HomeMy WebLinkAboutBradley Lake Feasibility Study Vol 2 1983BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC POWER
PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
VOLUME 2
APPENDICES
OCTOBER 1983
~Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation
....___ALASKA POW:t;R AITTHORITY _ ......
CONTRACT No. CC -08-3132 14500.14-H-(D)-1
BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC POWER
PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
VOLUME 2
APPENDICES
OCTOBER 1983
.___ALASKA POWER AITTUORITY _...,.
COPYRIGHT, 1983
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION OF THE ALASKA POWER
AUTHORITY AND IS TO BE RETURNED UPON REQUEST. ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE
COPIED, DISCLOSED TO THIRD PARTIES, OR USED FOR OTHER THAN THE EXPRESS
PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY.
VOLUME 1
VOLut-1E 2
VOLUME 3 -
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
REPORT
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDICES
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES
FEASIBILITY STUDY -CONSTRUCTION
FACILITIES
TRANSMISSION LINE ANALYSIS
FEASIBILITY STUDY OF TRANSMISSION
LINE SYSTEM
BRADLEY RIVER INSTREAM FLOW STUDIES
APPENDIX A
GEOTECHNICAL
STUDIES
Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Power Project
Geotechnical Studies
Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.
Bradley Lake Project Office
September, 1983
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
511
Suite B
5621 Arctic Boulevard
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
907-561-2120
..
Bradley· Lake
Hydroelectric· Power Project
. -
Geotechnical. Studies . .. .
•
•
• • • . ,
, ... •
l •
. . . .
Stone & Webster · Engine~ring Corp .
Bradley ~ Lake Project Office -1
' ~.0. Box 14359 .. ~ ..
... ·Anchorage, Alaska 99501
September, 1983
SHANNON & WILSON , INC.
• K•08 31
5111
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechn1cal Consultants
2055 Hill Road. P 0 Box 843 • Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 • Telephone i907l 452-6183
September 30, 1983 K-0631-61
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation
Rradley Lake Project Office
P.O. Box 14359
Anchorage, AK 99501
Attn: Mr. J.J. Garrity, Project Manager
RE: FINAL REPORT ON GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES, BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC
POWER PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 14500.09-G004S
Gentlemen:
Attached is our final report describing the findings of Shannon &
Wilson 1 S geotechnical studies for the Rradley Lake Hydroelectric Prwer
Project. This report includes the results of our reconnaissance geologic
mapping program of the tunnel alignment, and our subsurface explorations
at the intake structure, powerhouse, and b~rge basin locations, as well
as at the tunnel alignment crossings of the Bradley River and Bull Moose
Faults. Laboratory test results on soil samples from the barge basin
locatior are also presented.
If you have any questions, please contact us at your convenience.
Sincere 1 y,
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
By~~'{:~ onE. Cronin, P.G.
Associate -Engineering Geology
~a-t ... f'J~ ROhilD. AbbOtt, P.E.
Vice President & Manager
Encl .
Rohn 0 Abbott, P.E.
V•ce President and Manager
Seattle • Spokane • Portland • Fa~rbanks • St. LOUIS • Houston
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 . INTRODUCTION
2.
3.
1.1 Purpose and Scope
1.2 Limitations
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Description
2.2 Project Description
2.3 Previous Investigations
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
3.1 General
3.2 Geologic Mapping
3.3 Subsurface Exploration Program
4. LABORATORY TESTING
4.1 Soil
4.2 Rock
5. GEOLOGY
5.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics
5.2 Seismicity
5.3 Site Geology
5.3.1 General Geologic Setting
5.3.2 Lithologic Units
5.3.3 Structural Geology
5.3.3.1 General
5.3.3.2 Faults
5.3.3.3 Joints
5.3.3.4 Lineaments
K-0631
PAGE
1
2
3
3
4
6
7
8
12
13
15
16
17
18
22
23
23
24
6.
5.4 Geologic Conditions
5.4.1 Intake Structure
5.4.2 Tunnel Alignment
5.4.2.1 General
5.4.2.2 Intake to Bradley River
24
25
Fault Zone 26
5.4.2.3 Bradley River Fault Zone 27
5.4.2.4 Bradley River Fault Zone to
Bull Moose Fault Zone 28
5.4.2.5 Bull Moose Fault Zone 29
5.4.2.6 Bull Moose Fault Zone to
Powerhouse Site 30
5.4.3 Powerhouse 31
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
Genera 1
Intake Structure
Bradley River Fault
Bull Moose Fault
Barge Basin
Powerhouse
32
34
35
37
38
41
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
7.1 General 42
42
44
47
49
7.2 Rockmass Characteristics
7.3 Rock Type Distribution
7.4 Tunneling Characteristics
7.5 Barge Basin Soil Properties
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3-7
Figure 8
Figures 9-11
Figure 12
Figures 13-15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Appendix A
Appendix B
Photos 1-6
Photos 7-11
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Summary of Subsurface Explorations
Description of Rock Classification Methods
Summary of Laboratory Test Results
Location Map
Geologic Maps
Boring Logs
Test Pit Log
Grain Size Gradations
Unconfined Compression Test Results
Triaxial Compression Test Results
Plasticity Chart
Summary of Test Results
Annotated References
Glossary of Cataclastic Terminology
Selected Core Photos
Selected Site Photos
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Scope
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation, under contract to the Alaska
Power Authority, is currently performing a Feasibility Study for the
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power Project. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. was
retained by Stone & Webster to perform se 1 ected geotechni ca 1 studies
related to the project. This report summarizes the results of Shannon &
Wilson's studies, which were performed under Contract No. 14500.09-
G004S, dated April 28, 1983.
Shannon & Wilson's studies were directed at evaluating geologic
conditions specifically at the location of the proposed intake
structure, along the power tunnel alignment, at the proposed powerhouse
location, and in the vicinity of the proposed barge basin. This work
was accomplished through a reconnaissance level geologic mapping program
and the drilling, sampling, and logging of exploratory borings at four
locations. A fifth boring which had been planned to confirm the depth
of bedrock at the location of the proposed powerhouse was replaced by a
test pit because of the shallow depth of the overburden. Pertinent
previous reports were reviewed during the course of work.
The purpose of the geologic mapping and subsurface exploration at the
intake structure and powerhouse sites was to identify conditions which
might affect the design or suitability of the layout now being
considered. Geologic mapping along the tunnel alignment was performed
primarily to estimate the amount of various rock types that would be
encountered along the alignment. Exploratory borings were drilled at
the tunnel crossing of the two major identified faults in the area to
investigate the nature of the rockmass and the character and thickness
of any gouge zones in the faults. The boring at the barge basin
location was drilled to determine if the nature of the tidal flat
deposits was such that stability problems would affect the proposed
basin development. To assist in this determination, a soil laboratory
1
K-0631-61
testing program was added to Shannon & Wilson's scope of work to define
the properties of the soils from that boring.
The scope of Shannon & Wilson's geotechnical studies specifically did
not include relogging of core from previous borings; rock joint surveys;
pressure or permeability testing of borings; investigation of geologic
conditions at the dam site, quarry sites, or for the roads or other
adjunct facilities; testing of the rock core obtained from the borings;
or studies of seismic or other geologic hazards.
1.2 Limitations
This report was prepared for use by Stone & Webster Ergineering Corp-
oration, the Alaska Power Authority, or their consultants, and presents
the results of surface and subsurface geologic explorations at a limited
number of specified sites for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power
Project. The geologic conditions in the project area are complex and
variable, and the reconnaissance level geologic mapping and drilling
program performed may not define the entire range of conditions which
might be present. In addit1on, surface geology and conditions found in
relatively shallow borings may not be wholly representative of con-
ditions at tunnel depth. While this report is not a comprehersive study
of the geology of the Bradley Lake project area, it should provide a
basis for estimating conditions in the specific areas investigated.
2
K-0631-61
2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Description
Bradley Lake is located in a glacially carved valley on the Kenai
Peninsula about 25 miles northeast of Homer, Alaska and about 110 miles
southwest of Anchorage. The western end of the three-mile long lake is
located about four miles east of the head of Kachemak Bay. Lake water
surface elevation is 1080 feet, and the maximum depth of the lake is
about 268 feet. Water sources for the lake are glacial meltwaters and
runoff from the surrounding slopes of the Kenai Mountains. The lake is
drained by the Bradley River, which runs north\vestward from the west end
of the lake into tidal flats at the head of Kachemak Bay.
The terrain between Bradley Lake and the tidal flats of Kachemak Bay
rises to a maximum elevation of 2070 feet. Bedrock is found at or near
the ground surface in most areas. The higher elevations consist of
barren rock or low scrub vegetation, while the lower slopes support a
heavy growth of large timber.
The mud flats of Kachemak bay consist of an unknown maximum thickness of
tidal flat or deltaic deposits. The maximum tide range in the Bay is
about 28 feet, and, at the highest tides, the mud flats are submerged to
a point very near the base of the surrounding low bluffs.
2.2 Project Description
Plans for the development of hydroelectric power at Bradley Lake consist
of raising the lake level with c. dam at the natural lake outlet, and
diverting lake water through a tunnel to a powerhouse located adjacent
to Kachemak Bay. Adjunct facilities include such items as a barge
basin, access roads, an airstrip, and a construction camp.
The project plan previously identified by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers involved an intake structure on the right abutment of the dam,
3
K-0631-61
which required the power tunnel to cross the Bradley River on a bridge
downstream of the dam. Previous geotechni ca 1 studies were confined to
this route.
The project plan currently being investigated by Stone & Webster Engi-
neering Corporation involves an intake structure located on the left
abutment of the dam, thus eliminating the crossing of the Bradley River.
From this point, two possible tunnel alignments are being considered.
The tunnel alignment investigated and presented by this report extends
for approximately 14,050 feet along a N63°W trend to a proposed surge
tank location. Northwest of the surge tank this alignment trends N47°W
for about 4,250 feet to the proposed powerhouse location. Only the
latter segment of this tunnel alignment closely parallels the alignment
proposed and investigated by the Corps of Engineers. The alternative
alignment would extend for approximately the same overall total length,
and essentially follow the alignment investigated, on a continuous trend
of N60°W.
The depth and profi 1 e of the power tunne 1 is currently under study by
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. The purpose of these studies
is to obtain a balance between hydraulic characteristics and
construction considerations. At the present time, it appears that major
portions of the tunne 1 may be 1 ocated at depths as great as 900 feet
below the ground surface.
2.3 Previous Investigations
Bradley Lake was first considered for hydroe 1 ectri c deve 1 opment by the
Corps of Engineers in the early 1950 1 s. The project was dormant for a
number of years, with renewed interest since the mid 1970 1 s. ~~ost of
the Corps 1 work is summarized in their General Design ~1emorandum No. 2,
published in 1982. This memorandum includes a summary of site geologic
conditions, and the logs of 40 exploratory borings drilled during 1980
and 1981. Also of use during Shannon & Wilson 1 S studies were reports on
various aspects of site geology prepared for the Corps of Engineers by
Woodward-Clyde Consultants and DOWL Engineers in 1979 and 1983,
4
K-0631-61
respectively. The Woodward-Clyde study evaluated a variant of the most
northerly power tunne 1 a 1 tern ate discussed in the Design Memorandum,
while the DOWL study was restricted to the dam abutments and the recom-
mended Corps of Engineers 1 tunnel alignment including the proposed
crossing of the Bradley River.
Other selected references to previous work in the area are listed in
Appendix A.
5
K-0631-61
3. FIELD EXPLORATIONS
3.1 General
The field explorations for Shannon & Wilson 1 S study of the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Power Project were accomplished during the summer of 1983
in two separate phases, geologic mapping and subsurface explorations.
Geologic mapping was conducted from June 6 to June 16 by Dan Clayton of
Shannon & Wilson and Paul Mayrose of Stone & Webster Engineering Corpor-
ation. Boring locations for the subsequent drilling program were
selected after that reconnaissance. Results of the geologic mapping
effort are presented in section 5 of this report.
Subsurface investigations were accomplished from July 5 to August 20.
Three diamond core borings, ranging in depth of hole from 155.3 feet to
262.3 feet, were drilled along the tunnel alignment for a total drilled
footage of 623.9 feet, including 63 feet of soil drilling and 561 feet
of rock drilling. The cored holes were drilled at an inclination of 45°
to cross the predominantly vertical geological structure typical of the
project area, and to intersect and determine the horizontal extent of
suspected shear zones. A fourth boring was dri 11 ed to a depth of 50
feet in the area of the proposed barge basin, and was advanced using
soil sampling techniques.
In addition to the four borings, a test pit was dug by hand in the area
of the proposed powerhouse, in lieu of an additional boring, to verify
the presence of shallow bedrock at that location. Drilling operations
and geologic conditions were logged by experienced geologists from our
firm. The first three borings were logged by Roger Troost, and the test
pit and fourth boring were logged by Dan Clayton.
Daily transportation of personnel and movement of drilling equipment was
accomplished by helicopter based out of Homer.
6
K-0631-61
3.2 Geoloqic Mapping
The geologic mapping was focused specifically on the intake structure,
tunnel and penstock alignment, and powerhouse site for the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project. The purpose of this study was: 1) to identify
conditions which might affect the design or suitability of the layout
now being considered; 2) to map and describe the geologic units and
structural features in the vicinity of the intake structure, along the
tunnel alignment, and at the powerhouse site; 3) to estimate the amount
of various rock types that can be anticipated along the tunnel
alignment; and 4) to determine locations and orientations of borings to
be drilled as part of Shannon & Wilson's studies.
The geologic studies consisted of three main tasks; 1) a review of
previous geologic work; 2) geologic mapping of the intake, tunnel
alignment, and powerhouse sites; and 3) photogeologic interpretation of
the project area.
The review of previous work was accomplished prior to the other tasks.
Both project-specific geologic reports and geologic studies of more
regional significance were reviewed. Those studies which included
information pertinent to this evaluation are identified in an annotated
list of references in Appendix A. The scope of work did not include
sufficient time to field check the geologic maps or joint studies of
previous workers, except where their studies overlapped with the preser.t
mapping program. Nor was there time to carefully inspect the rock core
from previously drilled borings.
The geologic mapping was accomplished by foot traverses throughout the
intake and powerhouse areas and along the tunnel alignment. Mapping was
done on 1:2400 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers topographic maps. Map
locations were determined by compass triangulation from known locations
supplemented by altimeter readings.
The photogeologic interpretation of the project area was conducted
concurrently with the geologic mapping task. Photogeologic mapping was
7
K-0631-61
accomplished during the evenings and when inclement weather prohibited
helicopter access to the site. Stereo pairs of 1:12,000 black and white
aerial photographs and a stereoscopic viewer were used for the photo
interpretation. The photos were most useful for identifyin9 structural
features and liPeaments, but also aided in determining the distribution
of geologic units. Photogeologic interpretations were field checked as
part of the geologic mapping task.
The primary focus of the geologic mapping task was to develop a geologic
map of a 200-foot-wide corridor along the proposed tunnel alignment and
of the intake and powerhouse sites. Where bedrock a 1 ong the tunne 1
alignment corridor was obscured it was necessary to map adjoining areas
in order to interpret the characteristics of the lithologic units along
the alignment. Adjoining areas were also briefly examined to better
understand the structural features and lineaments that trend through the
project area. The scope of work for the study did not include geologic
evaluation of the dam site or of potential quarry sites.
Following completion of the field work, petrographic thin sections of
several rock samples were prepared and examined microscopically by Paul
Mayrose of Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. The results of this
work were relayed informally to Shannon & Wilson and have been incorp-
orated into this report where appropriate.
3.3 Subsurface Exploration Program
Three diamond core borings, SW 83-1, -2, and -4, were drilled in the
vicinity of the proposed intake structure and at the proposed tunne 1
alignment crossings of the Bradley River and Bull Moose faults, respec-
tively. A Longyear 38 drill rig, adapted for helicopter transport, was
used to drill the three angled diamond core holes along the proposPd
tunnel alignment. Using fresh water from nearby lakes as a drill fluid,
the holes began at the surface using an HQ 3 triple tube wireline core
barrel, which yields a core diameter of 2.38 inches. The wireliPe
system allowed relatively trouble-free advancement of the core barrel
through fractured rock and other caving materia 1 s, and the triple-tube
8
K-0631 -61
design facilitated recovery of highly fractured materials in a rela-
tively undisturbed state. When it became necessary, the coring system
was reduced to NQ 3 sized coring apparatus, recovering a smaller diameter
core of 1.78 inches. Both size coring systems used five-foot long inner
barrels.
When drilling action suggested zones of materials that could not be
suitably recovered with an internal discharge bit, a five-foot long NWD 4
conventional core barrel (core diameter of 2.06 inches) with a face
discharge bit was used. This minimized the exposure of fragile silty or
clayey materials to the water used as a drilling fluid, in order to
improve core recovery.
Generally the core runs were photographed while still in the split
innertube to record the natural state of the material as first observed
in the field. Photographs were also taken of each box of core.
Selected core photographs are included at the end of this report. A
complete set of core photographs has been provided to Stone & \·i~=>bster
Engineering Corporation for reference.
The Rock Quality Designator (RQD) was measured on each run of rock core
while still in the split innertube, using the method of Deere (Table 2).
Values of RQD are recorded on the boring logs, Figures 3, 4, and 7. It
should be noted that because of the different sizes and styles of coring
systems used that it may not be possible to directly correlate RQD from
one run or boring to another. Occasional instances of drill rod
11 Chatter 11 or vibration, or instances of "mudding" of the coring bit, may
also have caused mechanical breakage of the core, locally reducing the
RQD.
In general, core recovery was excellent for all three diamond core
borings, averaging 99% for the total 561 feet of rock drilled. Loss of
drilling water was minimal. No pressure tests, permeability tests, or
other in situ testing were performed in the core borings.
9
K-0631-61
Drilling techniques and geologic conditions are summarized on the boring
logs, Figures 3, 4 and 7.
The boring performed at the proposed barge basin, SW 83-3, was advanced
using rotary wash techniques with a Simco 2400 drill rig. Samples were
obtained at the base of the advanced casinq with either a 311 O.D.
thin-wall sampler (Shelby Tube), or a 211 0.0. split-spoon sampler driven
by a 140-pound hammer -~=a 11 i ng 30 inches onto the drill rods (Standard
Penetration Test). For the split-spoon samples, the number of blows
required to advance the sampler the final twelve inches is the pene-
tration resistance, which indicates the relative consistency of fine-
grained soils and the relative density of granular soils. Torvane shear
tests and pocket penetrometer tests were performed on the end of each
Shelby Tube sample in the field.
In addition to the sampling of Boring SW 83-3, vane shear tests were
performed at two depths in fine-grained material. Peak shear strengths
were first obtained for the undisturbed material and the remolded
strength was determined following 10 revolutions of the vane. The
results of all field measurements are presented on the summary boring
log for SW 83-3, Figure 5, and are summarized with laboratory test
results on Figure 17.
An additional shallow boring, numbered SW 83-3A, was drilled adjacent to
Boring SW 83-3 specifically to obtain Shelby Tube samples from zones of
fine-grained material not adequately represented in the sampling inter-
val of Boring SW 83-3. The log of this boring is presented on Figure 6.
All of the samples obtained from the barge basin location were sealed
and returned to our Fairbanks office for laboratory testing.
Because of the difficulty which would have been involved in setting up
the drill rig at the proposed powerhouse location, and because of the
shallow depth of the overburden, a test pit was dug at this location.
The pit was dug by hand, beginning at an exposure of rock on the hi 11
side, and eventually exposing the rock surface about 2 feet below the
10
K-0631-61
colluvial soils over an area about 9 feet square. The log of this test
pit is presented on Figure 8.
The preliminary locations selected for exploratory borings during the
geologic reconnaissance work were surveyed for horizontal location and
elevation by R & M Consultants. In the case of all three core borings,
the actual boring location was shifted from the surveyed location to
enhance the quality of subsurface information. Actual core boring
locations were determined by tape, compass and hand level from the
survey maker. During the course of the exploration program, the
proposed location of the barge basin was shifted from the south side of
Sheep Point to the north side. The boring location was shifted accor-
dingly, and the approximate location of the boring was established by
triangulation referenced to features on the Corps of Engineers 1:2400
scale topographic base map. The coordinates and elevations given for
each boring on the individual boring logs should be viewed as approx-
imate, given the limitation of the locating methods involved. All
elevations are referenced to the Bradley Lake Project Datum.
The boring locations are shown on the Location Map, Figure 1, and on the
appropriate sheet of the Geologic Map, Figure 2. Pertinent data re-
garding the borings is summarized in Table 1. The classification
methods used to describe rock properties such as hardness and weathering
are described in Table 2.
11
K-0631-61
4. LABORATORY TESTING
4.1 Soil Tests
Laboratory testing was performed only on soil samples obtained from
boring SW 83-3, located in the vicinity of the proposed barge basin.
The primary purpose of this testing was to establish the index and
engineering properties of the tidal flat deposits, particularly their
sensitivity, to determine if the stability of the proposed basin
development would be affected. No laboratory testing was performed on
the overburden soils from the diamond cored borings.
Index property testing on both disturbed and undisturbed samples con-
sisted of determination of water content, gr-1in size gradation (by both
mechanical and hydrometer analyses), specific gravity, Atterberg limits,
pore water salinity, and organic content. Unit weights were determined
only on undisturbed Shelby Tube samples.
Engineering property testing consisted of performing unconsolidated-
undrained triaxial compression tests on both undisturbed Shelby Tube
samples and on remolded samples for the purpose of determining the
sensitivity of the materials. Remolding was accomplished by disag-
gregating the sample by forcing it through a #4 sieve, followed by
recompacting in a mold to approximately the unit weight and moisture
content of the natural sample.
A pair of unconfined compression tests (undisturbed and remolded
samp 1 es) was a 1 so run. Laboratory Torvane tests, both natura 1 and
remolded, were also run where possible to· obtain additional shear
strength va 1 ues. The remo 1 ded strength was measured after 8 to 10
revolutions of the Torvane.
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with applicable ASTM or
other generally accepted laboratory procedures. Water added to samples
for determination of Atterberg limits was a solution of Sodium Chloride
12
K-0631-61
approximating the salinity of the natural pore water of the sample.
Another modification to standard procedures was the application of back
pressure to the unconsolidated-undrained triaxial test samples after the
application of the confining pressure. This was done to prevent
consolidation in the event the samples were not saturated when received
in the laboratory.
The laboratory test results are summarized on Table 3, Summary of
Laboratory Test Results. Grain size gradations are plotted on Figures 9
through 11, compression test results are plotted on Figures 12 through
15, and Atterberg limit values are plotted on the Plasticity Chart,
Figure 16.
The soil properties and test results from Boring SW 83-3 in the proposed
barge basin area are summarized and discussed in sections 6.6 and 7.5 of
this report. Laboratory data relating to the sensitivity of the
material are summarized in Figure 17.
To our knowledge, no soil tests on samples of the tidal deposits have
been reported in previous investigations.
4.2 Rock Tests
With the exception of index property tests performed on a sample of
gouge material from the Bradley River Fault from Boring SW 83-2, no
other tests were performed by Shannon & Wilson on rock from the diamond
core borings, as this was outside the scope of the present study. Water
content, Atterberg limits, and grain size gradation \vere determined on a
sample of gouge from the Bradley River Fault. Results of the first two
tests are shown at the beginning of Table 3, and the grain size gra-
dation is plotted on Figure 9.
Tests on rock core were performed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and reported in Appendix 0 of General Design Memorandum No. 2. These
tests consisted primarily of unconfined and triaxial compression tests,
and splitting tensile strength tests.
13
K-0631-61
During the present Feasibility Study, Dr. Alfred Hendron, under contract
to Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, performed addition a 1 tests
on rock from the Corps of Engineers' borings. These tests consisted
principally of unconfined compressive strength; Schmidt, Shere, and
Abrasion Hardness; and longitudinal wave velocity.
A brief discussion of the results of these rock tests by others is
contained in Section 7 of this report. We understand that at least two
manufacturers of tunnel boring machines have also tested portions of the
Corps of Engineers' rock core, but we have not reviewed the results of
these tests.
14
K-0631-61
5. GEOLOGY
5.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics
The portion of the Kenai ~1ountains in which the Bradley Lake project
area is located is composed of metamorphic rocks of upper Mesozoic Age
named the McHugh Complex (Clark, 1973). These rocks are thought by
Clark and others to have been deposited in deep water on the continental
margin. The rocks have been uplifted, deformed, and shaped by erosional
processes. Accentuated by glacial and colluvial influences, the local
topography is dominated by conspicuous lineaments that are surficial ex-
pressions of a complex network of faults or major joint sets that are
resultant of the activity of the seismic region in which the area lies.
An expression of the primary tectonic influence on the project area is
found in the Gulf of Alaska, where, about 185 miles southeast of Bradley
Lake, the axis of the Aleutian Arc-Trench occurs sub-parallel to the
prevalent northeast-southwest strike of the prominent tectonic features
found a round Bradley Lake and in the surrounding region. The
convergence of the North American and Pacific lithospheric plates,
marked at the earth's surface by the Aleutian Arc-Trench, is responsible
for substantial regional tectonic activity as a result of the northward
movement and underthrusting of the Pacific Plate at the rate of about 6
em per year. The resultant subduction zone of this regional megathrust
system dips to the northwest from the Aleutian Arc-Trench, and a plane
of seismic activity, called a Benioff Zone, marks the bourdary of the
two colliding lithospheric plates. This Benioff Zone is the focus of
several historical earthquakes in Southern Alaska, and at the project
area occurs about 30 miles below the earth's surface.
The immense compressional forces generated by the plate tectonics of the
Kenai Region have resulted in deformation of the upper crust materials
of the Kenai Peninsula in the form of folding, jointing and faulting.
Of the several major regional fault systems that express this defor-
mation, two faults are found in the vicinity of the Bradley Lake
15
K-0631-61
Hydroelectric Power Project. The Eagle River Fault crosses through the
southeastern portion of Bradley Lake, and the Border Ranges Fault forms
the northern front of the Kenai Mountains and flanks the northwest
portion of the project area. Neither of these faults crosses the
project area but their proximity suggests a relatiorship and possible
influence on two other lesser, but still pronounced, faults that cia
cross the proposed tunnel alignment, the Bradley River Fault and the
Bull Moose Fault, found 3,900 feet and 9,800 feet, respectively, from
the proposed intake area at Bradley Lake.
Like the Eagle River and Border Ranges Faults, the Bradley River and
Bull Moose Faults strike in the general northeast-southwest direction
that is characteristic of the regional tectonic grain, and they have
been suggested to be splays from the Border Ranges Fault (Woodward-Clyde
Consultants, 1979). Together with several other randomly oriented
faults, these lineaments create the topography found in the Bradley Lake
project area.
The tectonic processes discussed above have also been responsible for
the pervasive shearing of the rockmass itself, which is discussed in
greater detail below and in section 6, Subsurface Conditions.
5. 2 Seismicity
Shannon & Wi 1 son 1 s scope
project site seismicity.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
of work did not include an evaluation of
This subject was considered in depth by
(1981), and is summarized by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers in General Design Memorandum No. 2.
Briefly summarizing this previous work, the Corps of Engineers selected
two design earthquakes, a magnitude 8.5 event occurring on the
megathrust beneath the site, and a magnitude 7.5 event ocurring on the
Border Ranges or Eagle River Faults. Studies by Woodward-Clyde Consul-
tants indicated that these latter two faults dominated the response
spectra for the design maximum earthquake.
16
K-0631-61
None of the Border Ranges, Eagle River, Bradley River, or Bull t~oose
Faults are known to be historically active according to the
~Joodward-Clyde report. t~i croea rthquake data avail ab 1 e at the time of
the report revealed no association between the recorded seismicity and
the mapped faults in the project area. In fact, the seismic activity
appeared to be at a depth shallower than the subduction zone, defor-
mation along which is thought to be the primary cause of motion on these
faults. Since the Woodward-Clyde study in 1981, we understand that
evidence has been found to suggest recent activity on the Eagle River
fault near Eklutna, some 125 miles northeast of the project site.
If the Border Ranges or Eagle River Faults are active, Woodward-Clyde
concludes that displacement on either of them could induce movement on
the Bull Moose or Bradley River Faults, or on other small faults in the
project area. In addition, they state that independent fault rupture
appears possible on the Bradley River or Bull Moose Faults, with amounts
of slip ranging from 20 em to 300 em. They estimate the probability of
displacements occurring on these faults in the next 100 years in the
-3 -4 range of 4 X 10 to 2 X 10 .
Woodward-Clyde Consultants report that data on the Border Ranges, Eagle
River, Bradley River, and Bull Moose Faults is generally scarce. They
suggest that further detailed geologic studies would be required if it
becomes necessary to further quantify the dominance of the site response
spectra by the first two faults, or to more precisely estimate the
potential for surface rupture along the two on-site faults.
5.3 Site Geology
5.3.1 General Geologic Setting
The project area is underlain by weakly metamorphosed sedimentary strata
of the McHugh Complex. This bedrock is locally mantled by
unconsolidated glacial, alluvial, and colluvial deposits and, below tree
lines, is generally obscured by vegetation and soil cover. The
17
K-0631-61
McHugh Complex in the project area is comprised primarily of weakly
metamorphosed graywacke, argillite, and cherty argillite. Locally
these racks are intruded by dacite dikes. A metaconglomerate has been
described in previous geologic studies of the Bradley Lake area, but
was nat observed in the area of the proposed tunnel alignment, power-
house, and intake.
The graywacke, argillite, and cherty argillite of the McHugh Complex
have a complex distribution as a result of their intense deformation
and structural juxtaposition. Recognizable bedding planes and marker
beds are generally absent or masked by tectonic foliation, making
individual units very difficult to map. Many contacts appear to be
tectonic rather than depositional, and individual lithologic units
commonly are discontinuous over short distances. Many of the thicker
lithologic units either pinch out or are truncated within a few hun-
dred feet along their trend, whereas the thinner units often can be
traced no more than a few feet to few tens of feet. Consequently,
projection of lithologic units and rockmass characteristics from sur-
face exposures laterally into areas where the rock is obscured and
vertically into the subsurface is necessarily speculative.
The rocks in the Bradley Lake area are predominantly cataclastic rocks
that have been broken and granulated due to stress and movement during
fau 1 t i ng.
low-grade
These broken rocks have generally regained cohesion through
metamorphism. The deformational hi story of the rocks
explains their sheared texture,
extremely gradational contacts.
intimate intermixing, and the often
However, lithologic classifications
were used during the geologic reconnaissance, rather than cataclastic
nomenclature, for consistency with previous investigators.
5.3.2 Lithologic Units
For the purpose of this evaluation we have subdivided the bedrock into
five lithologic units based on their distinctive
These units are graywacke, massive argillite,
18
rockmass properties.
foliated argillite,
K-0631-61
foliated cherty argillite, and dacite intrusives. The general char-
acteristics of these bedrock units are discussed below.
The graywacke is a highly indurated, dark gray to dark greenish gray,
very fine to medium-grained, weakly metamorphosed sandstone. It
typically contains dark gray, angular to subrounded, sand-sized rock
fragments that, in hand specimen, appear to be argillite or slate.
The graywacke grades in grain size to the massive argillite described
below. In the finer grained samples lithic fragments generally were
not observed. Fine irregular quartz and calcite veins are locally
common in the graywacke.
The graywacke is massive with little or no evidence of
for lenses or detached remmants of beds of foliated
cherty argillite that locally occur within the unit.
bedding except
a rg i 1 1 i t e and
Although com-
manly slickensided, tne graywacke in hand specimen and outcrop does
not reflect the pervasive tectonic fabric that is strongly expressed
in the foliated argillites. The graywacke is relatively resistant to
weathering and generally .underlies the more prominent hills in the
project area. Where exposed, the rock is fresh to slightly weathered.
Moderately to widely spaced, partly opened to very tight joints are
typical of the vertical exposures of the graywacke.
The massive argillite is a strongly indurated, dark gray to dark
greenish gray, weakly metamorphosed siltstone to very fine-grained
sandstone. It is a fine-grained equivalent of the graywacke and has
similar rockmass properties. Exposures of this unit are fresh to
slightly weathered, massive, lack evidence of shearing or foliation in
hand specimen and outcrop, and typically have moderately to widely
spaced joints. The massive argillite occurs in juxtaposition with
both graywacke and foliated argillite. Chert is noticably rare in the
massive argillite, but in other respects this lithologic unit appears
to be the relatively unsheared equivalent of the foliated argillite.
19
K-0631-61
A weakly metamorphosed tuff vias identified in a thin section
sample taken from a location just northwest of hil 1 2036.3.
from a
In hand
specimen this rock resembled a metamorphosed mafic intrusive, but in
outcrop it appeared to grade into massive argillite. Tuff was also
identified in a thin section of a sample of graywacke taken from a
location midway between hil 1 2036.3 and the surge tank. Even at the
microscopic level, the tuff appears to be intermingled with graywacke
and/or argillite. The texture of the tuff is suggestive of deposition
in a water medium. These observations suggest contemporaneous depo-
sition of the various parent materials, a situation compatible with
the geologic setting. The Corps of Engineers classified a thin sec-
tion sample from their boring DH-11 as a "volcanic graywacke". Its
occurrence is not noted on the log of that boring. Considering the
appearance of the material in thin section, this term may, in fact, be
more accurately descriptive of its origin than is the term "tuff".
It is difficult to accurately determine regarding the aistribution of
the tuff because it can only be positively identified in thin section.
It appears to be present within both the graywacke and the massive
argillite. Although its presence has been confirmed only in the area
between hil 1 2036.3 and the proposed surge tank location, this may be
a coincidence of locations from which thin sections were made and
areas with abundant exposed rock. Because the tuff was not differen-
tiated in the field reconnaissance, it is not indicated or referenced
on the geologic maps.
The foliated argillite and foliated cherty argillite are differen-
tiated solely on the abundance of chert within the rock. For this
evaluation we have considered the argillite to be "cherty" if inter-
layered and lenticular chert exceeds about 10 percent of the outcrop.
The argillite is a dark gray to black, weakly metamorphosed siltstone
and very fine sandstone. Chert occurs throughout the rock (in various
percentages) typically as discontinuous layers and elongated nodules
up to a few inches thick and occasionally up to one to two feet thick.
In a few instances, discontinuous, fractured chert layers as thick as
20
K-0631-61
10 feet were observed within the foliated argillite. Chert layers and
nodules lie within the foliation plane, which strikes from N-S to N
20° E and dips steeply. With the exception of the few thick chert
layers described above, the chert generally does not constitute more
than about 20 percent of the rock in any one location.
The foliated argillite is a highly sheared rock. While the foliation
may conform in general with relict bedding, it is predominantly a
shear foliation that has developed along the regional structural
trend. This shearing resulted in the severe fragmentation of the
chert layers and pervasive cataclastic texture of the unit as a whole.
The rock breaks preferentially along a myriad of subparallel fractures
that collectively define the foliation plane. Jointing is not fre-
quently expressed in outcrops of the foliated argillites but where
present the joints are typi-:ally widely to very widely spaced and very
tight. Linear, soil-covered topographic depressions at various angles
to the foliation suggest, however, that jointing may be more prevalent
in this unit than exposures indicate. Outcrops of the foliated
argillite are fresh to sli9htly weathered.
Two dacite dikes were observed in the map area. One is known from a
single small outcrop at the exit portal, whereas the other is exposed
to the east near the middle of the tunnel alignment. The eastern dike
trends northeasterly to easterly across the regional structural trend,
cutting across both graywacke and argillite units. It is about 30 to
50 feet wide and can be traced to the northeast of the tunnel align-
ment where it dips nearly vertically. Viewed from the air, this dike
appears to bifurcate along its trend although this was not confirmed
on the ground. It has apparently been offset about 1,000 feet in a
right lateral sense across the Bradley River fault zone. The dacite
is a light greenish gray, porphyritic rock. It is typically slightly
weathered in outcrop, and appears to be slightly more resistant to
erosion than the units it intruded. There is no obvious alteration of
wall rocks resulting from the intrusion, nor does there appear to be
any significant variation between the center and margins of the dike
21
K-0631-61
itself.
joints.
The dacite is a massive rock with widely spaced, very tight
Its rockmass properties to be similar to the massive argil-
lite and graywacke.
Unconsolidated deposits in the project area consist of glacial outwash
and till in the vicinity of the proposed intake and locally along the
tunnel alignment, tidal flat deposits near the powerhouse site, and
colluvium in the valleys and on the hillsides throughout the project
area. The glacial deposits, intennixed with colluvium, occupy the
smal 1 drainages and bedrock depressions adjoining the Bradley Kiver.
These deposits consist of silt, sand, gravel, and boulders derived
primarily from the argillite and graywacke, and probably range from
less than a few feet to perhaps over 20 to 30 feet thick. Colluvial
soils are prominent in the forested areas and on the lower hill slopes
throughout the area. These materials are derived from the bedrock and
contain sand to boulder sized clasts of argillite and graywacke in a
rna t r i x of s i 1 t .
5.3.3 Structural Geology
5.3.3.1 General
The most prominent structural elements in the project area are the
pervasive, closely-spaced shear foliation in the argillites and the
complex structural distribution of bedrock units. The area is com-
plexly defonned by the pervasive shearing, by two major fault zones,
and by numerous smaller faults in a variety of orientations. The sig-
nificance of folding in the project area is not apparent because;
a) wel 1-defined marker horizons and bedding are lacking, b) vegeta-
tive cover obscures much of the rock, and c) the bedrock units are
complexly distributed.
22
K-0631-61
5.3.3.2 Faults
The Bradley River and Bull Moose faults are the most significant
faults in the project area. These faults zones are high-angle struc-
tures that trend N5°E to N20°E and extend for at least a few miles
outside the project area. These fault zones are described in greater
detail in the discussion of the geologic conditions along the tunnel
alignment. Several smaller high-angle faults and a few low-angle
faults have also been identified in this and previous studies. The
high-angle faults tend to fall into two general sets: those subpar-
allel to the Bradley River and Bull Moose fault zones and those at
about 90° to these larger structures. Only a few low-angle faults
have been observed. This may reflect the general absence of these
features, but is more likely indicative of their poor surface expres-
sion. The low-angle faults that were observed are exposed in cliff
faces.
5.3.3.3 Joints
Jointing is present in al 1 the rocks in the area although it is gen-
erally best developed in the graywacke. Joint orientations are highly
variable, and the joint orientations observed in a given outcrop are
controlled to some extent by the orientation of the outcrop itself.
Joint surfaces are generally relatively smooth, and range from very
tight to open cracks about 2 inches wide. Where open, the joints are
typically not filled except very near the surface where soil and
organic matter have entered from overlying soil cover. Joint spacing
is also highly variable, ranging from a few inches in local areas to
several tens of feet in other areas. Generally at least three joint
sets at high angles to one another can be found, resulting in a blocky
rockmass. Detailed joint descriptions along transects at the damsite,
powerhouse site, and intake and exit portals is presented in OOWL
Engineers (January, 1983).
23
K-0631-6 1
5.3.3.4 Lineaments
Many linear topographic depressions cross the project area in apparent
random orientation. A few of the most pronounced and continuous of
these lineaments are recognized as faults, but the origins of many of
the others are not readily apparent. Most of the lineaments are prob-
ably the surface expression of either faults, joints, or series of
closely spaced joints where the surface has been differentially eroded
by glaciation, frost action, and runoff along planes of weakness.
Unfortunately rock exposures along the lineaments are commonly absent,
and colluvial or glacial deposits obscure the evidence needed to
determine the nature of these features. Nevertheless, the lineaments
provide an indication of the frequency and extent of the relatively
larger discontinuities, particularly in the areas lacking extensive
soil and forest cover.
5.4 ~ologic Conditions -Surface Investigations
5.4.1 Intake Structure
The intake to the power tunnel wil 1 be located in the area of the left
abutment. Although its exact position has yet to be determined it
will be situated in the lowland immediately north of hill 1270.7.
This lowland area is covered by dense vegetation and an unknown thick-
ness of colluvium shed from the adjoining highlands. The colluvium
may directly overlie bedrock or it may overlie glacial till or outwash
deposits which, in turn, rest on rock.
The adjoining hills provide the best indication of the characteristics
of the bedrock that wi 11 be encountered at the intake. This rock is
ccrnprised of ccrnplexly mixed graywacke and foliated argillite ~vith
less than 10 percent chert nodules and layers. The contacts between
the graywacke and argillite roughly parallel the foliation in the
argillite which typically trends N-S to N20°E and dips steeply. Hil 1
1270.7 iS also cut by several small faults and joint sets. These
24
K-0631-61
features have been described in some detail by Woodward-Clyde (1979)
and OOWL Engineers (January, 1983) as part of their investigations for
the left abutment of the dam.
To tne north of hil 1 1270.7 the next bedrock exposure is on a small
knoll that lies near the intake location. Like the rock to the south,
this exposure consists of a mixture of graywacke and foliated argil-
lite, but is not faulted and does not display the complexity of joint-
ing that can be seen on the north side of hill 1270.7.
The lowland between hill 1270.7 and the smaller knoll to the north
lies along an east-northeast-trending topographic lineament that
appears to be the surface expression of an east-northeast-trending
rockmass discontinuity. About 1,000 feet to the west of ~radley River
the lineament merges with an eQst-trending fault mapped by Woodward-
Clyde (1979). Directly east across Bradley River, it trends into the
vicinity of a small covered area which may be the surface expression
of a joint or small fault. The lineament also parallels an east-
trending fault located about 250 feet to the north on the east side of
the river, and a series of lineaments of unknown origins to the south-
west. It also roughly parallels a joint set exposed on the north side
of hill 1270.7. As detailed in section 6.2, a boring oriented to
cross this lineament indicated a zone of very closely spaced joints
and fractures.
5.4.2 Tunnel Alignment
5.4.2.1 General
The tunnel alignment evaluated for this study extends for approxi-
mately 14,050 feet along a N63°W trend from the proposed intake to the
proposed surge tank location. Northwest of the surge tank the align-
ment trends N47°W for about 4,250 feet to the proposed powerhouse
25
K-0631-61
location. For this discussion the surficial geology along the align~
ment is described in geologically distinctive segments beginning with
the area closest to the intake portal.
5.4.2.2 Intake to Bradley River Fault Zone
This easternmost section of the tunnel alignment is underlain by
interbedded graywacke and argillite. Because of their complex mixing,
we have mapped these rock types as a single unit comprised of approxi-
mately 50 to 65 percent massive graywacke and 35 to 50 percent argi 1-
lite. The argillite is commonly foliated and contains less than about
10 percent chert nodules and thin interbeds of chert. The argillite
is in gradational and irregular contact with the graywacke. It occurs
as interbeds and pockets that range from less than a foot to as much
as 100 feet thick.
Jointing is more apparent along this section of the tunnel alignment
than farther to the northwest. This apparent abundance of joints may
be partially due to the relatively high relief and steep rock faces in
this area, but the jointing also contributes to the high relief
because many of the cliffs in this area are formed along joint faces.
Several lineaments also cross this section of the tunnel alignment at
various orientations. We suspect that some of these features may be
faults, but there is generally insufficient rock exposure to determine
whether they represent faults or major joint sets. One pair of par-
allel lineaments, located about 1,700 feet northwest of the intake
structure is particularly suggestive of a fault zone. These linea-
ments, separated by about 100 feet, trend about N10°W for about
3,500 feet along parallel sets of aligned notches and valleys. These
lineaments terminate abruptly to the south against a fault mapped by
Woodward-Clyde (1979). Although this pair of lineaments was mapped by
Woodward-Clyde (1979) as a fault, the origin of the lineaments is
uncertain because of lack of exposure. If they are the surface
expression of a fault, then the zone may contain highly fractured and
26
K-0631-61
crushed rock up to about 200 feet wide along the proposed tunnel
alignment, which crosses these features at an angle.
5.4.2.3 ~radley River Fault Zone
At a distance of approximately 3,900 feet from the intake the tunnel
alignment crosses the Bradley River fault zone. Two main branches of
the fault are recognized in the vicinity of the proposed tunnel align-
ment. The main trace, which can be followed for several miles along a
trend of about N15°E, occupies the west side of a steep-walled, fault-
controlled val ley. The other branch trends northerly through the cen-
ter of the valley and merges with the main trace just south of the
drainage divide in the val ley. Although these faults are mantled by
colluvial and glacial deposits, they are believed to be nearly ver-
tical because of their linear topographic expression. Exposures else-
where along the Bradley River fault indicate that the main fault trace
may have a gouge zone of finely pulverized material that is about
50 feet wide, with sheared argillite extending another 50 to 75 feet
on either side (DOWL Engineers, January, 1983). It appears that the
gouge zone along the present tunnel alignment may be more extensive
than elsewhere owing to the wider zone of faulting. Limited exposure
in the vicinity of the tunnel alignment indicates that the zone of
shearing associated with the margins of the faults is also substan-
tially wider than described elsewhere; strongly sheared argillite with
nodules, boudins, and discontinuous layers of chert, appears to extend
for about 400 feet on either side of the main fault trace.
The amount and sense of displacement along the Bradley River fault
zone is not well established. The only marker horizon that can be
observed on both sides of the zone is a dacite dike which has appar-
ently been offset about 1,000 feet in a right lateral sense. Slicken-
sides noted by OOWL Engineers (January, 1983) and Woodward-Clyde
27
K-0631-61
(1979) rake from 0 to 30° along the fault suggesting a vertical com-
ponent of up to 400 feet associated with the 1,000 feet of apparent
horizontal displacement.
The structure of the Bradley River fault zone-tunnel intersection is
further complicated by several rockmass discontinuities of unknown
origin, expressed at the surface as topographic lineaments, that trend
into the fault zone near or through the proposed tunnel alignment.
Two of these lineaments trend northwesterly across the fault zone
without any apparent offset, and parallel a fault mapped about
1,000 feet to the north by Woodward-Clyde (1979) with a similar but
stronger topographic expression. If these lineaments are faults, the
amount of broken or crushed rock in the vicinity of their intersection
with the Bradley River fault zone will probably be greater than pre-
sently estimated. Subsurface conditions as defined by a boring in the
fault zone are outlined in section 6.3.
5.4.2.4 Bradley River Fault Zone to Bull Moose Fault Zone
Northwest of the Bradley River fault zone the tunnel alignment crosses
the highest elevations and best exposed bedrock along its route. This
area is underlain predominantly by foliated argillite, with lesser
amounts of massive argillite, graywacke, and a single dacite dike.
Much of the foliated argillite contains nodules and thin discontinuous
layers of chert comprising about 10 to 20 percent of the volume of the
rock. A few massive lenses of very closely fractured chert up to
10 feet wide were also found interspersed with the foliated argillite
in this area. The foliation in the argillite and cherty argillite
strikes from N-S to N20°E and typically dips greater than about
75 degrees. Exposures of massive argillite occur primarily within
about 1,000 feet of the Bull Moose fault zone and as isolated pockets
within the foliated argillite. There are two main occurrences of
graywacke in this area. They are unusually wel 1 exposed on hills
2036.3 and 2043.2, the highest points along the alignment. These
graywacke masses are each about 300 feet thick. They are locally
28
K-0631-61
interspersed with foliated cherty argillite but in general are rela-
tively homogeneous and massive. The dacite dike, although not exposed
on the alignment itself, appears to cross the proposed tunnel align-
ment along a N80°E trend with a nearly vertical dip.
Bedrock outcrops along this segment of the tunnel alignment tend to be
widely to very widely jointed. However, discontinuities in the rock
mass are more significant than outcrops would suggest because the
larger fractures are commonly masked by soil cover and slope wash.
Hundreds of short, linear, soil-filled depressions can be seen in this
area, many of which are presumably the surface ~xpression of bedrock
joints and faults. Unfortunately, however, without better rock expo-
sure it is not possible to distinguish which of these features are
faults or joints.
Larger lineaments, also common in this area, present the same problem
for attempts to define their structural significance. A series of
lineaments located east of and subparallel to the Bull Moose fault
zone are likely to be the surface expression of smaller faults asso-
ciated with the main faul-t trace, but exposures are insufficient to
conclusively determine their origin. Similarly, several weaker
northwest-trending lineaments recognized from air photos cross the
alignment southwest of Lake 1542.3. But in spite of relatively good
rock exposure in this area, we were unable to determine conclusively
whether these represent minor faults or prominent joint sets. In
either case exposures limit the width of these apparent discontinui-
ties at the surface to less than about 10 to 15 feet where they cross
the tunnel alignment.
5.4.2.5 Bull Moose Fault Zone
The main trace of the Bull Moose fault zone is located approximately
9,800 feet northwest of the tunnel intake. It is expressed as a
narrow, topographic notch with a 200-foot-high, steep west wal 1. This
29
K-0631-61
area is densely vegetated and rock is exposed in smal 1 isolated out-
crops. No exposures of gouge or broken rock were found in the fault
zone; but relatively undeformed rock on either side of the main fault
trace indicates that this zone must locally be less than about 50 feet
thick. As discussed above, a series of lineaments subparallel to the
main fault trace may represent fractures associated with the Bull
Moose fault. If so, shearing along the fault may have affected the
bedrock in discrete zones across an area over 1;000 feet wide. Sub-
surface conditions defined by a boring are outlined in section 6.4.
5.4.2.6 Bull Moose Fault Zone to Powerhouse Site
The bedrock exposure is much more limited along this segment of the
tunnel alignment than it is to the southeast. This is particularly
true to the northwest of the surge tank location where forest and soil
cover mantle all but a few small isolated rock outcrops. The avail-
able exposures along this section of the tunnel alignment indicate
that it is underlain predominantly by foliated and massive argillite.
Cherty argi 11 i te (greater than 10 percent chert nodules and 1 ayers)
and graywacke crop out in relatively small amounts, although boring
data (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1982) indicate that these rock
types are more common than their surface exposure suggests. A creek,
which roughly parallels the tunnel alignment about 450 feet to the
soutnwest, provides the best bedrock exposures in the 1 owermost
1,000 feet of this section of the alignment. Bedrock is exposed along
this creek essentially from the bay to the vicinity of ~oring OH 13EX.
It consists predominantly of argillite with local cherty zones and
about 10 to 15 percent fine-grained graywacke.
The recognizable structural trends along this section of the alignment
in this area conform to those elsewhere along the tunnel alignment.
Foliation in the argillites is consistently oriented at N-S to N20°E.
Jointing is widely to very widely spaced in most exposures, with a
dominant strike of N75-85°E, and dip of 80 to 85° North. Lineaments
30
K-0631-61
are weakly expressed or absent owing to the dense forest cover and
lack of rock exposure.
5.4.3 Powerhouse
The proposed powerhouse location is situated on a topographic bench
above the Kachemak Bay tidal marsh. This bench is underlain by rock
at shallow depth as witnessed by exposures along the shoreline bluffs.
However, with the exception of the bluff exposures and outcrops along
a stream about 450 feet to the south, the bedrock is almost completely
covered by a veneer of soil. Based on these exposures and previous
borings drilled to the south along the stream channel, the powerhouse
site appears to be underlain by highly fractured argillite and lesser
amounts of highly fractured graywacke. A dacite dike also occurs in
the area based on a single exposure observed near the exit porta~.
Near-surface conditions were investigated with a test pit, as dis-
cussed in section 6.6.
The rock along the bluffs, comprised primarily of argillite, contains
numerous minor shear zones, slickensided fractures, and tight to open
joints in various orientations. Further south along the creek, how-
ever, the rock is less fractured and joints are generally tight to
very tight.
31
K-0631-61
6. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
6.1 General
The rocks of the McHugh Comp 1 ex encountered during Shannon & Wi 1 son's
subsurface exploration program at Bradley Lake have been classified by
the same lithologic descriptions such as graywacke and argillite that
were used in the reconnaissance geologic mapping of surface exposures
(see section 5.3.2) and by previous investigators. The decision to use
these classifications was made for consistency and to facilitate the
evaluation of the engineering properties of the rocks.
In a geologic sense, the rocks in the Bradley Lake area are cataclastic
rocks, or rocks which have been broken and granulated due to stress and
movement during faulting, and which have regained primary cohesion
through metamorphic processes to some extent. According to the
classification system of Higgins,* the rocks in the Bradley Lake area
would be classified as a protomylonite. The origin of the rocks
explains their sheared texture, intimate intermixing, and the often
extremely gradational contacts from one lithology to another.
Of the previous investigators at the site, DOWL Engineers (January 1983)
acknowledged the existence of cataclastic rocks in association with the
Bradley River and Bull Moose Faults. In our opinion, the whole of the
project area is most likely of cataclastic origin. Where appropriate in
the logging of the three Shannon & Wilson rock core borings, cataclastic
terminology has been used to describe textural features in the rock. A
glossary of selected terms from Higgins is included in this report as
Appendix B.
The rocks in the Bradley Lake area have all been metamorphosed to some
extent. But because it is difficult to assess the degree of
metamorphism in hand specimen, and for simplicity, the prefix "meta-"
* Higgins, Michael W. "Cataclastic Rocks," U.S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 687.
32
K-0631-61
has not been applied to the lithologic classifications. The major
lithologies encountered in the Shannon & Wilson exploratory borings are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Graywacke was commonly encountered in the three borings along the
proposed tunnel alignment. This hard, light gray to gray material is
generally fine-grained to very fine-grained. Its cataclastic texture
with local fluxion structure commonly contains sand and gravel-sized
clasts of argillite as well as stringers and wavy bands of argillite, as
illustrated in Photo 1. Calcite veins are also common. Joint spacing
in the graywacke is dependent on the occurrence of argillite within it,
as it is generally closely jointed where argillite is common, but ranges
to moderately close to widely jointed where the occurrence of argillite
is not significant.
Argillite was encountered throughout the borings in many different types
of occurrence. This dark gray to black material is generally foliated
due to shear stress (see Photo 2), but was encountered with massive
texture in small zones usually associated with zones of massive
graywacke. Elongated porph~roclasts of graywacke and chert are common
in the foliated argillite, and fluxion structure is common. Argillite
a 1 so commonly occurs as stringers and wavy bands within zones of gray-
wacke or chert.
Apparently the relatively lower strength of the argillite is responsible
for its susceptibility to mechanical deformation, evidenced by its
common shear-generated foliation and, more distinctly, its occurrence as
fault breccia or gouge in the shear zones encountered (see Photo 3).
The stringers of argillite within other more competent materials are
genera1ly slickensided when broken, and most joint faces in all of the
rock types encountered were coated with slickensided argillite, and
commonly contained crushed argillite fragments.
Where a significant amount of chert occurs in the argillite as
porphyroclasts or lenses (over 10 percent chert), the resultant rock
type is classified as cherty argillite, as shown in Photo 4. The very
33
K-0631-61
hard porphyroclasts of chert in a moderately hard foliated argillite
matrix range from sand to cobble-sized randomly throughout the rock, and
local small zones can contain up to 70 percent chert. Porphyroclasts of
graywacke are also found in the cherty argillite. This rock is
generally closely to very closely jointed.
Very hard chert occurs in local zones up to 17 feet (12 feet
horizontally) thick within the depth drilled at the Bradley River and
Bull Moose fault zones. Although usually interspersed with stringers
and local small zones of foliated argillite as illustrated in Photo 5,
occasionally small zones of relatively 11 pure 11 chert were encountered.
Joint spacing in this light gray rock ranges from very close to
moderately close depending on the occurrence of argillite within it.
Tectonically mixed graywacke and argillite as shown in Photo 6 was
commonly encountered in the borings. The cataclastic texture and common
fluxion structure of this material is composed of porphyroclasts and
interlayered wavy bands of the two lithologies. The graywacke retains
its massive texture in this material and the argillite can be massive to
foliated. Joint spacing varies from close to locally very close.
6.2 Intake Structure
Boring SW 83-1 was dri 11 ed in the vicinity of the proposed intake
structure near the natural outlet of Bradley Lake. Oriented in a S5°E
direction, the boring was drilled to a depth of 155.3 feet at an inclin-
ation of 45°. The boring location is shown in Photo 7.
About 28 feet (20 feet vertical) of overburden sands, gravels, cobbles,
and boulders, including a 10-foot thick boulder, were penetrated before
bedrock was encountered. Below the overburden, alternating zones of
graywacke and tectonically mixed argillite and graywacke were encoun-
tered throughout the boring. The contacts between the observed zones
are usually gradational.
34
K-0631-61
Boring SW 83-1 was oriented to cross a north to northeast trending
1 ineament observed at the site. Although no distinct shear zone or
thick gouge was encountered in the boring, the closely jointed argillite
lithologies are locally very closely jointed, and slickensided argillite
and fragmented, crushed argillite are common in joint apertures.
Two borings completed by the Corps of Engineers in this area, DH-16 and
DH-35, were drilled about 190 feet north-northeasterly of SW 83-1 on the
left abutment of the proposed dam. Substantial zones of argillite were
logged in these vertical borings, in contrast to the lesser amounts of
argillite encountered in boring SW 83-1.
6.3 Bradley River Fault
The Bradley River fault zone was explored by boring SW 83-2, which was
drilled perpendicular to the fault trace at an orientation of N75°W and
at an angle of 45°. Drilled to a depth of 262.3 feet, the boring
penetrated two significant shear zones, the west and possibly east
branches of the fault. The general location of this boring is shown in
Photo 8.
From the surface to a dri 11 ed depth of about 30 feet, 1 oose gravelly
sands with cobbles and boulders were encountered above bedrock.
Striations observed on a cobble from one of the two lengthy runs through
the overburden material suggested that these materials are, at 1east in
part • g 1 a cia 1 .
Beginning at the top of bedrock, shear fo 1 i a ted cherty argi 11 ite was
encountered, and encompassing the two shear zones, continued to a
drilled depth of about 197 feet. Chert porphyroclasts typically consti-
tute about 20 percent of this rock, however this occurrence varies
randomly throughout the material explored, and locally can be as much as
70 percent of the rockmass. This rock is closely jointed to locally
very closely jointed.
35
K-0631-61
Below a depth of 197 feet, alternating zones of graywacke and chert were
encountered, with local zones of cherty argillite and foliated
argillite. Joint spacings in these materials increase to moderately
widely spaced joints when argillite materials are not significantly
present.
The two shear zones were encountered at drilled depths of 47.4 feet to
62.0 feet, and 138.0 feet to 175.6 feet (10.4 and 26.9-foot horizontal
widths, respectively). The deeper shear zone correlates well with the
observed side hill trace of the west branch of the fault, assuming a
near-vertical fault plane. The trace of the east branch of the fault is
not we 11 defined topographically, but the higher shear zone in the
boring coincidentally correlates well with the mapped trace of the fault
shown on Sheet 1 of Figure 2. However, it is possible that additional
shear zones exist to the east of the upper one encountered in the
boring. The material observed from these zones is predominantly
brecciated argillite rock containing clasts of chert. Locally the rock
has been reduced to fault gouge consisting of breccia fragments in a
clayey silt matrix.
The cherty argillite adjacent to the shear zones is generally very
closely jointed and the argillite faces of the apertures are extremely
slickensided, often containing crushed rock fragments as breccia and
gouge.
The Corps of Engineers' boring DH-lOEX was drilled in an easterly
direction at an inclination of 31° approximately 1600 feet north of
boring SW 83-2, on their tunnel alignment, north of the suggested
convergence of the east and west branches of the Bradley River Fault.
Significant core loss at specific locations in their bating suggests
several shear zones that were penetrated at different depths. The lack
of core recovery from these zones precludes specific information about
the materia 1 s that were penetrated, and it can only be surmised that
they were of a soft nature.
36
K-0631-61
The Corps of Engineers' summary boring log for boring DH-10EX describes
the materials encountered as thinly bedded argillite, and no mention is
made of secondary constituents. Examination of photographs of the core
obtained from DH-lOEX shows significant amounts of what appears to be
chert as porphyroclasts, including local zones of concentrated chert
clasts, suggesting that subsurface conditions at that location may be
similar to those encountered at the location of Shannon & Hilson's
boring.
6.4 Bull Moose Fault
The tunnel alignment crossing of the Bull Moose Fault was explored with
boring SW 83-4 (see Photo 9). Drilled at an orientation of N80°W at an
inclination of 45°, this boring was drilled to a depth of 206.2 feet.
Bedrock was encountered after only 4.2 feet of penetration, and the
shear zone of the Bull Moose Fault was encountered at a drilled depth of
about 146 feet.
A broad spectrum of occurrences for the typical lithological rock types
encountered in the Bradley Lake area was observed in the core from
boring SW 83-4. Random alternating zones of graywacke, argillite, and
chert, as well as mixtures of these lithologies were logged within the
depth explored.
From the top of bedrock to a drilled depth of about 50 feet, zones of
graywacke, argi 11 ite, and mixed graywacke and argi 11 i te were encoun-
tered. These closely to very closely jointed zones contain porphyro-
clasts of chert, and, below about 30 feet, local chert layers.
Significant amounts of chert were commonly encountered below a depth of
about 50 feet both as cherty argillite and zones of chert. These
closely jointed rocks occur with zones of very closely to closely
jointed argillite and graywacke to the bottom of the boring at 206.2
feet.
37
K-0631-61
Porphyroclasts of apparent altered dacite were encountered within cherty
argillite from a depth of about 170 feet to 189 feet.
The shear zone of the Bull Moose Fault was encountered from a depth of
about 146 feet to 154 feet in the boring (horizontal width of 6 feet).
The brecciated argillite and graywacke in this zone is locally sheared
to silty sand and zones of clayey gouge. The rocks adjacent to the
shear zone, argillite above and chert below, are highly fractured from
considerable shear deformation.
The vertically projected location of the shear zone encountered in
boring SW 83-4 is consistent with the mapped location of the fault trace
on Sheet 3 of Figure 2 for a near-vertical fault plane.
The Corps of Engineers' boring DH-17EX, drilled across the fault at a
location about 480 feet northeast of boring SW 83-4, inferred a 13-foot
wide fault zone in a zone of total core loss from 210.7 feet to 229.2
feet. This location is also consistent with a near-vertical fault
plane. Continued core loss below that zone in the Corps' boring sug-
gests the possibility of highly sheared rock adjacent to the main fault
plane.
The rock in the Corps' boring is classified as a thin-bedded argillite,
with some cherty zones. Photographs of the core appear to show 1 a rger
concentrations of chert, suggesting that at least some of the rock could
be classified as a cherty argillite, as found in the Shannon & Wilson
boring.
6.5 Barge Basin
Boring SW 83-3 was located about 700 feet northeast of Sheep Point in
the mud flats on the east side of Kachemak Bay, in the area of the
proposed barge basin (see Photo 10). A detailed description of the
materials encountered can be found on the boring log for SW 83-3, Figure
5.
38
K-0631-61
From the surface to a depth of about 18 feet, clayey silt was
encountered, containing scattered stringers and thin lenses of fine
sandy silt, pockets and lenses of silty clay, and occasional small zones
of clean sand. Below about 18 feet, interbedded sands and silts with
random gradational changes were encountered to a depth of about 23 feet.
From 23 feet to 29 feet, clayey, silty, gravelly sand wit:h zones of
clayey silt was encountered. Below 29 feet slightly clayey, silty sand
with local gravelly zones was encountered to the bottom of the boring at
51.5 feet.
Another boring, SW 83-3A, was drilled about three feet to the north of
boring SW 83-3 in order to obtain additional undisturbed Shelby Tube
samples from shallow depths at this location. From the surface to a
depth of 14 feet, slightly clayey to clayey silt with pockets and layers
of clay, and small zones of clean to silty sand was encountered. From
14 feet to 16 feet, the bottom of the boring, clean fine to coarse sand
with fine gravel was encountered.
The laboratory test results are summarized on Table 3, Summary of
Laboratory Test Results. Grain size gradations are plotted on Figures 9
through 11, compression test results are plotted on Figures 12 through
15, and Atterberg limit values are plotted on the Plasticity Chart,
Figure 16.
The sensitivity of the fine-grained soils was calculated from the
results of natural and remolded field vane shear tests, laboratory
Torvane tests, and unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression tests.
Strength and sensitivity data from these tests are summarized on Figure
17.
The two pairs of field vane shear tests yielded the highest sensitivity
ratios, 8.6 and 5.2. Ten pairs of laboratory Torvane tests yielded a
relatively consistent average sensitivity ratio of 3.0. The three pairs
of triaxial compression tests yielded an average sensitivity ratio of
2.3. A pair of unconfined compression tests yielded a sensitivity ratio
of 1. 2, but this va 1 ue is suspect because the water content of the
39
K-0631-61
remolded sample was 3% lower than the natural water content of 24%, and
because the undisturbed sample exhibited a relatively abrupt failure.
The three undisturbed triaxial test samples all continued to deform
until termination of the test at 20% strain (see Figures 13 through 15).
Low undisturbed strength values obtained on the sample of silty,
gravelly sand from a depth of 23 feet may reflect either disturbance of
the material during sampling, weakness of the material due to
interbedding, or the fact that only cohesive strength is being measured
on a sandy sample.
In order to evaluate possible errors caused by horizontal structure in
the soils when running laboratory Torvane tests parallel to the axis of
the sample, a pair of tests was also run perpendicular to the sample
axis on a sample from a depth of 26.6 feet. Good agreement was found in
the strength and sensitivity values from all four tests.
The cleanest fine-sandy interbed noted in our boring was found in a
sample from a depth of 26 feet. A mechanical analysis performed on this
sample (see Figure 11) showed it to be a silty, fine to medium sand with
medium and coarse sand-sized shell fragments. Cleaner sands were noted
in our exploration, but the sand contained a significant medium to
coarse fraction.
The results of Atterberg limit determinations on five samples are also
summarized on Figure 17 and on Figure 16. The materiels tested are both
clays and silts of low to medium plasticity or compressibility.
Borings performed by the Corps of Engineers in the tidal flats of
Kachemak Bay describe the soils north of Sheep Point as "fat clai'
becoming "lean" with depth, and the materials south of Sheep Point as
"silty clai'. As laboratory testing was not reported on samples from
the Corps' borings, it is difficult to equate their classifications to
the material described in borings SW 83-3 and SW 83-3A, and suggestion
of trends based on the present limited informatior would be conjecture.
