. Petro-
Canada, one of the country's largest oil and gas compa-
nies, and Talisman Energy, through its Alaska subsidi-
ary FEX, are actively exploring for oil in the National
Petroleum Reserve. In May, Talisman announced that
they had struck oil during a series of exploratory wells
located on the federal lands about 60 miles southeast of
Barrow.
Canada is a sizeable participant in Alaska's seafood
industry both as a processor and as an export destina-
tion. In 2006, seafood exports from Alaska to Canada
totaled $67 million. Alaska General Seafoods, owned
by the Jim Pattison Group, Canada's third-largest pri-
vately owned company, is one of the larger seafood
processing firms in Alaska. The Vancouver-based com-
pany produces canned salmon and salmon roe products
from its plants in Naknek, Ketchikan and Egegik. Dur-
ing the peak season, the company employs more than
600 workers.
Alaskan ComDanies in Canada
It should be noted that the flow of investment and busi-
ness is not entirely in one direction. A growing number
of Alaskan firms have set up shop in Canada, including
Rank as of 2006
Country
2004
, $1,189,666,446(1]
$579,610,263 (21
:$241,501,571 (41
Alaska's Top 10 Export Partners
U.5. Dollar
2005
. $1,180,644,227.(1)
$683,537,334 (2]
$337,i:(4;518(.]
2006
$1,095,8E;9,$~()
$725,681,530
. $474,279,855 .
%Change
2006/2005
-7.18
6.17
.40.65
$146,5.30,789tSI .
$69,978,834 (9,
$107,664,717(6)
$92,385,427181
$92,64.7,515 (7)
Belgium $52,826,636 (10)
( ) Number in parentheses Indicates Tank In given year
Source: US Census Bureau
$180,080,.321(51....
$71,446,569 (0)
$165,705;611.161'
$114,298,057 (7)
$103,405,853 (81.
$38,347,651 (ll)
.. $241,527;683
$143,748,487
. $128,983,31:\0
$124,533,651
$11.5,152,768
$94,202,870
www.wtcak.org
53
Special Report - Canada
Alaska's Exports to Canada
Yearly Totals. In Millions
$445
$450
$400
$350
$300
$250
$200
$150
$100
$50
$0
~ ~ ~ $ # ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~
~. ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Source: us Census Bureau
.
those that are pursuing opportumtles in the booming
energy and mining sectors. VECO, an Anchorage-based
company engaged in construction, project management,
and oil and gas field services, has established a regional
office in Calgary. Another example is Lynden Interna-
tional, a diversified transportation and logistics solutions
provider. The company maintains offices in Toronto and
Vancouver.
3
June 2007
overall rela-
tionship. In
the field of
education, for
example, the
University of
Alaska An-
chorage offers
programs and
scholarship
opportunities
for students
seeking to study about or actually study abroad in Can-
ada as part of their overall educational experience. The
Elizabeth Tower Endowment for Canadian Studies pro-
vides funding support to raise the visibility of the
school's Canadian course and makes possible scholar-
ships to students seeking to study in Canada. Through
the National Student Exchange Program, Alaskan stu-
dents can study at a variety of universities across Can-
ada. Some students utilize the program to do French
language immersion courses.
There are, of course, many other areas of cultural ex-
change, including music and sports. In addition, as
strong allies, there is considerable coordination and
teamwork between American and Canadian military
forces. The North American Aerospace Defense Com-
mand (NORAD), established in 1958, is an example of
this close cooperation. The richness of the Alaska -
Canada relationship is celebrated each year in Anchor-
age during the Canada Day Picnic & Celebration.
Skagway Entry Point
Photo Courtesy of the Government of Canada
Visitors from Canada
Alaska also benefits from the growing number of Cana-
dians who visit the state each year. It is estimated that
nearly 100,000 Canadians travel to Alaska each year. As
with most other travelers to the state, these visits occur
predominantly during the summer months. In terms of
the overall summer visitor market, Canadians accounted
for 6 percent last year. Looking at just the international
visitors, Canadians made up nearly 40 percent of those
traveling to Alaska during the 2006 summer season.
Alaska and Canada have partnered to cooperatively pro-
mote tourism. There are, for example, two important
Alaska/Canada Highway promotions jointly fund by
Alaska and several Canadian provinces. The ''North to
Alaska" partnership program includes brochures, direct
mail packages, e-mail campaigns and a special website.
The Yukon, British Columbia and Alberta provinces,
along with Alaska, fund the program jointly. Another
partnership is the AlaskalYukon Joint Marketing Pro-
gram. This program seeks to expand the number of high-
way vacationers on both sides of the border. .
Cultural Links
The relationship between Alaska and Canada is defined
not only by strong commercial ties but also by the many
and varied cultural connections that provide depth to the
www.wtcak.org
oY
Resources to Provide Assistance
World Trade Center Alaska and a number of other
organizations and agencies stand ready to assist you
in learning more about Alaska-Canada business op-
portunities. Please see the box on the right that lists
a number of these organizations and provides con-
tact information and website addresses. One or
more of these can furnish you with the information
and assistance needed to initiate or expand business
activities.
~. LOOK FOR WORLD TRADE
CENTER ALASKA'S SPECIAL
RESEARCH REPORT ON
CANADA, AVAILABLE IN
SUMMER 2007
Trade Mission to Canada
In September 2007, World Trade Center
Alaska, in cooperation with the U.S. Commer-
cial Service offices in Anchorage and Calgary,
will conduct a trade mission to Edmonton and
Calgary. The timing of the mission coincides
with a major oil sands tradeshow and confer-
ence. Mission participants will have the oppor-
tunity to attend the conference and take part in a
guided tour of the Fort McMurray oil sands de-
velopment. There will also be meetings and
briefings in Calgary. The mission is an excellent
venue to learn about new business opportunities
and make valuable contacts.
For more information, contact WTCAK at
278-7233 or bye-mail: info@wtcak.org
4
www.wtcak.org
05
July 2007
Monthly Planner
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7:30 PM P &Z .
Meeling
Happy 4th of July
OffICes Closed
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
7:30 PM C~y 6:30 PM CC WS 11:30AM
Council Meeting L rCF Access LibrarylMuseum
Issues Steering
Committee
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
6:30PM P &Z
Work Session
11:30 AM
PACAB Meeting
6:30 PM Historic
Preservation
Meeting
9:00 AM -1:00 PM
Social Securlty Rep
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7:30 PM C~
Council Meeting
29
30
31