Hydropower on the Mill River Feasability StudyFeasibility Study For
Low. Heal Hvlrojower
On the Mill River, Northampton, Massachusetts
Conducted by the Northampton Planning Department for the U.S. Department
of Energy under Cooperative Agreement No. EW— 78— F -01 1189
Prepared By Curran Associates, Inc., Northampton, Massachusetts
With Montreal Engineering Company, Ltd., Montreal, Quebec
in City Council,
UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAYOR, DAVID B. MUSANTE, JR.
41644404W RESOLUTION
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MASSACHUSETTS
..............N....M.M.M .M ..MN
January 21, 1982
the owners of dams on the Mill River in Northampton
have expressed a desire to cooperate with each other
and with the City of Northampton in developing the
hydropower potential at five sites on the Mill River,
and
any development of these dam sites for hydropower will
have a definite impact on abutting properties and on
the recreational opportunities of City residents, and
coordinated development of these sites will have the
best prospects of attracting private investment and of
serving the public interest, while at the same time
respecting the legitimate concerns and interests of
present dam owners, and
WHEREAS, the timing for filing a competing application for a
Preliminary Permit is critical in regard to protecting
and enhancing these public and private interests in
the City of Northampton,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of North-
ampton hereby: endorses the competing application of
the Northampton Energy Resource Commission to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (F.E.R.C.) for a
Preliminary Permit for the five dam sites on the Mill
River; endorses the planning and implementation of
private development of these sites in keeping with the
interests of the dam owners and the City of Northampton;
and endorses the appointment of a sub- committee of the
Energy Resource Commission consisting of representatives
of all the dam owners and one member of the Energy
Resource Commission, to act as the coordinating body for I
this possible development, with the assistance of the
City of Northampton's Office of Planning and Development.
Feasibility Study For
LOW HEAD HYDROPOWER
On The
MILL RIVER, NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Conducted by the Planning Department of the City of Northampton for the
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
With
(Cooperative Agreement No. EW- 78 -F -07 -1978)
Submitted To:
U.S. Dept. of Energy
Advanced Technology Branch
Energy_& Technology Division ID
550 Second St.
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
Prepared By
Curran Associates, Inc.
182 Main St.
Northampton, Massachusetts 01060
Montreal Engineering Company, Ltd.
P.O. Box 6088, Station A
Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3C 3Z8
January, 1979
CURRAN- ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
30 April 1979
Planning Department
City of Northampton
Municipal Office Building
Northampton, Massachusetts 01060
Sincerely yours,
Robert G. Curran
Project Director
RGC /JRF /dm
0
Attn: Ms. Nancy Stack
Re: Feasibility Study for Low -Head Hydropower, Final Report
Dear Ms. Stack:
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS
Northampton, Massachusetts
Palo Alto, California
Lima, Peru
We are pleased to submit our final report entitled, "Feasibility Study for Low
Head Hydropower" in accordance with the terms of the Agreement dated 21 August
1978 between the City of Northampton and Curran Associates, Inc., and Coopera-
tive Agreement No. EW- 78 -F -07 -1789 between the U.S. Department of Energy and
the City of Northampton.
A Summary of Findings responds in order to each of the items in Article I.B of
our Agreement, with references to sections of the report containing more de-
tailed discussion.
We thank you for your cooperation and valuable assistance throughout the study.
We also thank the owners of the dams, the Massachusetts Electric Company, and
the Department of Energy for their time spent in visiting the sites and dis-
cussing the projects with us. Finally, we wish to acknowledge the contributions
of the staffs of both Curran Associates, Inc. and Montreal Engineering Company,
Ltd. who worked together on preparation of the feasibility assessment report.
We have enjoyed working with you on this interesting and challenging project,
and would welcome the opportunity to be of further assistance to the City.
122 MAIN STREET, NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS 01060 TELEPHONE (413) 584 -7701
ABSTRACT
Five existing dams along a 6.5 -mile reach of the Mill River in the City of
Northampton, Massachusetts were studied to assess the feasibility of developing
the sites for low -head hydroelectric power generation.
Each of the dams was inspected to evaluate existing conditions and.necessary work
required to rehabilitate the structures. Analyses of hydrology and power poten-
tial were carried out and a packaged tube turbine generator unit was found to be
suitable for installation at all sites. Project layouts were developed making
maximum use of existing structures and natural and man-made features. Capital
and operation and maintenance costs were estimated based on the project layouts
and the selected turbine generator units. Financial analyses were performed.
using a set of baseline assumptions. Sensitivity tests of alternative assump-
tions were also prepared, along with analyses of assistance program alternatives.
Finally, the legal, environmental, and socio- institutional considerations affect-
ing development of the hydro projects were identified and reviewed.
Hydro developments on the Mill River were found to be technically feasible,
presenting no extraordinary engineering, environmental, or legal problems.
However, none of these projects, either individually or jointly, would be finan-
cially feasible without substantial assistance in the form of capital grants.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMP_tON, MASSACHUSETTS_
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The summary of 'findings resulting from the present feasibility assessment of
potential hydro projects on the Mill River is presented below in the same or-
der indicated in Article I, Section B, "Responsibility of the Engineers of
the Agreement of 21 August 1978 between -the City of Northampton and Curran
Associates, Inc. A copy of this portion of the Agreement is reproduced in
Appendix C of this report.
1. Configurations and Capacities.
The proposed layouts of the hydropower facilities are described in Section
4.1 and the selection of.unit sizes is given in Section 3.0. As shown. in
Plate 4 -1, each powerhouse would be constructed adjacent to the existing:
dam and would contain one horizontal -shaft turbine- generator unit. The.
-Cookes .Intermediate project would involve diversion of water from the pond
formed by the Button Shop dams through a penstock to a powerhouse below
Cookes Dam, thereby combining the heads available at both projects.
The capital costs of the power facilities are derived in Section 4.2.1.
The estimated costs are in mid -1978 dollars and include all facilities re-
quired to tie the plants into the existing distribution system. They also
include allowances for engineering and Owner's administration but exclude
interest during construction.
The installed capacities and estimated capital costs corresponding to the
four plants selected for study throughout this report are as follows:
ii
CURRAN- ASSOCIATES,- INC: ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMP_T-ON,._MASSACHUSETT_S
Project Installed Capacity Estimated Capital Cost
kW mid -1978
Chartpak 235 880,000
Cookes Intermediate 265 1,160,000
Pro Brush 200 800,000
Smith College 120 770,000
Total 820 3,610,000
2. Peak Power and Energy.
The estimates of power available from the hydro projects are derived in
Section 3.4 and the assumed potentials for saleable peak power production
are given in Section 5.2. The table below summarizes the power potentials
at the four selected projects:
Assumed Saleable Peak Average Total Annual
Projects Power Production Energy Production
(Equivalent
kW MWh /a Barrels of Oil /a)
Chartpak 204 850 (1,420)
Cookes Intermediate 0 1,140 (1,900)
Pro Brush 171 845 (1,410)
Smith College 106 570 (950)
3,405 (5,680)
*The local utility indicated that it would purchase any energy available from the
hydro plants but would not give credit for capacity. Since power from the Cookes
Intermediate project could not be used to directly serve a well defined load, the
"assumed saleable peak power production" was considered to be zero.
3. Impacts on Water Resources.
Principal uses of the Mill River in Northampton, described in Section 7.3.1,
are water supply and disposal of wastewater discharges. Pro Brush withdraws
small quantities of water from its pond although most of the cooling water is
obtained from wells. Thus, more water is returned to the river than is with-
drawn. River water is also used for irrigation of a golf course down-
stream from Cookes dam. None of these uses of the water resource would
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
be measurably altered or affected by installation and operation of hydro-
power facilities. Besides Pro Brush, the only other impoundment in current
use is Paradise Pond formed by the Smith College dam. This pond provides
for summer and winter recreation as well as aesthetic enhancement of the
campus. Major concerns expressed by. Smith College officials are the need
to minimize water level fluctuations in the pond, the need to maintain a
small amount of flow passing over dam for aesthetic reasons, and the
need to make hydroelectric structures compatible with the existing visual
character of the area. All of these needs could be met by the proposed
project although only with some loss of energy generation due to intenn
tional spillage..
4. Marketing Potential.
The marketing potential of power produced from the Mill River hydro plants
is addressed in Section 5.1.
Part of the output of the Chartpak project would be used by the Chartpak
company and the local utility, Massachusetts Electric Company,would buy the
residual at the prevailing fuel displacement rate which is currently 2.2 /kWh.
Massachusetts Electric Company would purchase all of the output from the
Cookes Intermediate Project at the prevailing fuel displacement rate.
All of the output from both the Pro Brush and Smith College projects would
be used by the current dam owners.
5. Regulatory Requirements.
Regulatory requirements applicable to hydro development of the existing
Mill River dams, outlined in Section 7.2, are both: formal and informal.
.CURRAN ASSOCIATES, --INC. ENG:NE._.1S_ AND. PLANNERS NOR. T- RAMP_T_o.N,._MASSACHUSE.T_T_S._
Upon decision to proceed with any of the projects, frequent and close
coordination with all agencies involved would be important in expediting
project approvals. Essential requirements would include:
Short -form license from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
Section 10 and Section 404 permits from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
Waterways permit and wetlands permit from Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering (the latter after approval by
Northampton Conservation Commission);
Consultation with and review by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries
and others.
6. Capital Investments.
Capital investments per installed kilowatt for each of the four projects
are summarized in Section 6.1, while Section 6.2 describes the calculation
of total costs per kilowatt -hour and return on investment. Results are
given in the tables of Section 6.2 and Appendix B and are summarized as
follows:
Present Value Present Value
Capital Cost for Cost for
Investment Hydro Energy* Purchased Energy
Project /kW) /kWh) 0/kWh)
Chartpak 3,400 2.89 2.32
Cookes Intermediate 4,110 2.64
Pro Brush 3,600 2.72 1.96
Smith College 5,750 4.03 1.93
All projects together 4,020 2.59
*Based on total costs over 50 -year life cycle
*Based on costs to user for purchasing electricity in amounts equal to hydro
project production over 50 -year life cycle, allowing for utility rate infla-
tion 4% greater than general inflation.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND_ PLANNERS_! NORTHAMP ._T_ON,__MASSACHU
v
The return on investment assuming concurrent development of the four projects
was calculated to be 4.1 percent per annum based on a project payout period
of 50 years.
7. Operation and Maintenance Costs.
The anticipated operation and maintenance costs for the projects are derived
in Section 4.2.2. If the four plants were operated and maintained as a
single system the estimated cost would be $55,000 /annum.. The corresponding
figure for the operation and maintenance of a single plant would be in the
order of $20,000 /annum.
8. Project Life.
On the basis of a site inspection of the dams on the Mill River, as described
in Appendix A, it was concluded that the remaining life of the existing
structures is. unlimited. The economic life of all the hydro projects was
assumed to be 50 years which is a figure often used for this purpose.
9. Environmental and Socio- institutional Impacts.
Environmental impacts of hydro developments on the Mill River would be
associated with construction as well as operation of the projects as dis-
cussed in Section 7.3. Excavation and other land disturbing activities
necessary for powerhouse, tailrace, and penstock construction would gen-
erate some sediment which might be washed into the river. Because much'
of the required excavation would be in rock, sediment quantities would like-
ly be small. Construction phase impacts would be minimized by scheduling
work in and near the river to avoid the season of greatest recreational
fishing pressure and by requiring sediment and other pollution control
measures to be taken as necessary during construction.
Operational impacts relate basically to modification of natural river flows.
While ponding water at Chartpak, flows in the river could be reduced to
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS- NORTHAMPI ON, MASSACHUSETTS
near.zero, except.for seepage and local inflows, frequently for periods
of a few hours and infrequently for up to 18 hours. During the summer,
reduction of already low flows during part of the day could adversely
affect trout and other stream biota, although augmentation of flows
during the generation period could be beneficial for the stream fishery.
These issues would need to'be addressed further by the agencies respon
Bible, should the projects proceed. Water flows between Button Shop
south dam and Cookes dam would be substantially reduced if the Cookes
Intermediate project. were developed. Increased sedimentation., stagna-
tion, and encroachment marsh and terrestrial vegetation would be pos-
sible in the Cookes pond area due to the decreased flows.
None of the proposed Mill River projects is expected to have major social
or institutional consequences locally (Section 7.4). However, the proj-
ects would contribute to the national policy of lessening dependence on
foreign oil, even if only in a small way, and would set a precedent for
cogeneration projects in the Massachusetts Electric Company service area.
Alternative institutional arrangements for implementing the projects would
include: Individual development and operation of each project by the
present owner; individual development by owners and operation by the City;
development and operation of all projects by the City; or development of
all projects by the City and operation by a single private contractor.
Advantages of having all projects developed by the City and operated
together may include: (1) potentially better ability of the City to
obtain funding assistance; (2) operation and maintenance cost savings;
and (3) ability to develop the full power potential by construc-
tion of the Chartpak project and associated storage capacity.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS MASSACHUSETTS
vii
Section 1 of the Mill Acts (Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter '253)
states that, "A'person may erect and maintain a water mill and a
dam to raise water for working it, upon and across any stream not navi-
gable." The Acts and subsequent case law, discussed in Section 7.1 of
this report, have interpreted the rights of use very broadly and pro-
vide a firm legal foundation to enable the owners to use the Mill River
for hydroelectric purposes.
10. Safety.
In Section 2.0 It was concluded that the addition of a hydropower facility
at any of the dams under study would not affect the safety of the existing
structures.
As stated in Section 7.2 a possible safety hazard would be introduced in
the course of operating the plants in periods of low flows when genera-
tion would not be continuous. At the start of generation the water level
downstream of each dam would rise causing a potential problem to individuals
who might have strayed into the riverbed. The magnitude of this rise
should not be more than a foot or two.
11. Engineering Acceptability.
Section 4.1 concludes, on the basis of a visual inspection of the sites
and the subsequent engineering work which was carried out, that the con-
struction of a hydropower facility at each site considered is technically
feasible.
12. Availability of Suitable Equipment.
The type of turbine generator unit considered at all potential cites
on the Mill River is discussed in Section 3.3. On the basis of the avail-
ability of flow and head it was concluded that the smallest -size standard-
ize.d tube turbine generator unit now available commercially from the
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS
viii
Allis- Chalmers company would be a suitable machine for installation at all
sites under study: This type and size of unit was used to obtain equip-
ment costs and to size the civil works at each site. On.the basis of
manufacturers' quotations for small generating units obtained for other
studies, the cost of the Allis- Chalmers equipment is considered representa-
tive of that for alternative units. Comparison with hydro generating equip-
ment available from other manufacturers would be necessary at the design
stage to ensure final selection of the most suitable unit.
13. Schedule.
A preliminary schedule for the design and construction of power facilities
for the Chartpak, Cookes Intermediate, Pro Brush and Smith College projects
is discussed in Section 4.4. The schedule is illustrated in Plate 4 -3.
It shows nine months of detailed design, advertisement for bids, and bid
preparation and analysis prior to the award of contracts. Civil construc-
tion, and equipment fabrication, delivery, installation and testing would
take a further fourteen months. This gives a total elapsed time, from
the decision to proceed until all four plants are commissioned, of 23 months.
Cdndlusions.
Development of the existing Mill River dams for hydroelectric power production is
considered technically feasible and would present no unmanageable engineering,
legal, or environmental problems. However, none of these projects, either indi-
vidually or jointly, would be financially feasible without substantial assistance
in the form of capital grants.
ix
CURRAN__ASSO. CIA ..T.ES,._INC.____•___ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page,
Abstract
Summary of Findings
List of Illustrations xii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 -1
2.0 EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS 2 -1
3.0 HYDROLOGY AND POWER POTENTIAL 3 -1.
3.1 Streamflows 3 -1
3.2 Available Heads 3 -2
3.3 Type and Size of Units 3 -2
3.4 Power Available 3 -3
4.0 LAYOUTS AND COST ESTIMATES
4.1 Project Layouts
4.1.1 Chartpak
4.1.2 Button Shop
4.1.3 Cookes
4.1.4 Pro Brush
4.1.5 Smith College
4.1.6 Combined Developments
4 -1
4 -1
4 -3
4 -3
4 -4
4 -4
4 -4
4 -4
4..2 Cost Estimates 4 -5
4.2.1 Capital Costs 4 -5
4.2.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs 4 -7
4.3 Combined Development Alternatives 4 -10
4.4 Project Schedule 4 -10
5.0 MARKETING POTENTIAL AND VALUE OF POWER 5 -1
5.1 Value of Power 5 -1
5.2 Calculation of Direct Project Benefits 5 -3
5.2.1 Chartpak 5 -3
5.2.2 Cookes Intermediate 5 -4
5.2.3 Pro Brush 5 -4
5.2.4 Smith College 5 -5
CURRAN- ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND. PLANNERS NORTHAMP T_ON,__MASSACHUSE_T_T_S
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
Page
6.0 ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFIT -COST ANALYSIS 6 -1
6.1 Summary of Capital Costs and Power Outputs 6 -1
6.2 Feasibility and Benefit -Cost Methodology 6 -1
6.3. Sensitivity Testing 616
6.4 Results 6 -7
6.4.1 Sensitivity Analysis 6 -11
6.4.2 Program Alternatives 6 -12
7.0 LEGAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIO- INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW 7 -1
7.1 Water Rights 7 -1
7.2 Regulatory Requirements 7 -3
7.3 Environmental Impacts 7 -4
7.3.1 Environmental Setting 7 -5
7.3.2 Environmental Impacts 7 -9
Construction Phase 7 -9
Operational Phase 7 -11
7.3.3 Summary 7 -15
APPENDIX A DAM INSPECTION REPORT A -1
A.0 Introduction A -1
A.1 General Observations A -1
A.2 Condition of the Dams A -2
A.2.1 Chartpak A -2
A.2.2 Button Shop A -5
A.2.3 Cookes A -5
A.2.4 Pro Brush A -7
A.2.5 Smith College A -7
APPENDIX B FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, SENSITIVITY TEST, AND ASSISTANCE B -1
PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS EXHIBITS FOR INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
APPENDIX C ARTICLE I, SECTION B, "RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ENGINEERS" C -1
FROM AGREEMENT OF 21 AUGUST 1978 BETWEEN CITY OF NORTHAMPTON AND
CU RAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
APPENDIX D GLOSSARY OF SELECTED TECHNICAL TERMS
D -1
CURRAN_ASSOCIAT_ES,_ INC. _..!__ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Plates
Plate Page
2 -1 Dam Locations and River Profile 2 -3
3 -1 Graphs of Generating Unit Characteristics 3 -4
4 -1 Typical Powerplant Layout 4 -2
4 -2 General Arrangement of Combined Development Alternatives 4 -6
4 -3 Preliminary Schedule of Development 4 -12
Exhibits
Exhibits
5 -1 Computation of Annual Revenue Equivalent for Chartpak Project 5 -6
5 -2 Computation of Annual Revenue Equivalent for Pro Brush Project 5 -8
5 -3 Computation of Annual Revenue Equivalent for Smith Project 5 -10
6 -1 Financial Analysis for All Projects Jointly 6 -8
B -1 Financial Analysis of Chartpak Project B -1
B -2 Financial Analysis of Cookes Intermediate Project B -3.
