Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
04/15/2019 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB91 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 91-NUYAKUK RIVER: HYDROELECTRIC SITE
3:32:13 PM
CHAIR BIRCH announced the consideration of Senate Bill 91 (SB
91).
3:32:45 PM
TIM GRUSSENDORF, Staff, Senator Hoffman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that SB 91 is straight
forward and detailed the intent with a sectional analysis as
follows:
• Section 1:
Adds "or the Nuyakuk River Falls" to AS 41.21.167(c) to
include it on a list of sites that are not considered an
incompatible use of the Wood-Tikchik State Park.
• Section 2:
Instructs the Wood-Tikchik State Management Council along
with the Department of Natural Resources to amend the Wood-
Tikchik Management Plan to conform with the change made in
Section 1.
He noted that the Wood-Tikchik State Park currently has two
areas that are on the statute list and the Nuyakuk River Falls
will be the third listing.
3:34:16 PM
BOB ARMSTRONG, Electric Operations Manager, Nushagak
Cooperative, Dillingham, Alaska, provided an overview of the
Nuyakuk River Falls Hydroelectric Project and addressed "Logical
Natural Location" from his presentation as follows:
• Glacial moraine defines Wood-Tikchik lake system:
o The glacial moraine creates a natural dam.
o The lake acts as a natural sediment deposition site.
o Nuyakuk Falls acts as a natural spillway.
He addressed "Power Production Location and Potential" from his
presentation as follows:
• Location: Nuyakuk Falls:
o 2.5 miles inside Wood-Tikchik State Park.
• Flow monitored by U.S. Geological Survey since 1953.
• Initial modeling diverts less than 25 percent flow at 4.5
to greater than 10 megawatts.
• Enough production for regional distribution.
• Production potential matches seasonal demand.
3:36:21 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD joined the committee meeting.
CHAIR BIRCH asked Mr. Armstrong to explain why Nushagak
Cooperatives electricity usage is lower in the winter than in
the summer.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that fish processing is the main industry
in Dillingham and that makes electricity loads extremely high in
the summer.
He addressed "Power Plant" from his presentation for the
initial design as follows:
• Nuyakuk Falls occurs at an oxbow in the river.
• An intake will be located above the falls.
• Short forebay, approximately 2,500 feet.
• Short power channel, approximately 1,500 feet.
• Affected water flow 3,000 feet from the top of the falls to
the bottom.
He detailed that final engineering will occur after project
studies are done. He summarized the hydroelectric concept as
follows:
• River is tapped on the upriver side of the falls.
• Diverted water runs through a pipeline called a penstock.
• Penstock leads down to the turbines.
• Water runs through the turbines and dumps back into the
river.
• Water diversion is approximately 1,500 feet:
o Water temperatures are not going to change much in
1,500 feet.
o Nitrogen levels typically increase when water runs
through turbines, but the nitrogen levels are already
up due to the natural turbulence caused by the falls
so the water will match up.
3:38:52 PM
CHAIR BIRCH asked Mr. Armstrong if Nushagak Cooperative
anticipates any fish being impacted.
MR. ARMSTRONG said no; they think that the hydroelectric project
can be done without significant impact on fish. He said not to
impact fish is the reason that Nushagak Cooperative is just
tapping the river instead of putting up a dam. The natural flow
of the river will still be the same as it always was and the
natural pathway for the smolt going down and adults coming up
will be the same as it has always been.
SENATOR BISHOP asked what the diameter of penstock pipeline will
be.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that it will have to be determined. He
opined that the diameter will have to be approximately 25 feet
to get the amount of water needed for the hydroelectric project.
He added that because there is not a lot of drop for the
penstock, then a lot of water is required.
SENATOR BISHOP surmised that the penstock will require greater
volume.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered correct. He reiterated that volume is
necessary if you don't have drop. He noted that the added volume
also helps with the fish. The proposed project is a low-head
turbine with lower pressures in front and behind the turbines.
Higher pressure turbines generally cause greater harm to fish.
The pressure difference has the greatest effect on fish. The
fish survivability rate for a fish that happens to go through a
system with a low-head turbine is approximately 98 percent.
SENATOR BISHOP observed that a fish going through the system
would be inadvertent.