40
K-0631-61
In two borings performed by the Corps near the shoreline, cr.e at the
Corps' tailrace location and one south of Sheep Point, artesian water
was noted above and near the soil/bedrock interface. Increased water
flow was noted with depth. This was not observed in cur boring, however
the soil/bedrock interface may not have been approached, or our boring
may have been too far offshore to encounter such artesian water.
Although bedrock was not encountered in the Shannon & Wilson boring, it
should be noted that bedrock was observed in the banks of a drainage
channel about 100 feet north of Sheep Point.
6.6 Powerhouse Site
A hand dug test pit w~s located in the area of the proposed powerhouse.
Shallow bedrock was confirmed at this site below about 1 to 2 feet of
overburden material (see Photo 11). A log of the test pit is shown on
Figure 8.
The dacite bedrock encountered in the test pit is similar to other
outcrops of dacite dike rocks observed in the Bradley Lake project area.
Although the lateral extent of the material at the powerhouse site is
not knowr, if it is a similar. dike rock, its width should not be
expected to be too great.
41
K-C631-61
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
7. l Genera 1
Shannon & \~ilson 1 S field explorations at Bradley Lake were primarily
designed to provide subsurface information at the proposed intake
structure, powerhouse, and barge basin locations, to investigate the
thickness of the brecciated zones at the tunnel alignment crossirgs of
the Bradley River and Bull Moose Faults, and to provide an estimate of
the percentage of various rock types exposed along the tunnel alignment.
Subsurface conditions at the five sites which were explored are dis-
cussed above in section 6. The general characteristics of the rock
encountered are discussed Jelow in section 7.2. Our estimate of the
distribution of rock types along the tunnel alignment is presented in
section 7.3. Information on the tunneling characteristics of the rock,
based on testing by others and the results of our subsurface explor-
ations, is summarized in section 7.4. Stability of the proposed barge
basin is discussed in section 7.5.
7.2 Rockmass Characteristics
The three borings cored in rock during this study were drilled in knowr
or suspected faults or shear zones, and the rock encountered in these
borings should not be considered representative of the project as a
whole, with respect to either lithology or discontinuities.
llithin this cc·rstraint, rock encountered in the three explorRtory
borings ranged from very closely to widely jointed, with joint sep-
arations, exclusive of gouge-filled fractures in fault zones, ranging
from tight to narrow (see Table 2 for description of classification
systems). Rock qua 1 ity, after the method of Deere, was poor in a l1
three Shannon & Wilson borings, with the total RQD ranging from a low of
32% for bering SW 83-2 at the Bradley River Fault to a hi~h of 51~ for
boring SW 83-4 at the Bull Moose Fault. The average tr.tal RQD of the
42
K-0631-61
three borings of 43% was significantly lower than an unweighted average
RQD of 60~ calculatea for 23 borings drilled by the Corps of Engineers.
In our opinion, this reflects the nature of the fau:":s or shear zones
penetrated by the three most recent borings. Unweighted average RQD for
the Corps of Engineers' borings ranged from a minimum of 29 to a maximum
of 93.
It is difficult to extrapolate the rock quality at a tunnel depth
significantly greater than the maximum depth of the borir.gs drilled to
date. The greatest penetration of a Shannon & \·iil son boring was 240
feet below the ground surface at the Bradley River Fault. Maximum
penetration by the Corps of Engineers was 475 feet at the surge tank
location. Trends of slightly increasing RQD with depth can be seen in
at least the borings at the intake structure location ard the Bradley
River Fault. However, such trends are difficult to assess v1hen the
boring crosses a fault or shear zone. The penetration of boring SW 83-4
across the Bull Moose Fault was not great enough to revea 1 a re 1 i ab 1 e
trend of RQD with depth. Such interpretations may also be complicated
by the dependence of rock quality on lithology, given the variable
lithologies found in the borings.
Pocks of all major lithologic units identified in the surface geology
reconnaissance (section 5) were encountered in the three borings, with
the exception of the dacite which was encountered only in the tPst pit
at the powerhouse location. In the core, f'ractures and joints were
observed to be more widely spaced in the graywacke zones than in the
argillite. This fact is also supported by a study of the logs of the
borings drilled by the Corps of Engineers. rn their borinos in which
graywacke predominated, the unweighted average RQD averaged 69%, while
in borings in which argillite predominated, the RQD aver2.9ed 48~~. r.n
our borings, joints or fractures in areas of mixed argillite and other
rock types (graywacke or chert) most often occurred in either major
zores or thin stringers of argillite. These surfaces were commonly
slickensided, at a variety of rake angles.
43
K-0631-61
Boring SW 83-1, at the intake structure location, was oriented
perpendicular to a lineament, and approximately parallel to the primary
structural trend of the project area. Tn this bori~g, jointing at high
angles to the core axis was interpreted as pertaining to the lineament
(and/or the secondary joint set in the project area). Numerous joints
at low angles to the axis of the core rnost 1 ikely reflect the primary
joint set. Borings SW 83-2 and SW 83-4, at the Bradley River and Bull
Moose Faults, respectively, were oriented perpendicular to the primary
structural trend. In these two borings, joint angles near 45° tc the
axis of the core predominated. ~Jhile it is not possible to establish
the true orientation o~ these joints in a boring inclined at 45° without
oriented coring, these joints most likely correspond to the predominant
vertical, northeast-southwest trending joint system typical of the
project area, especially since they are generally parallel to the
lithologic grain of the core. Occasional joints sub-parallel to the
core axis may correspond to the secondary east-west trending joint set.
7.3 Rock Type Distribution
Based on reconnaissance geoiogic mapping, the footage and the percentage
of the various rock types along the tunnel align~ent are as follows:
Litho 1 ogy
Massive Argillite
Foliated Argillite ( <10% Chert)
Foliated Cherty Argillite ( >10% Chert)
Mixed Graywacke (50-65%) and
Argillite (35-50%)
Graywacke
Dacite
Chert
Footage
5,400
3,660
3,740
3,550
1,600
100
50
Severely Brecciated Rock and Fault Gouge 50
18,150 feet
44
Percentage of
Tunnel
Alignment
30
20
20
20
9
<1
<1
<1
100~~
K-Cf31-61
This estimate is based on the observed and interpr8ted surficial
geology. The length of each lithologic unit was measured from the
geologic map with no attempt to correct for the angle of the tunnel.
The degree of accuracy of this estimate is limited by a lack of bedrock
exposure along much of the tunnel alignment, and by the possibility that
the surface geology may not accurately represent rock ccrditions in a
deep tunnel along the same alignment.
The percentage of chert tabulated above reflects only observed or
inferred thick layers of relatively massive chert. During the recon-
naissance mapping, this chert, as well as the "cherty argillite,"
appeared to be more common in the vicinity of faults or major shear
zones than elsewhere in the project area. During the mapping, rocks
mapped as cherty argillite were observed with a maximum of only about 20
percent chert.
However, in the borings at the Bradley River and Rull Moose Faults,
rocks logged as cherty argillite commonly contained as much as 50
percent chert as porphyroclasts, lenses, or boudins, and in local zones
contained as much as 80 percent chert. It cannot be said whether this
high percentage of chert is confined tn the major fault zones, where
surface exposures tend to be sparse, or whether general lack of surface
exposure in the project area prevented the observai:ion of the very
cherty argillite during the reconnaissance mapping. The very cherty
argillite in the borings was not classified as 11 chert" or incorporated
into the percentage of chert in the table above hecause the chert tends
to be separated by masses or lenses of argillite and thus is not the
massive, amorphous rock normally associated with the classification of
chert. In our opinion it does not seem that this cherty argillite would
be as hard as a pure massive chert. However, whether the "cherty
argillite" will truly behave more like a chert or an argillite ir terms
of tunreling characteristics should be the subject of ~urther study.
The cherty argillite classification was not used by the Corps of
Engineers in the 1 oggi ng of their borings, ard references to chert in
45
K-0631-61
the logs are limited. Observation of a limited amount o• the core from
these borings shows a high percentage of chert in the borings at the
Bradley River and Bull Moose Faults, borings DH-10 and DH-17, respec-
tively. This observation tends to support the assumption that major
amounts of chert are found near major fault zones.
With the exception of the width of zones of fault breccia and gouge,
subsurface information from Shannon & Wilson's borings was not used to
modify the estimates tabulated above because their total horizontally
projected length corresponds to only slightly more than 2 percent of the
tunnel length. Likewise, Corps of Engineer's borings were not
incorporated, because in our opinion their vertical orientation is not
necessarily representative of the distribution of lithologies given the
predominantly vertical structural grain in the area.
The percentage of fault breccia and gouge may be greater than indicated
above, because of the sparse subsurface information to date. Two major
structures, the Bradley River and Bull Moose fault zones, are
recognized. These faults may affect zones up to about 1,000 feet wide,
and appear to consist of multiple fault planes. Presently known in-
tensely crushed or gouge zones appear to be restrictfd to less than
about 40 feet wide in the Bradley River fault zones and less than 10
feet in the Bull Moose fault zone, but the percentage in the table above
excludes rock which is probably still more highly fracturP.d than normal
for the project area. Several other strong lineaments that trend across
the tunnel alignment are suggestive of faulting. One lineament that
crosses the alignment between the intake and Bradley River fault zore
could contain a broken and crushed zone up to 200 feet wide, making it
potentially as significant as the larger kncwn faults. Oeterminat~on of
the origin of this and other 1 ineaments awaits furtrer investigation
because soil cover obscures the bedrock along their traces.
As additional subsurface data becomes available, the estimate of rock
type distribution given above should be modified as necessary, to
reflect the additional information. Similarly, once the final grac'e of
the tunnel has been established these numbers can also be refined.
46
1<-0631-61
7.4 Tunneling Characteristics
The 1 imited subsurface exploration program carried cut by Shannon &
~lilson at Bradley Lake was designed to investigate conditions relative
to tunneling only at the crossings of the Bradley River and Bull Moose
Faults. Tunneling characteristics along the remainder of the power
tunnel alignment are being evaluated by others. This work involves
correlating surface geologic mapping by Shannon & Wilson with test
results on rock core from borings drilled by the Corps of Engineers.
A major concern with the crossings of the Bradley River and Bull Moose
Faults was the possible presence of materials in the fault zone which
r:ight 11 runu into a tunnel excavation. At the location explored, the
Bull Moose Fault was found to cant a in a 6-foot wi cfe shear zone of
argillite and graywacke which were locclly crushed to gravel and sand
sized particles, within a matrix of silty clay. The western branch of
the Bradley River Fault was found to contain a 27-foot ~tJide zone of
crushed rock and slightly clayey, silty sand gouge.
Neither of these fault crossings encountered gouge which appeared to
have the potential for running at the depths and locations explored.
The Corps of Engineers' borings at their proposed tunnel crossings of
the two faults encountered almost complete core loss in what was
interpreted as the fault zone, but the differert drilling techniaues
used by the Corps may account for this core loss. Drilling water loss
was not significant in either the Shannon & Wilson or Corp of Engineers'
borings at the two faults. The Corps of Engineers did rot pressure test
their boring at the Bradley River Fault, and what was interpreted as the
fault zone in the Bull Moose Fault did not take significant water during
pressure testing. Groundwater conditions were not tested in the Shannon
& Wilson borings, and in any case might be significantly different at
tunnel depth than at the depth explored.
Significant zones of lo~t1er than average rock quality (RQO) for the
project area were encountered in the vicinity of the two faults. Rock
quality within the Bradley River fault zone was poor :o very poor (based
47
K-0631-61
on ROD after the method of Deere), whi 1 e the rock to the v!est of the
fau 1 t zone i ncree.sed in qua 1 i ty from poor to good or very good with
distance away from the fault. To the east of the Bull Moose Fault rock
quality was geed to poor, and to the west was fair to very poor.
Tentative penetration rates for a tunnel boring machine at Bradley Lake
have been assigned to various rock types encountered in the Corps of
Engineers' borings by Dr. Alfred Hendron based primarily on Total
Hardness calculated from laboratory tests or samples of the rock. The
results of these tests show reasonably distinct ranges of Tota~ Hardness
for the three rock types tested, argillite, graywacke, and chert. The
argillite originally tested was foliated argillite, and a single later
test showed that rock classified as massive argillite was similar tc the
foliated argillite in Total Hardness, but that its unconfined
compressive strength fell within the range of strengths of samples
classified as graywacke.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did not test the hardness of the rocks,
but did perform unconfined compression tests on rocks classified as
"interbedded graywacke and-slate", "graywacke", and "quartz-graphitic
slate". It is perhaps significant to note that ~he compressive strength
values determined by these tests are somewhat higher and more scattered
than those determined by Dr. Hendron. Whether this strength difference
corresponds to a similar difference in hardness should perhaps be a
topic of further study if it becomes necessary to refine penetr2tion
rate estimates for a tunnel boring machine.
No tests were run on rock classified as "cherty argillite". As
discussed in section 7.3, this rock type was a major constituent of our
borings in the Bradley River and Bull Moose fcult zones, and i•Jas ob-
served to contain considerably more chert than was observed in surface
geologic mapping. The possible unique properties and distribution of
this rock type should be evaluated in further refinements of tunneling
rates.
48
K-0631-61
Of perhaps less concern are the prrperties and distribution of the
''volcanic graywacke" identified in thin section and discussed in section
5.3.2. More needs to be learned both about its distribution and its
strength and hardness properties before its tunneling characteristics
can be properly evaluated.
Another concern in evaluating tre tunneling characteristics of the rock
types on the project is their cataclastic nature and sheared and
interlayered texture. Lenses and stringers of argillite commonly occur
within the harder graywacke and chert, and on a large scale may make
excavation easier than test results might indicate. Conversely, such
variation in rock types makes it difficult to select rock samples for
testing in the laboratory and care must be taken to arrive at
representative test results.
7.5 Barge Basin Soil Properties
The potential stability of the soils in the vicinity of the proposed
barge basin was evaluated by a laboratory testing program or samples
from the single boring location in that area. These soils consist of
soft to stiff, silty clny and clayey silt overlying silty and clayey
sands.
The sensit~vity of the fine-grained soils was calculated from the
results of natural and remolded field vane shear tests, laboratory
Torvane tests, and unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression tests.
Strength and sensitivity data from these tests are summarized on Figure
17. The two pairs of field vane shear tests yielded the highest
sensitivity ratios, 8.6 and 5.2. Ten pairs of laboratory Torvane tests
yielded a relatively consistent average sensitivity ratio of 3.0. The
three pairs of triaxial compression tests yielded an average sersitivity
ratio of 2.3.
Another concern with regards to the stab i1 i ty of the proposed barge
basin is the possible presence of interbeds of potentially licuifiable
clean sands in the silts and clays. The cleanest fine sandy interbed
49
K-0631-61
noted in our boring was found in a sample from a depth o~ 26 feet. A
mechanical analysis performed or this sample (see Figure 11) showed it
to be a silty, fine to medium sand with medium and coarse sand-sized
shell fragments. Cleaner sands were noted in our exploration, but the
sand contained a significant medium to coarse fraction.
The results of Atterberg limit determinations on five samples are also
summarized on Figure 17 and on Figure 16. The materials tested are both
clays and silts of low to medium plasticity or compressibility.
These test results from soils in the vicinity of the proposed barge
basin, while suitable for evaluation of feasibility, should not be used
for design purposes. In addition to possible vari0tion of soil types
between locations in the tidal flat deposits, not all representative
soil types may have been sampled nr tested at this given location.
While the Corps of Engineers' General Design Memorandum No. 2 does not
contain soil test results, significant differences can be seen between
the field classification of materials from north of Sheep Point and to
the south of Sheep Point. The material to the north, in the area to the
west of the Corps' proposed powerhouse location, is classified as "fat
clay", while the material south of Sheep Point is classified es "silty
clay 11
• Unfortunately, these groups of holes were logged by different
geologists. Given the difficulty of field classifying borderline clays,
it is difficult to state whether such variability actually exists in the
tidal flat deposits.
The soils from our boring in the barge basin area were found to have
pore water salinity of 3.0 and 1.4 parts per thousand in the t~110 samples
tested. Given the dependence of sensitivity of at least some clays on
their salinity, consideration should be given to possible leaching of
clays in the barge basin area as a result of the discharge of fresh
water from the tailrace of the powerhouse.
Artesian water flow was noted on the logs of two of the Corps of
Engineers' borings located ,iust offshore in the tidal flats, one north
50
K-0631-61
of Sheep Point, the other to the south. No artesian water wa~ noted in
the Shanncn & Wilson exploration at this site.
51
TABLES
•·
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
Vertical
Inclination Footage Depth of
Boring Location Orientation ----of Boring Drilled Penetration Remarks
S~/ 83-1 I nta l<e S true tu re S 5°E 45° 155.3 109.8 Rock coring
sw 83-2 Bradley River Fault N 75°\.J 45° 262.3 185.5 Rock coring
sw 83-3 13arge Basin Vertical Vertical 51.5 51.5 Rotary vJash;
Soil sampling
techniques
S~l 83-3A IJa rge Basin Vertical Vertical 16.0 16.0 Drilled to
obtain
supplementary
samples for
SH 83-3
St•l-83-4 Bull t·1oose Fault N 80°~1 45° 206.3 145.9 Rock coring
Table 2
Description of Rock Classification Methods
Fresh
Slightly
wedthe red
r~oder·a te 1 y
,;eat he red
lliyhly
weathered
Extremely
weathered
Residua I
Very tlard
liard
Med1um
WEATHERING ----
tlo visible sign of rock lfldterial weathering; perhaps
slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces.
Discoloration indicates weathering of rock mdterial and
discontinuity surfaces.
less than thirty five percent of the rock material is
decomposed and/or dis integrated to a soil. fresh or
discoloured rock is present either as a continuous
framework or as corestones.
More than thirty five percent of the rock material is
decomposed and/or disintegrated to soi I. Fresh or
discoloured rock is present either as a discontinuous
framework or as corestones.
All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to
soil. The original mass structure is still largely
intact.
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass soil
structure and "'"terial fabric are destroyed. There is a
large change in volume, but the soil has not been
significantly trdnSported . .
HARDNESS
Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp
of hand specimens requires several hard
geologists pick.
Breaking
of a
Can be scratched wtth knife or pick only w1th difficulty.
Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen.
or gou~tod 1/16 ln. deep by firm pressure
point. tan be excavated 10 small chips
1 in. maximum size by hard blows of the
a geologist's pick.
Soft Can be youged or yrooved readily with knife or pick
nt. Can be excaYated in chips to pieces several
hes in size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small
thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Very Soft Con be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with
putnt of p1d. Piece> an inch or '""re in th1c~ness can
be broken by finger· pressure. Can be scratched readlly
by finger na i I.
For Engineer1ny Description of Rock • not to be confused with Mob's
>cale for minerals.
JOHI!__BEDO!NG AND FOI !ATION ~~ACING IN ROCK
~pac i n_9_ Beddiny and foliation
Less than 2 in.
2 in to 1 ft.
Joints
Very c 1 ose
Close
Very thin
Thin
Medium
Thick
1 ft. to 3 ft.
3 ft to 10 ft.
More than 10 ft.
Moderately close
Wide
Very wide Ver·y Thick
After Deere, 1963 1
NOH: Joint spacing refers to the distance nonnal to the plane of the
joints of a single system or "set" of joints which are parallel
to each other or nearly so.
M'~RTURf OF OISCOilTl!_!~!H ~URFACES
TERM
Very wide
Wide
Moderately wide
Moderately narrow
Narrow
Very narrow
Tight
APERTURE
Over 200 11r11
60-200 IIIII
20-60 nm
6-20 111n
2-6 mm
Over 0 to 2 "'"
Zero
!3_Qf~.gtJAIITY DESIGNA_TOR l!!QQl
RQO Itt :!. ~ !00 __ -: ___ ~!.Core in Pieces 4 in. and longer
RQO
Exceeding 90'1,
90-75
75-50
50-25
Less thon 25~
Length of Run
Di~stic Description -Excen-ent:·-
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
After Deere, 196lb
NOH: Diagnostic Description is Intended primari
problems with tunnels or excavations in
for evaluating
aOeere, D.U. "Technical Description of Rock Cort•s for Engineering
Purposes" felsmechdnik and lngenierg!Ooloyie, Vol. I, No. I,
1963, pp. 17-22.
bOeere, D.O. et al., "Design of Sud<Jce and Neu Surface Coustruction
in Rock Proceedings, 8th Symposium on Rock Mechanics. The
American Institute of Hining, Metallurgical and
Eny1neer, Inc., New York 1967. pp. 237-302
From: Society of Civil Enyineers, Journal of the Soil Mechdnics and
Foundtaions Division, Vol. 98, No. 5Mb, pp. 568-569, June 1912.
tD
0
::D z
C)
z p
~
00 w
I
N
(/J
::t:
~
~
I-'
'rABLE 3
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
BORING NO sw 83-2 .
~~ ifif;~;i ;{{~;if, o· ~ dl>.._J> ~~ u ~~ di> ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ v;; lit ""' ~.... ~ .... ~ ~ $ $' ~ ~ $' ~ if s .s: .f ~ /~· q,tlt-~ I# ~ ~ $' .r""~ tR ~I /ltf $.:!' .:;-~ ~, IF~ l' $
(j Q ~ u '1 ..., 8 ..;--q,"~ 0 (j
R-31 158.9-8 Fig 9 18-13
158.2
--·
·---
-
------·--
---· ----'-·
-·-·
--
--·------f-·
--
-· -----·-
------· ---------
--~ ~-~-----
~----~~-----·--
··---·-
. c---------. ----------------------.------·-·------
--------··------·---
1--·-~--~--------·----------···
-----------·-·-..
SHANNON & WILSON
JOB NO. K-0631 DATE Sept. 1983 ---
CLASSIFICATION
Gray, clayey, silty fine to coarse
SAND (fault 9ouge with rock fragments)
I
I
:
.. ---
f-
---
---~---~--··-------------··
~-···------------------_______ ...
~---·--
~ :n z
G)
z p
~
00
w
I w
en
:J:
m
~
1--'
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS SHANNON & WILSON
. w~•-BORING NO s~J 83 -3 K-0631 JOB NO. oAn sept 1983
~ tfif;lj;i ;~;~~ J! ~ ~ ... ; &~ u ~ .tP
.... "'l ... " ~,t; ..\. ~ c.,.._.:t' "' ... ~~~ ~~ l/ .. ~~$ !1//ll/l~~ 11 ll CLASSIFICATION
S-2 4.5-5.0 24 110 Fiq 10 2.63 27-21 19.2 5 Tv=0.35 tsf Dark aray t clayey SILT to silty CLAY 1 trace
PP=0.9-1 25 fine sand
tsf
Salinitv=3.1%%
S-2 Remold 21 109 16.0 Same
S-2 5.0-5.5 24 106 18.1 Same
S-2 Remold 24 104 6.8 Same
S-2 6.2 27 Dark aray 1 clayey SILT with occ. lenses of silty
fine SAND, occ. pockets of silty ClAY
-------~---·-
S=_4 12.0-22 107 13.4 Dark qrav. clavey SILT, trace of fine sand -· ---------12.5 26 ----------·
·-----------------..
S-4 Rerrold 23 103 24-21 5.2 Same
---S-4 13.0 29 Dark gr~y, slightly silty fine SAND with occ. --------··--· . --------lenses of sandy clayey SILT
~-~-· ------· .. --
·-··--···-----· ---··~-
S-7 22.9-21 103 Fiq 10 24-NP 5.1 Dark gray 1 sligb.tly__.c!_a_yey.Lsil!;yL__fine to -----~~-~-------1-----------23.6 coarse , fine to coarse SAND
1--------f--------1---·-----·---
-----·-----· ~--------------f---.-.------------------. ·--· --
S-7 Remold 24 101 3.5 Same
-·-·----·--------------·--------------~---
l -------··---1--·--···-t------. 1---------1-------~---~-----·-
--------·-···---.~-·-·---·····----I-.----·---·--~··----·····-
~
:::0 z
C)
z p
ctl ~
00 w
I w
(/)
::t:
ffi
z p
N
'TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
BORING NO sw 83-3 .
11/J 1.4;1;~~ #;~~ $! o· ~ ()P ..._ .{' ~ ~ u c.;-aP ~ ~ ..... "' ~~ 4 4f ..,.::-(, ..... ~ II $'.! .... ~~ ~ .l ~~~ I~.~ ~~.~ .f 1.:-t .! ~ ~ '.i-'f: !' ~ ;; ~ 'f: li ~ $ :$ ~ .t ~ ' ~! ~ ~ c.;; Q ~ G "'i ~ 8 ~ q_'? 0 u
S-9 26.0 17 Fiq 11
S-9 26.7 34 Salinity:::l.4%
'iV=O. 43 tsf
0.12 tsf Ran.
'IV=0.41 tsf
0.14 tsf Ran. -
T\1=0.34 tsf -
0.12 tsf Ran. -
T\!;;::0.40 tsf
0.12 tsf Ran. -
S-16 35.5-16 Fig 11
37.5 , ___ -·-----
-----~,·~ -----
---· --
------------, --------
-·----
--------·-·------------~,-·--------
--------f--
--·-·----·· ·------1-----------------
--·----~---~--
___ , __ ---··------------~-·-
--------... ----~~--·-----------~ ----
-------·------··-
SHANNON & WILSON
JOI NO. K-0631 DAT£ Sept 1983 --··
I CLASSIFICATION
Dark gray, slightly silty, clayey fine to coarse
SANTI, with trace of fine gravel. Shells and
fraoments throughout
Dark gray, clayey SILT, trace of sand
-
Parallel to beddina
--
-
-
i-Perpendicular to beddinq
-
-I
l
Dark gray, slightly clayey, silty fine to coarse
SM'D with trace _Qf fine nr;:mp 1
------
··--
-----------
----·-----~------------------·
------·----------~.-----~-----~----
··-~------~----~-----·--·-·
m
0
::D
z
G)
z p
~
00 w
I .w
:to<
C/)
:I: m
~
z p
~
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
BORING NO sw 83-3A
lit jfif;~;i $~~;if o· dP p ~ c., (j ' ()(' ~ ~ ... f ,$' .$ v -~.. IS ~ ..... ~ v ...._ ,::J~ II $ ~ .~.. ;:j; ~ i 1 ! f I ~ -~ q.~ ~ l# !" ~ ~ ~.,. ~ ~ ~ ,rl .,. ~ ct $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... ~! 8 ~ v Q ~ u " ~ cSJ ~ q., 0 v
S-1 1 n-1 R 29 1)-21 'I\r-=0.39 tsf
0.11 tsf Rem.
S-1 3.0-3.1 35 Tv=0.27 tsf
0.10 tsf Rem.
S-2 8.1 'I\r-=0.56 tsf
0.18 tsf Rem.
S-2 8.5 24 25-17 Tv=0.62 tsf
0 20 tsf R£ID
S-2 9.5 24 'I\r-=0.62 tsf
0.46 tsf Pem.
S-3 14.6 17
SHANNON & WILSON
JOB NO. K-0631
CLASSIFICATION
DATE Sept 1983
Dark qrav, clavev SILT with\"-!," lavers of
silty CLAY
Same
Grav sliqhtlv clavev SILT locallv with trace
fine sand occ. nockets or lavers to k" thick of
gray silty ClAY
Same
Same
Dark qrav to black, clean fine to coarse SAND,
trace of subqranular fine arqillite gravel
!
FIGURES
/
I
I
KACHEMAK BAY \
\
/ ;£,
lj. .
( ~ .
SHEEP
POINT
I
\
~\-
....... -
'
/ .
. ;
' (
POWER
HOUSE,_'·
\] ~ TP-1
\
\
'-.\.
I
(
\
··~
0 ·o
·'b
I
/
/
I
GEOLOGIC MAP\
FIGURE 2
SHEET 4 OF 4
)
/
I
I
'-....
)
/
/
/
/
-----/
/'
I~
/
~/
' . \ . . I
/' SU__f!GE ~ \ ',
__.-/TANK GEOLOGIC MAP ~ ~ (~FIGURE 2 ~SW83-4
\ SHEET 3 OF 4 \ I /
(-
'
/
0 500 1000 2000
SCALE IN FEET
\
\
\
3000
I '
~\ . \
4000
/
(
---------12.50-
~!.5 00 --...../
I
I
\
\
! \
\
_ _)
/
-1 7 .5 0 --------._/
~
GEOLOGIC MAP
0 ~FIGURE 2 ) ~0° SHEET 2 OF 4
l ~
//
/
/
\
\ \
' \
//
./'/ . / .r
\
~ \ /GEOLOGIC MAP
_;' SWB~-2 ·/ FIGURE 2
_ / \ SHEET 1 OF 4
\ )
\ J
./
INTAKE \ fV
STRUCTURE~·
\ '-·; ~ SW~3-1
\
BRA DLEY
L AKE
r 's~ /
I ' \
\
\
\
\
\
(
_,--.-...,
I
.........
/
(0
EXPLAJCATION
BOUNDARY OF GEOLOGIC
MAP AREA
SHANNON & WILSON BORING
SWBJ -4 LOCATIOlll A.ND NUMBER
!'ij TEST PIT LOCATION AND
TP-1 NUMBER
STONE & WEBSTER Eft.CtNEERING CORPORATIO•
BRADLEY LAKE HYORt:IELECTRIC POWER PROJECT
GEOTECHXICAL STUDIES
LOCATION MAP
SEPTEMBER 1983
$.HANNON & WILSON , lftC.
G eotechn iul C onsu lt.artt5 FIG. 1
'I
)
. (" I I
' (
' / /'
)~
NOTES:
1 ) S e e Figure 1 lor loca tion o f g eolog ic
map .
2 ) Topographic base hom U .S. Army
Corps of Eng i n ee rs. Conto u r interval
is 5 fe e t .
;;.--.
/
0 200 <OO 6 00 80 0
SCALE IN FEET
I
I
-----------
/
I
I '
;(-
. t .•
' '
. '
.. ~.(i\._ . ~-.
~~
!I
'' :f ,,
; '
I. \\. \\.
' '
\
' \
' \
~I
\
'
/
BRADLEY
LAKE
Qa
Kg
Ka
Kaf
Kac m:mfl ~
Kagrn
Kd ED . . .
'
L
so __ ,.;;;!_
~85
Yso
~
SW8J.4
--€:)
DH·17EX
EXPLANATION
QUATERNARY OEl'DSIT S , undifferenuznd ; Includes glacial
outwash , till, and ce~Anium. Shown oaty ._ .. i cinity of Intake.
GRAYWACKE ; maant, weakly metamor;t-.ou:d sandstone with
minor argillite liiiyen..
MASSIVE ARGIL LITE ; weak l y metamorpksed s i ltstone and
'lery fin e s;:~nd-s t one...
FOliATED ARGILLITE ; Petv oniudy shev-ed, wuklv metamor -
phose d siltstone and nrv fin e sandstonr •nil Ius th a n 10%
nodules, b01.1dins, .... discontinuous layen af chert .
FOLIA TED CH E A rr AA Gl L LITE ; u mo.e w1th 10 ·20~ nodules,
boud i n1 , ani::l disco•tD:uous l ayers of chert.. ln~;ludes a few la yers
of fr a ctured , mau;.e chert to 10ft. thidt..
GRAYWACKE&: ARGILLITE , undiffere•t:i:aUd ; com p l exly m ill e d
ass e mbla g e cons ist ... of 50-65 % graywadr.e .and 35-50 % u g1 ll~e.
Argilli t e is predom~tly foliated wilh ~ th.an 10% c ll u t .
DACITE DIKE ; wuU'r metamorphosed . h11e grained , porph y otrc
intrusiu~ rock .
R o ck no t e11posed •itb in about 200 feet of tunnel alignm~:nt.
L i thology inferred fro. more distant u :pasares , t o po g raphic ell:-
preuio n , and /or adtoilling rock acr o ss stniC'hlr•l trend .
R o ck upose d with• tunnel alignment con.tor or w1thin about
200 feel ol tunnel a l•m e nt.
FAULT ; approx.imately located , show i n9 nte of slicken1tdu
LINEAMENT; a p p ro:.imat el y located
LITHOL O GIC CONTACT ; approximately iocaud
STRIKE & DIP Of FOLIATION
STRIKE & DIP OF JOINTS
Shannon & W ihon
BOA lNG LOCATION : arrow shows orientatton and hor izontal
pro jec t i on of incl ined bor ing
U .S. A r my Corps of Eng ineer!
BOR lNG LOCATION lall borin g s at dam Ute not shown I
STON E & W E B STER ENGINEER I NG CORPORATION
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJEC~
RECONNAISSANCE BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP
DF THE INTAKE. TUNNEL ALIGNMENT.
AND POWERHOUSE SITES
S EPT E MBER 1983
SHANNON II WILSON ,INC .-
G e o technic:al c;on-ltan tt
K-0631·61
FIG. 2
SH EET 1 OF •
~\ ...._ \ ·o -...__ ' -~~ ,::..-... ' -·
..J
---.....____
•• (l•' 'X
\ ""' ... , \
' \ \
\ \
•
I ,~-/·) l
/_;...--'
-"".,./-
' I 'r \ ' .
I
\\"'' .. \ ~~
\\
\
'-..,
-;;
' ,_ ..... ~ '~'\. ~--
\ v t' 1 ·-........ \ v l
\ -.;~oi:~'-\'
''\'', ' \ \ I
I
'
(.
', I ;
.\ '
~
-. . ,~ . --~ ..... -............ ~ ---=----.... f ' I ' . ·• f ~ ---~ ~ --........... ~ 1 f -· ·y ..;
~-"',/ --'~----~ --.:~,;------....'·.., ______ ~_·,\ .· . .~...-..-' .. J ., ~
-I /
/'
( '_,..;•: I. ... /' ~ -;-~--....-' .,_,. ~-, .!<!, ·--~ \ -' /· 1 ' / ·o
~ ______ _:.....,,~--~----..... .... • ..........._ ------' ' p ."' ~-~___.,. .,. -=--· . ~' ....
. ''/ /C ,"-.: ..._ ·• . .......... --,::..,~,, ' I •./ { -" ' ..-• ~ ~->-;:-..... ..._ ' -----..__ --.. f ' ___., I .
i
. I ...-:;,· .--' .. -~ ---. . ,· ---....:. .I ~ __. ' ) ~1. / . / . --• .. --~ ..._ ....._ . ;' --. . . '-.. ' . .
. ,, . ---~ ..._ ·r ~ -
c ' --/ -----......, -............ .......... •• --· -----• -:--------, -......_, -------·; -· ...... I I · . / _d. · ~~-• '• f • •'-. ., '-.. ~ ---.._ · ·. :::-:--.... · ---~ ,.
I
;.· ')~·· 4-
/:_,....--.
I
'
\,
...._,
' ... r ... _
' J-· ~ ")0.: v
~ ....... '-.... '· ·"' ' '
'-..
··o ' -., -., ---0 '-..-......· . . \
'~ ·-..
' )\\
~
\
I/ ~ II
I • ~· • . / ) -..-:-. z-:.. ~~-/ ~~-/ -. ::-~---,._:·. -..._______-~ ·: __ :---. ~ ( ---""'------. I ----___ ~ • -~ , -I •
' ' . -'' I ·''r· . / ' C~~~ ' ' ·--,..__• . < '... ' ' I I / / '" / ". ~-.. :. ' / "' / _.. I •. -----' ......... ..____,. I /-:" --' ---------------I i
. -/ ,-;,r· .. ·1 • r 1·.--·"' • • --·," ----~---•• '~ ----------/ /•;/;·~~y'l . . ' ' ~~/ .·---""· . ' --~ ~~ .· -~ ::::--.::'· .~ -•\ /--/ • / • ' I /'' • 0 --' .. _ ' • . • ./' ..._ -I
I ' / ' -• , / I' / -'-.. /' I • • ~ ---• :,_ ' • .......... -;.------., ;-... ---.---:----..., ---"\. /. • -~ /,'/ / '/ ·'/ .· I ' -. ~~ // ,--. -\ / . ,/ -,_ ·----~ ... ,, I.~'--...._'·· ... ·._ "<' -./ ~ ------:-_.....~ ·, ' -~-. . • / -~~-
' ' • ' . ~ I' • i ...._ -· ----........_ "' • ---' __,... ;/ __..: __ Y. ~-/· ' ,' //-::-~( ·~-,· . -·· . '. ~~:: -~--:::::-·-="· . . --... '·.-..... _':" I .~.1-~ '7--. -.· ~-J I'.... 7-'' ,. ! ;',,> -..
I/ (. I / ' -: I • / ,. // • ~-/ .... -"' ..:::..._ ·~ -"-"'-.. . ~ -. I / I ......__ -:: ---• ,·. • --·< .. //, If ; "\,; ,. ,.--,.. ~-' ~ , • .-;--..-.... _...---. --.. , / /'
(
" ·' I 1 't /I -1 "'-''-, • --' • -:~~ ,· (.·1 •• :---_~...=.--'.-·'• --·/-~ ·' ' I ' . I I . '~ .... -' ' I --. . . -==---'
• ' ' • ; / ~ / / ' -; .. t' • . ~... ' -.............. ' ' ' -/' ' ' ' -; J .. • • -----• -~---...--..__/ ,·
,·; ( / ""' I/-/ .-· .--'/ . ·' . /r,,,·..:..J -"'-.:-~--_. \ -· ·, ,•,~·. --~""' (' -\ ~J :::1 ..--' --~--":--~-~~~ / " \ .
_,--.:,. -,: ' I
1
,-....._ I ·"j ............ ..._.-...., ' .--.. 1 '"\... ___..-'/ ~----:-.-..... --..:;;:...._~ / GJ \ I\\ I ' ' ~ /.'/ /./"~ >' -\ I / --~'-,.\ '--. . ~'~~..... _-; ~-;:. !"':-.; -~ \ -0. '-</
"~' ' \ ' \ ' (..._ :-.. ' '., ...,, ~' .
' \' '-\ I ·, ·-......._-.....__,__,' ·~. . \ ....... , -
--.......... , ' f I \ , ... , \ .<~\.
\'~".\'
' \~\
' '
-:/ i ( r · ,
~li' . ~r . ~~.·'/ I I I ~ ---j / // ' ,, . . • -· ' ·~l, -' ' / . ( .-...·---: . --'
' ' . -I . ----/"' I -·· ' ( ..J • ~-I I'' I \ '""' /Y• -/-/ ~ ;' -I "'-.: -' ' ) .. -·~ \· -~ -· \ · .. ~il l I . J I '' -./ ~
,__ I ' f ' .' • • -~ --. ' •• ~ '-. , , , , --...--... ._____......,._ ....__ 1 ,
1
/
..:;/
~
./... ---I lj I I ...... ,.1..-....-~ ' ' "" '-,., \ ~ ~--~ ·~~ -' I f
.....-... ~~ -, __ -' ; t ~---~_-_ . .. -, . ~.9 " \ ~ r----.. ::-._--_:... a ·~ \ ~ .... :---: /"' ----. ~-
• I -• . '·. -:~~·:::::·;·;:.:/:-.:·;\i(f,;~:::::P:-~.-.. :' .. ~ ' l ._..__,,,-:.,;:-'."/-.-"· ~ •: ~·_.., •..: ."-:-~-:-:-::·.·-·~~-~ ...
, 11 ::: -;::-=-;. , ·WI '\J\ \: J: . '·-... -Ill
,..--
~
.. ,
\
\,\
.~---..... ...
,· ----'-----../ . --... ~ ,-, I ---.,_.)..........._ ,, ,/ f
-~~:
\ ~
\ ·, ~ ~~---~
.... /"':-_; -~· . ,.-------...,
. :.-;---------. ~
'.·~, ! .. \
'
v·0:) '\. -'--r· / _;· .. / ~ -~
-/ . / /
f of I .-'
/r' ' . !"; . . I r•
, -< ~ I
<I
J ~ . ..--:----
' -· ~
•• -<l \
.•.:_...;
, ---..:Y'
-(
/· 85~~
I· I .
~
--.----
-~
·~
-~ ~'--· ' ! I
~"" ,o1 ·
. ... --,..-\ ~ ' -
"'-.: . ,...-;--;,:/ •· ~" !
~
' ' --
----· " ,_ !";
I
~ ,/ ,. ' ~ -..-r' -· "'~
NOTES :
1) See Figure 1 for lo c ati o n ol geologic
map .
2) Topo!;Jraphic base from U .S. Army
Corps of Engin ee rs. Conto "r int e rval
is 5 f e et.
,I
/ I
/ ~.I \(-
', .--;.
~
_/' '
.li -~
~~-J·
---~,
~ .
-:::::::__...... __ •' l.-.
, .. ;.. ~ //l~: :· 1 _, ·; ' !· . --! ' ·, / -\ r ' . -
3"
. ;/ ) \ . ·\ <:l/ -I ; ' -/, ...
. ' .' ~-----:-. ' I ' ' , l , ,
I I . 'I .
""'~ -: ~ .. ~ -~,. i~ --__ /
-·/·. /7:-•" ~
'· I
' -----------_..--.... ~-_J ::-, I -. -. ../·
,--~-/--'
I ~ . / //
I ' ·. '
. ._....,
.· ~
-----
/
~
/ / I
,--' ,-· _,
-~,__..
'~-.~-...-' ~. ~ -----... ~
' \ J ;r •
/ }f ' I . I ~-.:._... -~ / • ; . I I .
-II .. ,;, . --.:-? ~ _-__.. ·/: /
. I ~-/ ~'/:·.
/
.I /,...-~ ' '. I
' I
... I ,· ... .:.__j,~ I \ .. ," __ . ~)
I I . -------.;_ -.../ • ' ' ' c ~ ~--.-, ~ -' ' , ~-. "' ~~ .. o--c::::, ·--, ~ . . <=·.-"''....... .. ' .•. ,
~-'v."?f· ~ .......----. . ' ,, ;-~ 1 / / -/-' / ·-/ ,· '· ~ _. .._ . ·-:,, ' ... , ... -.·. ·--"'_c.>:'~,-~0:~ / ./ r / . ' r r •._____-' _. ~-/ ... ~ .. -.. -• >' .
/ ·' c . t. f' 2-.,
I ..
""'----
o" ../ '•//, "' ' -.--...... _........ ~ -:-. '-..._.. ---. ___ ::. .::--:-. . . .. ··---:: / ... _, -. -..._ ___ ..,.n•~ •, ... .;~---, /j
-, '-,'-............_ ---......
. ~ "' ,.y
' . ·) r"/..,. --{"
' I / /''• ... \
.• I /' ~.--~c·-..___ ,'
Jl'"" ,6 .,., ·_,
0 100 200 400 600 800
• ' ' i
SCALE t N FEET
~ --;-r '"'---.. -T ·":"/""~' \·I\
I
--. ' '/ '-
\ ~J '_-_.7 1 ' I/' .--------__ ../. / --"":l --------. ' ' / . .----....
',_:, I ! l
-~ . ' --~-::; ';'-'j t \
1 .-I .;;r'!.--
'· / "/-' -·// I _:_. --. ,_.... ~ ... _, ......... ~..._----" // .~
i i) I /, -, -d --~ /f -...._ _ __..!, /i'' __ , --___,___--. ~ -·r;t;· ./-,,....--.. --;: r· ~--) ' .• ..../ i:: ;-;;r; ;...-.. -.. / I . (
__,. '--: I .r ·_· ) ~;; \·i<(_~ .... \, _/J/--~-~-,; -' .-·<-·
··., \"-~ .I :/~ "->/
.l(l t\ .:~ -J ./:/
(.·I---.-.. . • • r._, .r-'
,.--. . -----.,' :-...
/fl ~~-______ .. _..., '
:·:~;?·\~·
./.y /
'/, ,·· rJl-.. ~
.,
----
0
~
w z
~
Qa
Kg
Ka
() .. -llo ~ Q
• • • 0 •• 0 .
' c • "
X
~
C1
Kat [I]~
"' ,
fiM!.JI Kac l'li!J:lj__J
Kag[}]
Kd [J 1
J: u ::;;
L
50 --~-
/as
Yso
~
SWB3-4
--47
DH·17EX
EXPLANATION
QUATERNARY DEPOSITS, undiff~rentiaud; Includes glaci•t
oulwashl, till, and CD••ium . Shown only • wicinity of Intake.
GRAYWACKE ; milunt, weakly metamCKplloRd nndstone with
minor argillite Layen..
MASSIVE ARGILLITE ; weakly metamorpMR"d siltstone and
wery f i ne sandnone.
FOLIATED ARGILLITE; Pervasively shured, weakly metamor -
pho!ed 1iltstone and ury fine s01ndstone wirll len than 10%.
nodules, boudins, .... discontinuous layen of chert.
FOLIATED CHERTY ARGILLITE ; as ;~tun-e •ith 10-20 % nodules,
b o udins , and discoRn-olls layers of che-rt... Includes a lew layers
of fractured, mus.iu dte-rt to 10ft. thick..
GRAYWACKE & ARGILLITE , undiflere•t-l;.trd ; compi!!!Kiy miKed
assemblage consiuicMI ol 50·65% graywadr.e aad 35-50% argillite .
Argillite is predom i ~tfy foliated witt\ len th~n 10% chert.
DACITE DIKE; wutty metamorphosed, f-.e gra ined , porphyritic
intrusive rock.
Rock not exposed wittlin about 200 feet of hlnnel ali-gnment.
lithology inferred tro• more distant e•pos.res, topographic ex -
preuion , and/or adio•ing rock acrou su•c-mnl uend.
Rock exposed w ithill hnnel alignment conidor or within about
200 feet of tu nne I •U,.ment.
FAUlT; approxim•tety loc;ated , showing ~lll:e of slicken1ides
LINEAMENT ; approxi•ately locat e d
LITHOLOGIC CONTACT; approximately '-:lcated
STRIKE & DIP OF FOLIATION
STA IKE & DIP OF JOINTS
Shan non & W ilion
BORING lOCATIOJI ;ilrtDw 1hows orient•tion •nd horizontal
projectiOn of inclined bor ing
U .S . Army Corps of E•qineers
BORING LOCATION
STONE & WEBSTER E NGINEERING CORPORATION
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT
RECONNAISSANCE BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP
OF THE INTAKE, TUNNEL ALIGNMENT,
AND POWERHOUSE SITES
SEPTEMBER 1983
SHANNON & WILSON . INC.
Geohchnical Con"'tt..•hi
K...0631·61
FIG. 2
SHEET 2 OF 4
•
't. 0
"~
/_ -,..~ ~ -..._ ---------=--·0 r---____-/ -~--::., ... -~ /
.-------/ ~ -._ ~~/--~< -:-
:-.,~-----/ / --/ ---------. --.... ___ . -----------.._ --=:-_ ----~-----/ .-----......
/ -____ ;: .,----...
/ ~--
'·
/ ·'
_,-----~ ~-~ ·--::-·
I --~---~ •/
~~~-I
,--------_ .... :-:--... -~----
-0 ••• ,o. -,.~ .. ----/ ...--__../· y: -. ' / /
•'
/ """" -'~/ _.r_,
~ /
PROPOS ED -.>
SURGE "TANK
Kac
1
,/
______...-/'
"""·
,.---... ...... _
/ ! ~---
-~ ~--=-=-'-..
Ka
--.......
' -,_ //
-~
' \
',
~ -~ --....
•'. --~ -:::.: ,;
'· -------..
-......_,_ __
-..,, .__.,/-
NOTES :
1 ) See Figure 1 for location of geologic
map ,
2t Topographic base from U.S. Army
Corps of E ngineeu. Contour interval
is 5 fe e t.
I '
.. '-.
-
•
\
. ~ "-....-....... ""' ... -... -.. -'\ ---~ ./ ,:=' '. ·-~ ~ """' ... -/'-l -·o " "'\ \ ~ J \ \ ~,' • ' •<JI \-: -~ ~ • 0 ' -......___ .. . ..,l -___,:.: )--·-. -~ -~ ".\ ::----· J -__ -......._ '-... · ' ~o -. · · \ "····· .u', 1
·.' ,' r '·"--:, --. -. ·
._/ ' _j""' ==_· : ~~--. ' "' / -"-;:~/ i~ . -'\ \ ~ ·"· ,., . I!:. I( ; ;' / ,.---~0 ., ' •• ;~~) \ "'-'--........ \
·· -· -....__ · ' .--.....__ .'-. • ' , I ' / I ' ---a·~-......__ \ "-"' • '\
\\
\
v
_,
'
.-,r.:.I..-~ -~\ "'--........__. \._,' \ -~\,Jr--.....'-\ '-. ' \\ ;, ·. ;' I I : I f I/
0 fl' "'~ '.--??' : \ ~ ....
v . -~ ""'---. ........ ' --.....,_ 'l ~ I ' . I ' / , f-.~\···. --:_z~< •!'"'I •· '\.\:·,' '-. ,\_ ·· .• ··\J -: •,!(/:/\!/ .---......-.. t I· )/1 •/
\
. . -~ ' / ~ '-'---• · . · · · . /· ·, • I I ' • :;. '-L I I · · I · ' • ,.·_ ./~ "<. :''""::'--. -"--../ ,,,, \.· ... ~ .· ,.,____: ' ·.'·; \I ' ,.~~ ... I I / : \\ "-.\._
' ' ' ---~ ' ' . ' ,, I• I / I ~ ' • /
' '· ------
~ (/ ' ' · ~ · -\' ~ .-... ' ' ED '-. li ·-' I I ( ~ , · \ \ \'\'"'....___ \,--~
'-, , ·-;· • .~ .\: . //-\ . ("""'-'\ , ,,\\_ \ _!JH-17EX ' \ '' i / (' \ ___ / r . / J \ ' // /
' -_.. .• -< • \· \ I ' • ~ -/' . ' ' ' . \ ,. ,·-II I . ' . ......-:1// ~ I . '''\\ \ I \ / ... I . '\ \ '. . -·, . : / \ '-----, .. ' • /•/; //. -. . . \ ~ -\ ' . I I I --..._....--. ' ... ~ / ' ' \:...--... ~ ~--• ' 1 -.. ' " BULL · ' r . • · ' I -' 1 · / --
. -( ('"", I . _/.. \ . '~ r-" . ,/-',, \\ -\ \·\\MOOSE ' \ --~ ,. ' '"....._\,'-~ ·_------( I :/// . // ---------" . --_ _ , . \:, _ , · , r . . 1 · -, \ . · \ FAULT \ 1 \.. ':---:---· , ~ .-· . ...--... \
1
, ·· 1 . r 1 1 /
1
/ -~ ·)·. \ _"'· \ __ _ _ / / ~./ -,, \ \ .\ , . 1 \. , , · ~ \ ... _,..-·,~ _ / . = '-.,_ .\ . I , / r' : ·, : r I
'\ ' ....._ ~ 2! ---/ ' /-' " •, \ ' ' ' ' ' • ' / I \ I '-c--. '' \ ' I I I I 1 ' L\ .
• . ---: ..___ '' .. / ' ', ' ' -.. • I ' I ' " -. : I I . : I -~ _-. ----... , -/ /"" ,, ' . \ t0 -85 ~ 'v .....-/\ . I ' ;' . • '-I ------\ I I ' I ' ' 1 '\ \ I ~ ' '-. ' -I / I " -·-" . . I ' ' ~ -' ' ' I ' I --"""' ' . ' I ' ~ . I I ' . I \ .. ~ ' I ' • I • . ---~ .• --~ .. " . ----...:. • -.. -I .___. \ ~----.. . \ II ' ' . I'\ '\\ I I I I·'' . \ ~ " ,. ' / -. --J ' . ' . I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' .. . . '--.. -" . I ' --. . I I 'I . ' ·-· .· " ' \ ' \ . ' -' ' ... ~ ' \ ' Kg -. . . I \ \ 1 -., • ' ' •• I • •': . ' I i
-::-83>-4 K~ --...... \ \ \ I I \ \ /---.' \ . II . ' ' I I I I ) --· ' ,. ' Kat -' ' ,. ' · 1
· r .' ! I
II l ['\~ L\l lOVII :U .j .: ... "/ l • ' •'
Kai :-.,
;'~ ' " ~~ .. _
. '"'\--\ t<a ~ --=--/ ., .
/,
I
' -\ Ka J \
\
·\
,' ...... :
Kaf -' 'I
i
! ,~"-...... .... _ -...\_.\ . ,,, ~-:-1· \,f \/-----~ l '·,, ',, . . \ I, • -::..... ___: • (
\ \\ / ~-at ~-\ . -1--_._I I \~\'·· ,· . ·\ / . ,-::' .~\\' / /'' ~:\: .I t
,-· •"
. -' ' ' 85 ---\ ~,. ~---\ I ~--., l -"••
I • • \ ;,. -\, ~-, ~ .;::,::: -• -r~~ , ~ I .
·' \ · · · ~ =--..._ . :so , ~,76 I ~~ ~,_. '---.:._ ' \ . ' \Y I> ! I ,
' ' :.----,... \ ---:... _,/ /\\ .. ' ! . \''--. ' ,~~ "??, '· ';--I '· o";_: "-. , I
'-'-'""" -~-_· -----.. .' ·. ~-I \y i I I '~....., ,..........._ ~ ~ . ' --------......:._ . -..___./ .
... ...... \ 80 \ --.......... --\ . --·-·.
..... \ ~ -_ ·-.. -1""" .....v-~
" ____.... --.. 'J'"' ------~~ -, ----------\ r~ ~-, --I ---. -·~ 1r·,~ --1,
I ._ .->r-: 1 ~~\' ~-,.., ~ i. r -
""" \ , -· --_..... '•,•-I . ,_-' " . 3' ! ~ o-~ -.......... ' ' \. ...---... · '-..., , '........_ o'> · I -;? ....... "'\.... ""-_ ___.... ....... _ ...._ // ~ "'-,ot.,v--•""'~· 1 '~ '\ ~-
. . '-........... -·--"'l-. ,. I ·,;;'----•
/-----,·,...._"-----...._ ";·. __...-·' --\J " • ·----~-:; '\. ' ' -·----.-r ~.
'
0 100 :ZOO <11JO 6 1JO 800
SCALE IN FEET
\
\, i ,, ',.
• 1 ' / I ; .
\ \', i . ' ,t' '\ i I .. /'l_;
\. I ' I \ ~, '\ \ . I / . . . I
' '
' ,:( .-' . /
. . /
I 1 · ., ...
.--.... . " . . .
'
( ., .,
\.
<'
!
/
' \
\\
/
I
) .
I; ,' /.
(. . '
. I.' I'
'
\
' . ., '
\ ' ' \\
\ '
/
'
•'
,.
!
l
'-:...
~
~ • • r
~
0
~
• z
~
r u
~
< •
Qa
Kg
Ka
• • ,. a ~ • o . . .
I>. Q 0 •t:
• "'"•' o;:".~c
• .!1
0.
E Kat[TI~
Kag [ .. ] I
Kd
.. ' o I A A ·>>> . . . .
" I u :;;
L=
50 --....,;;;;;:-
""85
Yso
~
SW83-4
---43
DH-17EX
EXPLANATION
QUATERNARY DEPOSITS, undifferentaud; lndudes glacial
outwash , till, and eoa.wium. Shown only.-•ieinity of Intake.
GRAYWACKE ; massrn , weakly rneumorpDo~ sandstone wath
minor argillite laye~
MASSIVE ARGILliTE ; weakly mecamor-pbowd siltstone and
wery fine undstone..
FOLIATED ARGILLITE ; Pervasiuly Jhurn:i . weakly metamor -
phosed siltstone and nry fine sandstone wrtb ~~~than 10%
nodules, boudins, aDd discontinuous layers of chert,
FOLIATED CHERTY ARGILLITE ; as abon w1th 10-20% nodules,
boudins , and d i scon o auous layers of chen.. lndudes a few layers
of fractured , mass1wr chert to 10 h . thicll.
GRAYWACKE & ARGILliTE, undifferentiand; complexly m ixed
assemblage consiUIPfl of 50-65% graywac.ke and 35-50 % argillite .
Argillite it predomt~tly fol iated with Jeu th~n 10% cllert.
DACITE DIKE; wuil:ty metamorphosed , fine ~rained, porphyritic
i ntrus ive rock .
Rock not exposed wf'lilin about 200 feu of tunnel alignment .
Lithology inferred fTO• more diuant exposures, topograph ic ex -
pression, and /or adjo•ing rock across ltruC"tVr.~l trend .
Rock e~~:posed withdl tunnel alignment _5orridor or within about
200 feet of tunnel al .. nment.
FAULT ; approximaniT located , showing r.~kc of slicken1ide1
LINEAMENT ; approz•mately louted
LITHOLOGIC CO NT A.CT; approximately locate-d
STRIKE & DIP OF FOLIATION
STRIKE & DIP OF JOINTS
Shannon & Wilson
BORING LOCATION;~rrow showsorientiltio• and horizontal
projection of inc l ined bor ing
U .S . Army Corps of Engineers
BORING LOCATION
STONE & WEBSTER ENGIN E ERING CORPORATION
BRADlEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PRO J E C T
RECONNAISSANCE BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP
OF THE INTAKE, TUNNEL ALIGNMENT,
AND POWERHOUSE SITES
SEPTEMBER 1983
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
Gee technica l Con1ultants
11::·0631-61
FIG. 2
SHEET 3 OF 4
'' ~
~.
ln
.
~~-j
,, \
I --...., /' ----·
KACHEMAK
BAY
0 ?' o(J
~,, ...
I> ,.
----~-
'' "
~
" ('
\
·-
;(
I
//
\ ,-
. ,
'
"
I
I
I
,,
·'
\,,
\,
\ "\ \ .
•, ·,
\
\
K
-~
" I
EB ·
•
DH-15
/
~ \ j' -· /
( /
"
(
/ '/
///
( /,
' '
\
I ~~
I / .
I
\ \.
\,
-·
\
' ( ~\ ~.·:\ -'-$--ffi_ . ..-/ ~ DH-38
'.Jf4 / //;. -I I
'. / //. ~
' [' ///
'/ / ~ "'l "./ • -~ _c
\
,. , I
'( ,r' -I I --._, ' ' ' ' 1 /
' '·
\
I ~/~I .
Qt:J_... '· I ( -------
~-'/ ,, .... ' ---
NOTES :
11 See Figure 1 for locat io n of geologic
map .
2) Topographic base from U .S. Army
Corps of Eng ineeu. Contour interval
is 5 feet.
.'-.
\
0
'i
' '
11 I
II I, \\
' ' ' \ \
/'
;
I' , I! I
''
J/f
/
" ·' /)I ·:\ .
,.-/· i
( \ j
I
'
I' t I . , II
' ' II \, I
)''I \J
' /' l j ' '
I ' I
I
\
·\
I
\
'" '
I \ DH-BEX
'• I
'· ~ .~c ~' -~~~ ~ -~-------·.'
/ ' r ,/ /
I
', I /
0 100 200 400
\
·~ • ·o
00
•,
' ' .
I \ \~
I
'
\
\
/,
',
' I
\
'
I,
'
:-;.,.-_.,..r ----~::>-:.__
/--~-·/·~-----/' ·, ..... //
' /;
600 ---
SCALE IN FEET
\ ' ' \ '
, I I
' l
I
I
/ )
(
Kat
' i I /
800
I'
1 '
' '
I
\ ',,
··\\ \
\ \ \
''
' ' I I
{ j : ' \ '
I ,
' :
)
a
.•
l
{ .. ~. ,../-:: ~--1:/ ,.,-.
/./../" /
'I/
--,j
I
I
\\. "' ~-~--\:J \ --..._ I ----~·\\\
-..... ~\
' ' .
/
"-J<a ,
·, \ \
\ \
I I
I
I
\
/ '....-
(\J, "/
l //·, /l
u .
/ ' '
/
~
/
/ !:(/
I
I I
I
' '
j
' \
:J I,-
j !'i ~'-· • i ,. /" . . -I
j / / (It ( ~-·Y,
"
'
\
,\ •
~ --,\
~~. ,.
...
·,' .... " ' " '
' '-'"',
'\. :,~ ......_.. '"
~·'_j'\\\1
~-
·,
'---.......
' I
\\
........... '-...... ..._" ' '-'
""" \ '\ ' ' ·, '
'>, \. \ \ ' -........._~-----
\ "-......_ ·------
' :~ ... -~; ',, --~ ---......., ., '-...... -~-,,' ··..._:::~--'" ...... "-----~'-. ...
_ .... ' ~ \
·,------__/
'• ~-
\
' .,
...
~
" w
w
z •
0
" w z -:
" " • •
Qa
•• 0
0 (> "lo G o •~;~•oGt.,o
' • t. t
Kg I <I I' : ·:-_:::·-_: ..
Ka ~
~
0.
Kat [I]~
"'
Kaclill7ilfl ~
Kag[IJ
Kd <<<· . ' .. ... ....
i
" :;:
L
50 __ ..,..;:_
~85
.Xo
~
SW834
---€1
DH -17EX
110
TP-1
EXPLANATION
QUATERNARY DEPOSITS, undifferentiated; Includes glacial
outwash, till, and colhnrium . Shown only in •icinity of Intake.
GRAYWACKE; manne ,
minor argillite layers.
weakly metamorphosed sandstone with
MASSIVE ARGILLITE; weakly metamorphosed siltstone and
very fine sandstone .
FOLIATED ARGILLITE; Pervasively sheared, weakly metamor -
phosed siltstone and very fine sandstone with leu than 10%
nodules. boudin1 , and di1continuous layers of chert.
FO~IATED CHERTY ARGILLITE; as above with 10·20% nodules ,
boudins , and discontinuous layers of chert . Includes a hw layen
of fractured, mani .. e chert to 10 ft. thick.
GRAYWACKE & ARGlLLITE, undifferentiated ; comple•ly mind
anemblage consisting of 50-65% graywacke and 35-50% argillite.
Argillite is predominantlv foliated with leu than 10% chert.
DACITE DIKE ; weakly metamorphosed, fine grained, porphyritic
intrusive rock .
Roek not e~tposed within about 200 feet of tunnel alignment .
Lithology inferred from more distant e•posures, topographic ex -
press ion , and/or adjoining rock acron structural trend .
Rock e~tposed within tunnel alignment corridor or within about
200 fl!et of tunnel alignment.
FAULT ; approximately located, showing rake of slickensides
LINEAMENT ; approximately located
LITHOLOGIC CONTACT ; approximatelvlocated
STRIKE & DIP OF FOLIATION
STRIKE & DIP OF JOINTS
Shannon & W ihon
BORING LOCATION ; arrow shows orientation and horizontal
projection of inclined boring
U .S. Army Corps of Engineers
BORING LOCATION hll borings in mud flats not shown)
TEST PIT
LOCATION
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT
RECONNAISSANCE BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP
OF THE INTAKE, TUNNEL ALIGNMENT,
AND POWERHOUSE SITES
SEPTEMBER 1983
SHANNON 8o WILSON, INC.
G •ouehnieal Con1u lt•nu
K.0631·61
FIG. 2
SHEET 4 OF 4
(
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO. Sri 83-1
< ::m~ STRUCTUf£)
PROJECT BRADLEY LAKE HYORQELECTR!C PO;;t:R PROJECi 1 ; oa NO. K-631 SHEET OF
Cll EM T
STONE ~ WESSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATlON I LOCITIOM (COOROIM~HS OR SUTIOMJ
N 2,103 474/E 342,987 l 094 ft.
ORilLING COMFlNI MFR. OESIGHITIOM OF DRILL
~RCT1C ALP.~~; TEST!:JG LABORATORIES
Sll( UO TTPE OF !IT
HOiriL "':tO 'lQ<>IL D IA~IONO
LONGYE~'l 38
SOIL fOOTlGE l CORE FOOTlGE TOUt DEPTH I OEPTH TO UTER
OlTE STlRTEO
DEPTH
IN fEET
28.4 ft.
7/U/83
126.9 ft. I DUE COMPlETED
CllSSifiCATIOM OF •lTERIIL
(DESCRIPTION)
7/17/33
I ELEV.
IN FEET
I
;::. ;::..
~::;•, ~~n<1;• ~RAVELS with cobbles and boulders. :omposed 1094 !~ •. ·, r:~a1nly of graywaCKe gravels "'ith argillite fraa·
1
....... ments. Subangular co angular, occasionally
'.'.• subrounded, r· .. : ..
Q • • I
;:-
f-
L::.o r.:.: ... • ... •• ... ·-+---------------------+11oss.s
r-:.:
~
c-,; •.::~ GRAYWACKE -······ .. -.: ::·
BOULDER
r:-20 .•. • •• : f:'" 20.5 r-:o-r:+--------------------ti079. 5 f:" ::::~.Sandy GRAVELS with cobbles. Subangular, some
~ ,. • • • p1eces sue rounded to rounded. -........ ·.
-28. 4 ,..,....,. ,:.··~·..;·r:-:--:--:---...,.----,-,..=""".,.,..=----.,-,---,--...,--+1073. g
-~C [..>,: '.· Mod. nord to hard GRAYWACKE; ~ray, fir.e-g.-ained,
-1>'··,'.':·· massive. Catac~astic texture "'ith local fluxion ~ ',·····"········ structur<?. contolning strH.~ers. and porphyroclasts ,... (' of 'llassive to locally fol1ated 3nillite. Calcite f:" . >· · · stri~gers and veins are cocr1on. Very closely to
'-.... ·· closely JOinted. Fresh 'a sl1ghtly weathered. r-~o 39.6 P-'t-------------------tto66
f:. 1=-1:...
-
-::o ----
-60 -
Moderately hard to hard SRAYWACK£ and ~RGILUTE,
m1xed; Light gray to Jark gray. Arg1llite is
massive to locally foliated. Cataclastic texture
with local f1ux1on structure. Calcite veins are
corrmon. Closely jOinted, locally very closely
J01nted. Fresh to sl iqhtly weatherea. Below
54 feet joints are close to moderately close·.