B -3 Financial Analysis of Pro Brush Project B -5
B -4 Financial Analysis of Smith Project B -7
Tables Tables
2 -1 Summary of Existing Structures 2 -2
3 -1 Power Potential Estimates 3 -1
3 -2 Estimated Average Monthly Distribution of Energy Generation 3-5
4 -1 Summary of Capital Cost Estimates 4 -8
4 -2 Comparison of Alternative Developments for Chartpak, Button Shop, 4 -10
and Cookes Projects
6 -1 Summary of Capital Costs and Power Potentials 6 -1
6 -2 Sensitivity Tests for All Projects Jointly 6 -10
6 -3 Comparison of Electric Rates and General inflation 6 -11
6 -4 Analysis of Assistance Program Alternatives for All Projects 6 -13
Jointly
B -1 Sensitivity Tests for Chartpak Project B -9
B -2 Sensitivity Tests for Cookes Intermediate Project 8 -10
B -3 Sensitivity Tests for Pro Brush Project B -11
B -4 Sensitivity Tests for Smith Project B -12
B -5 Analysis of Assistance Program Alternatives for Chartpak Project 8_13
B -6 Analysis of Assistance Program Alternatives for Cookes Inter- B -14
mediate Project
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, _INC. ENGINEERS AND- PLANNERS- NORTHAMP_TON,_- MASSACHUSETTS_
xii
B -7 Analysis of Assistance
Project
B -8 Analysis. of Assistance
Photograph
A -1 Chartpak Dam
A -2
A -3
A -4
A -5 Pro Brush Dam
A -6 Smith College Dam
Button Shop South Dam
Button Shop East Dam
Cookes Dam
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (cont' d)
Program Alternatives for Pro Brush
Program Alternatives for Smith Project
Photographs
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Page
B -15
B -16
A -4
A74
A -6
A -6
A 8
A
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report describes the work carried out on the feasibility assessment of
possible hydropower sites on the section of the Mill River which lies within
the City of Northampton, Massachusetts.
Financial assistance for the accomplishment of the feasibility assessment was
provided by the United States Department of Energy under Cooperative Agreement
No. EW- 78 -F -07 -1789 with the City of Northampton. The City also participated
financially by providing services of its employees.
The assessment was carried out in accordance with the Agreement dated 21 August
1978 between the City of Northampton and Curran Associates, Inc. (CAI). An
excerpt of the Agreement is contained in Appendix C of this report.
Part of the work involved in performing the assessment was subcontracted to
Montreal Engineering Company, Limited (MECo). MECo provided assistance to CAI
on portions of the responsibilities described in Article I, Section B of the
Agreement between the City and CAI, specifically items: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12
and 13.
This report describes the condition of the existing structures which provide
the head for potential hydropower developments on the Mill River. It gives
estimates of power potential at each site considered. The layouts of the hydro-
power facilities together with estimates of their capital costs are included
as are estimates of operation and maintenance costs. The marketability and
CURRAN ASSOCIATES INC.--- ENGINEERS AND P LANNERS NORTHAMPTON,. MASSACHUSETTS
1 -1
value of the hydro power are discussed, and an economic feasibility and benefit-
cost analysis are described. Finally, the environmental, legal and socio-
institutional aspects of the projects are reviewed.
A glossary of technical terms and abbreviations is included as Appendix D to,
assist the lay reader.
CURRAN- ASSOCIATES, INC:• ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, ._MASSACHUSETTS
1 -2
2.0 EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS
The attached Plate 2 -1 shows the location, project area and river profile for
the existing developments considered in this report.
The five sites under study were visited and inspected several times in the fall of
1978 to assess the general condition of the dams and to consider the most con-
venient method of installing hydro power facilities. The results of the in-
spection and the conclusions regarding the general condition of the dams, in-
cluding photographs, are attached as Appendix A. The configuration of the
hydroelectric facilities which would be installed at each dam is described in
Section 4.1.
In general, all the dams are overflow structures of stone masonry construction
and appear to be founded on sound durable rock. Only one structure would re-
quire any appreciable rehabilitation and all appear to have many years of re-
maining life. There are no generating facilities currently existing at any
of these sites. It appears that little pondage remains at some of the dams
due to reservoir silting.
Based on the observed condition and configuration of all dams it can be con-
cluded that the addition of hydropower facilities would not affect the safety
of the existing structures.
Table 2 -1 gives a summary of the physical characteristics and the general
condition of the dams.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
2 -1
Table 2-1: Summary of Existing Structures
Necessary
Crest Maximum General Remedial Remaining
Dam Type Length Height Condition Action Life
ft: ft
Chartpak Masonry 150 28 Very Good Replacement of Unlimited
top two masonry
courses with
concrete
Button Shop
East Masonry 80 10 Excellent None Unlimited
Button Shop
South Masonry 80 10 Excellent None Unlimited
Cookes Left Masonry 80 20 Excellent None Unlimited
Cookes Right Masonry 30 8 Excellent None Unlimited
Pro Brush Masohry 120 15 Excellent None Unlimited
Smith
College Masonry 120 15 Excellent None Unlimited
C.URRAN_ASS_OCIATES, ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON,_MASSACHUSEtTS
2-2
350
300
u
0 250
L" 200
150
CHARTPAK
FSL 355
BUTTONSHOP
FSL 312 COOKES
FSL 300
PROJECT AREA
RIVER PROFILE
PRO BRUSH
FSL 235
GAGING STATION
1000
0
2000
SMITH
COLLEGE
4000
SCALES 1:30000 HORIZONTAL
1:10000 VERTICAL
6000
N.Y.
VER.
CONN,
MASS.
NORTHAMPTON
LOCATION MAP
SMITH COLLEGE
FSL 137
Plate 2 Dam Locations and River Profile
300
250
200
150
100
2 -3
3.0 HYDROLOGY AND POWER POTENTIAL
Table 3 -1 summarizes the now and head available, and the.resultant power poten-
tial at each site.
Development
Average Gross Installed Average Capacity
Flow Head Capacity Energy Factor
Note: (1) See Section 4.3.
Table 3 -1: Power Potential Estimates
cfs ft kW MWh /a
Chartpak 70 26 235 850 0.41
Button Shop 82 10. 65 315 0.55
Cookes Low 1 83 19 165 680 0.47
Cookes Int. (1) 82 32 265 1140 0.49
Cookes High 70 67 380 2080 0.62
Pro Brush 90 22 200 845 0.48
Smith College 96 15 120 570 0.54
3.1 Streamflows
The flows available for power production in the Mill River were estimated from
recorded daily flows in the river at the U.S. Geological 'Survey Gaging Station
#11715 for the period October 1940 through September 1976. The drainage area
above the gage is 54 sq. mi. and the average flow is 93.8 cfs. The average flow
at each site was estimated from the corresponding ratio of drainage areas, and
the duration curve of daily flows for the gage was adjusted in the appropriate
ratio to give a flow duration curve at each hydro site.
3 -1
CURRAN ASSOCIATES,_INC. ENGINEERS_AND_P_LANNERS NO.RTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
The quantities of water withdrawn from the Mill River, as described in Section
7.3.1, are very small in relation to the total volume of flow in the river and
were disregarded in the estimation of the projects' power potential.
3.2 Available Heads
The gross head available at each site was measured during field surveys carried
out in October and November 1978. River flow was very low at the time of the sur-
veys and the measured head at each site was adjusted downwards to provide an
estimate'of the average gross head that would be available for power production.
Net heads were computed by reducing the corresponding gross heads by 2 percent
to allow for general hydraulic losses in trashracks, intakes, tailrace, etc.
An additional head loss, computed from the estimated flow and penstock size,
was allowed for the long penstocks of the combined developments (see Section 4.3).
3.3 Type and Size of Units
In order to take advantage of standardized designs, resulting in reduced manu-
facturing costs and shorter delivery times, it was decided to select a packaged
turbine- generator unit for all sites studied during the present feasibility
assessment. Consideration was given to the use of the standardized Tube turbine
units manufactured by Allis Chalmers. This manufacturer offers ten standardized
packages with outputs ranging from 50 to 5000 kW designed specifically to develop
heads up to 50 ft which are available at existing dams. The turbines are horizon-
tal-axis, propeller -type units which provide the highest possible operating speed
and maximum capacity for a given size. The powerhouse structure can therefore
be substantially reduced in plan area and height. Also, the need for deep foun
dations is minimized, thus reducing excavation and other civil construction
costs.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
3 -2
On the basis of the streamflows and heads available it was concluded that the
smallest size of standardized turbine available from Allis- Chalmers, which has
.a throat diameter of 750 mm (about 30 inches), would be a suitable machine for
installation at all sites under study. Plate 3 -1 shows the typical character-
istics of this unit. In addition to the turbine and generator, the package in-
cludes an inlet valve, draft tube liner, speed increaser, static exciter voltage
regulator, and protection and control equipment. Because of the large variation
in streamflows occurring in the Mill River and the limited amount of pondage
available, it was assumed that turbines with adjustable runner blades would be
used to permit generation with acceptable efficiency over a wide range of dis-
charges. The Allis- Chalmers packaged unit was selected here in .order to obtain__
equipment costs and to size the civil works at each site. On the basis of.manu-
facturers' quotations for small generating units obtained for other studies, the
cost of the Allis- Chalmers equipment is considered representative of that for
alternative units.. Comparison with hydro generating equipment available from
other manufacturers would be necessary at the design stage to ensure final selec-
tion of the most suitable unit.
3.4 .Power Available
The capacity available at each site was calculated from the discharge capacity
of the selected unit and the net head available, assuming an over -all efficiency
of 0.864. This was composed of a best gate turbine efficiency of 0.90, genera-
tor efficiency of 0.97 and a transformer efficiency of 0.99.
The energy potential at each site was estimated from the volume of runoff of
the flow duration curve below the corresponding unit discharge capacity horizon,
and the available net head, using an over -all efficiency of 0.,787. The lower
efficiency used to estimate energy was based on an annual average turbine
efficiency of 0.82 to allow for operation at less than best gate discharge due
CURRAN INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
3-3
1.0
0.8
D.6
120
100
80
20
40
60
PERCENT OF FULL LOAD
RELATIVE TURBINE EFFICIENCY VERSUS PERCENT OF FULL LOAD
ADJUSTABLE. BLADE FIXED GATE PACKAGED UNIT
NOTE:
BASED UPON FIGURES 2 7, RESPECTIVELY,
OF'THE ALLIS- CHALMERS BROCHURE ENTITLED
"STANDARIZED- HYDROELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS
80
NET HEAD IN FEET
UNIT DISCHARGE VERSUS NET HEAD IN FEET
750 mm STANDARD TUBE UNIT
100
Plate 3 -1: Graphs of Generating Unit Characteristics
3 -4
RELATIVE TURBINE EFFICIENCY
4 BLADE
5
BLADES
5 15 25 35 .45 55
1.0
0.8
D.6
120
100
80
20
40
60
PERCENT OF FULL LOAD
RELATIVE TURBINE EFFICIENCY VERSUS PERCENT OF FULL LOAD
ADJUSTABLE. BLADE FIXED GATE PACKAGED UNIT
NOTE:
BASED UPON FIGURES 2 7, RESPECTIVELY,
OF'THE ALLIS- CHALMERS BROCHURE ENTITLED
"STANDARIZED- HYDROELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS
80
NET HEAD IN FEET
UNIT DISCHARGE VERSUS NET HEAD IN FEET
750 mm STANDARD TUBE UNIT
100
Plate 3 -1: Graphs of Generating Unit Characteristics
3 -4
RELATIVE TURBINE EFFICIENCY
to low river flows, lower heads due to high flows, unit down time, and other
factors. The other component efficiencies were assumed to remain the same.
The computation of the amounts of energy available was based upon the use of
limited pondage, primarily supplied by the rehabilitation of Chartpak, which
would be required to allow some hours of generation from low average daily flows.
Any restriction on pondage availability, its use, or a requirement for minimum
hourly releases during days of extremely low river flow, would have the effect
of reducing the energy that was estimated to be available.
A preliminary estimate was made of the average monthly distribution of energy
generation at the hydro plants on the basis of the variation in streamflow in
each month and the turbine efficiency at different discharges. Table 3 -2 gives
the results of this estimate.
Table 3 -2: Estimated Average Monthly
Distribution of Energy Generation
Month Average Monthly Generation
(Percent of Annual Generation)
January 8.4
February 8.2
March 15.6
April 19.1
May 13.9
June 7.4
July 3.1
August 2.5
September 2.7
October 3.3
November 7.2
December 8.6
100.0
CURRAN ASSOCIATES,, INC. ENGINEERS- AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
3 -5
4.0 LAYOUTS AND COST ESTIMATES
4.1 Project Layouts
The layouts for all developments were prepared so that maximum use could be made
of the existing structures, and natural and man -made features.
Each intake would be an integral part of the upstream slope of the dam. It
would be of concrete and would include a trashrack and bulkhead gate. The
area upstream would be dredged to provide a clear approach channel and reduce
the rate of silting of the intake. it is likely that occasional dredging of
the approach channels would be necessary and an allowance for this was made in
the operation and maintenance costs discussed in Section 4.2.2.
The layout of each powerhouse was based on that required to house the packaged
tube turbine generator selected in Section 3.3. It would comprise a single
operating room containing the valve and turbine controls, the generator and. elec-
trical equipment. Equipment would be installed and maintained by means of a
mobile crane with access through a detachable roof hatch. The operating floor
level would be determined by the level of the draft tube, the roof of the draft
tube being at the'level of the operating floor. The powerhouse sketches shown
in Plate 4- 1,,illustrate the type of arrangement applicable to the Smith College
site. All other powerhouse layouts would be similar.
The generator output would be cable- connected at 600 V to the generator breaker
and then to the generator transformer where the voltage would be stepped up to
13.8 kV. The connection to the 13.8 kV distribution system would be by means of
a short distribution line, circuit breakers, protection and utility metering as
specified by Massachusetts Electric Company. A station service supply would be
4 -1
CURRAN ASSOCIATESINC ENGINEERS -AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON,-MASSACHUSETTS
ANL
SNR11
LIMA
s
NOTE:
t. a.
E 4:
SO
O .r
p
Ate
�I�DIRi�R.Ii
iw'4 Jul
NIRILIIF SECT IOII•
OF RAN'
a
ZIL
AL
I 2 6 IO I2 lut
2.
POTREAN OF LIME III IETAILS RILL VARY TO SUIT GEOIIETRY OF
EXISTNIR IM N FIRFOREO LOCATION. AMAN0EVE3T SNOW 13
AFFLICARLE 11 MN AT SIITN COLLEGE DATA, FONERFLANT UY00T
IS A!LICASLE 13 ALL 3 HELNIENT3.
EXUSTIS ORIENT MODIFIED. 11 NOT
FINERFUNT AND WIN
■1■
sECim aM
ISINTfNANOE
NM•TCITIOVER
a
/511'..ein NNW
NT TUVE TURBINE
►CAI !wire I lr71vmll
Deg
CROSS SECTION
r 0111
CL UNIT
11
DRAFT TINE
GATE SLOT
ACCESS
LEVEL -4
ME18IN MMES
OPENING M
ACCESS
MINIVAN
511
Plate 4 -1: Typical Powerplant Layout
4 -2
t to the load side of the generator breaker to supply plant services
and start -up power for the unit auxiliaries. The units would be equipped
with protection and control which would be included in the basic turbine
generator package.
During operation automatic shutdown and start-up of the units would be controlled
by headpond level sensors.
On the basis of a visual inspection of the sites and the subsequent engineering
work which was carried out it can be concluded that the construction of a hydro-
power facility at each site considered is technically feasible.
4_..l.. chartpak. The dam would be restored by placement of concrete to raise
the crest level of the central spillway section to that of the auxiliary spill-
way adj5ining the left bank. The concrete would be faced with masonry on the
downstrEam face in order to retain a uniform appearance. The powerhouse would
be bt.a:lt in the open area below the spillway adjacent to the left bank. The
tailrace would be cut from the powerhouse area back into the river through the
rock ridge that currently exists.
4.1.2 Button Shop. The powerhouse would be located on the left bank immediately
below the eastern dam because the available head could be developed there with
less tailrace excavation than would be the case at the southern dam.
The intake would be set in the area of the original penstock intake and a new
penstock would be routed close to the old penstock line. The tailrace would
discharge directly into the river channel.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES. INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
4 -3
4.1.3 Cookes. The powerhouse would be sited below the main dam on the left
bank. Due to the proximity of the dam to the road bridge, it would not be
possible to site the powerhouse as close to the dam as would be desirable and
hence a short penstock would be required.
4.1.4 Pro Brush. The intake and powerhouse would be located close to the left
bank. A tailrace channel would be cut in solid rock for a distance of about
400 feet downstream to increase the available head.
4.1.5 Smith College. The powerhouse would be sited below the existing gate
structure on the left bank and would utilize the existing gate and pipe through
the dam. Little excavation would be necessary since the existing stilling area
could accommodate the powerhouse. The existing wooden flashboards would be re-
placed by a concrete cap on the dam crest. This would not cause instability in
the structure.
4.1.6 Combined Developments. The proximity of the upper three projects pre
sents an opportunity to combine their development. This would result in reduced
powerhouse and generating equipment costs but the saving would be offset by the
cost of, and the increased head losses occurring in, the longer conduit systems.
Three alternative methods of developing the total head between the Chartpak
headpond and the tailwater below Cookes dam were considered. Alternative I
assumed three separate power plants at Chartpak, Button Shop and Cookes (Cookes
Low). Alternative II comprised separate development at Chartpak, together with
combining the heads of Button Shop and Cookes (Cookes Intermediate). Alternative
III would have only one power facility and would concentrate the head of all
three sites in the powerhouse at Cookes (Cookes High).
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS
4 -4
The development as three separate projects would include the project layouts as
described in Sections 4.1.1, 4.1:2, and 4.1.3. For the Cookes Intermediate
development a penstock would be buried alongside the road from the Button Shop
intake to a powerhouse located downstream of Cookes Dam, using sewer- laying
techniques. For the Cookes High development, water would be diverted from the
river at Chartpak. The penstock would be encased in concrete for the first
350 feet to prevent ice damage and the remainder of the penstock would be buried
alongside the existing road running between the Chartpak and Cookes Dams.
Layout drawings of the Intermediate and High developments, showing the penstock
alignments, are shown in Plate 4 -2.
4..2 Cost Estimates
4.2.1 Capital Costs. The unit prices used to develop construction costs in the
present study were based on direct costs prevailing in the Northampton area in
mid -1978. Unit prices were obtained by increasing the direct costs by 20 per-
cent to allow for contractors' overhead and profit.
The factory prices of the packaged turbine generator units were obtained from
the manufacturer and an allowance of' $100,000 was added for delivery, installa-
tion and commissioning of each unit.
The cost of plant mechanical and electrical equipment was based on experience
with similar work of this nature. The electrical equipment cost includes the
metering, protection and distribution line necessary to tie the plants into the
nearest point on the existing 13.8 kV electricity distribution system in the
City, as specified by the Massachusetts Electric Company.
CURRAN_ ASSOCIAT ES,_INC.__!___ENGINEERS_ AND _P_LANNERS__. NORTHAMP__T_ON, _MASSACHUSETTS
4 -5
POWERPLANT
(INDEPENDENT
DEVELOPMENT
ONLY)
MILL RIVER INTAKE
COOKES DAM
DEVELOPMENT
POWERHOUSE
(INDEPENDENT
DEVELOPMENT
ONLY)
CHARTPAK DAM
DEVELOPMENT
PENSTOCK LAID IN RIVER
AND CONCRETE ENCASED
(HIGH HEAD DEVELOPMENT)
LEGEND:
PENSTOCK
LAID IN TRENCH
UNDER ROAD
EXISTING BUILDINGS
EXISTING ROADS
EXISTING DAMS
POSSIBLE LINES OF
PENSTOCKS
POSSIBLE SITES OF
i POWERPLANTS
PENSTOCK
(INDEPENDENT
DEVELOPMENT
ONLY)
1§1 Ca RI ESSI
100
200
SCALE 1 INCH 200 FEET
BUTTONSHOP DAMS
DEVELOPMENT
400
.POWERPLANT
-1(INTERMEDIATE
HIGH HEAD
DEVELOPMENT)
POWERPLANT
(LOW HEAD
DEV. LOPMENT
ONL
Plate 4 -2: General Arrangement of Combined Development Alternatives
Each capital cost estimate includes an allowance for engineering and Owner's
administration..