MR. ARMSTRONG agreed and explained that the intake will have a
guard with its placement based on a study to pull in the least
amount of fish if there are any at all. He added that there are
a lot of different things that can be done to mitigate fish
intake by guiding them, especially with the smolt coming out. He
said adults coming up will not be a big issue because they will
swim by the intake and keep going.
3:42:08 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the Wood-Tikchik State Park current
management plan prevents hydroelectric power.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that the management plan has two sites
designated for hydroelectric development, but Nuyakuk Falls was
not included in the initial plan.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked what would prevent studies from
continuing if SB 91 is not passed.
MR. ARMSTRONG replied that Nushagak Cooperative currently has a
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) permit that locks
the project up for only Nushagak Cooperative. They have three
years to get studies done to show progress on the project. There
is a possibility of a two-year extension through FERC. June 2019
will be the first-year anniversary for Nushagak Cooperative
putting in for the FERC preliminary permit, which was
significant because the permit locked the project for Nushagak
Cooperative.
He said if SB 91 passes, Nushagak Cooperative will still have to
get a permit from the Wood-Tikchik State Park, which will have
to be put up for comment and that will add two months to the
project. He said the hope is to get work started in August 2019
before winter sets in. He pointed out that passing the bill in
2020 would mean there are three years of studies to get done in
one season and two months without getting an extension.
3:44:23 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the 21 studies being undertaken for
the project can happen concurrently without SB 91, or if the
bill needs to pass to proceed to the next step.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that due to the current Wood-Tikchik
State Park management plan, the only way to finish the studies
is with the passage of SB 91.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked at what point the cooperative would say
that the project does not work due to information from the
studies.
MR. ARMSTRONG replied they will pull out of the project if
studies show that it is not viable. He noted that they pulled
out of two other projects when the sites were determined not
viable. He added that $4 million was returned to the grant
agency as well.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked him to confirm that Grant Lake and Lake
Elva are not in operation but were studied.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered correct. He reiterated that the two sites
were studied and found not to be viable.
3:46:49 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked if the power line to Aleknagik will travel
through the park.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered no; the top of the ridge of the glacial
moraine is outside the park and that is where the power lines
will travel. He pointed out that power lines on top of ridges
are more conducive because there are less creek and river
crossings, more stable soils, and a better place for power
infrastructure.
SENATOR KIEHL asked if the project will be able to supply power
to Levelock.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered yes; the power loads are small, less than
a megawatt between the four upriver villages. He said Levelock
is considering putting in a fish processing operation and
supplying additional power will not be a problem.
3:48:22 PM
SENATOR KIEHL referenced a letter from United Tribes of Bristol
Bay that asks for more consultation. He asked what the state of
consultation is with the tribes and what the expectation is
going forward.
MR. ARMSTRONG replied that Nushagak Cooperative does not have
any news regarding United Tribes of Bristol Bay. He noted that
the United Tribes of Bristol Bay required a year to think if
there was a different way to get into the park. He said Nushagak
Cooperative has been working with the Division of Parks and
Outdoor Recreation and the Department of Natural Resources for
over a year and they were told that the only way forward to do
the studies is to pass the legislation.
SENATOR REINBOLD noted that she has worked with the Division of
Parks and Outdoor Recreation for five years and was on eight
boards and committees dealing with access plans, trails plans,
and management plans. She remarked that it was frustrating. She
opined that park plans are just general plans that need to be
modified as needs develop. She pointed out that "categorical
exclusion" is a key word in government lingo that is used to
evade the process. She extended good wishes for the
hydroelectric project.
3:50:36 PM
SENATOR BISHOP asked how many tons of carbon the hydroelectric
project will take out of the atmosphere.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that he does not have the statistics on
the upriver villages, but it will be significant. Nushagak
Cooperative is looking at about 1.5 million gallons of diesel a
year coming out.
SENATOR BISHOP asked him to follow up with the information.
MR. ARMSTRONG agreed to do so.
SENATOR COGHILL asked what the drop is from one end of the river
to the other.
MR. ARMSTRONG replied they have not completed the underwater
survey but they guess the drop will be between 30 and 40 feet.
SENATOR COGHILL asked what type of soil and bedrock is in the
project area.
MR. ARMSTRONG answered that it looks like solid rock. Core
samples need to be taken to identify the type of rock.
3:52:35 PM
CHAIR BIRCH opened public testimony.
3:52:51 PM
CHRISTINE O'CONNOR, Executive Director, Alaska Telecom
Association, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB 91.
She noted that she is a former board member of Nushagak
Cooperative and lived in Dillingham for 24 years. She said the
hydroelectric project is exciting to her both personally and
professionally.
MS. O'CONNOR said the cost of energy in rural Alaska is a
continual drag on the economy and quality of life. The
potential for this project to lower energy costs is
transformational.
She added that another struggle in rural Alaska is connectivity.
She opined that by placing the proposed infrastructure, Nushagak
Cooperative, which is also a telephone cooperative, will be able
to place fiber broadband service in the region which will be as
transformational as lower energy costs.
3:54:25 PM
ROBERT HIMSCHOOT, CEO, Nushagak Cooperative, Dillingham, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 91. He emphasized that the board is
committed to approach the hydroelectric project with the same
diligence taken to assess the Grant Lake and Lake Elva sites.
Nushagak Cooperative knew going into the project that the
location was critical. He added that the hydroelectric project
will have both regional potential and regional impact. He
emphasized that the cooperative knew that a social license
within the region would be critical in moving the project
forward.
He remarked that the recent quasi-opposition by the United
Tribes of Bristol Bay is misguided. He said their recent letter
favors continued study of the project but opposes the bill. He
disclosed that the cooperative has reached out to United Tribes
of Bristol Bay several times but has not been able to sit down
and meet with them. He opined that the misunderstanding comes
from a belief that the cooperative has other options to get into
the park. However, a statutory change in the park management
plan is needed to advance the studies for the project.
He said with the necessary social licensing for the project, the
board passed a "fish first" policy to safeguard the region's
industry heartbeat.
3:57:25 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD asked for an invitation in June to possibly
view the project site.
MR. HIMSCHOOT replied that the cooperative would be happy to
take her to the remote site.
CHAIR BIRCH asked if the cooperative has plans for funding the
hydroelectric project.
MR. HIMSCHOOT answered that they have a couple of potentials. He
noted that the cooperative put in a capital request with the
state understanding the current budget situation. He said the
cooperative has received support on the federal level from
various departments. He concluded that for the cooperative to
find money, it needs access to the park.
3:59:57 PM
CORY WARNOCK, Senior Regulatory and Natural Resources
Consultant, McMillen Jacobs Associates, Ferndale, Washington,
testified in support of SB 91. He disclosed that he has been
working for Nushagak Cooperative for the past year on the
licensing process. He detailed that he provides additional
context to the regulatory process as well as clearing up any
misconceptions on what SB 91 will or will not allow.
He opined that there is a bit of concern among the public that
SB 91 might exempt the project from going through the more
expansive FERC regulatory process where the design,
construction, and operational process will be expedited in
advance of what is normally dictated. He emphasized that is by
no means the case. The hydroelectric project will be required to
go through a very rigorous and onerous regulatory process which
will involve feasibility studies for a number of years.
He referenced a previous question about ceasing if the project
didn't appear to be feasible and explained that if at some point
during the regulatory process the feasibility of the project
appears in question, they would be required to cease. The
project could not move forward.
4:02:17 PM
MARK LISAC, representing self, Dillingham, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 91. He said he did not support the previous two
sites that were considered because they required a dam. He
supports the Nuyakuk Falls location because no dam is required.
He highlighted that the modern penstock design reduces the
impact on fish.
MR. LISAC summarized that the bill will allow the cooperative to
get the DNR permits to operate within the park to get the
baseline data necessary to assess the hydroelectric project for
viability and allow for the FERC process to proceed.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked why consideration of the Lake Elva and
Grant Lake locations was discontinued.
MR. LISAC answered that they did not have the potential to
produce enough power.
4:06:49 PM
PAUL LIEDBERG, representing self, Dillingham, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 91. He said the proposed change to the park
designation should not be taken lightly. He opined that
consideration should be given to whether the impacts in
developing the project within the park is a fair exchange for
the expected impacts. He said he believes that conducting the
necessary baseline studies to assess the project would not
materially conflict with the intent of the enabling legislation.
He stated that his ultimate support of the project will depend
on the results of the studies.
4:09:20 PM
GARY CLINE, representing self, Dillingham, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 91. He disclosed that he is an Aleknagik tribal
member. He said he is a commercial fisherman and is concerned
about the impact the hydroelectric project can have on salmon,
but he is also concerned about the area communities'
sustainability which includes the concerns about energy security
and climate change. He said he views the hydroelectric project
as part of the climate change solution to reduce carbon
emissions. He said his support for the project will depend on
the results of the studies. He noted that he had spoken to the
Aleknagik Traditional Council and they have not taken a stance
on the project until more information is available.
4:11:40 PM
WANDA WAHL, representing self, Dillingham, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 91. She noted that she volunteers on the Nushagak
Cooperative Board of Directors.
She said she would like the management plan for the Wood-Tikchik
State Park to add the Nuyakuk River Falls as a site. It is not
incompatible with the Wood-Tikchik State Park management plan.
MS. WAHL stated that she is in favor of the bill because
Nushagak Cooperative has the best interest of the residents of
the region at heart. The plan has a fish-first policy, the
project is not a dam, a feasible project will bring power
stability to the region, reduced air pollution, and there is a
lot of local support to explore the possibilities.
4:14:04 PM
ALANNAH HURLEY, Executive Director, United Tribes of Bristol Bay
(UTBB), Dillingham, Alaska, testified in opposition of SB 91.
She explained that UTBB is a tribal consortium representing 15
tribal governments in Bristol Bay and over 80 percent of the
population of the region.
She explained that their opposition to SB 91 is not due to the
feasibility studies being conducted by Nushagak Cooperative. She
noted that UTBB has not taken a position on the feasibility
studies and neither have many of the individual tribes. She
pointed out that many of the support resolutions and letters on
the record are in support of the feasibility studies, not the
bill. It is an important distinction.
She said Mr. Himschoot's earlier statement that UTBB's
opposition is a misunderstanding of the options is not correct.
She pointed out that Nushagak Cooperative presentations have
been broad and lacking in specific details, and there never has
been an outline of the bill. UTBB communities and leadership
have viewed the project exploration as extremely problematic.
She specified that UTBB's tribal leadership has concerns with
the unnecessarily broad language in the bill which changes the
overall designation of appropriate uses of the falls within the
state park, language that will permanently open the falls. The
UTBB board's responsibility is to its communities and the board
feels that a more cautious and specific approach to removing
more protective designations to any area in the park is critical
when considering any type of development. UTBB does not know if
the Nushagak Cooperative project will move forward or not and SB
91 does not take that fact into account.
She said UTBB feels that any language changes that would put
appropriate parameters or sunset language for a more cautious
and deliberate approach to predesignating acceptable uses of the
falls would make SB 91 much more palatable to a region that
continuously strives to be very thorough and deliberate in
considerations of any types of development. For those reasons
UTBB's letter of opposition outlines the need for further
discussion and local consultation with local stakeholders.
MS. HURLEY said she also wanted to correct the record about the
statement that the tribe needed a year to think it over. She
said there has been no direct effort to facilitate dialog or
solutions to UTBB's concerns. She reiterated that a deliberate
and cautious approach is in the best interest of the UTBB
people.
CHAIR BIRCH asked Ms. Hurley to confirm that UTBB's last letter
of record is dated: March 28, 2019.
MS. HURLEY answered correct. She reiterated that UTBB asks for a
withdraw of support for SB 91 at this time.
4:18:15 PM
CHAIR BIRCH closed public testimony.
4:18:26 PM
CHAIR BIRCH held SB 91 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB91 Version A.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Sponsor Statement 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Sectional Analysis 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Fiscal Note DNR-PKS 3.29.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 NETC Presentation 4.15.19.pdf |
SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Nuyakuk Hydroelectric Update 2019.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Nuyakuk Studies Cost Estimate.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 NETC Resolution 11.15.17.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 CTC Resolution 3.12.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 City of Dillingham Resolution 3.7.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 BBNC Letter 3.19.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 City of Aleknagik Resolution 3.19.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 BBNA Resolution 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 UTBB Letter 3.28.19.pdf |
SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |