Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Anchorage Fairbanks Intertie Inset Structure Preliminary Report 2005
ANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS INTERTIE INSET STRUCTURE PRELIMINARY REPORT ae \ Prepared For: Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Prepared By: Dryden & LaRue, Inc. 3305 Arctic Blvd., Ste. 201 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 February 28, 2005 Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report Table of Contents Page INGER © DU CULO IN Beeerrrcteerrreerencrseretereeneeresnerereeeseaeee-seeceeceracaererarequgrerargea-aesSrraetsrevesetaccuccesoesed 1 EXTSPING EINEXAND HUIS TOR Wire erestetetttccscccesescectesrscssevesccnceces<sesetscatsusnesessa vanesrsrsacwereervessears it TOWER/CONDUGCTOR LOADS rire ccressereessoscearstirseneistsctesesecnssacsecucseccnsncesssaczsesesussesssessssvessesstcs 2 INSET STRUCTURE DESIGN CRITERUAG ie -ccscovsseceaqsorereasessererss <6 cg, --=seceaseseaononeneesosesserssea 2 Target{ Ground (Clearance essere tc ncece--ncesecoo-cesvessorgasanzesnssrsussversadetr ater scsvasessISriAUIaSs is ieenoeesarenesa 2 Inset; Structure sa yOUts icc sccscsesrerceeccoucwesreresere<esioonseceasncensucossuu Sete Tei axsatecorosacssesssesesxacnssvswar sete 3 Inset Placement Criteria:..............-csssssescocsessssssovonesosonsasesnctbllpsreceneosetlitttanroncacesssonsasecessssnensereacs 3 Alternative Mitigation:..........csssssssssecsessssscsecssersceetetti tenes tesccsssscsesseentieersssessccesosessctsnseasecs 4 PRELIMINARY LAYOUT & BUDGET COSTS:....A...cc.cesosesssnsucoresvessssesescst Mattascesecensncnseoonsore 4 DRAFT SUMMARY ......ccscscssosesssesosesssorscecssecssoceg lOO Mes-ocerercesetinesensosererersesssssersesMPERME scssactssooeee 4 Appendix A-Structure Drawings ....c.cccccecececeseceteteteteteees ni .A Appendix B-Existing Structure Critical Unbalanced Me adings Mareen renee tecete renee ere B Appendix C-Cost EStimates..........2gitis.....s.ssseoesecvcensesossstaetinosesscevsvsss coussteiseseacsscoeossessssereee G Appendix D-Plan & Profile Drawinngs......ccccccccccscsssessssecessnecstersesesesenceseseaeeeeseseueeeeseeeaeeaees D Appendix E-Unbalanced Examples. Appendix F-Geotechnical Draft Report. February 28, 2005 i Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report INTRODUCTION The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has contracted Dryden & LaRue, Inc. (D&L) to evaluate and model inset structures on the Anchorage-Fairbanks Intertie. The study area will evaluate the first 50 miles of line from Douglas Substation in Willow, Alaska to structure number 224, approximately 5 miles north of the Talkeetna River. The purpose of the study will be to model snow conditions that may create ground clearance concerns, locate inset structures, and develop a cost estimate and schedule for constructing inset structures along the existing line. EXISTING LINE AND HISTORY Anchorage-Fairbanks Intertie has been in service since the early 1980s. The line was constructed of steel guyed X-Structures with typical spans of about 1100 feet to 1300 feet. The towers support a 2-wire bundle of 954 Rail ASCR per phase and with two 3/8” HS 7 strand overhead shield wires. The line was designed to operate at 345 kV but is currently energized at 138 kV. Designing the line to handle 345 kV required long insulator strings of about 12 feet. These long insulators make the line especially susceptible to uneven snow loads. Unbalanced snow loads can create problems because the insulators are free to move lomgitudinally along the line. Falling snow will slowly accumulate on the line and increase the tension and the sag of the conductors. This by itself is not a problem; however the line will eventually unload, often suddenly in large sections. When this begins to happen there will always be a last span to unload. This span will have a load while its adjacent spans will be clear. The tensions across these spans will try to equalize and the insulators will swing towards the loaded span and the sag of the wire can increase dramatically. Even small changes in insulator swing can have large affects on ground clearance. Over the life of the line there have been several documented cases of the unbalanced snow loads causing clearance concerns. In order to alert operators to the possibility of reduced ground clearances, the Snow Load Monitoring System (SLMS) was put into operation in 1997. The SLMS consists of remote monitoring stations installed at about 2-mile intervals. The SLMS samples longitudinal insulator swing, line load, and other climatological data. The SLMS is not capable of determining actual field conditions because its sensors are only on approximately every 10" tower; rather it provides information that can allow operators to estimate field conditions. The Intertie Operating Committee (IOC) decided to supplement the SLMS with ground safety patrols in the fall of 2001 because of its limitations. The ground safety patrols verify conditions on the line after snow fall has occurred in the area of the line. Currently the line is patrolled from Tower 1 to Tower 231 (the same coverage areas as the SLMS) after 2 inches or more of new snow has fallen in Talkeetna. No radial snow load over 1 inch has been recorded during the patrols. February 28, 2005 1 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report TOWER/CONDUCTOR LOADS: The National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) does not directly address unbalanced snow loading. - The Intertie was designed with the following clearances requirements. The mechanical and structural loadings of the line were used to determine the line tension and sagging criteria. Ground Clearance Requirements: 30. feet at 120°F Final Condition Conductor Mechanical Loadings: NESC Heavy Load w/lower temperature: 2 inch Radial Ice, 4psf Wind, -20°F, 60%RTS at Initial Condition -40°F, Bare No Wind, 25% RTS Initial Condition +40°F, Bare No Wind, 20% RTS Final Condition Structure Loadings: NESC Heavy Load w/lower temperature: % inch Radial Ice, -20°F, Initial Condition Extreme Ice: % inch Radial Ice at 0°F High Wind: 100 mph at 0°F INSET STRUCTURE DESIGN CRITERIA: Target Ground Clearance: The minimum target ground clearance used for evaluating the line was 22.4 feet over the bare ground. Figure 1 shows a breakdown of the target ground clearance. This ground clearance is the same value that was used to determine alarm levels for the SLMS. Once a ground clearance is determined, an unbalanced snow load that will cause that clearance can be modeled. Typically, a unit snow/ice load of 0.7lbs/ft per conductor on a single span with Target Ground Clearance adjacent spans unloaded will cause the loaded conductor to drop below the | target ground clearance. A 0.7lb/ft Sarr snow load is equivalent to a 1.5 inch a4 radial snow load with a density of 7.5 Ib/ft®. Although this event and has not = 22.4 FT occurred in the last three years, a 1.5 4 inch or greater radial snow load has been documented several times throughout the line history. A 0.71b/ft = —— Ground Line load is almost equivalent to a % inch radial ice load with a density of Electrical Component of Clearance 8.0 FT Height of Man 8.0 FT “-. Snow Figure 1: Minimum Target Ground Clearance February 28, 2005 2 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report 57lb/ft® Appendix A contains a table with the required snow load required for the conductor to fall below the target ground clearance for each span. Inset Structure Layout: Tangent Structures This report studied two options for the layout of inset structures; guyed steel V-Towers and self supporting steel H-Towers. Both types of towers are shown in Appendix B. The V-Tower can be lowered between the phases after the shield wires are temporarily pulled apart. The legs can then be pulled together and attached to the foundation with a simple pin connection. Four guys and anchors are required to stabilize the structure. The V-tower is beneficial because it is lightweight. Its foundation reactions are much smaller than the H-structures. It can be placed on side sloping terrain by simply adjusting the guy wire leads. The tower deflection during unbalanced or longitudinal loads will be minimized because the V-tower is guyed ahead and back line. The H- tower can be installed in a manner similar to the V-tower. However, two moment-resisting foundation connections are required. The H-tower is advantageous because no guys or anchors are required. This requires fewer ground setups and reduces potential conflicts with the public traveling the right-of-way. Also, the H-tower can be placed closer to streams and roads because no ahead or back span anchors are required. Deadend Structures There are two groups of options for deadends evaluated along the line. The most cost effective will be installing inline deadends designed to handle only construction loads and unbalanced longitudinal loads. They will not be designed to handle the maximum design tension of the conductor. Also, only the phase conductors will be deadends, the shield wire will not be deadended and will have attachments similar to the tangent structures. Although this may affect the performance of the line, and may not stop a cascading failure or shield wire phase contacts, it will eliminate any insulator swing and improve the unbalanced ground clearance of adjacent spans. These deadends will be similar in configuration to the Tangent V structures. Sketches are shown in Appendix B. The other option is to install true termination deadends to handle the full tension of the phase’s conductors and overhead shield wires. The layout of these deadends will either be guyed three pole structures similar to those installed on the existing line or self- supporting swing-set structures. The swing set structures will be more expensive to install, but will have a smaller foot print so they can be placed closer to roads or streams if necessary. Sketches of both full tension deadend configurations are shown in Appendix B. Inset Placement Criteria: During the preliminary layout of the inset structures, any span that can support a 7 lb/ft or more unit load (equivalent to a 6-inch radial snow load at 7.5 lb/ft’) will probably not require mitigation. Any spans not meeting this requirement will receive an inset structure placed mid- span or other mitigation. The 6 inch radial snow load criterion was chosen because it is the largest known load that has occurred on the line. However, the snow density of that load can only be approximated. Before the design is finalized a maximum unit weight snow density February 28, 2005 8 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report should be statistically estimated for the life of the line based on data collected by the SLMS and ground safety patrols. Alternative Mitigation: There are over 20 locations along the line where insetting a tangent structure was not practical because of overlap with roads, rivers, or other terrain conflicts. If possible, a deadend inset structure should be placed on the adjacent span to minimize insulator swing on the existing structures. In some cases, this would not improve unbalanced ground clearance sufficiently; therefore a conversion of the existing tangent X-Tower into a deadend was required. Sketches of proposed deadend structures and modifications to the X-tower are shown in Appendix B. Before the inset preliminary design is finalized other alternatives will be evaluated, such as modifying existing X-Towers with longitudinal V-strings to reduce insulator swing or inverted V-strings to effectively deadend the conductors. PRELIMINARY LAYOUT & BUDGET COSTS: The preliminary layout requires about 176 inset-tangent structures, 15 inset deadends, and 7 modifications to the existing X-towers. Appendix D contains plan and profile drawings with the proposed locations for inset structures. The budgetary cost estimate assumed 25% of the line to have helicopter-only access during construction. The cost estimate assumes H-Structures and 3- Pole full-tension deadends (similar to the existing deadends) will be used for the insets on the line. Table 1 on the following page shows the budgetary cost estimate for installing inset structures over the first 50 miles of the Intertie is almost $32 million. Appendix C contains a breakdown of the cost estimates. DRAFT SUMMARY Most of the line will have insufficient clearance with a 0.7Ib/ft unbalanced snow load. Although this load has not been observed since ground safety patrols began in 2001, the line has had clearance issues observed prior to the installation of the snow load monitoring system and initiation of the ground patrols. Insets will dramatically improve the unbalanced snow load clearance of the line. However, installing insets structures, especially areas where deadends will be required, is an expensive undertaking estimated to cost about $32 million. This estimate assumes 75% of the line will be accessible over land. If access is limited because of permitting or environmental issues and more helicopter time is required for construction the estimated cost will increase. The cost may be reduced slightly by using guyed V-towers instead of H-towers and three pole deadends that were evaluated in the cost estimate. Also, the cost of mitigation may be reduced by alternative mitigations. In areas with smaller unbalanced loading concerns, longitudinal V-strings may be installed rather than insets. The use of longitudinal V-strings will be evaluated before the preliminary layout of inset structures is finalized. February 28, 2005 4 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Alaska Energy Authority Inset Structure Preliminary Report Table 1: Inset Budgetary Construction Estimate from Towers 1 to 223 Mobilization/Demobilization 1 Ea $750,000 $750,000 Tangent Insets Overland Access 144 Ea $88,000 $12,672,000 Helicopter Access 32 Ea $163,000 $5,216,000 Deadend Inset Overland Access 4 Ea $202,000 $808,000 Helicopter Access 1 Ea $417,700 $4,594,700 X-Tower Retrofitted Deadend Helicopter Access 7 Ea $58,200 $407,400 Resagging/Clipping 954 Rail Overland Access 1153 1000 LF $1,500 $1,729,500 954 Rail Helicopter Access 426 1000 LF $1,500 $639,000 3/8 HS OHSW Overland Access 384 1000 LF $2,000 $768,000 3/8 HS OHSW Helicopter Access 142 1000 LF $2,000 $284,000 Other Line Outage Time 60 Days $20,000 $1,200,000 Project Subtotal $29,593,600 Contingency ~10% $3,000,400 Project Total $32,594,000 February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Appendix A - Structure Drawings February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AEAINST 32 i 2 B11" CONDUCTOR: RAIL 954 kemil ACSR 54/7 SHIELO WIRE: 3/8” HS Ts Ts Ls Vs Vs — J Tp /\ Tp lp lp lp Vp Vp Vp TRUCTURI THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. 2. Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL LOADS AT THE SHIELD WIRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. 3. @ 1S THE ANGLE GETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER AND THE WIND DIRECTION. “W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED TO THE STRUCTURE BASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. "k” IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. xx 4. FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS ¥¥¥, THE X.Xx LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER. 5S. ATTACHMENT PLATES AND VANGS FOR HARDWARE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUY, INSULATOR AND HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES SHOWN. 6. GUY VANGS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1.2 TIMES THE RATED BREAKING STRENGTH OF THE GUY. WIND SPAN: 900 FT. WEIGHT SPAN: 1000 FT. UINE ANGLE o TEMP [SNOW/ICE] DENSITY | WIND Vs Ts ts Vp Tp lp Ww DESCRIPTION * R-IN pct psf kip kip kip kip kip kip psf @ k NESC HEAVY. =20° 0.5 57.0 0 15 © HEAVY ICE = 20° 5.0 75 0 1.0 © TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND =20' 0.0 =. 0 1.0 & LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND. 60° 0.0 90 1.0 3 UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL | -20" es 5.0 o | 10 g LOADING DIAGRAM 8 c 1 ¢ TOWER ; ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Dryden t LaRue, Pre. ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE CONSULTING ENGNEERS PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT en —— TANGENT V—TOWER DRAWN: RAE (CONTRACT No: CHECKED: PMw ORIGINAL DATE: 02-21-05 | DRAWING NO SHEET 1 of | REV, A PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AEAINIST FILE NAME (CADO): 13°-8%" Aq Ts ts Vs Vs J Tp A\ tp A Tp lp ip lp Vp Vp Vp NOTES: 1. THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. 2. Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL LOADS AT THE SHIELD WRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS. RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. 3. @ IS THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER ANO THE WIND DIRECTION. “W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED TO THE STRUCTURE BASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. “k” IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. i! Z i! : I 4. FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS YY, THE XXX LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED = i AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER. uy 5. ATTACHMENT PLATES AND VANGS FOR HARDWARE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE 4 =" WITH THE GUY, INSULATOR AND HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES SHOWN. alle 18° TP. 6. GUY VANGS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1.2 TIMES THE RATED BREAKING ' | STRENGTH OF THE GUY. STRUCTURE CONDUCTOR: — RAIL, 954 kemil ACSR 54/7 ; SHIELD WIRE: 3/8" HS WIND SPAN: 900 FT. 1 WEIGHT SPAN: 1000 FT. UNE ANGLE: o ! TEMP [SNOW/ICE| DENSITY WIND Vs Ts ls Vp Tp lp Ww DESCRIPTION *F_| R-IN pcf psf__| kip | kip | kio | kio | kip | kip | pst | 0 k NESC_HEAVY =20" 37.0 O15 o HEAVY ICE, =20" 73 oO [1.0 e TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND. =20" % 0 1.0 = 1 LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND 60" = 30_[-1.0 a UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL | -20° 5.0 o | 10 = 8 LOADING DIAGRAM 8 I = a \ 1 \ es Ee \ € TOWER a } ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY l ea t Lakue, Pne. ANCHORAGE—FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE Mesias PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT amine ioe eens TANGENT H—TOWER — ae DRAW RAE CONTRACT Ne: a CHECKED: uw ORIGNAL DATE: 02-21-05 DRAWING NO. SHEET 1 of 1 rev. A PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AE AINST FILE_NAME (CADDO): 15'-6" 16-0) 16°-0" Bau" Ts ls Vs Tpo— Vs Ts 1. THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. 2. Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL LOADS AT THE SHIELD WIRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. 3. @ 1S THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER AND THE WIND DIRECTION. “W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED TO THE STRUCTURE BASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. “k” IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. X00 4. FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS Yvv, THE X.XX LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED Me Pe pe AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER. tl 5. ATTACHMENT PLATES AND VANGS FOR HARDWARE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUY, INSULATOR AND HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES SHOWN. 6. GUY VANGS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1.2 TIMES THE RATED BREAKING STRENGTH OF THE GUY. 7. OHSW IS NOT DEADENDED. 8. DEADEND IS DESIGNED TO RESTRAIN UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOADS ONLY. STRUCTURE CONDUCTOR: RAIL 954 kcmil ACSR 54/7 SHIELD WIRE: 3/8” HS WIND SPAN: 900 FT. WEIGHT SPAN: 1000 FT. LINE ANGLE: o a TEMP |SNOW/ICE] DENSITY WIND Vs Ts Ls Vpo Tpa Lpo T Vpb Tpb Lpb w = DESCRIPTION F R-IN pct pst kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip psf o k = NESC HEAVY =20" 0.5 57.0 0 15 S HEAVY ICE =20" 3.0 75 oO 1.0 ¥ TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND. =20" 0.0 = 0 1.0 w LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND 60" 0.0 * 90 10 2 UNBALANCED LonciTuoINaL | -20° | —48 5.0 o | 10 g & LOADING DIAGRAM € TOWER Reve ean — ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY TSSUED FOR PRELIMINARY REPORT I Ee Dryden ¢ LaRue, Fne. ANCHORAGE—FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE iat PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT Pan aa ae V-TOWER DEADEND - ORAM: Rae CONTRACT Na pt — — CHECKED: uw ORIGINAL DATE: 02-21-05 DRAWING NO SHEET 1 of 1 rev. A PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AE AINST FILE NAME (CADO): 33'-0" -0" © © © — NOTES: = THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. Lso Lso Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL rds 132 LOADS AT THE SHIELD WIRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS = me) RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. ® Ls yapven reeves @ IS THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER n AND THE WIND DIRECTION. “W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED s = TO THE STRUCTURE BASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS = FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. "k" IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY — FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. Lpo Lpo Lpo a aajen nape are =3 FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS ¥.v¥, THE X.XX LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED ao Be pe a AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER | [veo 1b | |Veo Lpb } |Vpo =F & oe a ° ATTACHMENT PLATES AND VANGS FOR HARDWARE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUY, INSULATOR AND HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES SHOWN GUY VANGS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1.2 TIMES THE RATED BREAKING | STRENGTH OF THE GUY. TRI RI CONDUCTOR: RAIL. 954 kemil ACSR 54/7 SHIELD WRE: 3/8" HS WIND SPAN: 900 FT. WEIGHT SPAN: 1000 FT. UNE ANGLE: o } 1 TEMP |SNOW/ICET DENSITY WIND Vso | Tsao ] Lsa | Vsb | Tsb [ Usb [ Vpa [ Tpa | Lpo | Vpb [ Tpb | Lpb Ww DESCRIPTION . R-iN pef psf kip kip kip kip | kip kip kip kip kip kip _| kip | kip | psf ® k : NESC_HEAVY =20 | 05 37.0 of 1s = THT HEAVY ICE =20° [| 5.0 75 o [10 ej i TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND -20" 0.0 = Oo 1.0 5 LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND. 60] 0.0 = 20 [1.0 3 UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL | -20" | £9 — 5.0 o | 10 w 2 | LOADING DIAGRAM z a Wi 1 | i} A a SE Sa as i. TOWER INO} DATE BY | REVISION DESCRIPTION ‘ATE BY | REMSION DESCRIPTION {x= 25OSPMW| SUED FOR PRELMINGRY REPORT — et i ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Dryden ¢ LaRue, ne. ANCHORAGE—FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE CONSULTING ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT aire oe 3-POLE FULL TENSION DEADEND DRAWN: RAE CONTRACT No.: CHECKED: Puw ORIGNAL DATE: 02-21-05 DRAWING NO. SHEET 1 of 1 rev. A 0.25(V1-0")+10'-0" = 0.25(V2-a*)+10'-0" = 0.25(vI-a*)+b* “L2"=0.25(V2-0%)+b* Nes 4 BACK LEFT 0.25(V4—0")+10'-0" FOR REQUIRED VALUES OF T1 TO T4 & L1 TO L4, SEE DWG 302 "L3"=0.25(V3-a*)+b* 13" = 0.25(V3—0*)+10'-0" TRANSVERSE LOADS ARE SHOWN FOR LEFT LINE ANGLES, TRANSVERSE LOADS WILL BE TO THE RIGHT FOR RIGHT LINE ANGLES. I HH 1. THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. 2. Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL LOADS AT THE SHIELD WIRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. 3. @ IS THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER AND THE WIND DIRECTION. “W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED TO THE STRUCTURE BASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. "k” IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. xxx 4. FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS ¥vv, THE X.XX LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER. 5. ATTACHMENT PLATES AND VANGS FOR HARDWARE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUY, INSULATOR AND HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES SHOWN. 6. GUY VANGS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1.2 TIMES THE RATED BREAKING STRENGTH OF THE GUY. PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AEAINST FILE NAME (CADD): PLAN VIEW STRUCTURE CONDUCTOR: RAIL 954 kcmil ACSR 54/7 SHIELD WIRE: 3/8" HS WIND SPAN: 900 FT. WEIGHT SPAN: 1000, FT. TNE BENG . TEMP [SNOW/ICE| DENSITY WIND Vso Tso Lso Vsb- Tsb Lsb Vpo Tpa Lpo Vpd Tpb Lpb Ww DESCRIPTION = pef pst kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip pst o kf NESC HEAVY =20" 57.0 0 5 HEAVY ICE __| 20° 75 oO 1.0 2 TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND id = _ O 1.0 e LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND 60° | = = _ oe Samal f 30) a) 2 UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL _ “2a 5.0 ~ | G i oy oe, LOADING DIAGRAM TOP FLAT OF ARM SECTION TO BE ORIENTED HORIZONTAL = * DEMENSIONS TO 8E wy DETERMINED BY FABRICATOR 3 z = ° 5 als 5 2 | FRONT ViEW LOOKING TOWARDS FAIRBANKS FOR LEFT LINE ANGLES TSSUED-FOR PRELMNARY REPORT — i ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY - as : Dryden ¢ Laue, Fne. ANCHORAGE—FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE oonenh-Tna mensre PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT sesicien, ew sconoven SWING SET FULL TENSION DEADEND eam ae CONTRACT No: CHECKED: PMwW ORIGINAL DATE: 02-21-05 DRAWING NO. SHEET 1 of 1 REV. A PLOT DATE: PROJECT CODE: AEAINST ~~ NOTES: 1. THE INDICATED LOADS ARE ULTIMATE LOADS WHICH INCLUDE ALL OVERLOAD CAPACITY FACTORS. ts L i 2. Vs, Ts, Ls AND Vp, Tp, Lp ARE THE VERTICAL, TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL uw LOADS AT THE SHIELD WIRE AND THE PHASE CONDUCTOR ATTACHMENT POINTS Vs Vs RESPECTIVELY. WEIGHTS OF INSULATORS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE ARE INCLUDED. Lpo Lpa Lpo Tpe : Teo = Tro” 3. @ IS THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TRANSVERSE CENTERLINE OF THE TOWER Tpb ' pp | AND THE WIND DIRECTION. "W" IS THE WIND PRESSURE TO BE APPLIED /\\, P| Nin TO THE STRUCTURE SASED ON CYLINDRICAL MEMBERS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS. Lob, | SPS Leb FOR SHAPE FACTORS FOR OTHER SECTIONS. k” IS THE OVERLOAD CAPACITY veD) P FACTOR BY WHICH THE DEAD LOAD OF THE TOWER SHALL BE MULTIPLIED. 4. FOR UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD, INDICATED AS ee, THE X.XX LOADS SHALL BE APPLIED AT ANY ONE ATTACHMENT POINT WITH THE Y.YY LOADS APPLIED AT THE REMAINDER. 5. GUY WIRES WILL BE REPLACED AND ADDITIONAL ANCHORS WILL BE INSTALLED AS REQUIRED. 5 e 3 REMOVE. EXISTING |-STRINGS 6. DEADEND |S DESIGNED TO RESTRAIN UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL LOAD ONLY. th tw AND REPLACE WTH YOKED i i DEADENDS (SEE SECTION A) th tt i i ra Y a ‘STRUCTURE CONDUCTOR: RAIL 954 kcmil ACSR 54/7 (A SHIELD WIRE: 3/8" HS WIND SPAN: 900 FT. WEIGHT SPAN: 1000 FT. LINE ANGLE: o TEMP [SNOW/ICE| DENSITY WIND’ Vs Ts Us Vpo | Tpa | Lpo | Vpb | Teb | Lob Ww DESCRIPTION > R=IN pct psf kip kip kip kip kip kip kip kip psf ® k NESC_HEAVY =20 | os 57.0 oT 45 HEAVY ICE =20° [5.0 75. o_1.0 TRANSVERSE HIGH WIND -20" 0.0 = 0 1.0 LONGITUDINAL HIGH WIND 60° 0.0 = 30 1.0 UNBALANCED LONGITUDINAL -20° a8 5.0 0 1.0 77 ERSTING X-TOWER REMOVE YOKE PRETENSION GUY WRE (SEE NOTE 5) ‘ section (4) No} DATE _| BY | REVISION DESCRIPTION pe JOS TE_| Br) REMERON Des / ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY x SSUED_FOR PRELIMINARY REPORT _ = = = * Duden t LaRue, fn. ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS 345kV TRANSMISSION LINE ConsthTING ENGREERS PRELIMINARY INSET LAYOUT DESIGNED: MSW APPROVED: S DRAWN: RAE CONTRACT No.: A CHECKED: | PuW ORIGINAL DATE: 02-21-05 DRAWING NO. SHEET 1 of 1 REV. Appendix B - Existing Structure Critical Unbalanced Loadings February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line DRAFT Existing Structure List & Critical Unbalanced Loadings ; Ahead Line [Structure] Structure — <a True Station Span Angle Critical Unit SEE Load* (ft) (ft) (°) (Ib/ft) SUB 0+87 248.44 : 1 3435 980 70.89 F 71.5 2.78 _|Inset Not Likely Req'd 2 13+15 1290 A 92.5 0.90 3 26+05 1142.83 A 92.6 1.11 4 37+48 1227.17 | 9.03 Cc 73.5 0.71 5 49+75 1350 A 92.5 0.71 6 63+25 1285 A 87.5 0.71 7 76+10 1290 A 87.6 0.71 8 89+00 1250 A 87.5 0.71 9 101+50 1225 A 82.5 0.71 10 113475 1250 A 87.5 0.71 11 126+25 1147.6 A 82.5 0.71 12 137+73 1152.4 | -8.95 C 72 0.71 13 149+25 1225 A 82.5 0.71 14 161+50_ [1275 A 86.7 0.71 15 174425 1250 A 82.5 0.71 16 186+75 1200 A 87.5 0.71 17 198+75 1250 A 82.1 0.71 18 211425 1025 A 88 qn 19 221+50 1225 A 88.5 0.71 20 233475 1075 A | 728 0.71 21 244450 1125 A 72.5 0.71 22 255475 1200 A 83 0.90 23 267+75 1175 A 78 0.71 24 279+50 1250 A 83 0.71 25 292+00 1200 A 77.6 0.71 26 304+00 1275 A 87.5 O71 | 27 316475 1250 A 87.7 0.71 28 329425 1250 A 87.5 0.71 29 341+75 1165 A 77.5 0.71 30 353+40 1160 A 77.5 0.71 31 365+00 1250 A 82.3 0.71 32 377+50 1250 A 88.1 0.71 33 390+00 1300 A 82.5 0.71 34 | 403+00 1300 A 92.5 0.71 35 416+00 1225 A 87.5 0.71 36 428425 1200 A 82.5 0.71 37 440+25 1210 A 83 0.71 38 452+35 1265 A 82.5 0.71 39 465+00 1275 A 87.5 0.71 40 477+75 7300 A 87.5 O71 |, 41 490+75 1325 A 92 0.71 42 504+00 1275 A 82.8 0.71 43 516+75 1275 A 87.5 0.71 44 529+50 1300 A 87.5 0.71 45 542+50 1275 A | 876 0.71 46 555425 1275 A 87.5 0.71 Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line DRAFT Existing Structure List & Critical Unbalanced Loadings ; Ahead Span True Station ‘ua ao Structure | Siructure Critical Unit Comments Load* (ft) (ft) (°) (Ib/ft) 47 568+00 1300 A 88 0.71 48 581+00 1275 A 92.4 0.71 49 | 593+75 1300 A 87.4 0.71 50 606+75 1125 A 93.3 1.85 51 618+00 900 A 87.4 1.85 52 627+00 1350 A 83.3 0.71 53 640+50 1150 A 82.7 0.90 54 652+00 1250 A 88.7 0.71 55 664+50 1100 A 87.4 0.90 56 675+50 1290 A 82.5 0.71 57 688+40 1260 A 87.2 0.71 58 701+00 1260 A 82.0 0.71 59 713+60 1240 A 82.4 0.71 60 726+00 1275 A 87.9 0.71 61 738+75 1225 A 82.1 0.71 62 751+00 1275 A 82.5 0.71 63 763+75 1325 A 87.3 0.71 64 777+00 1200 A 87.9 0.71 65 789+00 1225 A 87.5 1.11 66 801+25 1150 A U2 0.71 67 812+75 1225 A 77.6 0.71 68 825+00 1325 A 87.7 0.71 69 838+25 1295 A 92.6 0.71 70 851+20 1030 A 92.5 0.90 71 861+50 750 A 730 5.20 Inset Not Likely Req'd 72 869+00 1300 A 87.5 0.71 73 | 882+00 1250 A 87.0 0.90 74 894+50 1175 A 82.5 0.71 75 906+25 1125 A 77.5 0.71 76 917+50 1150 A | 775 0.71 77 929+00 1175 A 775 0.71 78 940+75 1225 A 82.5 0.71 79 953+00 1225 A 82.5 0.71 80 965+25 1175 A 82.5 0.71 81 977+00 1150 A Mad) 0.71 82 988+50 1150 A 77.5 0.71 83 1000+00 1069.91 A | 775 1.11 84 1010+70 1161.08 | 47.34 E 71.5 0.90 85 1022+31 1260 A 82.5 0.90 86 1034+91 1138.36 A_| 83.5 41.11 | 87 1046+29 1159.83 | -47.27 E 115 0.71 88 | 1057+89 41250 A _| 2.5 Wai 89 1070+39 1250 A 82.5 0.71 90 1082+89 1200 A 82.5 0.71 91 1094+89 1125 0.16 A 77.5 0.71 92 1106+14 1075 0.35 A Uo 0.71 93 1116+89 1042.88 A 12.5 0.90 94 1127+32 1132.12 | 28.89 Cc 715 0.71 Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line DRAFT Existing Structure List & Critical Unbalanced Loadings : Ahead Line [Structure] Structure oe on True Station Span Angle Critical Unit PLL Load* (ft) (ft) (°) (Ib/ft) 95 1138+64 1250 A 83.5 0.71 96 1151+14 1250 A 89.3 0.71 97 1163+64 1285 A 87.5 0.71 98 1176+49 1265 A 87.5 0.71 99 1189+14 1250 A 82.5 0.71 100 1201+64 1325 A 82.5 0.71 101 1214+89 850 A 84 0.90 102 1223+39 1008.87 A 135 dad 103 1233+48 1020 -29.40 Cc 61.5 0.90 104 1243+68 1131.63 0.06 A 77.5 0.90 105 1255+00 1250 0.04 A 86.6 1.77 106 1267+50 1150 -0.04 A 72.5 0.71 107 1279+00 1200 -0.07 A 78.1 0.71 108 1291+00 1250 A 87.8 0.71 109 1303+50 1300 -0.17 A 87.7 0.71 110 1316+50 1275 -0.01 A 87.1 0.71 111 1329+25 1215 A 87.9 0.71 112 1341+40 1295 A 89.4 0.71 113 1354435 1040 A 88 2.14 114 1364+75 925 A 70.9 4.31 Inset Not Likely Req'd 115 1374+00 900 -0.06 B 103.6 144 116 1383+00 1175 -0.14 A 92.5 0.71 qf; 1394+75 1250 0.00 A 775 0.90 118 1407+25 1725 0.13 B 92.5 0.90 119 1424+50 1025 0.00 B 73.2 0.71 120 1434+75 1125 -0.03 A f27 0.71 121 1446+00 1025 A 72.6 0.71 122 1456+25 1225 0.02 A 72.6 0.71 123 1468+50 1175 0.01 A 87.9 0.71 124 1480+25 1000 0.01 A 73.0 0.71 125 1490+25 1075 0.01 A 62.6 0.71 126 1501+00 950 A 62.5 1.11 127 1510+50 850 0.09 A 63.6 2.78 Inset Not Likely Req'd 128 1519+00 1380 0.03 A 92.6 0.71 129 1532+80 920 -0.01 A 93.1 6.16 Inset Not Likely Reg'd 130 1542+00 1350 -0.03 B 103.0 0.71 131 1555+50 1250 -0.12 B 101.8 0.71 132 1568+00 1200 -0.43 A 82.7 0.71 133 1580+00 1320 0.14 A 87.8 0.90 134 1593+20 1603.55 1.09 B 92.6 1.34 135 1609+23 1145.1 50.07 F 101.5 (0 136 1620+68 1350 8 103.0 0.74 137 1634+18 1250 A 81.4 0.71 138 1646+68 1300 A 87.8 0.71 139 1659+68 1325 A 93.6 0.71 140 1672+93 1575 B 91.7 0.90 141 1688+68 1275 B 102.5 0.71 142 1701+43 950 A 73.1 0.90 Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line DRAFT Existing Structure List & Critical Unbalanced Loadings ; Ahead Span True Station ch pine) Structure} Structure Critical Unit ig Load* omments (ft) (ft) (*) (Ib/ft) 143 1710+93 1100 A 62.6 1.85 144 1721+93 934.12 A 62.4 a 145 1731+27 716.33 -50.65 E 61.5 2.78 Inset Not Likely Req'd 146 1738+44 1065 -0.12 A 62.5 0.71 147 1749+09 1235 -0.07 A 87.5 0.71 148 1761+44 1225 0.00 A 92.8 0.71 149 1773+69 1375 0.00 A 89.4 0.71 150 1787+44 1375 0.02 B 102.3 0.71 151 1801+19 800 0.02 A 93.2 3:51 Inset Not Likely Req'd 152 1809+19 1500 -0.01 A 82.3 0.71 153 1824+19 1500 -0.02 B 92.3 0.71 154 1839+19 1525 0.02 B 93.5 0.71 155 1854+44 1100 0.02 A 72 ai 156 1865+44 1175, 0.00 A Wie 0.71 157 1877+19 1150 -0.01 A 83 0.71 158 1888+69 994.79 A 72.6 0.90 159 1898+64 1080.21 3.04 A 63 0.71 160 1909+44 1225 A 82.5 0.71 161 1921+69 1400 A 87.8 ein 162 1935+69 1275 B 88.3 0.90 163 | 1948+44 1075 A 92.7 1.34 164 1959+19 1550 A 92.7? 0.90 Ht Adj Scaled from P&Ps 165 1974+69 1075 A 82.9 ana 166 1985+44 1125 A 73 0.71 167 1996+69 1175 A 89.1 0.90 168 2008+44 1160 A 88.1 0.90 169 2020+04 1090 A 82.2 0.90 170 2030+94 1225 A 83.8 0.71 171 2043+19 1250 A 85.3 0.71 172 2055+69 1013.36 A 87.5 0.71 173 2065+82 1286.64 | -26.54 Cc 70 3.51 Inset Not Likely Req'd 174 2078+69 1050 A 77.3 dat ZS 2089+19 1167.87 A 73.1 0.90 176 2100+87 1232.13 18.93 Cc 71.7 0.71 177 2113+19 1250 Au |im62:9 fan 178 2125+69 AZO) A 77.8 0.90 179 2137+44 1050 B 85.1 0.90 180 2147+94 1400 A 83.4 0.71 181 2161+94 1225 A 76.7 0.71 182 2174+19 1185 A 71.9 0.71 183 2186+04 990 A 83 0.90 184 | 2195+94 1250 A 64.9 0.90 185 2208+44 1400 A 78 4 186 2222+44 Ue) A 88.8 8.34+ Inset Not Likely Req'd 187 2230+19 550 Baretta. 9,0. 8.34+ Inset Not Likely Req'd 188 2235+69 1650 A 78 3.51 Inset Not Likely Req'd 189 2252+19 850 A mi 72.9 0.90 190 2260+69 1100 A (Aes fot True Station (ft) 2271+69 Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line Existing Structure List & Critical Unbalanced Loadings Ahead Span Critical Unit Load* Structure} Structure (Ib/ft) 950 Comments DRAFT 2281+19 975 2290+94 1175 2302+69 800 2310+69 1425 2324+94 854.56 2333+48 1325 Inset Not Likely Req'd 2346+73 1225 2358+98 1300 2371+98 850 2380+48 1013.62 2390+62 1186.38 2402+48 1350 2415+98 1100 2426+98 1000 2436+98 1200 2448+98 850 2457+48 1000 2467+48 950 2476+98 1475 2491+73 1175 2503+48 950 2512+98 1100 2523+98 950 2533+48 900 2542+48 2200 Inset Not Likely Req'd 2564+48 1150.99 2575+99 1299.01 Inset Not Likely Req'd 2588+98 1000 2598+98 800 Inset Not Likely Req'd 2606+98 900 2615+98 1535 2631+33 1865 END OF PROJECT 2649+98 1050 2660+48 1025 2670+73 925 2679+98 1375 2693+73 1225 2705+98 1300 2718+98 725 2726+23 DDD P| S| P| YP|DW/O/ S| S| S| S| MOO) S| P| P| S/W W/ P| P| YP| P| Y/ S| YP|O/ S| YH] P| wlan) YP] P| Y| P| yp] > 750 * Critical load is a weight per foot on each conductor in the bundle that causes the ground clearance to fall ** snow load has a density of 7.5 Ib/ft® Appendix C-Cost Estimates February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line Anchorage-Fairbanks 345kV Intertie Unbalanced Load Mitigation Towers 1-223 Inset Construction Layout Extended Item Item Item Description Qnty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Miscellaneous ROW & Site Clearing 25 1000 LF $5,000 $125,000 Access Roads 40 Miles $10,000 $400,000 Mobilization/Demobilization 1 Ea $750,000 $750,000 Tangent Insets Overland Access 144 Ea $88,000 $12,672,000 Helicopter Access 32 Ea $163,000 $5,216,000 Deadend Inset Overland Access 4 Ea $202,000 $808,000 Helicopter Access 11 Ea $417,700 $4,594,700 X-Tower Retrofitted Deadend Helicopter Access 7 Ea $58,200 $407,400 Resagging/Clipping 954 Rail Overland Access 1153 1000 LF $1,500 $1,729,500 954 Rail Helicopter Access 426 1000 LF $1,500 $639,000 3/8 HS OHSW Overland Access 384 1000 LF $2,000 $768,000 3/8 HS OHSW Helicopter Access 142 1000LF $2,000 $284,000 Other Line Outage Time 60 Days $20,000 $1,200,000 Project Subtotal $29,593,600 Contingency ~10% $3,000,400 Project Total $32,594,000 DRAFT Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line Inset Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown Item H-Structure 3-Pole Deadend |-String 345kV V-String 345kV Deadend 345kV OHSW 3/8" HS Tangent OHSW 3/8" HS Deadend H-Tower Pipe Pile Foundation H-Tower Pile Cap H-Tower Grouted Foundation Pile H-Tower Pile Cap Deadend Pipe Pile Foundation Deadend Pile Cap Deadend Pipe Pile Anchor/Guys Deadend Anchor Clamp Deadend Grouted Foundation Pile Deadend Pile Cap Deadend Grounted Anchor Pile Deadend Anchor Clamp Reclipping 954 Rail (1000') Reclipping 3/8 HS OHSW (1000') Upgrade Guy/Anchor ROW & Site Clearing Access Roads Mobilization/Demobilization Line Outage Time (per Day) Overland Access Material $25,000 $30,700 $600 $1,500 $1,700 $100 $150 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $600 $500 $0 $0 $5,000 $10,000 $750,000 0 Labor $20,000 $30,000 $1,400 $2,100 $5,000 $600 $1,800 $7,500 $5,000 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $800 $1,500 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 Extended $45,000 $60,700 $2,000 $3,600 $6,700 $700 $1,950 $10,000 $7,000 $7,500 $4,000 $3,600 $1,300 $1,500 $2,000 $5,000 $10,000 $750,000 $20,000 DRAFT Helicopter Access Material $25,000 $30,700 $600 $1,500 $1,700 $100 $150 $4,000 $2,000 $3,000 $1,000 $1,500 $500 $0 $0 $1,000 Labor $52,000 $78,000 $1,400 $2,100 $5,000 $600 $1,800 $25,000 $7,500 $25,000 $4,000 $10,000 $1,500 $1,500 $2,000 $4,500 Extended $77,000 $108,700 $2,000 $3,600 $6,700 $700 $1,950 $29,000 $9,500 $28,000 $5,000 $11,500 $2,000 $1,500 $2,000 $5,500 Note: Most Foundation & Labor Costs are based upon 2001 construction in the Foothills section of the Northern Intertie & Inset Placement on the Tyee T-Line in 1997. Tower costs are based upon estimated weight at $2.50/Ib. Crew Hour costs are $750/hr (4-M an). Anchorage Fairbanks 345kV Transmission Line DRAFT Inset Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown Item Overland Access Helicopter Access Qnty Material Labor Extended Material Labor Extended Tangent Inset Structure H-Structure 1 $25,000 $20,000 $45,000 $25,000 $52,000 $77,000 H-Tower Pipe Pile Foundation 2 2500 7500 $20,000 $4,000 $25,000 $58,000 H-Tower Pile Cap 2 2000 5000 $14,000 $2,000 $7,500 $19,000 |-String 345kV 2 $600 $1,400 $4,000 $600 $1,400 $4,000 V-String 345kV 1 $1,500 $2,100 $3,600 $1,500 $2,100 $3,600 OHSW 3/8" HS Tangent Z $100 $600 $1,400 $100 $600 $1,400 Total $88,000 Total $163,000 Deadend Inset Structure 3-Pole Deadend 1 $30,700 $30,000 $60,700 $30,700 $78,000 $108,700 Deadend Pipe Pile Foundation 3 $1,500 $6,000 $22,500 $3,000 $25,000 $84,000 Deadend Pile Cap 3 $1,000 $3,000 $12,000 $1,000 $4,000 $15,000 Deadend Pipe Pile Anchor/Guys 12 $600 $3,000 $43,200 $1,500 $10,000 $138,000 Deadend Anchor Clamp 12 $500 $800 $15,600 $500 $1,500 $24,000 Deadend 345kV 6 $1,700 $5,000 $40,200 $1,700 $5,000 $40,200 OHSW 3/8" HS Deadend 4 $150 $1,800 $7,800 $150 $1,800 $7,800 Total $202,000 Total $417,700 Retrofit X-Structure Upgrade Guy/Anchor 4 $1,000 $3,500 $18,000 Deadend 345kV 6 $1,700 $5,000 $40,200 Total $58,200 Appendix D-Plan & Profile Drawings *See Separately Attached Bound Copy of Plan & Profile Drawings February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Appendix E-Unbalanced Examples February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Example 1: This is a baseline example. Two loading scenarios are overlapped below. The All of the top spans are unloaded at 32°F final sag. The bottom spans at the same condition except they are ail loaded with a 0.7 lb/ft load. There is only about a 3 foot reduction in ground clearance. 350) 31,A.080 32 A.08S 33.A.080 34 A.090 35, A.085 STA=36500.00 STA=37750.00 STA=39000.00 STA=40300.00 STA=41600.00 HT=82.30 ELE=230.64 HT=88.10 ELE=235.83 HT=82.50 ELE=237.13 HT=92.50 ELE=239.36 HT=87 50 ELE=241.68 EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER 1300 1300 1225 1250 1250 \ J \ JY 32°F 0.7ibs/ft (2" Snow) = All Spans 100% Loaded | 22.4 (Target Clearance) ee STREAM STREAM STREAM 350) 300) 250) 200.0 FT. Note: Tower deflection is not modeled —S———— HORIZ. SCALE 20.0 FT VERT. SCALE Example 2: This example shows the effects of an unbalanced load. The top span between towers 33 and 34 is shown at 32°F final sag and all of its adjacent spans are at the same condition. The bottom span between towers 33 and 34 is shown at the same conditions but with a 0.7 lb/ft load on that span only. All of the adjacent spans are unloaded. There is a ground clearance reduction of about 12 feet. Note that adjacent spans to the loaded span the ground clearance is actually increased because the overall tension in that line section has increased. 31a: 38500 00 SA 50 3t4:38000.00 SA W00.00 A375 00.00 Hi=82.30 ELE=230.64 HT=88 10 ELE-235.83 Ht=82.50 ELe-297.13 Hi'=92 50 ELe-239.36 Bea so eee=244. EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER © 1300 1300 1225 1250 4250 32°F No Load 32°F No Load SQ aN 32°F No Load ‘ 32°F No Load oS | 32°F 0.7ibsift (2° Snow) a) } Single Span 100% Loaded ingot ceria} Single Span 100% Loaded STREAM 200.0 FT. Note: Tower deflection is not modeled 900 FT HORIZ. SCALE a VERT. SCALE 350 300 250 350 300 250 Example 3: This example demonstrates how a single loaded span is the worse case scenario. The top span between towers 33 and 34 is loaded with 0.7|bs/ft at 32°F Final sag, along with its two adjacent spans, all other spans in the section are bare. The bottom sag is a single span loaded at 0.7Ibs/ft with all adjacent spans bare. Loading the two adjacent spans actually increases the ground clearance by 4.5' over the single loaded span. 314.080 320.085 33 A.080 34 A.090 ae Aes Breas 30 ee-230.64 Fiteaa 10 cl e=235.83 Brea 40 cl e-237.13 B19 Se ei 239.36 Brest Oe 041.68 EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER EXISTING TOWER 1300 1225 350] 1250 350 i 300 32°F 0.7ibs/ft (2" Snow) 32°F No Load 32°F No Lopd 32°F No Load 32°F No Load 3 Spans 100% Loaded 45ft 32°F 0.7ibs/ft (2" Snow) ial 32°F 0.7ibs/ft (2" 3 Spans 100% Loaded 250] 32°F 0.7Ibsift (2" Snow) sraisenan sh ae | 22: I Spa P 2 3 Spans 100% Loaded (Target Clearance) ia E a 200.0 FT. Note: Tower deflection is not modeled oOo FT A ORIZ. SCALE VERT. SCALE Example 4: This example demonstrates the improvement inset structures will have on unbalanced loading ground clearance. The area modeled is the same section in the previous examples, with inset structures inserted on every span. The top sag has an unbalanced load of 0.7Ibs/ft, simlar to the 2nd example. However, instead of a clearance of less than 22 feet, with the inset, the clearance is now 67 feet. Even increasing the load to 8.7 Ib/ft (12" radial snow load at 7.5 Ibs/ft3) as shown in the lower sag only reduces the ground clearance to 41 feet, almost twice the minimum target ground clearance. 1A INS.085 32.A.085 32A INS.080 33 A.080 33A INS.085, 340.090 344 INS.085 35 A Bee es HES EB one BAF URE oases HASH E ooson SSPE or s3 FASE 8c on HED aa FABER ose FRE aan ASHE EXISTING TOWER” EXISTING TOWER 7 . EXISTING TOWER" ” : EXISTING TOWER | 7 : EXISTING TOWER ™ oo nee 693 350] 350 32°F 0.7ibsift (2" Snow) Single Span 100% Loaded 300] 300 32°F 8.3ibsift (12° Snow) Single Span 100% Loaded 250 22.4ft 250 (Target Clearance) 200.0 FT HORIZ. SCALE FT. VERT. SCALE Note: Tower deflection is not modeled Appendix F-Geotechnical Draft Report February 28, 2005 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. Golder Associates Inc 1750 Abbott Road, Suite 200 Anchorage, AK USA 99507 Telephone: (907) 344-6001 Fax: (907) 344-6011 February 25, 2005 053-5698 Dryden & LaRue, Inc. 3305 Arctic Boulevard, Suite 201 Anchorage, AK 99503 Attention: Del LaRue, P.E. RE: ASSESSMENT OF GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS FOR PROSPECTIVE TRANSMISSION LINE STRUCTURES WILLOW TO TALKEETNA, ALASKA Dear Del: Golder Associates Inc. has prepared the following report to summarize our assessment of the geologic conditions on the Anchorage/Fairbanks Intertie between Willow and Chunilna Creek, several miles north of Talkeetna, Alaska. The purpose of the study was to assess general geologic conditions that can be anticipated at inset structures that will be constructed during an upgrade of the transmission line. We understand that this effort will provide the basis for preliminary design, planning, and serve as the background for future field reconnaissance and subsurface investigations. This transmission line segment has 236 existing structures and is approximately 50 miles long. The spacing of the structures averages about 1,200 ft. The scope of work for this project included the review of the following types of existing data (see References for specific citations): ¢ Geologic maps and reports available from the U.S. Geologic Survey and Alaska Division of Geologic and Geophysical Surveys. e Plan and profile sheets of the existing transmission line (Alaska Power Authority, 1982). e Pile driving records and borehole logs from original construction (Alaska Power Authority, 1983). ¢ Geotechnical report pertinent to the intertie by Shannon and Wilson (1982). e Geotechnical information available from the ADOT&PF along the Parks Highway (ADOT&PF, July 2000). Aerial photographs of the route taken in 1996, available for approximately 45 miles of the 50 mile project, were interpreted in stereo (Aeromap U.S., 1996). Terrain units were delineated on photo overlays and compared to information from borehole logs, pile driving records, and the topographic expressions on the plan and profiles. Based on the information review, landform delineation, and OFFICES ACROSS ASIA, AUSTRALASIA, EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA, SOUTH AMERICA Dryden and LaRue February 25, 2005 Del LaRue -2- 053-5698 comparison to the construction records, a station-by-station table of subsurface conditions was developed that inferred the geologic conditions likely to be encountered at inset structures along the alignment. Regional Geology The region traversed by the alignment is characterized by generally lowland to gently rolling terrain with swampy breaks. More upland areas are forested by spruce and birch while lowlands are typically covered by muskeg and low bushes. The topography has little relief south of the Talkeetna River but becomes steeper north of the river. The overall gradient is to the southwest and the alignment traverses several tributaries to the Susitna River. The region is underlain at depth by Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary and metamorphic rocks plus Tertiary intrusive rocks. The entire alignment has been intensely glaciated during the late Pleistocene. The glaciations have scoured the landscape and left a mantle of glacial drift and related glacio-fluvial deposits on the bedrock. The depth of the surficial deposits varies considerably. Permafrost is generally absent but may occur sporadically in low areas that are well insulated by organic cover. The area is seismically active although no active faults have been identified that cross the alignment. The southern end of the line is within 10 miles of the Castle Mountain Fault where seismic activity is generally comprised of low-magnitude, shallow events (magnitude 3.0 to 4.5) even though the potential exists for larger magnitude earthquakes (magnitude 6.0) (Updike and others, 1985). The northern end of the line is within approximately 100 mile of the Denali Fault which ruptured in 2002 with a earthquake magnitude of 7.9. The epicenter of the 1964 earthquake is approximately 100 miles southeast of the alignment. Based on hazard mapping by the U.S. Geological Survey, the peak horizontal ground acceleration for an earthquake with an approximate 475 year recurrence interval (i.e., a 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years) is 0.4g. TERRAIN UNIT DESCRIPTIONS The transmission line corridor traverses several geologic terrain units. The general properties of these terrain units are described below. A ubiquitous mantle of organic soil and windblown materials, typically 1 to 2 ft thick, forms a thin cover over most of the ground. This mantle has not been mapped separately. Peat and Pond Deposits [Pt] — Swampy areas are usually treeless or have stunted trees. They consist of soft, wet organics (peat) and organic-rich silt, typically occurring as a result of channel or kettle infilling where gradients are low and drainage is poor. These low strength deposits typically range in thickness from 2 to 8 ft. Alluvial Deposits [Qal] — The alluvial deposits typically consist of well-stratified and well-sorted water-deposited, sand and gravel deposits with minor silt content along modern streams and on elevated terraces. They also include the older, coarse, glacial-fluvial materials deposited at the front of retreating glaciers. These materials are usually derived from glacial drift and re-worked by water. They are compact to dense and may include considerable percentages of cobbles and boulders. Glacial Drift [Gd] - Glacial drift consists of glacially-deposited materials including moraine, till and ice-marginal deposits. Materials generally consist of dense to extremely dense unsorted mixtures of silt, sand, gravel, cobbles and occasional boulders. The drift typically has significantly more fines than the alluvial deposits. Willow Talkeetna T-Line Report Golder Associates Dryden and LaRue February 25, 2005 Del LaRue -3- 053-5698 Bedrock [Bx] - The bedrock in this region is poorly defined due to the nearly continuous cover of surficial materials. Based on US Geological Survey mapping, the bedrock likely includes everything from Tertiary granitic intrusives (Reed and Nelson, 1980) and meta-volcanics, consisting of grano- diorite and andesite, to Paleozoic and Mesozoic marine meta-sedimentary rocks consisting of sandstones and shales (Csejtey Bela, et. al., 1978). GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ON THE ALIGNMENT The geologic conditions on the alignment can be separated into three general zones. The conditions in each zone are described below. A preliminary station-by-station distribution of the terrain units is presented in Table 1. The extent of the terrain units are estimated from air photo interpretation, limited borehole data, and pile driving records from original construction. Field investigations will be necessary to confirm and refine these interpretations. Where a dual terrain unit is shown, the top unit is the surface layer and is interpreted to be at least four feet thick. The bottom unit is likely to be encountered within 20 ft of the ground surface. Based on extensive probing in the Susitna Valley by DGGS (Nelson and Reed, 1978), the peat thickness is unlikely to exceed 10 ft at any location. Willow to Goose Creek (Structures 1 to 104) The southern portion of the alignment begins at an elevation of approximately 200 ft and gradually rises to an elevation of 400 ft. This segment traverses numerous small, lowland creeks and swamps with numerous forested breaks that typically have elevations less than 10 ft higher than the adjacent swamps. The swamps are saturated and filled with a layer of peaty materials with some inter-bedded silt and sand layers. The organic layer typically ranges in thickness from 2-8 ft and is underlain by glacial drift and glacial-fluvial deposits. The sediments are locally very coarse with numerous cobbles and occasional boulders in a silt-sand-gravel matrix. Bedrock is relatively deep and was not encountered in any of the boreholes or previous pile installations. No permafrost has been reported in this zone. Goose Creek to North Side of Answer Creek (Structures 105 to 161) The middle portion of the alignment begins at an elevation of approximately 400 ft and rises to an elevation of 750 ft. This segment is also underlain by glacial drift and glacial-fluvial deposits with some swampy areas. There is less swampy terrain than in the segment to the south. The sediments are locally very coarse with numerous cobbles and occasional boulders in a silt-sand-gravel matrix. Bedrock is relatively deep and was not encountered in any of the boreholes nor is it in evidence in previous pile installations. No permafrost has been reported in this zone. North Side of Answer Creek to Chuilna Creek (Structures 161 to 231) The northern portion of the alignment begins at an elevation of 750 ft and terminates at an elevation of 1,340 ft. Most of the elevation gain occurs north of the Talkeetna River (elevation 440 ft, Structure No. 195). This segment is generally mantled with glacial drift and glacial-fluvial deposits except for the alluvium of the Talkeetna River floodplain (Structures 193 to 196). These materials overlay bedrock. Bedrock appears to be within 25 ft of the ground surface over approximately one-third of this segment. Low swampy areas with deep organics are present in a few limited sections, which present a higher potential for encountering sporadic permafrost on other portions of the route. Willow Talkeetna T-Line Report Golder Associates Dryden and LaRue February 25. 2005 Del LaRue at 053-5098 We hope that this report meets your needs for this stage of the project. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information Sincerely, GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC. \ — j rs fs. Robert G. Dugan, C.P.G. Principal Engineering Geologist Attachments: Figure | - Location Map Table | ~ Terrain Unit Summary, Anchorage/Healy Intertie, Willow to Chunilna Creek RGDAem REFERENCES Aeromap U.S., July 3, 1996, Color Aerial Photographs, Scale 1° = 2000 ft., Rolls 20 and 21, Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, July 2000, Test Hole Logs and Locations, Parks [lighway Pedestrian Bridges (Lite Willow Creek, Kashwitna River, Sheep Creek). Alaska Power Authority, 1982. Plan and Profile for Anchorage-Fairbanks Transmission Intertie, prepared by Commonwealth Associates Inc. Alaska Power Authority, 1983, Quality Control Report | Piling Driving Logs. Csejtey Bela. et. al. 1978, Reconnaissance Geologic Map and Geochronology, Talkeetna Mountains Quadrangle. Northern Part of Anchorage Quadrangle, and Southwest Corner of Healy Quadrangle. Alaska. Nelson, Steven W.. and Reed, Bruce L.. 1978. Surticial Deposits. ‘Talkeetna Quadrangle. Alaska. U.S. Geological Survey Map MF-870-1. Reed. Bruce L. and Nelson. Steven W.. and 1980, Geologic Map of the Talkeetna Quadrangle. Alaska, U.S. Geological Survey Map [-1174 Reyer. RD. Cruse, G.R.. Stevens. D.S.P.. and Smith, RL. 2003, Geologic Map of Proposed Fransportauion Corndors in the Tyoneh Quadrangle. Alaska. published by Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. Shannon and Wilson. Inc... August 1982. Geotechnical Invesngation — Anchorage Fawrbanks Intertic fransmission Line Route, prepared for Commonwealth Associates. Inc and the Alaska Power Authors Goider Associates Dryden and LaRue February 25, 2005 Del LaRue -5- 053-5698 Updike, Randall G. and others, 1984, Guide to Engineering Geology of the Anchorage Area, published by the Alaska Geological Society. Winkler, Gary R., 1992, Geologic Map and Summary Geochronology of the Anchorage 1° x 3° Quadrangle, Southern Alaska, US. Geological Survey Map 1-2283. Willow Talkeetna T-Line Report Golder Associates FIGURES Willow Talkeetna T-Line Report Golder Associates APPROXIMATE SCALE 2 0 4 6 8 miles 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14km TABLES Willow Talkeetna T-Line Report Golder Associates TABLE 1 PRELIMINARY TERRAIN UNIT SUMMARY- ANCHORAGE/HEALY INTERTIE WILLOW TO CHUNILNA CREEK STATION RANGE STRUCTURE RANGE STARTING ENDING STRUCTURE STRUCTURE 1 5 5 6 6 6 6 11 11 14 14 14 14 16 16 19 19 21 21 23 23 24 24 25 25 25 25 28 28 29 29 33 33 38 38 39 39 39 39 40 40 42 42 42 42 50 50 52 52 53 53 59 59 60 60 61 61 65 65 66 66 70 70 74 74 94 94 98 98 101 101 102 102 104 104 105 105 106 106 112 112 113 113 116 117 118 119 126 126 130 130 136 136 140 140 143 143 146 147 147 148 148 149 149 150 150 151 152 152 154 155 161 161 173 174 175 176 180 180 181 181 185 186 188 188 193 193 197 197 200 200 204 205 207 Pt - Organics (peat) orted sand, gravel, silt, cobbles, boulders) orted silt, sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders) Bx - Bedrock FROM 8+00 51+00 60+00 69+00 135+00 165+00 168+00 189+00 222+50 241+50 264+00 284+00 290+00 296+00 330+00 348+00 391+00 457+00 465+00 474+00 478+00 503+50 509+50 609+00 627+00 637+00 712+00 731+00 743+00 785+00 797+00 843+00 895+00 1130+00 1180+00 1215+00 1226+50 1284+50 1296+00 1313+00 1387+00 1390+00 1427+00 1414+00 1540+00 1585+00 1625+00 1672+50 1722+00 1753+00 1760+00 1770+00 1786+50 1801+00 1821+00 1859+00 1935+00 2079+00 2104+00 2158+00 2168+00 2229+00 2255+00 2307+00 2365+00 2390+00 2435+00 2458+00 2712+00 LANDFORM GEOTECH BOREHOLE COMMENTS TO BOREHOLE 51+00 Qal B-1 Very stiff Sil/Clay 18-32 ft 60+00 Qs/Qd 69+00 Qd 135+00 Qs/Qd 165+00 Qd 168+00 Qal 189+00 Qs/Qal B-2 8.3 ft of peat overlies gravel 222+50 Qd 241+50 Qal 264+00 Qs/Qal 284+00 Qal 290+00 Qs/Qd 296+00 Qal 330+00 Qd 348+00 Qs/Qd 391+00 Qs/Qal B-3 4ftPt 457+00 Qs/Qd 465+00 Qd 474+00 Qs/Qd 478+00 Qd 503+50 Qs/Qal 509+50 Qd 609+00 Qs/Qd 627+00 Qal 637+00 Qs/Qd 712+00 Qal 731+00 Qd 743+00 Qs/Qd 785+00 Qd 797+00 Qal 850+00 Qd B-5 High blowcounts below 9 ft 895+00 Qal 1130+00 Qs/Qd B-6 Peat to 6 ft, high blows below 15 ft 1180+00 Qal 1215+00 Qs/Qal 1226+50 Qd 1284+50 Qs/Qd Goose Creek 1296+00 Qd 1313+00 Qs/Qd 1387+00 Qd 1390+00 Qs 1427+00 Qd 1457+00 Qs/Qal 1540+00 Qd 1585+00 Qal 1625+00 Qd Bs Hard silts and sands (many blows) 1672+50 Qal 1722+00 Qd 1753+00 Qal 1760+00 Qd 1770+00 Qs/Qd 1786+50 Qd 1801+00 Qd Cobbles and Boulders 1821+00 Qd 1859+00 Qs/Qd Cobbies and Boulders 1935+00 Qd B-11 Cobbles and Boulders 2079+00 Qd/Bx 2104+00 Qs/Qal Water sands 2158+00 Qd/Bx 2168+00 Qs/Qd 2229+00 Qd Cobbles and Boulders 2255+00 Bx Cobbles and Boulders 2307+00 Qd/Bx Cobbies and Boulders 2365+00 Qal Cobbies and Boulders 2390+00 Qd B-15 Many blows in gravel 2435+00 Qs/Qd Cobbles and Boulders 2458+00 Qd/Bx Cobbles and Boulders 2712+00 Cobbies and Boulders 2750+00 Bedrock at 13.4 ft