A summary of capital costs in mid -1978 dollars, excluding interest during con-
struction, is given in Table 4 -1.
4.2.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs. All four hydro plants which might be
developed are located in a 6.5 mile stretch of the Mill River within the City of
Northampton. It is envisaged that they would be operated and maintained as a
single system and that these tasks would be undertaken by the City's Public
Works Department in conjunction with their other work. Thus, the cost of opera-
ting and maintaiAing the plants was estimated as an incremental cost. Annual
costs, excluding capital repayment, were divided into four categories: opera-
tion, routine maintenance, interim replacement and insurance; and each of these
is discussed below.
The plants would be designed to shut down automatically in case of any major
trouble so that a Visit, say, every second day on average would normally be
sufficient to check on plant operation. During the visit the mechanic would
carry out such duties as adjustment of turbine gates to suit streamflow condi-
tions, check oil and air pressures and bearing lubrication, perform minor repairs
and keep plant records. It is estimated that each round trip visit would take
about five hours. For.the purposes of estimating it was assumed that a total
of 1000 manhours per year would be required for operation of the plants. An
annual payroll cost of $30,000 for 2000 hours, or $15 /hour, was used giving a
cost of time for plant operation of $15,000 per year. A vehicle would also be
required part -time and an allowance of $2000 per year was made to give a total
estimated annual cost of plant operation of $17,000.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS-- NORTHAMP- -TON, MASSACHUSETTS
4 -7
tnr-)
O •I-)
0 H
6
H
H
0
N d> l4
r-I r I M
ul dl M M 11 00
r•I d' i-I I CO N
OO N O N 01
d'
Ln
ul
1/40 0 N 0
r-♦ [1' CO
r1
Lfl N O N
M d'
to lD 0 N 0
r Gr
CO N M M 1 l0 d'
V V d' 1 M M
r•i
O
M r1
V lfl
N
01 O
N N
M
01 N
r♦
(d ao
Ed N
U
a) W U
W a 0
a) x 1.4 a)
l (1) U H
Q H P H W u u 0
co
0
rn
0
I`
H
z
H
O
W
0 m O O M M r- M
N d' lO M u1 CO l0 O
M HI U•) En l0 H
O M 0 in
N L1)
■0
M r•I
0 10 Ln M
N M N 1.0
M M -4
co d'
M
Lfl
V 01
CO CO
CO ON 0 IO lO l d l4
r I M r-I
0 m 0 M
N Lfl �O M ul
M r-I Lfl
0 CO 0 0
N r-I C' 10
M rl
0 m 0 En O cl'
N Lfl lO M Lfl
M -4 Lfl
0
4J ri dP
N 0
0
ro a 0
g 0 g
A U �I
0 O
H W CI).0
O
M Lf)
)I)
N N
CA
Lfl l0
M N
CO N
01 CO
ri
Lfl dl
N
N 00
r-I
O 61 ri
d> O rI
Ln l0
N CO
01 0
N N
N N
01 l0
u1 N
0
0
0
co
0
0
co
4 0
r-I N
-.4 CO
CO 0
r4 CO
r-♦ CO
ro
sT
g
rI
4-+ r1
g
r crr
a1
O a)
4) 0
g 3
0
Oro
cri
Oa
!-I
.4' a)
a)
S
a) •r4
•d tT
a)
0
0
0 4-1
•rl a)
0
b' G
a) al
3
0
a) -1
4
r�l t
—I 0
U
c U
4-I q
rI
ri
r-I
M g
4-)
E
a) 0
m
a)
4J -P
Q4 •rI U)
(I) 0
U
0
C
r
I~ rd
r-1 a)
r-I d-) 4-)
O U) O
rdS
O Cr) a)
N 4)
01 O Q
HI •r4 •rl
I
4 rtl
5 •ri
4-1 r4
0 U
•r1 W x
_a)
rd
A
co 0
O
n•) •ri
r 1
ID
0
4 -8
Routine maintenance of the plants would be required. This would include such
things as cleaning trashracks, replacing minor parts of the equipment, and keep-
ing the plant and grounds clean and. tidy., It was assumed that this would require
a further 1000 manhours at an average rate of $10 per hour giving a cost of time
of $10,000 per year. A vehicle would also be necessary to carry out this work
and, as before, an allowance of $2000 per year was made. In addition, an annual
sum of $6000 was allowed for parts and materials. It was also assumed that a
dragline would be required for several days each year to remove silt from the
intakes and headponds, and an allowance of $3000 was made to cover this cost.
This results in a total annual estimated cost for routine maintenance of $21,000.
Interim replacement would include non routine maintenance of civil works, such
as repair of concrete, as well as replacement of electrical and mechanical
equipment. It was estimated that, on average, about $12,000 per year would be
required to cover this work.
It was assumed that insurance would be carried on the four plants to cover loss
by fire and third party risks. It can be expected that the annual premium for
such insurance coverage would be in the order of $5000.
The total estimate of the annual costs for the four plants, excluding capital
repayment, is $55,000. This represents about 1.5% of the estimated total capital
cost of $3.61 million.
Because of economies of scale which might be expected to occur with the conjunc-
tive operation and maintenance of.all four plants, the corresponding annual cost
for an individual plant would likely be a greater percentage of its capital
cost and might be in the order of $20,000 per project.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSET
4 -9
,.J
J
4.3 Combined Development Alternatives
For the development of the upper three projects the three alternatives were com-
pared on the basis of index energy cost using the corresponding capital costs
developed in Section 4.2.1 and the average annual energy estimates given in
Section 3.0. Table 4 -2 shows the comparison and indicates that Alternative II,
which combines the head at Button Shop and Cookes, together with the separate
development of Chartpak, is the most economic method of developing the head in this
reach of river. Consequently, Alternatives L and III were not considered further
in the present study.
Capital Cost x 10
Chartpak
Button Shop
Cookes
TOTAL
Average Energy (MWh /a)
Chartpak
Button Shop
Cookes
TOTAL
INDEX ENERGY COST
/Av.Ann.MWh)
Table 4 -2: Comparison of Alternative Developments for
Chartpak, Button Shop, and Cookes Projects
Alternative
I II
III
880 880
820
800 1160 2160
2500 2040 2160
850 850
315
680 1140 2080
1845 1990 2080
1355 '1025 1040
4.4 Project Schedule
Plate 4 -3 shows a preliminary schedule for the design and construction of the power
facilities. It was assumed that all developments would be under construction
__C.URRAN_ ASSOCIATES, _INC. _ENGINEERS_AND_P_LANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
4 -10
simultaneously. Work. would begin on the civil construction of all sites at about
the same time. The commissioning of units would begin with Smith College, which
has the least construction work, to allow more time for the additional work at
Cookes and Chartpak.
As shown in Plate 4 -3 a minimum of nine months would be required prior to award
of contracts for detailed design, advertisement for bids, and preparation and
analysis of bids. The contract for the turbine generator units would be placed
early in the year with .delivery of the first turbine runner between six and eight
months later. Electrical equipment would be scheduled for delivery about Septem-
ber. The civil contract should be awarded in the spring, at about the same time
as the major equipment contract, with construction proceeding during the summer.
All civil work, including penstock installation, would be completed by the end of
the year. The powerhouses would be enclosed by early fall in order to allow unit
installation to proceed through the late fall and winter unhindered by the weather.
Units would be commissioned at the various sites at about one -month intervals.
If a decision were made to implement any of the projects, application for a Federal
.Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) short -form license should be made as soon as
possible after the decision to proceed. Also, coordination should be begun with
the federal and state agencies involved in environmental reviews and other aspects
to minimize delays on approvals for the project. By actively involving relevant
agencies early in the licensing process, it is likely that agreements can be
arrived at expeditiously. Barring delays, the licensing could proceed concur-
rently with the design and be completed prior to the scheduled construction start
shown on Plate 4 -3.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS` NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
4 -11
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
ACTIVITY
1
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
0
N
D
J
FM
A
M
J
J
A
S
0
N
D
1
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
ENGINEERING
PHASE I DESIGN
BIDDING
BID EVALUATION
PHASE II DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION
DECISION
TO
PROCEED
PREPARE
Rip EOCUMEITS
SUMMIT
VALUA TION
AWARD
CONTRACTS
PREPARE
DET4ILED
DRAWIIGS
EQUIPMENT
INSTA
LATION
I
CIVIL
WORKS
CONSTRUCTION
SMITH COLLEGE:
CIVIL POWERHOUSE
EQUIPMENT
I
V f�,..
EXCAVATE
AND CONCRETE
S+IITH
O TES
cn
e.e
tOLLEGE
1Nit
1
FAERICAT
AND
DELIVER
ItiSTALL
I
PRO BRUSH:
CIVIL POWERHOUSE
EQUIPMENT
EXCAVATE
AND CONCRETE
o
r
Q 1
r
‘..1
PRO
POWER
EST
BRUSH
FAERICATI
AND
DELIVER
I I
STALL
1 COOKES INTERMEDIATE:
CIVIL POWERHOUSE
PENSTOCK AND INTAKE
EQUIPMENT
1
I
1
1
t
EXCAVATE
AND CONCRE
E
-0
COOKE3
POWER
TEST
EXCAVATE
P�NSTOCK
TREI�H
{I��_`
l
O
CELIVE'
PENSTOCK
INT.
FA3RICA1T
AND
INSTALL
PENSTOCK
DELIVER
I
INSTALL
CHARTPAK:
CIVIL POWERHOUSE
DAM
EQUIPMENT
II
;1
EXIAVATE
AND C
?NCRE "IE
0
1
CHHAAATP
:I
b
FA
EFUREISH
D.M
O TES
IR I CAT
AND
)EL I MR
-0
4 3
INSTALL
Plate 4-3: Preliminary Schedule of Developments
5.0 MARKETING POTENTIAL AND VALUE OF POWER
5.1 Value of Power
During the course of the present study meetings were held with representatives
of Massachusetts Electric Company (MEC), which is the electric utility serving
the City of Northampton, to discuss the possibility of MEC purchasing the power
from the proposed hydro developments' and to discover what price MEC would be
willing to pay for the power. Officials of the utility indicated that MEC policy
is to cooperate in, what they term, "cogeneration projects" and that they would
be willing to buy energy available directly from the Mill River projects at the
prevailing fuel displacement rate (currently 22 mills /kWh). The utility would
give no credit for capacity associated with power purchased directly from the
hydro projects.
The dams and water rights at Chartpak, Pro Brush and Smith College are owned by
industrial and educational establishments which purchase electricity from MEC
according to the appropriate rate schedules. If power from the corresponding
hydro plants were used to reduce purchases by the owners from MEC then the value
of power from these plants would be substantially in excess of the fuel displace-
ment rate. MEC indicated that since the amount of power from the Mill River plants
would be small, use of the output to reduce purchases would not result in the
application of a different rate schedule to these three customers.
Power from the Cookes Intermediate project could not be used to directly serve a
well defined electrical load and, hence, power from this plant was assumed to be
sold directly to MEC at the fuel displacement rate.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
5 -1
A computer program was developed to assist in the calculation of the value of the
average power output from the Chartpak, Pro Brush and Smith College plants. The
program replicates the computation of monthly billings according to the utility's
rate structures applied to each of the three individual owners. The program was
first run using actual monthly peak demand and energy usage from the most recent
year of record, from data supplied by the owners. This established a baseline
annual cost of purchased power for each owner. The program was then rerun with the
peak and average energy potential of each project subtracted from the appropriate
monthly baseline totals to simulate an average billing year with the project in
operation.
For the purposes of this second run it was assumed that the hydro plants could
supply reliable peaking capacity to the owners during the high and medium flow
months of the year. The amount of reliable peaking capacity at each of the three
plants was estimated by reducing the corresponding value of installed capacity to
reflect the likelihood of having to produce peak power at less than optimal con-
ditions. The average monthly energy outputs at each plant were calculated from
the appropriate average annual value using the monthly distribution given in
Section 3.4.
The results of the computer simulation of monthly utility billings for Chartpak,
Pro Brush and Smith College, with and without the hydro plants in operation, are
given in Exhibits 5 -1, 5 -2, and 5 -3, respectively.
In the cases of Pro Brush and Smith College all of the power produced by the
corresponding hydro plants could be consumed by the owners to reduce purchases
from MEC. Therefore, for each of these two projects the value of power was
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
5 -2
C)
0
0
taken as the difference between utility charges for the historical case and the
case with the hydro plant in operation.
At certain times of the year the Chartpak
power than the company could use. It was
portion of the plant output would be sold
ment rate.
project would produce more electrical
assumed that the unusable, or residual,
directly to MEC at the fuel displace-
5.2 Calculation of Direct Project Benefits
The value of power from each hydro plant in this Section is based on the rates and
prices applicable in 1978. In the economic analysis described in Part 6 an infla-
tion factor was applied to give estimates of value in subsequent years.
5.2.1 Chartpak. As discussed in Section 5.1, revenue from the Chartpak project
would derive from two sources. Firstly, that portion of the plant output which
could be used by the Chartpak company was valued at the saving to the company
in purchases from the utility. Secondly, the residual portion of plant output
would be sold to the utility at the fuel displacement rate.
Using the computer simulations shown in Exhibit 5 -1, the total value of power pro-
duced by the Chartpak hydro plant was calculated as follows:
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERS_AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
5 -3
J
Th
Capacity available to meet peak demand 204 kW
Average annual hydro energy output
Portion used by Chartpak company
Residual portion sold to utility
Historical annual utility billing
Simulated billing with average annual
hydro output
Average annual revenue equivalent
Average annual residual energy
Sale price to utility
Average annual direct revenue
Total average annual direct benefits
850,000 kWh
691,000 kWh
159,000 kWh
53,827
23,102
30,725
159,000 kWh
2.2 /kWh
3,498
34,223
5.2.2 Cookes Intermediate. All output from the Cookes Intermediate project was
assumed to be sold directly to the utility at the fuel displacement rate and
the corresponding annual revenue was calculated as follows:
Average annual hydro energy output
Sale price to utility
Total average annual direct benefits
1,140,000: kWh
2.2 /kWh
25,080
5.2.3 Pro Brush. All plant output from this project would be used by the Pro
Brush company to reduce purchases from the utility. The value of hydro power
produced was estimated as follows, using the calculations shown in Exhibit 5 -2:
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
5 -4
Capacity available to peak demand
Average annual hydro energy output
Historical annual utility billing
Simulated billing with average annual
hydro output
Total average annual direct benefits
171 kW
845,000 kWh
$727,560
692,857
31,703
5.2.4 Smith College. Again, all hydro plant output would be used by Smith
College to reduce purchases from the utility. Exhibit 5 -3 was used to calculate
the value of the hydro power from this project as follows:
Capacity available to meet peak demand 106 kW
Average annual hydro energy output 570,000 kWh
Historical annual utility billing $579,957
Simulated billing with average annual
hydro output 558,906
Total average annual direct benefits 21,051
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
5 -5
cc
1
J
cc
z
L
CI
i
0 J
ci
W
z
C4 I
1 7 0 0 N
N M 4 O
44 M
4 O O M
r•1 N P^, P 0
CJ NN 00a
CJN M44
M F)
P N.+00.
CJ
N. M40
M
.1n
N N O O O
1 -1 M 4
M
.V
'J a
0 N N 0 N N M 4 N
N
c N 0 0 0
4 N cr
N 4
M -1NOOa
rdNMPO
.N
N N 0 0 CO
lN M
N N
0 N.
C•lM OO.
N CJ NNN
C1 a a a
0
N
0
a
!n
0
N 0 C) a 1 N
•J 4' 4 '0
.1 C: I P
i
-1 0 i
ClN Mca l a
'.4,4000 1 0
N N M P 0 1 a
.1N
N 0 iA NN OO COON •P
M CJ N N N C1 V 0 N T.
0 N N N N a P M a
C•1 P
01
N 0 40 a 1) C CO 0 Li 0 0 0 0 I
0 O P N N N0 0 Si. I
17 1 i a 0 I
I
'0 0 a N 44 0 CO P 0 a. 0
04 N N NN CO .•4 N•0
N
M4 0 0.100 P0000
C 4 0 -0 N
M N N a 4
N
00 a17 C400 00 MNC
00 ...N0 M .0
.M --I a 4,4
N
NO
O N
N a
N
0 4
Cd O
.M
0 0 C
N a
Cs N N 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0
NN N41O M 0CC
N a M t0
a N N00 1) 0 4N0
...NM 0
NN a 1i .N
a'i C1 O0 T4 0 1 .O
NN Nr•J N aO
TM TM a P b N
0.C•1 ali c.1OO N0 N.0
MO N- 1-1010 4.
`0 N N a 4 N
N
O a0 N M O a
O N0 0.1^0. COMMNN
CO 0.030V
44+-1 Ca'0
N 41 41 4, 1 4, 4 4, 4 44N 4.1"4'1
0 00000 0 0 0 0 0
sq. fa sq. sq. s, .4 .4.4 .4
0
17
M
4
a
c
N
O
P
N
KJ
7
cJ
N
n
4
i
i
1 !1 i
no a 4 CJ O O 0 0. 0 1 40 1
'MM N N CJ 0 N Nn a !1
1i n. i 4 I3 a
IM 11 M I
I I
I
1
I I
In V 0.N N0O .00 0^10 1 P II
OC. 4 4 1 4, 4 0 I M R M 1
4 ..0. I II a
M II I
I ii
I
!t
ii I
."0 aN 44 00 .O N 1 C. 0
0 .0 NN -,NO CM I !t I
0
N ..0. 0 I 17 !t 0 1
T. 1 M u C•
!i I
I
I
I
I
3 3 3 Sa
N 14 14
J 0
W i 3 W
C4101 0
O
CC I I v O 1 0 W 0 0 0 0 0
Z 40 0 40 Z I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40
Z 40 0 1 d M 4
0 1i 1 CO 1 +A 0 a
I ,-i i N lU r i i 4 L,
..1.4-. i 40
L I 1IJ X XXOI .,J t WCCX >C X Ci
O 40 W 1ZX 11 CCW 1111 ZXXXX
I F- 0 0W 0
.10 I to 40
O 1 0 S. Z L.
z
i-. V ...4 74 0 0 r.
a. I N
W I
1') *M
Ca I
>7! M
N*MVN
M V
"I I
z
**ONO
>71 N*MM
CI
71
1 ..000
1
I
.4
N N*MM
O 74 74 C) 0 0
43 N*M43
74 74 0 0 Cs
O N 74 n. cr cr
-11.1
**000
al*MVM
yy
O **COO
N*MV.a
141 **0*0
N*MN•
**0*0
11 N*MN
I-
C .0
1- U
0
NI
.7.77
*NN**
N****
0
0
,4
M 0) 14')
Y
r-
r- r- r-
14414 43 x
La w w
43144'
<r
N .1 Gs C4 CO Ch 0 0 0 0 0
Cq ,4 e-t N V
1-4
1)
..0M010
N'-.MN IV
C4
as N 00 000
Tr Tr
N NO CS N Ca M 0 o o
N Cs 74 74 74 N M
1.4 Cs N
VN chnc.imm 00000
074 ***NM M a
n yye.. n n
y
Nn
ON
*a.
00 CsONMM 0) 04)00
0, 74 ***NM V
N **a. V n
y
0 0 0 1414) N 00 cr m 00 0 0
Ti T4 r4 N In Ct.
