A Case Study in Hydropower Re-Development

William C. Rodgers

Director of Operations Great Bay Hydro Corporation

West Charleston Hydroelectric Project

A Case Study in Hydropower

Re-Development

William Rodgers

Great Bay Hydro Corporation

October 25, 2012

Case Study Outline

• I. Project Location and History

• II. Site Evaluation & Development

• III. Project Construction

• IV. Key Factors to Success

Project Location

• Town of Charleston, Vermont – Orleans County, NEK

– Clyde River

• West Charleston Dam – constructed circa 1900

– 196 feet long, 28 feet high

– 107 square mile drainage area

– 40 acre impoundment (Lubber Lake)

gawk, goon, lout, lummox, oaf, stumblebum, clod, lump, clumsy person

1. Lubber - an awkward stupid person;

2. Lubber - an inexperienced sailor

landlubber, landsman, beginner, initiate, tyro, novice Source: TheFreeDictionary.com

West Charleston Dam – early 1900’s

Project History

• Island Pond Electric – West Charleston began generating in 1903 – One of the early hydroelectric projects in VT

• Citizens Utilities – Owned the project from mid 1930’s thru 2004 – Station ceased operation in 1998 due to poor

condition of penstock

• Great Bay Hydro Corporation – Acquired West Charleston in 2004

Project License

• Clyde River Project, FERC No. 2306 – Newport Development (4,000 kw) – West Charleston Development (800 kw) – Original License 1963; New License 2003

• West Charleston requirements (2003 License) – Replace penstock & generating system – Run-of-river operation – Bypass flow: Oct-May=74 cfs; Jun-Sep=50 cfs – Remove 18 inch flashboards

West Charleston Dam - 2003

West Charleston Penstock

West Charleston Powerhouse

West Charleston Switchgear

Development Timeline

• Study & Evaluation 2004-2007

• Design & Permitting 2008-2010

• Construction 2010-2011

• Operational – April 2011

Study & Evaluation 2004-2007

• FERC licensed project – Time constraints – Rehabilitate or retire – Dam maintenance required

• Dam removal considered – Scope/process not well defined – Local opinion

• Re-development options – Penstock rehabilitation – New generating unit at dam

Design & Permitting 2008-2010

• New powerhouse at dam – Use all stream flow – New unit w/ increased efficiency – Reinstallation of flashboards – 25% increase in annual power generation

• Environmental enhancements – Elimination of 1600’ bypass reach – Improved water quality

• Agency Consultation – No fish passage requirement – Help meet State’s renewable energy goals

Key Factors to Development

• American Recovery & Reinvestment Act – Section 1603 Grants

– Incremental hydropower

– Begin construction 2009-10 (extended to 2011)

• Vermont FIT/SOC – VT utilities to procure 50 MW of renewables

– 20 year PPAs

– Technology specific pricing based on construction cost plus ROE

Design & Permitting 2008-2010 (cont.)

• FERC License Amendment

• Vermont WQC Amendment

• Historic & Archaeological (VT SHPO)

• Interconnection Upgrade (Section 248)

• Construction & Operating Plans – Penstock Removal – Trashrack Design – Flow Management & Monitoring – Water Quality Monitoring

Construction 2010-2011

• Remove gatehouse and penstock

• Demolish intake

• Excavate powerhouse footprint and tailrace

• Construct concrete powerhouse

• Install equipment

• Interconnection, start-up, testing

Old Gatehouse & Penstock

Intake with gatehouse removed – June 2010

Upstream cofferdam in place – July 2010

Excavation of powerhouse footprint – Aug 2010

Powerhouse walls being formed – Oct 2010

Installation of turbine assembly – Nov 2010

Powerhouse nearing completion – Jan 2011

Commissioned & On-line – April 2011

Powerhouse interior – July 2011

West Charleston Hydro Plant – 675 kw

Key Factors to Success

• Creativity in Evaluation and Design

• Pre-consultation with Agencies

• State and Federal Renewable Incentives

• Participate in the Regulatory Process

• Execute the Plan

QUESTIONS? Bill Rodgers

Great Bay Hydro Corporation 603.766.8747

brodgers@greatbaypower.com