-s4.o r..-+--------------------+1o4a. 1
-\···: f:aro "RM>iACK~; gray, fine-f•rained, ;,;assive.
'-/ ::atacl~stic texture Hlt~ sc;.l\ttered stringers and
-70 sand-sned clasts of argiliite and occasional
f-' ':: local zones containinn str1~qers anv wavy bands of :·;u r.;assive to foliate' argillite. C&lcite stringers
-•·: and veins are co;r,on. Closelr jointed, locally
f->· very closely jointec!. Fres~.
~ r : f-80 ,.,,
f-' .:
f-!·. r:-~,; -
::-90 ' --
r-
r:-f-100
r:-
i:
· .... ·.
,· ~ ..•. '.
['< .
:cE. 6 F-'--+--------------------11013.6
Hard f,RAn;ACKE, with zones of mixed ar~illHe and
graywacxe; ·:Jray to black, 9raywacke is massive,
fine-gra1ned, argillite is massive to ~oliated.
Cataclastic texture with local ~uxion structure
onere argi11ite occurs. Calcite stringers and
veins are cotm1on. Closely jo1n:ed, loca1 1 y very
cloself :ointed. •resn to sllgntly ~eatnered.
F!GUf£ 3
155.3 ft.
l lOTH CORE RECOHRT, ~
94.8%
SAMPlE N ~ REC laox I
ORRUM ~"'"'iOGIMo.i
I
lOTH ROO. \
45.6l
I Began HQ 3\IL Oiorccnd ~or~ng J surface
I
42
1A
i
I !Runs l ana 3: s11t and srnd portion
!generally washed away auring cor1ng.
I
4
5
6
7
f-a
f-9
10
ll
12
~
13 -
14
15
f-, 16
1-'
f-17 f-
I
I
I
44
NA
~
NA
31
NA
32
'!A
100
"TT
lOO a
!00
-r5
---1 !
2 I
I
3
i
I
4 ! ~
I
5 j100% gray
Hoedrocx
1oo 1 5
I
J'5' I i
lDO
60
! 100 ~ 04 ' 8 i
100
65 -1
.!.QQ. 9 i
32 . I
• 100
12 10
i if~
llff ~
I 100 12 1 24
l~O r-13 T7
f-!------1---1 13 i
r-I 100 '----' f:" : 9 Tz ,........_,
t-!00 g t.1 20 22 ---<
f----1----l
21
22
.!.QQ. I. -l I 73 ~o 1
1
100 ! ~edu~';d
-,::-6 ·116 114 .• I_:_. :
returns during coring of
to ,iQ 3 ~JL Cia'Tlond coring :;:
BORING NO. Sli 33-l
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO. S'rl 83-1 Cce«r.)
CNTM STRIJCTIJ!{)
IROIECT BRADLEY LA:<£ HYDROELECTRIC ?O•!ER 0 ROJECT I lOB ~0. K-631 !MEET 2 OF 2
Cll EXT STONE ~ WE3STER ENGINEERING CQRPOR~T!ON LOCATION !COORDINATES OR STITIOM) HEY IT ION
~ 2,103,474 E 342,987 1094 ft.
DRILLING COIPIK! MFR. OESIGNiT!ON Of DRILL
ARCTIC ALASXA TEST!~G LAGORATORIES
SIZ! AND TYPE Of SIT DIRECTION AKO INCL!HHIOH OF HOLE
SOIL F:OUCE I CORE FOOTAGE TOTAL DEPTH 1 OEP!!I TO WUER
DATE IUR!E~ I DUE COMPlETED I TO! IL CORE RECOVER!. s TOT H iQO, ~
7/11/33 7117/83
DEPTH LOG CLASSIFICATION Of MlTERUl l ELEY. SAMPLE N ~\sax I REMARKS IN fEET (OEStRIPTION) I M FEET OR RUN ~ RQO NO. :
I !
j::. 120 l'z,-,:. ;;ard GRAY~AC::£, as above 23 lQOJ~ j::. -go ' 1-1:4.7
1f(1r
Hard GRAY\iACKE; gray, fine-grained, massive. 1005.8
r:-100 17 ) 1-Catacli'Stic texture with sand-sized clasts of 24 JJ r:. 130 argillite and local fluxion structure <4ith f-_j str1ngers, wavy bands and clasts of argillite.
i= ~;','5 Calcite veins are comr.1on. l"oderate.ly c16sely to 100
r-closely iointed. Fresh to slinhtlv weathered.
25 74 I r-D5.0 998.5
100 18 i
1-'"oderately harct to hard 3RAY11ACKE and ARGILLITE, 26 76 :
1-va mixed; gray to blacK. Graywacke is c:assive, fine-'
f:. grained, argillite is foliated. Cataclastlc
100 i
f:. texture with co,r.oon fluxion structure of porphyro-27 19 I clasts and 1nterlayered wavy bands of tne -rr
f 1 i thO lo1ies.
28 100 t-j::. 150 w-1od. hard to hard GRAYWACKE; gray, fine-grained, \ 41 1--
~ massive. Cataclastic texture with scattered \
100 -152.5 ~ sand-sized clasts of arg1l1ite, local fluxion 986.2 29 8b 2D structure with stringers and ,.,avy bands of =-155.3 ~argillite. Calcite ve1ns are cor..~on. Closely ( 984.2 -\jointed. Fresn. /
-160 -Botto~ of txploration
-1
~
~ r-
I-
f::" 1-
r:-1-
r:-1-
~ t-
1-
1-
1-I
1-I
1-i
1-!
I r-
1-'
I-!
I r-
t-
t-I
t" i
1-I
I=" 1--!
I
I-
I=' 1-
1-
r-
~ 1-
1-I
1-'
E:-1
I
\_ I ~ 1-:
I 1-'
F!GU!t 3 BORING NO. Sl'i 83-1 (cooT,)
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO. SW 83-2
CBRAil.EY RivER FAULTl
PROJECT 9R~OLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT ! JOB N 0. I ~~m QF
K-OS31 ' 3 .
CliENT LDCHIOM (COOROIHHES OR SUTIOH) l ELEYI!lil~ ... STO:IE i. 'AEBSTER Ertii<NEERING CORPORATION N 2,1()5,531/ E339,684 :~~, ft.
OR ILL I MG C~MPlM! MFR. OESIGMATION OF DRill
ARCTIC ALASXA TESTING L.I1SORATORIES LONGYEAR 38
Sll[ lKD TYPE OF BIT CONVENTIONAL
OIRECTIOM lMO INC.IKATIOK Gf HOLE N7Sow @ 45° K0-;;;q3WL DIAI~ONO, NIW~
SOIL FOOHGE I CORE FOOHCE TOHL OEPTH I DEPTH TO WATER
30.3 ft. 232.0 ft. 262.3 ft. ~t Surface
QUE STARTED 7/20/83 I CITE COMPlETED 7/28/83 I TOUL CORE RECOVERY. ' 1 TOTAL •ao. ' 98.! .' J2. 4~.
DEPTH LOG CUSSIFICHIOM Of MATERIAL I !lEY. SAMPLE II ~ \aoxl REMAUS IN FEET (DESCRIPTION) IN FEET OR RUM \ RUD I KQ, I ,
;::.. ... 1535 I ~ ~· ,• I Gr~velly SAND •lith cobbles ana boulders '3egan r:Q3WL diar,:ond coring at ;::. . ...
"fJ ... surface . ~· -. . .. l 22 ri~ns l and 2; "cuttings are consi~-;::-... ,, 'j flA ten t.l ~~ su~anr:;u l a r .c . sana "'d
f-10 . -0 •• Coobles are r,1ore ~ommon belo~1 10 feet I f. :Jravel. ~il t not signifkuntl,· ... l :-Ill"' ., present, washed away. Driller .. ' suggested that so·. e :oars~ :ateri a 1 -... , ...
f-
... ". l is "pusne<i" out of the way by core .....
'~ ... I barrel.
~ ......
·~ .. ' ~ 20 ..... ' r Orili actior. indicates ,__ • 0 ' • 2 3 re 1 at 1Ve 1 y
~
... ,' ¢" rounaed GRAVEL with trace of str1at1ons 8 NA cobbly material oelow 1C ft. ........... recovered for Run 2
'. '" Cll I= j.· ~·· • . . . i:-. . . . . .
I=' 30
. ~ . 1513.6
~ 30.3 i(G\~{(
t1od. ~ard to hard CHERTY ARGILLITE; dk. 3 100 lOOt drill water returns in Jedrock
1-wi1 1~ gray to -s9 :... black, foliated. Cataclastic texture with
local fluxion structure containin~ high percen-
100 1 2 • -1\ \! \'\ tage of chert. Cloself ;ointed. :'resh to 4
-40 Ww\ slightly weathered. ~ -Chert generally constitutes l0-2C% of rock, with r-I ,__ ~~~~lll local zones containing up to 75% chert.
5 ;
r-.7 ¢ ltL 1501.5 I ~ -~ 6 1~0 w ~so ~ ~f>EAR ZONE, Argillite 1:ith chert porpnyroclasts
locally brer.~iated with rock fragments in silty i
I=' ~ sandy matrix. r-7 ' 40 1@ 55.7 ft. co:~ve:'teo to NW04 CJ,-.•
~ ~ 0 4 1ventional aiLonu cor Hi';.
~ ~~~ r 94 I ~ ~ 8 0 ---i ~ 60 ~'\ r-
1491.2 r I I r:-62.0 '''(~( 100 5
1-t\\1, r~otJ. ilarCI ~o ~<lrti Cr:ERTY ARGILLITE, dk, gray to 9
1-,ti/1\j/,, black, foliated. Cataclastic texture with f-0 i
~ '•1''1''' porphyroclasts o,' cnert. an~ grayw<~cl<e, locally
I r 10 ~ 70 111\l~fil •1ti1 flux1on structure, 'ocal concentratrations "''T' O'f chert oorph;,roclasts are cor.mon. :losely r 6
I=" ') " )I! ,lointe~. locally ver:; closely ;ointecl. Fres.1 r 100 r 11 1-1'1,~1 to slightly ...eathered.
'10 ;iJ@ i6.0 tt. converted r:-\·11M I LO ~OJ''L
1-I ')\)' 12 100 i 7 !diamond coring.
':... 80 ~~~~;',I L5
-1\ '\\h E1 98 H -. ,. 13 15' !=" I 8
,__ ~~~ ~elnw 88 ft., elonqated sand to cooble-sized 14 100 r:-30 'l ·J,\ clasts of fine-grained graywacke are cor.r.10n. 4J
~ 'tiT ,,,,! )' 15 100 I
\\)' \ 44 9 I -•I• It
100 H ,-100 }\1~\Jll\ f-16 ""'48
~ '-;,1\\1~\~ r 100
1
10 I ;l 1\ 1 17 40 r-~~~~~I I ,__ r }.\1. ~L lOO "j r 110 ;d;J~~~: 18 I 16
r dl i/1(1 ~ 100 ~ ill\f,,~l 19 JJ i I=' ! fi!((J .::rr r 120 iII/ ,,, t:" 20 12 '
BORING NO. Sl/ 83-2
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING
P~OHCT
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PO\IER PROJECT
Cll EM l STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEExiNG CORPOxATION
ORilliNG COMPINT
ARCTIC ALASKA TESTING LABORATORIES
S llE ANO TlH OF SIT
SOIL FOOUGE
OAT£ STARTED
OEPTH
IN m:r
~ 120 ')it~{l: ~ !;i\;~l1
I CO~[ FOOTIGE
I CITE COMPLETED
ClASSIFICATION Of MHERIIL
(DESCRIPTION)
Moc>erately ;,ard to haro CHERTY ARGILLITE, as above
I 108 HO, 1(-0631
lOCATION (CO ORO I HUB OR SUI ION)
~ 2, lOS 531 I E339 584
MfR. 0£SIGNlllOH OF DRILL
DIRECTION IMO INCLINATION OF HOLE
lOTH OEPTH
EUV.
IN FEET
I TOT ll CORE RtcOVERT. s
SAMPLE N U!£ IBOI II OR RUN I RQO NO.
I '
.___:_: --1--10-o-1d
r 30 I I
22
23
!CO 13 I
J!
100 1--
37.
BORING NO. Sri 83-2 (rorr.)
CBP/IllEY RivER ~NJLT)
i mET 2 OF
I UElATION
1535 ft.
I OEPTH TO WATER
1 rouL qao, s
REURJS
~ 130 ~~
~ 13G 0 I::'>IJ\:-I.:\l.lt'::<~:i-·-----------------4
-1'0 , r::,:~:~,·~~\\ 1437.4 • I~' SHEAR ZONE, Argillite ~<ith porphryocl asts o·~
-~~\ chert. Predo.ninantly fault breccia with nur.1erous
:=._ ~~~\;~ smaller zones of crushed rock ana silt repre-
24 10010 !4 J l~S. 3. ft. co.werted to 111<0 4 c;.-.;;. ,,,~...---~1:.;0;;01;,.;,0;..~~ convent 1 ona 1 d 1 amond carl ng
26 100
r-~~ senting all stages of shear, rangin<J in hardness f:. "'~"'~\:~' from c;edium nard to ver;• soft. Locally frag~ents
\~ ~\ are contained in a clayey fault gouge.
::-150 ~" I=" \~ Occasional zunes of relatively competent chert
~ ~~ are contained within hignly sheared material.
~ 160 ~~ ~ ~~ t ~
-170 ~
= 11s.o ~mJi .. ~tt,;n-. ----------------4 ruiY('·"'i~'' 14to.s -Jl/l'ill Moderately hard to hard CH~RTY ARGILLITE, dark
-130 ~~~·h. gray to black, foliated.C<Itaclastic texture with
-/l ( ((1 elongatea porphyroclasts of gray•,laC~e. Local
,__ tV:J!I'.r··~.(l~l zones conuin concentrations of c;1ert porphyro-clasts. Very closely to closely jOir.ted. Fresh
r-1'( to slightly weathereo.
-1.1/ occasion a 1 1 oca I zones containing up to 70':: chert.
= 190 1 1:((~~~.·l.' :
1
Chert constitutes about 20% of rock, ,,; th
-l/\(.[ '. (1 -:,',.![',\\
_ 197,0 \!+, ~~ur •• ~l"r •• L:"';l •• L· r------------------\139:5, 7
_ ooo !
1
.. . 'lery hard C!iERT; light gray. Cataclastic
" • • • texture with stringers of argillite and scattered
-;.;.·.· clasts of very fine-grained graywacke. Closely
-1: '; ·: ·: to r.1oderate 1 y c 1 ose 1 y jointed. '"resh.
:::: Z06.2 r'?:~;t·""'~:\:'-1-... ----'--------------!1339.1 . ··• i'oderately hard GRAYWACKE, gray to dark 9ray,
f-210 massive, fine-gra1nea. Cataclastic texture with I=" stringers and clasts of argillite an<:: scattered
t:" .. :·.·. small clasts of c11ert. Strin9ers ano veins of
~ : ·· .' calcite are cor,•non. Closely to very closely
t-: , JOinted. Fresh.
f-.. : ·. , 2ZO J-.--.r:"'r:+-------------------+1379.4
= ::::::1l r-' •.
r-••.
i:1 230 •••
C:-1 •• ·~
Very hara CHERT, lignt qray, Cataclastic texture
with stringers of foliated argillite and zones of
cherty arg111Ha. Closely joln~ed. Fresh to
slightly weathered.
~ 237.0
r 1 z~o
r-, .... ·.·--.1-------------------+1367 .4 .· Hard GRAY>IACKE
'lGUF£ 4
1--0-
f-J--2-7--t--r;.!.!¥-~115
100 28 0 r-j
29 96to ts I
1ao 1 i 30
31
32
33
34
n. i
100 ! ol
~ 111
tgo I
lls I
I
100
0
35
cr-~3~6-~~--19 1
lG0/0 I,
37
38
!GO
01
84
1 @ 185.9 ft. converted to NQ 3wL
5T 20 I <liar.1ond cor1n9
C1--3-9 -l-9-4--l_J
n
40
41
1
21
100
7'f I
96
4b 22
I
f-lGO I I r-42 -rr i I
,_J----t----\-1-,
f-43 wo I :
J7 23 1
~L c..J----+-___;_-1, I
44
9-f j24 i
1---+--i' !
I~
-45
! 25
1
100 i 'if I 47
48 toon7 26 I
BORING NO. Sri 33-2 (com,)
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSuLTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO .Sri 8.3-2 Cccm.)
(BRADlEY RI\'ER FIIIJLD
~ f:. f-
-
,------
PROJECT
6RAOLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POIIER PRO~ECT
CLIEHT STONE & •,;£SST£!< E~lGINEER!NG CORPORATION
JRILL lNG CO~PIN!
ARCTIC ALASKA TESTING LABORATORIES
SIZE IHO TTPE OF liT
SOIL FOOTAGE
OIT£ STARTED
DEPTH
IN FEET
240
250
260
lOG
}{2'·
;-<:'
[;<:·.
f ·.
~ .. ,;;
I CORE FOOTAGE
I DATE COMPlETED
ClASSIFICATION OF MITERill
(DESCRIPTION)
Hard GRAYWACKE> 1 t. gray to ak gray, .r.assive,
i·ine-crained. Cataclastic texture <~ith stringers
and zones of r.1assive to foliatec:i argillite and
local iluxion structure containing chert/
argillite and cobble-si~ed clasts of chert.
Closely to very closely jointed above 247.0 feet,
closely to moderately closely jointed below 247.0
feet. Fresh.
Calcite stringers and veins are comon in massive
~raywacke zones.
I
I lOB ~ 0.
;<-0631
LOCHIOH (COORDINATES OR SHilOH)
. '1 2.105,531 i E 339.684
WFR, 3£SIGUTIOM OF DRILl
DIRECTION IHO IMCLINATIOH OF HOLE
TOUL HPTH
I TOTIL COR£ RECGYERT. ~
!LEY. SAMPLE N SREC SOl I I H FEET OR RUN UQD NQ, I
48 ,j 100
49 6U
I
50 100 I
92 H 51 100
80
2a I 100 52 94 I
SHEET CF
3 3
ElEYill OM
1535 ft .
1 DEPTH ro wHER
TOT 1L ROO, ~
REIIRU
=-262.3 p~-r--------------------11349.5
=-Oottor:: o·i Sxploration =--
~
t"
~ 1-------::_
----i=-
f:" ~ ~ -----------
:::-
f:" ~ f-
---
----::_ -...._
FlGU~ 4 BORING NO. S'li 33-2 <ccm, l
SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ =(.Iii
Q.. = .. _. -Surface Elevation: 2 feet (.1\1
////
Medium stiff, locally soft or stiff, ;;~;,
clayey SILT, with scattered stringers;;;;
and thin lenses of fine sandy silt, ;;;;
pockets and lenses of silty clay, an j//~
occasional zones of clean sand.
Scattered shell fragments.
Interbedded loose, gray, slightly
silty to silty,clayey, fine to
coarse SAtlDS, and soft to medium
stiff sandy to slightly sandy clayey
SILTS. Random gradational changes
throughout. Scattered shell
fraoments.
~---~-------
Medium dense, gray, clayey, silty ...
gravelly, fine to coar.se SAND, with
zones of clayey silt.
Medium dense, gray, slightly clayey,
silty SAND, random fine to coarse
gradations with local fine gravelly
zones.
Frozen
Ground
LEGEND
Gravel
Sand r 111111trv' ous ua1
IIUr Inti
PIUOIIII!tf 110
~ Thermocouple
= -.. ..... =
7
8
9
10
29:0 11
12
"'13
14
15
S I I t
Clay
I z"o.o. SQII! sooan sample
II 3" 0. 0. tn• n-•&11 samp It
• Samolt not recowtrea
uuroera l•m•ts:
..... _.
Q.. -..
""'
=-.. ..... =~--= .. ::-
. STANDARD -PENETRATION RESISTANCE
= (I•O ID. •••ant, 30" drop) -.A. Slows ur toot Q..
~0 20 40
5 .... ..:...:. .. ___ . ~...:. .. Ll-!_· _· ·-··
•
t ........ '
10 .............. , __ , ___ :;,, __ .:... __ . '
I
I
I
I
I
,...,
• • •
15 ··--·t-.. ··------·i-·------1
I
\ 2 o ·····--r-·-·-·--~·--·--·-. . --··-··
• I
I
I
I
I
25 -··-A-------·i-·------
\
\
\
\
~
I
I
I
• •
... 30 ·--·······~-·····-·-·-·-
• I
35 ........... ····--+---------
e ~ Water content
Note: The strat>frcalron r,nes rel)reun:
tnt aopro11mate ooundar.es oelwten sor'
ttoes ana tnt transrt,on 113y 01 llfadual
Stone & Webster Enoineering Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
3arge Basin
LOG OF BORING NO •. SvJ 83-3
Peat I. I•LIQUid 1 11111t
'~later content
~Piast:c 11m11
September, 1983 K-0631
i"'~ 11 Organtc
15/1/•1! Content
SHANNON & IILSON, INC.
'£oncw••cu co•sut u•rs
FIG.5
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Surface Elevation: 2 feet
Medium dense, sliohtly clayey,
silty SAND, as above.
Bottom of Exploration
Completed 8/2/83
Depth (feet}
6.5
24.3
27.]
Torvane Tests
Shear Strength
0.9
0.24
0.36
(tsf)
Pocket Penetrometer Tests
Depth (feet) lam ressive Stren th(tsf)
6.5 3.0-3.25
24.3 0.5
27.1 1.0
Vane Shear Tests
Depth (feet} Shear Strenoth (tsf)
7.2-7.8
10.5-11.1
Location:
Frozen
Ground
N
E
Natura 1: 2.32
Remolded: 0.27
Natural: 0.73
Remolded: 0.14
2 '111 ,590
nLS40
LEGEND
Grave I
Sand
S i It
Clay
Peat
r IIIIOet••ous seat
liter level
PIUOIIIItll trp
~ Thermocouple
I 2.'"0.0. spl1t sooon umpre
II 3'" Q.D. tnrn-ull samole
• samore not reeoveie~
AtttrQiri I IIIII ts:
"• ~ 11 Oriantc ,:z 1/<,j Content
I e I 11 L 1 qu 1 d I 11111 t
"-.'-...:___later :on tent
~PlaStiC l1m1!
STANDARD
PENETRATIDH RESISTANCE = < 140 to. nqznt, 30" ~rocl
;:: A81aws pir toot
~ 0 20 40
3... · I
40 ;r_•· -----~ . . ' :
50 ..... ________ _
--·-------·~ ... -------
u e ~ Water content
!Iota: Tne strat.t•cat1on ••nes represent
tne IPOIOXH!Iate oounOafln netwten so• 1
types ana :ne trans1t1on may oe araoual
Stone & Webster Engineer~ng
Bradlev Lake Project
Barge Basin
Coro.
LOG OF BORING NO.
September, 1983
SHANNON t. WILSON, INC.
sw 83-3
(Cont.)
K-0631
FIG. 5
SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ -=c.:o ·= C...J -Surface Elevation: 2 feet c.:o
/////
Gray to dark gray, slightly clayey ;~~~~
to clayey SILT, with ~ockets and ~~;;/
layers of silty clay, scattered ~~~~
strinqers·and thin lenses nf siltv '//;~ . ' ///// sand, occasional zones of clean sand.:.~~~J. ;(.,;";<"'/"'
/// /·;
/////
v~~/,
"////
/////
. --....
...J
= ,_
A. ....
.. • ..
~
Cl
1il
-STANDARD =--PENETRATION RESISTANCE z,.,. = ~ ... < "o 1 b. .., zn t. 30H drop) = .. -:i• .. A 81 OW$ U r f 00 t :=:o 20 .10
' '
•
' '
5 ·-
~ '
~~~ 2 ~ ~;;:;/
'////
v~~/, • 10 ········-----·--+--·-----~
////
////
~(. !.(-.~ .•"Z•K,:~·,.
/////
/////
f-iDark gray to black,clean,fine to ;,,~,;;',,_1 4 .0 IT
coarse SArlO, trace of fine gravel. ~;St~~
16
.
0
3 •• 15 ·-··-·-··-·--·-+-·-------!
Bottom of Exploration
Completed 8/3/83
Depth (feet)
3.6
10.1
16.0
Pocket
Depth (feet)
3.6
10.1
16.0
Location:
Frozen
Ground
Torvane Tests
Shear Strength (tsf)
0.46
0.45
0.3
Penetrometer Tests :
Compressive Strenath(tsf)
1.25-1.5
1.0
0.5-0.75
N 2,111,593
E 321,839
LEGEMO
Grave I
Sand
S i It
Clay
Peat
Organ1c
Content
r Jmpervtous nal
liter IIUI
PlUOtlllllr !tp
~ T~trmocouple
I z: 0. D. spl 't spoon samp 11
II J... a. D • t n I n-u I I Slimp I I
* SaiiiOit not rteourta
lttllbtllf ltlllltS:
1 e l•liQUtdltmtt
'-. ~llttr content
~PI<tC ltl!ltl
·-··--·---·-;....--------!
~---·----~------·--
•.
20 .1 1 e ~ Water content ·~
Note: The strattltcat•on .nes reoruant
tne aporuunate oounaan es oetween so, 1
types ana tne transt!<an may oe rraaual
Stone & Webster Enaineerina Corp.
Bradley Lake Project ~
Barge Basin
LOG OF BORING NO. sw 83-3A
September, 1983
SHANNON & lllSON, IHC.
;[Qf!CKMICH COMSU,lUTS
K-0631
FIG.6
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO. SW 83-4
(BULL ~m;E FAULD
PROIECT BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC ?OWER PROJEC"'!' I JOI HO,
K-0631
SHEET OF
1 2
Cll EKI
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATIO~
lOCATION (COORD 1Hil£S OR SHTION)
~ ?.ln~ liDO;£ 333.032
ElEV HI OK
1235 ft
ORILLIHC :OMPIHI IFR. DESIGNATION OF DRILL
ARCTIC ALASKA TESTING LABORATORIES I ONf.YEAR 38
I---~-1-1E--IN-D_r_r_PE--OF __ a_tr __ H~Q~,~~~L~,_N~Q~,'W~L~·,N~W~0~4~CO~N~V~E~NT~l~O~N~AL~-------------+~O~IR~EC~T710~N~IN-O-I-N-CL-1-NA-l-ID-N-O-F-H-O-lf--N~8r0~0~W;~~4~50~~~------------~
SOIL FOOUCE I CORE FOOTAGE lOTU DEPTH I OEPTH TO UT£R
4.2 ft. 202.1 ft. 206.3 ft. 3.5 ft.
I O'TE co "LETED I TOTll C09R9E.~.E.;COYERI, s am mRTED 8/9/83 " Mr 8/17/83 : TOTH RQD, 1
so "~
DEPTH
IN FE£! LOG CllUIFICUION Of MATERIAl
(OESCR!PT!ON)
ELEY.
IN FHT
• • • • i 1235.0 ....
4 • 2.~· :_.' ·~·~· ~-:----:-~TO::.:;P_,::;OF:_::R~OC=.:K~-:::-:7.':"::-:::::----:--:---j 1232 • o
Moderately hard to hard GRAYwACKE; greenish gray,
fine to medium grained. Cataclastic texture with
porphyroclasts of graywacke and argillite col11110nly
elongated along shear foliation, local fluxion
structure of foliated argillite contains elongated
chert clasts. Numerous stringers of argillite,
2
100
J"6'
100
-sf
REUR~S
I Beqan HQ 3 w1reline coring at
1 I surface, washed to top of rock-
"0 sample
Water loss 7.5-a.o ft., o1ugoed
f--witn cuttings
scattered calcite veins. Closely to very closely
jointed. Very slightly weathered to fresh.
24.n~i:~~.~~~"~Me~dni~um~h~a~r~d~t~o~ha~r=d>7AR~G~r7L~L~IT~E~;~bl~a~c~k-,~v=e~ry~f~i~ne~-ilZlJ.6
grained, massive to weakly foliated. Cataclast1c
100 2
I CJ---3----~~-:--~
f-4 47
texture with porphyroclasts of grayw4cke and chert
30.6 scattered calc1te str1ngers. Closely JOinted { 1213.4
\With local clay filling. fresh
Moderately hard to hard ARGILLITE and GRAYWACKE,
r.lixed; black and greenish-gray. Cataclastic
texture with shear foliation and local fluxion
structure. Lithologies are tectonically mixed
and occur as porphyroclasts dnd stringers
elongated alona foliation. Scattered chert clasts
to .2 feet dia., local chert layers to 1.3 feet
thick. Closely jointed with local calcite and
49 •5 pyrite f11li nos.
Moderately hard CHERTY ARGILLITE; black, foliated,
Cataclastic texture with porpnyroclasts of gray-
wacke, local fluxion structure. Moderately closel] K. jointed. Fresh.
1200.0
~~~~~~~'Chert constitutes approx. 30-40% of rOCkQass, with
62.2 ~~ocal zones ranging from :0-60%. r 1191.0
64.9 ~ 'iery hard ChERi; light greenish-gray, nassive. /llll9·1·
\
Cataclastic texture •·ith stringers of foliated
argillite. Very closely to closely jointed.
-70 fresh.
f-H1_a_r_d_A_R~G-I-LL""t"'T"'E_a_n_d,.-GR-A""Y"'W"'AC""K':':E:-,-;n-ic-X-ec-d-; -g-r-ee_n_ic-s-:-h----J
f-gray ana black, cataclastic texture with shear
f-foliation and local fluxion structure; porphyro·
f-clasts of graywacke and chert in arg111ite 1ayers,
ana stringers and porphyroclasts of argillite and
chert 1 n graywacke 1 ayers. Very c 1 ose 1 y to
closely jointed. Fresh.
80 :_
,:..
b
f-
1-90
~
1--
Local zon~ contain un to 30k chert.
94 ... 1\W~~~\'I\ Hard CHERTY ARGILLITE. dark gray to black,
1]'\\,\\1 foliated .• Cataclastic te.xture w1th ~c~t.tere.d
1-\ \' ·~\ porphvroclasts of gray~acke and local zones of
1168.2
~ 100 [,\ '1\\1 chert with arg1! 1 ite stnngers. Closely ~o1nted.
Fresh to slightly weatherea. / 1164.3 ~ L-------------------------------~ -f~~ Hard ARGILLITE; gray to tJlack, massive to foliated.
'Cataclastic texture ~1th oorahyroclasts of
r•:,.~ sraywacke and Chert, numerous calcite stringers,
1-110 ;•, local ayrite ;n1neral izat1on. Very closely to
1=-i ;'l,2J, closely jointed. rresn.
1-·:·;~T', Chert constitutes 5-10~ of rockmass in localized f 116.3 1 , zones.
t:-120 (:.-~ard SRAYWACKE
l
Ll52.8
F!GU~ 7
6
_ji
100
fJ
100 "
ft., prooaoly
"57 1 ~ !100% water returns below 29 ft.
1-1----+--L-' r--j a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
~~
19
20
21
22
[:"-r-
23
!-24
r-25
I
100
87
!00
30
6 i
~
• 7 I
i I 3 I
·100/S3rl
1oo I 9 I
47 I
1.ao H
I '75-I 10 i
~R
100 ---j
\~o 12 i
100 Nl 90
l3 I~ i
1oo I jj 14 I ,_I
100 r-
S'f
i5
100 16
Oil
BORING NO. SW 83-4
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOG OF BORING BORING NO. Sf~ 83-4 (cONT.)
(BULL rmsE FAULT)
PRO I ECT I JOB !0. SHEET OF
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC POiiER PRO.JECT K-0631 2 2
CLIEil LOCATIO! (COORDINATES OR STIIION) ELEVATION
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION N 2,108,500 I E 3~3,032 1235 ft.
ORILLiiG COMPINT MFR. DESIGNATION OF DRILL
'RCTI C ALASKA TESTING LABOARTORIES
S liE liD TTPE OF BIT DIRECTION liD liCLINATION OF HOLE
SOIL FODTIGE I CORE FODTIGE TOTAl DEPTH I DEPTH TO WATER
CITE STARTED I DATE COMPLETED I TOTAl CORE RECDYERT, s TOTAL ROD, s
DEPTH LOG CLASSIFICITIDN OF MATERIIL I ELEY. SIMPLE N \REC 101 REMIR~S IN FEET (DESCRIPTION) I i FEET DR RUN \RQD NO.
1=. 120 k·" Hard GRAYWACK~; grayish oreen, fine to medium-
f-grained, low-grade metar:10rphosed, r,Jassive to 26 100 17
f-foliated cataclastic texture wit,, porphyroclasts 6J 1-of chert, argillite, and qraywacke. Local fluxion -
:gi
structure, scattered calcite stringers and 27 100 -130 pockets . Closely jointed and fractured becoming 4'9' 18
=-very clostly fractured below !J3'. Fresh -· f-100 -;:;, 28 J7 -19
f:" 138.1 1::{;/i Hard ARGILLITo; black, very fine-grained, low-1137.3 100 grade metamorphosed, massive to foliated, cata-29 r:-140
W:.''
clastic texture wi~" argillite and chert porphyro "'TS' r--
~ clasts. Very closely ;ointed and fractured 30 100 20 ~ 145.9 1132.0 20 I I=" ~ -S~EAR ZONE; brecciated ar7illite and nraywacke. -
150 Locally sheared to gravel y silty sand. Else-31 96
f:" ~ where rock is soft to medium hard, highly 5\r 21 r:-fractured rock franments held together with
f-154.~ ~selvages of silty clay. Loca 1 gouge zones 0.6 fr 1125.3 f-32 100
f-th1 ck. f-44 r--
f-... Soft to r:1edium hard CHEqT with very hard rock f-22 .... 100 ... 33 t:' !50 .... fragments; lt. gray, hiqhly fractured chert in (.1 ... . . . .
arqillite matrix, cataclastic texture, argillite t:" ... . . . . . . . matrix is commonly slickensided . local shear 100 f-.... 34 ... zones of sandy silt S1Ied aroillite. Very closely '74 23 .... ~ ... .... ~ractured, becoming closely jointed bel9w lb4.5 . . .
f-.... ... feet. Fresh. 100 1--~ 170169.5 .... 1115.1 35
~ 11,1~~ Hard to very hard CHERTY A~SILLITE; It. a ray to 69 24
I ~ ~~1\ black. Cataclastic texture ~ith norphyroclasts 36 ~ of chert and dacite locally, zone of mixed f-arnillite and nraywacke from 179 to 183, scattered
I f-calcite qeins and strinoers. Chert locally 37 100/23
f-180 ~~~ constitutes 60 to 75~ of rock. Closely to very v 100 25 i f-closely jointed and fractured. Fresh. 38 -4-0
--1·May -100 be disturbed by drilling -~(\(\( 39 10•
I -188.8 1101.5 f-80 -190 .•. · ..•... Hard GRAYWACKE; li~ht greenish gray, fine to ~P~. f-40 ZT 26 I -.o-'.: grained, massive, ~ixed with argillite below
Switched to N\o/0 4 conventional -i: :; <:
196.4 ft .. Cataclastic texture, scattered calcite f-41 100 r--drilling stringers. Closelv to very closely jointed and 47 -
. ,\, fractured, numerous slickensides. Fresh. -f-42 100 27
-200 .... ~-s-
i f-201.?. ... 1092.7 ... Hard to very hard CHERT; lt. aray. Cataclastic 43 98 rzai f-... texture w1th stringers of moderately hard foliated 26 ... . . .
I=" 206.2 . . . cherty arqillite. Close l' o1nted . Fresh. 1089.2 ...
I=" BOTTO,~ OF EXPLORATIO~I f-210 ,:..
1::-
f-
~ 220 ~ f-,:.. f-
f-f-
f-1-
f-230 f-
1-
i
f--210 I
FIGUfE 7 BORING NO. Sf~ 33-4 (cONT, l
.,
t-i
f'1
ro
SHANNON I IILSON. INC.
5f0lf£HIICAl COMSUllAMll
FIELD LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1
SOIL DESCRIPTION & REMARKS
r.:r!toose, brown, silty, sandy, ~gravelly BOUlDERS (angular Dacite
cobbles and boulders in silty
sandy soil with numerous roots.)
•• ~A 4 A4
A A
Moderately hard to hard, greenish
gray, fine-grained porphyritic
DACITE, closely jointed,
moderately to slightly weathered.
~"" =""' 0.._
c"' .,.
-o
QJ > L.
QJ
Vl
..0
0
QJ c::
0 z
c:: I
QJ
..!o<:
11:1
1-
.....
0 z
I
JOB NO. K-0631 DUE August 8, 1983INSPECIOR 0. Clayton
PROJECT Bradley lake Hydroelectric Power Project
LOCATION PQWE:rhouse; N 2,}}?,~?2/~ 327,?71
~til SKETCH OF North PIT SIDE SURFACE ELEVATION 78 ft. ...... w .,. ""
9
~
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE IN FEET
n 9
I" . . I . . . . . . . j I : . : . j
I
12
... ,. .. ; ..
AA~A~b. •,_;,: :
61·····
''/A A A'"._A,."~4
•••••••••• h ................... ~ ............ uu ...................... .f .......... ~ ....................... '* •• ~ ...................................... ~u····.:l"',r"A"A•i.a.A.a.,_A.4A"·t;.·._A..~...i .... i•····
AAA4-"A·A.A:A.A,.,4 • .\.A
AAAAAAAAA:AAAA
A A A A .A A.A .... \lAoA·-'·A..4
A AA A A A A AA A Ao\ A ..A A .AA.A 1A -:A~AA.o\lt·t\ •
AA ltAA4AitAAAAAAAAAt.A,-A'LA.AA·AA·AA•A •
A A A A A A AA A It i\ .A AA AA It 4 "·A.,. "·A ··A"· A ~A'.
A A: A: :A: A:A: A :A:A: A:l\:.-:r :·A1A:A~A:•
A~ A= A: A A: A: A: A: A: A: A: A: A:,: A::~:~:~:~.
_ · 0 • A A'\
4
4 AA: :•: A:A = 4 = A:A :· ~.\:1\ '1• :·A ~·A:A :·A;~ •
31···•···"""••·n••···••H•••••••HH*1·······•••••••••·•"*""""'""""""n••• • • • O •. ;. A A :~:-<A·!·:!·:t·.-··:;:A:A:~:·:~:~:·~:·t·~~·~:~:~:=~::·: ............ .
............
• • " " " " ;;"' • 0 A 4' A A A 4 4 A A A A A A A A -A A A A IC A 4 A A A
• • • .e. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA4 AAAAAAAAA 4 AaAkA=A·ArA:A::A::A~:~::
A= A :A: A :A: A:A 1\A:A: A A:A: A: A:A:A: A:A~ A: A~\ A.4 o\_4 A.AA.A.
AAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAA J\AAA4Ao\AAko\II.AI'Atr!AIIo"A.AAA>\AA,11 A.A •
._...,.. ,..-; A o\ A. .0. .-4 11 AA11AAAAA.\:A:.IIo\11AA AA.\AAJ\AI';AI';Ar.Ar.li'AA*'A~A.4 A.AA_AA.AA'o\
• • • .t"A"AAo\.A A 4-'l4AAAAAAAA A Ao\AAA •,."'-AAlAAA._A~A·A•A•"~/··"··"·•"····
_ _ f~~l: ,.•"A••"•":" • .. •,"•"•,.•""••""•",. .,",.,."•"~"""•"•"Jt",.*~•·A"·,A·,.··· • •
••• 'd. • A A II A A A A 4 A A A A ....... ll A A A A A A A A 4 A J~::A A'· •
O • , • , • • A A· A.. A-A. .\. 4 o\ A: • A A A A A 4 A A A A A • A ). l t. ), A fo "A ••
0 I . -. :: ·. X ~ 1 ., " ... , ... , •• ~,.~.~ .... ~ •• ~*~ ... ~ .• ~,.\·~·!!·*"~ ~~~.!.~.~ .. 1~A-•• ~ ..... A ... A.Al:t..IA.:AKAJ(AifAJAX~ ...... : ....................... ..
····:.; .. •• .A /o ,A ,A ,A A.ottA 1 A.A~A~A~A~It~A A·A4.A4-Itlfo·Aito\ltltlt"AI/'AA 11 AAAA4AAAAA(AAAAAAA AlA~AAA~A~·\"4·\A· •t
' A A A A A 4 A A 4 A A A -A A A A A A A A A A A A A II A A A A A II A A II. o\. A. o\, "· , • •
• ...., /o ·" .A .A ·" .A ·" ;, ·". "1"' l". A i ..... ·~A A· ·-A· A· II k k Ill K A A ~ II " " a. ~ • • ~ A " A I : :~:~:A :J\ :.A :.•:.A ~· 4 1• ;~,• i" ~ •1 •Z A~4~4 A~ It: A~ A·: A; A-: •:•·: x: :A:• :~:A: •: A :•:•:•: :~ ::• ~-~ ~ •• • . •
• Alt 4/o A .A AJ. A'
4 A.A 411 l' "A" i." i." i.11 £4 i'A "A"A A~lt~A·A A·AA·A A·A •. A*A A A A' A A 11 A AI A .C A "• AA lAA .~A l I.A ••
·'•" "lt".A".A • .A •"" ,;It A" """'"'"'"'" l ., "A ••• t ... "A"A" 4 ··.A· .. A A'~,.··,. ""A A A lt.t .·A •• :... IIi •11 •
,\ .4 .A .A .A .A ·A .A,A "·A~A.A.If,.A•4•A•A•A A" A' A* A• A A' A A" A" ,C A A A A A-A •
• \ A.A •.A ~lfo~A~A~A~A ~. A~ ... ~A ~4~A ~ .. +.~ A~.tl' • A~A~Af'4~ ~/'*A A AA'4 A·" A A4 .tA ,C 4 .C 4 A 4 II A_A.
A A 4 A " A 4 A A A A A A A .A A A~ A A A A 4 A"A A A A A 4 A A A A • '1" .\A .A ..A .A •-' •A •-' •A A ........ A•A•A•A•A•A~A A• A A' A• 4' A" A' A A .C ,C .C A: .( 1
.IA.A ".A".A ~A ~-~A~A ~A o\ ~.~~~~A~ A~ A~·" A' A~A A~4f.A~4~ A'AAfa Af A.A •• ~ ".c" .t" A" A" J A. • • •
" ... " A A A A A " A A ' A A A • A ft A A A A 4 ":.c-' .... A:"K ....... ~ ............................... . ...... .\~A~i::~:·;~=~=~: =·~:~:·;·:i :·~:··: ~-= ;·: ;·: ·: ~: !':":":~::A :,A A .A A A It ,.A . . . . · ~ ·
• i\ A A • • • • ' • • • : ,. ~ .~ .J. ,/f. I< -" .* ' • . ' • • • • • • ' .
·-·
SAMPLE
NO.
R-31
1-
l:
~
~
)-
Ill
a: w z
u.
!z w u
ffi
D.
SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM
I'll s .:tl!l!::! .., 8 0 <D .., (') N ll! Ill X !2 ('I 0
100.,.. Ul q M N --('1 Ja ...-~ ... ~ ~ ~ :6 '"' ~ q q q q Ci ~ q q ~ ~ q • I o t i
90
80
10
60
60
40
30
20
10
. ~
I
I
I
t
I
!
' . '
j
I
I
I
i . 1
·• i
I
i
··f"
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
·~i., .. l:;!,, ::; : : ! i :
:" ' . I I , j i i i • .,. __
II\ I ; i I i , l i ! I i
; ! \
10
20
30
40
60
60
10
so
90
i: o8~-8;---!g~g~S~~~~~~~~--o~~m~"';-~~~----~~~~~~----~~--l-~~------~~~~~--_j,oo
(') N .. ~ ~ '"; ~ ~ ~ -QJ~ .,'1 ~ ~ q Ci • ~ ~ ~
~
.., <') q
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
COARSE I PINE FINE MEDIUM COBBLES FINES GRAVEL SAND
!i:
Q
~
)-
Ill
ffi
Ill a:
<(
8
!Z w u
ffi
Q.
DEI'TH·FT. u.s.c. CLASS IF ICA TION NAT.
w.c." LL PL PI Stone & \'-7ebster Engr. Corp.
158.9-
159.2
SM • Gray, clayey, silty, fine to coarse ~~~
(fault gouge witl1 rock fragments)
8 18 13 5 Bradley Lake Project
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Boring S'W 83-2
Sept. 1983 K-0631
SHANNON & WILSON. INC ...
Geotechnical Consultants I FIG. 9
SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH f'ER INCH GRAIN SIZE IN MM
~ 'It "' ll)o:l :l!l"' 0 "' '~ ~ o o So 00 oo o .-4D V M N .-"'" M s .-~ .-• .-N $ ~ . • q 0. • • ~ •
100 , I , , 0
I I I 1 '
1; l •
90 i I N ! i ; 10
' 1 l '
I I 11 l . ! i
l I j •
80 t . I I I 20
r
~ 70 ~
X . ~ ~ !
iii 60 : r 40 l!! ~ i ~
~ ; m
m I ~
~ 60 i 60 ~ ~ ! ~
<;{
LL 8
~ 40 60 ~
w z u w
~ u w ~
c.. 30 , 1 1 70 w
I i C..
I ' 1
I I : j ;
: I f I
20 I i i i 80
10 I QO
i 1 i
; I
0 100
~ 8 8 g s ~ ~ ~ ~ <I) II) ., "" "' ~ "l "! , "l '1 ': ~ ~ ~ q q ~ § § 8 8 s 8
N .. GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS • • • • C!, •
COBBLES COARSE PINE I COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE _j FINES
GRAVEL I SAND I
SA::J.LE Of:.PTH·FT. U,S.C. CLASSIFICATION w~t.T% LL PL PI
Stone & Webster Engr. Corp.
s-2 4. 5-5. 0 CL-ML .... Dark gray, clayey SII.'l' to silty CLAY, 24 27 21 6 8 dl Lak P . t • · d ra ey e roJec
trace f::~,.ne san GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
1 1 Boring 5\-J 8 3-3
S-7 122.9-IGM 1• Dark gray, slightly clayey, silty, fine I 21 1241NP
23.6 to coarse gravelly, fine to coarse SAND 1 1 Sept. 1983 K-0631
SHANNON & WILSON, INC~ I Fig. 10
Geotechnical Consultants
"
SAMPLE
NO.
S-9
S-16
t-
I
S! w ~
>-al
a: w z
u.
t-z w u a: w
0..
SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
[ SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM I
[! .., 0 0 1010 ..,M N ~
N ~ ..._e;l ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 .., M N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
.-1D ,._ M N .-.-r) .a .-.-N ..,. CA .-N q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 • • • • • • • • • •
I I 0
90
80
70
60
60
40
30
20
10
i
I .
j
(
I , I
I I I I I '
' l ' I : I !
, I
'i ! I :
l I
' :
'' i I
\ l
, I
1 ~ !
I I
'I I I
' .l • ·~· .
. .· .· ~. _____
' ' '
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 100
0 0 000 00 0 01010 'fM N ~m10 'fM N ~1!1"' 'fM N ~!II~ XM 0 0 0 CD U) • ("') N .-, • • • • • 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Q (5 0
M N ~ GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS ' ' ' ' ' ' • • • q
COBBLES I
I I
COARSE I PINE I COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE I FINES GRAVEL I SAND
s q ~
~
l!l
~
>-al
a: w en a:
<(
8
t-z w u a: w
0..
DEPTH·FT. u.s.c. CLASSIFICATION NAT.
w.c."' LL PL PI
26.0
35.5-
37.5
SM
SM
•
•
Dark gray, slightly silty, clayey fine
to coarse SAND, with shell fragments
throughout
Dark gray, slightly clayey, silty fine
to coarse SAND, with trace of fine gravel
17
16
Stone & Webster Engr. Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Poring sw 8 3-3
Sept. 1983 K-0631
SHANNON 8o WILSON. INC~ I .
Geotechnical Conaultanta Flg • 11
Boring S\4 83-3
Sample S-2: 4.5-5.0 feet
• Undisturbed Sample
Dry Unit Weight = 110 p::f
Water Content = 24%
o Rem:>lded Sample
Dry Unit Weight = 109 p:f
Water Content = 21%
UNIT STRAm I % .
Stone & Webster Engr. Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
UNCONFINED CCMPRESSION TEST
K-0631
Geotec:hntcal Consultants FIG. 12
25 i ! I I ! I
1
......... , ................... , ......... i·········!
.:::::::::.:::::::::l:::::::::i:::::::::,:::::::::j ·········!········· .................. , ......... !
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~::,~~~~~~~~~~
20 I . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I • • • • • • • • • I . . . . . . . . . !
., : : : : : : : :. : 'I : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : l . .-~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . I a ~·········1········· ········· ····· ......... , ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~::~~~~~~~~::~:~::i;::::~:~~~~~:~~~~:~l ! 15 ...... ···I···· · · · · ·! · · · · · · · ·I········· l · · · · · · · · ·! " ::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::l::::::J ~ :::::::::,::::::::: ::::::::: :::::::::,:::::::::,1 . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . ~ . .
. . . • • . • . • I . . • . • . • . '! • . • • . • . . • I . . . . . . . . . ! . . . . . . . . . j ·········!·· ...... ·········1·········1·········!
10 ................. 'I' ........ : ......... i ...... -:·:-:-j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l· . . . . . . . . . !
• . • • . . . . • . . • . • • . • . • . . . • . . . • . . • . • . . . • . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::·,:::::::::1
:::::::: ::::::::: :::::::::1:::·::.::,:::::::::1
5 ::::: .. :: j::::::::: i::.: .. ::: i:::;:;;;; l;;;;; :-~;;; l . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . i
1:::·.::::1::::::::. :::::::::,:::::::::1:::::::::1
,:::::::::1 .... :::: :::::::::,:::::::::j:::::::::!
l . : .... : . i . : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I
O S 1 Q 1 I 2 ! ·--··-.. ·---· .. 23
Boring SW 83-3 UNIT STRAIN, %
Sample S-2: 5.0-5.5 feet
• Undisturbed .sarrple
Dry Unit Weight = 106 p::f
Water Content = 24%
0 Rarolde:l Sample
D:ry Unit Weight = 104 p::f
Water Content = 2 4%
NOI'E: Unconsolidated -Undraine:l Test Stone & Webster Engr. Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
TRIAXIAL CCMI?RESSION TEST
Boring SW 8 3-3
Sept. 1983
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
Geotechnical Consultant~
K-0631
FIG. 13
Boring S\>J 83-3
sar~~le S-4: 12.0-12.5 feet
• Undisturbed Sample
Dry Unit Weight = 107 pcf
water Content = 22%
o Raroldal Sample
Dry Unit Weight = 103 pcf
Water Content = 23 %
UNIT STRAIN I %
NOI'E: Unconsolidated -Undrained Test Stone & Webster Engr. Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
T.RIAXIAL CCMPRESSION TEST
Boring sw 8 3-3
Se t. 1983 K-0631
Geotechnical Consultants FIG. 14
•
0
NOI'E:
2sl· ......... ,· ......... j •••...... ·········1·········1
"' .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ,. .. i . . . . . . .. .. . .. ~ . . .. .. . .. .. i .. . . . .. . . . . ~
! ......... ! ......... !' . . . . . . . . . . ........ i ......... i
l : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : 1 , ......... ! ......... , ......... ·········!······ ··!
I : : : : : : : : : ! : : : : : : : : : ! : : : : : : : : : , : : : : : : : : : i : : : : : : : : : l
I ......... I ......... I ......... I ......... I ......... i
20 · I ! j ! ·--· .... -..... ~ I . . . . . . . . . l . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . I • • • • • • . . . j , .......... 1·········1········· ·········!·········! i::::::::: :::::::::,:::::::::1:::::::::1::::::::·~
! . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . l . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . , ;
151 : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : ~---. '
I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : ,,i : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I
: . • . • . • • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . I • . . . . . . . . :
i·········!·········.·········l·········t·········l I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . ! . . . . . . . . j
I : : : : : : : : : ' : : : : : : : : : 1 : : : : : : : : : l : : : : : : : : : 1 : : : : : : : : . 1
I ......... I ........ 'I ......... ! ......... i ......... i 10 j I I '" ... ·••••• I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : 'I : : : : : : : . : !
I
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I' : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : j . . . . . . . . 'I' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . l . . . . . . . . i I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . i
sj : : . : : : : . : i : : .~ . : : : : ; : : : : : : : : : : l : : : : : : : : : : : : : : • ~ [ j
I . . . . . . . . i ......... I . . . . . . . . . • • .... I ........ .
I::: ... ::: I::::::: .. : .. : .... :: I::::::::: I::::::::: i I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I • • • • • • • • • i . . . . . . . . . i
,· ·····::1.::::::::1:::::::::j:::::::::j:::::::::j
0 10 15 20 ....... '""'25
Boring SW 83-3 UNIT STRAIN, %
Sample S-7: 22.9 -23.6 feet
Undisturbed Sample
Dry Unit Weight == 103 pcf
Water Content == 21%
Rem:Jlded Sample
Dry Unit Weight = 101 pcf
Water Content = 24%
Unconsolidated -Undrained Test
Stone & t':ebster Engr. Corp.
Bradley Lake Project
TP.IAXIAL CO.PRESSION TEST
Boring SW 8 3-3
Seot. 1983
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
K-0631
FIG. 15
~------~~-------------------------------------------------g
....I =· ..
....I -
0 = Cl CD
0 ....
0
CCI
Cl ...,
Cl
"""
0 ..,
Cl
=-----~~----~~----~------~----------------------Jo 0 Cl Cl Cl 0 Cl 0 .... CCI ..., """ ..,
. X30NJ UI311SY1d +.1
~
01"'-NNI"'-Ln . . . . . .
:S 0'\<qONI"'"l...-!C:O
Ln ...-tN
.....
• .....
0:::::0
a
.....
Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. ...-!
~
-~ Nl"'"ll"'"ll"'"l~~
I I I I I I
1"'11"'11"'11"'11"'11"'1 c:oc:ococ:oc:oc:o
~~~~~~ . . . . . .
...-!NI"'"l<qOLn\.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Bradley Iake Project
Sept. 1983
SHANNON & III.SOH, INC •
iEOTECHNICAL COMSULTlMT$
K-0631
FIG. 16
SHEAR STRENGTH
(tsf)
SENSITIVITY
RATIO
W~.TER CONTENT
(%)
LIQUIDITY
INDEX
0
0
I
0.5
I
1.0
I I ......... ! . . . . .... i i ................... l
·······~ ... -......... , 3 6 i . 6-:-:--::--:-~. . •••.•..• i-.
0
I
20
I
40
I
i · · · · · · · · · I · · · · · · · · · ;
I : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ; I ~I; ~ ~~ ! ~ ~ ~ I i . . .
0.7
!:.;..:..:. .. :::: :::::::::j_ 2.7
! ........• , ......... ; (i')
,········· ··········! lzb
l · • • • • • • • • ·a-=• · · · · · 1 ---•
I . . . . <..;· • :-. .-• -:. • • • • • • t -2 • 7
1:::::::::1::::::~:1
I : : : : . : : : : I~ • · : . ·I 0.5 5
10
15
20
25
i. . . . . . . . . . ........ I
! .... ~ . . . • . .•.... ·• i ................. (2.3)/8.6
i .... o--------------~-·-1 •• ·6-·--....................... !--3.1
I .. ·~------•· ...... 1--3 1
I · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · I · i········e:.t-... ·······l-1.4
! · · · · · · · · · I · · · · · · · · · I 5 2 l .. Q-r -:-:-.-.~, "'1"-:"'':'" ••••• ! -•
!:::~::::~:::::::::!_
I::::::::: I:::::::::~ ! . . . . . . . . .,. . . . . . . . . !
! . . . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . • !
i · · · ' · · · · · · · · · · · · · · I . I I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . I
I ......... I ........ .
• • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • j
j ••••••••• i ......... j
~ . . .. . .. .. . . .. I . . . .. ·.. . . . . i
~:::::::::,:::::::::1
I I . ! .. '" . . . . . . .. .. ........ -i I· . . . . . . . . . ........ I
i • . . • • • • . • . .•..•..• !
I . . . . . . . . . I • • • • • • • • • i
! ......... I ......... !
i ......•.. l ......... !
~ • ·o-e •'' •' I • • • • • ,•, • '~-
! ......... I ......... ! ! ::: :•:::: ;I·::::::::: I
. . I
2.6
1.5
j . . . . ~ . ~ . .. i . . ~ . . . . . . :
i " . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . i
~ . " . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . !
! . . . . . . . . f-+-4lf. . . . . . . !
I::::::::: I :e::::::: i
! : : : : : : : : :I : : : : : : : : :I I :: :: ::: Jlr· ~ : H
i ......... i ......... i
~ . . . . . . . . .. i . . . . . . . . . i
~~~~;;;~~;1~::~:~:::1 I : : : : : : : : :I : : : : : : : : :I
i . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . l
1~:~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1
i .....•... !4r-l ...•... i
!·~··9····i·~~··~~··~
f • • • • • • • • • I · · · · · · · · ·! I · · · · · · · · · i · · · · · · · · · l
0.9
1.7
I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : !
' . ·o--·-·-· .... I ......... ' -I·.,.··· •. · · · · · · · · · · i I::::::: HI::::·+ :I 3. {1d
I : : : : : : : : : I : : : : : : : : : !
I : : : : : : : : : i : : : : : : : : : ! : . :
30
i ......... ! . . ....... !
Remolded Natural
Lab Torvane
Field Torvane
Field Vane
Triaxial Comp.
Unconf. Comp.
t:::.r-------·
• 0------.
o-------·
0--------
CD Remolded test at 3% lower
water content than natural.
~Average of 2 tests parallel to
sample and 2 tests perpendicular
to sample.
i ~ . .. . .. . .. . . f . • . • • . . . . ~ j:::::::::l:::::::::j
Plastic Limit
"" 1-1 -/-tet---~1
Water Content 'Liquid Limit
Stone & Y.Jebster Engineering Corp.
StlMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
Bradley Lake Project
Sept. 1983 K-0631
r SHANNON & WILSON. INC. I FIG. 17
Geotechnu::al Consultants
-
-
-
-
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
K-0631-61
APPENDIX A
ANNOTATED REFERENCE LIST
Clark, S. H. B., 1973, The McHugh Complex of South-Central Alaska:
u.s. Geological Survey Bulletin 1372-D.
A brief description of the regional lithologic units within the McHugh
Complex is presented. It is of limited value to this study.
Cowan, D. S. and R. F. Boss, 1978, Tectonic Framework of the South-
western Kenai Peninsula, Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulle-
tin, Volume 89, p. 155-158.
This paper presents a regional tectonic framework for the lithologic
and structural units in the project area.
Dowl Engineers, 1983, Bradley Lake Project Geologic Mapping Program:
unpublished report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District.
This is the most recent report on geologic mapping of proposed tunnel
alignment, quarry, damsite, and powerhouse. Provides geologic maps of
damsite and powerhouse locations corresponding to present SWEC layout,
descriptions of lithologic and structural map units, and statistical
joint studies for areas of present powerhouse, exit and intake por-
tals.
K-0631-61
Soward, K. S., 1962, Geology of Waterpower Sites on the Bradley River,
Kenai Peninsula, Alaska: U.S. Geologic Survey Bulletin 1031-C.
This is the first reconnaissance geologic study of the Bradley Lake
project area. It provides general geologic descriptions and a map of
lithologic and structural features.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1982, Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project
General Design Memorandum No. 2, Volumes 1 and 2, Alaska District.
This is a summary of most of the work done on the Bradley Lake project
to date. Its most significant contribution to this study is boring
logs from holes drilled in the vicinity of the present SWEC layout of
project facilities.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1979, Reconnaissance Geology, Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project: unp~blished report to U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers, Alaska District.
Results of this study are incorporated, in less detail, in the "Gen-
eral Design Memorandum No.2". This report presents a general geo-
logic map of part of the present study area, and a useful delineation
and discussion of faults and lineaments. It also provides descrip-
tions of lithologic units and rockmass characteristics, as well as
results from seismic refraction surveys in the damsite vicinity.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1981, Report on the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project Design Earthquake Study: unpublished report to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District.
Results of this study are incorporated, in less detail, in the 11 General
Design Memorandum No. 2.11 This report discusses the evaluation of
design earthquakes and the derivation of design ground motion for the
project. It contains the calculation of seismic exposure, and discusses
the likelihood of on-site fault rupture. Methodology used is detailed
in two appendices.
-
-
....
-
APPENDIX B
GLOSSARY
APPENDIX B
GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY
FOR
CATACLASTIC ROCKS
Cataclasis: The process by which rocks are broken and granulated due to
stress and movement during faulting; granulation or comminution.
Cataclastic Rock: A general term for any rock produced by cataclasis,
regardless of whether or not the rock is coherent.
Compositional Layering: Layering due to chemical and mineralogical
differences in the adjacent layers, regardless of origin. May
include color lamination.
Fault Breccia: A rock composed of angular to rounded fragments, formed
by crush1ng or grinding along a fault. Most fragments are large
enough to be visible to the naked eye, and they make up more than
30 percent of the rock. Coherence, if present, is due to secondary
processes.
Fault Gouge: Pastelike rock material formed by crushing and grinding
along a fault. Most individual fragments are too small to be
visible to the naked eye, and fragments larger than the average
groundmass grains make up less than 30 percent of the rock.
Coherence, if present, is due to secondary processes.
Fault Zone: As opposed to a fault which is by definition a plane of
movement, a fault zone is a zone of faulting. A fault zone may
consist of many separate fault planes concentrated in a relatively
narrow zone or may be a zone of distributed movements with few or
,no distinct fault planes.
Fluxion Structure (fluxion texture): Cataclastically produced
directed penetrative texture or structure commonly involving a
family or set of S-surfaces; cataclastic foliation. May be visible
megascopically or only microscopically. Does not necessarily
involve compositional layering or lamination, although many
examples do show such layering.
Foliation: Any type of recognizable S-surfaces of metamorphic (includes
coherent cataclasis) origin.
Mylonite: A coherent microscopic pressure-breccia with fluxion
structure which may be megascopic or visible only in thin section
and with porphyroclasts generally larger than 0.2 mm. These
porphyroclasts make up about 10 to 50 percent of the rock.
Mylonites generally show recrystallization and even new mineral
formation (neomineralization) to a limited degree, but the dominant
texture is cataclastic.
Porphyroclast: A relatively large fragment of a crystal, mineral grain,
or aggregate of crystals or grains, in a cataclastic reck.
Porphyroclasts are not produced by neomineralization or
recrystallization (as opposed to porphyroblasts), but may be
recrystallized in blastomylonites and mylonite gneisses.
Protomylonite: A coherent crush-breccia composed of megascopically
visible fragments which are generally lenticular and are separated
by megascopic gliding surfaces filled with finely ground material.
The fragments, or 11 megaporphyroclasts,11 make up more than about 50
percent of the rock. Protomylonite commonly resembles conglomerate
or arkose on weathered surfaces. Features of the original rock,
such as stratification and schistosity, may be preserved in the
larger fragments.
S-Su rface: Any kind of penetrative planar structure in rocks.
Shear Zone: A zone of shearing in rocks; essentially like a fault zone,
but more specific because it excludes zones of faulting not
associated with shear. See fault zone.
Structure: The mutual relationships in space (geometric configuration)
of various components of a rock (crystals, parts of crystals,
multigranular aggregates, or microscopically irresolvable
groundmass materials), and any characteristic features to which the
arrangement of these parts gives rise. Europeans have
traditionally used texture for what Americans ca 11 structure, and
vice versa. Here, following Turner and Verhoogen (1960), the two
terms are considered interchangeable when applied to metamorphic
rocks.
Ultramylonite: A coherent, aphanitic, ultracrushed pressure breccia
with fluxion structure, in which most of the porphyroclasts have
been reduced to breccia streaks and the few remaining
porphyroclasts are smaller than 0.2 mm. These porphyroclasts make
up less than about 10 percent of the rock. As in protomylonite and
mylonite, recrystallization-neomineralization is present but is
subordinate to cataclastic texture. In hand specimen and outcrop,
ultramylonites are commonly homogeneous-appearing rocks (although
many have compositional layering), easily confused with chert,
quartzite, or felsic volcanic rock. Ultramylonite represents the
highest stage in intensity of mylonitization in the series
protomylonite-mylonite-ultramylonite.
From: M.W. Higgins, 11 Cataclastic Rocks 11
, U.S.G.S. Professional Paper
687.
PHOTOGRAPHS
-
-
::'.(:!~~· of fHIY-.tun !'::tllll·h \1:(: \·1\ t h PHaro 1
}it·3 · SW 83-1 Box 9
Intake Structure
Massive graywacke fran this zone contains local
zones of fluxion structure with foliated argil-
lite.
PHaro 2
SW 83-2 Box 28
Bradley River Fault Zone
COntacts between foliated argillite (black
material ) am massive graywacke (gray material)
are shown in this core l:xJx, as well as snall
zones of cherty argillite (upper left) am
mixed graywacke and argillite (upper right).
The white veins are calcite.
PHaro 3 sw 83-2 Box 15
Bradley River Fault Zone
Fault gouge arrl breccia are shown here with
fragments of diert arrl cherty argillite. r '· ,,, :
;~:W i1 "! ·~ '•
• .... l}")!Jf· 1'·' q,. . . ··'
.• ·.t! J '•''" R • f•· .. i . ' .t.\•f.•r ~.-., 1 .
'11.1 1: 'l<'oo. '" I. '~ ~·J o.., '-• ;''''1:.' ." ....... .. . ''1'-i4(~ t · . .
c:...l ··· • .·J.~~::.-·i-:1
L '·'-"."Iii.. . . .::.! ~ ~··· ... ' '•Ui '•i.: ,'.:Ju:~r t . :.J·.••: 'Ji. ·.J.·t: v; • t
-. .. .. tfj ·.~t·;· 1., . .f.l l , ··• ...... ·-r(l' I . • • • J l '-d.
PHaro 4
SW 83-2 Box 7
Bradley River Fault Zone
'lbe dlerty argillite typically encountered in
Boring SW 83-2 is shown here.
• tD.E ,.,. 51M B3 -r 111x •· at t/
lrfERVAI. Iss: I " 10 /,i, I '
IN"ilol: cf
t,f,.AI S 3 'J. ~ 3 3
PHOTO 5
SW 83-4 Box 22
Bu.ll Moose Fault ·zone
Fluxion structure is well displayed , in this
zone of chert with stringers of argillite.
-j ~
~· ... ,•lt. ·t.ot~ ........ 'l ... 'l.....nt:)e £ '"'"' . ..... •• ,_ "'fU.,,. t>'VV :!1 ,., .... \'
.. • "'~ • \~ St."¥.\ (:It ...... ~ •. ~~ -~yf-'(;\~ ·6 · . (} '"''~: ·t"''\iCP. ~ ·' V '" · · ~ c\'l~1'"'t. · · --· · 't"..c' . -. sw.,.a.~~~.~~st!J o.... . . .
W' · 1\t.AJ . .,.,, ·· ~ · t '' "~
t'={\·:J.V!' ilf'l.(! .~il ~-:l'eilit 7fbhe~:f C't:·. -· t.~:·r I :'...·J • -. , _.:t r•l!\..l 1.8 rola q~~$~Y ~~~4rff1· ~iXr~~~~e~
:);-srictn here ith .. -. ~·~it's\:!; gr chert Cli ht .. ., .. ,}111 '-"" .ilQ'+'~.l' .L""'-'.L g
I , ol \'~l'(.;-~~):._. !" ...
~~~~Y.~~~t~l li~;.){'l!ae .. snall zone of chert fran
~m,ut -3~-37 .2 feet (third rON, right) is rela-
tively "pure" ~to chert zones that were
typical! y encountered.
PHOTO 7
Boring SW 83-1
Intake Structure Site
This photo looks approximately east at Bradley
lake. A north -northeast trending lineamentt
accentuated by a brushed trail, parallels the
rock face at the right of the photo.
rm.Ho 1
~~l)r ha~ 5!-1 f(1-1
h. "' • .~ e $ !."111: t ~ ~ S ·, .tu
'l· .'1 ~~ .. ;;{riJ\J.X i:~i-l'i t:..' J .I
POOID 8
Borin] SW 83-2
Bradley River Fault
IDoking awrax~'mt~dsouth fran ~
~.:-i':'IJ'o; location of ·:eo~~SJ::;-2, ~ arrCMS on
.L~ lef~~~<Jfflytin .t'tbJ.ft pooto show ~ east
0 ~~,If .. .a. ~-j I --~·· o ' .. • ~ ..
)) ~t wese·f1-a~"()f..:th&t~~ey _River Fault,
...c~.~..-_(~.~--til\.' ( ... ~ .... . r,... c-r-
.-i?~~v.e.~~~'"·-~:~.~:~ 4"?~~ ~n~er~e very
• ~j t.ba oo:Ii·hv··~ ·mlled.0Wl« {.1ft ...... ~ •LU':;;~-~,, ••·r·
___ , c -'l,~<:;1 · ~.. • ' ; "'""'-' .!!..~-tl ' --a~"' n,. '· L . ~!ti ~;.ll~• _. · '-• c; oo..t "'-l't. . ,.._ *-•eo;,,_,,.:,..._..,. -~~ iR.itr..:...· • .,.v~y • Tt -· "•"-4' .:.tl.iJ t ·. ~ tw.J t-r. . I'
{, w·,. "'~"' •. .. Ck:66 IT....-.\,....tY:t:r ....... -~.---a b· . . ... • . ...,._ 'Vet • ~"it..~ ~t-c;;· ·'11·.~.!.. l .• • ' I.e&, .1,..;; i!.f:i(j .
l ~1\.1~ '· . ~~ ; '\ ~ ·;1~ . • . ,n~ .. nt ~~~~ ..... ~-. • "!" ... 1..,..-'·' • ... r~~ ~~ \..-' _-· •'\ · · .. -,..,.,. ~!'. r • · . p; 11..11.
_ ~· .... -.1 t'."-"1\..<-'· •; ··;;2. f'liiro . 9 ...... -1 • , ~..-·" • ~ ....,.._""""_ ,.,_u lt _,_;:, '-1• . • • -,. 1e~. 1:
'1t; ·~ ;uli-"'f.lJ38r.ili;i Sij ... 8.3-:~ ~ ~\,'\ 1~ ' '11 v . p-r.;·~' ...
• 1:! -~· ~;·,.J.Ifuii '1 M::i0Se Fault r1.~ "
Y.i~·~ran ~North, the main trace of c;,T"t~'
~ Bull lb:>se Fault is quite d:>vious. Drill
rig is shown on borin:;J location in lower left
of plx>to.
I.,_.,.. .. r,. \>"\H \.r; . \·:". ...... s: ... ~r~.,. ·· PHOin 1 n · . ' t· .. 'dt·::: f"· •· .., • --;"ie -~:~ r. ~ 91' . ,.,. ... ~It~'!)' \.' ·b•t \~ ~i-~L:sw '8.~-~.h.f:" (!~St ;;:iifC Of
&, 1 roo·:~·.:'\ ~· '' · ·-· ' <-• :1 t •::ttci1 V,-t • .-,.., 'rkti · • · · ~e .R;:u~~"'~.Jr;l\ i.-.: J..Y')r .. i ... ·
···-~· "'"j'-, ... ~-. ~-::~-~-.l -vc.~'\Poi.:rit: is shown at the right side of this
b Jlli)to/:Wfi{(n looks south at the east side of
Kachemak Bay. '!he ooring location is irrlicated
by the arrow.
APPENDIX B
FEASIBILITY STUDY
CONSTRUCTION
FACILITIES
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC
POWER PROJECT
PHASE I -FEASIBILITY STUDY
FINAL REPORT
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
ENGINEERS GEOLOGISTS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
r30/o1
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC
POWER PROJECT
PHASE I -FEASIBILITY STUDY
FINAL REPORT
Engineering Services
for a
Hydroelectric Power Project
for
Alaska Power Authority
Contract No. 14500.11 -H112R
August 1983
~&M CONSULTANTS, INC. 5024 CORDOVA • BOX 6087 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99502 • PH 907·561-1733
ENGINEE~S
GEOLOGISTS
PLANNE~S
SU~VEYORS
August 31, 1983
Mr. J.J. Garrity, Project Manager
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation
Bradley Lake Project Office
P.O. Box 104359
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Re: Contract No: 14500.11 -H112R
Dear Mr. Garrity:
R&M No. 351081
R&M Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit our final Phase I -Feasibility
Study report with your review comments incorporated. This report
concludes our work efforts as described in the above-referenced contract.
Very truly yours,
VJG/RLA/rma
ANCHORAGE
ALASKA
FAIRBANKS
ALASKA
JUNEAU
ALASKA
SALT LAKE CITY
UTAH
r30/o2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
3.0 ACCESS ROADS (TASK 11.01)
3.1 Summary of Prior Work
3. 1. 1 Reports
3. 1.2 Maps
3. 1.3 Surveys
3.1.4 Soils Information
3. 1.5 Other Data
3. 2 Field Reconnaissance
3.3 Design Criteria
3.3.1 Review of Existing Criteria
3.3. 1.1 Corps of Engineers
3.3.1.2 Beck
3. 3. 1 .3 Comments
3.3.2 Recommended Criteria
i
Page
vi
VIII
1-1
2-1
3-1
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-7
3-8
3-8
3-9
r30/o3
3. 4 Recommended Routes
3.4.1 Review of Corps of Engineers
3. 4. 2 Studied Routes
3 .4.2.1
3.4.2.2
3.4.2.3
3.4.2.4
Airport to Powerhouse
Powerhouse to Lower Camp
Lower Camp to Upper Camp
Upper Camp to Dam
Page
3-9
3-11
3-11
3-16
3-17
3-21
3-23
3.4.2.5 Martin River Material Site Access 3-24
3.4.2.6 Surge Shaft Access 3-25
3. 5 Modifications to Previous Studied Routes 3-26
3. 5.1 Changes in Project Facilities
3.5.2 Access Road Deletions
3. 6 Alternate Routes
3. 6.1
3.6.2
Bradley River Access Route
Battle Creek Access Route
3. 7 Material Sources
3. 7.1 Review of Existing
3.7.2 Martin River Delta Site
3.8 Disposal Sites
3.8.1 Barge Basin Dredged Spoil Disposal Area
3.8.2 Permanent Camp Disposal Site
3. 9 Estimated Quantities and Cost Estimates
3. 9. 1 Review of Previous Cost Estimates
3.9.2 Current Estimated Cost Estimates
3.9.2.1 Unit Prices
3.9.2.2 Quantities and Estimated Costs
3.10 Access Road Summary and Conclusion
ii
3-26
3-28
3-29
3-29
3-30
3-30
3-30
3-31
3-32
3-32
3-33
3-33
3-34
3-34
3-35
3-35
3-35
r30/o4
4.0 BARGE BASIN, ACCESS CHANNEL AND FACILITIES
(Task 11.02)
4. 1 Scope of Work
4.2 Summary of Previous Barge Basin/ Access
Channel/Dock Studies
4.3
4.4
4.2. 1 Hydrologic Considerations
4.2.2
4.2.3
4. 2.4
Operational Considerations
Environmental Considerations
Engineering Considerations
4.2.5 Cost Considerations
Barge Basin/ Access Channel/Dock Studies
Accomplished under this Contract
4.3. 1 Hydrologic Considerations
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
4.3.5
4.3.6
4.3.7
Operational Considerations
Construction Considerations
Alternatives Considered
4.3.4. 1 Access Channel/Basin Alternatives
4.3.4.2
4.3.4.3
Dock Alternatives
Dredged Spoil Disposal Area
Recommended Alternatives
Appurtenant Facilities Required
4.3.6.1 Channel Markers
4.3.6.2 Slough Crossing
4.3.6.3 Barge Off-Loading Ramp
4.3.6.4 Small Boats Ramp
Cost Considerations
Conclusions
4. 4.1
4.4.2
Summary
Future Additional Work Required
4.4.2. 1 Hydrologic Concerns
4.4.2.2
4.4.2.3
En vi ron mental Concerns
Engineering Concerns
iii
Page
4-1
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-6
4-10
4-11
4-13
4-14
4-14
4-15
4-15
4-16
4-16
4-22
4-23
4-24
4-27
4-27
4-27
4-28
4-28
4-29
4-29
4-29
4-32
4-32
4-33
4-33
r30/o5
5 . 0 CAM P AN D FA C I L1 T I E S ( T as k 1 1 . 03)
5.1 Summary of Prior Work
5.2 Camp Loading
5.3 Number and Location of Camps
5.4 Field Reconnaissance and Map Interpretation
5.5 Facilities Costs
5. 6 Operational Costs
5. 7 Non-Monetary Impacts
5. 8 Summary and Recommendation
6 . 0 S U RV E Y I N G ( T as k 1 1 . 04)
7.0
6.1 Summary of Previous Work
6. 2 Summary of New Work
6. 3 Resu Its of the Readjustment
6.4 Project Datum
6. 5 Conclusion
BASIN WATER YIELD (Task 11.05)
7. 1 N u k a G I a c i e r Run off
7. 2 Middle Fork Diversion
7.3
7.4
7.5
Lower Bradley River
Evaporation
References
8.0 GLACIER HYDROLOGY (Task 11.06)
8. 1 Introduction
8.2 Glaciers and Water Supply
iv
Page
5-1
5-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-7
5-9
6-1
6-1
6-3
6-4
6-6
6-8
7-1
7-1
7-3
7-5
7-9
7-14
8-1
8-1
8-1
r30/o6
8.3 Case Histories
8. 3. 1 Switzerland
8.3.2 Norway
8.3.3 Pacific Northwest U.S.A.
8.3.4 Glacier Contribution to Long-Ter·m Runoff
8.3.5 Summary
8. 4 Glaciers of Alaska
8.5 Tangborn Runoff-Precipitation Model
8.6 Application to Bradley Lake Basin
8. 7 References
APPENDIX A -GLACIER ICE VOLUME CHANGE
v
Page
8-5
8-5
8-7
8-11
8-11
8-13
8-14
8-15
8-20
8-29
A-1
r32/k1
Figure
2. 1
3. 1
3.2
3.3
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
6. 1
8. 1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
LIST OF FIGURES
Title
Bradley Lake Site Plan
Access Road Typical Sections
Access Road Typical Sections
Access Road Typical Sections
Tidal Elevation Exceedance
Alternative Barge Basin/ Access Channels
Recommended Barge Basin/Facilities Plan
Ramp Profiles, Dock Plan & Section
Horizontal and Vertical Control Diagram
Variance of Summer Runoff v. s. Percent of
Glacierized Areas
Northern Hemisphere Annual Temperature A noma I ies
Climate, Hydrologic, and Glacial Trends in the
Swiss Alps
Glacier Termin Variations/Swiss Alps
Accumulated Extra Runoff from Folgefonni Glacier
Corrected Annual Runoff Folgefonni Glacier
Cumulative Balances Thunder Creek and South
Cascade Glacier
Station Location Map Used in
Runoff-Precipitation Model
vi
ngborn
Page
2-2
3-12
3-13
3 14
4-7
4-18
4 25
4-26
6-5
8-2
8-4
8-6
8-8
8-9
8-10
8-12
8-17
r32/j 1
Tables
3. 1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
4. 1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
LIST OF TABLES
Title
Recommended Access Road Criteria
Summary of Unit Costs
Comparative Access Roads Construction Costs
Summary of Estimated Costs for Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project Access Roads
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Powerhouse to
Lower Camp Access Road (Sta. 12+50 -138 ... 00)
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Lower Camp to
Upper Camp Access Road (Sta. 138+00 -375+00)
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Upper Camp to Dam
Access Road (Sta. 375+00 -436+00)
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Airstrip to
Powerhouse Access Road (Sta. 2+00 -12+50)
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Surge Shaft Access
Road (Sta. 0+00 64 ... 50)
Estimated Quantities and Costs for Martin River Access
Road (Sta. 0+00 -74+50)
Design Windspeeds at Sheep Point
Design Wave Characteristics Sheep Point and
Chugachi k Island
Barge Basin and Access Change Alternatives
Descriptions and Estimated Quantities
Barge Basin Access Channel Location Alternatives Cost
Comparison
Barge Basin/ Access Channel Depth Alternatives Cost
Comparison
Comparison of Dock Structure Alternadves
Construction Cost Estimate Access Channel/Barge
Basin/Facilities
vii
Page
3-10
3-36
3-37
3-38
3-39
3-40
3-41
3-42
3-43
3-44
4-4
4-5
4-17
4-20
4-21
4-22
4-30
r32/j2
Tables
4.8
5. 1
5.2
6. 1
6.2
7. 1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8. 1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
A-1
Title
Comparison of Construction Cost Estimates Access
Channel/Barge Basin/Facilities
Camp Capital Costs
Camp Operating Costs
Horizontal Position Shift
Shifts between Previous and Current Coordinate Values
Bradley River near Homer Adjusted for Nuka Switch
Middle Fork/Bradley Monthly Runoff Ratios
Middle Fork Diversion Flows
Estimated Average Monthly Flow
Bradley Lake Evaporation Estimates
A Ietsch Glacier Water Balances
Contribution of Glacier Wasting to Runoff North
American Rivers
Verification Data, Wolverine Glacier Mass Balance Test
Verification Test Results
Summary of Estimated Glacier Mass Balance Changes
Bradley River near Homer Adjusted for Nuka Switch
and Glacier Balance Changes
Bradley River near Homer Adjusted for Nuka Switch
and for Trend of Glacier Wasting
Volume Change of Glaciers in the Basins above
Bradley Lake, 1952-1979
viii
Page
4-31
5-6
5-8
6-2
6-7
7-4
7-6
7-7
7-10
7-13
8-5
8-13
8-21
8-22
8-25
8-27
8 28
A-3
r30/r
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Alaska Power Authority retained Stone & Webster . Engineering
Corporation to perform professional services as required for the phase I
. Feasibility Study of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power Project. Stone
& Webster initiated professional services required under the Phase I
Feasibility Study and entered into a Contract with R&M Consultants, Inc.,
in April of 1983 for engineering-design and other professional services.
This report was prepared to present the results of these study efforts and
to satisfy the requirements of the specific work tasks assigned in the
scope of work outlined in Section 2.0.
1 -1
r30/m
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
R&M Consultants, Inc.'s work was to include, review and evaluation of
previous studies, reports, data, and other information, gathering and
. developing field and office data, and preparing conceptual design, quantity
take-offs, and cost estimates for various construction facilities of the
project.
This work was divided into seven subtasks as 1s specifically described in
the following paragraphs.
Figure 2.1 is included to show the location of the facilities covered by this
scope of work.
2.1 Subtask 11.01 -Access Road
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to gather and review existing maps,
reports and soils information for the development of engineering
design standards and parameters affecting project access road design.
This was to include a review of ground surveys, borrow sources and
existing design criteria. A field reconnaissance was to be made and
alternative design criteria addressed. Conceptual design drawings
were to be prepared of selected alignments and road configurations.
Cost estimates were to be reviewed and new cost estimates prepared
for alternatives selected.
2.2 Subtask 11.02 -Barge Basin & Dock
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to gather and review existing maps,
reports, soils information and bathymetry data covering the barge
basin and dock alternative locations. A field reconnaissance was to
be made to examine field conditions at the various sites. Alternative
2 -1
z----
\
\
-..
_-/ ~ ' ) (_["~~ ~ \_) u i ... u w .... w 0 a:.,. au >w :z:.., wO :w::a:: cD. .... > w .... a c a: ID
i
i
\
~ ...
z c .... D. ... ... :::") 0 > c .... .... c a: w z w 0
" "' l
i
I
\
.. .... .. .. ~
r30/m
dock types were to be considered and various basin configurations
evaluated. Conceptual design drawings together with cost estimates
were to be prepared for the alternative and their associated access
roads.
2.3 Subtask 11.03 -Camp Facilities
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to gather and review existing maps,
reports, soils information and proposed construction manpower loading
as it pertains to the proposed permanent and temporary camps and
utilities. The construction camp was to be evaluated as a means of
possible cost savings in operating a separate camp in the dam area
thereby reducing helicopter transport costs until a usable road can be
developed. Cost estimates were to be prepared for the permanent
and temporary camps.
2.4 Subtask 11.04-Surveying
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to gather and review survey data in the
project area and provide surveying services necessary to locate the
major test holes to be drilled by the geotechnical consultant. Maps
were to be prepared showing locations of test holes.
2. 5 Subtask 11.05 -Basin Water Yield
RS.M Consultants, Inc., was to collect data made available since
publication of the Corps of Engineers Design Memorandum No. 1 -
Hydrology and review its impact on water yield and downstream flow.
Also an evaluation was to be made to ascertain the flows into the
Bradley River from drainage areas downstream of the lake outlet.
2 - 3
r30/m
2. 6 Subtask 11.06 -Glacial Hydrology
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to determine the volume of ice lost in the
last 30 years by Bradley Lake Basin glaciers; determine if there were
any major changes in the rate of ice lost during this period and
adjust historical flow records accordingly.
Control surveys of high-elevation points near the glaciers and
evaluation of aerial photos taken in 1952, 1974 and 1977 or 1982 were
to be used to .:lssist in determination of relative elevation changes of
the glaciers over time. Photogrammetric mapping of
10 cross-sections/glacier were to be conducted by North Pacific Aerial
Surveys. Determination of volume changes were to be· completed at
the Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska. Results of these
studies were also to be applied to Wolverine Glacier, if possible. The
results of the above studies were to be utilized to develop criteria
and to adjust the summer flow records of the affected years.
2.7 Subtask 11.07-Report
R&M Consultants, Inc., was to prepare and issue summary and/or
letter type reports, discussing the evaluation of available data on
Construction Facilities; studies performed and results; quantities and
cost estimates and alternative cost savings; and, engineering-design
criteria and/or parameters compiled for Project use in the development
of the cost estimates.
2 - 4
r30/n
3.0 ACCESS ROADS
3. 1 Summary of Prior Work
The Corps of Engineers, referred to in this and subsequent sections
as COE, has prepared two reports addressing the Access Roads.
Design Memorandum No. 2 contains 8 pages in Section 15 addressing
the roads, barge basin and airfield. Design Memorandum No. 3
addresses access and construction facilities but is only in incomplete
preliminary form. Discussions with COE personnel working on the
project disclosed some important items not available in the published
documents.
The primary access road route from the powerhouse to the damsite
had been selected after considering routes up the Bradley River and
up Battle Creek. Aerial mapping of the area had been prepared at a
scale of 1"=200' with a contour interval of 5 feet. This topo map
was used to locate a road to the damsite; plan profile sheets were
prepared and quantities were generated from which a cost estimate
was prepared. Subsequent attempts to stake the alignment revealed
major discrepancies in the mapping. A grade was then flagged up
the hill to the dam followed by a surveyed line. Profiles and cross
sections were taken and maps were prepared at a scale of 1 "=50'
showing a narrow band of topography. The COE stopped work on
the project prior to completing preliminary design along the newly
surveyed route.
R.W. Beck and Associates, Inc., prepared a preliminary report
reviewing the work of the COE and made several comments and major
cost estimate revisions concerning the access roads.
The Environmental Impact Statement addresses the project as planned
by the COE along with several alternative facility locations.
3 -1
r30/n
Soils testing and reports for preliminary access road design were
completed under the direction of the COE.
The COE Bradley Lake general design memorandum number 2,
Section 5 contains a history of geologic work. Appendix D of
G.D.M. ::t2 contains geologic data compiled by the COE.
Section 3.1.4 lists those known geotechnical studies completed, or
on-going at the present time pertinent to access roads. The best
soils information existing at present is that of 1982 Bradley Lake
Access Road, Borings AP-98 to AP-116, Bradley Lake Access Road
Laboratory results and Geologic Reconnaissance Bradley Lake Access
Road. These combined with deep borings conducted by the COE
provide the information for study of tidal materials. Woodward-Clyde
also conducted se1sm1c testing of the surface layer along the tidal
flat alignment. Deep borings by the COE were completed at the old
tailrace site and one on Sheep Point. These borings are too
localized to be representative of the tidal flat, but do indicate deep
clay layers may be encountered in the tidal areas.
3. 1 . 1 Reports
Following are reports reviewed as a part of this study
0
0
0
0
Design Memorandum No. 2; COE
Design Memorandum No. 3 (preliminary); COE
Environmental Impact Statement; COE
Summary Report on Analysis of Construction
Procedures and Schedule (Preliminary Draft);
R.W. Beck and Associates, Inc.
3 -2
r30/n
3.1.2 Maps
Following are maps reviewed and as a part of this s.tudy.
0
0
0
Contour maps 1 "=200' 5' contours cover entire
project area.
Strip contour maps 1 "=50' 5' contour of main
access road.
Preliminary incomplete & unchecked plates for
Design Memorandum No. 3, COE including:
Main Access Road; Typical Section Sheet
Main Access Road; 31 Plan-Profile Sheets
Main Access Road; Drainage Basins
Main Access Road; Detail Sheets
Barge Basin & Dock; 3 Alternate Sites
Barge Basin & Dock; Barge Basin Sections
Barge Basin & Dock; Entrance Channel
Plan-Pr·ofile
Camp Facilities; Plan, Sections and Sewage
Lagoon Sheets
3 -3
r30/n
3.1 .3
3. 1.4
Surveys
Following are listed survey information reviewed as applicable
to access road design.
0
0
0
USKH 1979 Survey
!TECH 1980 Survey
COE 1981 Survey
Soils Information
Following are listed specific geotechnical reports known ·to
exist and reviewed as applicable to access road design.
0
0
0
Geologic Reconnaissance Bradley Lake Access
Road. 1980. Woodward-Clyde Consultants.
Bradley Lake Access Road Borings AP-98 to
AP-116. 1982. COE
Bradley Lake Access Road Laboratory Results.
1982. Alaska Testlab.
3.1 .5 Other Data
Following are listed other data and documents reviewed as a
part of this study.
0 Aerial Photographs of Project Area.
3 -4
r30/n
0
0
0
0
0
Computor quantity calculation sheets for access
roads from COE
Access Road cross sections from COE including
field probe notes.
U.S. Army Technical Manual 5-818-2, ''Pavement
Design for Frost Conditions".
U.S. Army Technical Manual 5-822-2, "General
Provisions and Geometric Design for Roads,
Streets, Walks, and Open Storage Areas.
u.s. Army Technical Manual 5-822-5
"Engineering and Design Flexible Pavements for
Roads, Streets, Walks, and Open Storage
Areas".
3.2 Field Reconnaissance
On June 30, 1983 a field reconnaissance was undertaken to observe
the proposed access road and camp locations. The recommended
access road route was flown from the proposed power b.ouse site to
the damsite via the proposed Barge Basin and Lower Camp Site.
The brushed out survey line for this route was visible on the upper
portion of the route but was lost in the timber in the center section
of the road. The upper portions of this route appeared feasible to
construct as located, however, no determination was possible for the
center section due to the heavy timber cover.
3 - 5
r30/n
The Bradley River and Battle Creek Alternate for this route were
also flown and it was apparent from the rough terrain why the COE
had rejected these alternates.
Time was also spent on the ground examining the terrain along the
alignment between access road stations 125+00 and 154+00 and
between 371 +00 and 379+00.
The former area is adjacent to the lower camp area. Several active
overflow channels, apparently from Battle Creek, were noted in the
access road and camp area. Consideration of flood control in the
design of the camp and access road in this area is included in this
study and discussed in Section 3.4.2.2.
On July 14, 1983, a second follow up reconnaissance trip was
undertaken to observe areas not looked at on the previous
reconnaissance trip. During this trip the access road was walked
thr·ough the thick timber cover beginning at approximate Sta. 330+00
to Sta. 134+00. From Sta. 330+00 to Sta. 288+00 no timber cover was
found but extremely steep sidehill and thick alders were
encountered. From Sta. 288+00 to Sta. 134+00 dense forest was
encounter·edl however the steep sidehill was moderated somewhat.
On July 15, 1983 a brief visit was made to Martin River delta site of
the probable source of borrow material for the access roads I camps I
and other project facilities as needed. The area appeared to be a
good source of clean sand and gravels required for construction.
3. 3 Design Criteria
Design criteria for the Bradley Lake project was originally developed
by the COE and presented in their Design Memorandums #2 and ¢;3.
This criteria was later reviewed by R.W. Beck and Associates, Inc. I
3 -6
r30/n
and modifications suggested. This review is presented in Beck's
draft preliminary report dated September 1982. A brief review of
these criteria 1s presented in following Section 3.3.1. R&M
Consultants, Inc., as a part of this current task has developed what
is felt to be the most appropriate criteria to be used on this project.
This criteria is pr·esented in Section 3.3.2.
3.3. 1 Review of Existing Criteria
The following sections present a brief review of the COE
suggested criteria for the project and the R. W. Beck and
Associates, Inc., suggested modifications to this criteria.
3.3. 1. 1 Review of COE Criteria
The design criteria used by the COE for their
preliminary design of access roads presented in
Draft Design Memorandum #3 was derived primarily
from the various applicable U.S. Army Technical
Manuals, in particular TM 5-822-2, "General
Provisions & Geometric Design for Roads,. Streets,
Walks and Open Storage Areas"; TM 822 5"
Engineering and design Flexible Pavements for
Roads, Streets, Walks, and Open Storage Areas";
TM 5-818-2 "Pavement Design for Frost Conditions";
and the American Association of State Highway
Officials Blue Book, "A Policy on Geometric Design
of Rural Highways.
3 -7
r30/n
A two-lane gravel surfaced road was chosen by COE
as the preferred road type as they felt they could
not meet required traffic carrying capacity with a
one-way haul road.
3.3.1.2 Review of Beck Criteria
R.W. Beck and Associates, Inc., in their preliminary
draft report to Alaska Power Authority dated
September 1982 suggested several modifications to
the COE criteria which if implemented would reduce
costs and time of construction. Beck referenced the
adequacy of similar construction at Green Lake,
Swan Lake and Terror Lake.
The criteria modifications suggested by Beck
included reducing roadway width to single lane
14-foot wide, increasing maximum allowable grade to
14°6, and minimum allowable curve radius of 60-foot.
Beck also cautions that some environmental effects
will be experienced associated with some side casting
of earth and blasted material, which there is no
practical way to avoid.
3. 3. 1 . 3 Comments on COE and Bee k Criteria
The COE criteria appears to be more conservative
than that used in existing practice as presented by
Beck, and that currently used by the State of
Alaska for resource development roads. Our review
3 -8
3.3.2
would indicate that due to the remote nature of the
access roads, no public access and expected low
traffic volumes after construction, a criteria less
conservative that the Corps of Engineers criteria can
be developed and still provide satisfactory access
roads for the project. Additionally, in developing
criteria recommendations we found that it will
probably not be necessary to compromise the criteria
to the extent suggested in Beck's report.
A modified criteria incorporating review of these
criteria has been developed by R&M Consultants,
Inc. and is suggested for adoption to govern project
design. This criteria is presented in the following
sections.
Recommended Criteria
After reviewing COE, Beck, and State of Alaska Resource
Development Road criteria, and after preliminary design
completion of the access road on the surveyed topography,
together with comparison of quantities and costs, a Design
Criteria Modified to per·mit reasonable access considering cost
as well as traffic was developed and is presented in following
Table 3. 1.
3. 4 Recommended Routes
This section will discuss the access road routes determined to be the
most economical to build and best meet project need as it is
currently defined. The estimated access road construction costs
3 -9
r30/n47
TABLE 3.1
RECOMMENDED ACCESS ROAD CRITERIA
Item
Road Type
Design Speed
Lane Width
Shoulders
Horizontal Curves =
Sight Distance
Vertical Curvature
Grades
Super-elevation
Cross Slope
Clearing and Stripping
Surfacing
Culverts
Criteria
Resource Development Road. Two-lane in higher
traffic areas such as Power House to lower camp
segment, and upper camp to dam segment. Single
lane between lower camp and upper camp
segment, power house to airport, and surge shaft
access.
Single Lane
20
14'
2'
100' min R
300'
Two-Lane
20
12'
2'
100' min R
150'
To be calculated in accordance with State of
Alaska DOTPF Highway Preconstruction Manual
procedure 11-10-5. Value dependent on Design
speed and Grade difference. Note: K value for
one-lane two directional roads four times that for
two-lane roads.
Desirable
Not to exceed 6°o.
0. 02-foot per foot.
5' from edge of cut slope or 10' from toe of fill.
2" minus gravel
14" Min. CMP.
3 -10
r30/n
developed in this study were based on these routes, their alignment
as shown in Figure 2.1, "General Project Layout", and typical
sections shown in Figures 3.1 -3.3.
3 .4. 1
3.4.2
Review of Corps of Engineers Recommended Routes
The final access road route recommended by the COE to
provide project access from the Airport to powerhouse to
lower camp to Bradley Lake was selected, surveyed and cross
sectioned in fall of 1981. The COE was able to complete some
of the geotechnical investigation for this route. Design work
beyond this stage however, was not completed. As a part of
this study we studied the COE alternate routes on available
maps and photos. After the field reconnaissance discussed in
Section 3.2, it was concluded in this study that the routes
selected by the COE were the most feasible to provide access
to the dam area. Emphasis for this study then was placed on
preparing preliminary designs, and construction cost estimates
for access roads along these routes.
Studied Access Road Segments
The access road segments studied for this report were
divided into s1x segments according to function and
similarities of constrCJction of follows:
0 Airport to powerhouse
0 Powerhouse to lower camp
0 Lower camp to upper camp
0 Upper camp to dam
0 Martin river material site access
0 Surge shaft access
3 -11
18 1
if.
I
UNCLASSIFIED FILL
FROM EXCAVATION
12" GRAVEL SURFACE
LOWER CAMP TO UPPER CAMP AND SURGE SHAFT ACCESS
STA. 138iOO TO STA 375-+00 STA. Oo+OO TO STA. 64-+50
28'
CUT SLOPE
DEPENDENT
ON MATERIAL
12"GRAVEL SURFACE
UNCLASSIFIED/
FILL FROM
EXCAVATION
UPPER CAMP TO DAM
STA. 375+00 TO STA. 436-+00
28'
ELEV. 14.00'
SEE NOTE
i
IZ"GRAVEL SURFACE I -..,
! CBORROW EMBANKMENTc::::_ ~ .. / -.......Ji._Y.~
NOTE: ARMOR TO BE 3.5'THICK
AND BROUGHT TO ELEV.
16.00 AT SHEEP POINT
FROM STA. 75 +00 TO
STA.I05 tOO
OWN. O.E.P.
POWER HOUSE TO LOWER CAMP
ST A. 1:iH50 TO ST A. 38-+50
ST A. 75+ 50 TO ST A.138+00
FIGURE 3.1
CKD. R.A. R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
ACCESS ROAD
TYPICAL SECTIONS
DATE AUG.I983 «~0~,...1!81::18 QCOt..QOI•T• P\..AflltN··· SUIIII'V.YOAa
SCALE I"= 10' Figure 3.1
3 -12
ARMOR 2.5'
SEE NOTE •
6
12.5'
FB.
GRID.
PRO.J.NO 351081
DWG.NO.
OWN. C.J.R.
CKO. T.S.
OATE. AUG.I983
SCAL.E. :": :o'
CUT SLOPE DEPENDENT
ON MATERIAL
18
1
~ 12" GRAVEL SURFACE
AIRPORT ACCESS
ST A. 1+00 TO ST A. 12 +50
28 1
DISPOSAL AREA
STA. 38+50 TO STA. 75 +50
FIGURE 3.2
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
•NGU'-'e& ... a o•Dl..OQt.Ta Pt,.;.NN··· .\.lllltV.YOIIIt.
3 -13
ACCESS ROAD
TYPICAL SECTIONS
Figure 3.2
F. B.
GRID.
PROJ.NO 351081
OWG.NO
OWN. C.J.R.
CKO. T.S.
DATE. A UG.I983
SCALE. t"=to'
MARTIN RIVER ACCESS
12.00'
BORROW FILL
APPROX.ELEV. 4.00' 1
FILL SECTION
ST A. 26+50 TO ST A. 67+00
GRADED EXISTING SURFACE
ELEV. ABOVE 12. oo'
GRADED SECTION
ST A. 5+00 TO ST A. 26+50
STA. 67+00 TO STA. 75+00
FIGURE 3.3
3 -14
ACCESS ROAD
TYPICAL SECTIONS
Figure 3.3
FB.
GRlD.
PROJ.NO 351081
DWG.NQ
r30/n
Construction of these access roads will be a critical factor in
beginning construction on other aspects of the project.
Access roads will be needed to move equipment, men, and
construction materials to the various required project
locations. These will be particularly critical for those aspects
of the project not located in the lower elevations, such as the
dam, in-take structure, etc., for which there is no current
ready access except by air because of the steep terrain and
dense forest cover.
As a result it is anticipated all access roads must be built in
one season during the time frame shown in the SWEC proposal
i.e. May through December of the year construction is
started.
The May 1 date is keyed to obtaining the FERC license also
on May 1 of the year construction is started. Due to the
amount of construction on the access roads and the critical
timing a delay in obtaining the FERC license could have the
effect of pushing critical portions of the access road
construction into the following season. Consequently this
could force a delay in beginning other portions of the project
similarly a full construction season.
In order to accomplish completion of the access roads in one
season sever·al of the primary access roads must be
constructed concurrently. As discussed in foilowing sections
this will mean that some of the excavated rock material will
have to be hauled to disposal since those portions of road
where it could have been used will necessarily have been
built.
These routes, their construction, and quantities are discussed
in the following sections.
3 -15
r30/n
3.4.2.1 Airport to Powerhouse; Sta. 1+00-12+50
The recommended location of the landi.ng strip as
chosen by the COE, north of the powerhouse has
been reviewed and is believed to be a good general
location. Considering available 1 "=200' topographic
mapping on the tidal flats and 1 "=50' mapping a long
the shore line, some modifications to the general
location of the landing strip and airport access route
have been recommended. It is recommended that the
landing strip be moved approximately 500 feet south
with a runway alignment of 23/5. Since predominant
wind direction will require the use of R/W 23 for
loaded landing, it is suggested that the parking
apron be located in a natural bay on the southern
one third of the landing strip. These two changes
result 1n approximately 1000' of savings on airport
access road length.
A typical section for on the airport access road may
be found on Figure 3.2. Changes suggested to the
airport access road include; reducing the width to
18 feet and shaping the alignment to follow more
tightly to the coastline. An 18-foot width for this
section will provide suitable and economical access to
the air·port facility. It IS suggested that the
alignment for final design be changed to contour
more closely to the existing shoreline, utilizing slight
cuts and associated benching where possible. Such
alignment will minimize settlement, which is felt could
be significant 1n the tidal clay areas. Also this will
take . advantage of the higher natural ground
reducing required embankment material thus reducing
costs.
3 -16
r30/n
Cost estimates for the airport access route were
derived from preliminary route alignment on available
1 "=50' topography with cross sections. plotted at
100 feet intervals. See Table 3.8 in Section 3.9.2
for airport access route; number of units, quantities
and cost estimate summary.
3.4.2.2 Powerhouse to Lower Camp Sta. 12+50-Sta. 138+00
Overall, the alignment of this section of the access
route has been changed very little from the COE
plan. The access route has been relocated to
incorporate a barge basin disposal site of
app r·ox imately 41 acres (see Sta. 38+50 to 75+50
Figure 3.2. Typical sections for the remaining
portions of this access road are found on
Figure 3.1. The typica I section has been modified to
include two-foot shoulders on each side of two
12-foot lanes. Minor changes were made to the
alignment incorporating the new powerhouse(s);
Francis Powerhouse at Sta. 12+50, and Pelton
Powerhouse at Sta. 14+00. Three major changes are
suggested for cons ide ration and have been
implemented for cost estimating purposes. The first
of these changes is a revision to the design elevation
for the access road.
for the access road
was 18 feet (project
based on a "highest
The COE suggested elevation
in the vicinity of sheep point
datum). This elevation was
tide" of 25.0 feet (mllw) or
11.37 feet (project datum). No documentation could
be found to support determination of this highest
tide elevation. Referring to the COE . shore
protection manual Volume 1, Table 3. 7, Page 3-110
3 -17
r30/n
(1977) and interpolated highest tide of 4.5 feet
above (mhw) was found. This 4.5 feet added to
(mhhw) conservatively yields an elevation of
9.28 feet (project datum). This elevation of
9.28 feet project datum (22. 9' mllw datum) was
checked with 4 years of extreme tides. The highest
tide occurring over this period was 22.6 feet (mllw
datum). Using 0.5 feet of freeboard and referring
to COE Bradley Lake General Design Memorandum #3
titled. "Summary of Design Data" the fifty year
design wave, including runup on Sheep Point, is
6.1 feet. For other areas the fifty year design wave
is 3.9 feet including runup. The resulting access
road design elevations based on project datum are
15.88 feet for Sheep Point and 13.68 feet for other
areas (project datum). Elevation 16 feet (project
datum) was used for the access road stations 75+50
to 105+50. Elevation 14 feet was used for all other
locations on tidal effected areas except the Martin
River temporary haulroad.
The second major change is that of expecting
significant settlement in those portions of access
road located on the tidal clay deposits discussed in
following paragraphs. At this time there IS
insufficient soils information available for
determination of expected settlement. Depending on
the location, we feel this settlement may be as much
as 2 feet in those areas with underlying deep fat
clay, i.e. the disposal site area. Since 2 feet of
settlement
25 percent
represents an
in borrow
increase of
quantities,
approximately
it IS our
recommendation that settlement analysis be performed
prior to final design.
3 -18
r30/n
Consolidation settlement of access road embankments
constructed on tidal flats in the vicinity of the
powerhouse and Sheep Point should also be
anticipated. The magnitude of this expected
settlement is a function of soil properties, layer
thickness, real or apparent preconsolidation and the
load which will be imposed.
Borings completed by others on the tidal flats area
identify deposits of fine grained soils as "fat clay",
"silty clay", and "silt". The variation of soil type
will ca.use a variation in settlement magnitude.
One consolidation test by others on a specimen from
a "silt" stratum, Boring AP-118, Sample 3, Depth 2
feet indicates an apparent preconsolidation pressure
of about 2. 7 tons per square foot. This exceeds the
anticipated new fill load by a factor of about 2,
hence, consolidation settlements of embankments
constructed on such material should not occur.
For the purpose of estimating increased embankment
quantities to account for anticipated settlements,
typical "fat clay" soil parameters were used in
conjunction with an estimated clay layer thickness of
40 feet. For a normally consolidated deposit,
approximately 2 feet of settlement could occur. Due
to the unknown areal distribution of different soil
types and consistencies, this study based estimates
of quantities of embankment fill in tidal flats areas
between Battle Creek and the proposed Powerhouse
on an anticipated average settlement magnitude of
1 foot. Prior to final estimation of quantities,
additional consolidation testing and layer thickness
3 -19
r30/n
determination for fine grained soils is necessary and
recommended.
The third major change proposed IS the use of
Martin River borrow for cost estimating purposes to
provide the required embankment which cannot be
suitably obtained from excess cut in the Lower Camp
to Upper Camp segment of Access Road. The COE
suggested sizing for filter rock was based on the
assumption that in-situ clay material would be used
to construct the embankment. Due to insufficient
data and analysis on the moisture content and
remolded strength of this tidal clay material, we feel
it would be difficult to recommend usage of this clay
for embankment. We suggest future soils work be
implemented to determine these performance
cha racteri sties.
As a result of
embankment and
using Martin
after rev1ew
River borrow for
of sieve analysis
performed on the Martin River delta borrow material,
it appears that filter material may not be required.
No fi Iter material has been included for purposes of
cost estimating.
We concur with recommendations for higher access
road elevation and erosion control protection in the
vicinity of the lower camp stations 120+00 to 138+00
and have included such in our material quantities
and cost calculations.
Cost estimates for Station 12+50 to 38+50 and 75+50
to 138+00 were based on ground surveyed 1"=50'
topographic mapping with cross sections constructed
3 -20
r30/n
at 100 feet intervals. Estimates for Stations 38+50 to
75+50 were based on average elevations from 1 "=200'
aerial mapping and a typical cross section.
For a summary of number of units, quantities and
cost estimates for Station 12+50 to 138+00, see
Table 3.5 in Section 3.9.2.
3.4.2.3 Lower Camp to Upper Camp Access Road;
Sta. 138+00 to Sta. 375+00
This segment of access road begins at Sta. 138+00
which is just past the Lower Camp and at the point
the access road goes from generally a fill type of
construction to a cut/fill cross section and goes to
Sta. 375+00 at the Upper Camp site. This section of
road was designed as a two-lane road by the COE
and costed in D.M. #2. Subsequent survey work
revealed errors in the aerial topographic maps that
precluded their use for design purposes.
A "p" line survey with cross sections was then
completed by the COE together with preparing strip
topography maps at a scale of 1 "=50' for design of
the road, however, the design and quantity
calculations were not completed by the COE.
Using this data, we have prepared a preliminary
alignment along this route, calculated quantities and
prepared cost estimates as part of this study. Most
of this route is characterized by steep side slopes
and shallow soils over bedrock. Thus construction
in this segment will involve large quantities of rock
3 -21
r-30/ n
excavation. Much of this excavated material wi II be
used in fill portions of the road, and excess placed
in areas set aside as disposal areas and turnouts.
No avalanche hazards have been identified in our
preliminary examination of this segment of road,
however, this potential should be considered during
final design phases.
Two alternate width roads were investigated for this
segment of access road, that of single-lane 18-foot
wide r·oad and that of two-lane 28-foot wide road.
The results of this study would indicate that the
two-lane width road will cost $901,000 more than the
single lane width due primarily to the additional
amount of excavation required.
Due to the large amounts of rock excavation required
in this segment it is suggested that this segment be
built as a one-lane road with turnouts. It is on this
basis quantities and resulting costs were calculated.
Quantities for construction for this segment were
generated based on the typical section for one-way
road as shown 1n Figure 3.1 presented in
Section 3.3.2.
A summary of these estimated quantities and
resultant estimated costs for this segment of access
road are as shown in Table 3.8 presented in
Section 3.9.2.
3 -22
r30/n
3. 4. 2. 4 Upper Camp to Dam Access Road;
Sta. 375+00 to Sta. 436+00
This segment of access road begins at Sta. 375+00 at
the upper camp site and goes to Sta. 436•00 near
the damsite. This route, chosen previously and
surveyed by COE traverses intermittent areas of
exposed bedrock, colluvium, talus and till deposits
with some areas of peat bogs associated with the
lakes and in undrained depressions as is described
in COE OM =3.
This section of road is designed as a two-lane road
to accommodate the additional traffic going from the
upper camp to the damsite. This section of road is
designed primarily as a cut and fill type of section.
Portions of the excavation are anticipated to be in
bedrock. This excavated material is anticipated to
be put in the roadway embankment and the excess
hauled to nearby disposal sites.
Quantities for construction for this segment were
generated based on the typical section for upper
camp to dam typical section as shown in Figure 3.1
discussed in Section 3.3.2.
A summary of these estimated quantities and
resultant estimated costs for this segment of access
road are as shown in Table 3. 7 presented in
Section 3. 9. 2.
3 -23
r30/n
3.4.2.5 Martin River Access Road; Sta. 0+00-75+00
The alignment proposed by the COE "{aS reviewed
and was determined to be reasonable. The route
departs the dam access route at Station 133+50. A
bridge crossing will be required at Battle Creek.
The location for this crossing was not changed. It
was noted that if the bridge could be moved
approximately 150 feet downstream it may eliminate
some excavation required south of Battle Creek.
After crossing Battle Creek the route follows higher
terrain to the east staying clear of the outwash fan
where possible. The route continues east crossing a
rather large tidal flat drainage slough at its
upstream reaches where use of a drainage culvert
will be possible.
After consideration of the Martin River Access
Routes, temporary usage, use limited to the
contractor, and the requirement that this facility be
removed and the surrounding terrain be
rehabilitated, we feel that it would not be necessary
to base its design requirements on those of a
permanent facility. Thus, no rip rap protection or
gravel top course were included in cost estimates for
this section of access road. An elevation of 12 feet
(pr·oject datum) has been used for cost estimating.
The terrain on alluvial fans from Battle Creek and
Martin River does not rise above elevation 12 feet.
It IS assumed that leveling and grading of this
material will suffice for a temporary roadway
surface. That portion of the Martin River access
route requiring fill/borrow has been cost estimated
3 -24
r30/n
assuming a one lane road.
this route assumes a two
The graded portions of
lane road. When the
access route is in use, trucks will be h~uling gravel
borrow and, maintenance could be provided as
required. En vi ron mental considerations require that
the Martin River road be removed and the land
rehabilitated. Cost estimates for this effort were
based on use of scrapers to remove fill and then
rough grading of the final surface.
Quantity estimates for the borrow required were
based on the 1 "=200' topography with several typical
sections being used. For a summary of; number
units, quantities and costs for the Martin River
Access Road, See Table 3.10 in Section 3.9.2.
3.4.2.6 Surge Shaft Access Road; Station 0+00-64+00
This route departs the Dam Access road at
approximately Sta. 288+00 and was not covered in
the COE studies as it is a new consideration.
Several alignments were considered including
continuing upward fr·om the Portal Access route and
one route lying further to the west which attempted
to avoid sections of steep slope. Other alignments
either pr·oved excessively long or encountered equal
amounts of steeper rock cross slopes.
Estimates for the surge
based on proportional
Sta. 315+00 of the dam
shaft
costs
access
access route were
from Sta. 138+00 to
route. No
cross sections were constructed. For a
specific
typical
3 -25
r30/n
section see Figure 3.1.
units, quantities and
Table 3. 9 in Section 3. 9. 2.
A summary of
costs may be
number of
found on
3. 5 Modification to Previously Studied Routes
As a result of changes 1n size and scope of project and studies by
others, some facilities associated with the project have had their
locations changed or have been deleted as no longer necessary. The
following sections discuss these changes and their impact on the
access r-oads planned for the project.
3. 5.1 Changes in Project Facility Locations
Several facilities have had their locations changed as a result
of inputs from this study by SWEC and their subcontractors.
These changes that have affected access road locations are:
0
0
0
0
0
suggested relocation of the landing strip,
alternate powerhouse locations for Francis and
Pelton types,
barge basin,
addition of the upper camp,
addition of an access to the surge shaft from
the higher elevations.
3 -26
r30/n
The suggested relocation of the landing strip approximately
500 feet south of its prior location and modifications to the
parking apron would result in shortening the ac~ess road by
approximately 1000'. This change is discussed in further
detail in Section 3.4.2.1.
Studies by SWEC have identified two alternate powerhouse
locations depending on type of power unit to be used. The
Pelton powerhouse location is approximately 300 feet North of
the site originally recommended by COE. The Francis
powerhouse location is approximately 200 feet North of the
Pelton powerhouse location. For purposes of this study the
access road was located just east of these two sites. Final
selection of powerhouse location will enable modification of this
alignment to provide the most economical location. These
changes can be incorporated in the final design stages.
Studies presented in Section 4.0 of this report have
recommended changing the location of the Barge Basin to the
vicinity of Sheep Point. The access road was subsequently
moved out further onto the tide flat between Sta. 38+50 and
Sta. 75+50 to accommodate an area for disposal of material
created in dredging of the Barge Basin. This modification is
discussed further in Section 3.6 and Section 3.4.2.2.
Studies of SWEC and discussed further in Section 5.0 of this
report have recommended consideration of an upper camp to
accommodate workers at the damsite.
This camp would be located adjacent to the access road
between Sta. 373+00 and Sta. 377+00. The access road was
relocated slightly to the Northwest to accommodate this
facility I however I the effect of cost on this portion of access
road was negligible.
3 -27
r30/n
3.5.2
SWEC requested that an access road be provided to facilitate
construction of the surge shaft. Two alternates were
investigated. The first alternate considered was an extension
of the COE portal access road. Subsequent deletion of the
need for the portal access route is discussed in
Section 3. 5. 2; steep grades, excessive length, and difficult
construction eliminated this route alternative to the surge
shaft. The second alternate is that of beginning at access
road Station 288+00 and extending an access road to the
North approximately 6,450 feet to the surge shaft. This
alternate is discussed further in Section 3.4.2.6.
Access Road Deletions
Several access routes considered earlier in COE and other
studies have become unnecessary due to various changes in
project scope and as a result have been deleted from the
project. These access roads that have now been deleted are:
0 the powerhouse to lower portal access road,
0 damsite to power tunnel road,
0 damsite to Quarry Road.
The lo\ver portal access road is no longer needed as SWEC
has deleted the lower portal by extending the power tunnel to
the powerhouse. Changes in location of the beginning of the
power tunnel by SWEC has also negated the need for the
Damsite to power tunnel access road originally planned.
Similarly changes 111 planned construction by SWEC have
eliminated the need for the damsite to quarry access road.
3 -28
r30/n
Consequently costs for these three access roads were not
included in this study.
3. 6 Alternate Routes
Several alternate access road routes were considered in earlier
studies by COE as presented in DM #2 and #3. The three major
routes considered were up the Bradley River Canyon, up Battle
Creek and an intermediary route eventually selected as the
recommended route. This intermediary recommended route was the
basis for cost estimates in this study and is discussed in
Section 3.4.2. The Bradley River and Battle Creek alternatives and
their deletion from consideration are discussed in the following
sections.
3.6. 1 Bradley River Alternate Access Route
This alternate route which was planned to extend north from
the powerhouse up to the mouth of the Bradley River then up
the Bradley River Canyon to Bradley Lake was deleted due to
the extremely rough terrain encountered going up the Bradley
River Canyon. Field Reconnaissance and examination of aerial
photos, and existing topography maps revealed very steep
terrain and a deep incised canyon that would make
construction very expensive for this alternate. No apparent
avalance chutes were identified along this alternate.
3 -29
r30/n
3.6.2 Battle Creek Alternate Access Route
This alternate route would have used the existing
recommended route from the powerhouse location to just past
the lower camp at approximately Sta. 150+00 then proceed up
the north side of Battle Creek Canyon to Bradley Lake.
Although the terrain along this route did not appear as
difficult as Bradley Canyon and similarly no avalance chutes
were identified it is felt to be more expensive to build than
the recommended intermediary route
3. 7 Material Sources for Access Roads
3. 7. 1 Review of Existing Recommended Sources
Considerable amounts of excess excavation and possible fill
material will be generated by construction of the access road
from Station 138+00 to Station 375+00. Also significant
quantities of excess fill material will be generated from the
power tunnel excavation. The COE suggested use of this
material were possible as well as use of in-situ tidal deposits
for core embankment for fill sections on the tidal flat area.
If moisture contents are as high as the samples discussed in
Section 3. 1 the clay/ silt would have to be dried before
possible use as embankment. As discussed in Section 3. 4. 2. 2
we feel too little information exists at present to recommend
use of the tidal flat material. It is our recommendation that
addition deep borings be performed along the access route to
determine actual consistency and depth of tidal deposits and
that the in-situ material also be analyzed to determine:
moisture content and general workability, remolded strength
for use as embankment material, and consolidation.
3 30
r30/n
3.7.2
Though we still recommend use of the excess excavation
materials were possible, we believe that during construction,
a first priority will be to construct access frofT1 the barge
basin to the lower camp area. This route constitutes the
majority of required embankment material. Therefore, we
believe that actual construction requirements will hinder the
use of portions of the available excess excavation material
from Stations 138+00 to 375+00 for use in construction of
Stations 1 +00 to 138+00. We do believe that some of the
material may be utilized by first building up embankments on
the tidal flats area to an elevation of around 12 feet with the
use of borrow material. This would allow access to the lower
camp region. Then as excavation is conducted in the upper
stations the elevation of the lower portion of the access route
could be raised to final grade.
Since contractor scheduling is unknown at this time, for the
purposes of cost estimating we have assumed all embankment
on the tidal flats will be created using Martin River Delta
borrow.
Martin River Delta Site
Fifteen sample borings were completed earlier in the Martin
River Delta area by the COE, boring Numbers AP79 -AP93 to
deter·mine the extent and availability of gravel materials.
These samples were taken to a depth of 10 feet. Samples
indicate generally wide spread good gravel in the Martin
River delta region. Analysis of test hole locations and boring
data could be performed to estimate quantities of gravel
available.
3 -31
r30/n
3.8 Disposal Sites
Five disposal sites were identified by COE to be utilized. for disposal
of waste material generated during construction. Only two of these
sites were associated with access roads. One located behind the
road between Sheep Point and the powerhouse was designed primarily
for waste material generated during dredging of the barge basin and
entrance channel. This disposal site is discussed further m
following Section 3.8.1. The additional disposal site primarily
designated for access road waste material was located approximately
between Sta. 160+00 to Sta. 170+00 just up from the permanent camp
and is discussed in following Section 3.8.2.
3. 8.1 Barge Basin Dredged Spoil Disposal Area
A disposal area for barge basin dredged spoil material was
incorporated in the alignment of a portion of the powerhouse
to dam access route along Stations 38+50 to 75+50. A natural
bay area is contained by the access road which serves as a
dike for containment of dredged spoil material. The enclosed
area is approximately 41 acres with surface elevations varying
from +8 to 0 feet providing a containment volume for
approximately 500,000 cubic yards of dredged spoil material in
its final state. The final elevations of dredged spoil material
will be approximately 12 feet maximum near the access
road/dike and will slope upward at 1-1:\-0
0 for drainage of the
disposal area. Drainage culverts will have invert elevations
of approximately g· and be placed at appropriate intervals
draining into the natural drainage slough which lies
immediately seaward of the access road. Ditches will be
utilized in the disposal area to allow culverts to be placed at
elevations which provide adequate top cover. For a typical
3 -32
r30/n
3.8.2
section of this area see Figure 3.2. The disposal site will be
separated into several compartments by dikes to allow
undisturbed settlement while continuing dredginQ operations.
The cost of these dikes has been included 1n the cost
estimates for the Barge Basin.
Permanent Camp Access Road Disposal Site
This disposal site located adjacent to the access road between
Stations 160+00 and 170+00 will receive much of the waste
material generated during construction of the access road.
This will include primarily tree stumps and excess rock
excavation. Actual construction schedules and methods may
require designation of additional or temporary sites. This is
particularly true if a portion of the road between the upper
camp and lower camp is built from the top down. Dec is ions
of this nature would be incorporated into the final design.
As planned by COE originally, we would recommend that
excavated material be used for fill purposes such as is
practical. Care should be taken during construction to
prevent spoil of shot rock downhill beyond construction limits
although this may not be possible at all times.
Where topsoil 1s available
distu r·bed a rea and seeded
it should be
with grass.
spread
It is
however, that topsoil will be very scarce in this area.
over the
probable
3. 9 Estimated Quantities and Cost Estimates
As a part of this study, previous cost estimates were reviewed and
an initial preliminary design completed for all portions of the access
3 -33
r30/n
road system. This preliminary design formed
calculation of estimated quantities of construction
the basis for
expected to be
encountered during construction of the access road. These
quantities and estimated unit costs for these were then used to
update previous estimates of cost for these access road portions of
the project.
3. 9.1
3.9.2
Review of Previous Cost Estimates
The COE prepared estimates for access roads and presented
these estimates in D. M. #2. These estimates were being
updated for D. M. #3 but were not completed.
The Alaska Power Authority then evaluated these estimates
from DM #2 and made some minor modifications.
R. W. Beck and Associates, Inc., reviewed these Power
Authority modified costs and. suggested an alternate design
which would reduce the costs anticipated by COE. The
resulting estimate for construction by R.W. Beck and
Associates, Inc., are then presented in their draft report to
the Alaska Power Authority. Both the Power Authority
estimates and Beck estimates are summarized in the following
Section 3.9.2.2 along with the initial estimates prepared by
SWEC as part of their proposal and the estimates prepared as
a part of this study.
Current Estimated Cost Estimates
As a part of this study a preliminary design was completed
for access r·oads and quantities generated for these designs.
Unit Prices for items in these designs were then developed
3 -34
r30/n
and costs estimated in 1983 Dollars for access roads from
these.
The development of these unit cost are presented in following
Section 3.9.2.1 and quantities and estimated costs are
summarized and presented in Section 3.9.2.2.
3.9.2.1 Unit Prices
Previous COE unit prices developed for this project
were
for
reviewed and compared to similar
the on-going Alaska Power
unit prices
Authority
hydroelectric project at Terror Lake and recent
highway construction projects. Table 3.2 summarizes
these unit prices and presents the estimated unit
pr1ces used for this project.
3. 9. 2. 2 Quantities and Estimated Costs
Preliminary designs for access roads completed 1n
this study have been presented in Sections 3.3 and
3.4. Estimated quantities of construction materials
generated by these designs and resultant estimated
costs in 1933 Dollars are summarized and presented
in following Tables 3.3 through 3.10.
3.10 Summary and Conclusion
After consideration of the var1ous alternatives we recommend that
with some modification, access roads for the project should generally
3 -35
r32/h 1
SUMMARY OF UNIT COSTS
Estimated
ni Unit Cost
Mob. /Demob. Separate
Estimate
Clearing & Grubbing
Light Acre 2,000
Heavy Acre 6,000
Unclassified Excavation C.Y. 20
Presplitting S.Y. 15
Borrow C.Y. 6
Gravel Surfacing C.Y. 12
Rip rap C.Y. 35
Filter Material C.Y. 20
Culvert
24" CMP L.F. 40
48" CMP L.S. 70
End Sections
24" CMP Each 250
48" CMP Each 400
Bridge S. F. 125
Grading L.F. 10
Marker Posts Each 50
3 -36
r32/i1
TABLE 3.3
COMPARATIVE ACCESS ROAD CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Route/ Item APA 1 Beck 2
Airstrip to Powerhouse 397,100 397,100
Powerhouse to Dam 22,685,000 6,700,000
Portal Access Road 41281.,000 1,433,000
Surge Shaft Access Road
Damsite to Power Tunnel 984,200
Camp to Martin River 1,210,700 1,210,700
Damsite to Quarry 985,500 985,500
Subtotal Direct
Construction Costs $30,543,500 $10,726,300
Mob. I De mob . 1,494,900 577,300
Contingency 6,407,700 2,260,700
Total Construction Costs $38,446, 100 $13,564,300
=========== ===========
Notes:
(1) Alaska Power Authority, March 1982.
(2) R.W. Beck & Assoc., Inc., September 1982.
(3) Stone & Webster Engineering Co., December 1982.
(4) R&M Consultants, Inc., August 1983.
3 -37
SWEC 3
93,000
.3,000,000
1,522,000
284,000
630,000
284,000
$5,813,000
468,000
1,256,000
$7,537,000
==========
R&M 4
172,500
6, 146,800
669,000
466,000
$7,454,300
500,000
1,590,900
$9,545,200
==========
r32/i2
TABLE 3.4
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS FOR BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ACCESS ROADS
Route/Item
Powerhouse to Lower Camp (12+50 -138+00)
Lower Camp to Upper Camp ( 138+00 -375+00)
Upper Camp to Dam (375+00 -436+00)
Subtotal (Powerhouse to Dam)
Airstrip to Powerhouse (1+00 -12+50)
Surge Shaft Access
Martin River Access
Total Direct Construction Costs
Mob. /Demob.
20?o Contingency
Total Construction Costs
3 -38
Estimated
Cost
2,604,000
2,664,300
878,500
6,146,800
172,500
669,000
466,000
$7,454,300
500,000
1 1590,900
$9,545,200
r32/i3
TA LE 3.5
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR POWERHOUSE
TO LOWER CAMP ACCESS ROAD STA. 12+50 -138+00
Quantit:t Material
Item No. Units Unit u it Price Cost S
Light Clearing AC 2,000.00
Timber Clearing 2.44 AC 6,000.00 14,600
Unclass. Excavation 2750 Yd 3 20.00 55,000
Borrow 215,000 Yd 3 6.00 1,290,000
Gravel Surfacing 12,900 Yd 3 12.00 154,800
Rip rap 29,300 Yd 3 35.00 1,025,500
Filter Rock Yd3 20.00
Culvert
24" CMP 800 LF 40.00 32,000
48'. CMP 180 LF 70.00 12,600
Culvert End Section
24" CMP 13 Each 250.00 3,250
48" CMP 3 Each 400.00 1,200
Surface Grading 1 '500 LF 10.00 15,000
Total Direct Construction Costs $2,604,000
======:::===
3 -39
r32/i4
TABLE 3.6
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR LOWER CAMP
TO UPPER CAMP ACCESS ROAD STA. 138+00 -375+00
Quantity_ Material
No. Units Unit Unit Price Cost $
light Clearing 7.62 AC 2,000.00 15,240
Timber Clearing 17.99 AC 6,000.00 107 f 940
Unclass. Excavation 110,916 CY 20.00 2,218,320
Borrow 0
Presplitting 8,502 SY 15.00 127 f 530
Gravel Surfacing 8,339 CY 12.00 100,068
Culverts (24" CMP) 1 f 632 LF 40.00 65,280
End Section (24" CMP) 96 Each 250.00 24,000
Marker Posts 119 Each 50.00 5,950
Total Direct Construction Costs $2,664,328
==========
3 -40
r32/i5
TABLE3.7
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR UPPER CAMP
TO DAM ACCESS ROAD STA. 375+00 -436+00
Quantit:t Material
nits Unit Unit Price
Light Clearing 7.62 AC 2,000.00
Unci ass. Excavation 38,064 CY 20.00
Presplitting 278 SY 15.00
Gravel Surfacing 6,891 CY 12.00
Culverts (24" CMP) 264 LF 40.00
End Section (24" CMP) 12 Each 250.00
Marker Posts 31 Each 50.00
Total Direct Construction Costs
3 -41
Cost S
15,240
761,280
4, 170
82,689
10,560
3,000
1,550
$878,489
========
r32/i6
TABLE 3.8
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR
AIRSTRIP TO POWERHOUSE ACCESS ROAD STA. 0+00 -12+50
QuantitY: Material
No. Units Unit Unit Price
Light Clearing AC 2,000.00
Timber Clearing 1.26 AC 6,000.00
Unclass. Excavation 2,800 Yd3 20.00
Borrow 1 1500 Yd 3 6.00
Gravel Surfacing 1,000 Yd 3 12.00
Rip rap 2,270 Yd3 35.00
Filter Rock Yd3 20.00
Culvert
24" CMP 118 LF 40.00
48" CMP 36 LF 70.00
Culvert End Section
24" 3 Each 250.00
48" Each 400.00
Total Direct Construction Costs
3 -42
Cost $
7,600
56,000
9,000
12,000
79,400
0
4,700
2,500
750
400
S172,500
========
r32/i7
TABLE 3.9
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR
SURGE SHAFT ACCESS ROAD ST A 00+00 -64+50
Quantity
No. Units Un Unit Price
Light Clearing 5. 12 AC 2,000.00
Timber Clearing 1. 70 AC 6,000.00
Unclass. Excavation 30,000 Yd 3 20.00
Borrow 0 Yd3 6.00
Gravel Surfacing 2,500 Yd 3 12.00
Rip rap Yd3 35.00
Filter Rock Yd 3 20.00
Culvert
24" CMP 330 LF 40.00
48" CMP LF 70.00
Culvert End Section
24" 22 Each 250.00
48" Each 400.00
Total Direct Construction Costs
3 -43
Material
Cost s
10,250
10,200
600,000
30,000
13,200
5,500
$669,000
========
r32/i8
TABLE3.10
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND COSTS FOR
MARTIN RIVER ACCESS ROAD STA 0+00 -74+50
Qua ntit:x::
Item No. Units Un nit Price
Light Clearing 0.9 AC 2,000.00
Timber Clearing AC 6,000.00
Unclass. Excavation 2,000 Yd 3 20.00
Borrow 25,000 Yd 3 6.00
Gravel Surfacing Yd 3 12.00
Rip rap Yd 3 35.00
Filter Rock Yd 3 20.00
Culvert
24" CMP 360 LF 40.00
48" CMP 240 LF 70.00
Culvert End Section
24" Each 250.00
48" 4 Each 400.00
Bridge 1,350 SF 100.00
Surface Grading 3,250 LF 10.00
Remove/Refurbish LS
Total Direct Construction Costs
3 -44
Material
Cost $
1 '800
40,000
150,000
14,400
16,800
1, 600
135,000
32,500
74,000
$46G,OOO
========
r30/n
be built along the COE alignment identified by their 1981 surveyed
"p" line. Modifications to previously identified access road criteria
is also recommended to be considered.
Specific changes to the COE recommended access road design
discussed in this report are as follow:
In particular the Airport to Powerhouse road is recommended
to be shortened by relocating the landing strip. It is also
recommended this road to be a single-lane 18-foot wide road.
The Powerhouse to Lower Camp road is recommended to be
generally located as shown by the COE except for that
portion just east of Sheep Point where the alignment is to be
shifted to the north to accommodate the 41-acre disposal area
for the dredged spoil material from the barge access channel.
This road is r·ecommended to be two-lane 28-foot wide and
built to an elevation of 14-foot (project datum) with the
exception of the higher wave area in the vicinity of Sheep
Point between Stations 75+00 and 105+00 where a final grade
elevation of 16 feet ( pr·oject datum) is recommended.
The Lower Camp to Upper Camp Road is recommended to be
designed maintaining a grade as necessary to minimize
required cut in r·ock. This road is recommended to be a
single-lane 18-foot wide road.
The Upper Camp to Dam Road is recommended to be a
two-lane 28-foot wide road with grades designed to minimize
the amount of required rock cuts.
The Martin River Access Road is recommended to be a
temporary one and two-lane road that is to be removed upon
completion of use.
3 -45
The recommended Surge Shaft Road not previously considered
will be required only if the Francis Powerhouse Alternate is
chosen. The r·oad is recommended to be a one-lane 18-foot
wide access road located approximately as shown in
Figure 2.1.
It is also recommended that additional geotechnical data be obtained
before the final design process starts particularly in the areas where
the roads will cross the low-lying tidal flats.
3 -46
r25/s
4.0 BARGE BASIN, ACCESS CHANNEL, AND FACILITIES
Movements of heavy, bulky equipment, parts, and materials to, the Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Power Project will be done most economically and with
least social and environmental impact by waterborne transportation.
Such transportation movements would likely be hub bed through Homer,
Alaska. Existing Kachemak Bay water depths between Homer and the
project site decrease as the site IS approached. Of the approximately
20 mile voyage from Homer to the site, "deep water" conditions (i.e.
greater than 10 fathoms below MLLW) exist for the first 15! miles. On a
line connecting approximately Chugachik Island and the Russian Village on
the west side of the Bay, the bottom rises sharply to "shallows'' (i.e.
0-2 fathoms below MLLW). Shallows taper gently to "mud flats" 1n
H miles. Mud flats are exposed during periods of low water with many
sloughs of various dimension remaining submerged and carrying drainage
of the upper flats and river flows from the head of the Bay.
In order to provide a reliable access to the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric
site, channel dredging and improvements are required for the upper
4t miles of the voyage. As a minimum, improvements required for the
channel will include dredging to a depth sufficient to allow barge and tug
traffic; channel markings; barge docking and off loading facilities; and a
materials !aydown area. Further, small boat facilities are desirable for
construction and operations personnel use.
4. 1 Scope of Work
Under the Phase 1 Contr·act for Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project,
the feasibility of construction of the Basin, Access Channel and Dock
facilities was identified as a portion of R&M Consultants' scope of
project work. Alternative locations for the facility as well as
alternative conceptual layouts and structural types were to be
4 - 1
r25/s
investigated for possible economic gain. Further, previous work
accomplished by others was to be reviewed for the occurrence of
"fatal flaws". Estimates of quantities and construction .costs of the
design concept were to be prepared for use in the overall economic
feasibility study.
4. 2 Summary of Previous Barge Basin/ Access Channel/Dock Studies
Previous basin, channel and dock siting, conceptual designs, and cost
estimating studies have been accomplished by the COE. The major
responsibility for these project features was carried by the COE
Hydrology Department. Some interfacing with other COE departments
was done for survey, environmental, soils, and civil engineering
considerations.
The COE identified three basic alternative barge basin location from
their conceptual studies. Additionally, several minor variations of
alignment, lateral location and sizes of basin were considered for each
of the basic alternates. Their final discussion of the alternative
locations were as follows:
a. Sheep Point North (Recommended Plan): Basin is located
about 650 feet south of Sheep Point in the tidal flats.
Channel axis is oriented at an azimuth of about N83°W.
b. Sheep Point South: Basin and channel
approximately 1300 feet south of Sheep Point.
is oriented approximately due West.
are located
Channel axis
c. Chugachik Island Site: A natural basin between the mainland
and Chugachik Island with ea.sy barge access from Homer.
Somewhat removed from the specific project site, the
alternative would require a 3. 6-mile haul road for access.
4 -2
r25/s
4. 2.1 Hydrologic Considerations
Extensive effort was exerted by the COE in ~tudying the
hydrologic aspects of the design of the barge basin and
access channel. Studies were accomplished regarding design
parameter determination for winds, waves, and tides. These
design parameters were then applied in studies of ingress and
egress to the project site, selection of design tug and barge
vessels, and determination of channel dimensions and depth.
Prevailing winds are from the north during winter and
southwest during summer in Kachemak Bay. Studies of the
magnitudes and frequency of occurrence of winds were based
on long-term ( 1965-1981) anemometer data from Homer Spit
and on short-term ( 1980-1982) data from a temporary Sheep
Point anemometer installation. Homer and Sheep Point wind,
speeds were correlated for funnelling and overwater effects.
Frequency & duration information was most heavily based on
the Homer Spit information.
Summertime windspeeds from the southwest were found to be
35 to 65 percent higher at Sheep Point than at Homer due to
the funnel!ing effects of the terrain surrounding the Bay.
Wintertime windspeeds were considered as equivalent at both
locations due to no such funne!!ing effects. Table 4.1
presents and 12-hour duration winds for exceedence
intervals of 2, 5, and 50 years.
4 -3
r25/s
TABLE 4.1
DESIGN WINDSPEEDS (mph) AT SHEEP POINT
KACHEMAK BAY, ALASKA (1)
Exceedance Interval
Duration (years)
Orientation (hours) 2 5 50
210° -260° 1 57 62 68
(summer) 12 47 52 63
300°-30° 1 32 36 47
(winter) 12 21 26 36
(1) After Corps of Engineers, NPS, Design Report Access
Channel and Moorage Basin Facilities.
Data of Table 4.1 are indicative of an advantage of shelter
from the relatively strong southwesterly winds. Lack of
shelter may temporarily halt off-loading procedures and would
require a more sophisticated dock structure and fendering
system. COE documents refer to all alternative sites as being
sheltered from southwesterly winds.
Waves associated with winds discussed above were estimated
using two wave theories. A tidal elevation of +25 MLLW
(+11.4 BLPD) was assumed for the study. Shallow water
wave analyses were applied for the COE Sheep Point sites and
deep water analyses for the Chugachik Island alternative.
Design wave heights (Hs) and periods (T), are presented in
Table 4. 2. for 2, 5, and 50-year event frequencies.
Wave estimates by the COE may be quite conservative with
regard to the actual frequency of occurrence due to
4 -4
J;:.
Ul
r25/tl
TABLE 4.2
DESIGN WAVE CHARACTERISTICS(1)
SHEEP POINT AND CHUGACHIK ISLAND SITES
KACI-IEMAK BAY, ALASKA
_______________ Frequency_Lyear§J ____________________ __
-----~Qc a tj_QIJ _____ _
Sheep Pv'nt
Chugachik Island
Wave
Qr_tg ina t ion
250°Al
2UJ 0 AZ
315°AZ
240°AZ
260°AZ
360°AZ
!iL.Lfj,_l
4.4
3.5
2.0
6. 1
5.9
2.2
2
T (sec)
4.3
3.8
2.8
5.3
5.3
3.0
Hs ( ft)
4.7
3.8
2.4
6.7
6.5
2.5
5
T ( secl
4.5
3.9
3. 1
5.6
5.5
3.2
_____ ,2_0
Hs (ft)
5. 1
4. 1
2.9
7.4
7.2
3. 1
(1) After Corps of Engineers, NPS, Design Report Access Channel and Moorage Basin Facilit_ies.
T (sec l
4.7
4. 1
3.4
5.8
5. 7
3.5
r25/s
4.2.2
differences between assumed and actual tidal elevations caused
by continuous tidal fluctuation.
Tidal exceedance curves were generated by the COE based on
1982 predictions of Seldovia Station. Three curves of Tidal
Elevation vs. Percent Exceedance are presented in
Figure 4.1. The three curves correspond to predicted hourly
high tides, daily high water, and daily higher high water
based on the Seldovia 19-year tidal record. Such curves are
extremely useful in assessing the accessibility of the site on
an hourly or high tide basis.
lee observations on Landsat photography and conversations
with tug captains familiar with Kachemak Bay conditions led
the COE to the conclusion that floating and shore-fast ice
should not impact winter shipping movements to the project
area. The production of bottom-fast ice in the Bay may
effect shipping movements in the shallow channel to the Sheep
Point alternative barge basin sites. Such ice may be
produced by increased frazil 1ce growth and adherence due to
greater fresh water flows into the Bay from the power
generation as well as by growth of surface ice lenses between
high tide periods during extreme cold weather.
Operational Conditions
On the basis of the conceptual power project design, material
and equipment quantities and movements across the wharf
were estimated. Further, barge and tug sizes were studied
and design vessels capable of handling the expected numbers
and magnitudes of movements were selected.
4 -6
"'
~
(,/) 0 ("') 0
n l> "' ~ ~ ~ 0 z
fT1 <
· l>ro c . ~ p z !""
(I)~~~(
2n
~gl
=~ •
~n ;o :iz ~m ;c
:~ a.;
~2 :.,.
a OJ
c~ ·-;z
go ..
~ rn-., )( c
-· m co 0 c mm .. mr-
CD em ~l>< . z l>
.... o:j
0
~
t;>
z
0
mO z
-o G> "' :;o ::0 to
0 p !'-z
0
(JI
Ul
0
CD
N
"'
.......
0
AFTER: Corps of Engineers.NPA i Design Report Access Chonnel ond Moorage Basin Facilities.
25'
20'! ----~+--+-
MHHW
f-MHW
ISj
171.6
-·-·--~ .,. __ _ + ---·--__ .§.,_E_' IXJ m
l> :u
15' I 1--\-~ -;
0
n1 --+-~ X
0
0 < m ..
1'11 10'
1'11
:~,~~· ~ l> ·------------1> n
:::! :r:: ~ m r
fTI
~
.......
0 z
s:
r r
:E
== 5 '1-------+---+---+-------1---l------1-----+----+-------l> ------;;: --+ +-~ HO RLY 1XJ
o' ~tt-w-+--+---·----· -+·----1---·-1-
l>
-< ..
l> -r-
l>
,. f--
1 1 ::~~~o•:r·~~~o~f.L~LA:~,:., -:1961 ;l---1-----+---_, ---J---------~!a.s:(
(/)
;;:
l>
-10'1-----1--1---•. ----+·--· -------· ----·--f -------'----•----------~~:§f
001 005 0.1 02 05 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99 9
PERCENT EXCEEDANCE
r25/s
The COE hypothesized that for the 6-year construction
schedule, a maximum of 50 loaded barges would require
off-loading at the project site. Most of such movements would
be accomplished in spring, summer, and fall months.
Materials and equipment would be off loaded from the barge
by roll-off, pass-pass, or crane lift operations.' Roll-off
operations include movement of wheeled vehicles from the
barge deck via a ramp extending from the barge to an
earthen ramp rising to an access road or staging area.
Pass-pass operations include off-loading by fork lift trucks
passing a load from the barge deck to the dock where a
second fork lift truck further distributes load on the dock or
to staging. Crane-lift operations would probably be required
in conjunction with either or both of the other alternatives.
Based on standard Alaska practice and barge loading
assumptions, a design barge of size 250 feet length by 76-foot
beam by 10-foot loaded draft was selected. Likewise, the
design tug was selected to have dimensions of 90 feet length
by 30-foot beam and 10-foot draft.
On the basis of experience with Washington State tug/barge
transit lines, as well as a COE Engineering Manual
EM 140-2-1611, "Layout and Design of Shallow Draft
waterways" and input from Seattle tug captains, a channel
bottom width dimension of 200 feet was selected. This
selection was based on a ~-knot tidal current assumption.
The COE predicated the 200-foot width be reconsidered should
tidal currents in the vicinity of the access channel be
measured at greater velocities. Turning basin width equal to
350 feet was determined by the length of longest barge which
may require use of the facility, i.e. 343 feet.
4 -8
r25/s
Channel depth requirements were studied in somewhat greater
detail with regard to access window periods and transit times.
Basic rationale used by the COE for selection of. their design
channel depth was as follows:
1. Minimize dredge quantities, hence cost.
2. Select minimum channel depth which would allow tug
and barge transit, docking, and tug return on high
tides within certain monthly "window" periods.
On review of the tidal and design vessel data by the North
Pacific, Seattle District (NPS) of the COE. A channel bottom
elevation of +2 MLLW (-11.63 BLPD) would be acceptable for
the design barge and tug of 10-foot draft. This would allow
transit beginning 2 hours before and extending until 2 hours
past predicted high tides of minimum elevation +18 feet MLLW
(4.37 BLPD). The minimum tidal elevation of +18 would have
been achieved on approximately 35 percent of all high water
and about 46 percent of all higher high water tides for the
years 1963 through 1981 (refer Figure 4.1). Such tides
occur, however, on a consecutive 8 to 10 day period followed
by a consecutive 5 to 8 day period of lower high tides.
Thus, a channel designed for vessel movement at a +18-foot
tide could accommodate movements made at full design draft
during the for·mer 8 to 10 day period and then none during
the subsequent 5 to 8 day period.
Further considerations, particularly with regard to cost and
the probability of not achieving full design draft, prompted
North Pacific, Alaska District (NPA) of the COE to ammend
the channel bottom recommendation.
4 -9
r25/s
4.2.3
NPA's suggested configuration has plan dimensions equivalent
to the N PS recommendation. N PA, however, recommended a
bottom elevation of +3.63 feet MLLW (-10.0 feet BLPD).
Hence, this conforms to a design tide elevation for the 10-foot
draft vessel of +19.63 feet MLLW (+6.0 BLPD) or a design
draft of 8.4 feet for the +18-foot tide. From Figure 4.1 it is
observed that +19.63 tides occur on about 17 percent of daily
high water and 25 percent of daily higher high water tides.
Dock design was not specifically dealt with by studies of the
COE. Concepts incorporated into cost estimates for the barge
facilities were a basic timber pile supported dock of plan
dimensions of 100 to 200 feet by 50 feet. The early
conceptual plans by NPA utilized a 200-foot dock length, but
DM3 suggested a final dimension of 100 feet.
Ramp design for roll-off unloading procedures was based on
local practice and maximum practical grades of 10-percent. A
crown width of 50 feet was established. No mechanical ramp
system was designed or suggested.
A small boat ramp of minimum width and grade was included
1n the COE conceptual design. This ramp was deemed useful
for launching and storage of small boats and work skiffs as
well as for use by landing craft.
Environmental Considerations
A study of environmental conditions for the alternative barge
basin sites was accomplished by the COE. The COE
published "Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Final
Environmental Impact Statement", August 1982, which
4 -10
r25/s
4.2.4
documents in detail the findings and concerns of the affected
environment.
Pertaining to the barge basin alternatives, marine mammal,
waterfowl and shellfish are the most affected life forms. The
Chugachik Island basin was found to be in conflict with an
archaeological site. Further, social impact and private lands
are a factor on the Chugachik site. The environmental impact
of the Chugachik Island site was considered as significantly
greater than the Sheep Point alternatives. The Sheep Point
alternative sites' most significant impact was considered as a
minor displacement of marine mammals and waterfowl habitat.
The final en vi ron mental impact statement filed by the COE
indicates that any dredge disposal areas on the tidal flats are
to be re-developed into waterfowl habitat at an appropriate
time during construction. Such a measure would enhance the
nesting habitat of the tidal flats which 1s currently
non-productive due to periodic tidal submergence. During
the first year of construction, to accommodate migrating
shorebirds, all dredging, dock, and road construction on the
tidal flats would be ceased from May through 15, in
accordance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife service
recommendations.
Engineering Considerations
Detailed design of the barge basin and access channel were
accomplished by the COE. Conceptual design of the wharf
and ramp structures were completed for cost estimating
purposes only.
Bathymet_ric survey data for Kachemak Bay accomplished by
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
4 -11
r25/s
was in the form of advance information from a 1980
hydrographic survey. The survey included widely spaced
soundings throughout the entire Bay, including .all accessible
tidal flats areas. Higher tidal flats were topographically
mapped during early COE studies from air photos. Detailed
topographic survey (by !TECH) on the higher tide flats was
limited to the Sheep Point alternate barge basin sites.
Geotechnical exploration was accomplished in the vicinity of
Sheep Point. Portable power auger borings with auger flight
sampling was accomplished in seven locations on the south
side of the Point. Explorations were advanced to a maximum
depth of 37.6 feet. Soils encountered near the basin were
described as "fat clays", "silts" and "silty clays" all with
organics and occasional to some gravel and sand to the full
depth of exploration. The consistency and strength of these
deposits is not noted on the logs of exploration or in
laboratory data.
Quantity calculations for dredge excavation and disposal were
based on the NOAA and I TECH surveys. Computed volumes
of dredging for the alternatives were 250,000 cy I 450 1 000 cy 1
and none for Sheep Point North 1 Sheep Point South, and
Chugachik Island site, respectively. These volumes are
based on bottom elevation of +3.63 MLLW (-10.0 BLPD);
200-foot channel bottom width; 350-foot basin bottom width;
475-foot basin length; and side slopes of 3:1
(horizontal: vertical).
In their final analysis, the COE recommended the Sheep Point
North site for the basin and dock. The recommendation was
heavily weighted on the bases of cost and environmental
considerations. An analysis of the potential additional cost of
shipping delays caused by missing a tidal access window was
4 -12
r25/s
4.2.5
not specifically undertaken except in the COE assumption that
vessel movements could be easily scheduled to arrive within
the acceptable tidal period.
COE analyses of the location of dredge spoils disposal were
based on consideration of suitable uplands, open water,
unconfined and confined intertidal disposal areas. Their
recommendation for Sheep Point barge basin spoils considered
400,000 cubic yards of material to be placed in two locations
adjacent to Sheep Point, i.e. one north and one south of the
point. The general site locations were recommended, but not
specifically sized . Environmental concerns about utilization
of the sedge-grass community for dredge disposal were
discussed and resolved. It was determined that as a low
percentage i.e. less than 2 percent of the available community
would be buried, no detrimental effects would be felt by the
filling.
NPA recommended construction of a
dimensions 100 feet by 50 feet for
dock of approximate
crane off-loading of
barges. No detailed design was accomplished, but a timber
structure was scoped in the cost analysis.
Cost Considerations
The estimated facility cost varied among COE documents. The
apparent final cost estimated by the COE is as follows:
Dredged Channel and Harbor
Dock Facility
Total
4 -13
$2,758,900
1, 1501000
$3,908,900 ----------_....,. _______ _
r25/s
4.3 Barge Basin/Access Channel/Dock Studies Accomplished under This
Contract
This section describes considerations
operation and constructability factors
channel and dock facilities completed
regarding the sizing, siting,
of the barge basin, access
in this study. No further
studies were accomplished with regard to environmental aspects, nor
were COE generated tidal statistics re-analyzed.
Of primary concern with barge basin and access channel was its
ability to provide the function for which it was designed. Further,
the ability to construct the facility as recommended by the COE was
examined. Design parameters were reviewed for conformance with
general practice. Dredge excavation quantities were computed for the
COE defined alternative barge basin locations. New alternative barge
basin and channel locations were investigated to realize any additional
econom1es. Unit prices were determined to extend total cost estimates
for dredge excavation and disposal for the basin and channel
alternatives.
4.3. 1 Hydrologic Considerations
Sedimentation 1n the basin and access channel was examined.
Three water grab samples were obtained for testing and
supplemental analyses. On the basis of very limited data
from Kachemak Bay (significant scatter exists in the available
data) our review concluded that the Corps COE estimation of
0. 2 feet per year may be low. Insufficient data exists to
make an accurate quantitative determination of sedimentation
rate.
4 -14
r25/s
4.3.2 Operational Considerations
An estimated 50 barges will require off loading at the selected
barge facility location at the Bradley Lake Project site over
the duration of project construction. Of these 50, possible 45
of such movements would originate in Seattle. These would
be sea-going barges drawn across the Gulf of Alaska by sea
going tugs at a cost of on the order of $12,600 per day for
barge and tug equipment only. The COE (NPA) final
recommendation for channel bottom elevation is +3. 6 MLLW
( -10.0 BLPD) thus providing an 8 to 10 day accessibility
"window" on daily higher high tides followed by 5 to 8 days
of inaccessibility of the design vessel. Should the
accessibility window be missed by one vessel, a penalty of
$100,800 for unuseable barge and tug time would be suffered
by the contractor for barge and tug time alone. An
additional loss of up to 8 days of time of the equipment or
materials aboard may also be a factor in completion of the
project work.
4.3.3 Construction Considerations
Channel excavation on the tidal flats is probably not feasible
in-the-dry due to the sensitive, saturated nature of the silty
clay, sandy silt and clayey silt deposits. Excavation by either
barge mounted clam-shell or hydraulic suction dredging can
be accomplished during tidal periods when sufficient water is
available to float the dredge.
A channel bottom elevation of 3.5 feet MLLW (-10.0 feet
BLPD) will have sufficient water to float a 5-bot draft
dredge approximately 54 percent of the time (based on the
4 -15
r25/s
4.3.4
hourly tidal exceedance curve presented in Figure 4.1). It is
our opinion that dredging under such circumstances would be
of at least double normal unit costs and would decrease
dredging efficiency substantially beyond a somewhat deeper
basin.
Conversations with dredging contractors
reinforced our position that the COE
have verified and
design depth is
insufficient in terms of constructability of the excavation.
Alternatives Considered
Alternatives for access channel/basin, dock, and a dredged
spoils disposal area were considered in this study and are
discussed in the following sections.
4.3 .4. 1 Access Channel/Basin Alternatives
Alternative basin and channel alignments as
indicated in Figure 4.2 were evaluated on the basis
of dredge excavation and embankment fill
requirements. Both dredged basins and causeway
type alternatives were considered for certain
alignments. For comparison with COE quantities,
channel bottom elevation was initially held at
+3.6 feet MLL\\1 (-10.0 feet BLPD). Likewise, the
planned 200 foot width of the channel bottom was
also maintained. Table 4.3 presents descriptions
and computed quantities for the various alternative
basin and channel layouts. All quantities include
neatline volumes plus 10-percent.
4 -16
.!:>
I-'
-1
r25/ul
A I te rna t i ve
__ NumQ£LL_
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
TARLE 4.3
BARGE BASIN & ACCESS CHANNEL ALTERNATIVES
DESC[ffffiONSMD ESTIMATED QUANTIIlES
A I te rna t i ve
___Q~~gr..L.Rt i onL_ ____ _
Causeway Sta -1+50 to 3+30
Dredged Basin 3+30 to 8+33
Dt'edgetl Channe I 8+33 to 81 +68
causeway Sta -1+50 to 0+00
Dredged Basin O+OO to 6+25
Dredged Cha~nel 6+25 to 81+68
Causeway Sta -1+50 to 3+30
Dretlged Hasin 3+30 to 8+33
Dredged Channel 8+33 to 66+68
Dredged Basin 0+00 to 6+25
Dredged Channel 6+25 to 71+08
Dredge<J Basin lJ+OO to 10 + 25
Dredgetl Channel 10+25 to 71+08
Dredged Basin 0+00 to 6+25
Dredged Channel 6+25 to 50+00
Dredged Basin 0+00 to 6-25
Dredged Channel 6+25 to 76+68
..Jllli!._n t i t y ( c u b i c _;ti! rd §j_
__l;!!L_ _F_i_l_l_
2411,000 55,000
251,000 6,100
167,000 55,000
266,000 0
210,000 0
226,000 0
432,000 0
NOTE: Basin and channel bottom elevations +3.6 MLLW (-10.0 BLPD) assumed herein.
Remarks
0 Stream Crossing Required
0 150'x350' Laydown Area
Included
Dock Bridges Stream
0 Stream Crossing Required
0 150x350' Laydown Area
Included
Follows Stream AI ignment
Follows Stream AI ignment
N PA Recommended A l i gnment
"Sheep Point North"
NPA "Sheep Point
South" AI ignment
I I '\ I \ I
000 0~£
s ~\ ..,. ..,
+
CX)
N
\
§
"' .... ... ... ...
~
(
\ 0.
J
oc +·
00
In'"" I ...
0
0
+ I
0
0
0
+
0
. _ ..... _..,.._-:...
''--------···
I \
I
I
I
/·
I
I I
t j:;
I r I
I
3:1
~I \
~I \
c ~ ..J CD !; oj (!) 0 ~ 7 ~ > '"" '"" a: ..J c IIJ II. :z 0 0 1-0 1-z 0 11.1 CD
'"" 1-
0 z
z-.--~~~---"' • ...J ..
u
"'
CX) I ol
I
<Dc:i I :\ ... . I <D~ I
000'>1£
DWN. O.E.P.
CKD. L.N.P...:__
DATE. AUG. 1983
SCALE SHOWN
~ <DIU 3::/
::!:
0.. .. ol
1<)/ I
ltll 21
;::'""
CX) •
<De + .
coC!
r--w
0/ o.
01
ALTERN.\ TIVE ALIGNMENT 0 :> o_;
"''
"''
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
•NOIN •• II:I. a•OLC018T8 PLANN··· auA\1.'1"0118
gi
..;;
ALTERNATE BARGE BASIN/
ACCESS CHANNELS
Figure 4.2
d -18
FB.
GRID.
PROJ.NO 351082
DWG.NO
r25/s
Dredge quantities computed in this study for
alternates "F" and"G", (COE, NPA; Sheep Point
North and South, respectively) agree closely with
quantities computed by NPA (250,000 and 450,000
cubic yards, respectively). Note that alternative
"A" and "C" include a temporary lay-down area of
approximately 150 feet by 350 feet. Likewise, they
both also incorporate a crossing of the slough
between the lay-down area and Sheep Point. On
the basis of excavation and fill quantities and
access road requirements, preliminary cost estimates
were derived for each of the alternatives.
Table 4. 4 presents these estimated costs. The two
least cost alternatives, "C" and "E" were selected
for further study.
An infinite number of alternatives exist which
couple causeways and dredged channels of differing
lengths on each of the two best alignments. Some
optimal causeway length may exist for the final
basin/channel configuration. Definition of that
optimum situation is however, beyond the scope of
this study. Causeway construction on the tidal
flats to a deep water basin has not yet been
addressed by others. Of particular concern may be
sedimentation, and hydrologic and en vi ron mental
factors for long causeway alternatives.
In light of operational and construction
considerations discussed in the previous
subsections of this report, deepening of the access
channel and basin was considered. A dredged
bottom elevation of -0.4 feet MLLW
4 -19
r25/s35
Alternative
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
TABLE 4.4
BARGE BASIN/ ACCESS CHANNEL LOCATION
ALTERNATIVES COST COMPARISON
Total Estimated
Cost ( 1 ) Remarks
$2,151,000 With laydown area
(1,951,000) With no laydown area
$1,756,000 Dock Bridges Slough
$1,624,000 With laydown area
(1,424,000) With no laydown area
$1,822,000
$1,439,000
$1,548,000
$2,959,000
Note: Based on Table 4.3 Quantities and Unit Prices of:
Cut
Fill
Bridge
$6.85/cy
$6.00/cy
$150,000/Lump Sum
4 -20
r25/ s
Dredge
Alignment
Alternative
He"
"Elf
(-14.0 feet BLPD) was used for the purpose of
computation of earthwork volumes for Alternatives
"C" and "E". Based on the curves of Figure 4.1
With this bottom elevation, barge movements (at
10 foot draft) could be accomplished on 99 percent
of all high tides, or on 49 percent of all hourly
tidal stages. Due to the depth and extent of the
"shallows" at the head of the Bay, deepening
beyond elevation -0.4 feet MLLW would require an
impractically long dredged channel to provide
''better yet" functional value of the facility.
With deepening of the channel and basin, dredging
operations may be continued for increased time
periods between groundings, thereby resulting in
significant excavation unit price savings. Table 4.5
summarizes excavation volume, unit and extended
costs for Alternatives "C" and "E" for channel
bottom elevations of +3. 6 feet and -0.4 feet MLLW.
TABLE 4.5
BARGE BASIN/ACCESS CHANNEL DEPTH ALTERNATIVES
COST COMPARISON
Bottom El. Dredge Volume Unit Extended
(MLLW) (cubic yards) Price Cost
+3.6 167,000 6.85 $1,144,000
-0.4 464,000 5.00 $2,320,000
+3.6 210,000 6.85 $1,439,000
-0.4 535,000 5.00 $2,675,000
4 -21
r25/s
Alternative
Structure
Timber Pile
Supported
Deck
Anchored
Pile
Bu I khead
4.3.4.2
This table demonstrates a 260-percent (average)
increase in excavation volume accompanied by a 190
percent (average) increase in total dr:edging cost.
The increased cost should be considered in the final
analysis relative to the increased potential benefit.
Dock Alternatives
Dock structures considered for use in the barge
bas in were a timber pile supported deck and an
anchored sheet pile bulkhead. Based on
preliminary designs of the alternatives, the cost of
the two appear to be nearly equal.
Advantages and disadvantages of the structural
types are summarized in Table 4. 6.
TABLE 4.6
COMPARISON OF DOCK STRUCTURE ALTERNATIVES
Advantages
1. Short construction time
.., Readily available materials
3. Phased construction feasible
4. Small environmental impact
1. Nearly unlimited deck load
2. Less sensitive to ice forces
4 -22
Disadvantages
1. Limited deck load
2. Possible increased main-
tenance
1. Settlement potentially
harmful to anchors and
stability
2. Greater environmental
impact
r25/s
4.3.4.3
Based on nearly equal cost of construction, it is
apparent that· potential advantages of the timber
dock structure outweigh those of the anchored
bulkhead alternative. Further, potential
disadvantages of the bulkhead are, in our opinion,
more severe than for the timber dock. In order to
provide crane-pick access to most of the surface
area of the design barge, dock dimensions of
approximately 200 feet length by 50 feet width are
recommended.
Dredged Spoil Disposal Area
It is our opinion that the most likely dredge
excavation technique which may be used for the
barge basin and access channel is hydraulic
dredging. Dredge size would probably be on the
order of 16 inches and would be capable of pumping
5,000 to 8,000 cubic yards per day to disposal at
approximately 5000 feet from the dredge. Channel
dredging beyond 5000 feet from the disposal area
would require utilization of a booster pump.
Disposal of the dredged spoil could be accomplished
by appropriately diking and pumping into a large
compa rtmenta I i zed area. Based on two grain size
tests of clayey silt soils performed during this
study, in order to return dredge effluent to a
suitable suspended solids concentration, the slurry
would necessarily be retained for sedimentation for
an estimated 18-hou r period. A detailed
sedimentation basin design was not done under this
4 -23
r25/s
4.3.5
contract. A preliminary estimate of the size of the
sedimentation basin was made. Based on
8,000 cy/day soil in 60,000 cy/day slu~ry, an area
of about 40-acres would be required. On
completion of disposal, the disposal area ground
surface would have been uniformly raised by
approximately nine feet. The disposal area North
of Sheep Point shown in Figure 2. 1 would be
enclosed by construction of the access road
embankment in such a fashion as to retain dredge
effluent behind the dike and to prevent intrusion of
tide waters from the bay side of the dike. To
create the desired bird nesting habitat the area will
necessarily be graded to raise portions of the fill
surface to above mean higher high water elevation,
to provide surface drainage and ponds.
Recommended Alternatives
Based on the foregoing, we recommend final design and
implementation of the access channel and basin alternative
described herein as Alternate "C". A plan of the facilities is
presented in Figure 4.3. In order to assure constructability
and competitive bidding for harbor excavation; to increase the
functional value of the facility; and to further insure the
longevity of use, a dredged harbor bottom elevation of
-0.4 feet MLLW ( -14.0 feet BPD) is recommended.
A timber pile supported dock structure of approximately 200
by 50 feet dimension is recommended for final design and
construction. Figure 4. 4, details C and 0 present a
conceptual plan and sect1on of the structure. This structural
4 -24
I
I
I
I
I
-
I SOUTI"I 8~o 'IllEST ------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--+-
CD~~ : ~: r .. ,.
'""'" ·-'--.J
0
G>
,. t.'-
SMALL BOAT LAUNCH RAMP--
0 .... ,o _, .. ,...
~
~
~
GRAPHIC SCALE. ~ F[fT
00 25 !10 100
~-\---~~~-Q-PILE MOORING DOLPHIN
...... ~~o'' o• 7i\--~~ .. -.... )
--(----
\
,, ~ .. .
'~ ·~ ...
'~o
'•
\
uo·xre'
\
\
\
\
DEStiN IAWIE ___.-\.
110' DR.,TJ ~ \
f'"""'
_;<<---
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
9-:~)liEP:I~ORUIII dW ----!
•• o
~/ ,. ......
tl1.,.o'"•
DCCI( ( 5[[ DETAIL I®
DOCK ACCESS ROAD
~ R[CIPROCATUtl BARS[ O#F • LOAOINI RAMP
_______ BARil OfF-LOADINI EARTH RAIIP
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC
PROJECT
RECOMMENDED
SHIIT
IW I
~
r I'
I
i
ii
i
I
I
i
l
l
'l
l
TIDE tai. Bl.POl
MLLW
APPRO)( ORIG!IrrtAL GAOUNO
.b .JJfl"''/ /~-
STAGING ARI:A
£1.. ,,i. Mll.W iii_Q, BLPO)
SUAf'AC£ COIIICA'ET£ LOGS
-·--~--~-....,.....---------· ------:ry------,......
--,r-
--y-----·--;,-
11'' HULl. 8AitG£, [MPTY
(j). HIGH TIO[
+~
DREDGE UJrrt£
......
A
~ ~ t· PILE MOOAitiG DOLPHIN
//
,I' , j' ~~I ~~-L. ~A"
SMALL BOATS RAMP SECTION
GRAPHIC SCALE ~11"b I~FT
R£ClPROCATIJtG tAftG[ .. /'1 O"~t..OADU'G lllAIItP 68' X. tO'
.-/ PlLIE SUPPORT£0
COIIII(';RET( AIUTMIIIT I
12' HULL lARGE
@. LOW TIO[
I ~n=========~»~~~*Y~======7,j~~----~~'li: ll!lij(. I :11!11 I' I' ~--,, ,,,,1 ';.A,-:::-"" \~......,-
'\_oR£0G£ Llll•£
I
I• ~
il ;;
li
J
\
"----BOTTOM DRE.OG£0 PSIN
EL •0.!, Wl LW { • 14 8LP0}
'4.4 OFF-LOADING RAMP SECTION
a IJtAPMIC IC:ALr "-
APPROXIMATE ORIGINAL GROVf\10
RA.WP SUA,AC£ CONCR[T( LOGS
FILL -...,
E.L U: 1.. MLLWI8i:. 8LPO. .J.__,__
Oft!=N:; --·
i It)'-~~~
/ ,·,,v.·
-q· !_6_!{!!!~®~?·-~ 'Q.&.
r-,1 ~)
I ,_ ~~-'--r-=='"---~')fy ,, ==~·'It =----
j I:~ :: • li ] : I ! ~! 1
1 ::
d! i1 • ~ :1 : •; ';
~ ~~ ~~ \1 ~~ ~~j; 11 ~ II •; ,, •i '1 i•
,II• I • ~ I II il II II
·'r? ~ r' 1· 1 ~ r ~ (
T
~
~
/ -J'~t~-~J DltlftE•Ar
~~--~\f---
<;,~ { v\\
, I "
II
!I
II"
~ ,I
" II : I ~ : i ' ,I ,I ,I ill : OJ il jl 1 1 I' 11
J,, Lnw:::±L e ·!'! -11 II II ~
~ ' L
.....
c
DOCK PLAN
PiLES HIOIC:AT£0 ON BUilT "• TYPICAL SPACifriiG
BIATTI:R PIL(S ARRANGEMENT AS UfOICATIO \
!HEEL CL£AfS; YtVt: TOTAL
GRAPMIC SCALI FT.
... ---6"X S,.8ULL RAIL, ALL 610[$ // --••• J( 12·· A:()IJGH OtCki .. G, CCA TRI AT£0
••all. ---~~ JoLWUrniiiiliixi~---IO"XIO" •OISTS@ 2'-0"0C, CftEOSOT£ TOUTU
' ,.,-'T~~r -~1 -r,-,0T_,....___ , ! \I 1 ! -~--12"x Jt' PtL[ tAP<.i) 12'·1,.0C • CR£0S0'f[ TREATED
~ 4" lU2" STRIJt$£ftS(9 1'-0"0.C ,CAIEOSOT£ Tllt(AT[D
FEk0£111 PILES ---------I ~ I I
UNTAEATEO,CL4SS"e" 1 I ; I
VERTICAL .JSfT@tO'Oe \ I t-CLAIS'"8"CR:t;:OSOT( TRIUTtO TUt8£RPlLI:I XH'
' ~ • , 12 Y[RTtCAL PU.(S/8ENT i i ' 2 &ArTER P1L[S/8lNT (4M: l2V &•TTEJU
I
EL-O,ifiiLL.W(-14 8LPD) . l
OREOGE .... ~~ I~
. I
·I I u ' I
·4 04) ::~~~~~.!E~~:~~ -~IL!:~:T
... 5 0 tO
RAM CONSULTANTa. INC.
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC
PROJECT
RAMP PROFILES
DOCK PLAN end SECTION
Figure 4.4
tHI:tT
a024 ConloYa atroot Anollorago. Alaoka 11M2 a .,.. 2
r25/s
4.3.6
type may be built in such a way that the construction effort
is effected only minimally by daily tidal fluctuations and can
provide use value for barge off-loading operations during
construction.
Appurtenant Facilities Required
To complete the access channel and barge basin, several
miscellaneous facilities are required.
4.3. 6.1
4.3.6.2
Channel Markers
Marker bouys and piles were considered for marking
the access channel. The pile alternative was
selected for final design due to the limited channel
width, hence increased marker accuracy
requirements. Such piles would be equipped with
light and radar reflectors. Single treated timber
piles at 500 feet intervals would be sufficient for
use in this regard.
Slough Crossing
The slough between Sheep Point and the
recommended basin would require a crossing of an
appr·oximate 100-foot length. The crossing should
be of one lane width, or a minimum of 12 feet. The
crossing could be accomplished by either a bridge
or by earthfill above several large culverts. In
4 -27
r25/s
4.3.6.3
4.3.6.4
either case the design must be capable of carrying
extremely heavy vehicles and of freely passing
slough flow.
Based on minimal obstruction of the slough, we
recommend a bridge alternative be designed in the
final design phase.
Barge Off-Loading Ramp
To accomplish roll-on roll-off barge unloading
operations, a ramp of maximum 15 percent grade is
required. The conceptual design of the ramp is
shown in Figure 4.4, detail B. The design
combines an earth ramp above mean high water
elevation with a reciprocating bridge structure of
length 68 feet. This structure, of width 20 feet,
was selected to accommodate the design barge draft
range over the anticipated normal range of tidal
elevation, i.e. 0 to 22 feet MLLW. A concrete log
surface 1s recommended for traction on the earth
ramp.
Small Boats Ramp
A small boat launching and mooring facility is
required for use on the project. The recommended
ramp location is shown in Figure 4.3. A typical
ramp profile is shown in Figure 4.4, detail A. The
cut and fill portions of the ramp should be final
designed for side slopes of a maximum of 2:1
4 -28
r25/s
4.3.7
(horizontal to vertical). The launch ramp surface
should be of maximum 15 percent slope and may be
constructed of well compacted graded gravel.
Cost Considerations
Cost estimates for the dredged access channel, barge basin,
dock and appurtenant facilities were generated. The bases of
these estimates are recent job cost data, materials cost
quotations, and local contractor input. Table 4. 7 presents
our cost estimate for construction of the faci I ities as
discussed herein.
A comparison of cost estimates prepared by agenc1es during
the course of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project studies
is presented 1n Table 4.8. The tabular comparison
demonst1·ates that the primary difference among the estimates
of the various agencies lies in the dredging cost, related, in
turn, to the estimated total quantity of dredging excavation
to be accomplished. Note, too, that the R&M estimate
contains a 350-foot by 150-foot laydown (staging) area in the
total cost of the dredged basin.
4. 4 Conclusions
4. 4.1 Summary
Barge transportation is the most economical mode of shipment
of bulky materials and heavy equipment to the site of the
proposed Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. Various
alternative barge basin locations were studied. The
4 -29
r25/v1
TABLE4.7
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
ACCESS CHANNEL/BARGE BASIN/FACILITIES
Quantity Cost
Extended
Item No. Units Units Unit Price Price
DREDGED HARBOR
Mob. I Demob.
Dredge Excavation & Disposal
Classified Fi II
Slope Protection
Slough Crossing
Channel Markers
* SUBTOTAL DREDGED HARBOR
DOCK & FACILITIES
Mob. /Demob.
Foundation Piling
Dolphin Piling
Deck & Substructure
Bollards, Cleats & Misc.
Ramp Surfacing
Reciprocating RO-RO Ramp
* SUBTOTAL DOCK & FACILITIES
1
464,000
55,000
2,000
1,200
20
1
224
27
9,850
. 1
1,000
1,360
LS
CY
CY
CY
SF
Each
LS
Each
Each
SF
LS
SY
SF
5.00
6.00
30.00
125.00
1,350.00
1 ,350. 00
1,350.00
50.00
12.00
100.00
566,000
2,320,000
330,000
60,000
150' 000
27,000
$3,453,000
126,000
302,400
36,450
492,500
5,000
12,000
136,000
$1,110,350
TOTAL DIRECT COST ACCESS CHANNEL BARGE BASIN & FACILITIES = $4,563,350
4 -30
r25/v2
TABLE 4.8
COMPARISON OF CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
ACCESS CHANNEL/BARGE BAS I N/FACI Ll Tl ES
Item
Dredged Harbor $2,758,900 $2,758,900
Dock & Faci I ities 1 1 150,000 1 1 150,000
TOTALS $3,908,900 $3,908,900
NOTES:
(1) Alaska Power Authority, March 1982
(2) R.W. Beck & Assoc., Inc., September 1982
(3) Stone & Webster Engineering Co., December 1982
(4) R&M Consultants, Inc., August 1983
4 -31
$0
2,700,000
$2,700,000
$3,453,000
1,208,850
$4,661,850
r25/s
4.4.2
functional value and constructability of proposed designs were
studied and the conceptual design revised from previous
recommendations. Alternates were eliminated based on
practical, environmental, and cost considerations. Detailed
cost compansons of two basin sites and channel alignments
were made. The alternative selected for further study and
recommended for future detailed design is shown in
Figure 2.1. A facilities layout plan, Figure 4.3 shows the
recommended location and arrangement of the dock, ro-ro
ramp, and small boats ramp. Typical profiles of the ramps,
plan and section of the dock are shown in Figure 4.4. Based
on the foregoing studies, this study estimates the direct
construction cost, for the access channel, barge basins,
dock, and facilities to be $4,661,850.
Future Additional Work Required
During the cour·se of our study of the barge basin project we
have noted a distinct need for the following additional data.
This data could be of extr·eme importance with regard to the
alternative alignments, construction techniques, and facilities
designed conceptually by this effort. The following
paragraphs present a synopsis of the further studies
requir·ed.
4.4.2. 1 Hydrologic Concerns
A quantitative refinement of the rate of
sedimentation rn the boat basin and channel is
required. Additional sampling and testing of the
water column at various tidal stages and locations
4 -32
r25/s
4.4.2.2
4.4.2.3
are needed. Data derived in these efforts may be
utilized in model studies for predicting
sedimentation rates and maintenance .requirements
for the proposed facility. Erosion of access channel
cut slopes should be studied, primarily as a source
of bedload sediments which may be trapped tn the
channel by tidal currents. Year-round Bay
circulation currents should be measured for use in
prediction of operational constraints of the proposed
facility.
Environmental Concerns
The impact of a suitably sized dredge spoils
disposal area should be re-studied for the
recommended area north of Sheep Point. Of
particular· concern is the effect of elimination of
41 acres of sedge-grass vegetation from the
Kachemak Bay ecological regime.
Engineering Concerns
A detailed bathymetric survey of the proposed basin
and channel alignment is required in order to obtain
in an accurate estimate of the dredge excavation
and disposal quantities. A topographic survey of
the tidal flats north of Sheep Point is required for
disposal area design.
4 -33
r25/s
Additional geotechnical engineering data is needed
for timber pile design 1n the vicinity of the dock
structure. Soil sampling to the anticipated dred~e
depth is required along the channel alignment for
detailed engineering and disposal area design.
4 -34
r31/k
5.0 CAMP AND FACILITIES
5.1 Summary of Prior Work
The subject of camps was briefly addressed in COE Design
Memorandum #2, published in February, 1983. D. M. #2 used a 730
man construction camp based on estimates completed for a similarly
sized job, the Snettisham Dam. The cost estimate presented 1n
D.M. #2 is fairly detailed and is summarized on Table 5.1.
The Alaska Power Authority reviewed D. M. #2 and revised the camp
and staging area estimate to $9,090,900.
R. W. Beck's draft report suggested that there should be a small camp
at the dam and a main camp at the site selected by the COE. No
change was made 1n the camp total cost, since the total number of
men was assumed to be the same as Design Memo #2. The estimate
given was $9,090,900 for staging area and camps; identical to the
Alaska Power Authority figure.
In COE draft D.M. #3, dated July 1983, the camp loading was revised
down to a single camp of 250 men. The reason was that the actual
construction camp at Snettisham Dam turned out to be about one third
the size previously estimated by the COE.
5.2 Camp Loading
As mentioned in
proposed at 730
Section 5.1 above, the camp size was
men. D.M. i::3 suggested 250 men
originally
based on
Snettisham experience. A preliminary review by Stone and Webster,
based on the reduced scope of work and revised work schedule,
suggested that there be 2 camps, with approximately 200 men at the
upper camp and 250 men at the lower camp.
5 -1
r31 /k
For this study we used the SWEC proposal schedule and cost estimate
along with rough conversion of $1,000 work accomplished per man day
(approximately a 50-50 split between labor and materials costs), to
come up with the following loading:
Upper Camp: 40 beds May '85 -Apr '86
210 beds May '86 -Oct '86
60 beds Nov '86 -Aug '87
Lower Camp: 240 beds May '85 -Apr '86
190 beds May '86 -Jun '87
90 beds Jul '87 -Oct '87
60 beds Nov '87 -Apr '88
If a single camp is used, the loading would be:
280 beds May '85 -Apr '86
400 beds May '86 -Oct '86
250 beds Nov '86 -Oct '87
60 beds Nov '87 -Apr '88
The actual camp volume would vary with the season but the number
of beds and size of utilities must be designed for the peak loads.
5.3 Number and Location of Camps
SWEC has proposed splitting the camps in order to locate the work
force closer to the job sites. Approximately half of the work force
will be working on the dam, upper tunnel works, concrete batch
plant, intake structure, and upper access roads. The other half of
the work force would be working on jobs either close to the lower
camp, such as the powerhouse, lower tunnel and penstock or on
remote:-sites only accessible by helicopter, such as the transmission
I ine and the middle fork diversion. The main advantage of splitting
the camp is to shorten the travel time and increase job accessibility
5 -2
r31/k
during inclement weather. The disadvantages include duplication of
utilities and the inaccessibility to the upper camp site before access
roads are built.
5. 4 Field Reconnaissance and Map Interpretation
During this study we looked at several locations near the dam for a
suitable upper camp site. The site had to meet the following criteria:
close to the access road, several acres of relatively flat ground and
near a water source. The plateau around the west end of Bradley
Lake is characterized by a relatively flat relief punctuated with small
depressions and small knobs of bedrock out-crops. Most of the
depressions contain lakes or marshes. Drainage from one depression
to another is slight or non-existent. Both the west end of Bradley
Lake and the upper end of Bradley River have steep banks. The
only suitable upper camp site found in our reconnaissance trip of
7/13/83 was at access road station 380. The site has 4. 6 acres of land
at under 209o slope, an apparent water supply, an area for a sewage
lagoon that drains away from the water supply lake and it is
proximate to the planned access road. The only other flat area found
near the dam was at station 410, in a swale with a small lake. There
were only 2 acres of fairly flat land, and the lake appears too small
for a water supply. Though the chosen site at station 380 meets the
bare minimum requirements for a camp, it will still present many
difficulties. Soil borings by Woodward Clyde show the soils to be
only 3' deep, with bedrock exposed in many places. For this reason,
a standard septic tank/leach field system is not practical, and finding
a suitable well for the water supply is unlikely. Because of the
knobby terrain and forest on the lower slopes, a winter sled
mobilization is not possible. Bradley Lake does not develop suitable
ice in the winter for a large cargo plane to land. Therefore, all
mobilization must be by helicopter or by access road when completed.
5 -3
r31/k
The upper camp site is 1.2 miles from the dam and 4.8 miles (by
road) from the lower camp site. The lower camp site, where shown
in the COE report, is 2.4 miles from the powerhouse, but is only
1000' from open tide flats. All of the lower camp facilities can be
mobilized by landing craft or barge, then skidded in with a cat or
driven in by truck.
The lower camp site was reviewed during the same 7/13/83
reconnaissance. As is mentioned in D.M. #3, the camp site selected
by the COE is within the floodplain of Battle Creek. Unvegetated
overflow channels were found throughout the east end of the camp
site. Soils borings by Woodward-Clyde show excellent foundation
material. The positive aspects of the camp, the soils, flatness, size,
and proximity to road and barge basin, outweigh the negative aspect
of being within the floodplain. With a properly designed road
section, the camp site can be protected from floods.
5. 5 Facilities Costs
Facilities costs were recalculated based on the permanent camp srze,
the temporary and permanent office and warehouse areas, and the
larger water tank (for fire storage), suggested in D.M. #3. Camp
volumes are as discussed above.
The three alternatives shown rn Table 5.1 are:
1. Single -One camp with a maximum of 400 beds, at the COE
designated location.
2. Split -One 240 bed camp at the COE-designated location, and a
210-bed upper camp at Station 380.
5 - 4
r31/k
Item
Camp Size (beds)
Construction Camp:
Living & Dining
Offices
Warehouses & Shops
Pad ( s)
Sewage Lagoons
Utilities
Permanent Camp:
Residential & Office
Warehouse & Shop
Fuel Storage
Staging Area:
Mob. and Prep a ration
Subtotal
Contingencies (20°6)
Total (in thousands)
TAB 5.1
CAMP CAPITAL COSTS
in thousands of dollars
D.M. #2
(COE) Single
730 400
$2,664 $1 f 877
99 254
990 43
1 f 161 404
385 253
627 517
312 524
385 0*
99 33
1265 1265
330 284
$8,317 $5,454
1, 663 1 '091
$9,980 $6,545
* Use construction camp warehouses.
5 -5
This Estimate
Delayed
Split Split
210/240 210/280
$1,917 $1,936
297 297
43 43
505 505
281 281
542 542
524 524
0* 0*
37 37
1265 1265
370 333
$5,781 $5,763
1 153
$6,937 $6,916
r31/k
3. Delayed Split One 280 bed camp at the COE designated
location, and a 210 bed upper camp at Station 380 that is not
put in until the access road is passable (October '85), and the
trailers can be mobilized at a lower cost.
The camp pad cost is lower than the COE estimate both because of
the smaller camp size, and because the road estimate includes the
special flood control section.
The staging area was not within the scope of this report. Therefore,
costs associated are included as previously estimated by the COE in
DM #2.
5. 6 Operational Costs
Operational costs are usually absorbed into other unit prices rather
than bid as a separate item. But in order to assess the relative
merits of splitting the camps, this cost must be considered.
For the purpose of comparison, the same number of total manhours
was used for each scenario. The items that did not change
significantly from one scenario to another were those items based
strictly on mandays: i.e. camp fuel, food, transportation of food to
the main camp, transportation of off-shift workers to and from
Anchorage, and helicopter transportation of workers to job sites
inaccessible by road.
Splitting the camps resulted in higher camp crew wages (smaller
camps require a higher crew to bed ratio), and additional
transportation costs associated with hauling food and fuel from the
lower camp to upper camp.
5 - 6
r31/k
In the delayed-split scenario, the 40 man upper camp is not built
until 5 months into the project. This results in a slight savings of
food & fuel transportation, and the 40 men can be more efficiently
catered in the larger main camp. The difference in transportation of
men from camp to job site is insignificant since all travel will be by
helicopter for the first five months and the camps are only
n airmiles, or about 1 minute flying time, apart.
After the access roads are in, there is a slight savings tn splitting
the camps due to the shorter distance to the job site and less idle
time for the construction workers. The three scenarios are
summarized in Table 5.2.
5. 7 Non-Monetary Impacts
The major nonmonetary impacts associated with splitting the camps are
environmental. The additional sewage lagoon, use of the upper camp
Ia ke as a water source, additional water and fuel tanks at the upper
camp, additional fuel and solid waste hauling on narrow roads, and
access to the area surrounding the upper camp by off duty
personnel, are all impacts that have not been addressed in the
Environmental Impact Statement.
Lack of baseline engineering and environmental data at the upper
camp may cause delays in completion of the final camp design or the
final E.I.S., both of which could delay FERC licensing.
There appears to be an advantage to having a camp at the damsite,
in that the workers can access the site even in weather unsuitable for
helicopter transport. Unfortunately, finding a suitable site for a
camp at the dam appears unlikely at this time. The closest suitable
location, identified so far, is 1. 2 miles from the dam. Before the
access roads are usable, all personnel will have to be flown to the
5 -7
r31/k
TABLE 5.2
CAMP OPERATING COSTS
in thousands of dollars
Camp Scenario
Item Single Split
Crew Wages & Vehicle Rental $101849 $11,873
Camp Fuel (FOB Anchorage) 486 486
Helicopter Fuel (FOB Anchorage) 44 45
Fuel Transportation 214 228
Food (FOB Anchorage) 31445 31445
Food Transportation 451 521
Transportation of People 1 1 158 11073
Total (in thousands) $16,647 $17,671
5 -8
Delayed
Split
$11 1584
486
44
219
31445
506
1,073
$17,357
r31/k
jobsite. In marginal weather, the lower camp would actually be more
accessible than the upper camp, because the helicopter pilot can
follow Bradley River from the coast up to the lake more confidently
than he can fly cross country in limited visibility weather. After the
access roads are passable accessibility should not be a problem for
either camp scenario.
5.8 Summary and Recommendations
A single 400 man camp at the site recommended by the COE appears
to have the least capital cost, the least operating cost, the least
en vi ron mental impacts and the least potential scheduling delays. The
second best alternative is a 280 man camp at the lower site selected
by the COE for the duration of the project, with a 210-man camp at
the upper site only from October 1985 to August 1987 (the delay-split
scenario).
If the split or delayed-split option is chosen, additional baseline data
will be needed tn order to better define the utility requirements of
the upper camp. Additional en vi ron mental study will be needed on
the upper camp site, the impacted lake(s) and the transportation
corridor between the upper camp and the staging area.
5 -9
rG/1
6.0 SURVEYING
In May and June of 1983, horizontal and vertical control surveys were
performed by R&M to extend control up Nuka and Katchemak Glaciers
. and to coordinate the positions of the proposed geologic borings.
The glacier control was used to scale the photogrammetric models of
the glaciers. Profiles of the glaciers were then digitized from the
photogrammetric models to aid in calculation of volume changes in the
glaciers (see seetion 8.0 --Glacier Hydrology). The geologic boring
control surveys were per·formed to coordinate the positions of
proposed boring locations as defined by Shannon & Wilson field
personnel. All new survey work was tied to USC&GS/NGS and
Bradley Project control points set and coordinated previously.
For an overview of all survey control work, refer to the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project, Horizontal and Vertical Control Diagram located
in the pocket at the end of this report.
6. 1 Summary of Previous Work
In 1979, Unwin, Scheben, Korynta, and Huettl, Inc. (USKH)
engineers performed a photogrammetric control survey under
contract to the Corps of Engineers (COE). This work
established the Bradley Project horizontal and vertical control
datums. Horizontal datum is Alaska State Plane Coordinate
System, Zone 4. The basis of coor·dinates is USC&G NGS
station JEFF. The basis of azimuth is the line between JEFF and
USC&GS/NGS station SHEEP. Vertical datum is arbitrary and is
based on the published scaled elevation of JEFF --26.24 feet
(see Table 6.1).
6 -1
r6/l
HT
MHHW
MHW
Project
Datum
Origin
BEAR COVE
MLLW
DATUM
(Assumed)
MSL
MLW
MLLW
LT
TABLE 6.1
RELATIONSHIP OF VERTICAL DATUMS
Scale: inch = 6 feet = 1 fathom
25.0
18.41
17.60
13.63
9. 61
1. 61
0.00
-6.0
BEAR COVE
MSL
DATUM
6 - 2
15.9
8.80
7.99
4.02
0.00
-8.00
-9.61
-15.61
BRADLEY
PROJECT
DATUM
11.37
4.78
3.97
0.00
-4.02
-12.02
-13.63
-19.63
r6/1
In 1980, International Technology Limited (ITECH) performed an
inertial survey to control photogrammetry and to position
cadastral corners for the proposed transmission line. This work
was based on USC&GS/NGS station SHEEP, and U.S. Army
control stations DEEP CREEK, CARIBOU HILLS, KATCHEMAK
BAY and BALD MOUNTAIN. This inertial work is considered to
be independent from the Bradley Project control; and since it is
composed of entirely unconventional observations, no analysis of
this work has been made.
6.2 Summary of New Work
During the performance of the 1983 surveys, connections
between previous USKH/COE stations were made. Errors were
found in the previous work that made it impractical to adjust the
new work to the previous work. Consequently it was decided
that a thorough review of the previous work would have to be
done in order to determine the relationship between the new
work and the old work.
The previous
Fourth-Order.
work was found to be Third-Order Class II or
The new work was Third-Order Class I.
Further analysis found the previous adjustment lacked strength
both horizontally and vertically since reductions had not been
made to the geoid or the spheroid and only a linear horizontal
adjustment had been made. In order to make the control
network useable for the current study, a new adjustment was
performed that combined the old and the new observations. The
adjustment was performed in two parts: 1) a vertical network
adjustment using vertical angle observations; and 2) a horizontal
network adjustment using triangulation, trilateration, resection
and traverse. Both adjustments were simultaneous geodetic
least-squares adjustments of all observations weighted relative to
6 -3
r6/l
their respective strengths. Refer
Hydroelectric Project Horizontal and
(Figure 6.1).
to the
Vertical
Bradley Lake
Control Diagram
In July of 1983 R&M performed a site topographic survey of the
powerhouse area due to errors found in the topographic mapping
prepared for the area by COE. The COE topographic mapping
was prepared from cross-section surveys performed for the
access road design work that COE was doing. Vertical errors
up to twenty feet were found. The sources of these errors were
primarily due to inappropriate extrapolating of the cross-section
observations into a topographic base.
6.3 Results of the Readjustment
Vertical Adjustment -Vertical angle observations are generally
regarded as a Fourth Order method of obtaining vertical values,
consequently there is no standard of error published by NGS
The re-adjustment indicates that standard deviation of the
vertical network station values is 2.54 feet. Stations SHEEP and
JEFF were held fixed. Observation variances are between 0.00
and 0.52 feet for 75°o of nearly 100 observations. The mean
error of observation is 0.29 feet. Twenty seven redundant
measurements were made. The analysis indicates a relatively
str·ong vertical network, at least as strong as could be expected
for fourth -order obser·vations.
Horizontal Adjustment Most of the observations were
Third-Order. The specifications for Class I require 1:10,000 for
traverse closures after the azimuth adjustment and no more than
3" azimuth error per station. All rough closures, before azimuth
6 -4
~9 1n
Th11 .,..P repre1ent1 the m.110r
hor'llOfttel control eshbhshed to
date for the Bro~dley Lek.e
Wydi"'eJec1rtc ProJK1
In June of 1983 .1 re · adtustment was
perfo"'""'d on the observo~ttons made
by U .S .K .H , '" 1978 o~nd b y RU4
'" 1983 The re -~JUttment
~ncorpor.tted • geodetu: · bned
••mult•n.ous le•st squeres network
•dJustment of both 'Yert•c•l •nd
hor•lontel observ•t•ons All
observehons mo~de by both "'"""
were adJ~outed ••multan.oully
U.S C ' C . S ./N .C S . Sht1ons
AURORA BEAR ·2 . J EFF a n d SHEEP
were constr.trned 1n the horuontal
edjustment JEFF •nd SHEEP were
constra~ned 1n the v e r ttc•l
ldJustment
Honrontal sh1fh for p r ev1ously
publlshe;d monument~ st•t•on s •ere
under two f eet Vert•cal l~'llftS
were-9enerally under th r ee feet
Theae sh•ht w •ll not app rec ~.tbly
·affect •••ttmg mepp~ng ; ho•ever .
all subse-quent II.H''Yeys tnd mapp•ng
sho u ld be referenced t o the new
date
3 . The PFOj«:t horuont.ll datum ••
b•,.d on Alo~ska St•t• Plane
Coord•n•te Syst~ Zone-4 •h•ch "
referenced to th• North Amer•c•n
datum of 1927 I NA D 27 Cl •rl.
Sphero1d of 1866).
4 . The proJect vert1c al d•tum " b•ud
on •n .tUUifted loc.el datum for th11
p r OJect whtch was 1n 1t 1ated by uung
the scaled ele•dt•o n of JE F F at
26 2• feet l•ter observlttons b)'
N .O .A .A . pieced the local do~tum
or1g1n for Mean Se.1 Level I ~Sl)
~ 0 2 f e-et tower
MSL is a ~•I Metn s .. level d.tum
that •pproxNMt., the se• level
detu"' of 1929. The Me•n Lowe.-
Low Weter d•tum (MllW) o rig i l\ it
t3 .63 '"' lower th•n the Proj«:t
detum o.-igin .
Th• coordtnete t•ble on th •t shHt
Hate the proj«:t, MSL •nd MLLW
detulft owalues for eech controt po~nt.
~-The proj«:t gr1d shown her.on 11
en il\dexing syttMI only . hc:h
''bkKit H is RXJO t .. t eut••lt bv
5000 f"t I\Orthsouth . Orientatton
11 to tM Al•sk• St.tte Pl•ne
Coordinate SyttMI (A .S .P .C .S .)
Zon• 4 projection . ••• tr~Jleel .... ,14 ...... ,., •• _
LEGEND
1111 -OiuervettOn by U .S .C . '
G .$./N .G .S. held fi•.ct
UIIM -Observltton by USI(H for US CE
re#adjutted Jun•. liND
•••-Ob .. r-,atiof'l by AI.M Consultlnts
~justed Jwne, 1983
4 -Cont~ point-., .. c:oordin1te li tt
for fiiOI\~t•tton •nfonnahon
IOOOf .. l -i r
TYPICo\L
; f
PROJECT
F GRID
SUBINDEX
I
..L • s 4
•naTIOIUiMIIi" 0' 'WI .. TtC•L OATUMI .... _ .... ··-
=•~:
= 1!-:.
.... _
~~ ...
.... ....
..... .....
·~·., "='=-T
~ ..
~ ..
...... .... --
A
,----__ ·I --J ~.. OJ "'" .I --OF----;;r-a.,. •I aa zl aa al 100-----.r----roi----;r· 102 11 10~ sl 104 zl 10!'1----.r 1011: al 107 II lOA al IOQ al·---110 1.
,_ .... ....
''"' 1/l] ,.
11%1 11 1 , .. ,~ ·--~-·· lltJ Ja
la'l•l ......
Dlll» ,,_ ,.,,..
llUM tnt ut
'"" ..... -·· ...... ... ,. ..... ...... ..... .....
nu• ,.,. ....
lUJM --......
,. ,. ...
~ ~~
l m l»
:5E
l)llliOI ::= 1-StO _,. == ......
IJIOI'JI .... ...
JJXI'II
UJO.II'I tm.•to ,._ ,.,,u .... --,, ... ,.., .. ... ,.
13>111 .. -.... -·-
~
) .,,. MAS\ CA~
J If. I•AU (A P •·•·•·••""""" )t••···-llo\1 (4P ••·•· •••n '"'' ) !Jt ••'*lo~ .. " ,_.,,-.. •u c. .. ,
l t••-.. •n "" )·II·· t•U\ (AP ,_., •. , .... n c .. ,
J -1/ ...... ,,, ... ,
)I/ •. lll.A\1 (4 P
).If ....... ~, .. ...,
~~· •••n ..._ .. ,
!-.~· , ..
~· ~· .,. .,.
CIJtU• Of •._••u
cc•n • Of '""ll cont•o' ••••u
Cl .. ,,. Of """'-
CIIoT(a OJ ''"•U
CI .. TU Of '"""'-L
CVI1'l a Of Pillll(l
C(Jif(A Of 'bii:L
C:tJ1Jia Uf hiiii.L
, ... , •• Of ..... u
IJMI"" I *"'\a1iiMIIIIWN un~MnMMM
llVIISI
un•M ,_ .. -·· "''"' ···-~-·· --i~:: ··-·--••n• .•.. ta•,.
":~~
ll llo11 ....,.,,-u
Jal lll == =:~ :~~:
Ill)~ ":: ~~
..... 0
--~ W.tt »'
::; : :--·. .,.,.u J l
... :!II'
--~· ,. .... u ··· •• .-,, ur ·-w .. -
''-'" ft .... ,..,..,.!!"' .... » . ,... or ..... ., . .... ..
...... !I ..... ., ..
---~ :.· IW':') II ...,. ... ,., .....
•ru u · .... ,. .. .........
:;;:~
.. 44 ...
~---·~=~
== --:::: -··11 -•wr. ---_,.
..... u --__,, -·----IIIIJI)'S1
'"''].")/
,..,l'...tl
-llH~
-!Zlltl ...,, .
-:!'IW! ---..,..;:AI
-"~i] _,.,,. -· ~I! ---·
~.., ... ~u _...., n ~l
::~ !::~ ,., !I •••~
W" 12 u .,"'
:lrU !J ~
w n 11 ~~-»" u u !')UA ., .... ,..,
'I M !) f _.W ,......, :..;;.,. ..
~n !l .. ::.oll w ~s .. 11•1011
..... U!~l
:lr 41 ru ,.,,.
... 4 !l~l
wo .. "•u• W"":.! .!'UIIJ
tr II "ti ,;~ .. :: ~ ~ ~~~~
,... «J ¥.. uw...,·
,....., !I M i:;a
W"» ,, iii!! ... ..r :!10 ~0111' ..... !IIi ,,~
., .. "• ~110J
.. ., 1) !)j,Q "'n IJSSi :!l W'n ,__H
.... !J &;If'
:lr. I I UUI'
W". H OUI'
l:olt"" ,,; ...-~ ,,. u,. ·•·•· ,,.,. ... ,, .... 1.1 ..... ,. ,.,.,. '
!::.a" u )1 I !I .,
I)O"'~D ~ I""' IT .,_...
1)0"' <On :.~Q
·~· ... .,., ·~·· ... Itt ~11·1:. 1)11"~ ld!6f.,J
•:.o'"'\1 .... )#' •
<:•'"'! :"1 -H
....... ~! ~ ~~, ....
::: ~ .:~ ;!":
:~~ ':! ~ ~~.:~
l:u"'lo; ll tll!:
1:...-n •• ~; .. : ..
1:.0 ... U II/ !I)!:,
1:.1'1")) lA iit•• ::.: ~ !~ ! ......
l :a"' l.l U)
I:.." lite !!
:;: ; H
1!.0")1 ... ,,...)1 1'0 ,,...,. .
..:.~· .... -
..
,,
~:~::=: ::e:
f'( .. l( .. .,. .... ,
\._(,.1[. Of ..... ..
;::~::: :=~
'"'""''."'"$' C f .. H I.tlf '4 l
C l •H (a 0t"' l
(('0 1 111 Qf ''-'-
~!::.~~~ ·,•, ., .. ~".,
\"llfLI I.t "-.11 f".lll'
)Pl .. ( Lilt ..... , r'll"
\~O"f o I' • 11'1 ll o \1>
~~··· L I I I 1'1 \) \ .. •i>O IIf L I I""',.,
l''"'', 1, • "'", u• ~I If I f'O' • • I I II • ' ,,,,,,.., .. _)11 .. , .••
~~rl~ ''"" J I I h I \f' Hffl ..... ~ J I .f \, ,._.. ..
~HU hlo ~ J I I ""*--.: .....
~~!" ,, ... ' J 1 ~ '' c••
~ruo ''"" 'l , • :t.t ..._,..
SHU .... •JII .. ,,·.uo
\fill ..... ~ J I I l l 1: \f'
S flll ...... J I•I :t.l"-41'
S lflLhll&)l.l " k..:&•
\lUL .... lJ·tl··.u t.U ~~IMIIlt...at o"l&#
"
,.
..
I '
~·· ~ ..
=~
=* ~f:
C<' " ' ~:! . ..
~: ~ .• ' .. ,
"' "' :::
10 , ... f w o
~· ... , ....
W ·>
~· DM"IIIl
1101001 .. ,
•
... ;· ;.
.. .. ..
n ..
Figure 6.1
•RAaa..V LAK•
H V D..,_LIICTIIUC
:' L •.
r6/1
adjustment, exceeded 1:27,000 and averaged 1:174,500 for the 19
traverses and loops analyzed. Angular errors were less than 3"
per station in all traverses.
The horizontal adjustment was performed on the Clark Spheroid
of 1866 (NAD 27). The network contained 65 redundant
observations. USC&GS/NGS. Stations AURORA, BEAR-2, JEFF,
and SHEEP were held fixed.
The horizontal and vertical adjustments added significant
strength to the network. The affect of observation errors on
future work will be minimized by use of the new data and the
readjusted station values. See Table 6.2 for a summary of
position value shifts for USKH/USCE monumented stations.
6.4 Project Datum
The project horizontal datum IS based on Alaska State Plane
Coordinate System Zone 4 which is referenced to the North
American datum of 1927 (NAD 27/Ciark Spheroid of 1866).
The project vertical datum is based on an assumed local datum
for this project which was initiated by using the scaled elevation
of JEFF at 26.24 feet. Later observations by NOAA placed the
local datum origin for Mean Sea Level (MSL) 4.02 feet lower.
MSL, as represented here, IS a local Mean Sea Level datum that
approximates the sea level datum of 1929. The Mean Lower Low
Water datum (MLLW) origin is 9.61 feet lower than MSL origin or
13.63 feet lower than the project datum origin.
6 - 6
r6/1
TABLE 6.2
Shifts between Previous ~ Current Coordinate Values
This table summarizes the shifts between previously published
coordinate values of USKH/COE monumented stations and the new
adjusted values. The vertical position shifts represent the localized
vertical errors in the topographic mapping.
Horizontal Position Shift
Station Resultant Vector Vertical
N Bearing Position Shift
BR 1 .900' N26°37'51 "W +4. 701 f
BR 2 . 526' N74°22'08"E +1.170'
BR 3 .502' S89°14'52"E + 1 . 681'
BR 4 . 541' S7J024'39"E +1.352'
BR 5 .827' S56°33'34" E +2. 309'
BR 6 .242' S18°22'04"W + 1. 991'
BR 7 .242' N51°35'37"W +1. 939'
BR 8 1 . 687' S24°15'23"W +2. 971'
BR 9 1. 661' S30°34'45"W +2. 570'
BR 10 1 .337' S51°01'41"W +4. 500'
BR 1 1. 1 77' S69°37' 1 O"W +4. 71 9'
Mean
Error .877' S13°20'36"W +2. 718'
Standard
Deviation :!: . 525' ±1 .336'
of Errors
6 -7
r6/l
The coordinate table on the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project
Horizontal and Vertical Control Diagram (Figure 6.1) lists the
project, MSL and MLLW datum values for each control point.
From the information gathered to date, the relative accuracy of
elevation values should be within :!:2.5 feet.
The differences between elevations shown on the topographic
mapping done by COE and MSL or MLLW datums can be found as
follows:
MSL elevation = (Elevation from COE map) + (4.02) + (Vertical
Position Shift of nearest station*)
MLLW elevation = (Elevation from COE map) + (13.63) + (Vertical
Position Shift of nearest station*)
6. 5 Conclusion
The new adjustment provides coordinated stations that fit well
together. Future surveys based on the new coordinates will
have more consistency in position deviations. Previous mapping
and P-line surveys based on the old station values will have
errors but the errors will only be relative to the datum and
should therefore not impact design work based on them. Also,
most of the previous pre-design surveys were performed to
relatively low-or·der specifications and internal errors will
present as much relative discrepancy as datum errors. All
future work should be based on the new values as listed on the
control diagram included as part of this report.
ition Shift of the nearest station can be found
by cross-referencing the values in Table 6.2 with the plotted
location of the points as shown on the Control Diagram
(Figure 6.1).
6 -8
r6/1
It is recommended that a new, stronger control network be
surveyed for all future design work. It is suggested here that
specifications for horizontal control should not be less than NGS
Second-order and that the new network should be based on
stations tied together with first-order vertica I observations. A
first-order level line should be run from the tidal area to the
lake area and these observations should be included in the
future network adjustment. The US KH/COE control work
performed in 1979 and the R&M control work performed in 1983
should be included in the future adjustment, but respective
weighting should be applied based on the specification of the
surveys. The current network configuration is relatively weak,
consequently the new observations should be designed to
strengthen the network by including balanced quadrilaterals.
6 -9
r29/i
7.0-BASIN WATER YIELD
Streamflow data has been collected by the U.S. Geological S~rvey at the
Bradley Lake outlet since October 1957 and at the Middle Fork and Upper
Bradley River sites since October 1979. However, there are several
problems with the existing data. Anomalies exist in the Bradley River
data due to runoff from Nuka Glacier switching basins in late 1970 or early
1971. The data base for the Middle Fork basin is very short, and must be
extended to match Bradley River records. The basin below Bradley Lake
outlet and Middle Fork Diversion has not been gaged at all, yet estimates
are necessary for instream flow purposes. Evaporation has to be
considered. Perhaps most importantly, the Bradley Lake basin may have
been undergoing a significant "land use" change, due to potentially large
changes in the amount of runoff available from the glaciers in the system ..
In the following sections, the logic used in modifying and extending
existing flow records will be presented. The resulting flow values will be
used in conducting power studies.
7.1 Nuka Glacier Runoff
The terminus of Nuka Glacier is located at the basin divide between
Bradley River and Nuka River. Field notes from the USGS indicate
that, from 1958 until 1971, only about 259o of the runoff from Nuka
Glacier was flowing into the Bradley River. However, the drainage
pattern of the subglacial channels changed as the glacier terminus
receded, so that by 1971 virtually all flow was going into the Bradley
River. In order to have comparable flow records for the periods
before and after the basin switch, records prior to 1971 must be
adjusted to include the flow previously going into the Nuka River.
In 1983, runoff from Nuka Glacier was again primarily flowing into the
Nuka River. However, it is assumed that the runoff from Nuka
Glacier will be flowing into Bradley Lake during the life of the
7 -1
r29/i
project. Due to lack of continuous runoff data from Nuka Glacier,
the COE attempted to adjust runoff records by estimating the
snowmelt runoff from Nuka Glacier in the following manner, as
reported in Design Memorandum No. 1 -Hydrology.
For the period October 1957 -September 1970, the Bradley River
basin area was reduced by 75 percent of the area of Nuka
Glacier (assuming that 75 percent of runoff from the glacier ran
into Nuka River, with the remaining 25 percent running into
Bradley River). Adjustments were then made for both the
estimated precipitation runoff and glacial melt flowing into Nuka
River. Precipitation runoff was estimated by first estimating the
glacial melt from all glaciers in the Bradley Lake basin using the
snow melt option of the Streamflow Synthesis and Reservoir
Regulation model (SSARR), and subtracting this from the
recorded flows, leaving only the precipitation runoff component
from Bradley Lake. The precipitaton runoff from Nuka Glacier
was then directly estimated using the drainage area ratio.
Glacial melt for Nuka Glacier was then estimated using the
SSARR model. Both the estimated precipitation runoff and
glacial melt flowing into Nuka River from Nuka Glacier were
added to the recorded flows at Bradley Lake. The adjusted
flows for the period June-October were used for the hydropower
studies, with the flow for November 1957 also adjusted due to
unusually warm temperatures. The flows were not adjusted for
the winter months (November through May), as it was assumed
that Nuka Glacier is resting on bedrock and that winter
precipitation falls as snow, so that neither baseflow nor rainfall
runoff came from Nuka Glacier dut·ing winter months.
The estimated flow added to the annual runoff for WY 1958 -WY 1970
averaged about 46 cfs. Subsequent data collected by the USGS at
the Upper Bradley River site (below Nuka River) indicate that this
estimate was too conservative. The annual runoff from Nuka Glacier
(measured at the Upper Br·adley site) has been 146 cfs, 153 cfs, and
174 cfs in Water Years 1980, 1981, and 1982, respectively, for an
estimated average annual runoff of 158 cfs. Virtually all runoff from
Nuka Glacier was flowing into Bradley River at this time. If basin
conditions had been the same as during WY 1958 -WY 1970, then 75°o
of this flow, or 119 cfs, would have been flowing into Nuka River,
considerably more than the 46 cfs estimated by the COE. However,
precipitation at Seward during Water Years 1980-1982 averaged
7 -2
r29/i
82.49 inches, as compared to 61.74 inches during Water Years
1958-1970. The ratio of Seward precipitation in WY 1958-1970 to that
of 1980-1982 is 0. 75. If the differences in glacier mass storage are
ignored, and allowing for changes in annual precipitation, the average
additional runoff from Nuka Glacier which should be added to Bradley
River flows during WY 1958-1970 is therefore estimated as 0.75 (119),
or 89 cfs, an increase of 43 cfs over the estimate by the COE. The
43 cfs was added to the annual runoff for Water Years 1958-1970, and
distributed as monthly flows based on the pattern estimated by the
COE. The revised monthly and annual flows are shown in Table 7 .1.
These records are revised again to reflect the year-to-year variation
of the glaciers (Section 8).
7. 2 Middle Fork Diversion
Estimates by the COE for monthly flows from the Middle Fork of the
Bradley River were made using only WY 1980 data. The estimates
were for the months of May through October, and were made using
the ratios of average monthly flows of Middle Fork and Bradley River.
The ratios have been revised using three years of data, and values
for all months of the year have been estimated.
The Middle Fork basin covers high altitude areas with a significant
glacierized area. Since no data are available for mass balance
changes in the glaciers of the Middle Fork basins or for WY 80-82 in
the Bradley basin, monthly flows were estimated based on flows in
Table 7.1. Monthly ratios comparing average monthly flows from the
Middle Fork to those from Bradley River were developed for three
flow ranges, with the ranges divided at the 33rd and 67th percentiles
of average monthly flow. The ratios were developed in the following
manner:
7 - 3
r29/11
TABLE 7.1
BRADLEY RIVER N[AR HOM[R
ADJUSTED FOR NUKA SWITCH
DRAINAGE AREA= 56.1 SQUARE MILES
ADJUSTED MONTHLY AND ANNUAL MEAN DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
J!2~r 0C_k Nov QgQ Jan Feb Ma_r illU: May ,!un Ju I Aug full! Annual
19')8 rt5 577 1 11 79 lj2 32 74 389 1378 1410 1692 4116 587
1959 ?.75 102 60 33 25 22 33 308 1055 1 1 Oil 1 1119 371
1960 181 l)lj 60 39 35 24 33 593 900 1 1 1094 572 1!03
1961 2119 111 lj 1/Y 199 1 Wl 42 30 436 9118 1361 11 G6 1258 512
1962 311 I 116 71 55 31 22 39 177 852 1101 881 500 351
1963 269 317 121 11 3 87 67 45 237 781 1512 1118 1 1228 525
19611 562 911 108 75 63 40 33 87 841 1227 1597 1151 4911
1965 lj/-1 1 lj() 8') 64 50 5? 75 1 3 1 655 1153 1227 1756 490
1966 :>9'..i 165 70 39 32 3 1 Ill 150 966 1146 2162 1819 6()lj
1967 525 611 Ll3 35 31 29 36 253 910 12111 1562 1802 5116
1968 231 224 136 99 91 105 62 30 •t 739 1140 1287 513 1115
1969 211 73 ,,, 3') 35 34 43 310 16"13 1 106') 723 1189
19"/0 1900 211 239 118 1 16 109 103 331 895 1 1111 0 740 631
19 71 197 382 76 LJ5 36 31 3 1 115 6111 13911 1262 507 396
1972 376 108 5~ 32 20 17 17 141 517 1172 1378 1019 406
19"13 111 3 123 56 34 26 24 28 128 600 918 870 908 346
._J 19l4 515 1"/3 5il 32 23 19 23 227 551 860 1000 1501 421
1975 3116 2211 112 55 113 311 30 355 1035 1068 861! 850 1120
19-16 4211 118 ')2 39 32 26 41 206 813 1107 1153 1293 4Li3
J;:. FJr! 1!20 1114 312 326 306 178 119 354 995 1653 20119 6116 652
19/8 40l 70 3 l 311 40 42 56 291 -(55 1081 1182 959 1115
19"/9 572 161 lOll LJ3 30 2·r 31 290 712 1 0011 1883 1357 521
1980* 11B 1111 e·· 67 81 -,I, 58 326 936 1332 1304 897 5611 -)
1981* 7/9 150 1 ]() 233 160 170 310 788 908 11190 1643 885 6110
1982* 298 251 98 52 73 1!5 37 138 677 1107 9011 1780 456
* He co r'ded
r29/i
1. Monthly flow ratios for each month of the year (except April),
were computed for Water Years 1980, 1981 and 1982, comparing
average monthly flow from the Middle Fork to that at. the Bradley
Lake outlet.
2. Monthly flow duration curves were derived for each month for
Bradley River, using average monthly flow instead of average
daily flow.
3. The percentiles for Water Years 1980-1982 were noted. If the
three flows recorded for each month fell into different flow
ranges, the appropriate ratios were applied to those flow ranges.
If two values fell into one flow range, the flow ratios were
averaged for that range, and engineering judgment used for the
range with the missing flow ratio. The ratios used are shown in
Table 7.2.
4. The 3 values of flow ratios for months were then applied to the
22 years of record 1n which Middle Fork flows were not
recorded.
5. Flow for April was assumed to be 4 cfs, based on recorded flows
from 1980-1982.
The estimated average monthly flows for the Middle Fork Bradley
River from 1958-1979 are shown in Table 7.3, together with recorded
values for Water Years 1980-1982.
7.3 Lower Bradley River
Estimates of flows from the unregulated portion of Bradley River are
necessary for assessing in stream flow impacts. The unregulated
portion of Bradley River covers about 17.95 sq. mi., and includes the
7 - 5
r29/ q 1
TABLE 7.2
MIDDLE FORK/BRADLEY
MONTHLY RUNOFF RATIOS
Bradley River Estimated Bradley River Estimated
Flow Range Middle Fork Flow Range Middle Fork
Month (cfs) Ratio Month (cfs) Ratio
0-346 . 125
October 347-550 . 100 April All Flows 4 cfs
551+ .075
0-120 .100 0-191 .055
November 121-219 .060 May 192-318 .045
220+ . 110 319+ .035
0-63 . 125 0-763 .100
December 64-109 . 115 June 764-927 .100
11 0+ .050 928+ .090
0-38 . 125 0-1118 .110
January 39-71 . 110 July 1119-1327 .130
72+ .075 1328+ . 150
0-34 . 150 0-1157 . 125
February 35 69 . 125 August 1158-1457 .135
70+ .080 1458+ .110
0-30 . 100 0-813 . 105
March 31-42 . 115 Sept. 814-1247 .120
43• .070 1248+ .085
Bradley River flow ranges determined by 33rd and 67th percentiles of monthly flow
duration curves.
7 -6
r29/ s 1
TABLE 7.3
MIDDLE FOR~IVERSION FLOWS
(Based on ratios developed for Bradley River flows
adjusted for Nuka Glacier switching·lf)
'!'.Qi!J: Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar M.I !:t!Y Jun J!.!l Aug ~gg
1 Q '.>!3 ~9 611 6 6 ~ 4 11 111 126 2111 188 47
19')9 311 10 8 4 II 2 4 14 93 11 3 127 113
1960 23 9 8 II 4 2 II 21 90 152 137 60
1961 3 1 9 9 15 9 5 4 15 85 204 157 107
1%2 3~ 12 13 6 5 2 II 10 8~ 121 110 53
19(>3 34 35 6 8 7 5 4 11 78 227 163 1 II 7
19611 112 9 12 6 8 5 4 5 134 160 176 138
1965 118 8 10 7 6 4 4 7 66 150 166 1LI9
1966 115 10 8 4 5 4 4 8 87 1119 238 15~
1967 53 6 5 4 5 3 4 11 91 161 1 72 153
1968 29 25 7 7 7 7 II 111 74 1118 1711 54
1 <)(,9 35 7 5 II lj 4 II lli 151 231 1 3 3 76
Jg-(() 1 i,3 1 3 12 9 9 8 II 12 90 172 190 78
1971 25 42 9 5 5 4 4 6 611 209 170 53
197? 38 11 7 11 3 2 II 8 52 152 186 122
1973 41 7 7 4 4 2 II -I 60 101 109 109
-..J Jg-(lj 113 10 6 II 3 2 II 10 55 95 125 128
19/5 113 25 6 6 5 4 4 12 93 117 1()8 102
1976 112 12 -I 11 5 2 4 9 81 122 1114 110
-..J 1 9 1-1 112 116 16 211 24 12 II 12 90 2118 225 68
1978 111 7 5 lj 5 5 II 13 76 119 160 115
l<JIY 43 10 12 5 5 3 lj 1 3 71 110 207 115
1980"* 98 35 9 5 5 4 11 lLI 85 208 180 115
19131** 51 8 ~ 17 9 7 II 211 92 211 183 813
19132** l~ l.l u ~ _2 _2. __.!.! __li ___fli .1!!!.! l_ll l36
Ave rage 46 19 8 7 6 4 4 12 83 162 162 101
" Nuka Glacier basin switclling assumed to occur after WY 19-/0.
** Recorded monthly average~
r29/i
portion of the basin below the Bradley Lake outlet and below the
proposed Middle Fork diversion site. The basin is steep and rocky,
with a thin soil mantle in the lower reaches. No discharge data are
available except for isolated discharge measurements. Consequently,
estimates of average monthly flows were made using data from Barbara
Creek, located approximately 35 miles to the southwest. Barbara
Creek covers 20.7 sq. mi., contains no glaciers or lakes and ponds,
and has a similar basin elevation and aspect.
Flows for lower Bradley River were estimated using only the basin
area below the Bradley Lake outlet and the Middle Fork diversion.
Flows generated above these two points are included as Table 7.1 and
7 .3. Average monthly flows at Barbara Creek were multiplied by the
ratio of average annual precipitation and drainage areas of lower
Bradley River and Barbara Creek in the following manner:
Adjustment
Ratio =
Area {Bradley)
X
Area (Barbara)
17.95 sq. mi.
= X
20.7 sq. m1.
Ave. Ann. Prec. {Bradley)
Ave. Ann. Prec. (Barbara)
67 in.
= 0.62
93.6 1n.
Average annual precipitation for each basin was estimated using the
Water Resources Atlas, U.S. Forest Service ( 1979). Recorded values
for Barbara Creek were used from June 1972 through September 1982.
The streamflow for Barbara Creek was extended back to October 1957
us1ng linear regression with Ninilchik River and Anchor River. The
ratio developed above was then applied to the simulated monthly
flows, except in certain months and years where the data did not
appear reasonable based on precipitation records at Homer or on
runoff patterns. The following adjustments were primarily for. high
flow periods and during breakup:
7 -8
r29/i
a. Flows estimated based on the ratio May flow/June flow (Barbara
Creek flows) times the estimated June flows at lower Bradley
River. Technique was used for May, 1958-1972.
b. Based on data from Anchor River at Anchor Point. Ratios of
monthly flow to average monthly flow of Anchor River at Anchor
Point were multiplied by the average monthly flow of lower
Bradley River for specific periods. Technique was used for the
following periods. Oct-Nov, WY 1958; Dec-Feb, WY 1961 and
WY 1963.
c. Technique (b) was used with data from Anchor River near
Anchor Point during Dec-April, in both WY 1968 and WY 1970.
d. Technique (b) was used with data from Bradley River during
Nov, WY 1968; Oct-Nov, WY 1970; and Nov, WY 1971.
The estimated monthly flows are shown in Table 7 .4. These flows are
estimates for planning purposes, and may be refined once data become
available from the lower Bradley River gage installed by the USGS in
May 1983.
7. 4 Evaporation
Evaporation
significance,
evaporation
from Bradley Lake was evaluated
using simplified methods. The
pan to Bradley Lake is located
to determine its
nearest long -term
at the Matanuska
Agricultural Experiment Station. The Matanuska station has a
through long-term average precipitation of 17.94 inches for May
September (U.S. Dept. of Commerce).
7 -9
m6/hh2
TABLE 7.4
EST!MA TED AVERAGE MONTHLY FLOW:
LOWER BRADEY RIVER, UNREGULATED AREA
BELOW BRADLEY LAKE DAMSITE AND MIDDLE FORK DIVERSION
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul s
1958 125 190 40 36 23 28 65 113 182 103 63 53
1959 51 50 24 32 23 19 29 1 1 0 1 77 99 52 50
1960 52 51 29 36 25 20 28 11 5 1 86 1 04 58 63
1961 52 42 41 75 37 22 44 112 181 104 59 99
1962 55 53 27 34 24 22 39 115 185 99 55 38
1963 49 55 25 44 61 90 30 104 167 102 47 54
1964 61 20 24 38 29 16 13 149 240 115 61 50
1965 60 71 27 23 15 29 40 1 1 5 186 120 54 88
1966 59 23 13 27 26 18 24 125 202 113 74 94
1967 75 57 34 35 21 13 16 107 172 102 56 69
1968 48 123 48 45 32 18 38 105 169 94 41 33
1969 42 27 15 24 17 13 16 87 141 91 38 30
1970 270 58 46 49 45 52 43 94 152 98 46 47
1971 47 76 22 29 21 16 1 6 112 180 1 04 6 7 48
1972 50 33 29 39 27 18 1 7 7 1 1 1 4 8 7 34 58
1973 64 32 18 13 11 10 16 66 148 92 35 43
1974 41 30 22 17 13 12 21 97 135 53 22 52
1975 66 59 29 16 13 11 11 80 213 139 40 66
1976 80 30 20 15 13 11 ?? 87 184 106 35 117
1977 105 100 74 107 80 41 33 114 202 144 97 36
1978 107 32 14 14 15 12 15 99 180 82 34 41
1979 133 56 52 28 18 13 27 96 151 82 69 39
1980 156 175 52 23 36 24 29 127 215 131 104 76
1981 134 45 28 112 61 52 42 205 160 120 61 45
1982 58 69 36 29 20 18 59 77 29 99
Average 82 62 32 37 29 24 28 107 174 102 53 60
7 -10
r-29/i
Evapotranspiration estimates for Alaskan location have been computed
by Patrie and Black (1968). They used the Thornthwaite equation
(Thornthwaite, 1948) to compute potential evapotranspiration (PET),
which is the water loss from fully vegetated land surfaces always
abundantly supplied with soil moisture. The estimated PET values for
Matanuska and Bear Cove (head of Kachemak Bay) are 19.76 inches
and 17.47 inches, respectively.
Patrie and Black compared estimates of PET between high-elevation
stations and nearby low-elevation stations. Their data suggested a
decrease of about 1 inch of PET per year per 500 feet of elevation
difference. As there is about a 1, 130-foot difference in elevation
between the Bear Cove site and the maximum pool level at Bradley
Lake, this would result in a difference of 2.26 inches in annual PET
between the two site. Using the elevation relationship, this results
in an estimate of 15.2 inches annual PET at Bradley Lake.
Comparing the Thornthwaite estimate of PET to the actual historic
evaporation at Matanuska, it is seen that the evaporation is less than
the PET estimate. The estimate of evaporation at Bradley Lake
should this be reduced by a similar proportion.
Estimated pan evaporation at Bradley Lake =
Pan evaporation at Matanuska
[PET at Bradley Lake]
PET at Matanuska
= (17.94/19.76) (15.2)
= 13.8 inches pan evaporation per year.
7 -11
r29/i
The rate of evaporation from small areas is greater than that from
large areas. Consequently, a pan coefficient of 0. 7 is normally
recommended for converting from pan evaporation to lake or reservoir
evaporation. The resulting annual evaporation estimate for Bradley
Lake is 9. 7 inches. The monthly distribution of evaporation is
assumed to follow that at Matanuska station. The resulting monthly
evaporation estimates are tabulated in Table 7. 5, together with
estimated average monthly reservoir elevation and surface area and
the adjustment to streamflow. As expected with the cool, damp
climate and the cold water of Bradley Lake, evaporation from the
reservoir is minimal.
Flow adjustments for
previously presented.
below Bradley Lake,
evaporation have not been made in records
The str'3amgage site on the Bradley River is
and thus already has evaporation subtracted
from the flow. Additional evaporation due to the increased surface
area of the lake will be quite small.
7 -12
r29/ rl
TABLE 7.5
BRADLEY LAKE EVAPORATION ESTIMATES
Average
Inches of Average Lake Lake Surface Average Loss
Month Evaporation Elevation ( ft) Area (acres) of Flow (cfs)
May 2.4 1125 2810 9
June 2.3 1130 2920 9
July 2.2 1150 3350 10
August 1.6 1170 3570 8
September 1.2 1150 3350 6
7 -13
r29/i
7. 5 References
1. Patrie, J. H. and Black, P. E. 1968. Potential Evapotran~piration and
2.
3.
Climate in Alaska by Thornthwaite' s Classification, Pacific
Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Research Paper,
PNW-71, Juneau, Alaska, 28 p.
Thornthwaite, C.W. 1948. An Approach Toward a Rational
Classification of Climate, Geogr. Rev. 38: 55-94.
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Alaska District. 1981. Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project, Design Memorandum · No. 1,
Hydrology ..
4. U.S. Department of Commerce. Annual. Climatological Data, Alaska,
Annual Summary, Environmental Science Services Administration,
Asheville, North Carolina.
5. U.S. Forest Service. 1979. Water Resources Atlas for USDA Forest
Service Region X.
6. U.S. Geological Survey. Annual. Water Resources Data for Alaska.
7 -14
r29/k
8.0 -GLACIER HYDROLOGY
8.1 Introduction
This section addresses the problem of the effect of glaciers on the
proposed Bradley Lake hydroelectric power project. It does so with
little field data, and is therefore severely limited. Since most North
American hydrologists are relatively unfamiliar with the effects of
glaciers on runoff, some general remarks about glaciers are first
introduced, followed by several case histories in parts of the world
where long-term effects of glaciers on water supply are much better
known than in Alaska. This provides the perspective for the
discussion of relevant Alaskan glaciers, and finally for the Bradley
Lake glaciers themselves, and their effect on runoff since stream
gauging began in 1958.
8.2 Glaciers and Water Supply
Glacierized basins possess water reservoirs in solid form, which
regulate runoff in unique ways. On the short time scale, there is
the beneficial regulation due to the fact that the dry weather that
would produce low streamflows in an unglacierized basin usually
generates copious glacier melt water even in lightly glacierized basins
(Figure 8.1). On the long-time scale there is the less beneficial
effect of depletion of the ice reservoir that rna kes prediction of future
water supply difficult by conventional techniques.
Climate is clearly the ultimate control on glacier behavior, but before
discussing it, the response of a glacier itself needs to be described.
Consider the simplest climate change, a sudden and permanent one
less favorable for the glacier. The glacier. will respond by shrinking
its ablation area (that lower half or so of the glacier where melting
exceeds snow accumulation) until its net annual balance of ice mass
8 -l
OWN.
CICil
DATE.
SCALE.
• E
~
c: 2 10
::e
.c .. ucod• A.
•&ohr R
0 N Fk. Nook•oc\ R.
~~----------~.~o~----------.,~o----------~.J~o-----------.~.o~----------..s~o----------~60
Variance of summer runoff versus percent of glacierized areas
for several drainage basins in the North Cascades
(Krimmel and Tangborn,l974)
[
Figure a. 1 ] ::~~~
PRO.l.NQ
....___________.. 1--------iDWI.NQ
R&.M CONSULTANTS, INC.
•NGtN•••• ••GU:Ma••T• ~ANN«~-•w.-vavDIIa
8 - 2
r29/k
lost is zero. At this point the glacier is in equilibrium with the new
climate. An important practical point is how long this attainment of
equilibrium requires, because during the equilibration tim~ the glacier
continues to produce runoff out of storage, although at a steadily
decreasing rate. The answer depends upon the details of the flow of
ice from the upper, "accumulation" area of the glacier down to the
ablation area. This is only partially understood. Theory suggests
that typical response times may be on the order of a century for
glaciers such as those 1n the Bradley Lake basin. Therefore water
might be produced from storage for many decades after permanent
climate change.
However, the climate trends of the last century indicate that this
simple scenario is extremely improbable. Starting from 1900, for
example, the annual temperature of the Northern Hemisphere has not
been steady, but instead has been steadily increasing up to about
1940 (Figure 8.2). This increase in temperature, if continued, would
tend to remove water from ice storage until the glacier disappeared,
although at a steadily decreasing rate. However, a marked cooling of
the Northern Hemisphere began in the 1940's and continued until the
mid 1960's, when temperatures became relatively stable. Obviously,
the scenario is rather complex, and today's cooler temperatures
suggest that significantly less water is being produced from storage
than in the early 1950's, regardless of the uncertainty in glacier
response time.
Unfortunately, Figure 8. 2 represents only a Northern Hemisphere
average temperature trend, while local temperature trends can be
rather different and more complex. Nor is temperature itself a
unique indicator of glacier behavior, with precipitation and other
factors being equally important. For perspective on the Br·adley Lake
problem, case histories where more data are available (and
interpretation further advanced than in Alaska) have been examined.
8 -3
I I tSl I CD 1: I I i I iOl I I ......
I
tSl l (J)
til l.IJ
Ol
I
......
...... ....J <
I
:X
tSl
0 z
U1 <
Ol ...... w
0::
:::1 ......
(5I <
...r 0::
Ol w .... 0..
:::.!: w ......
....J (5I
< (T)
:::1 Ol z ""!' z <
tSl l.IJ
N 0::
Ol w ...... :I:
0..
(J) ....
tSl ::E -w
Ol :I:
z .....
0:: w
t$l :I:
l:s1 ......
m 0::
0 z -' I !$1
I (J)
(I) ....
I
I
{,';) I
CD I
CD I -
I ISl Ill IS1 (,.) lSI Ill
~ . . ~ ~ .... 0 -I I
I
[ J
F. B. OWN.
GRill CKD. R&M CONSULTANTS, INC. Figure 8.2 PRO.J.Nil .HGIN •• RS oecu.oateTs •t.ANN«•• •u•v••o•• DATE.
OWG.NQ SCALE.
8 -4
r29/k
8.3 Case Histories
8.3. 1 Switzerland -Aletsch Gletscher and Grande Dixence
Aletsch Glacier I the largest in Switzerland with an area of
? 65 km-1 has been very carefully studied for many years
(Anonymous, 1983). The glacier-climate relationships, and
the effect of the glacier on the hydrology of the 66%
in Figure 8.3. glacierized basin, are summarized
Figures 8.3.d shows that the glacier
relatively stable since the early 1950's.
volume has been
The records in the
figure have been divided into pre-and post-1952 categories,
and the results summarized in Table 8.1.
TABLE 8.1
ALETSCH GLACIER WATER BALANCES
Basin Averages
Precipitation
Water from Ice Storage
Runoff
1920-1952
2.22 m/yr
0.40
2.42
1952-1977
2.36 m/yr
-0.05
2.08
Prior to 1952 Aletsch Glacier was supplying about 17°6 of the
basin runoff from ice loss, but after 1952 the average was
zero or even negative. The loss of runoff from ice melting
was partially compensated for by a 696 increase in
precipitation 1 but the runoff still decreased by 12%.
The decreased runoff 1 rom Aletsch Glacier is fairly typical of
conditions in the Swiss Alps. The 50°6 glacierized Grande
Oixence hydroelectric project, the largest in Switzerland,·
8 -5
OWN.
CKO.
.,
Summet eir t.,-,oerarures
a.....-o~-............... -i ........
JWo,o,A\lQOalJ1r--"-...-~
1'101-19600!'1'<:-;.--...
bl
SWiss climat1· ,864-1965
................ ._. .... _._tal -Aif tempeniR.H .t in ~c
C)
Hydrologte regime •n me Aletsch
reoton 1920/21-1976t n
~ ..... ~r~;_kwu.~~
l.~-.»~
Ct~-MA,iSA 8""-.o<tH.I..._ Swf.-..,._
ltsllm" ............. ~
~d-~
Prec..,.taoon !Nl
Run-oH !AI
V•riation in •torl9• UU
a...e ..,..._. 01--~ (-...... _...,...
~..,.oi21C11'100W.,..ea.MdD,-
~ ........ ,,
R • /1.1 ~!A-+ ~H
__ .., _ _,.,._ 19151.1/SJ-t!IIIBJJO'
N • 222.3 em
A • 20l.6 em
A ... -0.3 em
!Balanced tegtme)
dl
Variations 1n mass of the
Aletsch gtac.an;: 1922 -t9n
fqttl ...... _ .. [)Oft!£ 81 1oo'1QII l Oct-
192;2 .... ~1'ft"d.,.-,lt!oc•-
IIbt<)'!oc:.,_.,.._.,..,. .. ol
J9611m"
Climatic, hydrologic, and glacial
trends in the Swiss Alps.
(Anonymous, 1983)
R&M CONSULTANTS. INC.
DATE. aNOtNaa~~t• o•aLoot•Y• .._ANN••• eu•v•vo•• [
SCALE.
8 - 6
]
OWG.NQ
F. B.
GRID. Figure 8.3
PROJ.NQ
r29/k
8.3.2
suffered on unexpected 13% shortfall of water during its first
14 years of operation up to 1979, because of the loss of water
production from ice storage (Bezinge, 1979). The mapping of
terminal positions of Swiss glaciers indicates that, on the
average, the glaciers are presently stable (Anonymous, 1983,
and Figure 8.4).
Norway
Norway has a large glaciological program in connection with
hydropower development. A product is shown in Figure 8. 5,
which shows the long-term water production from storage from
the glaciers in the 24% glacierized basin Oyreselv in western
Norway (Haakensen and others, 1982). The negative of the
slope of the curve in Figure 8.5 is the glacier balance on a
yearly basis, (i.e. a positive slope from Figure 8.5 indicates
a negative mass balance). The figure is based on only
6 years of balance data, which was used to determine a
balance model from climatic data 1n order to reconstruct
balance for the missing years. A break in slope is evident in
the 1940's. Since then glacier balance has continued
negative, so that water has still tended to be produced from
storage, but at a smaller rate.
Assuming the model is valid, these glaciers have produced
only about 2°o of the runoff over the time period indicated,
and their smoothing effect on yearly runoff has been only
moderate. This is illustrated by Figure 8.6, which shows
what the runoff would have been had the glaciers been stable
each year. This only moderate influence of glaciers may be
typical of maritime climates (as opposed to drier
environments) due to the larger flow of water through the
hydrologic system.
8 -7
Variations de Ia position des fronts gfaciaires dans tes Alpes Suisses
1890191 -1981182
~lambre des glaciers en crue et en d~crue, en pcurcents du nombre total des glaciers observes
100
75 -w "" (.)
; 5(1 z < > Q c
< ~ -~
OWN.
CKD.
DATE
, SCALE.
"'
E
0 c
-en -0 en
<D
'-. --·--------"
0
0
en en
<D ....-
0 -en
0 en -
0
N
0
M
0 -.:r -en
M en
0 0
<D I' --en en
1.0 <D
en en -
Variations in the positions of glacier termini
in the Swiss Alps, 1890/81 -1981/82
(Anonymous, 1983)
~'!':~-c;,~~-~~~.;T~~.r~,.!~= [
~---------------
Figure 8.4
8 - 8
0
<D
en
I' en
0 r~-0
i ! ; QJ I o
II! ~
25 ........ (1)
::l -0. :u (1)
0 m ~
50 c -4 (1)
(1) :u
::l m
"" > 75 -4 -
OWN. ----
CKD.
DATE.
SCAL.E
------
1Q5 m)
Joo~
+
100 l
+
100+
I
I
...!.
0
I '--1 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970
Accumulated extra runoff to the water gage no. 982 ¢yreselv
from the glacier Folgefonni during the period 1923-1972.
(Haakensen and others, 1982)
[ ;;.. C:,!'!.'~-~!:' ':.T~~-T"!!.~'o'!!::: [ Figure 8.5
J
8 -9
FB.
GRID.
PROJ NO
DWG.NO
OWN.
CKO.
DATE.
SCALE.
MEASURED
CORRECTED FOR GLACIER INFLUENCE
300
200
I ·' ~ I
1930
I I
I/
y
1950
·'
1960
Observed and glacier corrected annual runoff to the
water gage No. 982 ¢yreselv during the period 1923-1972
(Haakensen and others, 1982)
[ R&M CCNSULTANTS1 INC. Figure 8.6 .NO IN •• ,.. ca•aL.aateT• -"t..ANN··· aUIIIV.YD•e
8 -10
1970
l F. B.
GRID.
PROJ.NQ
OWG.NQ
r29/k
8.3.3
8.3.4
Pacific Northwest, U.S .A.
Figure 8. 7 shows the cumulative balances for the Thunder
Creek glaciers and for the South Cascade Glacier in basins
14.5% and 46% glacierized, both in the Cascade Mountains of
Washington (Tangborn, 1980a). The Thunder Creek glaciers
appear to have been storing, rather than releasing, ice since
the mid-1940's. South Cascade Glacier, however, has
continued to produce water from ice storage. This particular
difference in glacier balance is thought to be mainly due to
different glacier area-altitude distributions, rather than local
climate variations.
Since only recent glacier balance data are available, and only
from South Cascade Glacier, Figure 8. 7 represents a
reconstruction that is subject to serious uncertainty.
Nevertheless, Tangborn's approach is of great interest, and
later in this report it is applied to the Bradley Lake glaciers.
His idea is to attempt reconstruction of glacier balances by
comparing measured runoff with that from a nearby
unglacierized basin. These reconstructed balances are then
used to determine a balance -climate model, as done in
Norway and elsewhere.
Glacier Contribution to Long-Term Runoff
The idea of the production of water from glacier ice storage
is not new in North America, as illustrated by Table 8.2.
Several authors have recognized its importance. In addition
to the rivers cited, the effect of 0.49o glacierization also seems
to have a significant effect on runoff from the Columbia River
(Tangborn, 1980b).
8 -11
OWN.
CKO.
DATE.
SCALE.
"' w
~
0
V>
~
~
;!;
"'' w
u
z
" ;t
"' "' "' " ~
w
>
....
" ::;
~
:l
"
·0
-10 ~
I I
I
-20 ~
I
I
-30 I
I
I
-40 ~
I
-so~
I
I
_ .. r
-70 ~
THUNDER CRHK GLACIEnS
-----PRECIPITATION-TEMPERATURE
/ ~RUNOFF MODEL
~\/
"-,,
"-.. ,
\
'l /·~,
\•
MODEL
~ SOUTf' CASCADE GLACIER
PREC IPI T~T ION TEMPERATURE MODEL
MEASURED
~ \ ,,
I
~
I
~
I
I
I
-a~8L8_0 -----,.~.-o--~~,9~oo--~--,.~,o------,.~,o------,.~lo------,.~.-o-----,.~s~o----~,~.o~--~ .• ~,o~--~
i'EAA
Cumulative balances for the Thunder Creek glaciers (upper
curves) and South Cascade Glacier (lower curves) for the
1884-1974 period. The solid lines are cumulative annual
balances derived from the precipitation-temperature model.
The dashed curve for the Thunder Creek glaciers is from
balances calculated by the run-off model (1920-1974). The
dashed curve for south Cascade Glacier is from actual field
measurements of annual balance (1958-74). (Tangborn,l980a).
F. B.
R&M CCNSULTANTS1 INC. [ Figure 8.7 ] GRID.
aNGINaeiiJia CilaCJLOGIWTa ..._ANN··· aUJIV.YOJIW
PROJ.NQ
OWG.NQ
8 -12
r29/k
River
Upper North
Saskatchewan
Tanana
Susitna
8.3.5
TABLE 8.2
CONTRIBUTION OF GLACIER WASTING TO RUNO_FF,
NORTH AMERICAN RIVERS
96 Glacier
Time % Wasting
Interval Glacierization to Runoff Reference
1948-66 20 4 Henoch ( 1971)
(small) approx. 5 Anderson (1970)
1949-80 4 approx. 13 R&M and
Harrison (1981)
Summary
These case histories illustrate that a major climate shift
occurred around 1950, prior to which most glaciers had been
producing water out of ice storage. Since then less water
has been produced, but the pattern is complex, varying with
local conditions and glacier area -altitude distribution. For
a given amount of glacierization, glaciers seem to have less
impact on water supply when the setting is maritime and there
is heavy precipitation over all the basin. It seems evident,
on the basis of this large scale geographic experience, that
one cannot assume that glaciers will continue to produce water
out of storage decades into the future.
8 -13
r29/k
8.4 Glaciers of Alaska
Glacier balance data are available from the Brooks and Al?ska Ranges,
Southcentral, and Southeast Alaska. Most relevant are the data from
the Alaska Range and Southcentral Alaska. A large mass loss from
East Fork Glacier, (in the Susitna River basin) crudely estimated to
be an average of 50 m total between 1949 and 1980, indicates that
significant water production from glacier ice storage occurred then
(R&M and Harrison, 1981). However, the mass loss of Gulkana
Glacier, 80 km to the east, has been relatively small si nee
measurements began m 1966. This suggests that water production
was considerably larger during the earlier part of the 1949-1980
interval. In fact, the balance of G ul kana Glacier seems to have been
stable for the past few years, although the data are not yet
completely reduced or published (Larry Mayo, private communication).
Balance data potentially extremely useful for the Bradley Lake Project
come from Wolverine Glacier on the Kenai Peninsula, where
measurements began in 1966 (Meier and others, 1980). These data
show a strongly positive balance since 1976, which Mayo and Trabant
(1982) have analyzed in terms of a simple temperature model. This
model should be valid as long as the strong southerly air flow
responsible for these positive balances persists. In this model the
behavior of balance on temperature is complex and not even
monotonic. An important feature of this 72°o glacierized basin is that
although precipitation has been lost into ice storage since 1976, the
basin runoff has increased, because of the dominance of the increased
precipitation. We recall that precipitation also increased after 1952 on
Aletsch Glacier, but not sufficiently to compensate for the cessation
of water production from ice storage. This illustrates that when
considering runoff, the obvious question is not only how ice storage
varies, but whether it is accompanied by a change in precipitation.
8 -14
r29/k
The average water equivalent thickness change of the Bradley Lake
glaciers between 1952 and 1979 has been estimated from sequential
aerial photos. Details are in Appendix A. The loss amounts to
(68±90) x 108 ft3 , or an equivalent water thickness of 14±18 ft.
averaged over the glaciers. An important result is that although
Kachemak and Nuka Glaciers have retreated, the upper basins have
actually thickened. This suggests that the balances toward the end
of the 1952-1978 interval have actually been positive, despite the
cumulative negative balance. This seems consistent with the
Wolverine Glacier observations, and with those from Gulkana Glacier
that suggest little recent water from ice storage. In a longer
perspective, it is possible that the switch to comparatively stable
glacier balances that were typical of the late 1940's or early 1950's in
much of the Northern Hemisphere may have occurred slightly later in
Central and Southern Alaska. At any rate, when correcting the
Bradley Lake flow records for the effects of glaciers, it is expected
that the effects will be stronger in the earlier part of the records.
This is probably a reasonably safe assumption that can be used as a
check on the more detailed Tangborn balance model described in the
following sections.
8. 5 Tangborn Runoff-Precipitation Model
Tangborn (1980) has proposed a runoff-precipitation (RP) model for
estimating long-term glacier balances by relating measured climatic
variables with differences in runoff between a glacierized basin and
nearby nonglacierized basin. Before applying the model to the
Bradley Lake basin, the model was tested against the measured annual
mass balances at Wolverine Glacier, located 25 mi (40 km) northeast of
Seward and 75 miles (120 km) northeast of the Bradley Lake basin.
8 -15
r29/k
The Wolverine Creek basin is heavily glaciated, with 72<?6 of the
9.5 sq. mi. (24.9 sq. km.) basin covered by Wolverine Glacier.
Annual mass balance data on Wolverine Glacier exist since Water Year
1966 (Mayo and Trabant, 1982). The basin streamflow was gaged
from Water Year 1967 to 1978. Two nonglacierized basins (Ship Creek
and West Fork Olson Bay Creek) were used to calibrate the model.
Seward was selected as the most applicable weather station, as it is a
coastal station, measuring the major weather patterns from the Gulf of
Alaska. The locations of the drainage basins and the weather station
are shown on Figure 8.8.
The mountain drainage basins used in this analysis are similar in most
respects except that one basin is heavily glacierized and the others
are not. If glacier cover were the only difference, changes in annual
runoff could be attributed solely to the loss or gain in mass of the
glaciers in the Wolverine Creek basin.
precipitation between the basins make
variable necessary (Tangborn, 1980a).
However, differences in
the inclusion of another
The hydrologic balance of each basin is:
s = p 9 g
and
Where:
s =
p =
R =
E =
Subscript g =
Subscript n =
E g (glacierized basin)
(nonglacierized basin)
change in water storage (all forms)
precipitation
runoff
net evaporation -condensation
glacierized basin
nonglacierized basin
8 -16
( 1 )
(2)
CX>
I
1-'
-...J
. ... , ' . . . .-i ;·' ' . . .. " ' , , ., .,h·. ·: /.·.·: \·, ~ ·~2 .. :;';>~:.···•····;: ·\~" \~f~ .. ;,,:: .. ~~-~>:··:~~,;~~':::::.\;,~:.f.:;;.~~-:::.J:;.··;r;,;-.<,"~0<;·~~',~p'"(Ji.;~·:. { .
I ~ 'f ( '• f' ~ •"' • I ~~ j, , --~:'..-"'' ',,· _ ~":.\."'/-;:_, ~'.':: ...-~")~1 1 •, / /..,c
1
,
1 ~,...'---' -~i'orl '1'''"1"~ , , '•" ,II( I,, ..... , .. .ff.l~.-~ f;_, .' ·,· ·1' ···:-c·~"-'""·--,·-·A 1"1~C "'' li' ·-' "'M ·t····---~) ·''\~-i• ''1)'. ·"'-lc" ""\. \ v '·~" /~'·:f'~J~~:;.>~~'"·U·"~;.;.G, __ "~'nl-~;---"" {----:..f~':;1r,(0 ,~-:-!,..0.,\(u');,
• s ~u~" it-...\"(· ~ ,.r~ f--J ,[::r f::C{tl;~/, ~:;_, ~..;...::(.~.:J'-0 .. -) ' ~.~ .-v' ',' -;;,'"..-,~·rf: _.' ~~~ . '
(I) I 0 I 0 I 0 I , .. ···· C!i"':E I
r !" p ;z I I -:'· · ~ ·ti '~l..'t k
I!
~ I ..
\
D
~
~
.n ao
~2 ~UJ =c
~!:i a•
'2
= ... .UJ cw
I ·-~2 ll :p
---
0 • ~ z p
....
'TI -· co
"0
~
0
~ z p
c ..
CD
Q)
• Q)
.., ,.,
:!! !JI p
.
I· ANCHoHAc'F SHIP CREEK'} ,, ,---~-c.1 .•-·)1 r.•·' •f·/"•1 •') ,_-··t--:-,··-·•-;.' · ··N ,,;,;;,",''"'"'~~.;;:J 1' ,-, .':,~-</~.'.'a:L.::~~.:~~/:j~~;'; · ,~_:-;;:.:i()':(,,~'/)-;·,"',·..-::;i'o·:.·:.··;·.:!;,:;-,.:_,;t.:'.,__ ., , :: )'·i
I ., .
I
I I
'. "'{j 1~· ·~~'.;~):, ·~-'--, /1'. .~ ,-·.,-.~ ~:~ ,IC' •, ;:P,). ·.> /,p:.~~~~/ ~~~"" ):,c,;.:-:_''>'c",f ,, l. '·.·,: ,'; ;':.' ~;.1 ·~· / •.' ',\ ""'''''" , ' :.• "
_ ~ ~~-'·" ( rt \ -"-( "...,7-..'i / ~? ~\\'".-'J( ~ , ') lj ~~/~--·-:;"-_;;---I ~ c"-{~ I .-~ 'H i'l v 1 U" • I 1-<, 1 1 \,·, ;--;~ r, :.• ,: 1"' Jl=-~-f-() ~ ~ --\~"'~',,!,'.-t}r.f\.o: () 11!..('.:~ I .. : ~ 7~---::;.'./1"'"1) Got ... / I~~~ _,\~ / -~q .,. ' t•1 l "! ( .. /.'I'
•• ~ "• "" ,, 4 '-~·;·::' ~:· -;:' -~·;. •:,;;~, .'.';,'• t \ :r•_,·;~2 ~J-;, ' ~:\{~()::'; . >: '"'' '-'~.'> c•-J :"f-. ,.l, I"\~. :'} . '' r, !•; ,·,. ' ~
•h•• ,.,__.!-\"-'i ~,:" ~ ~~ ~?."',.., \~1 /~\./J<\I//1-j~¥·~,, (,t:~.-/ ... '1"'(:_.-_'...., t'...-'_..-t,\.:\''r • .--l, ,•~f,,ljr1(\~ •'t;.
.----~~~~~· · ~;"··'"'-"·~:"" ·~·---t-?~r.; "L·<'ih~~-~ U'"""~<t:J-J~{;-'--·~· ·:··~ f,:•' }if-"._ .. · ;-/:11 ( ., ~'. ._, :-: ... ""~" /--.. .-._ \/' >. "''' 0i;:ft1·~· ·-·~-'' o>f j T.Yf ,.,f' / ' , r I \ l 1 ' •>
• l i ~ . -. ····'· -r •\ .-::··' .. ~· \ ' " ----,';, '"''':' / "" _.·,, \-.. ~ ' ,, ,, ,-v ' ' ·:~r ·,' r' ,, ' '"'"" 11
'
1
" \) ,,
• ::' • 'D, I'' \ o. ~, -~~ "S ~ "'') '''-":,~~/.-'"'<~ • \ ,'), '~ 'l 'J .~ '"' ·~·:,·' '' -' "' ,.", ' \', < ,J r f • .......... ~ , \ .\ ;2~;-· ~-·"''"""•'"··~<?oj -L I' ';fl) ~ •'·•~" l .t ·)•1 .,., ·•··· 1 .-.
)'-i \ .;--
~· :-)·''·' '"" " ',('",~ .:. ~ !·,,,./. ...... } ... ~.-[? . ..-.~,. j ''""~',) '·.:I.i.)· ;::· ;_ ...... ··-; . ';'-·' ' '\
• ••• J \ 1._ '-..,. 11 /""" "' ..... l ..... ' ' ~ <1, jt 'J -1... ..
.
. ,.,:::·· .. •. , , c:.' , ~--""· .)N:' ·.: .. t(· /'" ,,.,;-~l·" §,fiA~oJ•~;.· · ·WEST FORK.{·/ 1f\' ,,.,,.
• ; • ~ '1. I ~( , 1 ~ _ 11, • ~ WHf PflUJ
0
' " \ ~I< r v • 17 /1
1 • ., 'i .,, · " \ ·' y ·~·, J ' Y • ,~;;,,;-;, /j-Jx :<") .·.':,· '":'',.·OLSEN BAY CREEK•·; ,
1
. . • . , 1 . .., t.: <. ...... • ., ~ .-w /( )/ (, , . . \:" JV · r '".-'· '' ,• ·,\•', ,.). './ '\:"'"~1 /),c, f:'"(m'·'.''', • ---=,:-;~;;;--" ,,\I j-·
\,. ~ \. , ~ ,., .._,.,,,,,,. ~~· ,,,,, ~. ";p:i r /' ·, ,1,1._0 ) )'•'"" •;,, c;.:J., l I_; c•'' 1 ' ,· '' \ ( lh ~ / ~·• n '\ .J."" :.. ' -" t' V " \I ..J V • '-' J \ ~ ,!1 ' ,. ( ~ " \ -1' . ~ ~ / ( ,, • ' :-. " I' 0 I I c' c~ riultJ I I} I yu / I ·'
) "• \ • -.-,,1• "'" ., u • ' · ;J f\. I_ , ' , ! '
I
(
•\)
\•
··:-· I'
J ' ' I ..
·-::-::·o..,. ' ·· G ·1· .. 1~··oey ...... /) ~ ~.,~.:.t~<:~·~wOLVERINE·,m:vu,·lm.t./ \[!:,(!IJNIJ O" l· .· ·
·;:-: •• t:::. ;~,;~~" <1~·~n,., 'r· ... : 1•• :-~· ,.:;, '"'>:) ~ S')'"'"""''"' r ,,,·'.-'
1 <;''~'"''' ·) . \ ) ,. ' ..... · ....... --..... I ,•, ~~GLACIER '(-I ·"'"""''' "•' ' I . -.. ' " '. ·:·'f''j'"' ;::· \~~::(:--......... -~· •. /-<-\~)· O· ' \ ,., •• >l''' I I'' ','' .
·r· r ·1 1 ·"" .\ !_ . ~ ~~o,-J : ... '-• "·:·<'.' r,' J''.'~·;\...,..!7~·&\ ( 1 ~'' \'
,. \ ,, 1. \ \ \\'""''' , ')·· -~-,.V) \ •, • ... '1 ··;'/· ~ ) . '"'"'", " I
, • \. I •• ( ~, ..... ~:~::.-~-·'"·z-:.~;· -~. .. .'·{:"·/ ...• -~. ';· I ~\ J . ,, ~ 1 ..... , ..... .,oaK
'j·\ 1;
';
'()
I ! \ ' I )l '/ "' 1 ' ..._ I t\ I .!::? ") -• .~ ) l ' ,.. '
, ,
0
) 'tlt,1•r<~,,~l~'" Alo,'-...~,111• '..., / '. 1 }l>.,. ,• •,W • /) ' '' /S[,\riO'I
f
I' ' I l t '. . " /( !.!{, tlo;·• •. ""''""''' J,· L'".. .... .· ( " ''. f\ J \ ) u' ".. ...... , , -~· ,v • .._-:::. ( ;.r:.J.4UCI.: t ... .,,t L.. I . I /
0
0
I
"I <·I '.t .. ll C ";-1J'-F
1
r;,,"lr-, r,'h~r._,)(L., ';.,fJ" r.,~.nhlanoh/j !( )
' :',: l-: ,(· \ 't \ _;; \) .:,~· : . ,,:;-\ \1' ''• ··!·· $) ··> !, ,9 ;·:: ... ; \ • .',
' ' '· \ '''·''~' .:',,)<. I t'''"'[•, r! -:a>-:;•.·-, '(il,_!•l/.,-0' /1<--..'' I v )'I ..,,I' ·I' . \ • J ·~~:1.~,~ ·. ···,'.~/ .<•;,}\• -, .• ~~ _,J ').'. )•··>~' : • ' •. ·
... I 'I I I . ·-, '"'""" '"""'' . ' .. ,,.1',p\l .. II I j,?( ""'' 1) J .... , . r ~ . i -. . .,, ,h /. , /· I; . ...
· · · .
1
. (, ··\ ' •wotc •c• ""o '. . SEWARD .-' .... -.\--! [ !; 1 \_,) /
0
-0 ' • I \' -' '!, o,'"',J .... , .... -"' :· ' '-;/',-j-~!~1 ,'!~"'~""/' • ', ..... ,, , ;' ,{."" /
/ ..... '-,.. ·-\ I ·--, ·:~ ---~ """: '/ I .Jt /1 5:--.,;·-1 J..L~'~''"'(/' ~,:·· ... ~,: ... / .P/
······.A --l} )l . , ..:::.::~.:::--. -'-... ~ !~ 'J\._ .. 'r·.:;. -;:;'~ ··~ _\ L.-) I A •l>tc~ ,':;r:;--:.. ~ ... c.~ro...Q\:.._ c.,/(;) J~~~""'o /r
! l ... __ .... 1 j '-, \, '[.,",·;·''"a"'", '"~":'l·~~f,~', ·"~ / ~~, V' '•( ~-;J -~") ' ,9:/ /.r •/' ~· < _ " l' ---
. \: .. ' :. -\ ~·::. ·;:; .;~, ~ '"''-( "~-'!"P~'•I ~~\':<. ~: •'' c!. !" ~-:n· '~.-, <""'',, ~1 ~ ../,l..oucm' /';'1 ~ v"
.
. : ( ' ' 1 ~~-· ,----. t', • '· \'i:, ·\;.'.J!-~~-~0 '"" • fJ / • I , ,cC, <./ , , ~""~ro"• """' ( ~ 0• """ /~ t---' L "~~ '>; ':~. , ~ -~ ~~~~~r;:.._,~ •,..to-)_!~ ; ,,{l <:! .? ; , , " ,H ... ND1
1 .~~ ~ )-
11
..
o ~ -..... > l I II: '-' ~ .fJ I -/ ..1, (• o
(,-· --' / -J , .. ,j '';;IJ V' <,~. ,, :·J J\"-{• ,' <;),:" rl .~ ( /' .)1.,,: ;, ''
'\'-. . / ,_.;) ... .('.BRADLEY LAKE ~ IJ[.l'.VGSOIJNJ) ' .~:': f,.:~)·
.. r ... '1' ,, ~........... I v ,, l ,,._ 1:•:·.__..~4 44 ::~ \•''l -':'.I.J.. -.;;,·~\<>::~.~~ ~~: ;__-~,. ,. j •':: I . r .<:-.. '.,, __ .l>-.1 o '·,.· •e·· ·"' . I ~~'(~ , '·· ...... .
!· -"-' r·;· . .,,:' '\",'•'.>.::/,' r.>;"~ ~_....,'~~·,'/1 ('" .. l "::;:::, , •. '"""".·.i. '-, "~ •:;;.r, ·, ·.~ __ , Ji iJ ,\~ • ~c :· ' ''
-(,' __ ,
:o •\.
\l ~
/' _-),
' . ~;-· y : :\ ....... iF)-j v ,,' ,\ v ""'"''"'"' I
1 ,., ---\ ~, 1(• · · t '·" o•
.... > -·1·_·~.· \ . . • ;" J/·_..J""j""'-. /·.,· ' 0 I I' , ~ ·, .\ ... :, ... :: , ... J _,2. ·,""' • • • . .. . ... I ''-'~-·--J:·'\i,.'c\ \lu :f"\ , I t-, .. .;>-··--~·., '.J ,~.J (··c:.s-I
· .. ~ • I ';'J .\o ..., _.. ~-.-.., I ~ ':: ~~· h ~~ . :'.1 ,r /__) ' ( 1 J ' 't-~ ,1 ;
1
, ..... · .,1:, ~~ , .,1. £1 •/', /11«nd 1
-. ! ~ ~ ; ' . '..:~· ' : ; ,-;_1 " .. ' J
i, /·/ r., .. P i' ,\ ~. -u-·· . "'·' l ). N ''-' /,t,,,<l I
_.-~J,.J: •.. /./.'. (} .. (!c...:· r·
Location map for stations used in
Tangborn Runoff-Precipitation model
!)
u
r29/k
The difference between s
9
and Sn for any time period is the
difference in the water balance for the two basins. When the
variables are summed over one hydrologic year:
s = n
(P - R - E )
9 9 9
(P -R -E ) n n n
(3)
(4)
where S and S are annual balances for the glacierized and 9 n
nonglacierized basins, respectively.
The annual balance of the nonglacierized basin (S ) is approximately n
equal to zero. The difference between basin balances (S -S ) is g n
then:
s =
9
[(R - R ) -(P - P ) -(E - E )] n g n g g n (5)
It is now assumed that the annual precipitation each basin receives
can be related to the annual precipitation at an index weather station,
multiplied by a unique coefficient for each basin. It is also assumed
that the net evaporation-condensation in each basin is the same.
These assumptions are expressed as:
p = M X p
g a
p = N X p
n a
E - E = 0
9 n
8 -18
r29/k
P is the annual precipitation (hydrologic year, October-September) a
at a low-elevation index station and M and N are coefficients
representative of the two basins. For a hydrologic ye':lr, Equation
(5) now becomes:
s ::
g [(R -R ) -(M-N) P ] n g a (6)
The glacierized portion of the Wolverine Creek basin is the major
source of annual water-balance variations. The annual balance, Ba,
is equal to the storage S divided by this glacierized fraction of the g
total basin a rea.
B = S I Af a g
where Af is the fraction of glacier cover.
The final expression for annual balance of the glaciers can now be
simplified to
B :: :;E ( ( R -R ) -k x P ]/ Af a n g a (7)
Where B a I R n I R g , and P a are all hydrologic year (October 1 -
September 30) values.
The coefficient k can be determined if B , R , R , and P are all a n g a
known for a period of time greater than one year. The annual values
for each of parameters are summed over the calibration period, and
the terms re-arranged to calculate k.
k :: ( :;E Rn -:;E R -Af x :;E B )/ :;E P g a a (8)
8 -19
r29/k
The value for the coefficient k was computed separately using data
from Ship Creek (1967-1978) and West Fork Olsen Bay Creek
(1967-1978). The data used for the computation of the ~ coefficients
are shown in Table 8.3. Results for the 1967-1978 period are shown
in Table 8.4. The Tangborn model appears to give reasonable
results. Year-to-year variations may be caused by variations in the
annual precipitation patterns.
8.6 Application to Bradley Lake Basin
The Tangborn runoff-precipitation model was then applied to the
glaciers of the Bradley Lake basin. Data were much more sparse for
Bradley Lake than for Wolverine Creek. No annual mass balance data
exist for glaciers in the Bradley Lake basin. To circumvent this
problem, existing aerial photographs from 1952 and 1979 were used to
photogrammetrically determine the change in mass
Although not all of the glacierized areas were
of the glaciers.
covered by the
photography, there are sufficient data to obtain an estimate of mass
change. These were used tQ help determine the different responses
of the glaciers to climate changes. The total water equivalent loss
estimated for the Bradley Lake glaciers between 1952 and 1980 was
(68±90) x 108 cu. ft., for an average thickness of 14::18 feet over the
glacierized area. Details on the computation of the estimated volume
change are in Appendix A.
Although flow records from Bradley River in Water Years 1953-1957
are not necessary for the power planning studies, estimates are
required for the flow records to match the balance estimates, in order
to distribute the annual mass storage or loss of the glaciers. The
only other glacial river on the Kenai Peninsu Ia with records back to
WY 1953 is the Kenai River at Cooper Landing. Consequently, a
linear regression equation relating annual runoff at Bradley River to
8 -20
r29/j1
Hydrologic
Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
Total
1967-1978
Total
1968-1978
Drainage Area
(Sq. Mi.)
Percent
Glacierized
Computed k
TABLE 8.3
VERIFICATION DATA, WOLVERINE GLACIER
MASS BALANCE TEST
Annual
Precipi-
Ship West Fork Olsen Wolverine tation
Creek Bay Creek Creek Seward
R R
n1 n2 Rg Pa
(in.) (in.) (in.) (in.)
27.9 81.59 173. 19 68.09
23.2 83.71 120.98 45.30
13.0 71.31 102.41 41.72
22.0 119.87 95.08 85.80
25.5 93.54 97.69 67.25
22.2 . 81.69 129.99 51.64
19.8 83.48 99.31 56.20
16.2 54.51 152.60 44.36
21.3 106.43 110.32 75.12
17. 1 75.44 134.05 61.69
33.1 164.70 140.61 111.76
21.9 73.51 122.09 50.37
263.2 1089.78 1478.32 759.30
1305.13 691.21
90.5 4. 78 9.51
0 0 72
-1.690 -0.602
8 -21
Annual Mass
Balance
Wolverine
Glacier
Ba
(in.of Water)
-61.4
-11.6
-2.6
76.8
25.6
-28.9
28.9
-40.7
8.5
-20.5
80.9
40.0
95.0
156.4
r29/}2
(1)
(2)
TABLE 8.4
VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
Estimated Balance.( B ) . a
from Nonglacierized Basins
Measured W. Fork Olsen
Balance Ship Creek 1 Bay Creek 2
Year (in. of Water) (in. of Water) (in. of Water)
1967 -61.4 -41.9 -70.3
1968 -11.6 -29.5 -13.9
1969 -2.6 -26.2 -8.3
1970 76.8 100.0 106.2
1971 25.6 57.6 50.5
1972 -28.9 -28.5 -23.9
1973 28.9 21.5 25.0
1974 -40.7 -85.3 -99.2
1975 8.5 52.7 57.4
1976 -20.5 -17.6 -29.8
1977 80.9 113.1 126.9
1978 40.0 -20.9 -25.4
Total 1967-1978 95.0 95.0 95.2
B = 1 . 389 ( R - R ) + 2. 348 P a 1 n 1 ·g a
B = 1 . 389 ( R - R ) + 0. 836 P a 2 n 2 g a
8 -22
r29/k
that at Kenai River was established to extend Bradley River flows to
WY 1953. The following annual runoff values (inches) were
estimated:
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
141.5
106.9
105.7
96.0
116. 1
Details on modification of streamflow records for the switching of
drainage basins of runoff from Nuka Glacier are included Section 7.1,
Nuka Glacier Runoff.
Ship Creek annual runoff data were used for the nonglacial flow data.
Seward was selected as the nearest weather station for data
representative of that at Bradley Lake. It was assumed that 38% of
the Bradley Lake basin was glacierized.
Using the above data, the following values and equations were
determined:
~R = 640.8 n
~R = 3093.0 g
~Ra = 1704.06
~B = -168 a
The coefficient k was then estimated as k = -l. 402. This resu I ted in
an equation for annual mass balance change of:
B = 2. 632 ( R -R ) + 3. 689 P a a n g
8 -23
r29/k
This equation was then applied to Water Years 1953-1979 to estimate
annual mass balance of the Bradley Lake glaciers. The conversion
from change in glacier mass balance to change in Bradley River flow
is 1 inch/year (glacier balance change) = 1. 57 cfs (Bradley River
gage). The results of the analysis are shown in Table 8. 5. Of the
168 inches of water equivalent contributed by the glaciers, 44 inches
were distributed to Water Years 1953-1957. Consequently, the
adjustment to streamflow during the period of WY 1958 -WY 1979 was
(0.38) (-124) = -47 cfs. As can be seen from Table 8.5, there is
considerable year-to-year variation. It is important to note that in
years when the glacier mass balance is positive, streamflow records
indicate flows lower than those which would have occurred if the
glacier had not gained mass. Consequently, streamflow values were
increased in those years.
The change in annual runoff was distributed to the months of
June-September, using a thawing degree-days index. Using average
monthly temperature at Homer, the distribution of change in flow to
each month was computed by:
Monthly Proportion of Change =
12
:;E ( T m -38 ° F)
m = 9
Where:
T = average monthly temperature at Homer
m = month (9 = June, 10 = July, 11 = August, 12 = September
38°F = Base temperatures for thawing degree-days, allowing for
temperature lapse rate between Homer and glaciers.
8 -24
r29/j3
TABLE 8.5
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GLACIER MASS BALANCE CHANGES AT
BRADLEY LAKE, AND ADJUSTMENT TO FLOW RECORDS
Estimated Glacier Balance
Water Year (Inches of Water Equivalent)
Adjustment to
Annual Runoff (cfs)
Adjusted Bradley
River Runoff (cfs)
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
Total
81 0 1
-43.2
28.2
-22.9
-87.2
11.0
5. 1
24.3
50.4
19.7
-68.8
-16.4
-9.5
-88.7
-23 .l
-36.1
-123.2
-27.2
63.1
-9.5
39.1
-61.7
65.8
-9.6
84.3
-20.8
7.8
-168.0
(Prior to streamgage period of record)
8 -25
17
8
38
79
31
-108
-26
-15
-139
-36
-57
-194
-43
99
-15
61
-97
103
-15
132
-33
12
604
387
441
591
382
417
468
475
465
510
358
295
588
495
391
407
324
523
428
784
382
533
r29/k
The change in annual runoff was multiplied by 12 to convert to total
monthly runoff, and distributed to the months of June -September
based on the percentages developed above. The values previously
adjusted for the Nuka Glacier switch (Table 7.1) were then adjusted
again for glacier balance changes, resulting in the recommended flow
values in Table 8.6. The flow values in Table 8.6 are the estimated
flows if the glacier did not change in mass in any year (i.e., no
water was stored or released from ice storage in the glaciers).
The monthly flow values in Table 8. 6 reflect a scenario where the
glaciers do not change in mass from year-to-year, but instead remain
in a static condition. As a planning tool, this scenario does not allow
the major benefit of having a hydroelectric project on a glacial river,
that of having a sustained water supply under normal drought
conditions. If climate conditions during the first 25 years of the
project life were similar to those of the existing period of record,
then flows in Table 7.1 would be representative. However, it has
already been shown that an estimated 14 feet of water equivalent has
been contributed by melting away of the glaciers. A minor shift in
climate could have caused the glaciers to be back at the same state as
they were at the beginning of the period. Consequently, a second
flow scenario has been developed in Table 8. 7, in which the trend of
glacier wasting has been removed from flow records. The removal of
this trend decreases average annual runoff by approximately 10 cfs
from that in Table 7. 1. In this scenario, glaciers have the same mass
at the beginning and end of the period of record. The flow records
reflect the year-to-year storage or wasting caused by differences in
climatic conditions, thus providing the increased water supply during
drought conditions.
8 -26
r29/u2
TABLE 8.6
BRADLEY RIVER NEAR HOMER
ADJUSTED FOR NUKA SWITCH AND GLACIER BALANCE CHANGES
DRAINAGE AREA= 56.1 SQUARE MILES
ADJUSTED MONTHLY AND ANNUAL MEAN DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
Year Oc_!, Nov De~ ,!a!} Feb Mar Allr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Annual
1958 715 577 111 79 42 32 711 389 1430 11,-ro 1750 475 604
1959 275 102 60 33 25 22 33 308 1070 1080 1070 436 379
1960 187 94 60 39 35 211 33 593 990 1320 1230 651 1!111
1961 2119 11!4 179 199 1 o·r 42 30 436 1160 1650 11140 1440 591
1962 347 116 71 55 31 22 39 177 937 1220 1000 541 382
1963 269 3H 12 7 113 87 67 45 237 560 1120 1090 944 4H
1961! 562 94 108 75 63 40 33 87 769 1140 1510 1090 1168
1965 477 140 85 6ll 50 55 "15 1 3 1 625 1100 1180 1710 475
1966 595 165 70 39 32 31 111 150 596 660 1690 1480 1165
1967 525 611 lt3 35 31 29 36 253 820 1110 11130 1730 510
1968 231 224 136 99 91 105 62 307 585 929 1060 416 358
1969 271 73 41 35 34 43 310 1080 820 466 308 295
1970 1900 211 239 118 11 109 103 331 T/1 1170 1250 660 588
1971 197 382 76 45 36 31 31 115 862 1750 1670 710 495
CD 1972 376 108 32 20 17 17 141 4811 1120 1320 987 391
19 7 3 413 123 34 26 24 28 128 760 1150 1090 1030 IW7
1974 575 173 50 32 23 19 23 227 309 530 652 1250 3211
"-> 1975 3116 224 112 55 43 34 30 355 1280 11150 1250 1090 523 ....... 1976 4211 118 52 39 32 26 lt1 206 7Tl 1050 1100 1260 1128
1977 420 414 312 326 306 178 119 3 511 1350 2100 2550 927 784
19"/8 407 70 31 311 40 42 56 291 670 966 1050 889 382
1979 572 161 1011 IJ3 30 27 31 290 739 1050 1930 1390 533
1980 1170 411 8~) 67 81 74 58 326 936 1332 1304 891 564
1981 779 150 110 233 160 170 310 788 908 1490 1643 885 640
1982 298 251 98 52 73 45 37 138 677 11 o·r 904 1"{80 1156
r29/u1
TABLE 8.7
ORAOLEY RIVER NEAR HOMER
ADJUSTED FOR NUKA SWITCH AND FOR TREND OF GLACIER WASTING
DRAINAGE AREA= 56.1 SQUARE MILES
AD.JUSIED MONT11LY AND ANNUAL MEAN DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
YCQ!: Q£!. .t:fov QfJ9. Jan Feb Mar Apr May JUQ J.!!! Aug Seg Annual
19')8 775 577 111 79 42 32 711 389 1340 1360 16110 422 573
19':")9 275 102 60 33 25 22 33 308 1030 1020 1010 lJ02 363
1960 187 94 60 39 35 24 33 593 879 1130 1060 553 394
1961 2119 1114 179 199 107 42 30 lJ36 915 1320 1130 1230 500
1962 347 1 16 71 55 31 22 39 177 833 1070 853 491 344
1963 269 317 12/ 113 87 67 45 237 765 1480 1450 1210 517
1964 562 94 108 75 63 40 33 87 813 1190 1560 1130 1184
1965 477 140 85 64 50 55 75 1 31 635 1120 1193 1720 480
1966 595 165 'ill 39 32 31 41 150 942 1110 2130 1800 595
1967 525 64 113 35 31 29 36 253 885 1200 1520 1780 536
1968 231 224 136 99 91 105 62 307 720 1110 1260 501 1108
1969 277 73 Ill 35 35 34 43 310 1650 1520 10110 708 482
1970 1900 211 239 118 116 109 103 331 858 1280 1360 716 618
1971 197 382 .76 45 36 31 31 115 619 1360 1220 487 386
00 1972 376 108 ~5 32 20 17 17 141 500 1140 1350 1000 398
1973 1113 123 56 34 26 211 28 128 576 884 838 890 337
1974 575 173 50 32 23 19 23 227 534 837 975 1480 414
N 1975 31!6 224 112 55 43 34 30 355 1010 1020 821 821 408
00 1976 IJ24 118 52 39 32 26 41 206 792 1070 1120 1270 434
1977 420 41 !J 312 326 306 178 119 354 947 1590 1980 608 634
1978 407 70 H 34 40 42 56 291 888 1460 1610 868 ll07
1979 572 161 104 43 30 27 31 290 651 1060 862 1750 509
1980* 1173 411 8') 67 81 74 58 326 936 1332 1304 897 564
1981* 779 150 110 233 160 170 310 788 908 1490 16113 885 640
1982* 298 251 98 52 73 45 37 1 38 677 1107 9011 1780 456
* Recorded
r29/k
8. 7 References
Anderson. 1970. Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Tanana B_asin, central
Alaska. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas HA-319.
Anonymous. 1980. Die Gletscher der Schweitzer Alpen, 1973/74 und
1974/75. Glaziologishes Jahrbuch der Gletscherkommission der
Natu rforschender Gesellschaft/SNG. VAW, ETH-Z, CH 8097 Zuerich,
Switzerland.
Anonymous. 1983. Excursion on Grand Glacier d'Aietsch, 28 juin 1983.
Campagne HTE/83 du Department de genie civil de I'EPF a Lausanne.
Bezinge, A. 1979. Grande Dixence et son hydrologie. La collection
donnees hydrologiques de base en Suisse. Association Suisse pour
l'amenagement des eaux. Service hydrologique national.
Haakensen, N., 0. Liesfol, S. Messel, A. Tvede and G. Ostrem. 1982.
G!asio!ogiske Undersokelser i Norge 1980.
Henoch, W.E.S. 1971. Estimate of glaciers secular (1948-1966) volumetric
change and its contribution to the discharge in the upper North
Saskatchewan River. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 12, p. 145-160.
Jones, P.O. and T.M.L. Wigley. 1980. Climate Monitor, Vol. 9, No.2,
p. 43-45.
Krimmel, R. M. and W. V. Tang born. 1974. South Cascade Glacier: the
moderating effect of glaciers on runoff. Western Snow Conference,
1974.
8 -29
r29/k
Mayo, L.R. and D.C. Trabant. 1982. Observed and predicted effects of
climate change on Wolverine Glacier, Southern Alaska. Proceedings of
the Conference on Potential Effects of Carbon Dioxide I nquced Climate
Change in Alaska, in press.
Meier, M., L. Mayo, D. Trabant and R. Krimmel. 1980. Comparison of
mass balance and runoff at four glaciers in the United States, 1966 to
1977. Date of Glaciological Studies, Chronicle, Discussion. Academy
of Sciences of the USSR Section of Glaciology of the Soviet
Geophysical Committee and Institute of Geography, Publication No. 38,
p. 214-219.
R&M and W. Harrison. 1980. Glacier Studies 1981, Susitna Hydroelectric
Project. Alaska Power Authority, Task 3 -Hydrology. Report for
Acres American.
Tangborn, W. V. 1980a. Two models for estimating climate -glacier
relationships in the North Cascades, Washington, U.S.A. Journal of
Glaciology, Vol. 25, No. 91, p. 3-21.
Tangborn, W.V. 1980b. Contribution of glacier runoff to hydroelectric
power generation on the Columbia River. Data of Glaciological
Studies, Chronicle, Discussion, Academy of Sciences of the USSR
Section of Glaciology of the Soviet Geophysical Committee and Institute
of Geography, Publication No. 38, p. 62.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We have been greatly aided by advice and information from abroad. We
are especially greatful to Dr. G. Ostrem, Dr. H. Roethlisberger, and
Dr. S. Omnanney.
8 -30
r29/n
APPENDIX A
GLACIER ICE VOLUME CHANGE
The volume change between 1952 and 1974 of the glacier ice in the basin of
the proposed Bradley Lake project was estimated from vertical photo sets
taken in those years. On neither of the two major glaciers was stereo
coverage complete, and no maps were made of the smaller glaciers in the
basin. Thus the final result is very sensitive to the extrapolation method
used. Topography was constructed from the photo sets by North Pacific
Aerial Surveys, as described in the attached letter. The relative accuracy
of the two sets was estimated by them to be :t10 feet, although some
failure of bare ground to match to this accuracy suggests that the error
may be somewhat larger.
The volume change of the 65°o of the Kachemak Glacier which had complete
coverage was estimated from 8 transverse altitude profiles. These profile
data were also used to construct a relation between glacier thickness
change and 1952 altitude. Such a relation is rather poorly defined since
glacier ice flows and redistributes itself. This relation was used to
extrapolate the volume change of the 35°6 of the glacier without stereo
coverage.
Volume change of Kachemak Glacier was also estimated by integrating the
product of thickness change-altitude and the area-altitude relationships.
This procedure was also followed for Nuka Glacier, using the Kachemak
thickness change altitude relationship, and was in fact necessary because
stereo coverage included only the lower half of Nuka Glacier. The volume
changes of the smaller glaciers was estimated 1n a similar way, except that
they were assumed to have all of their areas concentrated at their mean
altitudes.
The results are summarized in the following table.
A
r29/p 1
TABLE A-1
VOLUME CHANGE OF GLACIERS IN THE
BASINS ABOVE BRADLEY LAKE, 1952-1979
Kachemak Glacier(1 )
Stereo Estimated
1952 Area 2.65x108 ft 2
Volume Change -64x108 ft3 (2 )
Average
Thickness Change -24 ft -16 ft
Nuka Glacier
Estimated
-29 ft
Small Glaciers
Estimated
approximately
-33x108 ft3
+39 ft
(1) Includes small glaciers just south of main glacier, but connected to it by
streams.
(2) 65°o covered by stereo (-71x108 ft3 ); 35°o estimated (+7x108 ft3 );
Total = -64x108 ft 3 .
A - 2
r29/n
From this table it is evident that the volume change of Kachemak Glacier
estimated from the thickness change -altitude relationship does not agree
very well with the estimate obtai ned more directly from the repeated stereo
coverage. This implies that the estimates for Nuka and the small glaciers
are probably rather poor.
The most striking feature of the glaciers is that there has been a gain of
ice at the higher altitudes (typically 50 feet at 4000 feet altitude) while
strong loss (typically 160 feet at 2200 feet) and marked retreat have
occurred at the lower altitudes. This is why the small glaciers, which are
typically rather high, have probably gained ice.
The collected results in Table A-1 lead to the following totals for the
1952-1979 changes:
s· 3 Volume (-75 ± 100) x 10 ft
Average Ice Thickness -15±20 ft.
Note that these are ice values, and must be multiplied by 0.9 to obtain
water equivalent volumes. The errors arising from the limited stereo
coverage, and from the limited relative elevation accuracy, seem to be on
the same order of magnitude. To summarize, the glaciers seem to have
undergone a net mass loss over the 1952-1979 interval, but it is on the
same order of the uncertainty in the information available at present.
A - 3
R&M CONSULTANTS, INC.
ENGINEERS GIEQLOOtSTa PLANNERS SURVEYORS
APPENDIX C
TRANSMISSION LINE
ANALYSIS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
rl
I
BRADLEY LAKE HYDRO PROJECT
TRANSMISSION LINE ANALYSIS
G EPTEMBER 1983
STDN E & WEBSTER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDRO PROJECT
TRANSMISSION LINE ANALYSIS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
SEPTEMBER 1983
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page
1 TRANSMISSION LINE ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION. 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION. 1-1
1.2 ASSUMPTIONS 1-1
1.3 DESIGN AND OPERATING CRITERIA 1-2
1.4 LOAD FLOW STUDY CASES 1-2
1.5 CONCLUSIONS 1-4
2 LOAD FLOW STUDY CASES 2-1
2.1 LIST OF CASES 2-1
1988 Peak Load 2-1
1995 Peak Load 2-2
2003 Peak Load 2-2
2.2 POWER FLOW DIAGRAMS 2-3
Case 1 2-4
Case 2 2-5
Case 3 2-6
Case 4 2-7
Case 5 2-8
Case 6 2-9
Case 7 2-10
Case 8 2-11
Case 9 2-12
Case 10. 2-13
Case 11. 2-14
Case 12. 2-15
Case 13. 2-16
Case 14. 2-17
Case 15. 2-18
Case 16. 2-19
Case 17. 2-20
Case 18. 2-21
Case 19. 2-22
Case 20. 2-23
Case 21. 2-24
Case 22. 2-25
Case 23. 2-26
Case 24. 2-27
2.3 LOAD FLOW STUDY CASE INPUT DATA 2-28
1988. 2-29
1995. 2-31
2003. 2-33
B1-1450098-4 i
SECTION 1
TRANSMISSION LINE ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The objectives of this analysis are to determine the suitable operating
voltage for the transmission lines from Bradley Lake Hydro Project when it
becomes operational in 1988, and also to determine the transmission
facilities required on the Kenai Peninsula to economically transmit electric
power from the project site to Anchorage, through the study period.
The transmission required for plant capacities at 60, 90, and 135 MW has
been developed. Transmission design has been based on conventional power
system design and operating criteria. Load flow studies have been run to
check that the design meets these criteria.
The present peak load on the Kenai Peninsula is approximately 70 MW spread
over a distance (north to south) of about 150 miles. About three-quarters
of this load is near the town of Soldotna, 80 miles south of Anchorage.
There is a single 115 kV transmission tie, extending 145 miles, from
Soldotna to Anchorage. A portion of this line passes through rugged terrain
at the north end of the peninsula.
Load to the south of Soldotna is served by a single 115 kV line to the town
of Homer. The Bradley Lake site is in the south near Homer. A second
115 kV, line from Soldotna to Homer, is planned to go into service before
construction of Bradley Lake. Load on the peninsula is supplied by local
generation, while the long tie to Anchorage serves several small load
centers and provides about 40 MW of backup to the peninsula. The addition
of new generation the size of Bradley Lake will result in power export from
the peninsula to Anchorage until load growth on the peninsula absorbs the
new generation. Thus, the new generation will impact transmission
requirements from the hydro site all the way to Anchorage.
1.2 ASSUMPTIONS
This study is based on the following assumptions:
1. The Bradley Lake Hydro Plant will consist of two units with a
total capacity of 60, 90, or 135 MW, and is scheduled for
commercial operation in 1988.
2. Projected peak load on the Kenai Peninsula is 87 MW in 1988,
103 r~ in 1995, and 120 MW in the year 2003.
3. The present transmission system on the Kenai Peninsula will be
expanded to include a new 115 kV line from Fritz Creek to Soldotna
before Bradley Lake is in service.
4. Existing generating capacity on the Kenai Peninsula is approxi-
mately 85 MW, and plants are located at Bernice Lake and Cooper
B1-1450098-1 1-1
Lake. No additional generation plants, other than Bradley Lake,
will be installed on the Kenai Peninsula through the year 2003.
1.3 DESIGN AND OPERATING CRITERIA
Transmission design for Bradley Lake has been based on a single contingency
design and operating criteria. The transmission system has been designed so
that the tripping of any single transmission line or any single generator
will not create any of the following operating conditions:
1. Damage to equipment
2. Loss of customer load
3. Transmission voltage drop of more than 10 percent
1.4 LOAD FLOW STUDY CASES
Twenty-four load flow study cases have been run to determine that
transmission designs for the 60, 90, and 135 MW plants meet the power system
operating criteria. Section 2.1 lists the load flow study cases.
Cases were run for peak loads in 1988, 1995, and 2003.
was developed for each load flow study case.
Section 2.2.
A power flow diagram
These are shown in
Section 2. 3 presents load flow study input data for each load level. The
source of this data is a previous study by the Alaska Power Administration
which was included in the Corps of Engineers Design Memorandum No. 2 for
Bradley Lake, and additional updated line data from local power companies.
Load data for the years 1988, 1993, and 2003 was developed from two sources.
Peak load for the Kenai Peninsula was assumed to be 15 percent of the
Anchorage area load and was based on the "Sherman H. Clark Association NSD
Case" load forecasts. Breakdowns of individual bus loads on the peninsula
were developed from Exhibit AI of the "Feasibility Study of the Soldotna-
Fritz Creek Transmission Line" by Gilbert/Conunonwealth, June 1983. The
computer program used for the load flow studies was the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) "Transient-Midterm Stability Program."
Load flow study cases chosen were those which would stress the transmission
system. With the installation of Bradley Lake, there will normally be power
exported from the Kenai Peninsula to Anchorage. Essentially, the greater
the power export, the greater will be the loading on the transmission
system. The magnitude of the export will be determined by the economics of
dispatch of all generation in the Railbelt Area of Alaska. The thermal
generation at Bernice Lake can be expected to operate only when this power
is competitive with other thermal generation in the Railbelt Area. This is
expected to be a small percentage of the time, occurring primarily at peak
load periods. For this reason, the load flow study cases chosen to stress
the transmission system represent peak load periods with 70 MW generation at
Bernice Lake, 15 MW at Cooper Lake, and 60, 90, or 135 MW at Bradley Lake.
Power export from the Kenai Peninsula will be a function of generation and
load on the peninsula. With future load growth, this export will decrease.
Therefore, the first year of Bradley Lake's commercial service should
BI-1450098-1 1-2
produce the highest export. For this reason, the maximum transmission
requirements for the period 1988 to 2003 will be in 1988, and the emphasis
in the load flow study cases is on this year.
As long as power is being exported from the peninsula, the loss of a gene-
rator on the peninsula will not be a problem since it will reduce, rather
than increase, peninsula transmission loading. Therefore, the contingencies
analyzed by load flows have been limited to transmission line outages.
Transmission from Bradley Lake to Soldotna, and Soldotna to Anchorage are
treated separately in the following discussion.
With the installation of the planned 115 kV line from Fritz Creek to
Soldotna, there will be two 115 kV circuits from Soldotna to the south.
These were tested by load flows to check their adequacy for the largest
Bradley Lake Station (135 MW). If they are adequate for this size station,
they will be adequate for the smaller sizes. Load flow study case 3
illustrates the worst contingency, loss of the Bradley Lake to Soldotna
line. The remaining line to Soldotna, along the west coast, is thermally
overloaded and voltages on the peninsula are low but acceptable. A direct
solution is to automatically trip one unit at Bradley Lake anytime the
Bradley Lake -Soldotna line trips. A second, and probably acceptable,
solution is to manually reduce generation at Bradley Lake whenever this line
trips.
With load growth in the Homer area, the loss of the Bradley Lake to Fritz
Creek line becomes critical. Cases 19 and 23 illustrate that the existing
line to Homer cannot carry peak load in 1995 and 2003. The solution to this
is to establish a common 115 kV bus and install circuit breakers at Kasilof
by 1995. Cases 18 and 24 illustrate this solution. Case 24 also shows that
reconductoring of the existing Diamond Creek to Soldotna line may also be
required by the year 2003.
The addition of the new 115 kV Fritz Creek -Soldotna transmission line will
improve operations and reliability in the southern part of the Kenai
Peninsula. However, as recommended by the June 1983 Gilbert/Commonwealth
study, this existing east coast 115 kV line would need to be reconductored
at some future time, depending on load growth in that area.
The transmission system could be improved by tying the two transmission
lines, south of Soldotna, together at Kasilof so that reconductoring could
be postponed until some future date.
Transmission north from Soldotna to Anchorage consists of a single 115 kV
line. Load flow study cases 8 through 14 were run to check the adequacy of
this tie for a range of output at Bradley Lake ( 60 to 120 MW). At 120 HW
(case 14) system voltage is too low and peninsula losses are approaching
30 percent of peninsula load. At 90 MW system voltage and losses are
acceptable. Therefore, for the 60 and 90 MW plant sizes no further
transmission north of Soldotna is required. However, loss of the one line
to Anchorage will cause overspeed of peninsula generation, tripping of
units, and possible blackout of the peninsula. This can be prevented by
tripping a Bradley Lake unit whenever the Anchorage line trips. Stability
studies will be required to establish the coordination necessary between
peninsula power export and automatic tripping of generator units.
B1-1450098-1 1-3
The 135 MW Bradley Lake plant will require additional transmission from
Soldotna to Anchorage. This could be at a 115 or 230 kV transmission
voltage, following the route of the present line, or a more direct route
with a cable crossing of the Turnagain Arm. A 230 kV line over the direct
route would provide the most transfer capability and reliability.
For the same level of reliability, more transmission is required between
Anchorage and the peninsula when power is being imported to the peninsula
than when it is being exported. On loss of all ties to Anchorage, there
will be an excess of generation on the peninsula in the export mode and a
deficiency in the import mode. A generation deficiency will cause at least
partial loss of load, while an excess will not if a generation tripping
scheme is carefully planned and coordinated with export power. With two
ties to Anchorage, import power should be limited to the capability of the
weakest tie, so that tripping of the strongest tie will not cause separation
from Anchorage. Export power, on the other hand, can be limited to the
capability of the strongest tie, since the loss of this tie can be compen-
sated by generator tripping to prevent any loss of load. Since power export
is the expected mode of operation for several years, a 230 kV tie to
Anchorage is very attractive as it will provide approximately four times the
transfer capability of a 115 kV tie. For either voltage level, automatic
generator tripping at Bradley Lake will be required when the new line to
Anchorage is tripped. Stability studies will be needed to determine the
coordination between export power and unit tripping.
1.5 CONCLUSIONS
The results of the load flow study cases produced the following conclusions:
1. Two 115 kV lines are required from the Bradley Lake Hydro Station
to the Fritz Creek to Soldotna 115 kV transmission line. Each
line should be thermally capable of carrying the full output of
the plant.
2. For the 60 or 90 MW Bradley Lake plant size, no additional trans-
mission is required on the Kenai Peninsula or from Kenai Peninsula
to Anchorage other than that transmission planned to be added
prior to 1988.
3. For the 135 MW Bradley lake plant size, a new line from Soldotna
to Anchorage is required in 1988, preferably rated 230 kV.
4. By the year 1995 a new switchyard will be required at Kasilof to
interconnect the existing and new 115 kV transmission lines.
5. Automatic unit tripping should be installed at Bradley Lake to
operate: 1) in the event of the loss of an Anchorage tie while it
is exporting power, or 2) in the event of the loss of the Bradley
Lake to Soldotna line.
B1-1450098-1 1-4
SECTION 2
LOAD FLOW STUDY CASES
2.1 LIST OF CASES
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Case 4
Case 5
Case 6
Case 7
Case 8
Case 9
Case 10
Case 11
Case 12
Case 13
Case 14
Case 15
Case 16
1988 PEAK LOAD
135 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
Two 115 kV Lines, Soldotna to Anchorage (Double Existing 115 kV
Lines)
Base Case -230 kV Line Soldotna to Anchorage (Plus Existing
115 kV Line)
Bradley Junction to Soldotna Line Out
Bradley Junction to Fritz Creek Line Out
Soldotna to University 230 kV Line Out
Soldotna to University 230 kV Line Out and Trip 68 MW at Bradley
Lake
Soldotna to University 230 kV Line Out and Trip 70 MW at Bernice
Lake
60 to 120 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
Existing 115 kV Line Onl~
60 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
70 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
80 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
90 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
100 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
110 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
120 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
90 MW Generation at Bradle~ Lake
1 230 kV Line Soldotna to Anchorage (Plus Existing 115 kV Line)
152 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
1 230 kV Linel Soldotna to Anchorage (Plus Existing 115 kV Line)
B1-1450098-3 2-1
Case 17
Case 18
Case 19
1995 PEAK LOAD
135 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
Base Case - 1 230 kV Line, Soldotna to Anchorage (Plus Existing
115 kV Line)
Bradley Junction to Fritz Creek Line Out (Bradley Junction to
Soldotna Line Connected to Kasilof)
Bradley Junction to Fritz Creek Line Out (Bradley Junction to
Soldotna Line Not Connected to Kasilof)
2003 PEAK LOAD
135 MW Generation at Bradley Lake
Case 20 Base Case - 1 230 kV line, Soldotna to Anchorage (Plus Existing
115 kV Line)
Case 21 Soldotna to Anchorage 230 kV Line Out
Case 22 Bradley Junction to Soldotna Line Out
Case 23 Bradley Junction to Fritz Creek Line Out (Bradley Junction to
Soldotna line not connected to Kasilof)
Case 24 Bradley Lake Junction to Fritz Creek Line Out (Bradley Junction
to Soldotna Line Connected to Kasilof)
B1-1450098-3 2-2
2.2 POWER FLOW DIAGRAMS
This section presents the power flow diagrams developed for each study case.
Bl-1450098-3 2-3
BERNICE LAIC[
1.021
22_62 SPORTS LAIC[
24.00 26.97 -26.97 26.97 -26.69 0.992
12.20 18.12 -17.62 17.62 -17.96 21.05
26.69
,g,().3 17.98
3.65
SOLDOTNA
0.988
20..82
0.976 26.65
20.J!) 5.31 -5.29 -1!!.01
-2.49 2 • .38
12.90 -~1 Tl51 114.11
~ 16.80 -9.58 em -16.54
7.20
0.975 -1!!.47 .50 KENAI TIE 19.91 12.75 1t92
et ICV
18.55 ,~ ICV
SKI HILL 3.70 -12.92
teo
-2225
Q.987 '11.32
21.29
22.54
-1t67
KASILOF
-XI.M
8.37
-31.04 3104
8.45 -a45
Q.999
31.69 24.26
-8.50 NINILCHIK
UNIVERSITY
1.014 1.023
-6.85 -7.05
2JO KV 11& KV PORTAGE SW
'----.0.994
96.74 -0.40
~4.61
-----113.60
-112..}4 6.00
DAVES Cl<
115.70
0.965 -28.81
7.~
7.21
0.35
122.92
26.46
-119.49 124.43
30.~ -23.7
D.i86 -14.94 ruo -6.30
OUARTZ CK
38.61
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 WW
LOAD • 87 MW
1030
34.61
EXPORT • 112 MW
LOSSES • 21 MW
1050
36.61
tOOB F'RIT Z CREEK ........ _,__,...,.........1135.00
26.74 U!O 1.022 -4 7.55 47.99 -132.89 135.00 9.73
080 3222~1~41~--0~·~67~-~3~.4~0~~9.~73~
. DIAMOND RIDGE
-33.49 l4.01 ~5·06 45·35 220 BRADLEY BRADLEY 7.70 -7.65 2.69 -2.31 0.90 t---...,;.__ __ ._.;,;~~=--=~....;;;~• JUNC liON LAKE
ANCHOit
POINT
t017 Tl05
J0.60 4.96 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE f\0. 1
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
'988 PEAt< LOAD
2-115 KV LNES
SOLDOTNA-ANCHORAGE
UNIVERSITY
1 1.012 i t024 I -6.12 1 -818
12.47 ~93.041 -12.61
8.65
'
BERNICE LAKE
1.030 70.00
4.85~
I I 2JO I<V 115 KV
!
1025 SPORTS LAKE I
24.00 j' 27.57 -27.57 27.57 _,..,. 1004 1
12.20 n 11 < -10.69 n.s9 -11.28 2.40
4.t)
I. ' I 27.J4 I
i 18.43 1t28 I
jto2 I l
d SOLDOTNA I
1.001 too9 1
0.984 -2~:.)1 1
94.82 -~:.:81 94.68
1
1
1.710 I 4.76 -4.75 -11.35 ~20.55( 24.54 L24.54
i-4.42 4.J1 l i <. I
12.110 1-, __ ;;..__.;..;;...;_12.05 12.05 ,19.46 230 ICV
5.50 I 16.80 -1151 < lt89 . -9 . .3::?
I ~ ~ J
KENAI TIE 0.985! -'18..28 t-80.75
1.220 14.1.) I 15 . .23
69 KV
18.36
SKI HILL 3.70 -14 .2B
1.60~
-33.91
3.86
ton ~-14.95
-1.51 -2.88
QUARTZ Cl<
PORTAGE SW
1.009
12.73 l-6.38
-n04 I
1.3.60
_26.33 I o.oo •
~
SEVri\RO
• COOPER ~ AKE
;~-~:I
22.36
1.3.04
760
KASILOF'
-29.96
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 WW
LOAD • 87 WW
4.06~
-JO.es 30.as I
9.871 -9.87
31.501 . ~~ ~-9.941 NINILCHIK
1.015! F'RITZ CREEl<
1().051 1.80 1.026 -47 . .35
j 0.80 13.53 ! 2.88
DIAMOND RIDGE I
EXPORT • 119 WW
LOSSES • 14 WW
1.033 1.050
15.91 19.93
o.62 I I t35.oo
47.79 i -132.90 1.3500~
-2.16 i t56 4 72~ , I
I i -33.30 33.82 -44.87 45.1!-l 2.20 I BRADLEY 1-...;.9;.;..14 ____ -.:.:9·.;,;:10+_..;.;4·.;..;14_-..:;3:.:.;.. 7..;;;;8+-' _0:.:,.9C~· J UNCTION BRADLEY
LAKE
1.022 nos CASE NO. 2
ANCHOR
POINT
11.91 1--4.-,96;;..;.._ __
HOMER
I
! POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
!ANCHJRAGE/KENAI PENIN.
1988 PE.AK LOAD
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT BASE CASE
0.981
2.48
LAI<E
Q.972 SPORTS LAI<E t67
24.00 26.92 -26.92 26.92 -26.61 0.941
12.20 '18..31 -17.75 17.75 -17.82 -0.07
0.924
-0..85
19.08
3.79
5.27
-2.5J
-5.24
26.61
17.82
SOLDOTNA
0.9.37 0.960
-0.32 -2.20
26.57 67.76
-17.82 -51.00
67.63
54.49
UNIVERSITY
1.002 1.023
-7.12 -9.19
-66.,)4 -7.02
41.66 12.42
2.30 I<V 115 I<V
DAVES Cl<
20.98
0.966 -1J . .'3S
-5.15
7.22
0.45
28.20
9.91
PORTAGE SW
0.997
7.14 -7.95
-14.80
13.60
-20.74 6·00
B.BO
SEWARD
12.90 t-.::;.;:;;:...__..:,;2.4.,;.::3~
-11.56 11.56 13.79 230 KV -tl43 28.37
'5.47 -tl.18 5.50 16.80 -9.63 9.99 -18.26
7.20
KENAI TIE 0.923 -66.54
-1.34 77.10
69 I<V ,...a..;..;.;.;.....;--.....
115 KV
Sl<l HILL
68.46
-73.6.:3
0.922
0.923
1.92
7.60
3.30
-72.16
72.03
77.57
-62.12
KASILOF
-65.17
58.62
-97.05 97.05
J6.66 -J6.86
0.892
23.07
NINILCHIK
lJ5.46
-21.31
J3.oo 180
F' RITZ CREEK
0.980 -t29.26
44.70 -7.05
DIAMOND RIDGE 0.80
0.983 -14.94
-3.66 -6.29
QUARTZ Ck
KENAI PE~NSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 WW
LOAD • 87 IIIW
EXPORT • 87 WW
LOSSES • 46 MW
1020 1.050
51.41 55.32
135.00 132.80"""-"""o~z--.80...--13""'"5-.oo...j 28.56
Zt80 -21.80 28.56
COOPER LAKE
-107.26 113.59 -124JS4 127.06 2.20 BRADLEY BRADLEY
!-=2:.:::0.5:;:,.;..1 ___ -8;:::·;:::90+...:;3.;.;:.89.::.,___:::;6:.;::.15::.....f-....;0:.:..90:..::... .JUNCTION L AI<[
ANCHOR
POINT
o.961 n.oo
39.73 5.02 HOWER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO.3
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
'S88 PEAK LOAD
BRADLEY Jl...t.CTON TO
SOLDOTNA LNE OUT
BERNICE LAI<E
1.030 70.00 usro
1.022 SPORTS LAKE 3.71
0.977
-27.02 27.02 -26.74 0.993
-17.09 17.09 -17.46 2.13
26.74
17.46
SOLDOTNA
0.989
1.90
26.70 91.21
1.4 3 5.27 -5.25 -f7.50 26.53
-2.64 2.53
12.90
5.50
KENAI TIE
0.976
0.98
69 KV
11.55 18.70 < 1).04 -11..34
<
27 . .:51 122.08
7.90 37.43
-27.17 115 KV
SKI HILL -7.97
23.47
0.982 ~6~.37___,
l46 I
-23.20
-6.72
KASILOf
15.60
3.42
15.35 -15.35
4.65 -4.65
0.944
1.000
-0.37
91.08
30.45
230 KV
UNIVERSITY
1.010 1.024
-6.25 -8.31
-89.50 -11.86
18.28 9.30
230 ICV 115 KV
DAVES Cl<
25.90
1.006 -6.99
-3.38
7.24
2.12
-33.14
4.e8
PORTAGE SW
1.007
11.98 -6.59
-1169
13.60
-25.5!3 6.00
5.69
SEWARD
I
-18.93 33.341
9.03 . -5.05
l.OOB -14.95
-1.78 -3.98
QUARTZ Cl<
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT • 115 MW
LOSSES • 18 MW
COOPER LAKE
-15.T7 1.06 1.050
-5.45 NINILCHIK 27.84
0.927 fRITZ CREEK 135.00 -z.oa! 180 0.915 ~--"""'o"""2,....,.88~,3"""5.,....,oo~ 13.97 ! ~~~ -2.81 -7.57 13.97 ~ DIAMOND RIDGE 1----++--;---'...;.;;;..;.-=--1
I 13.37 -1.3.26 2.20 -2.20 2.20 BRADLEY BRADLEY
I-4;.;,;.6;;;;;5 ____ -5::.;;.2:..::5+...:0;;.;.19;..__-...;:0;;.;:.9~0~0:.;;.9C:.::~:...,.· JUNCTION L AI< E
ANCHOR
POINT
0.916 11.06
-2.72 5.06 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 4
POWER FLOW OIAGRAt.A
1988 PEAK LOAD
BRADLEY JI.KTOO TO
FRITZ CREEK LINE OUT
0.9:35
62.09
8(RNICE LAI<E
0•925 SPORTS L AI<E 61.22
24.00 26.09 -26.09 26.07
12.20 19.22 -18.62 18.75
0.875
58.52
118.8.3
4 . .31
5.15
-2.20
-5.13
2.11
-25.73 0.892
-18.54 59 . .38
25.81 1
18.54
SOLDOTNA
0.887
59.11 I
25.76 I 0.00
-18.50 -0.00
0.887
59.11
-0.00
0.00
UNIV(RSITY
1 t012 i i.02o
1-7.35 ~~~0
c I<V 115 KV
I
1 T DAVES Cl<
104.01
0.828 -26·10
24..36
7.48
-10.64
-110.lJ
.36.44
PORTAGE SW
0.877
64.06 6.01
-65 . .37
1.3.60
-96.26 6.00
58.99
S(WARO
12.90 -n21 1121 1lJ.43 2 JO KV -99.53 113.72 ~·~~~1~7~.2~5--------------------~2~8~.96~--~20~·~ 5.50
KENAI TIE ~ '-19.62 77.84 0.624 -14.27
58.00 3.31 -1174 .32.61 -7.96
6 9 I< v r-----+-....;.;;.;.---, COOPER LAKE
51<1 HILL
7.60
3.30
19.70
-3.42
23.69
-t97
I<ASIL Or
-3t27
-l.JO
-32.40 32.34
.33.14
2.10
-tao t83
0.9.33
64.82
NINIL CHI!<
115 I( v
0.957 t F'RITZ CRHI<
67 . .31 I 180 o.9a9 -49.12
I 0 80 70,86 -9.77
. DIAMOND RIDGE
49.64
10.92
QUARTZ Cl<
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT = 96 MW
LOSSES • .37 MW
-34.96 35.56 -46.55 46.89 2.20
-2.89 3.18 -8.i9 8.87 0.90 BRADLEY t-=.;;._----~~+-...;;;.;.;;._....::.:.~+-=:..... JUNCTION
BRADLEY
LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
0.976 11.03
69.14 4.99
CASE NO. 5
HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
SOLDOTNA TO
LNIVERSITY LINE OUT
. --------'---------------
1.030
19.48
BERNICE LAKE
1027 SPORTS LAKE '8.7."5
24.00 27.93 -27.93 27.93
12.20 6.92 -6.5.3 6.53
0.959
'6.27 4.46 -4.42
-5.58 5.47
-27.72 1.011
-7.21 16.95
27.72
7.21
SOLDOTNA
1.009
16.70
27.69 -0.00
-7.29 -0.00
1.009
16.70
0.00
0.00
UNIVERSITY
1.012 1.024
-8.."53 -9.42
-42.48
23.43
230 KV 115 KV
DAVES CJ<
58.87
0.996 -10.51
3.83
7.22
1.26
09
9.25
PORTAGE SW
0.996
4."5.61 -3.5.3
-21.28
13.60
-57.21 6·00
15.28
SEW-'RD
12.90 12..38 53..95 230 I<V -51.97 66.92
12.04 -6.60 5.50 1J.'K) -6.93
-1.87 36.77
3.79 -2.66
0.992
KENAI TIE 15.76
19 KV
1.87 11~ KV
SKI HILL 3.70 -4.13
t023
19.44
1.50
-5.57
1.008 2.53
16.77
5.59
-3.46
7.60
3.30 KASILOr
-13.19
0.16
-13.34 13..34
1.78 -1.78
1.018
13.45 18.46
-2.94 NINILCHIK
rRIT Z CREE I<
taO 1.032 -28.70
21.15 -2.43 o.ao DIAMOND RIDGE
1.002 -14.95
7.07 -5.43
OUARTZ CK
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 1~2 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT • :,7 MW
LOSSES • 8 MW
1.050
24.50
.....,,.,.__....,_-I 67.00
28.86 -66.48 67.00 3.58
1.87 -4.43 3.58
COOPER LAKE
-15.25 15.35 -26.40 26.50 2.20 BRADLEY
~2::.;..14;..;.... ___ -.:;2·;;;.;95~--.:;2 . .;;.01_...;;t;;;;5.3~_...;;,;0.90=-• JUNCTION BRADLEY
LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
1.027 11.05
20.24 4.95 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO.6
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
'S88 PEAK LOAD
SOLDOTNA -UNIV. LNE
OUT -68 KW TRPPED
AT BRADLEY LAKE
CL8S9
12.00
24.00
t2.00
D.857
lt75
BERNICE LAI'E
~': SPORTS LM£
24.87 24.87 24.67 2!!>.'5 0.891 -n 12.41 -12.41 12.43 14.97
-25.15
0.87 -12.43
-o.JO
SOLDOTNA
0.894
\5..25
25.19 -QJX)
T2.42 -o.oo
O.IM
!1.25
Q.CIO
0.00
UNIVERSITY
1.011 1.023
-8.61 -9.87
DAVES Ck
48.&4
0..949 -t9..80
t97
7.24
-2.57
55.77
22.38
PORTAGE SW
0.973
l3.54 -4.86
-29.56
-47.14
23.56
13.60
6.00
SEWARD
12.90 43.51 2l0 av -4 '1.58 56.52
26.16 -20. 5.50 2V.63
KENAI TIE 18.12
-ll.26
19.66 11!1 KV
SKI Hfll -4.07
-23.36
0.896 2.47
'5.74
23.67
-2.&3
KAStL Or
-31.27
-D.67
-32.32 l2.l2
-t'5 t'5
0.937
JJD6 20.95
\41 NtNIL C HIK
0.1160 F'1t1TZ CM:U
23.44 1.80 0.191 -49.04
2e.98 -9.03
O.BO DIAMOND RIDGE
O.!M1 -14.94
5.21 -6.18
OUARTZ CK
tU:MAI P'EMINSut.A SUMMARY
GENERATION • 1~0 IIW
LOAD • 87 IIW
tPOWT • 41 MW
LOSSES • • MW
\050
l3.28
13!.00
4U& t-_-::132~.&4~13!-r::-:00~ 46.99
l).e -l9.44 46.99
COOPER LAKE
-34.86 35.45 -46..50 46.84 2.20
-2.21 2.•8 -7 . .4! 8.13 0.90 -ADLEY BRADLEY ~~~----~~~~~~+-~~..CT~ LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
OS?9 lt06
~~ .....
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PRO£CT
CASE NJ. 7
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
'Q88 PEAl< LOAD
SOLDOTNA -I.HV. LN:
OUT -BERNCE LAK£
GENERATION TRFPEO
1.030
IUS
BERNICE LAKE
1027 SPORTS LAKE '!l.-40
2-4.00 28.06 -28.06 28.06 -27.85 t014
12.20 5.+4 -5.06 5.06 -5.75 1.l60
D.991
12.91
12.90
5..50
17.94
-0.03
<4.34
-5.99
-4.30
5.89
-12.50
16.80 -13.09
7.20
0.99-<4
21.85
5.75
SOLDOTNA
ton
13.35
27.82
-5.84
12.50 <47.<4,
13.53 -7.22
KENAI TIE -o.02 32.07
12.<40 3.09 -3.56
SKI HILL
S9 KV
tot)
'llJ8
O.D2
-3.4<4
-3.72
\.84
3.73
-2.78
KASILOF'
-n.33
-o.52
-n.+4 1t+4
1.20 -1.20
1.019
1t52 14.74
-2.42 NINILCHtt<
11~ ICV
\024 F'RITZ CREEJC
~7 t80 1.033 -26.73
0 80 17.09 -2.83
. DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVERSITY
1.024
-9.66
-J7.~
'9.73
PORTAGE SW
DAVES CK
52.93
1.001 -9.57
2.00
7.23
t69
.16
U!S
-45.89 60133
1J.27 -5.93
t006 -14.95
<4.92 -4.34
OUARTZ Cl<
JB.OO
-1!.83
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERA liON • 1-45 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
1.041
t!.J7
EXPORT • ~2 MW
LOSS£5 • 6 MW
t050
20.B
60.00
26.87 ... _-:59~.58'!i!""""!60.~00~ 3.36
2.18 -4.69 3.38
~m
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
-13.32 13.40 -24.45 24.53 2..20 BRADLEY BRADLEY
l-t;:;:6:::,2 ___ -...:2:.:.;.4:;.:::6+--.:::.2·:.;:.46:::._...:t;;::;93=...,j....::::0.90:::::.-JUNCTION L AI<E
AHCHOR
~OINT
1.02e n05
15.26 4.95 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 8
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
60 UW GEI'£RA TON
AT BRADLEY LAKE
tOJO
20.91
BERNICE LAKE
t02S SPORTS LAKE 20.15
24.00 27.57 -27.87 27.137 -27.66 t010
12.20 7.61 -7.22 7.2.2 -7.88 !UQ
0.988
17.70
12.90
5.50
!CENAI
"6.13
0.60
4.51
-5.39
TIE
SKI HILL
14.27
-.115
0.991
17.20
1!18 KV
2.65
3.70 ~.43
t60
-~
t007 2.83
1!.23
6..38
-3.74
27£,6
7.88
SOLDOTNA
1.008
1!.14
27.6:3
-7.97
12..:32 56.7.3
12.90 -6.7J,
-2.65 .38. 77
4.09 -2.28
115 KV
KASILOr
-13.98
O.J.J.
-14.15 M.'fl
2.02 -2.02
1.017
20.06
NHGLCHJK
\022 FRITZ C1tE E K
2t t) taO \0.32 -29.54
22.!9 -2.27
0.80 DIAMOND RIDGE
UMIVERSITY
\02:3
-9.32
-44.70
25.09
DAVES Cl<
61.:37
0.994 -10.89
4.61
7.22
t06
68.59
9.83
-S4.54 69.49
12.80 -6.87
0.999 -~.94
7.99 -5.94
QUARTZ Cl<
PORTAGE SW
0.994
45.96 -3.10
-22.J5
13.60
-59.56 6.00
~.35
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 155 MW
LOAD • 87 WW
EXPORT • 80 MW
LOSSES • 8 MW
\Ql9 \050
24.31 26.37
~~~~~70.00
29.7'1 -69.4.3 70.00 .3.74
t76 -4.38 3.74
-~7 16.19 -27.24 27.34 2.20 IRilDLEY
t---:2:;;;.J:;.;:5;...... ___ -.:;.3·:.;;;13+--.;;.;t8:;.;:2~...:::t3;::.7~-0;;.;.90;:.;.,. JUNCTION BRADLEY
LAKE
ANCHOl'
POINT
t027 nos
2\95 4.95
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO.9
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
70 ~ GEI-I:RA TION
AT BRADLEY LAKE
BERNICE LAI<E
~·~ SPORTS LAKE
24.00 27.62 -27.62 27.62 -27 . .39 t005
12.20 10.57 -10.16 10.16 -10.76 2.3 . .31
27 . .39
16.38 10.76
t46
SOLDOTNA
1002
23.07
0.965 27 . .36
22.62 ~.74 -4.71 nB:3
-4.57 4.46
12.90 12.09 65.90
5.50 12.04 -4.99
0.986 -5.26 45 . .37 KENAI TIE 22.14 5.00 -121
u I<V
5.27 115 KV
SKI HILL 3.70 -5..:3.3
1.60
-8.97
1.001 3.73
23.22
9.01
-4.58
7.60
.3.30 KASILOF"
-15.61
1.26
-16.86 16.86
2.71 -2.71
101.3
17.04 25.51
-.3.72 NINILCHIK
1.019 F"RITZ CREEl<
26.77 t80 1.0.30 -.32.37
28.81 -1.90
0.80 DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVE ItS IT Y
1.02.3
-9.01
-5177
.3166
DAVES CK
69.51
0.982 -12.57
7.27
7.21
0.11
76.72
12.46
-62.9.:3 77.88
14.62 -8..'31
0.988 -14.94
n.15 -6..31
OUARTZ CK
PORTAGE SW
o.965
5.3.52 -1.66
-26.66
1.3.60
-67.12 6.00
20.66
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 165 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT • 67 MW
LOSSES • 11 WW
1050
.32.74
80.00
.32.571-_-=,:-:::9":::".2=-s -=8:-:::0_":::"0-::-i0 4.94
1.54 -4.79 4.94
-18.8~ 18.99 -30.04 30.17 Z.20
292 -'.61 -1."~5 tOO 0.90 BRADLEY BRADLEY ~:;;:· ;.:_ ___ .:;::~~-::::~:.:::__.::;::.:::..,~::.:;:;::..,. JUNCTION LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
t025 n.os
27.77 4.96 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE t\0. 10
POWER FLOW DIAGRA~
1988 PEAK LOAD
80 WI GEt-i:RA TION
AT BRADLEY LAKE
B_ERNICE LAKE
1.0 2.3 SPORTS LAKE 30.03
24.00 27.:31 -27..31 27.:31 -27.06 0.999
12.20 14.14 -13.70 13.70 -14.20 28 . .38
27.06
18.69 14.20
2.50
SOLDOTNA
0.996
28.14
0.981 27.ro
27.68 5.01 -4.99 -14.26
-3.58 3.47
12.90 11.81 74.92
5.50 11.02 -2 . .34
0.981 -7.84 51.87 KENAI TIE 27.22 5.85 -0.27'
&9 KV
7.85 115 KV
51<1 HILL 3.70 -6.17
1.60
-11.55
0.995 4.57
28.35
n62
-5.36
t<ASILOr
-19.22
2.06
-19.56 19.56
J.2B -.3.28
1.008
19.80 31.12
-4.15 NINILCHIK
1.016 F'RIT Z CREEIC
32.59 1.80 1.027 -35.21
34.69 -1.69
O.BO DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVERSITY
1.02.3
-8.72
-58..J2
39.14
DAVES CK
PORTAGE SW
0.975
60.67 -0.25
-31.45
13.60
-74."Z7 6.00
25 .. 45
0.968
77.J2
j...:..14:.::.3:::::3~
9.97
84.5J
15.37
-71.04 65.98
16.13 -9.86
0.974 -14.94
14.40 -6.27
QUARTZ CK
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 175 MW
LOAD • 87 WW
EXPORT • 74 MW
LOSSES • 14 MW
1.036 ~
36.61 39.26
90.00 ~45~---89.~06~"""'90 ......... 00~ 6.82
1.51 -5.77 6.82
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
-21.60 2181 -32·86 33·01 220 BRADLEY BRADLEY ~3.J=5;.._----.::::3·::..94+--.;:;1.0::.:2;.._..;:0·:.:..79~...::.:0.90;;.;..• JUNCTION LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
1.022 11.05
33.74 4.96 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. n
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
90 MW GENERA TON
AT BRADLEY LAKE
BERNICE LAKE
~~ SPORTS LAKE
24.00 26.96 -26.96 26.96 -26.68 0.992
12.20 lt28 -17.78 17.78 -18.13 .33.61
26.68
19.04 18.13
3.70
SOLDOTNA
0.988
33.39
0.976 26.64
.32.91 5.32 -5..30 -'8.16
-2.45 2.33
12.90 11.:i0 8.3.77
5.50 9.85 t05
0.975 -1).J8 58.26 ICENAI TIE 32.47 6.67 0.59
19 KV
1l.40 115 KV
SKI HILL 3.70 -6.96
teo
-M.tl
0.9e8 5.J6
l.l.65
14.21
-6.07
KASILOr
-:zun
2.77
-22.25 22.25
3.76 -3.76
1.003
2'2..57 SIO
~.47 NINILCHIK
t011 F' RITZ CR£ E K
38.5& U!O 1.024 -38.06
4t15 -1.62
O.BO DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVERSITY
1022
-8.45
DAVES Cl<
84.76
0.952 -1S.04
12.71
7.2~
-2.34
-9t99
18.J8
-78.85 9.178
f7 .53 -11.31
Q.957 -14.94
17.72 -6.22
QUARTZ CK
PORTAGE SW
0.962
fi7.:J7 114
-.36.~1
13.SO
-eo.97 6.00
.30.61
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI ~NINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 185 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT • 81 IIIW
LOSSES • 17 MW
t050
45.96
moo 38.J4t-_-:98.=a~4"""'=1CO.=oo::-i 9.37
1.64 -7..31 9.37
-24.37 24.64 -35.69 35.86 2.20 BRADLEY
~3;.;.;.6o..7 ____ -4_._o.....,.-_o_.83-...._.;;.;0.~72~-0~.90;;.;;..,. JUNCTION BRADLEY
LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
t019 11.05
J9.90 4.96
HOliER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE~-12
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
'()() tMi GEt-£RA TK>N
AT BRADLEY LAKE
tOOS
-42.-41
BERNICE LAKE
o.m SPOIITS LAKE -41.&4
24.00 26.9.1 -26.9.3 .26.9.3 -26.64 0.9e9
t2.20 1!1.34 -17.82 17.82 -18.04 Jg.gg
0.953
3~t26
t2.Sm
~
S.07
:3.76
5.31
-2.47
-5.2B
2.J6
o.gs1
215.54
18.04
SOLDOTNA
0.9e5
.39..78
2&.eO
'8.011
n.52 ~ . .:w
9.e9 -4.-40
-1.3.09 .22 KENAI TIE :38.80 6.02 -2.25
&i I<V
13.1.3 11~ ICY
SKI HILL 3.70 -6.27
1.60
-16.8.3
0.965 4.67
-40.07
1).98
-5.26
I<ASILOr
-24.56
1.96
-25.15 25.15
2.62 -2.62
0.987
~ 43.83
-3.11 NINILCHIK
0.999 rRITZ CMEIC
-45.73 \80 1.016 --41.16
48.56 -3.34 O.~ DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVERSITY
1.022
-6.2:3
DAVES Cl<
91.50
0.92:3 -S.OI5
15.715
7.30
-4.45
23.51
-815m 1l1.03
20.55 -1-4.-41
0.926 -14.9.3
21.54 -6.14
QUARTZ CK
PORTAGE SW
0.943
73.17 2.5-4
--43.95
'1.3.60
-!8.77 6.00
.37.gs
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE 1
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 195 WW
LOAD • 87 MW
EXPORT • 87 WW
LOSSES • 21 MW
1.050
53.79
m.oo
4 t50 t-_-:::ll:::e:-:.s=-=7:'"""::::oo=-.oo==i 18.28
3.61 -14.98 18.28
-27.35 27.70 -38.75 38.96 2.20
2.31 -2.61 -2.36 2.44 0.90 8RA-OLEY BRADLEY ~:.:=.;---.....:::=..:..t......::::::::....,_~~...::.:::.::... JUNCTION L AI<[
ANCHOR
POINT
tooe nos
47.18 4.97
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE f'.(). 1J
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAt< LOAD
ro lAW GEt£RATCN
AT BRADLEY LAI<E
BERNICE LAKE
0 ·97 " SPORTS L AICE .o485o4
24.00 26.72 -26.72 26.72
12.00 18.53 -17.99 13.02
0.927
19.01
3.89
4 6.05 5.26 -5.23
'12.90
5.50
-2.42 2 . .:32
0.926
KENAI TIE 45.57
69 I<V
15.81
SKI HILL 3.70 -S,.4B
teo
0.940
46.96
-19.50
J.88
'19.70
--4..33
KASILOF'
-27.29
1.03
-28.04 28.03
\:50 -1.:50
().969
28.56 53.25
-1.53 NINILCHIK
0.98!1 F'RilZ CREEK
53.38 tao t007 -44.29
56.46 -5..32
O.BO DIAMOND RIDGE
UNIVERSITY
1.021
-8.01
-7~.48
71.11
PORTAGE SW
0.922
78.-45 3.96
-51.52
13.60
-91.68 6.00
-45.-43
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI PE~NSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 205 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
t021
58.68
EXPORT .. 92 MW
LOSS£S • :16 MW
1.050
82.13
1-:~:::-:::::::-::~120.00 «.68 -1'18.26 120.02 7.54
5.89 -23.68 28.46
-30 . .:36 30·79 ~'\.82 "2·08 220 BRADLEY !RADLEY
t--'0;.;.;.7_4 ____ -0~.&4'""""i--4_,._14 __ 4.-.42~-0;;.;.90;;.;;..• JUNCTION LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
0.998 tl05
54.98 4.98
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 14
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
120 WW GEt'-ERA TION
AT BRADLEY LAKE
1.030
0.77
24.00
12.20
0.~2
-2.49
BERNICE LAKE
25.1.3 -26.1.3
4.62 -4.24
17.87
-0.26
4.28 -4.23
-6.22 6.12
1028 SPORTS LAKE 0.01
28.1.3
4.24
-27.92 t015
-4.94 -1.80
27.92
4.94
SOLDOTNA
1.013
-2.05
27.89 61.76
-5.04 -14.24
UNIVERSITY
t015 1.025
-7 . .:33 -51.31
-6tOJ -6.88
-2.22 5.71
230 KV 115 KV
DAVES CK
20.73
1.015 -4.35
-5.80
7.26
2.93
27.98
1.43
PORTAGE SW
1.01.3
6.513 -8.29
-8.45
13.60
-20.53 6.00
2.45
SEWARD
12.90 13 . .:30
-6.56
230 I<V -13.17 28.12
5.50
l-20 I
0.9951
KENAI TIE -:5.01
-7.04 -52.19
7.68 4.37
&i J<V
7.56
-8.00 Sl<l HILL 3.70 ~=-'
1.50
7.60
-tt26
6.40
tt34
-7.22
J.JO KASILOr ~ -18.94
-1.1.3 3.9.2
-'19.27 19 . .27
5.20 -5.20
1.020
0.94
NINILCHIK
115 I< v
1.025• F'RITZ CREEl<
2.44 1 tao t033 -34.91 oao 4.74 o.J2 I . • DIAa.tONO RIDGE
3.32 -1.91
t01!i -14.go
-4.50 -1.41
QUARTZ Cl<
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 175 MW
LOAD • 87 WW
t039
6.45
EXPORT • 82 MW
LOSSES • 6 MW
t050
9.14
1-:::-:::-:::o::--::"::"'::'::-i 90.00 35.14 -89.07 90.00 -0.06
-0.5-4 1.06 -0.06
COOPER LAKE
-21.31 21.52 -32.57 32.71 2.20 BRAOLE y BRADLEy
1-~5~ . .3~0~------5~·~90~~0~.9~5 __ -_,=.2~2+-0~.90~.
ANCHOR
POINT
t029 1t05
3.60 4.95
JUNCTION LAKE
HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE N:J. 15
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
'S88 PEAK LOAD
go MW GENERA TK)N
AT BRADLEY LAKE
•
24.00
12.20
0.981
3.25
BERNICE LAKE
27.31 -27.31
14.18 -13.74
"S.69
2.51
5.02 -4.99
1023 SPORTS LAKE 5.59
27.31 -27.06 0.999
1.174 -14.23 3.94
27.06
14.23
SOLDOTNA
0.996
3.71
1.005
1.09
106.51
28.01 -28.01
UNIVERSITY
1.011 1.024
-5.69 -7.78
-104.41 -14.63
18.85 9.68
230 I<V 115 KV
DAVES CK
28.79
1.007 1-7.08
-2.16
7.24
2.22
36.03
4.65
PORTAGE SW
1.008
14.79 ,-5.70
-12.09 I
1.3.60 -,..,.16.00 •
6.09
I
i
SEWARD
-3.57 3.45
12.90 -11.8'1 11.81 12\69 230 KV
I -2\32 36.27:
5.50 16.80 -'0.66 11.01 -10.47 8.42 -4.87
7.20
0.9811 -22.10 ICE NAI TIE 2.78 16.73
-91.07
19.92
tOt:! -14.95
-0.43 -3.56
58 KV
22.23
SKI HILL 3.70 -1&.82
teo
-25.93
15.22
26.34
~.34
I<ASILOr
-33.94
12.,04
-35.12 35.12
11.:>8 -11.:>8
1.002
35.97 1).06
-11.23 NINILCHik
115 KV OUARTZ CK
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 237 MW
LOAD • 87 MW
1.029
19.49
£)(PORT • 133 WW
LOSS£5 • 17 WW
1.050
24.02
tOt:! F'RITZ CREEK 15.2.00
12.92 tao 1.022 -52.05 52.58'""'-""!',4~9~.34~15:-.!2~.00~ s.J5
0 "'0 15.86 ~...;3;;.;.;.5;.;;6 __ -... ;;.;"'·_41-+.1~0.~49.;:..__8:::;..3::::.5::...;
·"' DIAMOND RIDGE j f
-37.77 .38.45 -49.50 49.85 2.20 7 5 BRADLEY BRADLEY
COOPER LAKE
CASE NO. '6 ~10;.;.·4...;3;.._.----'X>.--.-0-+---.·11..__--...;4.;.;'4.;;;.6+-0;.;.·90;...;;_. JUHC T 10 N LAKE
1.018 11.05
ANCHOR
POINT
15.06 4.96 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
POWER F'LOW DIAGRAM
1988 PEAK LOAD
152 MW GEI\ERA TION
AT BRADLEY LAKE
BERNICE LAI<E
1.030
2.93
t024 SPORTS LAKE 2.28
26.80 2~.91 -23.91 23.91 -23.73 t004
'12.'KJ n.s4 -11.31 n.J1 -'12.10 0.83
23.73
19.29 12.tl
2.63
SOLDOTNA
1.001
0.63
0.979 23.70 62.51
-0.26 3.15 -3.14 -'12.20 -20.81
-4.92 4.80
15.30 -16.66 16.66 17.93
6.90 19.80 -1.3.70 14.J5 -9.28
8.90
0.982 -.37.52 ~88 KENAI TIE -0.67 19.02 8.91
6& I<V
37.61 115 I<V
Stet HILL 4.40 -18.81
2.00
-42.21
1.001 16.8'1
\49 43.12
-15.95
56.61
-6.97
KASILOF
-87.05
1t40
1.006 -20.88
4.02 7.82
-23.33 21.33
7.94 -8.134
2.00 1.010
0.90 6.51
1.01<4 F'RIT2
8.40 2.20 1.023
tOO 1t29
DIAMOND RIDGE
-25.91 26.23 -39.50 39.72
7.55 -7.91 1.58 -1.51
1.019 \3.28
ANCHOR 9.87 5.32
POINT
1.009
-t.38
-82.40 82.40
2.3.88
UNIVERSITY
t0\3 1.024
-6.59 -6.6.3
-61.16 -9.76
9.45 7.66
230 I<V 115 KV
DAVES CK
23.71
tOtl -5.81
-4.31
8.73
2.14
.32.43
l.66
PORTAGE SW
1.0()
9.~ -7.21
-t:>.22
\3.60
-23.44 6.00
4.22
SEWARD
230 KV -17.67 32.6.3
6.67 -3.90
K
-42.32
0.31
2.60
1.20
HOMER
t0\3 -14.95
-2.77 -2.77
QUARTZ CK
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 UW
LOAD • 103 UW
EXPORT • 105 MW
LOSSES • 12 MW
1.032 1.050
COOPER LAKE
90.23 13.39 17.41
0.46
135.00
42.67 -132.90 135.00 6.77
0.01 -0.47 6.77
BRADLEY BRADLEY
JUNCTION LAKE
CASE 1'(). 17
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
1995 PEAK LOAD
BASE CASE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
BERNICE LAKE
tOJQ~ 2.63~
1022 SPORTS LAKE 1.99
26.80 23.5.3 -2.3.53 2.3.53
12.'0 15.99( -15.61 15.61
S.67
3.69
'
-2.3.32 0.997
-16.26 0.62
2~2
"6.26
SOLDOTNA
0.993 1.003
0.43 -1.55
-23.29 79.95 -79.84 79..84
UNIV(RSITY
1.011 1.024
-6.68 -8.73
-713.63 -9.22
13.33 ~
230 I<V 115 ICV
DAVES CIC
23.16
1.008 -6.26
-4.50
8.72
1.92
-.31.88
4.34
-18.79
0.97 4 -.l.l)
-0.48 .3.49 -3.47
.3.61
-16.34 -24.81 {'27.8.3 !-27.83
15.30
6.90
-.3.74
-16..33 '16 • .3.3 17 . .39
19.80 -12.51 < 13.'0 -1).6-4
~ <
0.976 -.35.52 1-54.85
-0.86 23.56 15.12 ICENAI TIE
151 I<V
35.82
Sl<l Hll L 4.40 -2.3.32
..J.!}!L -40.22
0.991 21.32
t31 41.'15
115 I("
' 230 kV -17.12 .32.07
6.10 -4.59
tOll -14.95
-2.97 -.3.51
OUARTZ Cl<
PORTAGE SW
1.009
9.30 -7·35
-10.65
13.60
-22.90 6·00
4.85
SEWARD
COOPE:R LAKE
-20..39
8.20 55.60
'70 -1305 ~ KASILOF
-T2~92
23.00
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
CENERA liON • 220 MW
LOAD • 103 WW
0.9.38
0.991 20.96
.3.91 6.74
18..52 -20.52
6.74 -7.&4
2.00 0.959
-18.25 0.90 3.12
-7 ·41 NMCHII<
0.97 2.20
1.029
132.89 17 .9.3
6.00
EXPORT • 102 MW
LOSSES • 1!) WW
1.050
21.92
FRITZ CREEK 135.00
0.13 -6.00 12.37 1.00
16.05
5.41
0.923 II -132.89 135.00 12.37 0
DIAWONO RIDGE II ...----------___,
-15.89 2.60 -6.20 2.60 BRADLEY E CASE 1'(). 18
ANCHOR
POINT
-6.93 0.46 -1.20 1.20 JUNCTION BRtAOI<LE y
0.924 13.29
0.23 6.46 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM '
1995 PEAK LOAD
BRADLEY Jl..N:TQ\1 TO
FRITZ CREEK LINE OUT I
\022
2.51
BERNICE LAKE
1.0t3 SPORTS L AI<E 1.86
26.60 2.3 . .37 -2.3..37 2.3..37 -2.3.1.3 0.965
12.t:l 17.77 -17 . .36 17.36 -17.90 D.51
19.8.3
4.4.3
23.1.3
17.90
SOLDOTNA
0.981 0~
0.96.3
-o.62
15.30
6.90
3.62
-.3.27
ICENAI TIE
SKI HILL
O.J1 -1.66
-3.60
.3.14
0.~
-tOO
&9 KV
-~.16
-13.26
29.76
o.~m 11.26
-0.22
-29.29
-11.1!
16.20 15.86
12.63 -12.66
~..39 122.01
13.J8 .35.29
115 ICV
KASILOr
0.947 2t09
-t51 H8
-20.58
-8.11
230 ltV
UNIVERSITY
t009 t02~
-6.76 -8.62
-76~ -8.69
19.51 8.83
230 KV 115 I<V
DAVES CK
22.62
\004 -6.99
-·4.66
8.72
1.59
.31.34
5.40
-16.58 3\.52
ll.28 -5.65
\005 -14.95
-3.1.3 -4.6.3
OUARTZ Cl<
PORTAGE SW
1.006
6.77 -7.49
-11..37
1.3.60
-22..37 6 ·00
5 . .37
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KENAI ~ENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 103 MW
EXPORT • 19 MW
LOSSES • 18 MW
\050
26.J6
0.890 F'RIT Z CREE IC ..._..~...,....,.,.,........-~135.00
-4.72 2.20 0.874 -132.87 135.00 15.46
tOO -5.651---H--4--...:t:l::::·::::.01:,._16.::::,.;.;:_46:::...j
DIAWOND RIDGE
16.0B -15.91 2 ·60 -2·60 2·60 BRADLEY BRADLEY
t-5-.69;.;;.... ___ -.;..;7·;;;,;09~....;0..;.;;.5.;;.5_-_t;;;:20~__;;;t20;;.;;.-. JUNCTION LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
0.875 1.3.30
-5.5.3 6.54
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 19
POWER F'LOW OtAGRAM
1995 PEAK LOAD
BRMX..EY J.N:TOI TO
FRITZ CREEK Lr£ OUT
BERNICE LAKE
~~
29.JO 120 . .36 -20.36
1.3.20 1.3.16 -12.88
1024 SPORTS LAKE 0.26
0.974
-2.44
1
20.:34
:3.74
t61 -t59
20 . .36 -20.20 t002
12.88 -1:3.80 -0.92
20.20
'1.3.80
SOLDOTNA
0.999
-t09
-20.18 68.47
-'1.3.92 -2t66
-5.07
17.80 21.41 15.8.3
4.95 ~~-~;....;-2141
8.00
KENAI TIE
SKI HILL
23.00 -15.35
10.40
0.978
-2.76
ea t<V
s.ao
-15.66
-14.90
1.lJ6 0.996 ~=.;....-,
-0.76
15.09
-0.93
16.:31
-9.75
15.42
115
KASILOF'
0.990 -24.59
0.:35 9.6:3
-9.46
75.79
0.29
KV
-28.23 25.23
8.81 -1).21
3.00 0.995
140 3 . .}8
NINILCHIK
t002 F'RITZ
5.70 2.60 t016
t20 9.23
DIAMOND RIDGE
-31.38 3t85 -48.37 48.71
7.B:3 -7.87 -0.26 0.87
t009 '6.52
ANCHOR 7.49 8.0
POINT
1.008
-2.76
68.:39
23.85
UNIVERSITY
t012 t024
-7.11 -9.14
-67.52 -6.75
7.20 6.81
:ZJO I<V 115 t<V
DAVES CK
20.61
tOI) -5·38
-5.58
9.80
1.90
30.40
3.48
PORTAGE SW
tO I)
6.81 -8.10
-9.51
1:3.60
-20.41 6.00
3.51
SEWARD
230 KV -15.62 .30.57
6.65 -3.81
CREEK
-52.71
-2.67
4.00
t80
HOMER
5.3.25
3.89
1.00 -14.95
-4.13 -2.84
QUARTZ CK
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 120 MW
tOJO
11.84
EXPORT • 88 MW
LOSSES • 12 MW
1.050
15.84
135.00
-1:32.89 135.00 1).45
-4.n 1045
COOPER LAKE
BRADLEY BR.t.DLEY
JUNCTION LAKE CASE NO. 20
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
2003 PEAK LOAD
BASE CASE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
BERtUCE LAKE
0.959 .l?Jg SPORTS LAKE
29.JO 20.00 -20.00 20.00
13.20 15.29 -15.94 15.94
0.903
34.16
20.70
4.151
178
-4.32
-'!9.eo 0.933
-13.45 35.92
19.!0
13.4-5
SOLDOTNA
0.929
35.73
"19.n 0.00
-15.51 -o.oo
0.929
35.73
-0.00
0.00
UNIVERSITY
1.012 1.022
-7 .8.3 -8.62
-60.41
53.94
230 KV 115 KV
DAVES CIC
80.98
0.919 -2179
12.67
9.94
-5.24
-W.91
27.04
PORTAGE SW
0.945
63.54 0.82
-42.87
\3.60
-77.14 e.oo
36.67
SEWARD
17.80 21.24 83.47 230 ICY -n.94 1112.88
25.23 -19.12 8.00
KENAI TIE
SKI HILL
0.928
J6.06
0.929
J7.1S
15.69 -3.59
-10.51 -74.12
8.49 -4.08
IU55 115 KV
-8.72
-15.95
6.42
16.10
-e.92
KASILOf"
-25.60
2.62
0.917 -'M.9J
e.o -6.n
OUARTZ CIC
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GEN£RATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 120 MW
EXPORT • 71 MW
LOSSES • 23 NW
COOPER LAKE
-29.28 26.28
1.54 -2.94
3.00 0.948
t-40 4Q.27
NINILCHtK
F'RITZ CREEK
0.993 -53.88
46.17 -'1).55
DIAMOND RIDGE
1.050
52.73
~::o:-::~~~\35.00 54.50 -1.:32.7.'3 135.00 36.:51
12.15 -31.18 38.31
32·98 -49'51 49.88 4 '00 BRADLEY BRA.DLEY ~------...;;0;;:·2:.;;;8+--...;.7.;.:;•9.;..1 ---=:8;..:.·7.:::.5 +-..;;;t80~ JUNCTION LAKE
ANCHOR
POINT
o.saeo '6.53
44.36 8.19 HOMER
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE t-XJ. 21
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
200.'3 PEAK LOAD
SOLOOTNA TO
l.NVERSITY LN: OUT
BERNICE LAKE
0.973 70.00
-t25~
I -0·965 SPORTS LAKE
I
-1.86
29 . .30 ::?0,01 -20.01 20.01 -19.81 0.938
1.3.20 . 16 . .30 -15.95 15.95 -16.49 -3.12
12.~:; ~
I SOLDOTNA
0.934 0.957
-.3 . .30 I --4.571
UNIVERSITY
I
tOOl I t02.3
-8.00 -10.05
I
I -44.15 I -t6J r.89
1
l'J.95
I 2.30 KV 115 KV
I
I
DAVES CK I
~~~~I 0.9e6~
-7.41 I
9.78
-0.12
25.2.3
9.65
1-19.76 145.01 -44.9.3 44.9.3
-t77 .-15.56 ?-51.47 <5.3.75 ~5.3.751
4.2o 1 ~ I ~.:=..:....-~;...~~-21.23 21.2.3 i 10.74 230 KV
2.100 -14.60 ( 15.66 ,-19 . .37
~"0.40 I <
0.913 I -57.20
-5.20 70.74 ,_;....;;;;.;.._-+---. ei I<V
. ~:?~. I
SKI HILL 5.10 ~
2 . .30 . ~ -6.3.84
0.921 I 65.71
-t321
115 KV
-l'J.4.3 25.371
16.35 1 -10.os
0.9831-14.94
-6.07 -6.29
QUARTZ CK
I 1.3.60
-15.30 I MO.
7.51
SEWARD
COOPER LAKE
KASILOr
0.894 -77.7.3
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 120 MW
4.60 I 53.50 I
E>CPORT • 59 MW
LOSSES • 41 MW
-90.65 87.65
34.01 -.35.41
.3.00 0.888
1.-40 17.9.3
I
1.017
45.33
t050
49.2.3
0.916 rRIT Z CREEK i--........ ----~~1.35.00
27.28 2.60 0.974 -129.18 132.77,-1.32.77 1.35.00 .32.80
t20 J/3.62 -10./39 25.89 I -25.8So .32.80
DIAMOND RIDGE j
-100.6.3 106.25 -122.78 125.18 1 4.00 BRADLEY
1--19~·~31 ____ -~9.~05~....;;0....;;.8~0-~9:.=..0;;.,9 -1-,.;;;1.80:;.;;.,.· • J UNCTION
ANCHOR
POINT
0.9~3 16.54
.3.3.72 ~8.2=5 __ ., HOMER
BRADLEY
LAKE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 22
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
200.3 PEAK LOAD
BRADLEY Jt.N:TON TO
SOLDOTNA LNE OUT
•
BERNICE LAKE
0.943
-2.9.3
17.80
8.00
KENAI TIE
SKI HILL
ANCHOR
POINT
0·997 SPORTS LAKE -0.14
20.04 -19.85 0.971
16.04 -16.73 -1...32
19.85 n I SOLDOTNA
0.967 0.983
-1.48 -3.11
-19.83 62.05
-t81 -16.81 -37.11
4.12 I
,-21.19 21.19 14.35
23.00 14.52 ( 15.50 -14.78
1).40 ' 0.9<461 44.11 121.87
-3.25 21.42 31.77
&i I<V
-43.69
5.10 -20.92
2.30 1 38.59
0.953 16 •62
-2.14
115 KV
-37.69
-17.66
KASILOf
0.918 28.19
-3.79 '13.36
-27.15
-12.!!0
61.97
.39.48
230 ICV
HOMER
UNIVERSITY
1.007 I 1.024
-7 . .35 -9.40
-61.08
23.56
230 I<V 115 ICV PORTAGE SW
1.004
5.29 l-8.4 9
-11.39 I
'13.60
~ ~ DAVES19.~~ I
1.0001-7..2 9
I -6.06l
I 9.79
1.02
28.66
6.27
-14.08 29.02
12.42 I -6.62
1.000 -14.94
-4.62 -5.80
OUARTl CIC
KENAI PENINSULA SUMMARY
GENERATION • 220 YW
LOAD • 120 YW
EXPORT • 150 MW
LOSSES • 20 MW
SEW A.RD
COOPER LAKE
CASE NO. 2.3
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
POWER FLOW DIAGRAM
200.3 PEAK LOAD
BRADLEY Jt..N:TON T 0
FRITZ CREEK LINE OUT
UNIVERSITY
1.00 t024
-7.2.3 -9.26
-64..35 -6.05
13.20 7.50
BERNICE LAKE 230 KV 1~ ICY PORTAGE SW
t024 70.00 1.006
0.52 ro 6.10 -8.29
-10.18
~~SPORTS LAKE
13.60
-19.70 6.00
4.E
29.30 20.06 -20.06 20.06 -19.88 o.991
13.20 16.41 < -16.09 16.09 -16.86 -t17
<..
19.88 DAVES Cl<
19.89
20.64 15.86 -6.()8 1.007 4.69 -~82
SOLDOTNA 9.19
0.987 0.998 t57 SEW ARD
-\33 -2!¥7
-19.65 !-29.68
0.9&4 -3..80 ~ -19.8'5 65.27 -ta.20 15.20 4.50
-2.12 \85 -UM -15.96 !-27.58(29.n !-29.77
-4.20 4.07 <..
17.80 -2t16 2\16 'e.13 2.30 ICV -14.90 29.85
8.00 23.00 1-14.47 < 15.41 -11.49 8.81 -4.85
~ <..
0..967 -31..31 !-50.40 t008 -14.15 KENAI TIE -.3.02 24.03 16.59 -4.39 -.3.95
~~ KV co OPER LAKE
31.57 11~ KV QUARTZ CIC
SKI HILL 5.10 -23..85
~ -36.67
0.984 21.55
-o.51 37.51
-20.82
9.50 5t06
~ -'14.90 KENAI f!IENINSULA SUMMARY
KASILOr CI:NERATION • 220 MW
LOAD • 120 MW
-t25.86 EXPORT • 84 MW
19.66 LOSSES • 16 MW
Q.982 27.79
1.96 11.76
23.!M -26.SM
'10.41 -1\81
J.OO 0.936
-2~.~ 1.40 -().36 1.027 t050
132.87 16.04 20.02 -1J.5S NINIL CHIIC 9.60
0.906 F'RIT Z CREEK 1.35.00
-1.88 2.60 0.884
-J..O& II -9.60 16.04
-132.87 ~00 16.04 0
t20 DIAMOND RIDGE II 20.~ -20.56 4.00 -4.00 4 ·00 BRADLEY BRADLEY 9.36 -9.56 1.15 -1.60 1.80 JUNCTION LA ICE
Q.886 16.56
ANCHOR -2.!19 &41 HOMER POINT
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
CASE NO. 24
POWER f'LOW
2CX>.J PEAK
DIAGRAM
LOAD
BRADLEY Jt.N:Tk.JN TO
FRITZ CREEK LINE OUT
2.3 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA
This section presents the load flow study input data for 1988, 1995, and
2003.
B1-1450098-2 2-28
1988 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA
198S PEAK LOAD -135 t!H AT 8PAOLEY LAKES ; 70 !IH (;EN AT 8EPn!:::E Ot..TA TABLE LIS It{G Pt..GE t~O.
;:30 Llt~E FPC!l SOLDCTNA TO AH:!-'C'!!AGE: N::H 115 l!r~!: FRITZ CP T'J ~OLDOTrl~ F c::~ c~.s p~tl
;:CI!9e3 1~:2u.:u. it.PPEO :..T i:~t.:lLEY L JUil. BL'T ~lOT T.:.Pr'ED AT KASILOF fGrL.APAllOJ
BUS
TYPE
BE
B
BE
B
eo
eo
5
eo
e
OW~ER •• BUS NAI!E ••
A
D
AtlCHORGE 115
.0.'1CHR CT 115
eELUGA 138
E!ELL':;A. 230
BERr~CE 69
e.E!:HCE 115
e~AL'L Y 115
E<~l Y Jtl 115
:aocR LK 69
DAVES CH 69
B O.~'.'ES CK 115
0!!~~:~ P.G 69
O!l~P'J PG 115
A E. TE~I!~f!.. :30
4
2
5
s~~.·~n
. , ••• LO.:.O .•••••• DEVICES •.
ZC~E t!H" 0 !WAR ~IH HVAP P HA:O:
1.8
8. 0
2''1. 0
0. 8
3.4
12.2
3Z5. 7
70.0
135.0
15.0
0 SCHE'J VC'~..,T LI~'IT$ F'£l!CT£ E:'..:3 ~~:::: C ,,
P GEN Q 1\A.X 0 ~liN V n~X V t-1IN ••.. r-1.:.~~:;.... v;.,;:
tll-i 1-1\:'t..P HVt.~ VHOLD St.:":!~;_ ~0
~.030
l. 050
34.3
50.0 -50.0 1.050
7.3 -l.S 1.030
so
~
3
8
80
e
A E!-'LUTNA 115 34.3 14. 6 30.0 26.6 -13.~ 1.030
3
3
B
3
B
e
e
B
e
e
e
0 F~ITZ CK 115
0 HO"EP 69
!UTP!"!ATL 138
A rnPrL~TL34. 5
C K;.S!LOF 115
r·£~{..:.: :r 69
1-.·;n: t..t:'t13'-~. s
n:::_c:,:F !15
.t•.:,:~·r;z :-:;:o
r:.:~.:.cr:~l: :30
p .•~:.CH~l: 138
c. HOR''l' 135
P .1-;C":!t;:: l ~ 5
P::JTGE S 1:..5
~ o:.:::1.;: c~ 69
C .".='TZ. CK 1.!.5
sc;;~co e9
0 s:...·: HI!..L 115
C '::C'LDOTr;A 69
o s~:...~~n~A. 115
D SJLO~TtlA 230
S~RTS LK 115
A T~ELt..ND 115
A TEELAr.;::) 138
A U"I'J~STY 115
US!VRSTY 138
A Utl!VRSTY 230
A IJ"!!IJRSTY3Q. 5
A H. TER!!ttl 230
2. 2 0. 9
11.C 4.7
24'1.3 10~.1
7.6 3. 3
1:.9
13.6
/.!)
3.7
16".8
93.6
130.7
5.5
6.0
3.0
1.6
1. z
39.9
55.7
>1
..•• FR011. • • . . •••• TO.. • • • LINE LINE T K
BUS NAflE KV BUS NAt!E KV TYPE OHNER R T
ANCHORGE 115 UNIVRSTY 115 L A
EKL UTNA llS L A
ANCHR PT 115 NINLCKIK 115 L
D ItlND RG 115 L
14.4 46.5 38.9 -7.5 1.030
11~. 0
-11.0
-11.0
14.4
N •••••• Z:-PI. ••••
RATE 0 ••• R •••••• X •••
0.0014 0.0063
0.0462 0.1525
0.0619 0.1223
0. 0449 0. 0886
14.0 -4.8 1.030
l. 000
••••• Y-Pil •••••
•.. G1 .•.•• Bl. .
0.0004
0. 0094
0. 0066
Q.0048
• •••• Y-PIZ •••••
• • • GZ ••••• B2 ••
0. 0004
0. 0094
0.0066
0.0048
TRAHSFORI~E:~
BUS 1 BUS Z
• . TAP.. • • TAP .• RE>lARt-:S
I REV. I
BELUGA 138 BELUGA 230 T A 0.0010 0.0111 138.00 230.00 FIXED TAP I REV. I
BELUGA 230 P .tlACKNZ: 230
9ELU'3A 138
L
T
BERNCE L 69 BERNCE 115 T
KEN.:.I TI 69
BERNCE L ll5 BERNCE L 69 T
SPRTS LH 115 L
BRADL Y L 115 BRDL Y JN llS
6RDL Y JN llS
BRDL Y JN 115 SOl~OTNA 115 L
FPITZ CK 115 L
EC~SLY L 1!5
:z:::-~:,_ Y L 1 ~5
COOPR LK 69 QOPTZ: CK 69
DAVES CK 69 DAVES C~ 115 T
s~;..;.:~o 69
~~V!:S CK 115 DC.r'TZ Ct-: 115 L
IJA\.1!:5 CK 69 T
po;-:-sE s u.s
OI!1BD RG 69 DI~lnD RG 11.5 T
!-i"'"~? 69 l..
D:lli'D RG 115 A!l:Hc PT 115 L
O!rr:J PG 6? T
Fi'I7;:: CK 115 L
~-7E'OH~JL 230 U~;~'.'t"STY :30
H. i1:'"'~~:1!.. :3 J
=~:TZ C~ l~S D!!' ·J ;:~ 1:.5 L
~::-s:... Y ~·' 1.13
A
A
c
c
e
e
100
100
10
10
30
30
0.0031
0.0010
0.0209
0. 0111
0.0500
O.Z300 0.3:50
0.0500
0.0272 0.1:20
0.0253 O.ll40
0.0253 0.1140
0.0~43 0.2907
0.0203 0.0913
o.c:53 0.1140
o.c:s3 o.1J40
o.o:1e o.C663
0.0420
0.3915
0. 5000
o. eon
0.0184 0.0~27
o.o~.~:c o.sc•oo
c. 0464 0. 2086
0.1 ?33
0.0362 0.0511
o.o~49 o.Ciee6
0.1933
o.0144 o.c6-:3
O.CIG37 G.C'~-$6
C.O!Ui.O .i··~·U3
::-.:·:~·: c .o::3
2-29
0.1824
0. 0025
0. 0079
0. 0073
0. 0073
0. 0189
0.0059
0.0073
0. 0073
o.oooe
c. 0103
0. 0054
0. 0136
0. 0004
0. 0048
0. 0043
c.o:~s
0. C•CC:
(1. OQ'H~
c. . -.
0.1824
0.0025
0. 0079
0. 0073
0. 00 73
0. 0189
0. 0 059
0.0(•73
O.C073
0.0008
0.0103
0. 0054
0. 0136
0.0004
0.0048
O.OC43
o.o:~s
0. occ::
c. ('('?4
c. c C':~3
C. '~C S9
230.00 138.00 FD~E'O Tt.P
69.00 115.00 FI~~~ TAP I PEV. I
115.00
69.00
109.00
69.00 FIXED TAP
109.00 FI~EJ TAP
69.00 FIXED Tt.P
{ P.E\1. J
IHV.I
I PE\'. l
{ ?£'.'.}
I PC'!. I
(PEV. J
6?.00 115.00 FIXED TAP 1,-EV. I
IF oV. I
1:5. 0 0 69.00 F!X~O TA?
( f;Ev. )
( i?~\.'. )
1988 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA (CONT)
1968 PEAK LOAD -135 HW AT BRADLEY LAK~S ; 10 tlW GE:i AT B£PtHCE
:!30 L n>~: Ft:~tl SOLCOTNA TO A•;;:HCP~G£; t"iEl< llS L!N~ FR'ZTZ CP TO so:,..OOTNA
~:OOPED .!l.i 6~.!.Clf."' L J!JH, BUT tlOT TAP!'£0 AT H.t.SILC::C (GIJ:...APAllOl
if c s
DATA TAeLE LISTING PAGE NO.
"':'I:::DI19S<!: 1~:~4!11
TRANSecp~::::
..•. FPC•l. • .... TO ..... LINE I.INE THE N •••••• Z-PI. •.••••.•. Y-Pll .•••••••• Y-PIZ .•.. ::us 1 C"JS :
E'.JS ~ltd:;, KV S~S ~-1.:~:~ t-:V TYPE(\~;~;::~ P T C PAiE 0 •.. !L ....• Y. •••••• Gl .•••. SH ••••. ,7 ....... SZ .• , .i:..=' .... 7AF •. RE:;L;:;r<:::;
HO!!Et 69 Dll!tl? PG 69 L 0 0. 036~ 0. 0511 0. 0004 0. 000'1 i REV. I
WrPNATL 138 U'fiVPSTY 138 L
P. HO~:lZ.F 138 L
P. h:::r~z:: l38 L
INTP~'ATL34.5 T
IHTRHATL34. 5 IHTRt!ATL 138
Kt.SII_OF 115 S><I HILL 115 L
NitlLCHlK 115
KENAI TI 69 BEPNCE L 69 L
SO~DOTNA 69 L
KNIH ARHH.S UN1VPSTY34.5
NINI.CH!K llS KASii.O< 115
ANCHP PT 115
P .!IACKN~ 13$ P .flACHNZ :30
THLAr<O 138
P.wcor;zF 138 L
p .IIACH!Z Z30 H. TEPllllL 230
P. t:f-CKllZ 138 T
P. 11.:.c:-:n: 130 T
6EL',.IGA ::30 L
P.nACXtf2 138 P.liACr<HZ 2~0 T
P. ;.r:;;:::;c::: 13S 1..
P.HOPNZF 138 P.i!ACr:NZ 138
lNTPt:ATL 138
P .Hoqr;z: ne P .tiAC><N: 138 L
INrRllATL 138
PORTGE S 115 DAVES CK 115
UtHVRSTY 115
-QARTZ CK 69 OA~TZ CK 115 T
COCP~ LK 69 I.
QARTZ CK 115 SOLDOTNA 115 L
QARTZ CK 69 T
DAVES CK 115 L
SEI-IAPO 6'1 DAVES CK 69
SKI HILL 115 SOI.OOTNA 115 L
KASilOF 115 L
SOLDOTNA 69 KENAI TI 69 l
SOlDOTNA 115 T
SOLDOTNA 115 SOLDOTNA 69 T
SOLOOTHA 230 T
OARTZ CK 115
SPRTS LK 115
SKI HILL 115 ~
SROL Y JH 115 l
SOLDOTNA 230 SOI.OOTNA 115 T
UHIVRSTY 230
SPRTS LK 115 8ERNCE l 115 L
SOLDOTNA 115 l
TEElAND 115 TEELANO 138 T
TH\.AllD 138 P. HACKHZ 138 l
TE:::L/,~J~ l!S T
UlllVRSTY 115 POPT~E S 115 L
AHC~CF:GE 115 L
Ut.j:VPSTY 138 T
UHIVRSTY 136 U:i!VPSTY 115 T
:.nc·~'r.'STY ;: :! 0 T
u:;rc"RSTY34. 5
u~{!\IF'ST'l"340.S T
um::"Tl 138 1..
;,;~HV~STY 2.30 SOt..OC"Tt:t., :3c L
u:HVP.STY l3S T
E. TEP!!NL Z3~
UNlVRST"':'34.5 U!'tiVPS"!'Y 115 T
WH:\1~~T'f !38 T
l!~C\'0 STY l~ e T
;.~~i!!-. .t.OHJ4, 5
A
c
A
0
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
e
e
e
e
e
B
0
0
c
c
c
c
e
c
0
E
c
E
c
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
12
12
30
30
zoo
zoo
100
100
0. 004'
0. 0038
0.0038
0.0~37
0.0189
0.0151
0.0151
0. Ot.t~O
0.0037 0.0440
0.0441 0.0571
0.0881 0.1?40
0.:~00 O.JZ50
0.0733 O.lC40
o.o<es o.1465
0.0881 0.1740
0.0619 0.1~:3
0. oczo
0. Oli6
0.0086
0. 0016
o. or.::~
0. oo:o
c. 003l
0. o::z
0 .1066
0. 0034
0.0108
0. o:::
o.c::z
o. o:D?
0 0020 0. 02::
0.0018 o.oo::
0. 0086 0. 0034
O.OC3e 0.0151
0.0018 o.oo::
0.0038 0.0151
0.0464 0.2086
0.0486 O.Zl78
0. 3420
o.ou8 o.oeol
0.0684 0.3070
0. 3420
0.0184 0.08Z7
0.3915 0.809Z
0.0162 0.0319
0.0441 0.0871
0.0733 0.1040
0. 0015
0.0684
0. 0038
0. 0162
0. 0643
0.1333
0.1333
0.0425
0.3070
0. 01 il
0.0319
0. ~90"'1
0.0015 0.0425
0.0182 0.1097
o. ozn o .1220
0.0038 0.017l
0.0812
0.0176 0.1066
c. 081:::
o.0486 o.:l7a
0.0014 0.0063
o. c:•o
0 .115S
o. o:"o
o.oo:2o o.o:::!
0.140
0.14 70
0.0047 C.Cl!!9
0.0182 0.1097
0.0020 0.02:2
0.0037 O.C:66
0. !!55
0.} 46i
0 .l4 7":1
o.::;as c.:..-~:,s
2-30
0.0027
0.04:69
o. o:69
0. 004 7
0.0094
o. oozs
o. oooe
0.0024
0. 0094
0.0066
0. 0134
0.1400
0. 0!10
0.1824
0 .103"4
0.1400
0. 0:69
0.1034
0. 0269
0. 0136
0.0142
0. 0008
0. 0186
0.0054
0.0103
0. 0017
0. 004 7
0. 0008
0.0186
0. 0011
0. 0017
0. 0189
0.1073
0.0079
O.OOll
0.0134
0. 0!42
0.0004
0.00:?.7
0 .l0/3
o.o:6s
0. 0024
0. ooo:
C. CillO
0. 0027
(J. o:69
o=69
O.OC47
0.0094
0. 0025
0. ocos
0. 0094
0. 0066
0. 0134
0.1400
0. ?llO
0.1400
0. 0 269
0.0136
o. Ol<+Z
0.0008
0. 0186
138.00 34.50 Fil<EO T~~
34.$~ 138.00 FIXED T~P IRE'/.;
138.00
Z30. or
:oo. 00
Z30.00 FIX!:O TAP
ne.~o ci~~o TAP
13e. 00 ; n~:::. -;;.p
(PEV. l
r P~\i. l
{REV. i
rPE\1. l
l38.QO :::3o.oo rn:c:: TAt:~ c::::::v.:
( ~E'\.'.
t t:·.:. )
69.00 115.00 FIY.ED TAP I REV. I
115.00 69.00 Fll<EO TAP
0. 0054 I REV. I
0.0103
0. 0017
0. 004 7
I REV. I
I REV. I
0.0008 I REV. I
0.0186
0. OOll
0.0017
o. 0189
0.1073
0.0079
O.OOll
69.00 US. 00 FlXCD TAP I REV. I
115.00
115.00
69.00 F IXEO TAP
230.00 FIXED TAP
UO. 00 llS. 00 FIXED TAP
fREV. l
( ;:t~\J' J
O?EV. J
IRE\'. I
iREV. I
115.00 138.00 FillED TAP I REV. I
o.on• c~o·:.J
138.00 115.00 FIX~~ T~P
O.C'l4Z (P.~V. l
O.OOC4 (0£\', l
115.00 138.00 F!X~D T~P C~~~-l
1~5.(10 3~.50 FI~E~ TA'=
136.00 115.00 FI~E: r:e
1!8~00 ::30.0C't FIX::~ T~".? iR;v. t
136.0~ 34.50 FIY.tD T~P
l38.00 34 .so rt~rc r.:.!:l
O.OOZ7 (~tv. l
C .1~73 U~E'.'. l
Z30.00 138.00 FIY.EO TAP
0.0:::66 {~!V.)
0. OQC~
0. c:: :r.:
".50
~.so
15.00 F!Y.: Tt:'l l';'£1}. 1
3e.OO f"!~: T.:C! n~--·.l
if:'2_ •• J
( P.:.·:. )
1995 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA
1995 PEAK LOAD -135 HH AT BRADLEY LAKES ; 70 HH &EN AT BERNICE DATA TABLE LISTING PAGE NQ.
230 LitlE FROH SOLDOTNA TO ANCHORAGE; NEW 115 LINE FRITZ CR TO SOLDOTNA FOR CASE RUN
TAPPED AT 51! ADLEY L JUN ANn I<ASILOF I GO!. .APAl34 I 7125/1983 13:40 '"'
SHUNT Q SCHEO
P GEN Q f!-'<X
VOLT LIHITS REHOTE BUS PER CENT
BUS
TYPE
••••• !.CAD. • • • • • • DEVICES •• Q HIH V f:t.X V ffiN .... IUliL... VARS
C>lH~R •• BUS NAHE •• ZONE P HW Q lfVAR HW HVAR P HAX HW HVAR HVAR \/HOLD SUPPLIED
BE
5
B~
B
BQ
B
BQ
8
BQ
6
B
B
B
B
B:l
8
B
B
BQ
B
B
BQ
B
6
6
9
9
s
B
8
B
BE
6
6
B
B
6
a
B
B
B
B
B
B
A AHCHORGE 115
D AtiCHR PT llS
A !lEI.UGA 138
A BELUGA 230
C 6ERNCE t 69
C BErtNCE I. 115
E B:<ADI.'I' I. 115
E !lROL 'I' JN 11S
B COCPR LK 69
F DAVES CK 69
B DAVES CK US
D DII!:lO RG 69
D crr:o RG 115
A E. TERIINL 230
A El<l..UTilA 11S
D FRITZ CK 115
0 HOl-IER 69
A ItmlNATI. 138
A ItmlNA Tl.34. S
D KASILOF 115
C KEHAI Tl 69
A KNIK AR!!34 .S
0 NWlCHIK llS
A P .W.Ch11Z 138
A P .m.:KNZ 230
A P .I~C~~:z 138
A P. ~C:lN!F 131!
A P .f;~~HZ~ 138
6 POP.TGE 5 US
B QARTZ CK 69
B CARTZ CK 11S
SEII~RO 69
D SXI HILL US
C SOLDOTNA 69
D SCI.OOTNA 115
D SOI.OOTl'lA 23 0
C SPHS LK llS
A TEEI.ANO 115
A TEELAHO 138
A UNIVRST'I' 115
A U!IIVRST'I' l38
A UNIVRST'I' 230
A UNIVRSTY34 .S
A H. TERHIIL 230
1
4 z.z 1.0
1 e.o 3.4
l
3 26.8 12.1
3
4
4
2
5
z
4
<I
1
1 3'1.3 14.6
4 2.6 1.2
4 ll.Z 5.9
1
l 244.3 104.1
4 a.2 3.7
3 15.3 6.9
1
4 z.o 0.9
l
l
1
1
l
2 13.6 6.0
2
2
5 8.4 3.8
4 4.'1 2.0
3 19.8 8.9
4
4
3
1 93.6 39.9
1
1
1
1
1 130.7 55.7
l
H C S
1.030
340.9 1.050
70.0 3'1.3 -23.2 1.030
135.0 so.o -50.0 1.050
15.0 7.3 -1.5 1.030
30.0 26.6 -13.2 1.030
'!6.5 36.9 -7.5 1.030
14.0 14.0 -4.8 1.030
-11.0
-11.0
l.OOO
.... FROH ......... TO ••••• LIHE LIHE T K E fi ...... Z-PI .......... Y-PI1 .... .
TRAHSFORHER
..... Y-PI:..... BUS l BUS 2
... &2 ..... BZ •••• TAP •••• TAP ..
0.0004
BUS NAHE KV BUS NAHE KV TYPE. OHNER
ANCHORGE 115 UNIVRST'I' 11S L A
EKLUTNA 115 L A
ANCHR PT 115 HI!t.CHIK 115 I.
DlHNO RG 11S L
0
D
R T C RAT£ 0 ... R ...... X ...... G1 ..... Bl..
0.001'1 O.DC63 0.0004
0.0'162 0.1S25 0.009'1
0.0619 0.1223
0.0'149 0.0886
0.0066
0. 00118
o. 0094
0.0066
0.0048
REtlARKS
(REV. I
BELUGA 138 6EI.UGA 230 T A 0.0010 0.0111 138.00 230.00 FIXED TAP fREV. I
BELUGA Z30 P.HACKt!Z 230 L
BELUGA 138 T
BERNCE L 69 BEI!NCE I. 115 T
KEtlAI TI 69 L
BERNCE L 115 BERNCE I. 69 T
SPliTS LK 1lS L
BRADL Y L 115 BRDL Y JN llS L
BRDL Y JN 115 1.
BRDL Y JN 115 I<ASII.OF 115 L
FRITZ CK 115 I.
eRAOI.'I' L 115 L
SRADL Y L 115 L
COCPR LK 69 QARTZ CK 69 I.
D•WES CK 69 DAVES ~ 115 T
SEH:.RO 69 L
DAVES CH 115 OARTZ CH 115 L
DAVES CK 69 T
PC~TGE S 11S I.
OIHMl 1!&. 69 OIHND RG 115 T
HC!~t;;R 69 L
OIHND R& 115 AIIC.HR PT llS l
Olt!!\1! RG 69 T
FRITZ CK llS L
_E. TERIINL 230 UNI\'llSTY 230 I.
K. TERi:~r-230 L
Er:l. U7NA 115 t.::CHOSG'E llS L
FRITZ CK 115 Ol!~!il llG 115 L
E:~:l!.. Y J~; llS L
A
A
c
c
c
c
E
D
E
E
B
F
F
e
F
B
D
D
D
D
D
A
A
A
0
D
1
2
100
100
10
10
30
30
0. 0031 0. 0209
0.0010 0.0111
0.0500
0. 2300 0. 32SO
o.osoo
0.0272 0.1220
O.OZ53 0.1140
0.0253 0.11'10
0. 0'!16 0.1881
0.0203 0.0913
O.OZ53 0.11'10
0.0253 O.lli!O
o.on8 o.0863
0. 0'120 0 .sooo
0.391S 0.809Z
0. 0184 o. 01!27
0.0420 o.sooo
O~OtJ64 o.;::oe6
0.1933
0.036Z 0.0511
0.0<149 0.0886
0.1933
0.01'1'1 0.0643
0.0037 O.OZ66
0.0010 0.0056
0.0'162 O.lSZS
0.0144 0.0643
O~C:03 O.C:;'l3
2-31
o.oozs
0.0079
0. 0073
0. 0073
0.0122
0. 0059
0. 0073
0.0073
0.0008
0.0103
O.OOS4
0.0136
0.000'1
0.0048
0.0043
0. OZ6S
0. 0002
O.OON
0. 0043
C. QCS9
0.1824
o. aoz5
0. 0079
0.0073
o.oon
0.0122
0.0059
0.0073
0.0073
0. 0103
0.0054
230.00 138. 00 FIXED TAP
69.00 115.00 FIXED TAP !REV.!
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
!REV. I
!RE\1.1
!RE\1. l
!REV. l
69.00 109.00 FIXED TAP (REV. l
109.00 69.00 FIXJ;:D TAP
0.0136 !REV. I
69.00 115.00 FIXED TAP (REV. l
0.0004
0.0048 (REV.!
0.00'13
0.0268
0. 0002
0. 0043
0. C059
11S.OO 69.00 FIXED TAP
!REV. l
1995 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA (CONT)
1995 PEAH LOAD -135 HW AT BRADLEY LAHES ; 70 HW GEH AT BERNICE DATA TABLE LISTING PAGE HO. '!
:30 LINE FRO:-! SOLOOTiiA TO ANCHCRt.GE; NEH llS LINE FRITZ CR TO SOLDOTNA FOR CASE Rlm
7APPEO AT B<l-'.OLEY L JUtl AtO KASILOF (GO~.APAl34J 7/2511983 1J:qo:<n
H C S TRANSFCRIIER
...• FROH ••••••••• TO ••.•• LINE LINE T H E H •••••• Z-PI. ••••••••• Y-Pil •••••••••• Y-PI2..... BUS l 6:JS 2
5US N.!.HE KV BUS N:.HE KV TYPE Of~ER R T CRATE 0 ••• R •..••• X ••..•• (;! ••.•• Ell. •.•• GZ ••••• 62 •.•• TAP •..• TAP .• REHARHS
HOt!E~ 69 OifiND IIG 69 L 0 0.0362 0.0511 0.0004 O.OoOq (REV. J
ItiTRNATI. 138 UNI\'RSTY 138 L
P .HORtlZF l3S L
P. riC~NZZ 138 L
ItiTRIIATI.34.5 T
!NTRNATI.34.5 ItiTRNATI. 138 T
KASILOF ll5 SOLDOTNA llS L
SKI HILL llS L
Nit-LCHIH 115 L
e'>RDL Y JN llS L
KENAI TI 69 BERNCE L 69 t.
SO'~DOTI'IA 69 t.
KNIH A~H3'!.S UNIIIRSTY34.5 L
Nit-LCHIH 115 KASILOF 115 L
ANCHR PT llS L
P. HACKNZ 13S P. HACKNZ 230 T
TEELAlJ:l 138 L
P.HC~:-lZF 138 L
P .HACKl'U: :::SO H. TER~~":... :!30 L
P .1-'.t.CHtiZ 138 T
P.tl:.CK!i~ 138 T
BELU:lA 230 L
P .llACKN2 138 P. HACKNZ 230 T
P .NO~NZ2 138 L
P. 1-IDRNZF US P. t!ACKNZ 138 L
Irm:-r::.n. 138 L
o. HCRNZ2 .138 P .HACKN2 138 L
ItiTRNA Tl. 138 L
'CRTGE S ll5 DAVE5 CK 115 L
UNI\IRSTY 115 L
QARTZ CK 69 QARTZ CK 115 T
COOI'R LH 69 L
QARTZ CK 115 SOLDOTNA 115 L
QARTZ CK 69 T
DAllES 0< 115 L
SEfiARO 69 DAVES CK 69 L
SHI HILL llS SOLDOTNA 115 L
KASILOF 115 L
SOLDOTNA 69 KENAI TI 69 L
SOLDOTNA 115 T
SOLDOTNA 115 SOLDOTNA 69 T
SOI.OOTNA 230 T
QARTZ CK 115 L
SPRTS LK 115 L
SKI HILL 115 L
KASILOF 115 L
SOLDOTNA Z30 SOLDOTNA ll.S T
UtiiVRSTY 230 L
SPRTS LK 115 6E1!NCE L 115 L
SOI.OOTI'IA 115 L
T~ELAIID 115 TEELAIID 138 T
TEELA:-lO 138 P. ~lAC:KNZ 1'38 L
TEELANO 115 T
I.INIVRSTY 115 PORTGE S llS L
Af;CHORGE 115 L
L1(I\IRSTY 136 T
UNIVRSTY3 4 • 5 T
LJNIVRSTY 138 UNIIIRSTY 115 T
U:IIVl'ISTY !30 T
~'NIVllSTY3 4 • 5 T
~~!IVllSTY3'!. 5 T
!NT~NA 'tl. 1~8 L
_·: ;r\IRSTY 230 SOLDOn!A 230 L
U:UI:llSTY 138 T
E. TERH~r~ 230 L
-~NIVRSTY3~.5 l..mVRSTY 115 T
U:>IVClSTY 138 T
I..~!!'.'P.STY 135 T
KlilK ARH34.5 L
H. TERH:-;L 230 E. T!RI~:C 230 L
? .11.:.:~-Z;Z :JO L
A
A
"A
A
A
E
0
D
E
c c
A
D
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
a
B
B
F
0
0
c
c
c
c
B
c
0
E
c
E
c: c
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
1
2
12
30
30
zoo
zoo
100
100
0.0047 0.0189
0.0038 0.0151
0.0038 0.0151
0. 0037 0. 0<1110
0.0037 0.0'+40
0.0227
o. 0441
0.0861
o. 0416
0,1026
0.0671
0.1740
0.1881
0. Z300 0.3250
0.0733 0.1040
0.0785 0.1'165
0.0881 0.17QO
0.0619 0.1223
0. oozo o. 0222
0.0176 0.1066
o.ooe6 o.oo3'<
0.0016 O.OlOS
o.oo~o o.o::tz
0.0020 0.02::
0. 0031 o. 0209
0.0020 0.0222
0.0016 0.0022
0.0086 0.0034
O.OOl8 0.0151
0.0018 0.0022
0.0036 0.0151
0.0464 O.Z086
0.0466 0.2178
0.3'120
0.0216 0.0663
0.06811 0.3070
0.3<120
o. 0184 0. 0627
0.3915 0.8092
0.0162 0.0319
0.0'+41 0.0671
0.0733 0.10'10
o.nn
0.1333
0. 0015 0. 0'125
0.068<1 0.3070
0.0038 0.0171
0.0162 0.0319
0.0227 0.1026
0.0015 0.0425
0.0182 0.1097
0.0272 0.1220
0.0038 0.0171
0.0812
0.0176 0.1066
0.0812
0.0'186 0.2178
0.0014 0.0063
o.o2qo
0.1155
0.02'10
0.0020 0.0222
0.1'167
0.1470
0.00'17 0.0189
0. 0182 0.1097
0.0020 0.0222
o.oo:n o.ou&
o.usa
O.H67
0.1410
0.0785 0.1465
0. 0010 0. 00!16
o. OC!6 o. c::.aa
2-32
0.0027
0.0269
0. 0269
0.0067
0.00<17
0. 0094
o. 0122
0.0025
0. 0008
0 .002'1
0.00911
o. 0066
0.0110
0.182<1
O.lqOO
0.0269
0.1034
o. 0269
0.0136
o.olqz
o.ooo8
0.0186
0. 005'1
0.0103
0.0017
0.00<17
o. 0008
0.0186
0 .DOll
0. 0017
0. 0067
0.1073
0.0079
0.0011
0.01H
0.01<12
o. oooq
0.0027
0.1073
o. oo:;tt
c. 0002
0. 0110
0. 0027
0.0269
0. 0269
0.0067
0. 00'17
0.009'1
0.0122
0. 0025
0.0008
0.00211
0.00911
0. 0066
0.0134
C.HOO
0. 0110
138.00 311.50 FIXED TAP
3'1.50 136.00 FIXED TAP (REV. I
(REV. I
!REV.l
!REV. I
!REV. I
136.00 230.00 FIXEO TAP !REV. I
230.00 138.00 FIXED TAP
Z30.00 130.00 FIXED TAP
0.1824 !REV. I
0.103'1
0.1400
0.0269
0 .103'1
0. 0269
o.oooe
0.0186
138.00 230.00 FIXED TAP (REV. I
(REV. I
(REV.)
(REV. J
(REV. I
69.00 115.00 FIXED TAP (REV. I
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
0.005'1 !REV. I
0.0103 (REV.l
!REV. l
0.0008 (REV.l
0. 0186
0. DOll
0. 0017
0.0067
0.1073
o. 0079
0. DOll
69.00 115.00 FIXED TAP !REV. I
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
115.00 230.00 FIXED TAP
230.00 115.00 FIXED TAP
!REV.l
!REV. J
(REV. l
!REV.l
!REV.l
115.00 138.00 FIXED TAP !REV. I
0.0134 !REV. I
138.00 115.00 FIXED TAP
0.0142 (REV.l
0.000'1 (RE\1. J
0.0027
115.00 138.00 FIXED TAP (REV. I
115.00 l'I.SO FIXED Tt.l'
138.00
138.00
138. DO
138.00
115.00 FIXED TAP
230.00 FIXED TAP
3~.50 FIX~D TAP
311.50 FIXED TAP
(REV. l
!REV.I
0.1073 (REV. I
230.00 136.00 FIXED TAP
0.0268 !REV. I
3'1.50 115.00 FIXED TAP !REV.I
34.50 138.00 FIXED TAP !~E\1. I
3'1.50 138.00 fiXED TA 0 !REV. I
O.OC::!4 CR~V.)
0. 0002
C. O!lO
!REV. I
!REV. I
.. 2003 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA
2003 PEAK LOAD -135 HH AT B~AOLEY LAKES ; 70 HH GEN AT BERNICE
Z30 LinE SC~-A~iCH; llS LINE FC-SC:.. TA~PEO AT B~J t KASILCF
TYPE
6
SQ
6
BO
0
BO
s
B
B
5
e
6Q
6
6
6
50
s
s
8
E
8
BE
a
B
e
!l
8
8
e
5
5
6
6
e
OHNER •• BUS NA~IE ..
A AtiCHORGE 115
0 AtlCHP PT 115
A e::...UGA :.38
A BELUGA ::>o
C BE::::n::! L 69
C 6ERti:;E L 115
E e"'AC:.. Y L 115
E SROL Y JN 115
6 :OOPR LK 69
F Qt.VES CH 69
B O~VES CH 11S
OH~t;J ?G 69
0!:~~;: RG ll.S
A E. TE~t1N!.. ::30
A !::~LUTNA 115
o rR!TZ. c~ 11s
0 r<::::jER 69
A Itm;t;ATL 135
A !NTPfiATL34.5
0 KASILOF 115
H~nAI T! 69
:. xrnx AP.':34. s
0 N!HL:~:p.: llS
A P. !~.:.::~:;;:: 13S
A P.!•;.,:"':'lZ :'?C
A P. ,;:c::;: 138
A F. ),"J"HZF 138
A P, HJ:!HZ2 138
8 PC~TGE 5 115
6 0L"7Z CK 69
B C~r:'TZ Cl-; 115
5EH!!:'Q 69
D ~;::: H!LL 115
C 30L:~Ttl"-69
o so~ com.:. ll5
o s:::..oon1;.. ::~o
C SORTS LK ll5
A TEELC..tiO l!S
A TEELAJ;D 135
A UI!IVRSTY 115
A UIHV?STY 138
A UNIVRSTY ZlO
A UNIVRSTY34. 5
A H. TERtltlL 230
SHUNT
..... LOAO..... ..~EV!C!'S ..
ZON! P t!H 0 HVAR !<>l tiVA<I P HAX
4
1
4
4
2
5
4
4
1
1
4
3
~~6
a. o
Z9. 3
34.3
4.0
16.4
244.3
9.5
l7.a
3. 0
l.Z
3.4
13.2
14.6
1.8
7.4
104.1
4.3
a.o
1.4
13.6 6.0
9.4 4.:!
5.1 =.3
:3.0 10.4
1 93.6 39.9
1
1
1
1
1 130.7 55.7
1
357 .a
70.0
135.0
15.0
30.0
14.4 46.5
14.0
-1l. 0
-11.0
14,4
DATA TABLE LISTING PAGE NO.
8/25/1963 15:30!40
0 SCHEO VOLT LII!ITS REHOTE BUS PER CEMT
P GEN Q t!AX 0 I!IN V !tAX V HIN •• ~ .NA!!E.... \;';,~s
II~ IIVAR HVAR VHOLO SU?PLIEO
l. 030
l.050
34.3 -23.2 1.030
50.0 -50.0 1.050
7.3 -1.5 1.030
~6.6 -n.z l.03o
38.9 -7.5 l.030
14.0 -4.8 l.030
l. 000
.... FROH ......... TO ..... LINE
BUS NAHE KV SUS NAIIE KV TYPE
ANC~ORGE llS UNIVRSTY 115 1..
H C
LINE T K
OHNER R T
A
N
RATE 0
...... Z-FI .......... '1'-Pll. .. .. , •••• Y-PI2 .... .
TRAtlSFORt!ER
BUS 1 SUS Z
EKLUTNA 115 1..
ANCHR PT llS NINLCHIK 115 L
OUIND RG 115 L
BELUGA lJ& 6~LUGA 230 T
BELUGA Z30 P .HACKNZ 230 1..
BELUGA 136 T
6ERNCE L 69 BERNCE L US T
KENAI TI 69 L
BEIINCE L 115 BEIINCE L 69 T
SPliTS LK 115 L
BRAOL Y L llS BROL 'I' JN 115 L
SJ;OLY JN llS 1..
6RDL Y JN 115 KASILOF llS L
FRITZ CK 115 L
BRAoL Y L llS L
:;.:.::.CL Y L 115 L
COOPR LK 69 OARTZ CK 69 L
DAVES CH 69 DAVES CK 1l5 T
$'EH;.~o 69 L
DAVES CK llS Ot.:ITZ CK 115 L
VA\!ES CK 69 T
I'CRTGE S 115 L
OI!lND RG 69 OHI:IO RG 115 T
HGI!ER 69 1..
OI!I!ID RG 115 AtlCHR PT llS L
0!~!~\:i RG 69 T
FI"!TZ CK l!S
A
A
A
A
c
c
c c
E
0
E
E
6
B
F
6
0
0
0
0
100
100
10
10
JO
30
... R ...... x ...... Gl. .... 81 ..
0.0014 0.0063 0.0004
0.0462 0.15Z5 0.0094
0.0619 0.1223
0.0449 0.0886
0.0010 0.0111
0.0031 0.0209
0.0010 0.0111
0.0500
0.2300 0.3250
0. osoo
0.0272 o.uzo
0.0253 0.1140
0.0253 0.1140
0.0416 0.1881
0.0203 0.0913
0.0253 0.1140
0.0::53 0.1140
0. 0 Zl8 0. 0863
0. 04ZO 0. 5000
0.3915 0.&092
0. 01S4 0. 0827
o. o":o o. sc oo
0.0464 0.2086
0.1933
0.0362 0.0511
0.0449 0.0886
0.1933
0.01'~4 C.0:6:.t3
0.0066
o.oo•u1
0.1824
0.0025
0. 0079
0. 0073
0. 0073
0. 0122
o. 0059
0.0073
0. 0073
o. 0008
0. 0103
0.0054
0. 0136
o. 0004
0. 0048
0.0043
.. • Gz ..... az ..
0.0004
o. 0094
0.0066
0.0048
0.1824
0.0025
0.0079
0. 0073
0. 0073
0. 01ZZ
0.0059
0. 0073
c. 0073
0.0008
o. 0103
0. 0054
.. TAP .... TAP •• REHARKS
(REV. l
13&.00 230.00 FIXED TAP lREV. l
230.00 136.00 FIXED TAP
69.00 115.00 FIXCO TAP tREV. l
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
(REV.)
lREV. l
tREV. l
(REV.)
69.00 109.00 FIXED TAP !REV. l
109.00 69.00 FIXEO TAF
0.0136 [R~V.l
69.00 llS.OO FIXED TAP tPEV. l
0.0004
0.0046 rR!V. l
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
0.0043
-E:. TERt~~iL Z30 UtU\!?STY Z30 L A 0.0037 0.0266
0.0010 C.OC!'6
0. 0:6!1
!J. C0~2
0.0266
0.0002 ~'LTE'Pt!t~l.. Z30 L
Fr:;z CK llS ::i!~~;:J P.G 115 L
e::::;:.."f ..;~; n'=" L
A (L 0U6Z 0 .l$Z5
0.01"~ 0.0603
O.CZO:! O.C713
2-33
0. ~~'>3
O.O~E9
o. oo·~
0. (1043
C. CCS9
rREV. l
2003 LOAD FLOW STUDY INPUT DATA (CONT)
2003 PEA'< LOAD -135 f!H AT B~~OLEY LAH~S ; 70 ~II< GEN AT BERNICE DATA TABLE LISTING PAGE NO.
:":30 L!:r: SGl...-AHCH; llS LZNE !="C-SO~ it.F'PEO AT e~J S. KASILOF FQ" C!.~E KUN
11 c
.•.• FPO~L ..•.. i"O ••.•. L!tiE Lia= T K
8"'JS tit.~1E KV SUS N:..n~ t-:V TYP= Ci::;:;p P T
HOnEP 69 Oin~tO RG 69 L 0
INTI<HA71. 138 UNIV~STY 138 L
P. HC~tiZ!' l38 L
P. ~C?:iZ:~ 135 L
Itm<NATL3'1. 5 T
INTRNATL3'1.5 INTRNATL 138 T
KASILOF llS SOLCOTliA 115 L
S;{l HilL 115 L
tiiNLCHIK 115 L
8ROLY JN ll5 L
KEHAI TI 69 !lEPNCE L 69 L
~OLOOTNA 69 L
KNIK ARI13'1.5 <J~liVRSTY3'1.5 L
NHILCHIK 115 KASILOF 115 L
AtiCHR PT 115 L
o, HACHNZ 138 P, Ht,Cf<NZ 230 T
TEEt...t.~lD 138 L
~ .llC?tt::F ::ss L
~ .~tACXNZ :30 K TE!='1 l~{:.., ~30
P.flt.C~HZ l3B T
P.t:~:KN: 138 T
8ELUSA :::30 L
P.:;:.crmz 136 P.tfA':K~1Z 230 T
P .t:cr.:r~z:: 138
?.HC,tiZF 138 P.ilt.Cf(t~Z 138 L
ItfiRfiATL l38 L
P. ~ORHZ2 138 P. t1ACHH2 138
INTRtiATL 138
PORTGE S 115 DAVES CK 115
UNIVRSTY ll5
GA~TZ CK 69 QARTZ CK 115 T
COOP!? LK 69 L
OARTZ CH 115 SOLDOTNA 115 L
QARTZ CK 69 T
DAVES CK llS L
SEHA~D 69 DAVES CK 69 L
SKI HI!.!. 115 SOLDOTNA llS !.
KASil.OF llS L
SOl.OOTNA 69 HEHAI TI 69 l.
SOLDOTNA llS T
SOLDOTNA 115 SOLDOTNA 69
SOI..OOT!IA 230
Qt~TZ CK ll5 l.
SPRTS LH ll5 L
SKI HILL 115 L
MS!l.OF 115 L
SOLDOTNA ZlO SOLDOTNA llS T
UNIVRSTY ~!0 L
SPRTS LK llS BEPHCE L llS L
SOLDOTNA ll5 l.
TEEI..AND 115 TEELAI'IO 136 T
TE El.AtO l38 F . !!~CKNZ l3 S L
TEELAtm ll5 T
UN!VRSTY 115 PGnGE S 115
ANCHO?GS. 115 L
UtllVPSTY 13!1 T
Uti!VRSTY!~ .5 T
UNIV~STY 13!1 UfiiVPSTY ll5 T
WU\'RSTY 23 0 T
Uli!VPSTY34. 5 T
Ut!IV?STY34. 5 T
INTPNATL 136 L
U~i!V¥tST"l' Z30 SOLOOTNA ZJO L
!);tp.';STY 138 T
E. TER~~:tt. :30 L
-U~i:'.'~STY3'1.5 UliiVPSTY ll5 T
i.JHI~I=!STY 136 'f
t.:::I\.t:l$j"Y 136 T
l-\~1Ir: A!;'!~31i .S
A
A
A
A
A
c
c
A
D
0
A
A
A
A
~
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
6 a
B
B
B
B
6
D
0
c
c
c
c
!\
c
0
E
c
E
c
c
A
A
A.
6
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
e/~5/1983 15:3o:qo
TRANSFCt:: !E~
N ..•... Z-PL ...•••••. "1'-Pil •• ~-· ••..• Y-P!Z ..... EUS 1 et.:S 2
~~TE 0 ··:q··· ... Y. ...... Gl. ..•• e1. .... GZ ..••. e: .... Tt..P ..•. ::..o .. ~<"=nA~t-:5
12
12
30
30
zoo
200
100
100
0.0362 0.05ll 0.0004 0.0004 t~EV. l
0. 004 7
0' 0~38
0.0038
0. 0037
o. o::zt
0. 04q1
0. 0881
0. Qq16
0. 0189
0. 0151
0. 0151
0. O'i40
0.1026
0. 0871
0.1740
0.1881
0. 2300 0. 32SO
0.0733 0.1040
0.0861 0.1740
0.0619 0.1::~3
0. 0020
0.0176
0. 0086
0. 0222
0.1066
0.0034
0.0016 0.0108
o.oozo o.o:::z
o.oo:.:o o.o:~:
0.0031 0.0209
O.OQ;:O O.o:zz
c.oo18 o.oo;:z
0. 0086 0. 0034
0.0038 0.0151
0.0018 0.0022
0,0038 0.0151
0. 0464 0. 2086
0.0486 0.2178
o. 34ZO
O.OZl8 0.0863
0.0684 0.3070
0.3420
0.0184 0.0827
0.3915 0.8092
0.0162 0.0319
0.0441 0.0671
0.0733 0.1040
0.0015
0. 0684
0. 0036
0. Ol6Z
0. 0227
0.1333
0.1JJ3
0' 0425
0.3070
0. 017l
0. 0319
0.1026
0.0015 0.0425
0.0182 0.1097
0.0272 0.1220
0.0038 0.0171
0. 0612
0.0176 0.1066
0' 0812
0.0466 0.2178
0.001'1 0.0063
0 '(!;!40
0.1158
0. C240
0.0020 o.ouz
0.146 7
0.14 70
o.oo47 o.o1e9
0' 018'2
0. oo:o
0. 0037
0.1097
0. o::::
o. c::66
o .u;;a
c .146 i'
0 .1'170
0.0785 0.1<i65
o.rno o.:'056
0. L~ 16 c. o:ce
2-34
0.0027
0. 0269
o. o:69
0. 006 7
0 '004 7
0. OC94
0 .OlZ:::
0. 0025
0. 0008
0. 0024
0. 0094
0. 0066
0.0134
0.1400
0. Oll 0
0.1824
0.1034
0.1400
0. 0~69
0 .103'1
0. 0269
0.0136
0.0142
0.0008
0. 0186
0.0054
0.0103
o .oon
0. 0047
0.0008
o. 0186
o. 0011
0. 0017
0.0067
0.1073
0.0079
0. OOll
0. 0134
0. 0142
0. 000'1
0.0027
0.1073
0. OZ68
0. oo:u
0.0t;C'Z
o. c::o
C.0027
0. 0269
0. 0269
0. 006 7
0.00'17
0. 0094
o. 01:2
0. OOZ5
0. 0008
0. 0024
0.009'1
0. 0066
0.0134
0' 1400
0. 0110
ne.oo 34.50 FIXED TAP
34.50 136.00 FIXED TAP !REV.l
{REV. l
(REV.l
!REV. l
136.00 230.00 FIXED TAP lRE:V. t
Z30.00 138.00 F!XED TAP
::30.00 136.00 FIX£D Tt.?
0.18:4 !REV. l
0 .103'1
0' 1400
0. 0:!69
0.1034
0.00:69
0. 0136
0. 01~2
0. 0008
0.0186
138.00 230.00 f!XEO Tt.P r~EV. J
tREV. J
t ::!Z"·/. J
(PEV. I
( PEV. l
69.00 llS.OO FIXED TAP fR!:V. l
115.00 69.00 FIXED TAP
0.0054 (REV. l
0.0103 IREV.l
0 '0017
0. 004 7
IR~V. l
0. 0008 (REV. l
0. 0186
0. OOll
0. 0017
0. 006 7
0.1073
0. 0079
o. 0011
69.00 115.00 FIXEC TAP I REV. l
115.00
115.00
69.00 FIXED TAP
230. 00 FIXED no
230.00 115.00 FIXED TAP
(REV.)
(P.EV. J
(REV. J
fR2V. l
fREV. l
llS.OO 138.00 FIXED TAP f~EV. l
0.013'1 (REV. l
136,00 ll5.0C FIXED TAP
0.0142 I REV. t
0.0004 fPEV.J
0.0027
0.1073
0. 0268
ll5.VO 138.00 FIXED TAP I;;Ev. l
115.00 3'1.50 F!Y.EO TAP
136.00
138. oc
138.00
1!5. 00
230.0 0
115.00 FIXED TAP
23C.CO Fil:ED TA~
H.50 FIXEO T;.P
3'1.50 FIXED TAP
l38.00 !'IXEO TAP
IP.EV.J
I REV. l
IP.!:V. J
34.50 :15.00 FIX~C TAP IPE'.i.)
34.50 13$.00 FIXED TAP IP.EV. l
34 • .;)0 l~3.CO F!X::D Tt.!:l f~E\/.)
0.0024 r;:Ev. J
0. coo::
C. C:!.l~
1 ;:;~·J' l
~ :--r·~~. l