..0 M
0.0)14400 nomoo
***NM M M
yyo. n
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 000 o 0, .00000
0
00000 00000
0 0- 0 N Ca 00000
,4 0 1.4 T4 141
74
my o.nrqmy 1410000
*N ***Nsa 014
74
2
0.-014' 0'14')'03' 00NsON MMMNN
mymny 01*00
MMNNN NNN**
0 00000 00000
333
0 N
0
0
0 0
00 0 0 0000
0 000 0 0000
o o o y al In c
0 0 s s 0 0
01' 0 V pww w W
C.10,00
LI 1-
L X X X X X CI M LI M
M. WE-IL:L.3U
Ce.
LZZZ ZXXXX
LI
N I
M I
0 I
0
r..
N
M
41
.<1 M
0' 14
11
O 4 C
0
0 4
0 4
4
C 114 N
C 1 N
N 4 M
0 H
m n 4
H 0
N1
.1
1
01
CH
1
I
M
0
0
0
4
4.1
0)
0)
0
0)
4
0'
,1
0
4
0)
1
1
Q)
cd
0)
W
3)
co. En
7
s
1
20 I
07 1
t
0 i W
z
z
W
U
W
0
N n i. 0 c 47 •O
47 M c N. 4) Cl M
04 CO 0 .4 C 47 0 y C•!
M C' 47 •O .-1
04 4
0
iii M 1 N 47 a c47.O 0 0 IN IX 11
Cd D M 1 •O 0 M C•1
NI Q• 1 4? 0 -1 -1
i 04 -1
D D 0
04 E')
O 0 0
M
47 D Ps
M
O 0.O
O 0 a
M D
M
s-
o
•O
M a
9
n s-
O •O
co M
M co M
M C
04)
nl
Z5 'o a
M M
0 0
W
Cr,
co 0 C
V1 47
i• DC
Cd
0f
0 0
O .•a
D
4 C
4; Cd
-i
1'41 Ps
-J INa
M-1 M
-i -1 a
O 470 C' 47D C crs Ps
C Ps 47 Cd 47 C Cd •O Cd
4i ti Cs 01 04 n (lam .r
1 147
•O 47 O c 41 0
C1 Cd n CC: !s C
04 47 c „-1C
4) -1 i\ -1 r..I
C4
b
Cl
n J
1
04
4)
c
so
C4
CI
41
a
a
c
47a C470
C0)• Cd I.C'
-O D !'7-
'd --1
0 0 7 470
0 01 C
•O a M-1C
D .-1 -i
C! ,-1
O 0 47 47 47 0..
.o. 47 47
M 01 47 M C3 ^1 L71
D a '-1 C M -1
M M I C
47 0
n
QI •O
1 ;d
47 47
.1 j\."
ti ,4 O
0 0 P47O
co 0. CJ C
0 c M C
-1 M .ti H .ea
04 Ti
C4 D M 0
sO 47 co
01 n M
•O c C1
•d DC
v) 47 47
Cd is
•O c'
0 C
:•a
47 M
r
Cd
47 a C 47 I\ 0 .4 .4 co
CO C011PM +D
4) 0 0 1 0 0 •0 0
-1 -4.0 0 'l') M
N
C 47a
CJt\
=4a
-1-1 D
0 Os P1 sO Cs
aa. 0:"
M 0 D 47 I ZS
47 74 I M
1 47
04 C4 n•ps
0 41 C, CJ
Ca asl
47 M MT1
D0M I\ Q'C1c
O 0 C C'1 •O •O --1
0 404.0 a 0M
C•I C1 C1 .ti .-1 4 .-1
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 C
:Av-4 -4 -4-4 •R
3 3 3 3
L L_"L
0 X.
0
3 7: 77
0 W _0 0
1 Fl 0 0 0
i 0 4- 0 110'
47 0
.r I 0 7 L L L LL it
M. 1 u
W �1XL i7 J En 4.0
J I J<X X XXX
0 W
:O
I t
II 1
a '1 a
•O I! 0
•O I! Cd
M 11 a
sO H '0
11 C0
a Cd 0 -1 I! n
47 M a 11
M DI\ M II •47
',2 1 n u 0 0
47 II •O
1 1 W
a .4 .4 C a 1 'v7 t v
0 11 0 a 1 N 0'
M D 0 0 1
t: c0 i 1 N! 0
4? I •O
1
11
a. Os' 0 D 11 C
0 M c 4) I! D
M a 0 11 04
•O C M D !1 M .J
4) 11 •O 1
t
II
0 0 0 c 11 a! P-
CD Q M 9 y v
1\ c I! -1
0 M 01 !I i\
I-
I C 'i C 1
11 I
^d •O .O
i it 1
+r to tl C
D a CI z 11 01
M 0 .4 1 1 1 47 1
1 so 0 C C c( M 'I
I!
Il
0 -100 i a 7 4 1
47 ,-1 O. II I
M •O M -O 1
f! C 0u 9 0
cs II
II
U
11
I!
a
41
r
47
0 ,n
i
3
i sO
C1
D
47
11
L
W
z
L1
0
0
CC
s-I
,0
sQ
eC
j i
I
La 1
I
0
0 I
W
O
0
z
w
0
0
z
7
I-
0
0. O0- 10. alb 1-47n
I. M 1- I C4 NI Co n M
0 0 0 I CO 1-C4 0
M 1-. 1- -t 0 y --I O
C'! y
0. 0 0.
N 11 C
O 07 0
M• 1-
0 O .y
M -4
7
CO so
Cd M
O M
47 CO N.
1-
C b
O M 0.
M O
M 1-
O 0 .0
O M 0.
M 07 11
M 1-
in 0'.
04 NI 01
Q
M C
a 0 b
C•! M 0
O O b
O 4
f
0 0 0 1 4 1 CC! 1-4740
01 1147 1 CO 4 n 04 N. -4
O b C .0 0- M -4 47
04. M 1 c .-4 a .y .-4 a
1 04
I
I
I
O 0 N. 1 N.
Cl to C'! 1 47
-4 CO -4 a
M 1-
0. 0 0.!
M 0.
0. CO 37
M NI
0. 0 0
C4 M
14 co -4
i'! M
O N.
0 47
O .4
M 4.
CO
A
H
1-
Q
C. P01 1-47N
N. 1- a C.1 I\ 11
O 47 11-4.0
1- ,-I N. 0
04 -1
N
O b
CA
ti b
0 Tr 011 Ci n 4
47 N. 47 41 C'!
47 -1 .y .4 -4 01
b C. 0410 0. -4 •00 1 -0
Cl 0\ N \1- 7110 1 0
CA 47 11 -41- 11 047 I i.
47 41 N. Nyy b 1- C.1 1 Q
C! I 0
I
1
CA NC•l 04 N. c
CA !:7 1- M .4 P
47 -4 O --I -•4 y
CI .-1
Cs I. b P 47 04
47 C C 04 1-
0. 47 0 11 .-4
1- -1 4 O
C.I -I
4
0
1-
C•!
N.
1-
1-
-4 C'1
O M
y y
u
a!
0
1-x1
O
4p
0
C]
L I
u
I
4307 ')470.
N. 43 CA N. Cl
C47 11.-4 -4
.7 .-4 ..4 0
C4 .-t
1-471
N 1. O.
M -1 M
�..a
c 47 43
C! !..-1
M -4 47
1-47 Cl 0.000
04 N. Tr 0111 I
I. 0 1- 1
.-I .44 0 40 M
ti i
1- 47 0
C•! I. 0.
M 44 04
CO 0 M
1 0 1
40 M 0
C •1 C4 C'1
0 0 0
-4Y 4R
M i.O0
110 al
0. 47 M
n1- Cl
M I. M CO
M 0a 47
0. 41 .4
47 er 1-
470. 410.
0. a-IM
MO 07.4
471-
C 1- n b
1-;'l 40 C.
.4
b 471-
0.-+n o
47 M ,l,
M O 47
1- M
"4 0 0
47 N.
C C
„C'1
-Y 44 N.
47 co 47 Y1
c.. --4
471-MM
0.411 0
C b N.
M CO
47 C M
M CJ C
N a 1- v4
1- 4r
1-MM 04
\C 04
C•! 40 40 .r
ON C M
O 0 O O
44 -4 44 1*
3 3 3 3
0 0 0 1 0 1
0 Z 0 0
11! 00 0 000 0
Z 0 0 0 0 0 0
0!- 0 •..4 04 11 c 47
0 to 47
C ..I CC X 0 LI to CO rr
J 0=4 La CJ L4 i CJ C.,
Z X X X X X
0
in
M,
47
0
1.7
47
Tr
47
Cs
CA
b
CO
rs
Cs
Cs
P.
47
47
CO
b
O
M
b
47
M I
47 1
-I
a
47
47
0
a
M
0
b
Cs
c
r
N.
47
a
m.
-o
1!
1 CA
II M
I! a
1 a
11 47
O
0 4
40
b
r.
b
0
b
1-
47
N.
1-
17 1
47 1
C0 1
CA I
b I
1- I! r
I! i\ 1
is
C I! 1-
1
04
N.
47
v4
M
47
47
0
1n
0
{,C
T
U
J
6
1-
0
C7
CC
z
La
LA
X
La
0
W
0
z
z
0
CI
u
s
W
lL
0
CO 0 M
0 Cl CJ
O CZ NO
Cl M
Q O M
O M NJ
CO 0.O
CJ M
0 O
r. 0 03
CJ
O .-1
14 0
M
0 n
•0 M 0•
40 02 M
C•4 M
03 0
0 MC4
co 0 43
C! M
O O .'4
CJ M n
47 CO -I
CJ M
C4 0 N.
C. M NO
0 47
C4 M
03 M .•1
03
Cl M
O 0
4 I re 67
I I C3 C" I 0 I C! CI
.3 0 N.
n J
47 ^J
C4 u M
'J 0 .i
C•! M N.
In 0
Cl M
0
M .4
.4
W 13
03 I
0.
Q
Z I 0 0 0
0 I Z 0 47
I Q 47
O I Z l
Z I W L'+ 0
Q 0 UI c.
I W C4 C;
I J 033-
401 1 W t` X
Q 10
I I- 0
M
47
0
M
0
0
1'
1
P
M
n
c
3"
M
c
0
.•I
0
0
M
47 47
^J 47
C4
Cl
03
43 CA
N1 NO
4
Cl
C4 •3
M 0.
M
01 •O
0
.403
y
•0
•0 0
.1 0.
0
CJ
0f
0 4'.
.C1
re
C .3 O]
I c
O
C•J
03?
C•i
CJ •O
0 41
.4
C4
0 0
M
.4 0
Cl
470
CJ I. M
M .y
47 0
C•! N. Cl
M .4
.i y
47 4 0
CJ 1 M
M .-1 ,4
-1 .-1 0.
47 31
1 N. 47
M .4 C•J
.r -40
<C 47 C4
^4 C,
M -4
.i -1 CO
47
N M
M .4
.•i .•I a
.4 0? P 4731
O O? CJi47
O 0 M .•I 01
•4 co •4 03
H
47
C41.M
M..4 C4
'4 -4O
C 47 •0
'0 N. 0
M .4 .-t
-1
?47G.
0
I .4 0.
?47
Cl N. 0
M .4?
CO
C 47
C•1 .47
M -4 C!
H .i0
.4 O C'J0
..4 .4 N
-1 4
47 ,r T4
0 I. 0
-4 .•-1 `O
47 -1
CJ 47 •0 O
N. 0 Cl
C•1 0 N.
41 M
43 0
41 CO MI
O .O ?0.
M M
M 0 4'70
P
0.
47 M
-4 0 CJ 0
'4
VI C
47 C
0 T 0 0
4733
d
M
CO M 0
41 CO
M 0 0•
47
47- 0.
C•! 0
0 C
c 31 CJ
•O0' 10
47 •O
C M i
O CO 031 1.
O 47 CJ 40 •O
'0 43 M 0, Cl M M
ti ^J 31 C•1 y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 3Y `A A 4
0
47
47
Cs
7
CJ
No
C4
Cs
n
47
O
0
0
CI
O
v
.043 01 N.
031 43 I Cs
'0 0• I y
1' M
i
C•! ^J n 0. I C•1
0 VIn47 I CJ
C1.0. NO I
i7 MM I O
1
1
0
M
Y
Cs
0.
CJ
'3-
31
0
0
0
Cl
C•J
0
47
a
V'
43
-4
47
Cl
M
c
er
M
c
.4
CJ
03
3"
A
0`
Cl
47
3 3 3 3
44•C44 1 4
0 N. N.
0
0 2 S Z
3 Z 0 0
W O O O O
0 0 0 0 0
C J M?4;
0 00 470 0.
47 1.1. U. U. J. U.
9t 0 O 0 0 0
W i.'. X0 CO 0 0 7
G`4 Ul CO 113 CO m
CU -J iC W ZX XXXX
Q W Q
CO
0 CO
CI
W
Y
Q
J
O
z
rn
W
U
W
A
N
z
L
CO
uJ
z
7
z.
I
Z
03
L
z
x
ps
O M 40
n N C
Cd M
9-.1 T\
O M 47
N N C•
•0 O o
tel M 41
n 0 40
Cd M
O 0 .H
C•,
L7 05 '-I
C4 M
c or,
•0 M T
•0 CO M
C•, 11
0 0 M
O C4
^1 M
C 0 C
-4 M 0
C• N O
M M
•O 0 0
•0 M 0
•O CO C•
C4
Q 0 C•
M 0
<r N 0
C•J M
O N
O 40
0 -4
M Jt
N
5z
W(3
N l
L
I
I R O
Lt I Z
1 0 10
0 L
Z 1 1334I CD
1 A CO
W :C Ul
W I LO ;-4 J
0 I CC t X
Y
I 0 x
I.!- J
0
CS
C•
0
M
P
C•
n
CI
N
c
M
in-
s-
c)
M
CJ
c
C
M
co
M
-0
C•9-•
N
9-d 47
CJ M
0.-4
C• 05
M C,
Yr
C4
,0
-t 0
M N
C4
00' C• 1.0 CJ
N N C4 iNc
0 u0 M -4 CO
4 0. -1 ,.CJ
NC'
C '0
H C'
C,
C• •O 0 C• 41 0 .4 0• 40 0
M 4 3 0 C•, N. Cl 40 M
0 Cs NI M .405 •040
M N. .•4 9-•M
ti
Cd •0
O M
-f N
-a, O.
C1 •0
Cil
O C'
,4
C• 409"
1 N. 0.
M .40.
C• 47
M I.C.
M '4 0`
C• 47 •O
C•J N M
M 4=4
r�
c 40 M
C4 r. 40
CO
c 4') 0
C•1 N M
M C•
,4 -1
C" 40O M 9-
Cd ps 40 (1 O CO
M =405 .y CS
4 01 40
C• 40 0
C•1
M-40
N
'O 40 01 0
0 47 N
O, 0. 40
40 M -4
•040'•00
0 47 CO
C1 0. ts,
40 M -4
CJ 40 N. 0
CJ O C•
40 M
•0 0. CI '0
4705 MC'
N•0 c N.
C• M M
M O 40O
M 0 0
,-1U M
47 M
01.0
M
.4 .M
6i C•
'-i C• 40 0
40 M 0
•04041
c
0 co 0M 9C•
0 c 405 C•J •0 'O-+
0 •0 MO 0. C'M1'S
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 3 3 3
L •L 'L •L
i 0
W I
i 0 ..7.3 T Sx
L 1 3 Z
1 L W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 E 0 0 0 0
1 0 y CA VI C 41
CO I CD 10
0 0 0 0 0
iri I CO
�W v 0 W L X 07 CO 01 t0
Z I :.tl 0 !-1 W J C.i L'
W I L O 1 03 Z X X X X X
1 W
1
M 1 =!3. J
05
C•,
C
9-
0
M 11
•0 !1 P
N I P
G l n
v 'i c-
.4
"0
C
C
0.
0
0
O
O 0 I 0 0. CJ C' 40. M CJ ..4 0. 0 k 40
M C• I Cl C.1 C4 (.i\ 03 05
M 0 0• 19 0 40 M '0 40 9- O 1 05
CJ CJ I M -i 05 .-1 n C M y 1 I.
T. 1 I
I k
c 0 N. 1\ 0• C' 40 .0 N C. M N I C4
0. M N •1 I.III 0• C M C3 I
40 0 d l M n M -4 40 C. I 1 c
CJ M C• ,4 M' -r y co C• in M r N.
C4 k v
I
1
O O .y 0 0 c 40 N 1.4 •C, Ps 0 I O
0 M •0 C` C• =4 Cl k. M C4 05 C• i
C• N 0 0 .-f •0 M A n 40 9-1 1 43
EN M M T. C) -+T. 1■ 9-•M 9-.1 y
w is
40
Yr
4
CO
c
0
0
47
C4
0
y
4')
A
M
0`
C
0
0.
D
47
40
0
W
J
O
0
6.0 ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFIT -COST ANALYSIS
6.1 Summary of Capital Costs and Power Outputs
The following table summarizes the results of the estimates of capital costs and
power potentials. As discussed in Section 4.3, it was assumed that the heads
at Button Shop and Cookes would be combined.
Table 6 -1: Summary of Capital Costs and Power Potentials;
Installed Average Capacity Capital Index Costs
Development Capacity Energy Factor Cost Capacity Energy
kW MWh /a x 10 /kW /Av.Ann.MWh
Chartpak 235 850 0.41 880 3740 1040.
Cookes Int. 265 1140 0.49 1160 4380 1020
Pro. Brush 200 845 0.48 800 4000 950
Smith College 120 570, 0.54 770 6420. 1350
All Projects 820 3405 0.47 3610 4400 1060
Note: Costs are in mid -1978 dollars and represent all facilities required to tie
plants into the existing 13.8 kV distribution system in the City. They
include allowances for engineering and Owner's administration but exclude
interest during construction.
The anticipated useful life of the projects as used in the benefit -cost analyses
was taken to be 50 years. This is based upon a 50 -year life for all equipment
and new civil works, allowing for interim replacements in the operating costs.
On the basis of the field inspections, described in Appendix A, it is anticipa-
ted that the remaining life of the existing structures is in excess of 50 years.
6.2 Feasibility and Benefit Cost Methodology
Economic feasibility of each of the four Mill River projects was. assessed.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS
6 -1
in terms of annual cash flow projections and present -value investment analysis.
A program was developed to allow for testing of the sensitivity of project
feasibility to changes in cost variables. Cost variables were manipulated to
represent the effects of alternative potential federal or state programs to
assist in the development of low -head hydroelectric facilities. Criteria pro-
vided for evaluating project feasibility included overall benefit -cost ratio,
cost per kilowatt -hour, investment benefit -cost ratio, internal rate of return
on investment, and first year of positive cash flow, as well as the annual cash
flow projections.
Sample financial analyses for the combined projects, as well as for each indi-
vidually, are presented in Exhibits 6 -1 through 6 -5. The projections are
carried through a 50 -year investment life cycle, preceded by two years of
engineering and construction. Cash flow is shown annually by column for the
first 10 years, and by 5 -year intervals thereafter. Present value of cash flow
categories is indicated in the column on the far right.
Elements of the financial analysis include the following:
A. Operating and Maintenance Costs. 0 &M costs, as determined in Section 6.4,
reflect significant economies of scale. While annual 0 &M costs for the com
bined projects is projected to be $55,000, the annual cost for each project
individually is estimated to be $20,000. Inflation is included according
to a rate specified as an input variable.
B. Value of Power. The phrase "value of power" is used as a label signifying
the value to the user of the plants' electrical output, evaluated at the
cost of purchased energy. The inflation rate applied to -this cost is
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS -NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
6 -2
specified as an input variable.
C. Sales Revenue. All electricity generated by the Cookes Intermediate project,
and residual electricity from the Chartpak project, would be sold to Mass.
Electric Co. at the "fuel displacement" rate of 22 mills /kWh. The inflation
rate is specified as input.
D. Net Operating Revenues. Total cash flow income (e.g., benefits) less O&M
costs equals net project operating revenues. This value is the cash flow
available on an annual basis to repay the total capital invested in the
project, plus provide for a return on invested capital. Part of this return
on invested capital accrues to lenders as debt interest payments, and part
accrues to the owner(s) as return on equity after payment of income taxes.
R. Return on Investment. This figure indicates the annual, return on invested
capital as the ratio of annual net operating revenues to total initial
investment. It is a measure of the attractiveness of an investment rela-
tive to alternative uses of capital (on an annual basis).
F. Interest. It is assumed for purposes of analysis that the major portion
of capital cost is financed through a corporate or municipal sinking fund
bond issue. Annual interest payments on the face value of the bonds, over
a twenty year term typical of municipal financing, are shown in the examples.
The interest rate is a specified input variable.
G. Sinking Fund: A sinking fund with level annual. payments is established to
provide for repayment of bond issue principal at the end of the financing
term. Interest earned on the sinking fund is a specified input variable.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES,_INC. ENGINEERS_AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
6 -3
H. Cash Flow Before Tax.. Net income less debt retirement (interest and sinking
fund payments) equals cash flow balance. This is, in effect, the "profit"
from the project, although the true profit for a corporate entity would
deviate from this value somewhat depending on the details of accounting
practice with regard to depreciation and other factors.
I. Cash Flow After Tax. For the Pro Brush and Chartpak projects, gross cash
flow income is assumed to be subject to the prevailing corporate income tax
rate (46%). "Profit" is reduced accordingly.
J. Equity. Equity is the capital supplied by the owner, as distinct from the
capital supplied through financing (e.g.., bonds). Categories of potential
equity investment include:
Engineering and Administration. These are the "development costs"
incurred during the pre- operational phase of the project. They
include primarily engineering fees and the time spent by the owner's
administrative and technical staff, and are shown in years D1 and D2.
Construction Interest. Interest must be paid on the loan used to
finance progress payments to the construction contractors. If the
owner pays this interest, it is shown in year D2.
-Dam Value. The existing dam and the land under it is contributed to
the project by the owner. If this structure is deemed to have any
current value, or if any potential value is foregone by virtue of
its use in the project, then such value (less the present worth of
ultimate salvage value) is part of the owner's equity investment.
Other. This category is included to account for any miscellaneous
or contingency expenses to the owner. An example would be fees
paid to the bond underwriters. Also included in this row would
be any funds supplied directly by the owner toward the cost of
civil works or generating equipment:
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC. ENGINEERS AND`PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON,
6 -4
K. Annual Return on Equity. Annual return on equity is the ratio of annual
:_after- -tax cash flow balance to owner's initial,, equity in the project. It
is a measure of the attractiveness of a project from the owner's point of
view (on an annual basis).
L. Investment Benefit -Cost Ratio. This ratio consists of the present value of
total net operating revenues divided by the present value of total invested
capital, using the current Water Resources Council's standard discount
rate of 6 -5/8 percent. Present value analysis is useful in that it allows
future benefits to be rationally related to present costs, and further
allows for comparison of alternatives ;which have different investment
patterns. However, a value greater than one does not necessarily imply
that a project is desirable. The ratio is more appropriately viewed as
a composite of all of the annual returns on investment, and can only be
evaluated in comparison to other options for the use of capital. On the
other hand, a project with a ratio less than one is not a likely candidate
for investment, unless public policy considerations dictate such a decision.
M. Return on Investment (Internal Rate) The internal rate of return on an
investment is a measure of the economic "profitability" of an investment.
The rate is computed as the discount rate which yields a present value of
all benefits equal to the present value of all costs. This rate is then
evaluated by comparison to the standard federal discount rate (6 5/8
N. Overall Benefit -Cost Ratio. This measure is similar to the investment
benefit -cost ratio, except that net operating income is broken down in the
computations: O&M costs are calculated in the denominator with costs, and
benefits are strictly revenues.or their equivalent. This method is more
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
6-5
typically used in..evaluating public sector projects, and corresponds to the
meaning of the term "benefit-cost ratio" in general usage.
0. Cost per Kilowatt- Hour. Present value of total costs (capital plus O&M)
divided by total electrical output over the fifty year life cycle of the
plant gives an average overall cost of electrical generation per kilowatt-
hour over the life of the plant. This present value cost should be used
only for comparison among the individual projects and cannot be compared
directly with "the prevailing current price of electrical energy.
6.3 Sensitivity Testing
The design of the program used. to perform the economic analysis described above
allowed for a wide range of simulations to model the economic effects of a
variety of project conditions and potential assistance programs. The possibilities
demonstrated in these tests include the following:
A. Inflation. Separate input values are specified for inflation rates relative
to 0 &M costs, value of power plant output to user, and sales price of power
to the utility. Consistent with the basis of the federal discount rate, the_
analysis is in constant or "real" dollars. Hence the inflation rates speci-
fied are differentials over and above the prevailing general or "monetary"
inflation rate.
B. Financing Arrangements. The effects of extended financing terms, and of
higher and lower bond and sinking fund interest rates, were tested by
changing input variables appropriately.
C. Equity /Debt Ratio. A test where 25% of construction cost is supplied by
the owner (thereby reducing the amount to be financed) demonstrated the
sensitivity of project feasibility to a maximum plausible equity contribution.
6 -6
CURRAN-ASSOCIATES,-INC. -ENGINEERS-AND-PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS
Conversely, a simulation was run involving only token equity participation
by the owner.
D. Annual O &M Costs. Tests were run with O &M costs substantially lower than
projected to simulate the possible savings to the owners from use of existing
technical staff and equipment for project operation.
E. Development Grants. Engineering /administration and construction interest
costs were removed from the financial analysis to simulate grants for
project pre- operational planning and development.
F. Loan Guarantees. The market interest rate for long term debt was reduced
by. 2% to simulate the effect of a loan guarantee program
G. Tax Advantages. Income taxes were reduced from 46% to 25% to simulate
the effects of such programs as accelerated depreciation or an investment
tax credit.
H. Construction Grants. Input specifications allow for removal of any desired
portion of construction cost from the financial analysis to simulate the
effect of a construction grant program. Tests were run with 25% and 50% con-
struction grants.
6.4 Results
The results of economic analysis for "baseline" projections (i.e., with the
"most probable" values for input variables) are those shown in Exhibit 6 -1 for
all projects jointly and in Exhibits B -1 through B -4 (Appendix B) for individual
projects. Neither the four projects combined, nor any projects individually,
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC ENGINEERS NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
6-7
EXHIBIT 6-1
FINANCIAL
PROJECT-comazwo1
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF LOW-HEAD HYDROy MILL RIVER, MORTHAMPTONv MASS.
LISTING OF zwpuT TA
swGn/Aomzw COSTS, YEAR Di (w*)= 200.00
swon/AomzN COSTS, YEAR o2 (K*)= 280.00
SOURCE OF swon/*onzw COSTS= OWNER
CONSTR. INTEREST ooaT. YEAR oo (K$)= 110~00
SOURCE OF cowSTn^ INTEREST COSTS= OWNER
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST (u*/Yn)= 55^o0
VALUE OF EXISTING DAM (K$)=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY' YEAR o1 <n*/=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY, YEAR ou (K$)=
35o^oo
20.00
20.00
POWER AvAzLoaLs'rnom HYDRO (Kw*/Yn)= 3405000,
vALus OF PLANT OUTPUT (AS OF YR o1)(x*/Yn)= 83~*8
EXCESS .ENERGY FROM HYDRO (xw*/YR)= 129
SALE PRICE FOR EXCESS swsnoY (c/xw*/= u.uo
TOTAL CONSTR. COST (w/o swon/AzmzM)(x$)= 313'0.00
CONSTR. COST TO BE FINANCED (x*0= 3130.00
oowoTn^ COST FROM GRANT (K*/~ 0
CONSTR. COST FROM OWNER (K$)= 0
YEARS FOR CONSTR. FINANCING= 20
DEBT INTEREST RATE (%/YR)=
SINKING FUND INTEREST RATE (z/Yn)=
CORPORATE TAX RATE
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE', 0 M /%/Yn/=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ENERGY SAVED (%./Yn)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ELEC. SALES (%/Yn)=
CALCULATED DA TA
o
p^oo
26.00
2.00
4.00.
4.00
AMOUNT BORROWED, YEAR oz (x*)= 0
AMOUNT smnnowso, YEAR o2 (x*)= 0
TOTAL BORROWED, YEAR 1 TO 50 /K*/= 3130.00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR o1 (K$)= 570,00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR ou <x*>= 980.00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR 1 TO 50 (K*Y= 4110.00
F—
U
w.i
0
07
0
0 1
O
07
C•!
0 1 O 0 0 07 1,7
N1 I 0 0• 0 07
0
ON
0
i
i
sl
67
-•J
0
L4!
0
O 0 1,7 -1 „4 c o 19 C1 r
c rI 0 ,-4 0' 0 C1
0' N C O. c 07 0 0 NI
NJ N ,-4 0•1 M -i
I
lt7 ,-1 0 M N'
0 0 0 M 07 0 0 0 0 0
1 1.1 CJ 07 •i 0 0
,-1 O C1 0 '0 NO VI
J., C -1 C
M O 1 CO
NO 07
A
'-i
M
0
0
.0 10 n 0 r1
0 C -1 NO Ill
i-1 In y C M
L*' CJ NO CO 0
0 0 O. N. 0
N) M r1
07
O ri
C l Pd
0 P 0 n
07 07 -i M a
,-1 C•I
c i' N.
-a rJ c
C C rI NO -a
NO
N
07
L "4
a P al
-1
ra c a n.
O 1,1 al
y
i
-1 -i
0 NI r•! Cd
O M C lA0
0 NI 07 '0 0 177
07 0 M M r'
y 4
O M M C
b P CJ NO 0 C•I
07 Q• M rJ t1' n
-1
07 0 .4 NO r1
l) C• M NI v '0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 O 0 0 0 1 0 CA 0
I
1 1
1 1•
i iC D 0 0 1 Z I
1.0 I L I L I 1
I 0 Z. 0 ;.;1
LI I C? 0 1
L;! I t!! I 0 I
Z I r 4- I I
W I 4. 0 ::J 1
O.I J 0) Z I .t I
H
H
0'
M
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0. 0
O 0 0
v NO
C 0
07 C
b
C CJ
NI
!7 `L)
0 n
C•J �•1
C•7 P
C1 Y!
CJ '4
r C'1
NO NO
07 •O -f M
'-i
I 1
0 N 0 0
1
07 '0 -'1 NI r•1
P! M NI CJ
1
NI al
07 -0 -1 CJ
CI M NI
0 C•1 ON ON
07 NO ,4 NI :'I
M M C1 CJ
I
0 rJ
07 NO M M
NJ M NI CJ
I I
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0
O 0 0 O
O O O O
O 0 0 O
o o 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0
O o 0 0 0
0 O
0 0 0 0 0
0 -a r1 0 0
al NO -i M M
Ni M rJ .J
1
0 0 0 0 0
O 0 rJ NI r•!
07 O 1 c C
04 M Cd C•J
I I
0 0 0 0
0 :-1 CJ 07 07
07 NO c c
CJ. i rJ NI
1 1
O 0 0 0
0 0 1
L N P 1
o 0 0 0 0 0 4
r
Z 0 0 0 i~ 1
i I N n 07 C i
W :G 1 LI
.0 f X I 0 J
1 Z 0 3! 0 X a 1 "4 t [:i G 0!
L I 1 z
L i a 1. 0 1 I r I, 0
i L 1 W I- 4 1 41 L. 1 0 C 0 r 1
1 C :4 i- 111 CC 1
1 I Lai 0 0 1 Cr: 41)
0 1 1- al I L:. 0 I 10 Z Z 1- i- 1
I Z 0 1 Li Lt 0 I Z O C0 0 al 1
10 1 it) 0 110 <0 La i W Ci 10 44
Overall Investment, 1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio (t) Cost Ratio! Cash Flow
uawa.t-a.au
i.gau aa34V LS' 6S'Z 99'
11 i ZS' 69'Z b9'
i9• IS'Z 89'
11
11
ai
11
LS' 6S'Z 99•
f LS' 6S'Z 99•
LS' .6S•Z 99'
LS' 6S'Z 99'
11
LS' 6S'Z 99'
11 Z9' Z1 °Z TL'
i79' VV'Z OL'
ZL' 6Z'Z SL'
Z6' 6S'Z b6'
L£' 6S'Z IS
6S'Z 9L'
OS' 6S'Z T9'
LS' 6S'Z 99'
LS' 6S'Z 99
Input Input
Baseline Test
Value Value
ITV
aA Oi'
JA O£
'aA Oz
Et'
TO'
VZ'
$20K
5K
$12.5K
Sensitivity Tests
BASELINE PROJECTION
i
1. Inflation (O$M)
i
2. Inflation (Value of
Output)
3. Inflation (Elec-
tricity sales)
I
4. Financing Term
5. Debt Interest
6. Sinking Fund
Interest
7. Equity /Debt Ratio
2s W$o IEnuuV '8
tn
a.
CURRAN- ASSOCIATES,-INC.— -ENGINEERS- AND PLANNERS-- NORTHAMP_TON,.- MASSACHUSETTS
6 -10
Table 6-2
.J
0
show a benefit -cost ratio greater than .73 or an internal rate of return on
investment greater than the specified discount rate. The two, most favorable
projects from an economic standpoint are Chartpak and Pro Brush,.but neither
of these would be attractive as corporate investments without substantial
public subsidies.
6.4.1 Sensitivity Analysis. Summary results.of the sensitivity analyses are
shown in Table 6 -2 and Tables B -1 through B -4 in Appendix B. These tables show.
the effects on five criteria for investment feasibility from alterations in pro-
jected values of eight input variables. Baseline results for the five criteria
are shown in each table as a benchmark for comparison.
The findings indicate that the investment criteria are quite sensitive to the
projected rate of inflation in utility rates (as reflected in the value of
plant output to the user) relative to general inflation. Inflation in electri-
cal rates in the range of 6% greater than general inflation is a threshold for
attractive (but not competitive) project economics. However,. as shown in
Table 6 -3, electric rate increases have not approached this level since the
year immediately following the oil embargo.
Table 6 -3: Comparison of Electric Rates and General Inflation
Avg. Annual Bill per kWh
.Small Users* Consumer Price Index
Chng. From Chng. From
Year Rate Prior Year Index Prior Year
1973 2.30 133.1
1974 2.85 4 23.9% 147.7
1975 3.23 13.3% 161.2
1976 3.45 6.8% 170.5
1977 3.86 10.6% 181.5
*Data'from Electrical World, McGraw Hill, Inc., New York.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Difference
6-x.1
Financing arrangements have no effect on the project feasibility criteria. This
is to be expected, since interest rates and bond, terms affect neither capital
invested nor net operating income, and thus are not relevant to the projects as
economic propositions. Rather, these variables have an impact on annual cash
flow, as defined herein, and thus pertain to the attractiveness of the projects
as potential investment vehicles for particular municipal or corporate entities.
The feasibility criteria are sensitive in a modest degree to variation in annual
O&M costs, but not to such an extent as to alter the overall evaluation of the
projects' economic potential.
6.4.2 Program Alternatives. Summary results of the analyses of five possible
programs of public assistance for low -head hydroelectric projects are shown in
Table 6 -4 and Appendix B Tables B -5 through B -8.
The analyses indicate that major capital grants in excess of 25'percent of
construction costs would be required to make any of the projects yield a benefit
cost ratio of one or more from the standpoint of the municipal or coxpprate.,
owner; hence the projects would become feasible from their point of view. It
should be emphasized, however, that grant programs do not change the real economics
of a project. Capital investment is not reduced, but the accounting for part
of its cost is merely shifted from the project to an exogenous agency. There-
fore, the true economic analyses for the assistance program alternatives remain
the initial baseline results.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
6 -12
Overall Investment 1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit Positive
Cost Ratio (4). Cost Ratio: Cash Flow
1.uauiatz2ag
4goU .z;;.;w LS' 6S' Z 99
1 L9' LZ'Z SL'
I
11 98' 06'i 06'
OZ'I ZS'I £I'i
4oaJJ 3
Equity investment
reduced by $590K
ameo?Iddy 1.0N
Not Applicable
Equity investmen'
reduced by $590K;
debt reduced by
$782K
Equity investment
reduced by $590K;
debt reduced by
$1565K
Program Alternatives
it
BASELINE PROJECTION
1. Development Grant:
Grant for Eng. /Admin.
Construct. Interest
Costs
2. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
3. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
Accelerated
Depreciation
Investment Tax
Credit
dill
4. Development Grant
Grant for 25%
of Construction
Cost
5. Development Grant
Grant for 50%
of Construction
Cost
o'
a)
cd
4-)
d
cd
a.
ca
tH
cn
Q
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
6 -13
Table 6-4
n
0
0
7.0 LEGAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIO INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW
The following sections address the water rights, regulatory, environmental, and
socio institutional questions surrounding development of hydro facilities at
existing dams on the Mill River. From this initial overview, there do not appear
to be any major problems that would serverely constrain or prevent project devel-
opment. Should operating licenses be sought for any of the projects, the ques-
tions discussed in this chapter would need to be formally addressed as part of
the license application process.
7.1 Water Rights
Riparian owners have the authority to appropriate the use of flowing water in
non- navigable streams under the provisions of the Mill Acts (Mass. General Laws,
Chapter 253). Section 1 states that, "A person may...erect and maintain a water
mill and a dam to raise water for working it, upon and across any.stream not
navigable." *The term "water mill" is not restricted, and includes a mill opera-
ted by water to generate electricity. (Duncan v. New England Power Co., 113 N.E.
781).
This right of use has been very broadly construed by Massachusetts courts. The
rule established by the courts is that,
...every proprietor of land through which a watercourse runs
has a right to the use of the impelling force of the current,
or what is more familiarly called the head and fall of the
current, for mill purposes, so far as they exist on his own
land, if there be any such head and fall within his own limits.
(Gould v. Boston Duck Co., 79 Mass. 442)
*The term "streams not navigable" for purposes of the Mill Acts was meant to pro
hibit interference of dams with waterborne commerce. It is thus construed much
more narrowly than "navigable waters" in the context of Section 404 and other
Federal permits (see Section 7.2) which presently cover the great majority of
waters of the United States, even including tributaries of traditionally navigable
streams all the way to their headwaters. 7 -1
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
This right to make use of "head and fall" within the owner's boundaries is pre-
emptive, so long as. that use is "reasonable," and the owner is therefore not
liable for damages such use may impose on other downstream users:
.,.(The owner has) a right to use the water in a reasonable and
lawful manner to work and operate his mill, whatever might be
the effect of such use in reference to any easement to which pro-
prietors of land situated at any point below it might otherwise
be entitled. Each proprietor of land through which a natural
watercourse flows has a right as owner of such land, and as in-
separably connected with and incident to it, to the natural flow
of the stream for any hydraulic purpose to which he may think
fit to apply it; and it is a necessary consequence from this,
principle that such proprietor cannot beheld responsible for
any injurious consequences which result to others, if the water
is used in a reasonable manner; and the quantity used is limited
by, and does not exceed, what is reasonably and necessarily re-
quired for the operation and propulsion of works of such charac-
ter and magnitude as are adapted and appropriate to the size and
capacity of the stream and the quantity of water usually flowing
therein. (City of Springfield v. Harris, 86 Mass. 494)
0
The courts have explicitly recognized that the right to the "natural flow" is
secondary to the right to use the "head and fall," so that flow modification
is taken for granted:
By the rule that all proprietors of land through which a water-
course passes have an equal right to the use of the power of the
stream for mill purposes, it is not to be understood that each
or any one has a right to the natural flow of the stream in the
manner in.which it ran originally, or as it would run if no
mill were erected on it, or to be worked by it; in its mere natural
flow, it affords no power. Dams must be made to raise it, and
canals and sluices to conduct, apply and discharge it. The right
to erect these works, and to change ,the natural mode of the flow
of the current, is incident to the right of applying it to the
working of mills, and this right therefore is common to every
riparian proprietor... The mere erection of a dam, and the use
of the water in driving wheels, must necessarily derange its
steady and constant natural flow, and substitute a different
manner, as to the time and mode of holding it up and letting
it down. So far as such mode is reasonably incidental to the
use of the stream for mill purposes, it'is the right of the
proprietor, and constitutes, in part, the mill privilege which
the law gives him. (Gould v. Boston Duck Co.)
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
The Mill Acts further provide that a mill owner, in appropriating reasonable
use, may flood upstream land subject, however, to compensation in damages
to upstream owners.
These statutory rights, and the case law interpreting them, provide a firm
legal foundation to enable the owners to use the Mill River dams for hydro-
electric purposes.
7.2 Regulatory Requirements
.Federal, state and possibly local governments would become involved in various
regulatory aspects of the Mill River hydro developments. The regulatory in-
volvement would begin 'with a license application to the Federal Energy Regula-
tory Commission. The projects would meet the criteria set forth in recently
promulgated rules for short -form hydroelectric licensing (published in Federal
Register, September 11, 1978). The short -form license process is designed to
eliminate obstacles to the development of small capacity water power projects.
An application would contain a detailed description of the,project as well
as three major attachments: Exhibit K, a detailed map of the project lands
and boundaries, Exhibit L, engineering drawings of project structures and
equipment, and an environmental report.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
During preparation of the application and environmental report, various resource
agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection
Agency, and Corps of Engineers in the Federal government; Massachusetts De-
partment of Environmental Quality Engineering,Division of Fisheries Wildlife,
and Department of Environmental Management; the Northampton Conservation
Commission, and others, would have to be consulted and their comments obtained.
In addition to such consultation, permits would be required from several
7 -3
of these agencies.. Two permits would be required from the Corps of Engineers:
(1) under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and (2) under
Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(discharge of dredged or fill material to navigable waters).
The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) would have the
authority to issue a waterways permit for the projects, and DEQE's Division
of Water Pollution Control would issue a water quality certificate. An En-
vironmental Notification Form (ENF) would have to be filed with the Secretary
of Environmental Affairs within 10 days after filing the first application for
a. state permit. The Secretary would then determine the need for an environmen-
tal report (EIR) on the project. Finally, the projects would require wetlands
permits issued by the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering after
approval by the Northampton Conservation Commission.
Should a decision to proceed with any of the projects be made, frequent and
close coordination with all of the agencies would be important to expedite the
regulatory reviews and issuance of permits and licenses. Such consultation
would help to resolve potential problems and conflicts before formal actions
are taken. Procedures and requirements at the state level for dealing with
small hydro facilities may become more standardized in the future, especially
if increasing numbers of projects are developed.
7.3 Environmental Impacts
The installation of hydroelectric generating facilities at existing dams on
the Mill River would in general have considerably less environmental impact
than would be the case if entire new projects were to be constructed. Since
all projects would be constructed and operated in a similar manner, effects
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, "INC: ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS` s NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS
7 -4
0
on the environment would be comparable for each of the dams, except where differ-
ences would arise due to locational and other site specific factors. The fol-
lowing discussion conforms to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's format
for environmental reports in conjunction with short -form hydroelectric license
applications. This discussion is intended only as an overview of environmental
concerns and impacts that would likely be associated with the hydro developments.
Should license applications be submitted for the projects, more detailed environ-
mental assessments would need to be prepared.
7.3.1 Environmental Setting. The Mill River watershed drains about 59 square
miles in the City of Northampton and several towns to the west and north.
Historically, the Mill River was utilized extensively to provide water, direct
water power, and hydroelectricity for numerous mills and factories. From about
1850 t6 1930 most of the dams on the river fell into disuse and were gradually
abandoned. Presently, use of the river.for water supply is very limited. The
City of Northampton has a small water supply reservoir on Roberts.Meadow Brook,
a tributary which flows into the Mill River a short distance downstream from
the Chartpak dam. Also, Pro Brush withdraws about 3,800,000 cu. ft. annually
from its impoundment, and-a greater volume from its well supplies. The Northampton
Country Club. also uses water .during, the summer months for golf course irrigation.
.Water quality in the Mill River is generally good, although it is affected
by some point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The river is presently
designated Class B by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality
Engineering Division of Water Pollution Control. The Town of Williamsburg,
just upstream and bordering on the City of Northampton, will shortly begin con-
struction of a sanitary sewerage system to serve the populated center of town
and eliminate the discharge of untreated wastes to the river. Sewage from the
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC: 0 ENGINEERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -5
town will be conveyed to Northampton's sewage treatment plant on the Connecticut
River via the City's sewage system. Outlying homes will continue to rely on in-
dividual septic tank systems.
Two industries presently have permits to discharge wastes to the Mill River.
Pro Brush has ten separate discharges with a combined flow averaging 1.17 MGD.
The discharges are non- contact cooling water only; the remainder of the plant's
wastes are discharged to the City sewer system. The Mill River.discharges are
subject to permit limitations regarding flow, temperature, and pH and have
negligible effect on water quality.
Northampton Manufacturing Corporation is the other source of discharges to
the Mill River. The company has two discharges, 100,000 gpd of cooling water
and 4,500 gpd of plating wastes. The plating wastes contain minute amounts of
chromium, copper, zinc, and several other metals. Daily discharges are very
small in relation to streamflow in the river.
Runoff from agricultural and urban land in the watershed undoubtedly has some
influence on stream quality, particularly with respect to suspended solids,
nutrients, and coliform bacteria. A comprehensive water quality survey of the
river has not been undertaken to determine the possible magnitude of such
effects. However, the Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control confirms
that water is generally acceptable and adequate for fish life. Comple-
tion of sewer construction in the Town of Williamsburg will remove an important
source of pollution and result in improvement in water quality.
The Mill River and its tributaries are regularly stocked with trout to
support recreational fishing. According to the Fisheries Manager of the
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -6
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries Wildlife, Connecticut Valley District,
about 1,500 fish are stocked annually (springtime) in the Northampton section
of the Mill River, as far downstream as Look Memorial Park (just below Cooke's
Dam). Stocked species have been brook trout and rainbow trout in roughly a
1:2 ratio. Preferable stocking for the reach would be mostly brook trout with
a small number of brown trout, but availability of fish from the hatcheries
generally controls the mix. In the past, trout were stocked further downstream
in the Pro Brush area and may be again if water quality is improved. Fall
stocking from late September through mid October is carried out if fish are
available and flow and temperature conditions are suitable, although this has.
not been done for the last several years.
Discussions with the Chief of Fisheries of the Division. of Fisheries Wildlife
confirmed that there are no plans, present or future, for anadromous fish
restoration work in the Mill River watershed.
Considerable recreational use is made of the Mill River, both formally and
informally. In addition to sport fishing, other activities include swimming,
canoeing, sailing, ice skating, and aesthetic enjoyment.
Both the Pro Brush and Chartpak dams are reportedly popular for swimming,
particularly for diving or jumping from the spillways into the deep holes at
the bases of the dams. The companies indicate that such activity is difficult
to control.
The Mill River flows through Look Memorial Park and enhances the attractiveness
of that area. A variety of ducks and geese reside at Willow Lake, fed by the
river, and picnic grounds are located in streamside areas. The river forms
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
the western boundary of the park and is an important element in its scenic
beauty.
Paradise Pond is a fifteen -acre impoundment formed by the Smith College dam.
The pond is a central point of recreational activity as well as an aesthetic
highlight of the college campus. Many of the campus buildings overlook the
pond, and the athletic fields are located on the opposite side across the river.
Smith College has boat and bath houses on the pond for its physical education
and recreation programs; in the winter the pond is kept clear of snow and
flooded to maintain good ice for skating.
Downstream from Smith College, the river flows through the Arcadia Wildlife
Sanctuary to the Oxbow, an old meander of the Connecticut River. The Sanctuary,
which is owned and operated by the Massachusetts Audubon Society,.contains 561
acres of marsh, woodland, and fields in the area of the Oxbow and the mouth of
the Mill River. The Oxbow itself is a popular fishing spot for warm water
fish and is heavily used for boating, providing access to the Connecticut River.
Many people enjoy bird watching, nature study, hiking, and other outdoor activi-
ties in the sanctuary area.
The Mill River has a fairly steep gradient from its headwaters downstream to
the Smith College dam; the flood plain is very• limited in extent over much of
the river's reach, confined by the narrow valley and steep banks. Upstream of
the dams, somewhat larger areas are subject to flooding, most noticeably above
the Pro Brush dam. Flooding limits for the Mill River under various flow con-
ditions have been mapped as part of a Flood Insurance Study prepared by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -8
7.3.2 Environmental Impacts. Impacts that could be expected from hydro develop-
ment on.the Mill River may be categorized'generally as construction phase im-
pacts and operational phase impacts.
Construction Phase: Actual construction work would be undertaken simultaneously
at all sites as discussed in Section 4.4. Civil work would begin in the spring
and continue through the summer and into the fall of the year.
The major potential sources of impacts during construction are excavation, earth
moving, and other land- disturbing activities which could result in sediment
pollution in the river. At all dam sites some rock excavation is required, but
this would not generate large quantities of sediment. However, excavation and
dredging of the intake areas upstream of the dams would undoubtedly cause tem-
porary increases in turbidity. Presently, there is virtually no sediment in
unimpounded segments of the Mill River, indicating that the gradient and flow
are sufficient to flush out any fine material that might accumulate.
For the Cookes Intermediate project, the penstock from the Button Shop pond
to Cookes dam would necessitate trench excavation along a flat, level route
for the most part. Its location would minimize the potential for pollution
during construction, except at the stream crossing point and in the vicinity
of Cookes dam,.where some sediment might be introduced to the river.,unless
precautions are taken. The development of additional head at Pro Brush dam
would require excavation of a 400 -foot long tailrace channel in solid rock
below the dam. This work would involve operation of heavy equipment near and
in the stream bed and some sediment pollution would unavoidably result.
Pollution during the construction period would be controlled by including in
CURRAN`ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
7 -9
the specifications for the project measures designed to minimize erosion and
sedimentation. Essentially these requirements would deal with the scheduling
of various activities and installation of sediment basins or other structures.
The project schedule described in Section 4.4 is governed mainly by the time
involved in the ordering, fabrication, and delivery of the generating units and
associated equipment. Since the civil works construction required for the
projects is relatively minor, there would be a fair degree of flexibility in the
timing of construction activities to minimize impacts on water quality. During
the months of April, May, and June, the season of heaviest fishing pressure,
excavation and other work directly in the stream bed would be minimized at
Chartpak and Cookes dams to avoid adverse impacts on trout fishing in the stocked
segment of the river. Aspects of the work having little or no impact on water
quality such as the penstock for the Cookes Intermediate project•and miscella-
neous dam work, could be undertaken during the spring when entry to the stream
is either difficult due to high water or undesirable due to recreational usage.
Major excavation work in the stream bed, for example, construction of the Pro
Brush tailrace, would be done in the late summer or early fall when river flow
would be low, sediment pollution more easily controlled, and interference with
recreational fishing minimized.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries
Wildlife have tentatively indicated their desire that construction work direct-
ly in and affecting the stream be avoided during the months of April through
August, although these dates could be modified in response to detailed project
proposals in the event that decisions were made to proceed with design and con-
struction. The agencies' primary concern is minimization of activities and
associated disturbances during the best fishing months of April, May, and June.
7 -10
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
In addition to scheduling of construction to minimize impacts, measures would
be taken to reduce introduction of sediments to the river from work areas. Tem-
porary check dams• and sediment basins would be constructed as necessary to allow
settling out of suspended solids from site drainage water. Accumulated sediments
would be removed at the completion of work. All construction activities
would be carried out so as to conform with applicable water quality standards
and any special conditions that might be imposed.
Other construction- related impacts would be temporary and of lesser concern.
Noise and dust would be associated with the construction, but impacts would not
be significant due to the small scale and short duration of activities.
Operational Phase. Operationally, a system of hydroelectric dams on the Mill
River would have no direct impacts on water quality. The major environmental
consideration is modification of natural flow and its effects on uses of the
river. At high discharges; above the discharge capacities of the units (about
125 cfs at the upper three projects and 110 cfs at Smith College), essentially
the projects could be operated continuously and would have no effect on the
natural flow of the river with excess water being spilled over the dams. On
the average this situation would occur about 60 days per year at Chartpak, in-
creasing to 100 days per year at Smith College due to the larger drainage area
and lower discharge capacity of that unit. These high river flows are to be
expected predominantly in the spring months, although they may occasionally occur
at any time of the year. Project operation would cause no environmental impacts
in these circumstances.
At river flows less than turbine capacities, the projects would generally not
be operated all the time. The limited pondage available, primarily at Chartpak,
7 -11
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC: ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 6 NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
would be used to regulate flows for power production at times when most useful
to the users and at the best possible efficiency. Generally, this mode of opera-
tion would involve: (1) restricting river flows to a minimum at Chartpak for
filling the pond to maximum operating level;. and (2) generating for a six -hour
period at a rate equal to inflow plus augmentation from pondage. Operation of
the downstream three projects would be largely dependent on the releases from
Chartpak although minor re- regulation of flows could occur.
The pondage assumed to be available at Chartpak would be sufficient to augment
natural flows by about 15 cfs over a six -hour period. During much of the year
this pondage could be replenished by storing inflows for a few hours. On
occasional days of very low flow it might be necessary to hold back water at
Chartpak for longer periods to permit pond refilling.
At the start of the generation period, downstream water levels would rise,
creating a possible safety hazard to individuals who might have strayed into
the river bed. However, discharge capacities of the turbines would limit
the possible rise in water levels to no more than a foot or two.
River regulation for hydroelectric power production would not be likely to have
any significant effects on water quality. During the day when wastewater dis-
charges would largely occur, the hydro projects would be in operation and river
flows would be augmented from pondage, providing higher than natural discharges
for dilution and transport of wastes. Upon completion of a sewerage system in
Williamsburg there will be virtually no untreated sewage entering the river and
the minor discharges from Pro Brush and Northampton Manufacturing Corporation
are of no special concern with regard to hydro operation.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -12
J.
Whenever river flows are less than the unit discharge capacities, hydro operation
will cause fluctuations in flow over the course of a day, from near zero while
ponding to anywhere from 20 to 125 cfs during the six hour generation period,
as previously described. Because flows in this range would be confined to the
river channel and because the river bed is predominantly rock and gravel, the
potential for stream bed and bank erosion due to hydro operation is very low
and problems of this nature are unlikely.
In the case of the Cookes Intermediate project, hydro operations would have
effects different from those at other dams. Essentially, the diversion .of
water via penstock from the Button Shops pond to a powerhouse below Cookes dam
would cause a reduction in flow to near zero in the river segment between the
projects. During power generation periods at river flows less than 125 cf's,
little or no water would be spilled at the Button Shop dams, except for inci-
dental leakage. However, at a.progress meeting on 13 December. 1978, it was
learned that the City is considering replacement of both bridges across the
river bend near the eastern Button Shop dam (see Plate 4 -2) with dikes for the
roadway. Under this plan the river meander would be eliminated.
If both the dike and hydro projects were implemented, the possible environmental
effects of diversion for hydro operation would be of less concern. The Cookes
pond stretches upstream to within a few hundred feet of the Button Shop South
dam, so that only a short segment would be dewatered. High flows in excess
of that used for power generation would continue to pass over the south dam and
then over Cookes dam. Effects of a decrease in flow between the dams would
possibly include a greater degree of siltation due to reduced flushing, more
stagnant conditions during low flows, and encroachment of marsh and terrestrial
vegetation. Since the Cookes pond is presently quite shallow and silted in,
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -13
n
the possible changes in types of vegetation would be the principal environmental
concern. Such changes would not necessarily be detrimental but would represent
a shift in the ecological character of the pond. Any excess water not used
for power production would, however, be spilled over the Button Shop south
dam and help to reduce stagnation and vegetation encroachment in Cookes pond.
Recreational fishing could be affected by alteration of flows in the Mill
River, although during the best fishing months of April June effects on flow
would not be very great most of the time. During the month of April, natural
river flows would be altered very little or not at all, as water would be spilled
a large portion of the time. In May and June, spillage would be less and water
would sometimes be held back at night, normally for only a few hours, to refill
the ponds. On many days during these months, the natural or slightly higher than
natural river flow would be maintained for all but the few nighttime hours when
water would be ponded. Flows would seldom be restricted for an extended period,
such as on weekends, simply because insufficient pondage is available. Fluctua-
tions at the start or end of a generating cycle could be inconvenient for fisher-
men and perhaps a safety hazard, although river stages would not be greatly
affected in the range of generating discharges.
Trout fishing in the Mill River is maintained by stocking on a "put and take"
basis, with little natural reproduction or carryover of stocked fish through
the summer or to the following year. During the summer, reduction of already
low river flows during part of the day for pond filling could create additional
stress on the stream fishery. However, augmentation of flow during the day and
ponding at night could possibly reduce the daytime rise of water temperature due
to greater water depth and velocity accompanying increased flows. High water
temperature is one reason, among others, that few if any trout survive from
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -14
No adverse impacts downstream in the Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary would be likely
to occur as a result of hydro operations. Water levels in the Oxbow and lower
reaches of the Mill River in the sanctuary are affected by a downstream hydro-
electric dam on the main stem Connecticut River. Cyclic fluctuations in water
levels which occur due to that dam's operation are considerably greater than
would be occasioned by operation of the Mill River projects.
season to season. The issue of flow regulation effects on the stream fishery
would need to be addressed further by the agencies responsible should license
applications be submitted for one or more of the projects.
Concern for aesthetics in the Paradise Pond area could affect the way in which
the Smith College dam is operated for power production. Specifically, Smith
College officials have indicated that pondage operations which prevent water
from spilling over the dam might be unacceptable to the college. The "water-
falls" appearance is understandably an important attribute of the area's scenery;
allowances for intentionally spilling some small amount of water over the dam
at certain times (just during daylight hours, for instance) would reduce the
annual energy production and corresponding revenues by perhaps several percent.
The actual magnitude of the effect would have to be evaluated in a detailed
operational study based on criteria for dam overflows specified by Smith College.
7.3.3 Summary:. The principal environmental impacts during the construction
phase would be temporary increases in suspended solids in the Mill River below
construction areas, possible short -term disruption of recreational fishing, and
general disturbance due to excavation, equipment movement, and other operations.
None of these potential problems is very great due to the small scale of required
construction work. Techniques to minimize erosion from disturbed areas and
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -15
minimize sediment loads, to the stream would be required in construction specifi-
cations for the projects, in accordance with established water quality standards
and other applicable requirements.
Operational phase impacts would be associated mainly with modifications of
natural river flow during certain times of the year. The small amount of
pondage available at each site precludes the possibility of ponding water and
impeding natural river flow for more than ten continuous hours except during extreme
low -flow periods. Specific operating conditions with respect to minimum flow
releases, the stream fishery, and water quality would need to be determined
through discussion and negotiation with the responsible Federal and State
agencies.
7.4 Socio- Institutional Factors
None of the proposed Mill River projects is expected to have major social or
institutional consequences. No impact on the economic or demographic circum-
stances of Northampton is anticipated, other than the transitory stimulus of
construction activity and the multiplier effects of O&M expenditures. Both
of these benefits would be minor in relation to Northampton's overall economy,
and thus the social implications would be negligible.
On the other hand, any or all of the projects would make a contribution to the
implementation of public policy at the national level. Each would contribute-
however marginally -to lessening U.S. dependence on foreign oil, and each would
substitute use of a renewable resource in place of a depleting one. Further,
the process of project development and operation would reinforce the necessary
bonds of cooperation between the public and private sectors in the area of
resource management. In addition, the projects would set a laudable precedent
7 =16
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON;-MASSACHUSETTS
J
for implementation of cogeneration projects within the service area of Massa-
chusetts Electric Company.
There are several alternative institutional arrangements which could be employed
in implementing the Mill River hydroelectric projects. These include:
(1) Individual development and operation of any of the projects by the
respective owners;
(2) Individual development by the owners and coordinated operation of
all projects by the City;
(3) Development and operation of all projects by the City; and
(4) Development by the City and coordinated operation of all projects
by a City -hired private contractor.
Unified development of the four projects by the City would have a number of
advantages, among.;them economies of scale in construction costs and limiting
the duration of construction activities and associated disruption. Coordinated
operation would also result in some operation and maintenance cost savings as
well as enable the system to be regulated for most efficient use of the water
and head available at the.four projects. For these reasons development of all
projects by the City with coordinated operation by either the City or a private
contractor would be preferable to individual development and operation. In
addition, the City as a public entity might have greater opportunity an
ability to obtain funding assistance for the projects.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES; INC� o ENGINEERS AND "PLANNERS S NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
7 -17
APPENDIX A
DAM INSPECTION REPORT
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
APPENDIX A DAM INSPECTION REPORT
A.0 Introduction
Inspection of the series of five dams on the Mill River within the confines
of the City of Northampton, Massachusetts was carried out on 5 October 1978.
The objective of the examination was to assess the general condition of the
dams in conjunction with carrying out a feasibility assessment of providing
electric power generating facilities at each, or a.combination of several, of
these dams.
The flow in the river at the time of the inspection was low, estimated to be
of the order of 5 to 10 cfs. This made it possible to carry out a reasonably
complete examination of each of the dams. The results of the examination are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Photographs of the individual dams accompany the corresponding subsections.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A.1 General Observations
Built in the late 1800's, all the dams appeared to be of a similar design and
construction, varying mainly in their configuration. Basically, all are over-
flow structures, of stone masonry construction and appear to be founded on
sound, durable rock formations. From all indications, each dam was built with
an inclined face on the upstream side and a vertical face on the downstream
side. Three of the dams are provided with outlets embedded within the masonry.
All the dams are less than 200 feet in length and none exceeds a height of 30
feet from the lowest foundation levels.
A -1
Over the years, some of the dams have been infilled with sediments to the
point where they no longer provide any significant storage. The three up-
stream dams in this series appear to be serving no useful purpose at this time.
However, the two lowest dams are still being utilized. One of these, provided
with an intake in the left abutment, serves as a source of cooling water for
a small factory complex nearby and the other is being utilized for recrea-
tional purposes. To serve these functions, the impoundments behind both of
these dams have required periodic flushing and dredging to remove the accumula-
tion of sediments and other debris.
On the basis of the observed condition and configuration of each dam it can
be concluded that the addition of a hydropower facility would not increase
the safety hazard of the structure.
A.2 Condition of the Dams
A.2.1 Chartpak. This is the farthest upstream of the complex of dams in
question. It is the highest of the dams and appears to be the one that has
suffered the most from deterioration. It has a crest length of about 150 feet
and its maximum height approaches 28 feet. A steel pipe about 4 feet in dia-
meter has been embedded in the masonry next to the right abutment about 5
feet below the crest. This pipe outlet was open at the time of the inspection
but only a small portion of.the river flow was passing through it, with the
majority flowing over the damaged spillway.
The main spillway section occupies the central portion of the dam. Based on
available'sketches, this overflow section is 94 feet long with the original
sill level about 4 feet below the crest of an adjoining auxiliary spillway
located against the left abutment. At some stage in the past, the sill of
the main spillway was either reinforced or lined with wood. This woodwork has
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A -2
long since rotted away and only remnants remain embedded along the upstream
edge of the spillway opening. Most of the stone blocks in the top two courses
of the masonry forming the spillway sill have been loosened and many have been
pushed over the crest by floods and ice pressures. Some of these fallen blocks
can be seen broken and scattered across the riverbed downstream of the dam.
Apart from the deterioration of the spillway masonry and the cracking and
spalling of the concrete which caps the stonework on the crests of the abut-
ment sections, the dam appears to be in remarkably good condition. It showed
no signs of instability or any noticeable deterioration of the stone blocks
themselves. Similarly there was no evidence of any undercutting or erosion
of the underlying rock foundation. In all, the structure gave the impression
of having been well built and of being well preserved.
Although there appeared to be leakage through the mortar joints at depth below
the spillway section, this may not necessarily be the case. Rather it is
strongly suspected that most of the leakage is occurring through joints at
the surface where these joints have deteriorated as a result of frost action.
The leakage is inconsequential as far as the integrity of the over -all structure
is concerned but may be of importance in view of the limited minimum flow avail-
able for power production. With limited remedial work, notably the repair of
the spillway section, the useful life of the dam could be prolonged indef-
initely and, if necessary, grouting could reduce the leakage.
General observations indicate that bedrock occurs within 2 to 3 feet of the
ground surface on both abutments of this dam. Access to this structure is
somewhat limited. However, it can be reached by a well established trail on
the left bank of the river. This trail extends to a paved road where it ap-
pears to pass through the yard of a residence.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A -3
itir-1
*'%41 r.;4.7 1"114 1,:' :4 or 7 k0 .i 4....1/4'..17, 4,, rAl r
4
1.
Photograph A-1: Chartpak Dam
Photograph A-2 Button Shop South Dam
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A.2.2 Button Shop. This dam two separate sections, each on a
separate branch of the river where it has divided to form an island. The dams
themselves are situated at the head of this island and are each about 80 feet
long and 10 feet high. Of the two component dams, the eastern one, immediately
above a road bridge, is the more readily accessible, at least from its left
bank. Both dams are overflow sections and are completely contained in rock
which extends to within 1 to 2 feet of the ground surface. The rock appears
to be badly shattered but otherwise remains in place with no noticeable evidence
of serious weathering or spalling to an extent that would affect the integrity
of the dams.
The masonry of both sections was found to be sound and stable. Seepage through
the masonry could not be assessed because of the flow over the dams, but from
all indications any such seepage is not likely to be any more serious than
that observed at the Chartpak dam, described earlier. In-general, the masonry
of these structures has deteriorated very little over the decades, and, as near
as could be determined, remains virtually as originally built some 100 years
ago. Certainly, there is no evidence to suggest or suspect that they will not
last equally as long or longer.
A.2.3 Cookes. This dam also comprises two sections which are separated by
a short stretch of high ground. They are located just upstream of a road
bridge, on the same road as that which adjoins the Button Shop dams just des-
cribed. However, unlike either the Chartpak or the Button Shop dams, these
two are arched in the upstream direction. The left branch .or the main sec-
tion, is about 80 feet long and about 20 feet high, while the right section
is only about 30 feet long and from .6 to 8 feet high. Both sections are
founded and contained in rock which outcrops on both banks. Although exten-
sively fractured and jointed, this rock gave the impression of being tight and
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A -5
Photograph A-3: Button Shop East Dam
Photograph A-4 Cookes Dam
tAlt 6:11711:
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A-6
(J
showed no distress that would affect the stability and general integrity of
the overlying dams.
The masonry, as in the case of the Button Shop dams, was found to be sound and
durable with no indications of distress or widespread deterioration. There is
no question that these dams were well built and can be expected to continue to
perform satisfactorily for an indefinite period. The fact that they have
suffered no .ill effects, especially from freeze -thaw action, is probably due
to their being continuously submerged under sheets of flowing water.
A.2.4 Pro Brush. This approximately 120 -foot long, 15 -foot high dam currently
serves to provide a limited quantity of cooling water to the Pro Brush industrial
complex. This dam is equipped with about a 2 -foot diameter opening at the base
of the dam near mid length. This outlet, controlled with a butterfly valve,
is used periodically to flush out the sediment accumulation from the reservoir.
Like the dams described in the previous sections of this report, this structure
is founded on, and abuts into, sound, competent rock which appears to be tight
in spite of extensive fracturing and jointing.
In a like manner, the masonry of this dam appears to have endured the test of
time, showing no obvious defects or deterioration either due to wear or freeze
thaw action. It has been well constructed and should continue to be trouble
free for many decades. As in the previous cases, seepage was not readily ap-
parent because of flow over the dam but seepage either through or under the
structure is not likely to be of any consequence.
A.2.5 Smith College. Located within the grounds of Smith College, this last
A -7
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
1, j
r
1g7ts WWI 17 11t
1„; cia
PI
CC CC• 101 gr ras 411
II111011
Mligrf
PRO BRUSH DIVISION VSTRON
Photograph A-5 Pro Brush Dam
Photograph A-6: Smith College Dam
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
0
dam in question is contained in the flood plain of the Mill River. The
natural left bank at the damsite reaches heights well over 50 feet whereas
the right bank which confines the reservoir on that side is a man -made dike.
The approximately 120 -foot long, 15 -foot high dam would seem, and was reported
to be, founded on rock. Its left bank may also contain bedrock although the
channel immediately downstream on that side is protected by a concrete re-
taining wall which deflects the outlet discharges into the main river channel.
The right bank, as indicated above, is a man -made embankment and therefore is
not expected to contain bedrock, except possibly close to the foundation
level. Immediately downstream of the dam this bank of the river channel is
protected with riprap.
The outlet through the left end of the dam is equipped with a screw stemmed.
sliding gate and water discharges through a circular pipe about 30 to 36. inches
in diameter. The outlet was opened during the inspection visit to permit
examination of the dam.
This dam is somewhat different from those previously described. The masonry
is composed of smaller rock blocks and has a concrete toe as well as a cap.
In order to provide water depth for college boating and other recreational
activities the water level has been raised by the installation of about 18
inches of flashboards which are anchored to steel rods embedded in the masonry.
In general this dam exhibited the same good construction as the upper four
dams. The masonry appeared to be sound and tight with no readily detectable
evidence of any distress or instability. The only portion of the overall
structure in need of appreciable maintenance was found to be the concrete re-
taining wall of the left river bank below the dam. This wall exhibited numerous
cracks and spalls. However, these defects have not advanced to the point of
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A -9
severely endangering the integrity of the wall. On the other hand early
repairs would save more costly ones later.
As noted earlier, the masonry of this dam is sound and is expected to remain
in this condition indefinitely.
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC; AND NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A -10
APPENDIX B
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, SENSITIVITY TEST,
AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
FOR INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND "PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
EXHIBIT B-1
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF CHARTPAK PROJECT
pnoJscT-o*T,px01
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF LOW-HEAD HYDRO/ MILL RIVER/ NORTHAMPTON/ MASS.
LzaTzwo OF INPUT oAT
pmon/Aomzw COSTS/ YEAR oz (K*)= 60.00
sNon/AnMzw COSTS, YEAR o2 (x*)~ 70,00
SOURCE OF swQn/Aomzw COSTS= OWNER
CONSTR. INTEREST COST, YEAR o2 (n*)= 27.0.0
SOURCE OF cowoTm~ INTEREST COSTS= OWNER
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST (w*/Yn)= 20.00
VALUE OF EXISTING DAM (K$)=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY/ YEAR o1 (xw)=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY, YEAR •D2 (x*/=
POWER AVAILABLE FROM HYDRO (xw*/Yn)= 850000^
VALUE OF PLANT OUTPUT (AS OF YR n1) 30.72'
EXCESS ENERGY FROM HYDRO (xw*/Yn)= 159.000,00
SALE PRICE FOR EXCESS ENERGY (C/xw4)= 2,20
TOTAL CONSTR. COST (W/0 sNon/momzw)(xw)= 800.00
CONSTR. COST TO BE FINANCED (K$)= 800.00
cowaTn^ coaT FROM GRANT (x*)= 0
cowaTn^ COST FROM OWNER (x*>~ 0
YEARS FOR CONSTR. FINANCING= uo
DEBT INTEREST RATE (Z/Yn)=
SINKING FUND INTEREST RATE /%/Yn/=
CORPORATE TAX RATE (Z)~
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE/ 0 M (%/Yn)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE/ ENERGY SAVED (Z/Yn)=
.ANN0AL INFLATION RATE/ ELEC. SALES (Z/YR)=
oALcuL ATso DA TA
75.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
p4:oo
4a-oo
2.00
4.00
4.00
AMOUNT BORROWED/ YEAR Di <x*>~ 0
AMOUNT BORROWED/ YEAR o2 <xw>= 0
TOTAL BORROWED/ YEAR 1 TO 50 /xV= 800.00
cum^ TOTAL INVESTMENT/ YEAR o1 <x*>~
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT/ YEAR p2 (x*/~
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT/ YEAR 1 TO 50 (n*7~
145.00
252.00
105200
0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0
I .0 NI NI N 0 1. 0 a•
1 C C In N. C.1 7,1 .1
1
1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 r. •CI C 0 0
..1 NI c..) C 0 0 in
i
01 I 0 .3 .1" 3 :11 n 0; •0 I
0331 NI 0
1
1
I
1
i 0 11 In 0 In 1
33') NI 0 0.. -0
l i
1
I 0 2 0 0 0 0 In 0 .3 .0 T..• r.
I 13 17,1 N. N.- C 0 [3. .1
1 1 i
1
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 ..o (3 N: -q al a 0 •C! 43 0 (3 F 1'! i Lii -0 3'1 M 0 Ll 0
0 1 1
i
a..• I
0. o 0 0 0
.J 0 1, 1. u; N; 0. N; 0 -0 .3 N N
W EN C 0. 3'.1 (3 0' .3 .3
I
0
Z
3 .r-t -E C.) 0 .i 3'1 NI
C 0- 0 0 N. In CI N 0
7') rn 0 In N. NI 11
1 1
2'!
0.3
I
1
I
0! 31 IN .3 11 0 0..
..8
In 1 471 01 EN In 0 .1
01 t"..I 01 :7,1
1
Col 1
0!
N./
I
03 N
3M
C.1
N.
Ci
I
0 0 0 0 0
NI til
11) N. NI 0 ..1 .3 (3 r.
Ti 31) 14 0 ...s. '0 171
1 I
!...7. .q.. to 0- ...0 01 0'O .3 0 0
17.1 C ...r r'..i 0 7. 0 N. N :-.I
1 i 1
0 0 0 0 0
1 C..1 0 N. c 0 0 -0 NI .1 1 en
:4 C 3 O. N. IN 3
1 i 1
0 0 0 0 0
3I4 0 0 0 NI :4 0 -0 ..0 3'1 NI
rN C C C (3 0 i. N.
1
0 (3 0 0 0
r...1 a v 1 r.1 C.! '.2. .1 C C
C) 3') 3M N. N
I 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 '0 •0
31
C
1. 1.1
0
C
1
NI N
11.1
0 0 0 7 0
z
2'
0 0 030
Z
0. c c
r- Cr.*: .L1
W 1-
22 0 0!
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 43 4
`Cs 0 rct
.,4
0 0 O.
31
3M
0 0 0 0 0
0 NI
CO C
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.1 1-
.2 81
O 0 0 0 0
7.1
1).
0.
0.
i
0.
0
7
1
2.)
N.' 0 I 81
n 1 0
LI
1 1 1
1 1- 1 11
O 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
3.1 0 -0 .1 .1 •0 0
11 I
20 71 Os N N
1 1 I I 0
I
3330
.-I i l 0 1 i--
0 0 0 0 0
t' 0 sO •0 (3
03 ,-1 0 r■ N 'NI 8! 0
1 I I
I 0
O 0 0 0 0
1
C.I 0 .0 '0 0 W I--
0 0- N... N. ro I z
w
O u.;
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 8 0 N... 0 N. -'.3 1 u.t
1
'4! rs. :71 o N i I
I I 1 1 1:
1 1 3-3 1 Z _1
1 -0 I- 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 11-1_1
0 0 If: 1 1 0 1 -0
1 Z I 0
1 1.1.1 1 0
1 W i .3 IN '.4 C 08
1 ot- '4! .-I 1 1 L.1 1
1 1444 I 114! 1 Z 1 0
I
0.! 0 -.1 1 x n I Z -.1 3
Z 1 1 0. 08 -1 I 3- W 0 0 i
0! 3- I 0 1...:. 8 1-- W i 0 0 C 3
1 'La W J! i 0
0.
:r. cc 1- 0 i
e'
Z! 1 cc 1 LLI
UI La 3- 1
Cr: I 1 I CZ: 1 N. I.- 0 3.14 Cr:
1
I I
0, I 1-- 1 1.1.1 030 4130 .:3 1
20 I 0 1 1
1 0 1 1- 0. 1 c 1 1'
u.; 1 u.t t G. i Li a 3 z -...r. c•_-_, ;..t.1 1 1
a... 1 08-4 8 61 4.3 8 0 0 811 .1 :LI 0 c.-: I I
EXHIBIT B-2
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF COOKES INTERMEDIATE PROJECT
PROJECT-COOKES01
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF LOW-HEAD HYDRO, MILL RIVER, NORTHAMPTON, MASS.
L I S T I N G O F I N P U T DA TA
ENGR/ADMIN COSTS, YEAR DI (K$)= 71.00
ENGR/ADMIN COSTS, YEAR 02 (K$)= 90.00
SOURCE OF ENGR/ADMIN COSTS= OWNER
CONSTR. INTEREST COST, YEAR 112 (K$)= 37.00
SOURCE OF CONSTR. INTEREST COSTS= OWNER
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST (K$/YR)= 20.00
VALUE OF EXISTING DAM (K$)=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY, YEAR D1 (K$)=
VALUE OF•MISC. EQUITY, YEAR 02 (K$)=
POWER AVAILABLE FROM HYDRO (KWH/YR)= 1140000.
VALUE OF PLANT OUTPUT (AS OF YR D1)(K$/YR)= 0
EXCESS ENERGY FROM HYDRO (KWH/YR)=. 1140000.00
SOLE PRICE FOR EXCESS ENERGY (C/KWH)= 2.20
TOTAL CONSTR. COST (W/0 ENGR/ADMIN)(K$)= 1059,00
.CONSTR. COST TO BE FINANCED (K$>= 1059
CONSTR. COST FROM GRANT -(K$)=
CONSTR. COST FROM OWNER (K$)= 0
YEARS FOR CONSTR. FINANCING= 20
DEBT INTEREST RATE (X./YR)= 8.00
SINKING FUND INTEREST RATE •(Z/YR) 9.00
CORPORATE TAX RATE 0
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, 0 M (Z/YR)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ENERGY SAVED ()/YR)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ELEC.. SALES (X/YR)=
CALCUL A TED DATA
AMOUNT BORROWED, YEAR 01 (K$)= 0
AMOUNT BORROWED, YEAR 02 (K$)= '0
TOTAL BORROWEDr.YEAR 1 TO 50 (K$)= -1059.00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR 01 (K$)=
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR 02 (K$)=
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT? YEAR 1 TO 50 (10)
100.00
10.00
10.00
2.00
4.00
4.00
181.00
33.8.00
1377.00
1—
Z
V
0
i Q'
t4 C'1 i 0 •o 4 7 C'
I C 4a 0) -1 -1 0 0 0
L I 41 0 -G 41 0. :''1 0 i n
I I
0
0
II
lh 1
I
0
C'1
G 1
47
C v Cd
Ci 0
^a
C'1
Cd
0
T G
61 C'1 04
o 0
C'1
C
0
f If) M II
G] Gi re
01 Cd
07 0
-i -i
0
.0 .0
re re.
0
c1 NI M
M P•)
n 1
CI C•1
O 0 0
1
a
a
t0.
07
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
47 in a C
ea 0 c-
o M
11;
x 04 o a a
i I
O 0 0 0 0 J
II 0 0
C o 0
0 0 C.
4 -•t x) 41
c. 0 a a
4; C C
C'i 0 a a
1 I
L7 y 47 c C
'd 0 a a
1 i
II 0 0
C
i
M. 1'1
M
0 0
y -1
C•1 N
0
C C
G '0
41
c
14
0 0 0 0 0
v 0 0 0
o o 0 0 0
II 0 0 0
C 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
C O 0
0 C-
O 0 0 0 0
C o 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
C O 0 0 0
a r)
1"
o n
K:
C
a a 4')
C -1
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C.1
41 41
01 1
ca I
1
CO
N. 0 Cd 17 -1 07 N. 0 0 0 0 0 I
07 is :•7 QI IN N. C 1
1 1 �I 1 141
i 1-
C 0 0 0 0 1
N. N. -1 -4 07 -e ll? 47 4 I
C 1' 01 0 01 0 CJ 0 01 1 J
1 1 I I J
1 C
L
0 0 0 0 0 1 W
a
re re C's 4 07 -•1 0 0 0 I 0
h T c1 a c ea c
i-t i i
re te y 0 01 0 a a C'1 t
n i I I t
C'1
a
01
M
0
t
M 1
1
0 i
t•) 1
i
-I 1
1
CJ
it
O
i-
s
i
1 CO
1
1 U
EXHIBIT B-3
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF PRO BRUSH PROJECT
PROJECT-pno^Bno1
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF LOW-HEAD HYDRO? MILL RIVER, NORTHAMPTON, MASS.
LzoTzwoor zwf`uT DATA
swon/Anmzw COSTS, YEAR Di (K$)= 50,00
swon/Aomzw COSTS, YEAR o2 (x*/= 63.00
SOURCE or swon/Aomzw COSTS= OWNER
cowaTn^ INTEREST COST, YEAR o2 (x*)= 24,00
SOURCE OF oowaTm~ INTEREST COSTS= OWNER
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST /x*/Yn/= 20^00
VALUE OF EXISTING DAM (xm/=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY, YEAR 01 (xm`=
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY, YEAR 02 (x*)=
POWER AVAILABLE FROM HYDRO (KWH/YR)= 8*5000.
VALUE OF PLANT OUTPUT (AS OF YR o1)<K*/Yn>~ 31:70
EXCESS ENERGY FROM HYDRO (xw*/,n)= 0
SALE PRICE FOR EXCESS ENERGY (c/Kw*)= 2.20
TOTAL CONSTR. COST <w/o swoR/Anmzw/(x*)= 727^00
CONSTR. COST TO BE FINANCED (x*)= 727.00
oowaTn, COST FROM GRANT (x*)= 0
CONSTR. COST FROM OWNER (K$)= 0
YEARS FOR cowaTR. FINANCING= 20
DEBT INTEREST' RATE (%/YR)=
SINKING FUND INTEREST RATE (z/Yn)=
CORPORATE TAX RATE (0=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, 0 M (%/YR)=
ANNUAL .INFLATION RATE, ENERGY SAVED (%/YR)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ELEC. SALES (%/YR)=
CALcuL A TED T
AMOUNT BORROWED, YEAR o1 <x*/= 0
AMOUNT BORROWED. YEAR nu (xm)= 0
TOTAL BORROWED, YEAR 1 TO 50 (K$)= 727,00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR 01 (xE=
oum^ TOTAL INVESTMENT. YEAR 02 (K*)~
CUM. TOTAL zwossT*swr" •YsAn 1 To 50 (x*)=
75.00
1o^oo
10.00
10.00
9.00
46.00
2.00
4000
4.00
135.00
232.00
959..00
LL
C/7
o
t ti
t L?
I NI
3
'f1
C
I
i
z i 0
I C4
t
Z 1
i
0
O C O 0 v C v
u7 1 M M 117 r7 ,7
i G i
y i
1 i
1 0
0
c
M
CJ
ti
0
C-.1 '0 'U 0 1: CC M
C•1 .'d CO 0 10 M 0 n
M CO b c l' -I 0 M C
0 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 0
10 '7 P C1 a
117 M M 0
1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
1
0 0 —I 'O C't 1
i
i
0 y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M M 0 0. T c CI I
0 0 0 0
O 0 0
0
Cj c'0 0 '0
0
0' rj C.j M C M c r- c C
Cl c n W c c
O
0
4• 0 .0
0 c c fd
1
Z -4
C 0
E
0
y T 1
0
0 M
'a
M
M
y 0•
M
0
D C•
t M
C
N. C'
10
1• I
M c N. C1 'N!
N CO '.i '0 0
I 1 I
t
IC 0 0 ;1 0 ea c 0 _z
v 0 O
0 N. '0 NO r.
i i
0 0 0 0
Cd t'1 v :'1 C N C
I I
C
0 10 0 M 1 'il O]
Ci
NI C 0 0
n
10 N. 0
1
C
.y NO 0 •A 0 IC C 4
I I
C
NO v '0 117 CC M c Cd C!
C! M 0 "4 0 0 N. 0
1 I
0
4 1
0 e. '0 M C 0 M M
C-.1 M M W 0 n
1 1
0 0 O O 0 I- 0 0 O 0 0
z z
0 tal 4
0 0 10
W v
O. 1 0 0 O 0 !:7 0 10 0 0 0
0 Z
'i Z.1 Z 1 0 1 ti. 1
I H 1 i •0
v 1 X
J C' 4 1 Z t X
1- t i 2
1 1 11 1 1 _1
1 i- W L.L. �W
A r
11 1J t11
1 w Z :fl l i
1 6 Q 1.1 !a1 I 1 Z C. 1 L
1 C7 Z I .72 0 1 10 E
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 v 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O
00 0 d 0
O
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 v 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
c
O
n 0 10
N
0 R.
A
M
0-
M
CC
C!
0
c
EXHIBIT B -4
FINIAL ANALYSIS.OF SMITH PROJECT
PROJECT SMITHOJ.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF LOW -HEAR HYDRO: MILL RIVER: NORTHAMPTON, MASS.
L I S •T •I N G O F I N P U T D A T A
ENGR /ADMINCOSTS: YEAR Di (K$)= 50.00
ENGR /ADMIN COSTS, YEAR D2 (Ifs)= 60.00.
SOURCE OF F_NGR /A'I'MIN COSTS= OWNER
CONSTR. INTEREST COST: YEAR D2 (K$7= 23.00
SOURCE OF CONSTR. INTEREST COSTS= OWNER
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST (K$ /YR)= 20.00
VALUE OF EXISTING DAM (K$)= 100.00
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY: YEAR D1 (R$)= 10.00
VALUE OF MISC. EQUITY: YEAR D2 (K$)= 10.00
POWER AVAILABLE FROM HYDRO (KWH /YR)= 570000.
VALUE OF PLANT OUTPUT (AS OF YR 01)(<$ /YR)= 21.05
EXCESS ENERGY FROM HYDRO (KWH /YR)= 0
SALE PRICE FOR EXCESS ENERGY (C /I(WH)= 2.20
TOTAL CONSTR. COST (W /O ENGR /ADMIN)(K$)= 700.00
CONSTR. COST TO BE FINANCED (K$)= 700.00
CONSTR. COST FROM GRANT (K$)= 0
CONSTR. COST FROM OWNER .(K$).= 0
YEARS FOR CONSTR. FINANCING= 20
DEBT INTEREST RATE /YR)•= 10.00
SINKING FUND INTEREST RATE (Z /YR)= 9.00
CORPORATE TAX RATE 0
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, 0 t M (7. /YR)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ENERGY SAVED /YR)=
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE, ELEC. SALES /YR)=
C A L C U L A T E_ D DA TA
2.00
4.00
4.00
AMOUNT BORROWED: YEAR D1 (K$)= 0
AMOUNT BORROWED: YEAR 02 (K$)= 0
TOTAL BORROWED: YEAR 1 TO 50 (R$) 700.00
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT. YEAR D1 (R$)=
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT: YEAR 02 (K$)
CUM. TOTAL INVESTMENT, YEAR 1 TO 50 (R$)=
160.00
253.00
953.00
0
lit
I 0
M
P
0 1 0; 0
O7
W
17
!o
C•1
0
0
`0 y M n
!7 i in
0
1 W `'0 M,
0 1' n 'd
0
n! 0. 0. f'_ '0 C•! 1" 0 0
P Q 0 0 0
M n n C'1 -0 -i 0 •0 '0
1
0
M .0 10 C'1 '0
0 0 '0
:-t
0
Cl
C•1
O
0
y
n n 0
H
.0
O
O 0 0 0 0 0
P ^d Q• 0 P n 0
GO r's
.f.
0 0 0 0 0 0
11 -i r 07 0 P P -0 -0 0
^1 .0 N. .-t 0 N. N.
I
in O 0 0 0 0
N. 0 N. N. 0
Cd 0 N. 0
O 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 -0 m 0 P u
Cd C'! C'! N. N. n in
I I I
O 0 0 0 0
n. P 0• -i
Cd CJ C'! n
I I
O 0 0 0 0 0
-t •0 -0 c 0 0 I Q. 0. m
C'! C'! i'! N. m 0 I\ N. in
I I
c
Q c
Ca C1
N
O 0 0 0 0 0 0
w 0
3 0
O
0 0
0 0 0
L
z I i
I
0 1 0 I-
1 i-
y 1 CZ
s W!
;01 z f
W 7
0' P
M
z
a Ci 0 e 17
4 0 -0 -a
I I
0 0 c 0 0
4" 0 0 0
I I
NI 0 0 <r 0 0
N. w 0 0
I I
M
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M M
0 0
!I
I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I X
I
.0 •0 rI 7
I
I
I
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1: 10 l
1n M -4
O 0 0
O T i 0 0
0 O 0
I
vs 1
I
I
0 10 0 0
Z
3
1
W t
X
N 3 i
0 1 rn 7; i
0 1 It I ELI
J
0 Z 0 I U.
1
O 10 '-t i W
.7.: 1 !ti 1 1
N
P P
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0
c
'0
O
0
_i I
7
W Z I
CC 0
0 0 03 7
i
3 0 W
C•!
0
W
f 1
0'
L
W
10
Li
E I
I
y 1 0
I
1
i
Overall Investment 1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio (0 Cost Ratio Cash Flow
After Debt
.73 2.89 .62 Retirement
.75 2.78 .67
.69 3.03 .55
I
ZT'T 68'Z 60'1
68'Z ZS'
89' 68'Z LL'
6S' 68'Z 0L'
Z9' 68'Z £L'
Z9' 68•Z £L'
Z9' 68'Z £L'
Z9° 68'Z £L'
11 Z9 68 £L•
Z9' 68'Z £L'
Z9' 68'Z £L'
99' SL'Z 9L'
9L• 6S'Z I8'
I6• 6Z °Z Z6'
Input Input
Baseline Test
Value Value
ITY
Oti
JA 0£
'IA oZ
24.00%
.01%
43.00%
xS'zi$
xs
xoz$
Sensitivity Tests
BASELINE PROJECTION
WO) uo 'I
2. Inflation (Value of
Output)
3. Inflation (Elec-
tricity sales)
4. Financing Term
5. Debt Interest
1
6. Sinking Fund
Interest
ot�E2i I.gaQ /AlTnbg •L
8. Annual OtM Cost
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
B -9
Sensitivity Tests For Chartpak Project
Table B-1
Overall Investment lst Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit-, Positive
Cost Ratio ((f) Cost Ratio 'Cash Flow
After Debt
.44 2.64 .27 Retirement
1
ZZ' VL•Z Z1• 1
I£' SS'Z St'
J
LZ' 179'Z VV'
LZ' b9•Z tib'
u SS' V9' Z S9'
60' f9'Z 0£'
LZ' 179•Z tab'
LZ' 1'9•Z bb'
LZ' ti9'Z tV'
LZ' V9'Z VV'
LZ' 179'Z VV*
LZ' t79•Z t717'
i
LZ' 179•Z VV*
6Z' 6t'Z 9V'
11
S£' TV'Z Sb•
6V'• 6T'Z ZS'
Input Input
Baseline Test
Value Value
ITV
OP
aA O£
'IA 0
S7'
TO'
£Z'
)IS'ZT$
NS
NO Z$
Sensitivity Tests
BASELINE PROJECTION
1. Inflation (OM
2. Inflation (Value of
Output)
3. Inflation (Elec-
tricity sales)
4. Financing Term
5. Debt Interest
6. Sinking Fund
Interest
7. Equity /Debt Ratio
2.soJ 100 Tnnuuv •S
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS-AND PLANNERS NOR _T_HAMP_TON,_ MASSACHUSETTS
B -10
Sensitivity Tests For Cookes Intermediate Project
Table B72
Overall Investment 1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio Cost Ratio, Cash Flow
wauiaa-pou
lgaQ 09' ZL'Z ZL'
11 ZS' L8'Z 89'
I 99' T9'Z SL'
11 LI'I ZL•Z Zi'i
LZ• ZL'Z 6V'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL °Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
09' ZL'Z ZL'
S9' 8S'Z 9L'
9L' Zi7'Z I8'
16' Z1•Z Z6•
Input Input
Baseline Test
Value Value
ITV
aA OV
-IA 0£
'aA Oa
8b•
TO'
i7Z'
)tS'ZT$
NS
)OZ$
Sensitivity Tests
BASELINE PROJECTION
1. Inflation (O$M)
2. Inflation (Value of
Output)
3. Inflation (Elec-
tricity sales)
4. Financing Term
lsaaalul a.gac •S
6. Sinking Fund
Interest
1
7. Equity /Debt Ratio
8. Annual OEM Cost
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON,
B -11
Sensitivity Tests For Pro Brush Project
Table B-3
Overall Investment 1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio ((t) Cost Ratio Cash Flow
.48 4.03 .26 After Debt
Retirement
8i• 1Z'b Sb•
i£• 98•£ OS'
V9' £0'V SL'
170' £0'b
9Z' £0'V 8b'
II 9 Z' £0'V 81'
9Z' £0' V 817'
9Z' £0'b 8b'
9Z' £0'17 8b'
,4 9Z' £0'17 8b'
11 9Z• £0'b 8V'
9Z' £0'17 8b•
9Z' £0'1' 8b'
,i 6Z' £L•£ ZS'
£ti' OS'£ SS'
6S' S0'£ £9'
f
Input Input
Baseline Test
Value Value
ITV
20 Yr.
30 Yr
40 Yr
Lb'
i0
)IS'ZT$
ms
)toz$
Sensitivity Tests
BASELINE PROJECTION
(00) uoTieluul 'T
2. Inflation (Value of
Output)
1
3. Inflation (Elec-
tricity sales)
4. Financing Term
I
I
5. Debt Interest
6. Sinking Fund
Interest
7. Equity /Debt Ratio
I I
8. Annual O&M Cost
CURRAN ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
B -12
Sensitivity Tests For Smith Project
cd
Cd
cd
bn cn
cd
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
B -13
so
0
0
0
w
ca
bA
cd
1
•>s
ca
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
B -14
Overall Investment ,lst'Yr. of
Benefit Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio O Cost Ratio Flow
.72 2.72 .60 1 After Debt
;Retirement
11 t OL' £17'Z 08'
OL' £17'Z 08'
OL' £17'Z 08'
06' 80'Z 176'
SZ'T ZL'T 17T'T
1 -oaJJd
Equity investmen
reducted by $137
quity nvestmen
reduced by $137K;
debt int. rate
reduced 10% to 8
Equity investment
reduced by $137K;
debt int. rate
reduced 10 to 8
effective corp.
tax rate reduced
45% to 25%
Equity investment
reduced by $137K;
debt reduced by
$182K
Equity investment
reduced by $137K;
debt reduced by
$363.5K
Program Alternatives
1
i
BASELINE PROJECTION
1. Development Grant:
Grant for Eng. /Admin.
Construct. Interest
Costs
2. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
3. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
Accelerated
Depreciation
Investment Tax
Credit
4. Development Grant
Grant for 25%
of Construction
Cost
5. Development Grant
Grant for 50%
of Construction
Cosa
B-15
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Table B-7
Overall Investment ;1st Yr. of
Benefit- Cost /kWh Benefit- Positive
Cost Ratio Cost Ratio Cash Flow
2uamaaz2au
�.qau .za�.Jd 9Z' £0'b 8b'
0£• I9•£ £S'
T£' £S'£ SS'
017 ZO'£. 179'
SS' IS'Z LL'
1 oaJJ d
Equity investment
reduced by $133K
Equity investment
reduced by $133K;
debt int. rate
reduced 10% to 8%
Not Applicable,
Equity investment
reduced by $133K;
debt reduced by
$175K
5. Development Grant Equity investment
Grant for 50% reduced by $133K;
of Construction debt reduced by
Cost $350K
it
Program Alternatives
BASELINE PROJECTION
1. Development Grant:
Grant for Eng. /Admin.
Construct. Interest
Costs
2. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
3. Development Grant
Loan Guarantee
Accelerated
Depreciation
Investment Tax
Credit
4. Development Grant
Grant for 25%
of Construction
Cost
0
w
a)
0
bo
co
cd
CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON; MASSACHUSETTS
B -16
Table B-8
APPENDIX C-
ARTICLE I DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
B. Responsibility of the ENGINEERS The ENGINEERS are responsible to
assure that the feasibility assessment is accomplished in a manner consistent
with the provisions. of this Agreement. The ENGINEERS' proposal prepared for
the CITY in March 1978, identified as "Feasibility Study for Low -Head Hydro-
power," as amended on May 19, 1978, is made a part of this Agreement by this
reference; however, if there is any conflict between the content of the pro
posal and the content of this Agreement, the content of this Agreement governs.
The tasks provided for in the proposal are to be accomplished, and are to re-
sult in, a final feasibility assessment report which will include, as a mini-
mum, the following information:
1. Expected configuration and capacity of the hydropower facility.
2. Estimated performance characteristics of the hydroelectric power
facility including the potential for peak power production and an
estimate of average annual energy production.
3. Expected impact of the hydropower installation on other perceived
water resource needs of the area and the current use of the
reservoir.
4. Marketing potential of the power produced.
5. The necessary requirements of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission,: the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other appropriate
Federal, state, regional, and local agencies.
6. Capital investment per installed kilowatt, total coat per kwh, and
return on investment.
7. Anticipated annual operation and maintenance costs.
8. Anticipated project life.
9. An initial assessment of the environmental impact and socio-
institutional factors.
10. An initial assessment of the safety hazard, if any, introduced
by the addition or rehabilitation of a power plant and other
hydropower appurtenances.
11. Appropriate analyses resulting in sound judgment as to the
engineering acceptability of the proposed site for hydroelectric
power development.
12. Investigation of the availability of a suitable turbine(s),
generator(s), and accessories required for the proposed hydro-
electric power development.
13. Development plan (schedule) for putting power on- line.
Capacity factor The ratio of the average capacity used over a certain period
to the installed capacity of a generating unit. As used herein capacity factor
is calculated on an average annual basis. It is a measure of the degree of
utilization of a plant's maximum potential generating capability.
cfs —Cubic feet per second, a measure of the rate of water flow.
Gross head The difference in elevation between water levels immediately above
and below a dam.
Installed capacity The rate of energy production by a hydroelectric generating
unit under best operating conditions, expressed in kilowatts.
kw Kilowatt, a unit of power equal to 1,000 watts or 1.34 horsepower.
MWh /a Megawatt -hours per annum. One megawatt equals 1,000 kilowatts. A
megawatt -hour is a unit of energy or work equivalent to the power of.one mega-
watt operating for one hour.
Net head The difference in water levels that can be utilized for power genera-
tion after adjusting gross head downward to account for friction and other effi-
ciency losses.
Penstock a conduit or pipe for conducting water from a reservoir to a power-
house.
Tailrace channel into which water passing through a hydroelectric turbine is
discharged.
APPENDIX D
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED TECHNICAL TERMS
1 CURRAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS