HomeMy WebLinkAboutBeluga Coal Field Development Social Effects & Management Alternatives 1979PNL-RAP-29
Beluga Coal Field Development:
Social Effects and
Management Alternatives
May 1979
PROPERTY OF:
Alaska Power Authority
334 W. 5th Ave. Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Prepared for
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Technology Impacts
Through
Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development Department of Commerce and Economic Development 338 Denali Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Contract EY-77-C-06-1002
Task Agreement No. 2
and
Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Richland, Washington 99352
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the
United States nor the Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their comtractors,
subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or 2 contig im ree mmenete ee pc apparatus, product or process
The views, op of the contractor and do not
necessarily rep r Department of Energy.
BELUGA COAL FIELD DEVELOPMENT: SOCIAL EFFECTS AND MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Marvin Olsen Susan Brody Christopher Cluett Corby Howell Joseph Trimble Loren Leman
Glen Svendsen
May 1979
Prepared for
Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development Department of Commerce and Economic Development 338 Denali Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
and
U. S. Department of Energy
Office of Technology Impacts Regional Assessment Division
Washington, D.C. 20545
Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352
Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers
Seattle, Washington 98105
CHoM Hill
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
PNL-RAP-29
UC-11
CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE . : : : . : : : : : : : 7 vii
SUMMARY. . : : : : . : : : : : 7 ix
CHAPTER 1 - DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
INTRODUCTION . : : : 7 : : . 7 : 7 1-1
BACKGROUND DATA : 7 : : : : . : : : 1-2
FIRST SCENARIO: COAL-FIRED GENERATING PLANTS : : : : 1-6
SECOND SCENARIO: COAL EXPORTING . : : : : 1-9
THIRD SCENARIO: GENERATING PLANTS AND COAL EXPORTING . : : 1-11
KEY FACTORS AFFECTING BELUGA DEVELOPMENT : . 7 : 7 1-13
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 . : : : 7 : : : - 1-16
CHAPTER 2 - REGIONAL SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS
INTRODUCTION . : . : : : : 7 2-1
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORKFORCE . : : : : : 2-2
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARKET FOR COAL . 7 : : 7 2-4
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT REVENUES : : : : : 2-5
CONCLUSIONS : : : : : : 7 7 : : 7 2-6
CHAPTER 3 - SETTLEMENT REQUIREMENTS
SETTLEMENT SITES : : : : 7 : : : : : 3-1
Existing Settlements : : : : : : : : 3-1
Site Characteristics and Land Requirements. : : : 3-2
HOUSING . : : : : : : 7 : : : : 3-5
Existing Conditions . : 7 : : : . : : 3-5
Housing Requirements . : . : : : . : 3-7
SCHOOLS . : : : : : : 7 : : : : 3-11
Existing Conditions . : : : 7 . 7 : . 3-11
School Requirements . : : : : : : : 3-12
POLICE, FIRE, AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES . : : : : 3-14
Police Services : : 7 : 7 : : : : 3-14
Fire Protection : : : 7 7 : : : : 3-15
Health Care and Emergency Medical Services . : : : 3-16
iii
CONTENTS (Contd)
Page
RECREATION NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES . . : : : . : 3-17
WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS . : : . . . : : 3-19
Existing Systems . : . . . . . . . 3-19
Village of Tyonek . : . : 7 : : : 3-19
Tyonek Timber Camp . : . . . . . . 3-20
Trading Bay : : : : . : : : : 3-20
Requirements. : : : : : : : : : 3-21
Water Availability . . : . . . . . . 3-21
System Alternatives . : : : : : : : 7 3-22
Onsite Systems . . . . : . : 3-22
Community Water and Sewer’ systems : . : . : 3-22
Expansion of Existing Systems . . . . . 7 3-23
TRANSPORTATION AND POWER . : : : . : . : . 3-24
Existing Systems : : : : . 7 . : : 3-24
Roads . : : : : : : : : 3-24
Airport Facilities 7 : : : : : : 7 3-26
Dock Facilities : . : : : : : : 3-27
Power . 7 . - : 7 . . : : 3-27
Requirements. : : : . 7 : : . : 3-27
Power : . : : . : . : : 3-27
Airport Facilities : : : 7 : : . 7 3-28
Dock Facilities : : : : : : : . 3-28
Overland Transportation . : . . . . . 3-29
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3 . : : : : : : : 3-31
CHAPTER 4 - PSYCHOSOCIAL PROSPECTS FOR TYONEK
OVERVIEW . : 7 : : : : : 4-1
A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE VILLAGE OF TYONEK . : : : 4-2
PRESENT LIFE STYLE . . : : : 7 . . . 4-6
EFFECTS OF COAL DEVELOPMENT ON COMMUNITY LIFE STYLE : : : 4-8
COMMUNITY PERCEPTION TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT : : : : : 4-10
SUMMARY. . : : : . . : : . : . 4-14
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4 . . . . . : : . . 4-15
iv
CONTENTS (Contd)
Page
CHAPTER 5 - DECISION MAKING FRAMEWORK
GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTION AND POWERS 5-1
Tyonek Village Council 5-1
Tyonek Native Corporation. : . . . . . 5-1
Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated (CIRI) 5-2
Kenai Peninsula Borough 5-2
State of Alaska 5-4
Office of the Governor, Division of Policy Development and Planning 7 : 5-5 Department of Commerce and Economic. Devel opment 5-5 Department of Community and Regional Affairs . 5-5 Department of Environmental Conservation 5-6 Department of Fish and Game. 5-6 Department of Natu¢al Resources 5-6
OPPORTUNITIES FOR INVOLVEMENT . 5-7
Environmental Concerns 5-7
Air Quality : : 7 : , 7 5-8 Water Resources . ; A 4 5-9 Fish and Game . 5-10 Surface Revegetation/Reclamation 5-11 Land Management Issues. 5-12 Creation of a New Settlement 5-14
Provision of Community Services and Facilities 5-16
Education . 5-16 Public Safety . 5-17 Public Utilities 5-18 Housing. . 5-19 Community Transportation J 5-21
CHAPTER 6 - RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDED RESEARCH 6-1
Alaska Energy Worker Profile 6-2
Energy Development Monitoring . 6-3
New Community Planning 6-3
Area Development Assessment 6-4
Tyonek Ethnographic Profile 6-5
Tyonek Impact Prevention . - 6-6
CONTENTS (Contd)
POSSIBLE STEPS TO PREVENT UNACCEPTABLE IMPACTS
General Guidelines
Implementation Suggestions
State Policy Development .
Land-Use Planning. . . :
Town Site Planning
Employment and Job Training . .
Financing Community Services
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
vi
Page
6-7
6-10
6-10
6-1]
6-12
6-13
6-13
7-1
8-1
10-1
4
PREFACE
This study was conducted for the Division of Energy and Power Development
of the Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development and the Regional
Assessment Division of the U.S. Department of Energy. It was a joint effort
by the Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers and CH2M HILL. The development
scenarios in Chapter 1 were constructed by Marvin Olsen of Battelle; the eval-
uation of regional impacts in Chapter 2 was performed by Christopher Cluett of
of Battelle; the analysis of settlement requirements and service needs in
Chapter 3 was prepared by Susan Brody, Corby Howell, and Loren Leman of CH2M
HILL; the assessment of effects on the Village of Tyonek in Chapter 4 was
carried out by Joseph Trimble of Battelle; the decision-making framework dis-
cussed in Chapter 5 was produced by Susan Brody of CH2M HILL and Glen Svendsen,
a private consultant; the recommendations for further study listed in Chapter 6
were compiled by Marvin Olsen of Battelle from suggestions made by all the
project participants. Marvin Olsen and Susan Brody coordinated the project.
All written source materials for this study are listed in the bibli-
ography. Much information for the study was also obtained through personal
interviews. All of the persons interviewed are listed in the bibliography.
In addition to this study, the Division of Energy and Power Development
has prepared two baseline reports on the environment and land tenure of the
Beluga coal district, as well as a summary of coal technology and transporta-
tion methods for moving the coal to market.
vii
SUMMARY
Plans are under way to mine the Beluga coal fields on the west side of
Cook Inlet. The coal will be strip-mined for export, or to supply local
electric generating plants, or both. Over the next 20 years, this coal
development activity is likely to generate social and economic impacts at the
local, regional, and state levels. The purpose of this study is to assess the
potential social and economic effects of coal development, including employment
and population growth, regional impacts, and the facility and service needs of
a new settlement in the Beluga area. Of special concern is identifying the
role of various governmental agencies in the development process. Potential
effects on the natural environment are not examined in detail since they are
expected to be controlled to acceptable levels through existing federal and
state laws.
This report examines three possible levels of coal-field development and
the settlement requirements associated with each. Scenario 1 postulates a low
level of coal mining to supply local generating facilities. Initial construc-
tion activities in 1980 would create a total population of about 200 persons,
increasing to over 500 in 1982 and 1983, and leveling off at 320 in 1986, when
the construction phase would be complete. Scenario 2 assumes that mining
would begin in 1990 to supply coal for an export market. A population of 300
to 320 would be associated with this mining activity and would remain fairly
stable over the years unless the volume of coal being mined and exported were
considerably increased. Both scenarios 1 and 2 would require a permanent work
camp to house construction, mining, operating, and support workers and any
nonemployed dependents.
Scenario 3 assumes that two coal-fired generating plants would be con-
structed in the Beluga area between 1980 and 1985, and that six million tons
of coal would be exported, beginning in 1990. A work camp would serve workers
until about 1989, when it would begin to evolve into a full-scale community,
with a diversity of housing types and services. By 1991, a population of over
1300 residents might be reached.
ix
The most probable regional impacts associated with Beluga coal-field
development will include effects on the regional labor force, the market for
coal, and the generation and distribution of revenues. The main regional
labor force impacts will be positive in nature. The rate of regional unem-
ployment is likely to decline slightly for the duration of the project, with
an increase in wage income available for reinvestment in the region and a
reduction in the number of individuals receiving unemployment insurance
payments. Coal development is not expected to induce any significant in-
migration of workers from outside the Anchorage-Kenai Peninsula Borough
region.
The development of the Beluga coal resources and the production of
electricity from coal would add to the Kenai Peninsula Borough's tax base.
The assessed value of coal lands around Beluga would likely increase and, in
addition, Cook Inlet Region, Inc. would be the recipient of royalties from
coal leases.
The land requirements for a new settlement in the Beluga area will
vary, depending on whether a work camp or full-scale community is planned.
A 500-person work camp, with dormitory housing, a kitchen-dining hall, and
recreation facilities may require about 40 acres of land. A permanent
community for about 1500 people would likely require from 600 to 1200 acres,
depending on density and design. It would need to include a school, recre-
ation center and park, clinic, police-fire station, city hall, and retail
commercial area, in addition to both single- and multi-family housing.
A number of factors will affect the choice of settlement site, including
slope, drainage, soils conditions, land ownership, and access to transporta-
tion facilities. Placer Amex Inc. has suggested an area near Congahbuna Lake,
to the west of the former Moquawkie Reservation, as a likely settlement
site.
Housing requirements for a work camp would probably be met by prefabri-
cated structures, primarily dormitory units for single workers and a small
number of two- and three-bedroom houses or mobile homes for families. A
full-scale community would also require dormitory housing initially, until
the construction period is completed. Housing demand would then shift to a
mixture of one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, including mobile homes. The
total required housing units under scenario 3 is expected to be about 475
from the year 1991 on.
Classrooms and teachers will be provided by the Kenai Peninsula Borough
School District for any school-age children who live in the project area.
Few children are likely to live in a work-camp setting, but a full-scale
community is expected to attract many families. A community with a popu-
lation of 1300 residents could require school facilities for over 280 pupils.
Other services and facilities required by a new settlement include
police and fire protection, recreational services, parks, libraries, medical
care, water and sewer systems, roads, and electric power. The role of state
and local agencies in providing these services and facilities will depend to
a large extent upon the legal status of the new settlement. State support
of local public services could range from actual provision to financial
support of programs administered by a local government. A Development City
could be established under existing state statute, increasing the settlement's
eligibility for financial assistance from state agencies.
Life in the village of Tyonek could be disrupted by coal development
and any associated new settlement in the area. Tyonek residents may become
a minority in their own region and have difficulty maintaining their preferred
lifestyle. Social problems can emerge that would affect education, traditional
subsistence efforts, and community beliefs and attitudes. However, preventive
measures can be taken to minimize adverse impacts by assisting coal developers
and new workers to understand the needs and priorities of Tyonek residents.
Governmental and private agencies with interests in the Beluga area
include the Tyonek Village Council, the Tyonek Native Corporation, Cook
Inlet Region Inc., the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and the State of Alaska.
All of these organizations are likely to become involved in various aspects
of coal-field development.
xi
The principal purpose of this study is to assess the potential social and
economic impacts of Beluga development. A number of recommendations for
research and governmental activities were derived from the study effort,
however, and these recommendations are presented in Chapter 6.
xii
Chapter 1
DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
INTRODUCTION
The extent to which coal will be mined in the Beluga area during the
next 20 years cannot be predicted with any accuracy at the present time.
Possibilities range from no mining at all to large-scale operations of
30 million tons per year. Numerous contingencies will affect the eventual
development outcomes, including governmental requirements that utilities
substitute coal for natural gas for electricity generation (unless Alaska
is exempted from this requirement), the market demand for coal in the
United States and around the world, the rate of industrial growth in the
Cook Inlet region, and the responses of native villages and corporations to
economic development in their region.
To take account of this wide range of possible future trends at Beluga,
this report examines three alternative development scenarios: 1) a rela-
tively low level of coal mining to supply fuel for additional electric
generating facilities at Beluga; 2) moderate-scale mining operations for
export, but no on-site use by generating facilities; and 3) a combination
of both these conditions. These are the three situations that are thought
most likely to occur at Beluga, and they represent considerably different
levels of coal mining development.
In addition to these three possibilities, there has been considerable
speculation about various forms of industrial development in the Cook Inlet
region that would require coal for either process heat generation or
electricity generation, or both. These possibilities include a petro-
chemical plant, an LGN plant, and an aluminum smelter. However, none of
these projects is definite at this time. Therefore, their potential effects
on coal development at Beluga cannot be estimated with any certainty. At
one extreme, if a single plant were constructed on the Kenai Peninsula, and
if coal were already being mined at Beluga, no more than an additional 20 to
30 miners would be required. At the other extreme, if several plants were
1-1
constructed at Beluga, the construction and operating work forces, plus the
associated secondary economic growth and influx of dependents, might push
the population of the community at Beluga to 3000-4000 people. Consequently,
this
coal-
analysis does not specifically take into account the possibility of
dependent industrial growth in the Cook Inlet region. If and when such
plans become more definite, however, their likely social and economic effects
on Beluga could be incorporated into the scenarios analyzed here.
BACKGROUND DATA
from
e
The data used in constructing the scenarios for this report were obtained
a variety of sources, through personal interviews. These sources were:
Placer Amex, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association
Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development
Alaska Division of Community Planning
Alaska Division of Community and Rural Development
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department
Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
Tyonek Native Corporation
Tyonek Village Council
Considerable information relevant to future development possibilities
at Beluga resulted from these interviews, the most significant of which was
that:
The Beluga Coal Company (a wholly owned subsidiary of Placer Amex,
Inc.) would like to begin mining development in the Beluga area within
the next two or three years if possible, but it cannot initiate any
projects there until it has a firm market for the coal. At the present
time that market does not exist.
1-2 a
‘If mining is begun at Beluga, it will likely be limited to the Capps
coal field for the immediate future, since it is the most accessible of
the three deposits for which Placer Amex, Inc. holds leases. The land
on which the Capps field is located will be owned by Cook Inlet Region,
Inc., so that it would receive the royalties from all mining activities
in that field. These operations would be strip-mining with heavy
equipment, since the coal lies quite close to the surface. It is
subbituminous coal with a moderate heat value of 7500 Btus per pound,
low sulfur content (0.2 percent), but a high ash-moisture content
(about 35%) which makes it expensive to transport.
Chugach Electric Association has no plans at this time to construct any
coal-fired electric generating plants at Beluga. The company estimates
that the Beluga gas field contains enough natural gas to meet all its
needs until at least 2020, even with an annual demand growth rate of
13%-15% (which has been the case recently but which is not expected to
continue indefinitely). Any future electric generating units the
company installs at its Beluga plant will be convertible to coal if
necessary, but the company will not burn any coal unless required to by
governmental mandate. Such legislation is presently under consideration
by the U.S. Congress and is likely to become law, but the statute might
provide exceptions for situations such as Beluga where ample natural
gas supplies are available. If such a requirement were imposed on
Chugach Electric Association, however, it would undoubtedly install a
minimum of two coal-fired generators, so the case of a single generator
need not be considered.
Chugach Electric Association is not presently contemplating constructing
an underwater electric power cable across Cook Inlet to the Kenai
Peninsula. There is considerable disagreement among experts at the
present time concerning the engineering feasibility of such a project.
The Alaska State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has
laid out a route for a road from Knik to Beluga, but it presently has
neither plans nor funds to construct that road. Moreover, it will not
1-3
consider building the road unless there is extensive development in the
Beluga area to justify its expense. In other words, the road will
depend on prior development at Beluga, and would be constructed by the
state as a means of promoting growth on the west side of Cook Inlet.
Chugach Electric Association believes that if coal-fired generating
plants were constructed at Beluga, a permanent settlement should also
be built somewhere in that area. It would not consider rotating a
labor force of several hundred people back and forth between a temporary
work camp and Anchorage. The company would not assume responsibility
for providing any of the infrastructure necessary for such a community,
however, for it sees that as the responsibility of the state.
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. favors the creation of a moderately large,
permanent community somewhere in the Beluga area that would presumably
attract several industries because of the availability of coal and
electricity. It wants to participate in promoting this development,
but also assumes that the state has the primary responsibility for
providing the infrastructure for the new community.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough government has governmental jurisdiction
over the land where a town would most likely be built near the Beluga
coal field. Members of the Borough Planning Department believe, however,
that the borough has no intention of actively encouraging or facilita-
ting such a venture. Their view is that this would be a private activity
of the companies and individuals involved, and that the role of the
borough government would be limited to reviewing requests made by the
settlement for zoning, platting, schools, and solid waste disposal.
The community itself would have to decide if and how it wished to
obtain any other public services or facilities.
The village of Tyonek might likely seek to minimize contacts between
itself and a town in the Beluga area. Since a road already exists
between Tyonek and the proposed town site, however, such contact would
probably be difficult to avoid.
1-4
Several conclusions were drawn from these data and used as a basis for
constructing the scenarios for this report:
e There is a distinct possibility that no development of the Beluga coal
field will occur before 1990, if at all.
e Any such development would depend on at least one of three conditions
occurring:
1. a governmental order to Chugach Electric Association to use coal
rather than natural gas for generating electricity, either in
place of its present gas-fired turbines or in any additional
generating units.
2. construction of one or more industrial plants in the Cook Inlet
region that require large amounts of coal for process heat or
large amounts of electricity, although in the latter case Chugach
Electric Association would likely produce as much of that electricity
as possible with natural gas unless required by the government to
burn coal.
3. establishment by the Beluga Coal Company or by other coal lessees
of external (outside Alaska) markets for at least six million tons
of coal per year.
¢ If moderate levels of development did occur in the Beluga coal field,
the labor force would most likely be housed in what might be termed a
permanent work camp. Workers would remain there for periods of several
months to a few years, with occasional trips to Anchorage or elsewhere.
They would not be rotated back and forth on a weekly basis as/is now
done with the crews of the oil platforms in upper Cook Inlet. Some of
the workers would bring spouses to the work camp, but virtually all of
these people would also be employed in some capacity at the camp, since
there would be little for a nonemployed person to do there. There
would probably be few school-age children at the camp because it would
have limited or no school facilities, and Tyonek would probably resist
any significant influx of nonnative students into its school. Hence
the number of nonemployed persons at the camp would be limited to a
relatively small number of spouses and children.
* If a high level of development should occur at the Beluga coal field,
however, a more complete community would probably have to be created
there. It would attract a secondary labor force composed of both
persons directly supporting the primary labor force, and persons
employed in other activites stimulated by the needs of the growing
town. It would also include a sizable number of nonemployed depen-
dents. Such a community could be supported by air and water transpor-
tation, but demographic and economic growth at Beluga would be greatly
spurred by the construction of a road from Anchorage. An alternative
to creating a full community would be to merely enlarge the size of the
work camp, but that possibility was judged to be relatively remote and
hence is not considered in this report.
e At the present time, only Placer Amex, Inc. has assumed any responsi-
bility for planning a townsite at Beluga. The Kenai Borough government
is likely to play only a passive role of responding to whatever might
occur at Beluga. Chugach Electric Association and Cook Inlet Region,
Inc. are both business concerns that do not consider community organi-
zation to be their responsibility. And state agencies are just
beginning to establish policies concerning economic and community
development in the Beluga area.
FIRST SCENARIO: COAL-FIRED GENERATING PLANTS
If the federal government should require Chugach Electric Association
to burn coal in the future, either in place of its present gas-fired turbines
or in any new generators it constructed, it would probably build a plant
with at least two 200-megawatt coal-fired generators at Beluga. Since there
is no way of knowing when such an edict might be issued, this scenario
assumes the most demanding case of issuance in 1979. Construction of the
first generator might then begin in 1980, using a semi-modular form of
1-6
construction. On that schedule, the generator would be completed by 1983,
with limited mining beginning that year and full-scale mining and generating
operations beginning in 1984. This generator would require approximately
730,000 tons of coal per year. Construction of a second generator would
begin in 1982 and be completed by 1985. Full-scale operation of this
generator, which would require another 730,000 tons of coal per year, would
begin in 1986.
Estimates of the labor force needed to construct the two generators are
quite tentative since no previous construction experience is directly
comparable to this plan for semi-modular assembly. The construction labor
force figures used in this scenario are derived from estimates made by the
Chugach Electric Association and Burns and Roe Co., and from a recent sudy
(The latter figures are scaled down to take account of the planned semi-
modular mode of construction.) The labor force for the first year (1980) is
composed of 100 construction workers to prepare the plant site and 50 workers
of construction manpower requirements by Argonne National Laboratory.
to build the work camp. The labor force needed to construct the second
generator is assumed to be only two-thirds the size of that required for the
first generator, since many of the plant facilities for both generators
would be installed with the first one. Figures for the number of workers
needed to operate the generators were estimated from the Argonne study,
although this figure can vary widely from plant to plant depending on the
nature of the equipment used.
Estimates of the labor force requirements for coal mining in this
scenario are based on figures provided by Placer Amex Inc., on the current
experience of the Nenana coal field, and on the Argonne study. The base
figure of 60 persons needed to mine 730,000 tons per year is composed of
35 production workers, 13 maintenance workers, and 12 supervisory personnel.
In addition to the primary labor force, a relatively small support
staff would be needed to operate the work camp. A coefficient of 1.3 was
used to estimate the size of this support staff (0.3 support persons for
each primary worker). No secondary economic activity is assumed to occur
at the camp.
1-7
It is possible that some residents of Tyonek might join either the
primary or support labor forces at Beluga, thus reducing somewhat the
number of outside workers required. However, since there are only 60 men
over age 17 in Tyonek, almost all of whom are presently engaged in some
kind of occupation, the number of people who might do this is too small
to significantly affect the scenario.
Because of the isolation of the Beluga area, the scenario assumes that
none of the construction workers would bring any dependents with them who
were not also employed there. All those persons would be counted as part
of the labor force, not as nonemployed dependents. A few mining, operating,
and support workers might bring nonemployed dependents with them, but for
the reasons mentioned above this number would be rather small. The multiplier
used to estimate the number of nonemployed dependents in this scenario was
therefore only 1.2 (0.2 dependents for each mining, operating, and support
worker). Since the standard multiplier used in estimating the number of
nonemployed dependents who will accompany each operating (nonconstruction)
worker is 2.2, the scenario is assuming only one-sixth the usual number of
dependents at Beluga because of its work-camp nature.
The population estimates for this first scenario are given in Table 1-1.
Initial construction activities in 1980 would create a total population of
about 200 persons; this figure would increase to over 500 in 1982 and 1983;
it would level off at 320 beginning in 1986 when the construction phase
was completed. Since the scenario does not assume any secondary economic
growth, the Beluga coal development population should remain relatively
stable after 1985 unless there were further expansion of either the coal
mining or electricity generating activities.
The permanent work camp that would be established at the Beluga coal
field under this scenario would contain all housing, service, and recreational
facilities needed by the labor force and their dependents. These would likely
all be owned and operated by either Placer Amex, Inc. or Chugach Electric
Association. There would be no independent economic enterprises, and most
public services--from water and sewerage to retail merchandising and
1-8
TABLE 1-1. Population Growth with the First Scenario
for Beluga Coal Field Development
Construction Mining Operating Support Secondary Nonemployed Total
Year Workers Workers Workers Workers Workers Dependents Population
1980 150 -- -- 50 -- -- 200
1981 300 -- -- 90 -- -- 390
1982 400 -- -- 120 -- -- 520
1983 350 30 -- 120 -- -- 500
1984 200 60 90 100 -- 50 500
1985 100 60 90 80 -- 50 380
1986-on -- 90 120 60 -- 50 320
governmental administration--would be provided by the parent companies or
the support staff. Kenai Peninsula Borough would have to approve the land
use plans for the work camp but would not otherwise become involved in its
operation unless the people there applied for incorporation as a first-class
or second-class city. The North Kenai Recreation Service Area (a special
service administration that is responsible to the borough government but
functions relatively autonomously) does include the Beluga area, and hence
it might be drawn upon to provide revenues for establishing some outdoor
recreational facilities accessible to Beluga. Alaska state troopers would
provide police services to the work camp when needed. All serious medical
cases would have to be air evacuated to Anchorage. Finally, various state
agencies might provide some planning and other support services to the
settlement, although these would probably be minimal because of its desig-
nation as a work camp rather than a normal community.
SECOND SCENARIO: COAL EXPORTING
In this case, we assume that Chugach Electric Association does not
construct any coal-fired generators at Beluga, but that by 1990 Beluga Coal
Company has established sufficient markets for its coal to allow it to
produce at least six million tons per year--the minimum amount necessary for
1-9
cost-effective exporting. To export coal it would be necessary to construct
docking and loading facilities at Beluga, which would occur in 1989. A rough
estimate of 200 construction workers was made for this effort, plus 40 workers
to construct the work camp facilities and 60 persons to operate the camp.
None of these people is assumed to bring any nonemployed dependents during
the first year. Mining would start in 1990 and would require a labor force
of approximately 180 miners (based on the Argonne study), 30 workers to
operate the docking and loading facilities and 60 support personnel. As
in the first scenario, there would be no secondary economic growth and only a
few nonemployed dependents (again estimated with a coefficient of 1.2).
The population estimates for this second scenario are given in Table 1-2.
The total population of 300-320 should remain fairly stable unless the volume
of coal being mined and exported were considerably increased in the future.
TABLE 1-2. Population Growth with the Second Scenario
for Beluga Coal Field Development
Construction Mining Operating Support Secondary Nonemployed Total
Year Workers Workers Workers Workers Workers Dependents Population
1989 240 -- -- 60 -- -- 300
1990-on -- 180 30 60 -- 50 320
The total population figures for the second scenario are identical to
those for the first scenario after its construction phase (from 1986 on).
Hence the permanent work camp envisioned in the two scenarios would be the
same, except that in the second scenario it would not be established until
1989 and it would not have to accommodate a temporary "bulge" of 500 persons
during the construction phase. Consequently, a single analysis
will cover both scenarios except for the differing time frames and the
short-term bulge of construction workers in the first scenario.
1-10
THIRD SCENARIO: GENERATING PLANTS AND COAL EXPORTING
This third scenario is simply a combination of the first two. It
assumes that two coal-fired generating plants are constructed at Beluga
between 1980 and 1985, and that Beluga Coal Company begins exporting
six million tons of coal in 1990. Through 1988, therefore, it is identical
to the first scenario in both its total population size and its work camp
settlement. The population would begin to increase in 1989, however, with
the arrival of the construction workers to build the docking and loading
facilities. Then in 1990 the number of miners employed at the site would
greatly expand, together with a corresponding increase in operating workers.
At this point, the work camp would begin to evolve into a more normal
type of community because of its growing size and diversity. Secondary
economic growth would develop in the area, thus the camp support staff
could be cut in half in 1990 and eliminated in 1991 as support activities
were taken over by private businesses. To estimate the size of the labor
force employed in these secondary economic activities, a multiplier of 1.5
was used in 1990 and 2.0 in 1991. The latter figure--representing one~
secondary worker for each primary worker--is somewhat higher than the
overall Alaska figure of 1.46. (2) since this would be a case of creating an
entirely new community rather than just expanding an already existing one.
However, this multiplier is still considerably lower than comparable figures
for other parts of the United States (which commonly range between 2.5 and
3) 3.5).
With the availability of more housing and community services at Beluga,
additional nonemployed dependents would also begin to arrive. Because of
Beluga's isolated location, however, this growth would probably not be as
great as in most other communities. Hence a multiplier of 1.4 was used to
estimate the number of dependents in 1990 and 1.8 in 1991 (compared to the
standard figure of 2.2 for Alaska as a whole as well as the rest of the
country).
1-11
The population estimates for this third scenario are given in Table 1-3.
The total population of this new community would jump to approximately 700
in 1989 and to over 1300 in 1991. After that time it is virtually impossible
to make meaningful population estimates, since any of three different
conditions could occur: (1) with no further major economic development,
the population could stabilize at around 1300 people; (2) secondary economic
growth could continue at Beluga because of the availability of coal, elec-
tricity, and land, thus increasing the community's population to 2000 or
more within a few years; or (3) industrial growth in the Cook Inlet region
or expanding export markets for coal could lead to rapid increases in the
amount of coal being mined and electricity being produced, which could
eventually increase Beluga's population to several thousand people. Conse-
quently, the entries in Table 1-3 for 1992 and subsequent years are merely
question marks.
TABLE 1-3. Population Growth with the Third Scenario
for Beluga Coal Field Development
Construction Mining Operating Support Secondary Nonemployed Total Year Workers Workers Workers Workers Workers Dependents Population
1980 150 -- -- 50 -- -- 200
1981 300 -- -- 90 -- -- 390
1982 400 -- -- 120 -- -- 520
1983 350 30 -- 120 -- -- 500
1984 200 60 90 100 -- 50 500
1985 100 60 90 80 -- 50 380
1986 -- 90 120 60 -- 50 320
1987 -- 90 120 60 -- 50 320
1988 -- 90 120 60 -- 50 320
1989 240 90 120 120 -- 130 700
1990 -- 220 150 60 210 260 900
1991 -- 220 150 -- 370 590 1330
1992-on ? ? ? -- ? ? ?
1-12
As long as the Beluga settlement remained a work camp with limited
facilities and services, it would not likely attract a heavy flow of visits
from the residents of Tyonek. Since a road presently runs directly from
Tyonek to the proposed town site at Congahbuna Lake, however, it would be
impossible to prevent interaction between the two settlements. And if the
Beluga settlement evolved into a more complete community, this could pose
serious problems for Tyonek if it desired to preserve its native culture.
The consequences of this interaction between the two communities could be
both beneficial and harmful for Tyonek, as will be examined in detail in
Chapter 4.
KEY FACTORS AFFECTING BELUGA DEVELOPMENT
A wide variety of interrelated factors could influence whether or not
development occurs at Beluga, and if so, in what form and at what rate. A
few of these factors appear to be especially critical, since they could
markedly affect what happens at Beluga in the future. All of them are
incorporated into the scenarios as fixed assumptions, but in reality they
are dynamic variables that will require more detailed examination in future
studies of energy development in the Cook Inlet region. These key develop-
ment factors are:
1. if and when the federal government should require electric utilities
to burn coal rather than natural gas or oil, whether this require-
ment is partial or total, the time limit for its implementation,
and whether any allowances are made for special circumstances
such as Beluga where adequate natural gas reserves are available
for long-term use. Under the National Energy Act, provisions are
made for exceptions to switching requirements. Regulations for
general application of these provisions and specific decisions
regarding conditions in Alaska have not yet been handed down.
2. the amount and rate of future industrial and other economic
growth in Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula that would require
additional coal or electricity for manufacturing processes
1-13
oT 10.
11.
12.
the amount and rate of population growth in Anchorage and the
Kenai Peninsula that would increase the demand for electricity
expansion of markets for coal in the United States (especially
the West Coast states) or in other countries (especially Japan)
whether or not an underwater power cable were laid across Cook
Inlet from Beluga to Kenai and the amount of additional demand
for electricity stimulated by the cable
whether or not a road were constructed from Knik to Beluga (con-
struction of a causeway across the Knik Arm would shorten the
road distance from Anchorage to Beluga but is not necessary since
it is presently possible to drive from Anchorage to Knik)
if and when any industries should decide to locate plants in the
Beluga area to take advantage of the availability of coal and
electricity, as well as the energy requirements of those plants
and the sizes of their labor forces
the rate and nature of secondary economic growth that would occur
in the Beluga area if a permanent work camp or community were
established there
policies and actions of the Cook Inlet Region, Inc. to promote
economic development in the Beluga area
policies and actions of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly
concerning development in the Beluga area, especially in regard
to land use and schools
policies and actions of the Tyonek Village Council and the Tyonek
Native Corporation to either resist or facilitate population
and economic growth in the Beluga area and the creation of a
town at Beluga
policies and actions of the state of Alaska to restrict or promote
population and economic growth in the Beluga area.
1-14
Most of these factors are outside the direct control of the Alaska
State government. They will be largely determined by decisions of the
U.S. government, private businesses and organizations, and individuals.
Nevertheless, the government of Alaska could play a decisive role in shaping
the future of Beluga by adopting a definite policy regarding development in
the Beluga area, and by establishing programs to carry out that policy. At
one end of the policy spectrum, the state could decide to vigorously promte
development in the Beluga area. Programs to support that policy might
include constructing the road from Knik to Beluga prior to the time it was
urgently needed, aiding coal lessees to locate export coal markets, providing
inducements or requirements for Chugach Electric Association to switch from
natural gas to coal, encouraging other industries to locate there, providing
(through loans or grants) the initial capital needed to construct housing
and community facilities in the Beluga area prior to the community's
becoming financially self-sustaining, and working with the Village of Tyonek
to ensure that its autonomy and cultural heritage were protected as fully as
possible. At the other end of the policy spectrum, the state could decide
to oppose all development in the Beluga area, although this is relatively
unlikely considering the support it has already given to the Beluga Interagency
Task Force.
In reality, the exact nature of the state's policy toward Beluga
development will probably evolve gradually over the next several years through
a process of negotiation among all the involved parties. A central concern
throughout this negotiation process will be assigning responsibility for
managing the various economic and social impacts and needs associated with
coal development in the Beluga area.
1-15
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1
Erik J. Stenehjem and James E. Metzger, "A Framework for Projecting
Employment and Population Changes Accompanying Energy Development,"
Argonne National Laboratory, 1976.
Klockenteger, G., "Impact Model of Sub-Regional Alaskan Employment:
Economic Analysis." State of Alaska Department of Labor, 1972.
Argonne National Laboratories. A Framework for Projecting Employment
ang Population Changes Accompanying Energy Development. Argonne, IL. 6.
1-16
Chapter 2
REGIONAL SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS
INTRODUCTION
The regional impact area surrounding a development activity is generally
defined as that area that is likely to include most of the significant impacts
associated with the project. The region that will experience most of the
socioeconomic impacts from coal development at Beluga is limited to Anchorage
and the Kenai Peninsula Borough in South Central Alaska. The analysis in this
chapter excludes the immediate Beluga and Tyonek areas, however, since the
impacts on those areas are examined in greater detail in subsequent chapters.
The principal conclusion that emerges from the analysis reported in this
chapter is that the socioeconomic impacts of Beluga coal development on
Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula should be quite limited in nature. Several
factors contribute to this conclusion, the most crucial of which are the
isolated location of the Beluga coal field and the relatively small scale (in
regional terms) of the development anticipated in all three of the scenarios
sketched in the previous chapter.
Notwithstanding the paucity of data on which to base an assessment of
potential regional socioeconomic impacts, three broad categories of impacts
will be analyzed: 1) impacts associated with the regional labor force;
2) impacts associated with the market for coal and its by-products; and
3) impacts associated with the generation and distribution of revenues
associated with the development, including secondary regional economic
impacts.
The Alaskan economy has recently experienced extremely rapid growth,
spurred in part by the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline and other energy development
activities. This social and economic growth will undoubtedly continue in
the future, regardless of what happens at Beluga. Consequently, it is quite
difficult to forecast the regional socioeconomic impacts that might be caused
by Beluga coal development, apart from the more general effects of rapid
2-1
economic growth in the region. The analysis reported in this chapter must
therefore be expressed in rather general terms with a considerable margin
of uncertainty. The analysis uses the three development scenarios from the
previous chapter, as well as existing socioeconomic conditions in the impact
region, as points of departure.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORKFORCE
The three scenarios estimate the size of the workforce, secondary
employment, and nonemployed dependents associated with the construction and
operation of a coal-fired generating facility, a coal mining and exporting
operation, and a combination of these two. The maximum construction work
force requirement in any one year under any of these scenarios is 400. These
workers would be drawn primarily from the large unemployed construction labor
force pool (union labor) in Anchorage. Some of them would also be drawn from
the appropriate local unions that cover the Kenai Peninsula area. A few
workers might be hired from the native village of Tyonek. Although the size
of the unemployed labor force pool is influenced by seasonal factors, as
discussed below, more than enough construction workers should be available
within the region to meet the construction work force needs of each of the
development scenarios.
As provided by the Alaska Department of Labor, the preliminary estimate
for 1977 mean annual number of unemployed workers in the civilian labor force
in Anchorage, adjusted to the current population survey of the U.S. Bureau of
the Census, is 5490, representing an unemployment rate of 6.5%. Approximately
80% of these unemployed filed for unemployment insurance. Of this group,
about half listed contract construction as their previous occupation during
1977, although there is seasonal variation in this figure. Assuming that the
20% uninsured workers are distributed similarly and that 45% of the total
unemployed were contract construction workers, then approximately 2500
unemployed contract construction workers were available in Anchorage during
1977. Given estimated employment in contract construction of 7600, this
suggests a local unemployment rate for contract construction of 25%, or about
2-2
four times the overall unemployment rate. Moreover, the total number of
unemployed workers across all industries is projected to increase by about
2000 over the next five years. Clearly, there should be no need to bring in
workers from outside the Anchorage-Kenai area to meet the employment require-
ments for Beluga coal development, unless other major construction projects
such as the natural gas pipeline or the Susitna Dam) were drawing on the local
labor force at the same time.
Since all coal mining associated with these development scenarios is
surface strip mining, it would probably not be necessary to go far afield to
find workers with special mining skills. The skills required for this type
of operation are similar to many construction skills, such as operating
bulldozers and scrapers, and could be adequately met by available construction
workers with only a minimal amount of training. The addition of a coal mining
work force to the required construction work force would not raise the total
labor force requirement above the single-year figure of 400 workers. No other
skill or industry category would place a demand on the labor force equalling
the requirement for construction. Locally available unemployed workers would
be more than adequate to meet the projected needs for operational and other
secondary workers under the three scenarios.
The ready availability of local workers for future Beluga coal develop-
ment has several implications for potential socioeconomic impacts. These
projects should not induce any significant in-migration of workers from
ouside the Anchorage-Kenai area. Although there might be some tendency for
Anchorage workers to transfer to Kenai labor union locals in the belief that
this would enhance their employment opportunities in the Beluga area, the
magnitude of the potential labor force demand is small relative to the
available labor pool. This means that there would be little job switching and
little excess migration into the area in response to news of job opportunities,
assuming that a large wage differential does not exist. Excess migration of
workers responding to news of employment opportunities has been a serious
problem on past development projects in Alaska, often resulting in increased
levels of local unemployment. Thus, the main regional labor force impacts of
2-3
Beluga coal field development would be positive in nature. There would be
a modest decline in the rate of regional unemployment for the duration of the
project, with a commensurate increase in wage income available for reinvestment
in the region and a reduction in the number of workers receiving unemployment
insurance payments.
These effects would be further minimized to the extent that local resi-
dents of Tyonek were hired for construction or mining jobs. Even though there
are some unemployed males with the requisite skills in Tyonek, few are union
members, which puts them at a competitive disadvantage for this type of employ-
ment. However, any employment of Tyonek residents that did occur would reduce
local unemployment and provide valuable skill training, both of which would
directly benefit the Tyonek community.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARKET FOR COAL
The third scenario assumes the construction of two electric generators
along with the annual production of six million tons of coal for export.
The major market for the export coal would almost certainly be outside Alaska,
so that regional market impacts would be minimal. If Chugach Electric Asso-
ciation merely substitutes coal for gas in the production of electricity at
Beluga, the regional market impacts attributable to coal development per se
would be negligible, but there could be a significant increase in the price
of electricity. On the other hand, if the availability of coal at Beluga
results in significantly altered energy costs and supply reliability, the
impacts of Beluga coal development on the regional economy would be substan-
tially greater. Chugach Electric, however, will not voluntarily switch from
gas to coal. Natural gas supplies, as a by-product of oil development, are in
abundant supply, sufficient to meet regional needs beyond the year 2000. It
is unlikely that heavy industrial users of electricity, such as the aluminum
industry, would ever be placed on interrupted service solely because of
insufficient supply of the primary energy source, be it gas or coal. In
addition, the cost of gas (at controlled prices) is substantially lower than
any projected price of coal. Thus, the substitution of coal for gas is
2-4
expected to make the regional cost of electricity more than at present, and
this relative cost differential would likely continue into the foreseeable
future.
Other regional use of coal as a primary energy source could attract new
industry into the region in situations where gas was not economically sub-
stitutable for coal. An analysis of potential secondary coal-based industrial
development of this sort is beyond the scope of this report but would have to
be made in order to forecast properly the full potential for regional socio-
economic impacts implied by this initial development activity. To the extent
that these secondary or derived developments should occur within the local
impact area, socioeconomic impacts on Tyonek would be even more severe than
those likely to be associated with the three scenarios. The construction of
a road from Anchorage to Beluga would be a major factor precipitating these
kinds of impacts.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT REVENUES
The development of the Beluga coal resources and the production of
electricity from coal would significantly add to the Kenai Borough's tax base.
Specifically, Tax Code Area (TCA) number 54, which contains Tyonek and the
Beluga coal fields, would become the source of further revenues. These would
be in addition to the substantial existing revenues obtained from oil] and
gas properties situated in TCA 54. It is difficult to estimate the amount
of new revenues that would be generated under each of the three development
scenarios. Presumably, the assessed value of the coal lands around Beluga
would increase, resulting in additional property tax revenues accruing to
the Borough and the state. Cook Inlet Region, Inc. owns lease holdings on
the Capps coal field and would be the recipient of royalties from the develop-
ment of these coal resources. Further revenues could be generated from
severance taxes and sales taxes to the extent they are levied on coal pro-
duction.
2-5
The problem of estimating regional economic impacts associated with
these revenues is limited to ascertaining the magnitude of future income flow
in the region, though this is an important factor. The more serious problem
involves the distribution of these revenues within the Borough. While the
overall impact of increased regional revenues could be interpreted as bene-
ficial, inequitable distribution of these benefits to villages, towns and
cities causes adverse social impacts. This problem is characteristic of most
large-scale development activities, especially energy development. The
people who suffer most of the primary impacts, in this case the Tyonek natives,
tend not to receive benefits adequate to compensate for the negative effects.
Public revenues are typically redistributed through the provision of
public services. The Kenai Borough presently provides three main services:
education, solid waste disposal, and planning (zoning and subdivision). The
availability of these services throughout the Borough is at least in part
a function of the ability and willingness of the Borough to distribute suf-
ficient funds for their support. To the extent that the Borough can
effectively and equitably deal with the issue of revenue redistribution, the
region could be made more attractive to business and industry. In this way,
coal development in Beluga could encourage growth in the region beyond that
which would be expected in its absence, though the separation of these effects
is extremely difficult.
CONCLUSIONS
With the present rate of rapid growth in the Anchorage-Kenai region as
a baseline, coal development at Beluga should have only a few small socio-
economic impacts on the region. These would result from reductions in regional
unemployment, provision of a new regional energy source, and the generation
of new economic revenues in the region. Although a reduction in unemployment
would be positive for the region, the magnitude of this effect would not be
great. As a new regional source of energy, coal would likely be more costly
than gas at its present price. Requiring Chugach Electric Association to
convert to coal would represent a financial burden to its customers because
of the higher prices it would be forced to charge. Regionally, this would
provide a disincentive to industrial development. The greatest potential
impacts are associated with the generation of additional revenues to the
region. These could serve both to reduce absolute tax levels and to
redress existing or created regional fiscal inequities.
Chapter 3
SETTLEMENT REQUIREMENTS
SETTLEMENT SITES
Existing Settlements
Tyonek is a village of some 270 Tanaina Athabascans located on the west
side of Cook Inlet about 40 air miles west-southwest of Anchorage. The
village was originally located south of its present site, but was relocated
in the 1950s to higher ground. The settlement includes a store, bank, gas
station, and 66 housing units and is served by a water system and electricity
from Chugach Electric Association. Most of the housing and community facili-
ties are located on about 90 acres of land.
The Tyonek Timber Company camp is located about 3 miles south of Tyonek
Village on former Moquawkie reservation land. Kodiak Lumber Company is sole
owner of the chip mill operation, which processes timber received from a sale
on the west side of Cook Inlet. The chip mill operation has been temporarily
scaled-down because of a weakening in the Japanese market and shutdown of
the timber salvage sale. (1) There are currently 20 people at the camp. When
the mill was in full operation, it supported a community of about 200 residents
that included about 30 school-aged children.
In addition to these settlement sites, there are several oil- and gas-
related facilities on the west side of Cook Inlet at Drift River, Trading Bay,
and Granite Point. Marathon 0i1 Company's Trading Bay facility has a large
dormitory building to house workers.
Three-Mile Creek Subdivison, located north of Tyonek on the coast, con-
sists of privately owned recreational lots and covers about one-half square
mile of land area. Some of the lots have cabins and trailers. In addition,
fishing and hunting cabins are scattered throughout the study area, especially
along the coast.
Site Characteristics and Land Requirements
The land requirements for a new settlement will vary, depending on
whether a work camp or permanent new community is planned.
There is very little data to substantiate the amount of land necessary
to support commercial and residential development in areas such as Beluga.
A village or town will typically have a small amount of commercial develop-
ment to supply the local population with essential goods. Anchorage will
still be likely to supply the majority of household goods and specialty items.
Commercial development would tend to remain relatively small in a work camp,
but would expand in the case of a permanent community to reflect other
Alaskan towns.
Land needed for residential development will vary, according to preference
and availability. The work camp described in scenarios 1 and 2 (Chapter 1)
would tend to be compact and dense since industry-provided housing will have
double occupancy. If the work camp is relatively compact, up to 8 to 10 units
per acre would be accommodated. A permanent community would be less dense.
Workers with families will tend to seek space and privacy and will be more
likely to build single-family, detached homes. The density of subdivisions
for single-family residences could range from two to six units per acre,
depending on both the type of sewer and water system and the Kenai Peninsula
Borough's subdivision standards. (4)
A 500-person work camp, with dormitory housing, a kitchen-dining annex,
and a recreation annex may require about 40 acres of land. A permanent
community for 1500 people, however, would likely require from 600 to 1200 acres,
depending on density and design. The permanent community might include a
school, recreation complex and park, clinic, and retail commercial area, in
addition to both single- and multi-family housing.
(athe Kenai Per The Kenai Peninsula Borough Subdivision ordinance allows a lot size of
6000 square feet for single-family residences served by public water
and sewer. A 20,000-square-foot minimum is placed on a lot that has
on-lot systems for both sewer and water.
3-2
A number of factors affect the choice of settlement site, including
slope, drainage, soils conditions, land ownership, and access to transporta-
tion facilities. Land ownership is shown in Figure 1. The major landholders
in the Beluga study area are the state (mental health lands), Cook Inlet
Region, Inc., Tyonek Village Corporation, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough.
A new settlement could potentially be located on any of these lands where
slopes and drainage characteristics are not a limiting factor.
For purposes of this analysis, several assumptions were made regarding
site suitability for development:
e A new community should not be located in an area with poor drainage
or with slopes greater than 10%.
¢ Based on an analysis of slope only, there appear to be some potential
settlement sites on State Mental Health lands to the north and northwest
of the reservation, and northeast of Capps Field on land owned by Cook
Inlet Region, Inc. (south of Beluga Lake, north of Chichantna River,
and west of Beluga River).
e¢ A new settlement is not likely to be located on the lands owned by
the Tyonek Village Corporation (former Moquawkie Reservation lands)
(see Chapter 4 of this report).
¢ Coastal lands northeast of the reservation may be unsuitable for
building and road construction because of soil and drainage character-
istics. 2)
¢ Land along Trading Bay, to the north and east of the McArthur River,
appears to be unsuitable for development because of soil type and
poor drainage.
e Lands west of the reservation (Township 11N, Range 12W) appear to
offer the best potential for community development.
Beluga Coal Company, owned by Placer Amex Inc., has suggested an area
near Congahbuna Lake to the west of the Tyonek Reservation as a possible
settlement site. (3) This area has slopes of less than 10% and includes two
large land parcels, owned by the Kenai Peninsula Borough and Cook Inlet
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH
AND
eneral Grant Lands
TYONEK NATIVE CORPORATION
ED AND SELECTED
COOK INLET REGION, INC. SELECTIONS
6 miles
ment, Division of Energy
LEGS
wae 4A NS Y x
i (2 O? MY UY Z
% » \; 'Y ,
a0 Y, v4) K, 7 7 SEZ) WZ 4 Up
Y, RELY Vs Ge
KY y
GY D RB KAKI SES i Ui /
4 LLL 4 4 MKE X Th . .
7 y Y e land status designations shown on
Ki y . ww this map reflect the best available : , sh LE, XY
WY Us Yj YY; Wi Or oo information at this time and should be Z Ty 4 ao SLE . Ly, yy Yy U5 4 YY Yi . AR . September 1978
, “ak,
a
S
NORTH FORELAND
K, E 3-1 and Status: Surface E
gest” Central Beluga Coal District
3-4
Region, Inc. These two ownerships are shown in Figure 1. The borough-owned
land covers about an 8-square-mile area (about 5000 acres). The Cook Inlet
Region Inc. land is just to the west and south of the borough parcel and
includes about 2800 acres of land. The distance from Congahbuna Lake to the
village of Tyonek is about 10 miles.
The lake area offers an attractive site for a new community. There are
views to the Inlet and the lake can be used for recreation and float-plane
landing. The area is served by existing logging roads and has easy access
to the Cook Inlet Region, Inc. transportation corridor to Capps Field. Poor
drainage may present some problems for development on the west side of
Congahbuna Lake. Drainage characteristics appear to be more suitable to the
east side.
Figure 2 shows a conceptual layout for a community at Congahbuna Lake
developed for Beluga Coal Company. The lake has also been suggested as the
possible site for a power plant, with lake water serving as cooling water
for the power plant, which, in turn, might increase the lake's fishery
potential. (3)
HOUSING
Existing Conditions
Three primary settlement sites exist within the study area, including
the village of Tyonek, the Tyonek Timber Camp, and Marathon 0i1 Company's
Trading Bay facility.
The major housing concentration is at Tyonek Village, which has 66 housing
units (60 woodframe; 6 mobile homes). Many of the wood-frame houses are in
need of rehabilitation. They are poorly insulated and energy inefficient.
Twenty-seven HUD-financed houses are planned for construction this year.
This will satisfy the immediate need for additional housing, but many young
people in the village will still want the opportunity to have their own house.
In addition, teacher housing is in short supply; six units are needed.
All village housing is owned by the Tyonek Village IRA Council. The
Kenai Peninsula Borough School Distric
3-5
9-€
SHOPPING AND
COMMERCIAL
HOTEL ETC.
RECREATION COMPLEX
SCHOOL
[ss
AREA
H 4 oH XK
RAIL LINE
CLINIC HOSPITAL
TOTTI TT TTT ATT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT
CONGAHBUNA LAKE
PLAN fd
0
FIGURE 3-2.
500 1000 2000 4
FEET
Conceptual Residential Layout
ROAD TO DOCK
AND PLANT
All village housing is owned by the Tyonek Village IRA Council. The
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District might be able to subsidize teacher
housing since the district has responsibility for education within the
borough. Once built, a program for managing the housing units would need
to be established.
Village houses are heated by electricity, which is provided without
charge through an agreement with Chugach Electric. The contract for the
electricity was signed in 1972 and is scheduled to expire when the village
has used a total of 50 million kVh. At current rates of use (under 5 million
kVh per year), this is likely to occur between 1982 and 1984.
The costs of heating with electricity are higher than those associated
with oil heat, and village residents may find it difficult to pay for the
electricity when the contract with Chugach Electric expires. The new housing
units will have oil-fired, forced-air heating systems, with fuel purchased
from Tyonek Timber. The older units can be converted from electric to oi!
heat, but at a cost of at least $2000 per unit.
Housing is also located about 2 miles from the village at Tyonek Timber
Camp. The camp has six 20-person bunkhouses, five 3-bedroom modular homes,
about 12 trailers, and six duplexes. This number of units is capable of
housing about 200 individuals.
Marathon 0i1 Company has one dormitory building with a capacity of about
60 people at their Trading Bay facility. There are several trailers at
Granite Point, and both trailers and cabins at the Three-Mile Creek recre-
ational subdivision. In addition, small shacks and shelters are scattered
along the coast at private fish sites.
Housing Requirements
The coal development scenarios presented in Chapter 1 suggest two possible
types of settlement: a permanent work camp and a small community.
The first and second coal development scenarios described in Chapter 1
would establish a permanent work camp at Beluga. In the first scenario
for coal-fired generating plants, the first-year (1980) labor force is
3-7
composed of 100 construction workers to prepare the plant site and 50 workers
to build the permanent work camp. About 50 support workers are projected to
be needed initially. The total first-year population is projected to be 200,
rising to 500 in 1983-84, and declining to 320 from 1986 on.
Because the Beluga area is isolated from other development, this scenario
assumes that none of the construction workers would bring any dependents who
would not also be employed. The mining, operating, and support workers might
bring nonemployed dependents with them, but very few are expected.
The primary means of housing for construction workers and support per-
sonnel is typically mobile homes, modular houses, or prefabricated, dormitory-
like sleeping structures in a permanent work camp. The permanent work camp
would contain all housing, service, and recreation facilities needed by the
labor force. Based on the design of much construction camp housing, we have
assumed an overall average of two persons per housing unit. Some units with
single occupancy may be built for executive quarters, but most workers are
likely to be housed in double occupancy rooms. The number of housing units
projected for the work camp is based on two persons per unit for construction
workers and a small number of four-person families among the permanent workers.
Estimates of projected housing demands are presented in Table 3-1.
TABLE 3-1. Projected Housing Demand for the First Scenario
3-4
Bedroom
Dormitory Family
Year Population Units Units
1980 200 100
1981 390 195
1982 520 260
1983 500 250
1984 500 220 15
1985 380 160 15
1986-on 320 130 15
3-8
The total population in the second scenario (coal exporting) is the same
as in the first development scenario beginning in 1989. The permanent work
camps are expected to be similar, except that in the second scenario the
temporary "bulge" of 500 persons would not have to be accommodated. The
estimate of units needed would be about 160 from 1989 on.
Portable ATCO-design prefabricated structures have often been used for
construction camp housing in Alaska. These are typically single-story struc-
tures with segmented, 2-person sleeping rooms off a main hallway that connects
to lavatories. These dormitory-like complexes can range in size froma 4-
to a 400-person unit. This type of sleeping structure was typical of pipeline
construction camps.
Families can be accommodated in prefabricated 2- and 3-bedroom modular
homes or mobile homes. This is typical for family housing at many lumber
camps and was used at Valdez during pipeline construction.
A prefabricated kitchen annex and recreational annex are likely to be
included as part of the construction camp. Most buildings will be wood-
frame on a steel chassis with steel roof and siding with baked enamel
finish.
The construction materials can either be barged to the site or trans-
ported by airplane. Barging may require a temporary dock and roadway from
the dock to the camp site. Barges can also be off-loaded onto the beach.
For construction camp development at Beluga, materials could be trucked from
Anchorage to Kenai and then barged across Cook Inlet to Trading Bay or the
Tyonek Timber dock. Materials could also be barged directly from Anchorage
or Seattle. A rough cost estimate (in 1978 dollars) for work-camp housing
is $250,000 for a 52-person sleeping complex and $700,000 for a 500-person
kitchen-dining facility.
The third scenario, which combines generating plants with coal export,
is identical to the work-camp scenarios through 1988 in terms of total popu-
lation and size of the work-camp settlement. The population begins to
increase in 1989 as construction workers arrive to begin work on the docking
3-9
and loading facilities. Mining and operating workers increase rapidly in
1990. By 1990, the "permanent work camp" will develop into a community, with
ancillary businesses, services, and facilities.
For the purpose of projecting housing demand, we have assumed that the
construction workers will all live in two-person units (as in the previous
scenarios). A few nonemployed dependents would accompany mining, operating,
and support workers through 1988, as in the first two scenarios. After 1988,
there would be a diversity of household sizes, including single persons,
couples, and families with children.
To project the demand for permanent housing, we have estimated a possible
mix of housing types based on the nonconstruction worker population and on
what construction companies are likely to build. After 1989, demand for
dormitory housing will cease. In 1990, we have assumed a demand for about
100 3- to 4-bedroom houses, 225 2-bedroom units, and 50 1-bedroom units. The
number of families with children is expected to increase in 1991, requiring
additional 3- to 4-bedroom housing units. Projected housing demand by type
of unit is shown in Table 3-2.
TABLE 3-2. Projected Housing Demand for the Third Scenario
Population Housing Units
Con- Other 3- to 4- 2- 1-
struction Workers & Dormitory Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom
Year Workers Dependents Total Units Units Units Units Total
1980 150 50 200 100 100
1981 300 90 390 195 195
1982 400 120 520 260 260
1983 350 150 500 250 250
1984 200 300 500 220 15 235
1985 100 280 380 160 15 175
1986 -- 320 320 130 15 145
1987 -- 320 320 130 15 145
1988 00 320 320 130 15 145
1989 240 460 700 120 50 225 35 430
1990 -- 900 900 0 100 225 50 375
1991 on -- 1330 1330 0 200 225 50 475
3-10
SCHOOLS
Existing Conditions
Bob Bartlett School serves grades K through 12 and is financed and
managed by the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. Located at the
village of Tyonek, it is the only school serving the Beluga area. The school
has four regular classrooms, a home-economics suite, and a portable classroom,e
for a total capacity of 240 students. (4)
Enrollment history and school district projections are presented in
Table 3-3. The total 1976-1977 enrollment was 108, with 75 in grades K-8,
and 33 in grades 9-12. As of May 1978, 98 students were enrolled and 7 teachers
(5 regular and 2 cultural resource teachers) were employed. The Borough's
1977 school-construction report indicates that no facilities other than a
new home-economics suite need to be provided during the 5-year period ending
in 1982.
When the Tyonek Timber Company mill was in full operation, approximately
20 children were bussed from the camp to the village to attend the school.
TABLE 3-3. Pupil Enrollment and Projections ~ Bob Bartlet School, Tyonek(a)
School
Year K-8 9-12 Total
1972-73 76 21 97
1973-74 65 22 87
1974-75 73 18 91
1975-76 87 28 115
1976-77 75 33 108
1977-78 82 34 116
1978-79 90 34 124
1979-80 95 37 132
1980-81 103 38 141
1981-82 110 4] 151
(a) Kenai Peninsula Borough School District, Enrollment
Projections and School Construction Report, April 1977.
3-11
School Requirements
The permanent work-camp situations described in scenarios 1 and 2 (see
Chapter 1) are expected to include few, if any, school-aged children. The
possibility of a limited number of school-aged children should be anticipated,
however, and ways to provide for their educational needs should be considered.
At its maximum level of operation, the Tyonek lumber camp had a ratio of
about 0.10 school children per adult. If this ratio is applied to the mining,
operation, and support workers in scenarios 1 and 2, a possible school popu-
lation of 30 students for the work-camp situation is derived.
Even in the third coal development scenario, where a permanent community
is anticipated, a lower than average pupil-per-household ratio should be used
to estimate numbers of school children. Few school-aged children are likely
to arrive until 1989, when the number of nonemployed dependents would begin
increasing and secondary workers would begin arriving to provide services.
Total housing (nondormitory) units are expected to reach 310 in 1989, 375 in
1990, and 475 from 1991 on.
The current pupil-per-household ratio in the Kenai Borough is 0.74, but
the isolated nature of the Beluga settlement is expected to discourage
families with school children from moving to the new settlement. A gradually
increasing pupil-per-household ratio has been used instead to estimate numbers
of school-aged children. (@) (5) For 1989, a ratio of 0.3 yields approximately
90 pupils; for 1990, a ratio of 0.4 yields 150 pupils; from 1991 on, a ratio
of 0.6 yields 285 pupils. Assuming a class size of 20 pupils with one
teacher per class, 5 to 14 classrooms and teachers would be required to (b) (6) serve their needs.
The educational needs of school-aged children in the Kenai Peninsula
can be met in a variety of ways 5 depending on the number and location of
the pupils to be served. The school board of the Kenai Borough School
District is responsible for making final decisions on such matters. Several
options are listed below:
3-12
e New pupils could be accommodated at the existing school at Tyonek.
e A school could be constructed at a new settlement site.
¢ Portable classrooms could be used to handle a temporary peak in school
enrollment during construction periods.
¢ Pupils could be enrolled in correspondence classes through the school
district.
The Bob Bartlet School facility has the potential to serve another
100 pupils given its current capacity and enrollment trends. For students
to attend the Tyonek School, however, roads and bus transportation must be
established from the new settlement to Tyonek. If a new school were built
at the settlement site, it would probably be a prefabricated structure
similar to the ATCO-designed dormitory housing.
The decision of whether to send children to the existing school at Tyonek
or to construct a new school will be based on a number of factors. The number
of school children associated with a work camp would probably not justify the
cost of new school construction, although a school might be built to serve
the combined needs of the lumber camp and the coal development work camp.
On the other hand, a full-scale community in the Beluga area (scenario 3)
would almost certainly require a new school facility. Another important
consideration is the attitude of Tyonek villagers toward use of their school
by nonnatives. Issues related to this concern are discussed in Chapters 4
and 5.
Correspondence courses are an alternative that should be explored if
only a few children are associated with a work-camp situation. The Kenai
Borough School District currently has one of the largest correspondence
programs in the state, with over 100 students participating.
3-13
POLICE, FIRE, AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Police Services
Police services in the Beluga area are provided by the Alaska State
Troopers through a resident constable. The constable serves the area from
the Beluga power station south to Trading Bay, including the oil and gas
facilities at Trading Bay and Granite Point and the lumber mill camp near
Tyonek. A four-wheel drive vehicle is used by the constable to patrol the
area and an airplane is available to fly the area if the need arises.
The constable at Tyonek has the time and ability to handle an additional
number of complaints and other police activity, but the point at which popu-
lation increases will require the state troopers to add another policeman is
difficult to estimate.
A need for additional police officers in the Beluga area will definitely
be generated by the combined activity of the village, the Tyonek lumber camp,
and any settlement associated with coal field development. In most cases,
the state troopers wait to add staff until the new position can be justified
by increasing population numbers. During construction of the Alaska pipeline,
however, police service needs were anticipated and additional troopers were
assigned to affected areas in advance of actual population increases.
In a work-camp situation, the troopers encourage private companies to
hire their own staff for internal security. The troopers are then available
to provide emergency assistance. The temporary assignment of additional
troopers to the area is another option, especially if camp activity is short-
term or seasonal. In the Beluga area, this would involve assigning staff
from the Soldotna regional office of the state troopers.
A permanent community of 700 to 1400 residents in the Beluga area is
likely to require a full-time police officer just to serve local community
needs. The city of Seldovia, with a population of 600 and no road access to
the other Kenai Peninsula cities, has one police officer and police car. The
Kenai Peninsula cities of Kenai and Soldotna maintain a ratio of about two (6) police officers per 1000 residents.
3-14
The method of providing police services to a new community in the Beluga
area will depend somewhat on whether the community incorporates as a city.
A rough estimate of police manpower requirements can be obtained by applying
a ratio of 1.5 policemen per 1000 residents to the projected population under
coal development scenario 3, (7) These estimates are shown in Table 3-4.
TABLE 3-4. Police Service Projections for the Third Scenario
Police
Year Population Officers
1980 200 0.3
1981 390 0.6
1982 520 0.8
1983 500 0.8
1984 500 0.8
1985 380 0.6
1986 320 0.5
1987 320 0.5
1988 320 0.5
1989 700 1.0
1990 900 1.4
1991 1330 2.0
If the new community does not incorporate, the present constable can
probably handle the increased work load until 1989. During the years 1982-84,
however, he may require some staff assistance from the Soldotna office of
the state troopers.
Fire Protection
No publicly provided fire protection services are currently available
in the Beluga area except through the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau
of Land Management. However, a work camp would typically have its own fire-
fighting equipment on hand. A permanent community of 1400 residents would
require some fire-fighting capability and equipment of its own.
Estimates of staff and equipment needs can be based on the experience
of other Kenai Peninsula towns. The city of Seldovia, with 600 residents,
has 24 volunteer firemen, 2 pumper trucks, and a jeep pumper. Soldotna,
3-15
with about 2500 residents has 3 paid staff, 20 volunteers, 2 pumper trucks,
and 2 tankers. Fire services may also be provided through a borough service
area. An example is the Nikiski fire service area, which serves a 33-square-
mile area, including the unincorporated residential and industrial area north
of the city of Kenai on the east side of Cook Inlet. The service area has
2 fire stations, a paid staff of 19, 20 volunteers, and trained emergency
medical technicians. One pumper and tanker are located at each station.
Fire protection needs for cities of all sizes are based upon the water
flow in gallons per minute that may be required. According to the National
‘Fire Protection Association, one pumper truck (plus supporting units) is
required, in general, for each 500 gallons per minute (gpm). 7) Required
water flow by community population size is presented in Table 3-5.
TABLE 3-5. Water Flow Requirements for Fire Protection
In Million Water Flow
In Gallons Gallons Pumper Duration In
Population Per Minute Per Day Trucks Hours
1000 1000 1.44 2.0 4
1500 1250 1.80 2.5 5
2000 1500 2.16 3.0 6
3000 1750 2.52 3.5 7
Health Care and Emergency Medical Services
The state troopers are responsible for supervising rescue operations
for emergency situations in the Beluga area. Medical evacuations are usually
accomplished by private charter plane. The RCC (U.S. Air Force) also handles
some emergency evacuations.
Health care services are available to the residents of Tyonek through
a medical center located in the village. The facility handles both medical
and dental work and is staffed by a resident, licensed practical nurse. (8)
The clinic also has a community health aide (and alternate) provided through
Emergency medical care is received at the ANS hospital in Anchorage.
3-16
the U.S. Public Health Service. The health aide may provide services to
nonnatives on an emergency basis only. Nonnatives are billed for the (9) service.
The Kenai Borough's Central Hospital service area encompasses over
1000 square miles of land on both the east and west side of Cook Inlet. On
the west side of Cook Inlet, the service area extends from Beluga River to
Drift River, including the study area. A 32-bed hospital is located at
Soldotna.
The health care needs of a work camp of 300 to 500 workers could be
met in several ways. The camp could train or hire its own paramedics or
obtain the services of a resident nurse or doctor. Tyonek Timber Company,
for example, has its own paramedics at the lumber camp. Emergency medical
situations could be handled by air evacuation to either the Soldotna hospital
or a hospital in Anchorage. A small clinic could also be built at the work-
camp site. Prefabricated first-aid units are available and can be barged
to the site. A 14-bed, 58-foot by 56-foot unit costs about $125,000 in
1978 dollars.
A permanent community of 1000 or more without road access should have
its own resident doctor, nurse, and clinic. Needs for hospital and clinic
facilities and staff are usually based on the expected number of patients,
but, a rule-of-thumb "bed multiplier" is 4.0 to 4.5 beds per 1000 population. (7)
RECREATION NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES
For either a work camp or a community, adequate opportunities for both
indoor and outdoor recreation must be provided. Libraries, parks, community
centers, restaurants, bars, and shops all help to meet recreational needs.
Some problems were encountered during pipeline construction in those camps
that did not provide adequate recreation opportunities. Studies of energy
development communities elsewhere in the United States have also demonstrated
that a lack of recreation facilities and services can contribute to stress
3-17
and mental health problems, especially for nonemployed dependents. In
addition, worker productivity may decline if opportunities for rest and
relaxation are absent. (10)
Recreation needs in a work-camp setting can be met in several ways.
Work schedules might be arranged on a "three-weeks-on, one-week-off" basis,
with transportation provided to Anchorage (or elsewhere) during the off-
period. The camp operators could also provide a recreation annex onsite,
including indoor exercise facilities, informal meeting space, reading mate-
rials, and a bar.
Business opportunities will generate restaurants and other retail estab-
lishments in a permanent small city. In addition, residents will want to
develop a range of facilities, including libraries and parks. Requirements
for park and library space will vary depending on the expectations and
desires of community residents. General standards for small rural communi-
ties indicate that a library facility for a population of 1000 should have
a minimum of 6000 square feet, 10 patron seats, and 3000 to 4000 volumes.
The facility should be open at least 20 hours per week at fixed times. (7)
Bookmobiles (in this case, airplanes) may also be used to provide library
services to an isolated area. If a school is built to serve the community,
the school library might also be designed to serve the adult population.
The need for parks will be influenced by the character of the land
surrounding the settlement site and the opportunities it offers for outdoor
recreation--hiking, picnicking, and so forth. In any case, park space within
the city for children is undesirable. Community-based park facilities are
generally of three types: playgrounds (about 3 acres), neighborhood parks
(about 10 acres), and community parks (about 60 acres). A new community in
the Beluga area of 700 to 1400 residents could require a total of about
4 acres of park space. Parks might include play apparatus, a baseball (7) diamond, and tennis courts.
3-18
WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
Existing Systems
Existing water sources for the village of Tyonek, the Tyonek Timber
Company and the Trading Bay are described below.
Village of Tyonek
The existing water source for the village is a nearby lake.() The
former ground water supply was abandoned because of its high iron content
(with manganese).
The water system, which includes an infiltration gallery and pump house,
was installed by the village in 1976. The lake water is chlorinated, stored
in a tank, and filtered with activated carbon before being delivered to the
underground distribution system, which was completed in 1972 under an EDA
contract. A previous groundwater well was developed in 1964 by the U.S.
Public Health Service, but is used only for public water supply. Each house
and the school is served by the distribution system. The 27 new housing
units planned for the village by Cook Inlet Housing Authority will be con-
nected to the distribution system.
Several water system problems were identified in a recent Public Health
(11) Service survey:
e The chlorinator is not working properly.
e The activated carbon supply needs to be replenished.
e The lake level is very low, primarily because of extensive winter
pumping to keep waterlines from freezing.
The report also identified other potential water sources, including
Second Lake, Chuitna River, and Bunka Lake. Water quality tests indicate
(a) l y i ML later quality, prior to treatment, has the following characteristics:
Fe (Iron) 0.2 mg/2
Hardness 9.0 mg/2 as Caco,
Total Dissolved Solids 10.0 mg/2
3-19
that both Rainbow and Second Lakes are low in iron and should be good water
sources. The Public Health Service is investigating future water-source
development.
The primary method of wastewater disposal is septic tanks with sub-
surface leach fields; some cesspools are also used. The septic tanks were
installed in 1965, have a capacity of 200 to 400 gallons, and are constructed (11) of low-grade steel. Some of the tanks are rusting.
The soils have a gravel base, making them good for subsurface disposal.
The problems that have developed with the onsite systems are probably a
result of the small size of the tanks and inadequate maintenance.
An unfenced sanitary landfill is located 4.2 miles from the village.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough is in the process of establishing a new landfill
for the village, but it may be a year before all approvals are obtained.
Tyonek Timber Camp
Water is supplied from three wells, which have been adequate to support
200 people to date; no water shortages have occurred. The water contains
an excessive amount of iron and barely meets water quality standards.
However, no bacteria problems exist.
Water is distributed through an underground system that requires standard
maintenance. No winter freezing problems have been encountered.
Septic tanks with perforated-pipe drainfields are used for waste dis-
posal. The systems have required normal maintenance; no special problems
have developed. The soils (consisting of a gravel base, covered with a few
feet of sandy loam and some clay) are good for subsurface disposal.
Trading Bay
Water is supplied from wells at Marathon 0i1 Company's Trading Bay
facility and no shortages have occurred. Septic tanks with drain fields
have also been used with very few problems.
3-20
Requirements
To project water demand and system requirements for communities asso-
ciated with Beluga coal-field development, we have assumed a demand of
70 gallons per capita, per day (gpcd) for a resident work camp (4) and
90 gpcd for a permanent community. We have also assumed that 100% of the
total water supplied becomes sewage.
The first coal development scenario (generating plants only) estimates
an initial population of 200 in 1980, or a water demand of 14,000 gallons
per day (gpd), that must be supplied, treated, and disposed of. In the
peak year (1982), a 36,400-gpd capacity is required. This demand declines
in 1985, and the system requirements from 1986 on should be capable of
handling about 23,400 gpd.
In the case of coal export only (scenario 2), water demand is likely
to remain fairly constant, ranging from 21,000 gpd in the first year to
23,400 gpd from 1990 on.
Water demand for the third scenario is initially quite similar to
scenarios 1 and 2. Water supply, treatment, and disposal systems must
accommodate 21,000 gpd in 1980, rising to about 36,000 gpd in 1982-84, and
then declining to about 23,000 gpd in 1988. Estimates for 1991 and after
assume a permanent community with a 90-gpd demand, or a total daily demand
of about 120,000 gallons.
Water Availability
Water to meet the demands of a work camp or permanent settlement can be
supplied from either surface water or ground water sources. Potential
surface water supply sources in the Beluga area include the Beluga River,
with an average flow of 2400 cubic feet per second (cfs), and the Chuitna
River (about 5 miles northwest of Tyonek), with a minimum flow of 60 cfs.
Water quality data indicate that Chuitna River water would be acceptable (b) for drinking with minimal treatment.
(a) Based on the experience at Alyeska pipeline construction camps.
( b) USGS surface flow and well records for several locations in the
Beluga area are contained in the Appendix.
3-21
System Alternatives
The alternatives available for meeting the water supply and wastewater
disposal needs of new settlements include onsite systems, new community
systems, and expansion of existing systems.
Onsite Systems
Onsite systems (wells and septic tanks) will function well if good
soils and adequate separation (about 4 feet) are available between the
leaching bed and the water table. In general, areas suitable for subsurface
disposal systems have gravel and other permeable soils.
Onsite systems are best used where residential lot sizes are 20,000 to
40,000 square feet. When both individual wells and septic tanks are
employed, the minimum lot size should be 40,000 square feet; when water is
supplied through a community system, but waste disposal is onsite, a
20,000-square-foot minimum lot size is desirable. (!2)
Multifamily residences (including work camp dormitories and bunkhouses)
are less suited than single-family residences for onsite waste disposal.
Large quantities of wastewater must be disposed of, requiring large septic
tanks and leach fields.
Community Water and Sewer Systems
If onsite disposal is not possible, either because of adverse soil
conditions or living unit configuration, community water and sewer systems
must be developed.
A water treatment plant may be required, especially in the case of a
permanent community. The length of water transmission mains will vary,
based on the plant location in relation to the supply source. Small, out-
lying communities of low density are likely to have deep-well systems located
adjacent to treatment plants and distribution points and, thus, do not require
transmission mains.
Water-saving fixtures should be a part of the community water system,
and their use should be encouraged. They will help to decrease the total
water demand of a new settlement.
3-22
For sewage treatment, the system should be as simple as regulatory
agencies will allow, while still maintaining adequate effluent discharge
quality and receiving water quality. Types of sewage treatment systems,
in order of preference, are listed below: (4)
1. facultative lagoon (requires the greatest land area of the
alternatives)
2. aerated lagoon
3. mechanical systems (biological: activated sludge, RBS, ABF; or
physical/chemical)
Discharge of sewage to a stream will require approval from EPA and the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Discharge to Cook Inlet
is another possibility if the new community is located close to the Inlet.
This would not be feasible for a community in the Congahbuna Lake area
because the distance to the Inlet is too great to make it economically
feasible.
For solid waste disposal, the sanitary landfill method tends to work
best, especially for a publicly used and operated system. In most cases,
incineration is uneconomical when compared with sanitary landfill disposal.
If the flow of solid waste can be carefully controlled (as in an industry-
operated work camp), an incinerator might be an economical alternative.
Expansion of Existing Systems
A new community in the Beluga area is unlikely to be able to use existing
water systems to serve its needs. For example, the present Tyonek water
supply system is too remote to be used by a community next to Congahbuna
Lake.
(a) For a brief description of each of these system types, see Appendix.
3-23
TRANSPORTATION AND POWER
Existing Systems
Existing road, air, and shipping transportation facilities as well as
Power supplies are described below.
Roads
Most of the road system in the Beluga area has been developed by Tyonek
Timber Company in the form of logging roads that connect Granite Point,
Tyonek, Nicolai Creek, Kaloa, North Foreland, and Beluga. There are about
100 miles of primary and secondary roads. These roads are in good condition,
especially the main roads (see Figure 3).
The main logging road extends approximately 16 miles northwest of
Congahbuna Lake to within 8 miles of Capps Coal Field. Most roads are sand,
overlain with gravel, and require no special maintenance. The roads are
retopped following breakup.
Road rights-of-way (100 feet wide) are established along the section
lines of all state land (or land acquired from the state). All other land
has a 66-foot right-of-way along section lines. Some legal questions have
been raised about how this right-of-way provision applies to land "reserved
for public use." No rights-of-way are associated with the network of logging
roads. Access was permitted as part of the state's timber sale contract with
Tyonek Timber Company.
Beluga and Anchorage are not connected by a year-round road; however a
winter road has been used in the past when the Susitna River was frozen. The
road was originally constructed to carry large, heavy equipment to the area,
but it has not been used for the last two winters. (2)
The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has
studied the Beluga area and developed plans for river crossings and roadways.
A proposed highway would run from the Moquawkie Reservation to Goose Bay
(about 65 miles), crossing the Susitna and Beluga Rivers. An existing road
Ta) we 4) During the 1975- 1976 winter, the Susitna River did not freeze over.
3-24
a - = R13 R12 R10 Ro
ACCESS CORRIDOR
300’ wide floating transportation NS y
Tek FENNGULATORSUSS BOR — easement
oe md Be o \%00 on oo Be NS LOGGING ROADS 1 oO 900 f+
BELUGA LAKE _ > os mia” NJ
S fF WINTER ROAD i‘ St ue 4
@ 14N
PROPOSED KNIK HIGHWAY
lz °Y = | a ~— 7. : 7 % < “J EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINES UT Le » Gs ENATERNINSULA BOROUGH BOUNt MATANUSRa“SUSITNG S &,. 17s PRIMARY AIRSTRIP a i: o
VJ OO < i ms AN 0 1.5 3 6 miles
he Source: 1. State of Alaska, Department of
Commerce and Economic es 20 a Development, Division of Energy
7 and Power Development MATANUSKA-SUSITNA| a BOUNDARY KeNTATPENINSULA BORDYGH BOUNDARY er a o4
2. Beluga Coal Company
3. CH2M HILL. Consulting Engineers
Nig : a: CS al
Ge eit, The land status designations shown on
/ this map reflect the best available
/ : information at this time and should
fs be confirmed.
soe 4 |
/ / ' September 1978
eu! | pomBecon’ +! Sratioy | ~ ' 4 i |
. L ; wt
yt
Z P . ee Ra ff \ > Se
% ) Me, 3
Pe,
4 ON,
4 . : \
TYONEK \ . N SCE
‘NORTH FORELAND
10N
R14
There is another proposed dock located on the north side of MCArthur River
R13
TRADING BAY
R12
POTENTIAL DOCK LOCATIONS
R11
FIGURE 3-3. Transportation Facilities.
Central Beluga Coal District
3-25
already connects Goose Bay to Knik (10 miles), Knik to Wasilla (19 miles),
and Wasilla to Anchorage (47 miles). The approximate location of the road
is shown in Figure 3.
The proposed highway is not likely to be constructed in the near future,
primarily because the economic benefits to be derived from it do not justify
the construction costs. The river crossing alone would cost an estimated
$250 million (1978 dollars). This may be compared with an annual state
highway budget of a little over $100 million. The proposed highway may
become more attractive as additional projects for resource and industrial
development in the Beluga area (aluminum smelter, coal generating plants,
etc.) are proposed or become feasible.
Airport Facilities
Four primary airstrips are located in the Beluga area: at the Beluga
power plantsite, Tyonek Village, Kaloa, and Granite Point. Characteristics
of these four strips are described briefly: (2)
e Beluga: 5000 feet, gravel surface, landing lights, good condition
e Tyonek: 3500 feet, gravel surface, landing lights, good condition
e Kaloa: 5000 feet, gravel surface, landing lights, good condition
e Granite Point: 3500 feet, gravel surface, poorly maintained.
Other airstrips in the area include a poorly maintained 3500-foot City
Services Oil Co. field, 8 to 10 miles west of Beluga; a 1700-foot airstrip
in good condition at North Foreland that will handle a Sky Van; and several
light aircraft strips, including two 900-foot strips at Capps Fieid. (3)
All airfields in the Tyonek-Beluga area are privately owned and main-
tained. Use of the airstrips requires permission of the owners.
(a) a; : : : a Airstrip length requirements vary by type of aircraft. Both the Sky Van
and Titan need about 2000 feet of runway. A C-130 requires close to
5000 feet. (A Titan will hold 10 people, or can be converted to cargo
only up to 3500 pounds. A Sky Van will hold 10 to 12 people or 3000 to
3500 pounds of cargo. A C-130 is a large, 4-engine, turbo-prop plane,
much larger than the Titan and Sky Van.)
3-27
Dock Facilities
A 1466-foot dock at North Foreland is the only dock located in the
Beluga area. Owned by Tyonek Timber Company, it has 685 feet of berthing
space and a water depth of 36 feet at mean low water. The largest ship to
dock at North Foreland was 607 feet long and 45,000 metric tons. The dock
would need to extend about 3700 feet from shore to reach a 60-foot depth.
The dock is used from April to November, depending on shipping schedules.
No unusual maintenance has been required to date with respect to ice or
current problems.
Power
Chugach Electric Association operates a large, gas-fired generating
plant at Beluga with a present capacity of 297.7 megawatts (MW) and a planned
capacity in 1979 of 362.1 mw, (1) Chugach Electric supplies power to Three-
Mile Creek Subdivision, the village of Tyonek, the Tyonek Timber Company,
and others. Transmission line location is shown in Figure 3.
The village of Tyonek constructed a 10 MW generating plant some years
ago to be run with gas from two prospective wells. When these wells failed
to produce, the generating plant was sold to Chugach Electric Association
in 1972 for $447,500, a contract was negotiated to supply Tyonek with
50 million kilowatt hours (kWh). Tyonek has used somewhat less than
5 million kWh per year since 1972.
Requirements
Future power and transportation requirements are discussed in the
following sections.
Power
Power for a work camp in the Beluga area could be supplied from the
existing Beluga generating station, especially during the initial con-
struction phase of coal field development. If coal-fired generating plants
are constructed in the Beluga area (scenario 1), these could eventually
supply the work camp with electricity. Standby generators should also be
available in case of a power or transmission line failure.
3-28
A permanent community of 1300 people or more (as projected in scenario 3)
could eventually be supplied with power from a coal-fired generating station,
depending to some extent on its distance from the community. Power would
probably be available from the Beluga generating station during the initial
phases of community development.
A peak demand of 2.0 to 2.5 kW per household can be used to estimate
minimal power requirements for a small, isolated residential community. (2)
For the community described in scenario 3, a 1500-kW-demand load should be
anticipated. This would be adequate to serve residences, small businesses,
and a school but would not supply the power needs of any heavy industry in
the area. The potential 1500 kW demand is an almost insignificant percentage
of the Beluga generating station's eventual 400-megawatt capability.
Airport Facilities
A 3500-foot airstrip can support a work camp of 200 to 500 people if
barging is also relied on to bring in construction material, equipment, and
other bulky goods. Currently, all people, and most goods, are transported
to the Beluga area by air. Some goods are also shipped by small barges.
A permanent community of 1300 people or more will likely require at
least a 5000-foot airstrip with adequate lighting and a building for
travelers and cargo.
Dock Facilities
Dock facilities will be required to export coal from the Beluga area.
Coal transport ships must have a water depth of 65 feet at low tide in
which to maneuver and take on cargo. (3) A barging operation requires less
depth; a loaded barge draws from 18 to 30 feet, depending on its size, (13)
Placer Amex, Inc. investigated a number of potential harbor sites for
dock facilities on the west side of Cook Inlet between West Foreland and
North Foreland. The three potential harbor sites that were identified are
shown in Figure 3, (3)
(a) CHoM HILL estimate.
3-29
One site is adjacent to the Tyonek Timber Company dock at North Foreland;
access to the dock would be through Tyonek village lands. The other two sites
are adjacent to state-owned lands at Granite Point and Trading Bay.
The shortest distance to 65-foot depths is at North Foreland (about
3700 feet from shore). The distance at Granite Point is over 8000 feet and
over 12,000 feet at Trading Bay. These lengths assume that berthing must be
available on a 24-hour basis (i.e., including the period of lower low water).
If berthing space is required only part of the day, shorter dock lengths are
possible.
A road or rail connection must be constructed from the dock to the new
community and to Capps Field. It would be easier to build and supply a
settlement in the Beluga area if it were located fairly close to the dock.
Construction materials, equipment, and other supplies could be barged or
shipped in and then trucked a short distance to the site. The Granite Point
dock location is about 4 miles overland from the proposed community site
at Congahbuna Lake. This configuration of dock and community site would
avoid the need to cross Tyonek village lands.
Dock siting and construction require a permit from the Corps of Engineers
(see Chapter 5). The permit is subject to public notice and review before
it can be issued. Although the Corps has indicated that the permit should
present few problems, it could be the subject of considerable controversy
if road access is required across Tyonek lands to connect the new community
and dock.
Overland Transportation
Of primary concern for coal development in the Beluga area is trans-
porting the coal overland from Capps Field to either a coal-fired generating
facility or a dock for export. Gravel surface roads are preferable since
they are fairly stable, can handle heavy traffic, and are easy to maintain,
especially given the frost heave problems. A road from Capps Field must be (3) designed for at least 150-ton haul trucks.
3-30
The quantity of coal required to supply coal-fired generating plants
does not justify a rail connection. Rail becomes a feasible alternative
when over 2 million tons of coal must be transported. (3) The two methods
of transporting coal, railroad and truck, are not mutually exclusive. A
truck-haul system may be used initially until the market has built up
sufficiently to warrant railroad construction.
A third overland transportation method for coal is the slurry pipeline.
Slurry may be a mixture of coal and either oil] or water. The capital costs
associated with a pipeline are much lower than with railroad construction.
Costs are increased somewhat by other factors, however, such as storage and
use of oi] to mix with the coal. The coal must be crushed more finely than
is necessary for truck and rail transport. The more finely the coal is
ground, the more fly dust is produced and lost.
Loading would be simplified with a pipeline, since extending a pipe out
to a large ship is simpler than constructing a dock. A catenary (a metal
trestle), built to withstand the ice conditions and currents would suffice
for a pipeline. A platform or T-section would be anchored at the end of the
pipeline, so a ship can berth. A road would still be needed along the pipe-
line for maintenance and personnel transport, but less road maintenance would
be required for this than with the truck-haul system.
The amount of road construction required to support a work camp or
full-scale permanent community will depend on site design and living con-
figurations. A work camp with bunkhouses would require a minimum road
network. A full-scale community might require anywhere from 6 to 20 miles
of local streets. The city of Seldovia (population 600) maintains 6 miles
of community streets; Homer (population 1800) has 8 miles of local streets;
Soldotna (population 2600) has 27 miles of city-maintained roads. ()
3-31
1
10.
11.
12.
13.
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3
Institute for Social and Economic Research, Energy Intensive Industry for
Alaska Phase IV: Social and Economic Impacts, DRAFT, June 1978.
State of Alaska, Division of Energy and Power Development, Department
of Commerce and Economic Development. Alaska Regional Energy Resources
Planning Project, Volume 3, Chapter 1 "Environment," DRAFT, July 1978.
Placer Amex Inc., Beluga Coal Project Status Report (December 1977);
interview with Benno Patsch, Placer Amex, Inc.
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District, Enrollment Projections and
School Construction Report, April 1977.
CH2M HILL, Offshore Oil Development in Lower Cook Inlet: Implications
for the Lower Cook Inlet, July 1978.
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District, Annual Financial Report,
FY 1976-77.
Argonne National Laboratories, A Framework for Projecting Employment
and Population Changes Accompanying Energy Development, Phase II, 1976.
Kenai Peninsula Borough, Tyonek Comprehensive Development Plan, 1972.
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service,
Area Planning Office, Anchorage.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Rapid Growth from
Energy Projects: Ideas for State and Local Action, 1976.
U.S. Public Health Service, "Tyonek House-to-House Survey," May 1978.
(A summary of survey responses is contained in the Appendix. )
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
State of Alaska, Division of Energy and Power Development, Department
of Commerce and Economic Development. Alaska Regional Energy Resources
Planning Project, Volume 3, Chapter 3 "Transportation," DRAFT, July
1978. Transportation options for coal export are discussed at length
in this report.
3-32
Chapter 4
PSYCHOSOCIAL PROSPECTS FOR TYONEK
OVERVIEW
The development of coal in the Beluga field is likely to have extensive
impacts on the residents of the native village of Tyonek. Both negative and
positive consequences may occur. Unlike many native villages in Alaska,
Tyonek has previously experienced the impacts of development through:
(1) royalties obtained from gas and oi] leases in 1964, and (2) the con-
struction and development of a large lumber chip mill just outside village
boundaries. Like all native villages, Tyonek also faces the complicated and
sometimes confusing conditions created by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act of 1971 (ANCSA). Past and current experiences with economic development
have made Tyonek residents more sensitive to their consequences than most
native Alaskans. They view development of the Beluga coal field with appre-
hension, skepticism, and caution because its impacts may forever change their
village life style, quality of life, and life satisfaction.
This section of the report focuses on the concerns of the village
residents. It examines the potential impacts of development on their
community and life style and includes recommendations for minimizing negative
social and individual impacts on village residents. Throughout this section
emphasis is placed on the unique cultural orientation of Tyonek residents
and on problems faced because of accelerated contact with the values,
beliefs, and life styles of nonnatives and outsiders.
The scenarios presented and discussed earlier in this report suggest
various levels of coal development. Elements such as the presence of a
mining camp and the population size would vary as a function of the level
of development. Any one of the scenarios would affect the quality of life
and lifestyle of the Tyonek people, although the full-scale development
depicted in the third scenario would have the greatest effects on the Tyonek
village. To anticipate those maximum impacts, this section focuses entirely
on that scenario, which includes the development of a new community of
approximately 1300 people at Beluga.
A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE VILLAGE OF TYONEK
No one is certain when the first residents settled in the area now
known as Tyonek. As late as 1880, Ivan Petroff, a Russian territorial
governor, noted that the area around Tyonek contained "2 whites, 6 creoles
and 109 natives." The native population has steadily increased to the
present-day level of 271.
The native residents are related to the Athabascan-speaking clans and
tribes that inhabit the central interior of Alaska and certain provinces of
Canada. Many of the early folkways and mores of the Cook Inlet natives were
neavily influenced by various Eskimo groups and Northwest Coastal tribes.
Anthropologists noted that the Alaskan Athabascans displayed a "lack of
precisely definable cultural base". (1) The tribes and clans have always
been hunters and fishermen; as a consequence, they experienced a great deal
of mobility and mingling with members of other villages. These factors have
led many historians and anthropologists to believe that the Athabascan groups
were highly adaptive, resourceful, and susceptible to external influences.
While the residents of the northwest shore of the Cook Inlet are often
referred to as Tyoneks, they are actually of the Moquawkie tribe and of the
Tanaina component of the Athabascan linguistic group. Through the years,
outsiders have referred to the area as Moquawkie (many maps still show it
as the Moquawkie Indian Reservation), Tyonek, and in rare instances, Beluga.
Today, the native residents are identified as Tyonek.
Vestiges of traditional life style are still apparent in present-day
Tyonek. Fishing and hunting are highly valued among villagers and the
catches form the mainstay of the typical diet. Family networks are extended
to include all relatives, however far removed. As one resident pointed out,
"In one way we are probably all related." Tenets of the Russian Orthodox
Church dominate religious beliefs and values and have a strong, bonding
influence on everyday behavior. But while the tenets of Christianity guide
behavior, values generally attributable to American Indian and Alaska Native
groups are apparent. Tyonek residents value generosity, sharing, cooperation,
4-2
humility, and a present-time orientation. In general, the villagers believe
in living in harmony with nature and using only what is necessary. In this
regard, every part of something (such as a moose, fish, or tree) has a func-
tional use and should not be wasted. Moreover, most Tyoneks believe that
the old traditional ways are functional and should not be changed simply
because something new might be better.
Up to 1963, few major changes occurred in the Tyonek region. Daily
living patterns centered around routine subsistence tasks. The quality of
life was well below modern standards; many considered it close to poverty
level because of substandard housing and diet and lack of basic utilities.
However, the discovery of oi] and gas reserves in the region and around the
boundaries of the community had a dramatic impact on the Tyonek life style
and quality of life. In 1964, the Tyonek community, with the assistance
of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and a few beneficient attorneys, gained
about $12 million from oil and gas leases. In addition to undertaking many
profitable ventures, the Tyonek Village Council approved a program that
included improvements to roads, the airstrip, and community buildings, and
increased opportunities for youth. More importantly, 59 new homes were
constructed, one for each family residing in the village.
Some of the lease money was also invested, primarily in the Anchorage
area. The Tyonek Management Corporation was established to plan and oversee
those investments. Buildings were purchased and leased, and a construction
campaign was initiated that resulted in office buildings and homes for Tyonek
natives living in Anchorage. About 302 enrolled members of the village share
in the profits from the investments.
Money generated from the 1964 oil and gas leases had a dramatic impact
on the quality of life and life style of Tyonek residents. Many claim that
their diets have improved, resulting in better overall physical health.
Educational opportunities have been expanded with the construction of a new
school. Employment opportunities and skill training have advanced, particu-
larly in the construction fields. But wealth also brought the Tyoneks into
closer contact with outsiders, largely through individual purchases of
4-3
television sets, home entertainment equipment, and motor vehicles. Most
villagers welcomed the sudden change and adapted to it with ease, but some
did not and resented the intrusions and distractions created by the wealth.
Through all these changes, however, the village remained a reservation and
the Village Council retained the right to control access by outsiders and
developments on reservation lands.
The second major impact on the Tyoneks came about seven years after
the oi] and gas lease. In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
went into effect. Through ANCSA, some 79,000 Aleuts, Eskimos, and Indians
in Alaska were given about 40 million acres of land and close to $962,500,000.
Tyonek natives shared in the settlement through their choice to become part
of the Cook Inlet Region Corporation, one of 12 native regional corporations
established as a result of ANCSA. Within five years after ANCSA went into
effect, each regional corporation was required to distribute 10% of the monies
derived from ANCSA to shareholders. Tyonek residents participated in this
settlement and received an average payment of about $400 each.
While ANCSA meant income to Tyonek residents, problems emerged that
seemed to outweigh the small amount of money received. Questions concerning
jurisdiction, land use, water rights, and enforcement of village ordinances
soon plagued the Tyonek Village Council, otherwise referred to as the Indian
Reorganization Act (IRA) Council (see Chapter 5). Village residents today
feel that outsiders have abused visiting privileges, have contributed to the
disruption of hunting and fishing patterns and, in general, have negatively
affected the life style. In effect, ANCSA has led to the dissolution of the
reservation status, has created complicated institutional arrangements, and
is threatening traditional life styles among the Tyoneks.
The third major impact on the village of Tyonek occurred in 1975. At
that time Tyonek Timber Company (TTC), a subsidiary of Kodiak Lumber Mills
(KLM) began operations. TTC basically reduces wood to chips, which are
eventually marketed for newsprint and paper products. The main processing
plant is located just south of the present Tyonek village and occupies land
4-4
once "owned" by the Tyoneks. From time to time, TTC employs Tyonek residents,
but the bulk of the employees are transient nonnatives.
KLM and the accompanying housing settlement was the first "outside"
venture to locate near Tyonek. While TTC means jobs for Tyonek residents,
it also presents some problems:
1. Job opportunities for Tyonek residents are seasonal and skill-
dependent, i.e., many jobs require specialized skills.
2. Work schedules are oriented around a nonnative way of life.
Workers are required to put in eight hours a day, five days a week.
Many Tyonek residents are not accustomed to this schedule and find
it too constraining Although some residents want to work at KLM,
their first priority is fishing. When the season starts, many
would rather be in their boats and at their sites casting nets
than operating heavy equipment.
3. The presence of outsiders who have a different cultural life style
is viewed with suspicion and concern. Some villagers feel that
the TTC workers have contributed to the increase of alcoholism
and drug abuse in Tyonek. Others feel that teachers are more
responsive to the educational needs and life orientations of the
nonnative students attending the Tyonek school than they are to
those of the native students. There have been a few isolated
instances of hostility and overt conflict with TTC workers which
have tended to heighten suspicions and concerns. Overall, many
villagers feel they have little to gain from TTC's present
operation.
By way of review, village life at Tyonek has been dramatically affected
and altered by three major events. Within the past 14 years, Tyonek revenues
have increased owing to gas and oil leases, ANCSA, and employment opportuni-
ties at the lumber chip mill. Nonetheless, the three events have created
problems in life style, organization and management of the land, and
individual preferences for improved standards of living. Tyonek residents
4-5
have coped reasonably well with the changes evoked by the three events.
However, many problems have been introduced that are creating adjustment
and adaptation difficulties. By nature of their cultural tradition, Tyonek
natives have had to adjust and adapt to many circumstances, for the changes
introduced in the past decade and a half have posed problems never before
faced by the Tyonek people.
PRESENT LIFE STYLE
At present, slightly more than 270 people live in the Tyonek village.
Most, if not all, live in the houses constructed during the mid-sixties.
Most families have established a moderate standard of living; trucks, cars,
television sets, and citizens band two-way radios are commonplace. It is
apparent that the diffusion of technology and contact with the outside world
are influencing their life style.
For the most part, five major families tend to dominate village life
and decisions made by the IRA Council. This does not imply, however, that
other families are excluded from participation in community activities and
the decision-making process. Rudiments of traditional decision-making pro-
cedures are clearly evident in the efforts by the IRA Council to involve
everyone in current and future ventures affecting the village as a whole.
Participatory management seems to be the main organizational style of village
government.
At present, women hold key leadership roles in the village: the presi-
dent and vice-president of the Village Council are women, as is the president
of Tyonek Native Corporation in Anchorage. As a result, some outsiders
consider the Tyoneks to be matriarchal (i.e., women control decision-making
patterns). However, the present administrative arrangement is unique in the
long history of the Tyoneks. Instead of Tyonek social organization being
matriarchal or patriarchal, it is probably more a system of shared responsi-
bility in which males and females are joint participants in decision making.
Kinship is typically traced through the lines of the father (patrilineality);
but otherwise neither sex appears to exert more decision-making influence
than the other.
4-6
At one time, the Village Council prohibited outsiders from living in
the village. In fact, at one point during the late sixties, visitors were
not permitted in Tyonek unless they had been invited. This policy is still
nominally in effect, but it is not enforced as rigorously as in the past.
Moreover, a few nonnatives married to native residents are now living in
the village. Ordinarily, nonnatives were supposed to appear before the
Council to make their resident requests known. In addition, such individuals
had to state their intentions; i.e., what they planned to do, where they
would work, etc. The Village Council has also become somewhat lax in
enforcing this policy, although there is talk that it will be reaffirmed
in the near future. This reaffirmation is closely aligned with the senti-
ments of a few villagers who feel that ouside influences are becoming too
disruptive and are having a negative effect, especially on youth.
Employment opportunities in the village are limited. Apart from the
seasonal employees and the lumber chip mill, the major employer is the
Village Council itself. Positions are varied and include secretarial/
clerical work, heavy equipment maintenance and operation, and unskilled
labor such as painting, janitorial service, etc. Apart from those who
work in the native store, and occasionally on offshore oil rigs and at the
Beluga power station, most natives are subsistence fishermen. Fishing seems
to be the main interest, as it has always been. Many look forward with
great enthusiasm and anticipation to the fishing season. Although it is
not entirely true, it often appears as if all nonfishing-related village
activities cease during the season and everyone seems to participate in the
fishing activity.
In July 1978, 44 village males were unemployed although able to work
if jobs had been available. In addition, 40 individuals were receiving
some form of state welfare assistance, 10 of whom were participating in the
food stamp program. While the unemployment rate is consistent with other
native villages, participation in the welfare program was slightly less
than the average for the region.
4-7
Tyonek residents have more contact with urban life and the nonnative
world than do typical Alaska natives. Their close proximity to Anchorage
(about 88 air kilometers) affords them line-of-sight television and commercial
radio reception and easy air access (round-trip air charter fare ranges from
$30 to $60) to the city. Through the media and visits to the city, many
Tyonek residents are keenly aware of the impacts of industrial and land
development and of population expansion on people and communities. Many
recognize that idleness and boredom stemming from unemployment can lead to
socially disruptive behavior such as vandalism, alcoholism, and drug abuse.
Similarly, the role models provided youth by the unemployed and their
exposure to the electronic media are potentially disruptive and considered
counter to the preferred village pattern of living.
The present living standards of Tyonek are perhaps changing more
rapidly now than ever before. While Tyonek received an earlier start than
most Alaska native villages, its attempts to adjust to and cope with social
change differ little from those of Alaska natives in general. The preferred
life style is to retain the cultural traditions within a typical slow-paced
rural environment. Tyonek's future is tenuous, however, like that of many
Alaska native villages; it hinges on the potential impacts of coal and
industrial development in the region.
EFFECTS OF COAL DEVELOPMENT ON COMMUNITY LIFE STYLE
Life in Tyonek would indeed be changed by coal development in the Beluga
coal fields. Everyone in the village would be affected by it. Coal
development would mean more jobs and overall economic growth for the village
as a whole. — It would also mean accelerated contact with outsiders and an
introduction to new life styles.
Coal development would also produce population increases in the north-
western area of Cook Inlet. As many as five times the current population
of Tyonek could settle in that area temporarily or permanently. Along with
these people would come support services and other economic activities.
Children from the community might attend the school at Tyonek, and because
4-8
of their numbers could relegate the Tyonek youth to minority status. Overall,
the changes induced by this population expansion could have extensive and
very disruptive effects on Tyonek.
At a broad social level of analysis, development implies that two
distinctly different cultures would come together rapidly. Although Tyonek
residents have had considerable contact with the dominant American lifestyle,
this contact would be greatly expanded by coal development. Under those
circumstances, a variety of interpersonal and intergroup conflicts would
likely surface. The contact generated by employment, the proximity of the
mining camp to Tyonek, and the presence of nonnative children in Tyonek
schools could intensify salient and subtle cultural differences between the
two groups. The values, beliefs and customs of both parties would be chal-
lenged and could become points of controversy.
Coal development would also mean that, for the first time in their
long history, Tyonek residents would be in the minority in their own region.
Minority status usually is often a breeding ground for racism and discrimi-
nation. Status and cultural differences therefore can be factors in intensi-
fying unfriendly and perhaps hostile relationships.
With the potential for social conflict comes a potential for social
deviancy such as vandalism, larceny, alcoholism, and drug abuse. All of
these forms of deviancy contribute .to one another and in many cases can be
emphasized by prevailing differences of opinions, intergroup relations, and
feelings of inferiority, especially on the part of the group relegated to a
minority status. Intergroup conflict can also affect employment, job pro-
ductivity, learning in the classroom, and can disrupt a community's total
way of life. At present, however, Tyonek is faced with only limited forms
of alcoholism and drug abuse. Relationships between village residents and
TTC employees and their families appear amiable. Tyonek residents have had
only limited experience with the sort of problems generated by rapid economic
and community development. Long-term development of the Beluga coal fields
could therefore set in motion an irreversible change process in which the
negative outcomes might far outweigh the economic benefits to Tyonek residents.
4-9
COMMUNITY PERCEPTION TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT
In contrast to the Kenai Peninsula area on the eastern shore of Cook
Inlet, the northwestern shore is relatively isolated and, as yet, undeveloped.
The power station at Beluga, the TTC lumber chip mill, the Granite Point Oi]
Facility, and the village at Tyonek make up the bulk of the activity and are
the primary populated areas. At the same time, the area is ripe for extensive
industrial development, especially if a plentiful supply of coal were readily
available. How do Tyonek village residents feel about this present and
potential development? What are their preferences? Can they hope to maintain
their present life style in the face of population expansion? What are their
major concerns? In their opinions, who is responsible for preventing the
negative consequences associated with development?
Tyonek residents have had experience with developmental efforts. Through
the media and visits to other communities outside the region, residents have
acquired a sense of what the effects of development would be on the land and
their community. To assess community feelings towards the questions listed
above, interviews were conducted with a small representative sample of Tyonek
residents. The results are summarized below.
All of the respondents expressed concern about the effects that coal
development would have on their way of life, their culture, and the land on
which they live. They recognize that development is inevitable. Some prefer
that it not occur at all; a few acknowledge the economic benefits and hope
that development will occur in an orderly, nondisruptive manner. All of the
elderly respondents questioned are against development occurring within the
village and especially in outlying areas. One elderly male best summarized
this feeling when he said: "We want to live our life the way we have lived
it. We don't want to be impacted in a sudden manner by something that's
different to our way of life." One woman expressed concern for her children
and grandchildren and saw more negative consequences than positive benefits
emerging from coal development. She was especially concerned about "the
abuse of alcohol and dope" and the effect these elements would have on the
community as a whole.
4-10
Most people acknowledged the opportunity for employment and training,
but some definite concerns were raised. "It will be all right," said one
young male respondent, "if the coal company gives us training. But after
the coal is gone what good are our skills? There's nothing else to mine in
the area and I want to live here, not in Anchorage or some place else."
Another male focused on the job requirements when he said, "I can do the
work but I don't like to punch a clock and have the union tell me what to
do. I know fishing and that's what I like to do. You can't fish all the
time so I can use the job [at the coal field]. When it's time to fish I
want time off to do that and still have a job to go back to. The union and
coal company won't permit that." In general, the respondents felt that jobs
were probably the only positive benefit associated with development.
Many respondents raised questions about jurisdiction and use of present
facilities at Tyonek. Since Tyonek has the only school in the region, many
expressed concern over student enrollments, classroom space, student/teacher
ratios, and curriculum content. Of particular concern was the possibility
of the school losing federal monies for education. Villagers believe that
increases in nonnative student enrollment would lead to decreases in federal
support for educational programs earmarked for native students. "Who would
pay for the additional teachers, secretaries, additional classroom space, and
facilities?" asked a mother of four children. She continued, "We built that
school with our own money and assistance from the BIA [Bureau of Indian
Affairs]. Those developers and Kenai Borough can't expect us to foot the
bill for something we don't want in the first place." Another respondent
added, "Right now we get along with the nonnative children in the school.
Pretty soon there will be more nonnatives [in the school] and our kinds
will be left out. A few of the elderly are teaching the children the native
language, native crafts such as making moccasins and weaving baskets,
including legends and stories about our history. What good will this be?
Our culture is very important to us and we want to keep it. The school is
the best way to teach our children the things they should know about our
history, the language, and our way of life. We want to keep this."
4-11
Preservation of culture, intensification of external influences, and
pressures to change are serious matters of discussion in Tyonek. Equally
important are concerns over maintenance of cultural identity, a personal
sense of worth, and the way of life. Problems have arisen over the matter
of jurisdiction, since with the advent of ANCSA, traditional Tyonek forms
of government and control have been challenged. Said one respondent, “Look,
there was a time when the Village Council had complete control over use and
occupancy of the land. Now, Kenai [Borough] wants to tax us, build public
roads through our village, and bring in new laws. Now, who's going to
enforce them? There is a constable for this whole area and he can't enforce
anything. People come and go. Pilots bring in booze and dope. Hunters
shoot moose and leave it lying in the village dump. Now, we'll have 3000
mining people around here and they'll probably take over the whole damn
place. I'm 150% against development around here. Our life will be ruined
and the land destroyed, all for coal that isn't very good anyway."
Tyonek residents have strong feelings about the land and wildlife. Like
their ancestors, they want the area to stay pretty much the same as it has
always been. Many feel that they have lost the opportunity to exert control
over land use through ANCSA, some are bitter and wish they had not made the
choice, others reluctantly accept their situation, and some prefer to go
along with development without comment. Nonetheless, the deep-rooted feelings
for the community and its way of life are strongly entrenched. One young
student best summarized these feelings when she stated: "There is a certain
warmth and sense of belonging here. When away at school, I look forward to
coming home to be with the people and live with the land. When I finish
school, I want to live here and provide a service. But, if coal development
comes and change happens, I'm afraid our people will be faced with their
greatest challenge."
The Tyonek community is apprehensive, even fearful, of the consequences
of growth and development in the region. They have experienced the effects
of progress and know that large-scale development can be overpowering. They
recognize the negative impact of alcoholism, drug abuse, and other forms of
deviancy, but feel that as long as they have some jurisdiction, reasonable
4-12
controls can be maintained. However, the location of a mining camp some 10
to 15 kilometers from their village would present jurisdictional problems and
would challenge the authority of the IRA Council to govern and to regulate.
Current IRA Council members are exploring the nature and extent of their
powers in an attempt to define, once and for all, how much control they do
have. Tyonek residents are not bitter over past experiences with development.
Instead, those experiences have made most residents cautious and somewhat
pessimistic toward future development.
Currently, Tyonek residents have a sense of freedom of expression and
movement. Apart from difficulties and problems associated with ANCSA, the
the Tyonek do not feel subordinated or restrained in terms of mobility. In
some ways they are fairly autonomous and value the sense of freedom that
comes with living in a somewhat isolated environment. Should development
occur, however, their autonomy would be challenged. Their energy would have
to be redirected to protect their autonomy and to avoid feelings of powerless-
ness.
The presence of an outside community with a population five times
greater than that of the native people would directly challenge traditional
authority and group norms. Under similar situations, especially when communi-
ties are quickly and abruptly relegated to a minority status, feelings of
alienation and powerlessness have tended to increase. Along with experiencing
such feelings, individuals may find life meaningless. People in this situa-
tion not only attribute similar characteristics to those about them, but also
become confused about norms and values. Insight, clarity, practicality, and
thought processes in turn can be distorted. Taken together these physiological
and sociological phenomena can lead to low levels of personal involvement
in family and community responsibilities, lack of personal support, high
levels of aggression, and premature speculation about remedial recourses of
action.
It is probable that many residents could effectively adapt to the
changing conditions brought on by development. Nonetheless, they would
experience some psychological and cultural loss. The pace of daily living
4-13
could change, values and beliefs could be altered to accommodate changes,
and a bit of the cultural heritage could disappear. As long as the residents
remain at Tyonek during the development process, there is every reason to
speculate that, even in a small way, everyone will be negatively affected.
The anticipated psychological and sociological problems, therefore, demand
that preventive and corrective mental health efforts be undertaken.
The Tyonek people are proud of their life style, their village, and the
environs, and they want to protect it. Just as federal and state governments
seek to protect flora and fauna through environmental impact statements,
village residents feel that their cultural life style should be equally con-
sidered and protected under the same guidelines.
SUMMARY
Development of the Beluga coal fields--especially under scenario 3--
would likely have serious effects on the cultural life style of the residents
of Tyonek. Increases in population could place Tyonek residents at a distinct
disadvantage in maintaining their preferred standard of living and cultural
heritage. Indeed, they could become a minority in their own region. Distinct
social problems could emerge that would affect education, traditional sub-
sistence efforts, community feelings, and beliefs and attitudes, and that
could permanently alter the current way of life. Development could mean jobs
for a few Tyonek residents, and with those jobs, increases in economic
Opportunities. Nonetheless, such gains might be overshadowed by the potential
negative impacts associated with large-scale development in remote, rural
areas of Alaska. Preventative measures could be taken before development
begins, including establishing a standing committee composed of developers,
planners, and Tyonek residents.
4-14
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
Spencer, R. F., et al. The Native Americans. New York,
Harper and Row. 1965,155.
4-15
Chapter 5
DECISION MAKING FRAMEWORK
GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTION AND POWERS
This chapter describes the governmental and private agencies with major
jurisdiction in the Beluga area and suggests possible ways to influence coal-
field development. The principal agencies () that will be involved in any
future Beluga coal development project are:
e Tyonek Village Council
e Tyonek Native Corporation
e Cook Inlet Regional Corporation
e Kenai Peninsula Borough
e State of Alaska
Tyonek Village Council
The Tyonek Village Council is the federally chartered local "government"
that manages Tyonek's public affairs. The council acts as spokesperson for
the community-at-large, controls local use of village public lands and
buildings, and has responsibility for public services within the community.
The Tyonek Village Council, at this writing, believes it can control
access to lands encompassed by the former Tyonek reservation. When the
federal reserve was abolished by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,
the village council's authority over the reserve lands was terminated.
This did not, however, negate the role of the council in speaking for the
village nor the importance of the views of Tyonek residents toward develop-
ment at Beluga.
Tyonek Native Corporation
The Tyonek Native Corporation owns surface title to the site of the
former Moquawkie Indian Reservation as well as other lands within the area.
(a) . i 4) The role of Federal agencies will not be discussed except for those
programs administered at the State level.
5-1
As a major landowner, the Tyonek Native Corporation's policies toward
industrial development and use of corporation lands may affect transportation
routes, location of community and industrial facilities, and location of
transshipment or power plant facilities. (See Chapter 4.)
Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated (CIRI)
As a result of an exchange of land between the federal government, the
state of Alaska, and the Cook Inlet Region, Inc., CIRI will become a major
landholder in the Tyonek area. In addition to holding the subsurface rights
to most of the land selected by the Tyonek Village Corporation, CIRI selected
the surface and subsurface rights to major portions of the land surrounding
and including the private coal. leases within Capps Field. CIRI was also
granted a 300-foot right-of-way to connect its holdings in the Capps coal
field area to land along the coast.
As a further condition of the land trade, CIRI took over the ownership
of leased lands within Capps Field. Future lease revenues will accrue to
the corporation, and any lease renewals or extensions must be negotiated
with CIRI.
Because of its land ownership, CIRI will have a major role in determining
the development of coal deposits and access to those deposits.
Kenai Peninsula Borough
The Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) is the only local, general government
in the project area. As a borough of the second class, KPB is charged with
providing education, planning, and tax ‘assessment in the area. In addition,
KPB has taken over responsibility for the provision and management of public
solid waste disposal sites throughout the borough.
Under its planning authority, the borough is charged with land-use
Planning, zoning, and platting. No borough land-use plan now exists for
the area surrounding Tyonek. The project area is zoned "rural," which allows
any use except some specific activities that are noxious or harmful to public
health. Subdivision of private land must be approved by the borough, but
the subdivision ordinance has few requirements for subdivision improvements
in rural areas.
5-2
The borough also owns land that contains one portion of Congahbuna Lake
and part of the proposed site for a permanent community. As such, the borough
may have some ability to influence the nature of community development through
land leasing agreements.
Although a proposed land-management system ordinance is under KPB Assembly
review, the borough has not yet developed policies regarding lease of borough
land for industrial or community development. The borough would consider the
implications of the project after receipt of a land-lease application.
Two borough service areas encompass the project site: the North Penin-
sula Recreation Area and the Central Hospital Service Area. Neither of these
service areas provides facilities in Tyonek or the Beluga area, although the
North Kenai Recreation Area is considering extending some form of outdoor
recreation programs to Tyonek.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough is initiating a coastal zone management
policy study and a study of ports and harbor needs in relation to energy
facility development. The coastal zone management policy study will recom-
mend a set of policies for the management of coastal resources. This docu-
ment, designed for extensive public review, will be used by the KPB as a
basis for their own coastal management program. The question of coal develop-
ment at Beluga will not be specifically considered, and energy facility
siting will be included only in a general discussion of policies.
The port and harbors study will focus on the harbor resources and
facility needs related to energy development in the KPB. As such, it will
consider the possibility of development at Beluga, but will recommend
policies only in relation to the location and provision of port facilities.
The KPB is a participant in the Cook Inlet Air Resources Management
District, a three-borough organization responsible for air-quality monitoring
and enforcement in cooperation with the Department of Environmental Con-
servation (DEC). DEC retains the authority to set air quality standards,
grant air emissions permits, and regulate surface air emissions.
5-3
In summary, the Kenai Peninsula Borough is unlikely to begin developing ;
a policy for development at Beluga until industry approaches the borough with
a land-lease or subdivision application.
State of Alaska
The state of Alaska, through its various departments, has broad authority
to mitigate the environmental and, to some extent, the socioeconomic impacts
of coal development. Two inter-agency organizations, the Beluga Interagency
Task Force and the Coastal Zone Regional Planning Team, could also provide
a means for state intervention in energy development at Beluga.
The principal state agencies with program interest or responsibility
are:
e Office of the Governor, Division of Policy Development and Planning (DPDP)
e Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED)
e Department of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA)
e Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
e Department of Fish and Game (DF&G)
e Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Although it would not have a major regulatory role, the Department of
Labor would have a voice in the setting of policy concerning labor needs,
local hire, and in the inspection of construction-camp housing.
The Coastal Zone Regional Planning Team, headed by DPDP, includes the
Departments of Fish and Game, Community and Regional Affairs, Natural
Resources, Environmental Conservation, and Commerce and Economic Development.
The team is charged with preparing a regional resource management program
for the Cook Inlet Region for submission to the State Coastal Policy Council.
At present, the planning team is developing criteria for identifying uses
of state concern and areas meriting special attention. It is studying
whether these uses and areas should be specifically identified and located
or defined more generally. As a result, the extent to which Beluga-area
5-4
development will be addressed under the regional resource management program
is unclear. However, its progress to date and its December 1978 report
deadline suggest that recommendations and policies on development at Beluga
will be limited and fairly general.
The Beluga Interagency Task Force, chaired by DCED's Division of Economic
Enterprise, includes the Department of Environmental Conservation, Community
and Regional Affairs, Fish and Game, Labor (in a research and information
capacity), Natural Resources, and the Governor's Division of Policy Develop-
ment and Planning--in addition to DCED's own Division of Energy and Power
Development. The task force is charged with providing a coordinated state
response to industry proposals on energy development in the Beluga area.
Office of the Governor, Division of Policy Development and Planning (DPDP)
DPDP's role in the Beluga project will primarily be one of agency coor-
dination and policy formulation. As a policy spokesman for the Office of
the Governor, DPDP can encourage line agencies to adopt programs in support
of a state policy position. DPDP chairs the interagency Cook Inlet Regional
Planning Team, which may address the siting of an energy facility at Beluga
in the regional resource management plan in progress.
Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED)
DCED's Division of Economic Enterprise (DEE) also has a coordination
and policy role in the Beluga project. As head of the Beluga Interagency
Task Force, DEE is primarily responsible for coordinating state agency
information-sharing and policy development.
In the latter stages of Beluga development, DCED's role as a regulator
of private and public commerce, especially through various licensing
authorities and the regulative powers of the Alaska Public Utilities Commis-
sion, may allow it to influence aspects of Beluga development.
Department of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA)
DCRA's primary responsibilities regarding the Beluga project would
involve analyzing the public costs and benefits of establishing a new
community, including an evaluation of its effects on the provision of public
5-5
facilities and services. DCRA's ability to provide technical assistance and
Program funds for local planning and management efforts could be used to
affect the nature and extent of new community development. In addition,
DCRA's participation on the coastal zone regional planning team and the
Beluga Interagency Task Force gives it a direct voice in formulating overall
state policy on the Beluga project.
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
The Department of Environmental Conservation regulates the environmental
effects of industrial development, construction, handling of petroleum
products, and the disposal of solid waste and wastewater. In general, any
activity that affects air and water quality or involves the (potential)
spillage of petroleum products or noxious substances falls within the scope
of DEC regulations. Of importance for the Beluga project is DEC's administra-
tion of permits related to air quality, wastewater discharge, and solid waste
disposal. DEC's regulation of activities affecting air quality includes
identifying air quality districts and emissions standards under the Federal
Clean Air Act.
Department of Fish and Game (DF&G)
The Department of Fish and Game has primary responsibility for the
management of fish and game populations and the protection of their habitats.
Any activity that could potentially disrupt an anadromous fish stream or
affect an established game refuge or critical habitat area must be reviewed
and approved by the department.
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
The Department of Natural Resources has a potentially important role
to play in developing policy concerning Beluga coal-field development.
DNR regulates the use and disposal of state land and tidelands, including
temporary access and rights-of-way across state land, and the appropriation
and use of surface and ground water. The use of surface materials located
on state land (such as rock and gravel) also falls within DNR's jurisdiction.
5-6
DNR's responsibility for classifying and managing state lands affords the
state a useful tool for dealing with activities on state land. DNR may also
include performance stipulations in its land leases and permits.
DNR is preparing a land management plan for state lands within the Kenai
Peninsula Borough. This plan will identify land and resource entities,
develop resource management objectives and implementation recommendations,
and set guidelines for management and disposal of state lands. This manage-
ment plan will be coordinated with ohter state, borough, and private sector
planning efforts and will involve extensive local review and input. Land
management options and policy alternatives are scheduled for public pre-
sentation and review in November 1978.
The department will also have responsibility for administering and
enforcing federal regulations on surface mining and land reclamation. The
procedures for administering the surface-mining regulations will be established
by DNR.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR INVOLVEMENT
A number of opportunities will arise for government and private interests
to influence Beluga coal-field development. Potential areas of involvement
include:
e environmental concerns
e land management
e creation of a new settlement
e provision of community services and facilities
Environmental Concerns
Some environmental issues can be considered in advance of the review
of a specific project proposal. These general environmental issues include
air quality, water resources, fish and game populations and habitat, and
surface reclamation and revegetation.
5-7
Air Quality
Air-quality issues involve the overall effect of industrial activity
on air quality in the Beluga area and the surrounding region.
The responsibility for air-quality control lies with the State Depart-
ment of Environmental Conservation. DEC's authority stems in part from its
role in implementing the regulations of two federal programs--the Clean
Air Act and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System.
The provisions of these programs do more than give DEC authority for
the review and permitting of new sources of air emissions. The Clean Air
Act also requires any proposed new point-source developer to supply DEC with
sufficient background data on ambient air quality at the project site. This
allows DEC to adequately review the effects of the project and the proposed
emissions control technology. This background information must include
meteorologic data, measurement of a variety of pollutants, and analysis of
area topography. DEC has indicated that a 1-year monitoring program would
be required in the Beluga area before a coal-fired generating plant could
be approved. DEC determines the nature of the monitoring program to be
undertaken by the applicant, based on the expected project emissions. Con-
sequently, the applicant must inform DEC of overall project plans prior
to initiating the monitoring.
The proposed Tuxedni wilderness area, located about 50 miles south of
the Beluga area, has been designated as a Class I air-quality-control area
under the Federal Clean Air Act. Under current regulations, new sources of
air emissions in the surrounding region must not have significant effect
on the ambient air quality of a neighboring Class I area. In addition to
ensuring that any development at Beluga will meet the discharge limitations
for a "Class II" area, DEC must determine that coal-related facilities will
not exceed the deterioration standards established for the proposed Tuxedni
wilderness area nor adversely affect air quality in the Anchorage bowl. Air-
quality standards could become a major obstacle to the development of coal-
fired generating plants.
While DEC cannot change the air-quality standards and deterioration
limits established in the Federal Clean Air Act, it does have the authority
to determine the methods or processes of pollution control. This allows DEC
to influence the design and operation of a facility and its process of
development.
Water Resources
Water-resource issues involve the allocation and use of water for indus-
trial and community purposes in relationship to existing water supply and
other area water requirements. Also involved is the effect of industrial
activity on water quality, both during the construction period and over the
life of the operation.
Three state agencies regulate water use. The Department of Natural
Resources is responsible for arranging the appropriation of water rights for
ground and surface water located within state-, local-, and privately-owned
lands. DEC is responsible for approving the discharge of pollutants into
water and any discharge of wastewater. The Department of Fish and Game,
under its authority to protect anadromous fish populations, reviews and
approves activities that could affect the nature of an anadromous fish
stream.
The Department of Natural Resources's (DNR) program of permitting the
appropriation of water rights is based on the legal principle of prior
appropriation; in effect, it is a first-come, first-served system. Because
of its backlog of applications and limited staff, DNR has not given much
attention to determining the effects of a new appropriation on ground water
regimes or to forecasting future water requirements. DNR has the authority
to regulate the taking of surface and ground water from private lands.
Attaching conditions to a permit for the industrial use of water is one
method of intervening in industrial development.
DEC permits and monitors wastewater discharges and the design and
construction of public wastewater systems. The agency plays an important
role in the granting of Environmental Protection Agency NPDES wastewater
5-9
discharge permits, since permits must be certified by DEC prior to approval
by EPA. In those cases where an EPA permit is not required, the developer
must obtain a DEC wastewater-disposal permit to discharge wastewater or
pollutants into waters or onto land. This permit authority allows DEC to
influence the planning and design of industrial water treatment and liquid
waste discharge systems. The wastewater discharge permit application requires
information on the proposed facility; the nature of the discharge, treatment,
and planned disposal methods; and proposed sites.
The Department of Fish and Game's authority to protect anadromous fish
streams enables some public intervention into those industrial activities
that occur near streams or require crossing fish streams. Directed primarily
at the protection of habitat, any activity that could affect the natural
flow or bed of any anadromous water, including the use of equipment in or
crossing such waters, must be approved by DF&G prior to the initiation of
that activity. This includes all stream crossings by heavy equipment and
the construction of bridges and culverts. Through its authority to regulate
activites that could affect the flow of water in anadromous streams, DF&G
could require the submission of an overall plan for water use and for the
Management of surface and ground water flow at the mine site.
Fish and Game
Fish and game issues related to Beluga area development include the
protection and enhancement of habitat and identification of critical habitat
areas. The effects of industrial and residential development on the Susitna
Flats and Trading Bay State Game Refuges, and the protection of fisheries
resources in the Chuitna and Beluga river drainage systems are also major
concerns.
The Department of Fish and Game has identified the need for more back-
ground information on fish and game populations and use of the Beluga area
by wildlife. In addition, more information on industry plans and activities
is required in order to assess the potential impacts on habitat. A memo
submitted to the Beluga Task Force by DF&G@ listed the major issues to be
addressed in reviewing any project proposal: the formation of acid mine
5-10
waters, the disposal of mine waters, site restoration, anadromous stream pro-
tection, effect on water table, disturbance of waterfowl population, effect
of dock construction on tideland morphology and fish migration, and the
potential linkage of the Beluga area to a regional road system.
An applicant for DF&G's "Waterway/Waterbody Use Request" must submit
a plan for fish and game protection; a project schedule; an outline of
materials, equipment, and activity proposed in the project; and a description
of the project site. Most of DF&G's concerns about Beluga coal development
could be addressed during the permit process if an overview of the entire
project's effects on fish and game resources and full plans for the protection
of fish and game are included with the permit application. DF&G can probably
require such a broad overview under state statute [AS 16.05.870(c)].
Proposed activity or development within a state game refuge must be
approved by DF&G before a project is initiated. However, activity that will
take place within the boundaries of the Trading Bay State Game Refuge will
most likely be located on land owned by the Cook Inlet Regional Corporation.
Under the statute that establishes the Trading Bay refuge, lands owned by
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. are specifically excluded from refuge protection
[AS 16.20.038(j)].
Surface Revegetation/Reclamation
In response to enactment of the federal Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977, (@) the Department of Natural Resources has been
designated as the state agency that will administer and enforce regulations
governing surface mining and reclamation.
Under provisions of the federal act, state regulations must be at least
as stringent as the federal regulations. The federal government has published
a set of interim surface mining and reclamation regulations that have been
adopted by the state with minor modifications. These interim federal regula-
tions will be replaced by final regulations in early 1979; these final regu-
lations will then be adopted as the state regulatory program.
(a) pL 95-87.
5-11
Surface and subsurface coal mining operations with surface impacts must
comply with provisions of the act. The regulatory provisions include require-
ments for surface contouring, reclamation, revegetation, reestablishment or
replacement of ground water tables and surface and subsurface water flows,
as well as treatment and disposal of acid, toxic, or harmful wastes or
products. In addition to performance standards for reclamation, the regula-
tions also describe standards for industry operations such as preparation of
sites for mining and storage of materials, blasting, and drainage diversions.
Before activity can be initiated at a surface-mining site, plans for
the eventual use and reclamation of the area must be reviewed and approved
by the state regulatory agency. This includes approval of postmining land
uses as well as projection of the highest and best future use of that land.
The scope of the surface-mining regulations apparently includes any area
where activities attendant to the coal-mining operation disturb the natural
land surface. This would cover such activities as road construction and
coal transport, remote storage areas, processing areas, transfer and shipment
sites, and other areas that are used in relation to surface mining, proces-
sing, and shipment activities. The broad scope of the regulations will
enable DNR and other state and local agencies (through permit application
review procedures) to shape the conversion and future use of coal development
areas.
Land-Management Issues
Some land-management issues have already arisen from the complex land
ownership patterns in the Beluga area and differences in the objectives of
the various land owners. (See Figure 3-1, Chapter 3.)
Prior to passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in
1971, the Tyonek Village Council controlled the use of all village lands
within the Tyonek reservation. However, that reservation was abolished by
the act, with ownership of the reservation eventually passing to the corpora-
tions established under the act. The Tyonek Village Council maintains that
it still has the right to control the use and disposal of its former trust
lands and any lands that it owns now or will receive title to from the
5-12
Tyonek Native Corporation. The Council's desire to control the land
surrounding the community reflects its objective of minimizing outside
influences on village life and community services.
‘The Tyonek Village Council's position has been reinforced by the
recent initiation of a HUD housing project in the village. The project
consultant convinced HUD that the Council was the authorized land-management
authority in the area, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough's subdivision review
process was bypassed. The Council believes that borough planning, zoning,
and subdivision authority does not apply to their land.
Established as a profit-making corporation under the Native Claims
Settlement Act, the Tyonek Native Corporation (TNC) holds title to the
surface estate of the land over which the Council claims jurisdiction. TNC
has indicated it will defer to the opinions of the council on local land-
management questions. Hence, regardless of its legal authority, the Council
will have an effective voice in controlling the surface use of surrounding
lands.
Section 14(c)(3) of ANCSA provides that 1280 acres is to be conveyed
to the state by the Tyonek Native Corporation to be held in trust for future
community expansion. Under Alaska Statutes (AS 44.47.150), the state as
trustee cannot transfer the land, or any interest in the land, without a
resolution to that effect from the villate.
TNC's surface ownership of the former reservation lands is complemented
by ownership of the subsurface estate by the Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI).
Therefore, each of these two corporations has some ability to regulate the
other's use of land. Any disposals of land by TNC must be reviewed by CIRI;
conversely, the disposal of subsurface rights by CIRI may be vetoed by TNC
under provision of ANCSA 14(j). CIRI presently favors development in the
Beluga area more than does the TNC or the Council.
Another major land-use issue concerns the public role in managing land
use and development. The ability of state agencies to guide land use in the
Beluga area is limited by the existence of large, privately-owned tracts.
5-13
The state can influence land use through the classification and disposal of
the remaining state land, most of which was acquired under the Mental Health
Enabling Act. Under the provisions of recently adopted state legislation
(H.B. 720 and S.B. 159), land acquired under this act will become general
grant lands, thereby facilitating the state's disposing of that land.
H.B. 720 includes broad policy guidelines concerning the management of state
lands for public use and their disposal for private use that could influence
state land management in the Beluga area. The granting of an unspecified
easement across state lands to the Cook Inlet Region, Inc. under terms of the
State-Native corporation land trade has eliminated a major means of public
intervention in the coal-field development process. On the other hand, the
use and disposal of state tidelands for industrial or public use ‘could be
an important means of guiding the location of port and transshipment
facilities.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough has general authority to regulate land use
in the Beluga area through its mandatory planning, zoning, and platting
responsibilities; but no zoning review or land-use permits other than sub-
division review are required by the borough for development in the Beluga
area. This situation could change once more specific proposals are pre-
sented by industry, especially if borough-owned land is included in, or
affected by, a development proposal.
Creation of a New Settlement
Under state statute, a development city may be established to insure a
cooperative relationship between state agencies and private industry in the (a)
A development city may be created either by act of the legislature or through
creation of a new community and the provision of services and facilities.
an action of the state's Local Boundary Commission, following petition by an
industrial developer to the Department of Community and Regional Affairs.
This petition must be reviewed by the Department of Community and Regional
(a) thic analysis is a based on AS 29.18.220-460. This analysis is
5-14
Affairs to determine if the development project is likely to occur, and if
the industry proposal for community development appears to be in the public
interest.
In the case of the Kenai Peninsula Borough, the creation of a develop-
ment city could proceed in two ways. The Local Boundary Commission might
find that a special service area could be created within the borough for
the purpose of guiding and supporting community development. The Borough
Assembly, in turn, could agree to approach the proposed project as a
development city by creating a special service district at the site. In
this case, the borough would present the Local Boundary Commission with a
contractual agreement outlining the responsibilities of both the developer
and the borough to provide for community services, facilities, and the imple-
mentation of the development project.
Alternatively, the Borough Assembly could decline to establish a special
service district, instead requesting the Local Boundary Commission to create
a development city that would function independently from the borough. In
this case, an appointed city council would proceed with preliminary compre-
hensive planning for the community. Included in the planning process would
be economic and population projections, a capital improvements program, an
environmental assessment, and a land-use plan.
Designation of a community as a development city has a number of bene-
fits in terms of program funding. First, state agencies are specifically
directed to give priority to a development city in allocating program funds.
Second, a development city is granted housing and urban renewal authority
for a period of some 15 years and planning powers during a 5-year development
period. Third, a development city is granted the right to select 10% of the
unappropriated state land within its boundaries. (In the case of the Beluga
area, however, the city would probably not be located near available state
land.) Fourth, the development city is eligible to receive funds under the
state shared-revenue program, based upon a projected population figure.
Finally, the city council is granted broad powers to entér into agreements
and raise and spend funds without voter approval, including issuing revenue
bonds, during the development period.
5-15
When industry proposals for a new community in the Beluga area are
more definite, the applicability of the development city's legislation to
that community should be analyzed in greater depth.
Provision of Community Services and Facilities
The best mechanism for providing public services, as well as the role
of state agencies in public service delivery, will depend largely on the
legal status of the new settlement. This community might be a work camp
or company town, an unincorporated community within the borough, a special
service area, or a development city. As the community grows, it might
incorporate as a home-rule, first-class, or second-class city, as provided
in state statute.
State agencies would be required to provide some services, whether or
not a community is incorporated. State support of local public services
could vary from the actual provision of services to the financial support
of programs administered by a local government. If the community remains
unincorporated, planning and coordination of public service delivery could
be accomplished at the state level, through either a task-force approach
or direct policy direction from the office of the governor.
The community itself would be responsible for planning and coordinating
state agency programs if it were designated as a development city or special
borough service area. In both cases, a property-tax base would be available
to help support public service provision. State agencies are also specifi-
cally directed under state legislation to give priority in the allocation of
program funds to a development city or to a specially identified borough
service area.
Education
The major issue in the provision of education services is the potential
impact on the Tyonek school, in light of that community's desire to maintain
a strong role in the local school program and its opposition to use of the
school by large numbers of students from outside the village.
5-16
Education at Tyonek is provided by the Kenai Peninsula Borough, which
is responsible both for the provision of facilities and the educational
Program. Program decisions are made by the KPB School Board, with input
from local residents. The borough school board would need to determine
whether the Tyonek school will be used by all Beluga-area residents or
whether additional education facilities should be provided outside of the
village. The needs and wishes of area residents would be considered in
light of the availability of program funds and district-wide capital
improvement plans and program commitments.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough receives support from the State Department
of Education in the form of capital construction funds and funds for program
operation, based on school attendance levels. The principal mechanism for
obtaining additional funds is the borough property tax. Tax revenues are
used to repay construction bonds as well as to meet operating expenses.
The village of Tyonek, however, participates directly in the federal
Johnson-0'Malley (JOM) program, which funds supplementary educational
programs for native Americans. JOM program funds are currently used to
retain two local residents as cultural instructors. The Tyonek Village
Council administers the JOM grant, under the guidance of a JOM committee
composed of parents of the students in the program.
The Tyonek Village Council is concerned that an increase in the number
of nonnative students would adversely affect their standing in the JOM
program. JOM program allocations, however, are based on the mwnber of
native students in the program and are not related to the proportion of
native students in the total enrollment.
According to the state attorney general, a development city created in
the Beluga area could not independently receive or expend program or capital
funds for education from the Department of Education.
Public Safety
Fire protection, police protection, emergency medical services, and
justice services in the Beluga area could become the program responsibility
5-17
of either the state or the new community. The industry itself would have
major responsibility for providing fire protection and emergency medical
services initially. Training of residents in emergency medical techniques
could later be requested from the state's Departments of Public Safety and
Health and Social Services. Although industry would probably provide fire
equipment for protection of industry facilities that would also be satis-
factory for community needs, forming a volunteer fire department might be
desirable. This would make the community eligible for technical assistance
from the state fire marshall as well as funds from the state shared-revenue
program. Both of these sources could be used to increase the volunteer
department's capacity to respond to residential fires. Police protection
would be provided by the state troopers if the area remained unincorporated.
If either a special borough service area or incorporated city were
created, the primary responsibility for the provision of public safety
facilities and services would shift to the community. The city would work
directly with the Department of Public Safety, the Criminal Justice Planning
Agency, the fire marshall, and state court system.
Public Utilities
Provision of public utilities to a new community in the Beluga area
would present a number of opportunities for state involvement in the develop-
ment process. These public utilities would include community water and
sewer systems, solid waste disposal, and power.
Under recently adopted regulations, plans for new or expanded community
water systems must meet certain standards and have plans approved by the
Department of Environmental Conservation. DEC also approves plans for
community sewer systems. DEC administers water system and sewer system
construction grant programs that may provide up to 50% of planning and con-
struction project costs not funded by the federal government. Under this
program, DEC also sets the priorities for EPA-funded projects within Alaska.
Construction funding programs available through the federal Economic Develop-
ment Administration (EDA) include two programs for funding economic develop-
ment projects. Under the provision of the "section 304" grant program, EDA
would fund projects requested and prioritized by the governor's office.
5-18
The industrial developer might provide a major portion of the initial
capital facilities for utilities; the state and industry could cooperate in
the funding of facilities; or the public could carry the entire cost of the
utilities. A city or service area would support utility construction and
operation by issuing revenue or general obligation bonds. Industry purchase
of local bonds is also a possibility.
One means of exerting state influence over privately operated utilities
is through the Alaska Public Utilities Commission's requirements for a cer-
tificate of public convenience and necessity. This permit is required of
any organization, other than a municipality, that wishes to operate a public
utility, including electric power, communications, gas, water, sewer, or
refuse utilities. The Alaska Public Utilities Commission has broad authority
to review the nature of the proposed utility system and its ability to serve
public needs adequately.
Housing
For a work camp in the Beluga area, employee housing would probably be
built by Placer Amex, Inc. (the coal-field developer) or Chugach Electric
Association (if it chooses to develop coal-fired generating plants).
The state's Department of Labor administers health and safety standards
for construction-camp housing under Alaska's Industrial Housing Code. The
Department's Safety Compliance Section inspects housing only after construc-
tion to check for compliance with state and federal standards. However, the
Voluntary Compliance Section is available to review housing plans in advance
of construction at the developer's request. The state standards require a
minimum of 400 cubic feet per person. The state regulations do not require
the developer to remove the structures when industrial activity terminates,
although this can be stipulated as a condition of other state or local permit
approvals.
In the case of full-scale community development, housing can be provided
through the private market, with or without a government subsidy, or through
a housing authority. The permanent community described in coal development
5-19
scenario 3 (see Chapters 1 and 3) would probably require a combination of
industry-provided housing for construction workers and privately financed
family residences to accommodate permanent residents.
There are two basic home-ownership alternatives for permanent residential
development:
e conventional, single-family dwellings (individually financed and insured)
located on individual lots in a residential subdivision
e individual family cooperative shares in a residential complex or planned
unit development, using common project financing, utilities, open space,
and insurance services.
The construction of rental units (apartments) is also a possibility.
Financing for permanent housing may be obtained through a variety of
programs. The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) housing finance program
funds construction of both single-family housing and rental housing. The
Programs are designed for low- and moderate-income families; the effective
income ceiling for Alaska is about $25,000 per family. In 1977, the state's
total allocation for FmHA rental-housing-construction assistance was $3 million.
The FmHA area office in Soldotna serves the Kenai Peninsula Borough,
Kodiak, and the Aleutian Chain. Currently, 90% of the office's home-loan
activity is concentrated in the Kenai-Soldotna area. In the 1976-77 fiscal
year, the Soldotna office of the FmHA lent a record $6.2 million for
128 single-family dwellings and $2.1 million for rental-unit projects in
Kenai.
FmHA will fund individual home construction involving on-lot systems
if the property is owned by the prospective resident. However, on-lot
systems are not encouraged. Larger developments would be required by FmHA
to include community or package water and sewer systems or, at a minimum,
sewer systems with evidence of good water available on a lot-by-lot basis.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development offers a range of
programs to assist in the development of new housing. Included in its
5-20
Programs are mortgage and loan insurance assistance to low- and moderate-
income families through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) for single-
family homes, including mobile homes. FHA also insures mortgages made by
private lending institutions to finance the construction of multifamily
rental housing by either private or public developers. The project must
contain at least eight dwelling units. Application for funds under this
Program can be submitted by investors, builders, developers, and any others
who meet the FHA requirements if the housing project is located in an area
approved by the FHA for rental housing and if market conditions indicate a
need for such housing.
Some housing construction may also be possible under the jurisdiction
of the Cook Inlet Housing Authority (CIHA). It is one of 13 regional housing
authorities created by a special act of the state legislature to meet moderate-
and low-income housing needs. Encompassing the Beluga coal district, CIHA
has worked with the Tyonek Native Corporation to finance new housing in the
village.
Community Transportation
Future decisions by industry on the volume of coal to be mined will set
the overall requirements for surface transportation in the Beluga area.
Once that information is available to the state, community public transpor-
tation needs can be assessed. The primary state agencies involved will be
the Departments of Community and Regional Affairs, Natural Resources, and
Transportation and Public Facilities.
In addition to broad responsibility for planning regional road, marine,
and air transportation systems, the State Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT/PF) is responsible for the construction of state
roads and federally assisted road and highway projects. Local transportation
facilities, such as boat harbors, airports, and streets are also eligible
for DOT/PF funding. Programs range from grant assistance for locally con-
structed projects to actual state project construction, including state
airport construction and improvement projects, state boat harbor construction
5-21
and grants to eligible municipalities. Responsibility for maintenance may
be assumed by the state or may be delegated to local government.
DOT/PF grant funds are usually dispersed to a home-rule city, first-
class city, or a borough. A new community in the Beluga area could apply
directly to DOT/PF if it were incorporated or designated as a development
city. Otherwise, DOT/PF would work through the Kenai Peninsula Borough to
set project priorities and funding levels for local projects.
5-22
Chapter 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDED RESEARCH
As an outgrowth of the research reported in this report, the authors have
become aware of a number of pressing topics associated with energy and economic
development in the Beluga area that we believe should receive further study
in the near future. This section briefly describes these proposed research
topics.
All such future research should be addressed in order to:
1. clarify and emphasize the processes of change and adjustment
associated with energy and economic development that are unique
to Alaska;
2. resolve the problem of distinguishing development impacts from
baseline trends that will occur in any case because of the
overall economic and social growth occurring in Alaska;
3. give special attention to the interests and problems of Alaskan
natives;
4. examine the distribution of economic and social costs and benefits
throughout the impact region;
5. suggest clear policy implications of the development and its
impacts for both the Kenai Peninsula Borough and the state of
Alaska.
All research and planning efforts concerning the Beluga area should
be approached from an interdisciplinary perspective, with social scientists,
physical scientists, planners, public officials, engineers, and representa-
tives of native organizations working together as a team. All of this work
should be coordinated by a central body to prevent wasteful duplication and
to facilitate open communication among all involved parties. And this work
should be initiated well in advance of the actual beginning of development
activities, to ensure that adequate preparatory steps are taken before
rather than after impacts begin occurring.
Alaska Energy Worker Profile
Research has been conducted on the characteristics of construction
workers in the Great Plains area, but the people who work on energy develop-
ment projects in Alaska may be different in many respects. We therefore
propose that a study be conducted to determine the characteristics and
actions of workers who both seek and obtain employment on energy projects
in Alaska. Such information would be of great value in forecasting the
planning for the socioeconomic impacts that might result from a future
project such as Beluga coal-field development. This study should gather
the following kinds of information about the workers:
1. age, sex, race, education, marital status, number and ages of
dependents, income, and similar personal characteristics;
2. previous employment, migration history, labor union status, range
of occupational skills, and other occupational background data;
3. current employment status, job activities and responsibilities,
job satisfaction, spouse employment, and other current occupational
data;
4. residential location and housing preferences, satisfaction with
the area and the community, and similar social orientations;
a1 job preferences, anticipated tenure on current job, future job
plans, desire to remain in Alaska, and related future plans.
This research might also explore the role of local labor unions in
finding and recruiting energy workers in Alaska. These union policies
and practices will significantly influence who works on energy development
projects, where they come from, where they will live, how they will differ
from local residents, regional employment levels, and future economic growth
in the region.
6-2
Energy Development Monitoring
Assessments of anticipated future impacts of energy development projects
are forecasts based on judgments and estimates, and hence are subject to
considerable error. If and when these projects are initiated, it is vital
that they be closely monitored to identify and measure their actual impacts
so that appropriate impact management strategies can be implemented as
needed. In addition, such monitoring provides much valuable data for
improving future impact assessments. Consequently, as soon as a decision
is made to move ahead with coal development at Beluga, an impact monitoring
Program should immediately be implemented. This program would collect data
on an ongoing basis on both local and regional socioeconomic impacts of
the project, with particular attention to the native village of Tyonek.
Especially crucial in this endeavor would be identifying the distribution
of costs and benefits associated with the project, to determine what people
were bearing what kinds of costs from the project, and what people were
reaping what kinds of benefits.
Meanwhile, prior to the initiation of any energy development projects,
a considerable amount of preparatory work needs to be done, so that a moni-
toring program can be implemented quickly whenever necessary. This preparatory
research would include collecting and standardizing current baseline data
within uniform geographical boundaries, identifying key impact indicators
and devising measures of them, and selecting appropriate levels and units
of analysis for impact monitoring.
New Community Planning
With extensive development of the Beluga coal field, as depicted in our
scenario 3, a new permanent community would almost certainly be established
in that area. To minimize the problems that could occur in this process,
and to ensure that the new community met the needs of its inhabitants, con-
siderable contingency physical and social planning for the community should
be conducted well in advance of actual coal-field development. This planning
should cover such topics as the following:
6-3
1. selection of a suitable town site;
2. comprehensive land-use planning for this site and the surrounding
area;
3. ground and surface water availability and soil conditions
suitable for waste disposal;
4. desirability of applying the development city statute
(AS 29.18.220-460) to the community;
5. design and financing of community public buildings and recreational
facilities;
6. provision of adequate housing accommodations;
7. development and financing of public services, especially during
the first years of the community's existence;
8. organization of a community government;
9. transportation facilities between the community and Anchorage;
10. economic and political relationships between the community and
Anchorage, the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and the State of Alaska.
Area Development Assessment
Large-scale coal mining in the Beluga area could induce various indus-
tries to locate there to utilize the coal. If this should occur, the entire
Beluga area would experience rapid and intensive economic and social growth,
leading to numerous socioeconomic and other impacts and problems. An ade-
quate impact assessment, performed well in advance of any such growth, could
provide the information necessary to plan for and manage these impacts,
however. We therefore suggest that an impact assessment be performed now
on the potential consequences of extensive industrial development in the
Beluga area. This assessment should cover such topics as:
1. alternative land-use plans for the entire area;
2. necessary and feasible transportation facilities between the
area and Anchorage;
6-4
3. responsibilities of the Kenai Peninsula Borough and the state of
Alaska for coordinating and regulating development in the area;
4. potential accrual of tax revenues to the borough and the state;
5. potential lease royalties to Cook Inlet Region, Inc.;
6. effects of development on the water resources, soil conditions,
wildlife and fish habitats, and other environmental conditions;
7. labor force availability and the need to attract additional
workers from outside the Cook Inlet region;
8. effects of development on the regional economy, including stimu-
lation of secondary economic growth;
9. possible population growth in the region resulting directly or
indirectly from development in the Beluga area;
10. consequences of such development for the native village of Tyonek.
Tyonek Ethnographic Profile
The sociocultural and historical characteristics of the Tyonek natives
differ markedly from those of nonnative people in Alaska, and the Tyoneks
are also culturally distinct from other Alaskan native peoples such as
Eskimos, Aleuts, and southeastern Alaska tribal communities. If conflicts
over development on or near native lands are to be avoided or minimized,
it is vital that those who initiate and manage this development understand
the Tyonek value and belief systems, normative standards, conflict resolution
procedures, and similar cultural traits. Without such understanding among
developers, planners, and public officials, even minor disputes with the
Tyonek people could easily flare into major confrontations.
At the present time, very little is known about the Tyonek culture.
We therefore recommend that a carefully researched ethnographic profile of
the Tyonek people and their culture should be compiled in advance of any
development project in the area. Compiling this profile would require
considerable effort and time, since the Tyoneks are very hesitant to talk
6-5
openly with outsiders. Nevertheless, this profile--in conjunction with
the energy worker profile--could provide a basis for establishing effective
interaction and communication processes with the Tyonek people. The result
would be a more cooperative and beneficial climate for everyone involved,
natives and developers.
Tyonek Impact Prevention
When energy development projects are located near native villages such
as Tyonek, the residents of these villages are very likely to experience
severe social, cultural, and psychological impacts that they cannot handle.
The consequences of these pressures can range from alcohol and drug abuse
or other forms of personal deviance to the disappearance of native cultural
traditions or destruction of the entire village.
Two lines of action are required to prevent these impacts from occurring,
both of which call for extensive research and planning in advance of any
development projects. The first approach focuses on the village as a whole.
It involves devising strategies and procedures that the village can use to
minimize the extent to which the development project impinges on village
life, thereby limiting the nature and intensity of the impacts experienced.
The second approach is aimed at individuals who are seriously affected by
disruptions of native cultural patterns. Common symptoms of such personal
problems are alcohol and drug abuse and mental illness, so that the aim in
this case is to establish programs to prevent such problems from developing
by helping individuals to cope with the stresses they are experiencing.
Tyonek is already experiencing a serious alcohol problem, yet very little
is presently known about how to organize and operate alcohol and drug pre-
vention programs in native villages. The goal of research on both these
approaches to impact prevention would be to provide native villages such as
Tyonek with opportunities for exercising self-determination in preserving
their traditional culture and lifestyle.
6-6
POSSIBLE STEPS TO PREVENT UNACCEPTABLE IMPACTS
General Guidelines
Interpersonal and intergroup conflict between Tyonek residents and coal
field developers can be minimized or prevented. In addition, the preferred
life style of Tyonek residents can be maintained in the presence of a minimum
of influence and impact by the development. If change is to occur in Tyonek,
the decision should emanate from the village residents and not from an outside
development firm.
An effective procedure for minimizing social impacts and social conflicts
would be to establish an active collaborative arrangement between the two
groups. A standing committee of community representatives could be formed
to meet at least monthly to review, discuss, and recommend various courses
of action. Committee members would be responsible for processing information
and preparing relevant materials, distributing materials to their respective
constituents, soliciting and consolidating feedback from community members
at all levels, and promoting a consensus concerning steps to take on matters
requiring action.
Needs and concerns of both communities could be channeled through the
committee. In some cases, the committee might find it necessary to form
subcommittees to address particular community concerns or issues. Equal
representation at all levels would be essential if the communities were to
achieve reasonable policy decisions. The formation of a permanent collabor-
ative working committee would be a simple but reasonable approach to main-
taining open channels of communication between the two communities.
It must be emphasized that the Tyoneks are the native residents of the
region. Their cultural heritage, life style, and desire to retain their
way of life must be respected and acknowledged by outside developers. The
Tyonek residents have a right to exert some controls on the impact that
coal development may have on the village. Whether outsiders intend to reside
in the region permanently is not important; what is important is the fact
that Tyonek residents are the permanent residents.
6-7
Coal developers must be aware of the impact of their presence and of
the long-term effects on the community produced by the entire coal mining
operation. In planning, coal developers should give direct and immediate
attention to several considerations:
1. recognition of the differences in cultural backgrounds of community
residents. If developers anticipate training and hiring Tyonek
residents, steps should be taken to accommodate cultural and life-
style orientations. For example, instead of requiring Tyoneks to
"punch a clock" or work "from 9 to 5," developers could institute
flexible time schedules.
preparation of formalized and rigid controls to regulate the sale
and consumption of alcoholic beverages. Tyonek has an ordinance
that forbids the sale and consumption of alcohol within the village
boundaries. Alcohol consumption and the potential for alcoholism
is a major concern of the IRA Council. Future developers should
be aware of this concern and should take steps to regulate and
control alcohol consumption within their own communities.
recognition of the differences between the Tyonek life style and
that of the typical outsider. To understand, appreciate, and be
in a position to respond positively to Tyonek interests, developers
should make efforts to inform incoming residents and workers of the
differences in life styles. This could be accomplished through a
short series of preentry workshops in which the values, beliefs,
preferences, and life styles of the Tyonek are explained in detail.
Tyonek representatives could be extremely helpful in preparing
instructional materials.
assessment of the impact that coal development in the Beluga region
could have on migratory patterns of indigenous fauna. Some Tyonek
residents are subsistence hunters who rely heavily on seasonal
wildlife migratory patterns. The impact of the entire coal develop-
ment operation on wildlife should be assessed, not only for the
sake of the wildlife itself but for its effect on subsistence
hunting.
assessment by the Kenai Borough in collaboration with Tyonek repre-
sentatives of the impact and added burden of additional students
attending the Tyonek school. Specific efforts should be made to
hire more native teachers, counselors, and administrators to ensure
that the particular cultural and educational needs of Tyonek youth
will be met.
assessment by Kenai Borough and state law enforcement agencies,
in collaboration with Tyonek representatives and developers of law
enforcement issues and policy. Jurisdictional matters should be
clarified and confirmed. Use of Tyonek residents as potential
law enforcement agents should be encouraged.
review and assessment of land use and right-of-way issues. At
present, roads connect Tyonek with the TTC operation and the area
around the coal fields. In addition, several lakes on Tyonek land
could be used for recreational purposes. Use of the roads for
travel through Tyonek, and of the lakes and the land in general
should be discussed with Tyonek representatives. Village boundaries
should be made clear to developers and outsiders and the desires
of the Tyonek residents should be acknowledged and followed.
recognition of the Tyonek residents' long-standing traditional
fishing sites. As indicated previously, many of the Tyonek are
subsistence fishermen. Developers and outsiders should be aware
of the location of fishing sites and their use should be of
primary concern in planning discussions with Tyonek representatives.
monitoring and evaluation of the process of coal development and
its subsequent effects on the Tyonek natives by a third party.
Data could be collected to determine the impacts on quality of
life, life satisfaction, impacts on overall standards of living,
and the success or failure of collaborative efforts.
Implementation Suggestions
These recommendations are offered for discussion purposes. They primarily
Suggest ways to plan for coal-field development so that adverse effects are
minimized.
State Policy Development
An essential first step in the planning effort is formulating an overall
state policy toward Beluga coal-field development and the provision of
related services and facilities. One of the policy questions to be addressed
is whether the state wishes to encourage and subsidize the development of a
permanent, full-scale community in the Beluga area. A related question is
whether the success of the coal development project depends on developing
such a community.
The infrastructure needs and public service costs of alternative community
types (work camp, company town, full-scale community) should be assessed,
along with the possible relationship of a new community to Tyonek and the
Kenai Peninsula Borough. Tyonek wants to minimize impacts on its facilities
and potential disruption of village life. The borough, on the other hand,
has expressed little interest in actively influencing or guiding development
in the area. Together, these two positions indicate that most program
responsibility for providing community infrastructure and support would
rest with the state.
The Beluga Task Force should analyze these issues and develop policy
options for review by the governor's office. The ability of each state
agency to support community development through ongoing programs must be
delineated and a possible plan of action developed. Policy development
should include a detailed investigation of the desirability of applying the
Development Cities legislation to the Beluga project.
The task force should not initiate a detailed analysis of community
development needs until it appears likely that Placer Amex, Inc. will proceed
with coal development. As noted in Chapter 1, this will depend on Chugach
Electric Association's interest in developing coal-fired generating plants,
6-10
or Placer Amex's ability to develop an export market for the coal. In the
interim, the three scenarios and possible areas of intervention presented
in this report can guide the task force in assessing some of the key policy
issues.
The membership of the Beluga Task Force, with one exception, encompasses
the state agencies most closely linked to the policy issues. The Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities, which has responsibility for trans-
portation systems and planning, might also be included because questions of
long-term policy related to transportation are important components of new
community development in the Beluga area. Representatives from the Kenai
Peninsula Borough, the Cook Inlet Region, Inc., and the Tyonek Native Corpo-
ration should be invited to participate in at least some of the task force
meetings and, possibly, as permanent members of the task force.
Land-Use Planning
The Kenai Peninsula Borough should develop land use policies to guide
development on private lands in the Beluga area. These land-use policies
should include criteria or performance standards for siting both industrial
and residential uses. Guidelines for the lease and sale of borough-owned
land should also be developed, especially since portions of borough land
have been identified as possible sites for the proposed community. It is
crucial that policies and standards be adopted by the Borough Assembly before
coal-field development begins.
This planning effort could be coordinated with the borough's port and
harbor study and development of the district coastal management program.
Background information and policy suggestions will be available from the
Cook Inlet Coastal Zone Regional Planning Study and the ongoing South Central
Water Resources Study. Because of the regional and statewide implications
of industrial development in the Beluga area, it would be appropriate for
the state to assist in funding this planning effort.
6-1]
Town Site Planning
If a full-scale community is to be developed in the Beluga area, detailed
physical and social planning must be accomplished for the town site. This
plan should be a cooperative effort involving the coal-field developer, the
Kenai Borough, and state agencies. Placer Amex, Inc. might be willing to
help fund the planning work, possibly in conjunction with Chugach Electric
Association. The Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department might administer
the actual planning study, which could be accomplished in-house or by a
private consultant.
Several considerations should be incorporated into town-site planning
and construction:
e Community development should be staged because expected population
levels may change if coal-field development does not proceed as
predicted.
e Utilities (water, sewer, power) could be provided initially by industry,
with eventual transfer to a public body as the community grows and
revenue sources develop.
e Transportation facilities such as roads, docks, and airports should
be built to serve the combined needs of the mining operation and the
new community.
e Housing units should be clustered, rather than dispersed over a large
area, to save costs on the provision of water, sewer, and other
utilities.
e Industries should be required, through contract stipulations, to remove
temporary work-camp housing, and to convert it to other community uses
following the construction period.
e Potential or typical residents of the new community should be surveyed
about their preferences and expectations for housing, recreational
opportunities, and shopping facilities. This information should be
distributed to local builders.
6-12
e The community site should be located at a sufficient distance from the
village of Tyonek to minimize interchange and possible disruption
to village life.
Employment and Job Training
Coal-field development could benefit the local economy by providing
new jobs for Tyonek and other Kenai Peninsula Borough residents. Industry
hiring practices should be carefully monitored to ensure. that qualified local
workers are hired for both permanent and temporary jobs. Local job training
programs should be established with financial and technical support from the
coal-field developer.
Financing Community Services
The coal-field developer should be required to bear most of the costs
of establishing and operating a work camp since its purpose would be to
facilitate coal-field development. A full-scale community, on the other
hand, would serve many purposes. Its financial support should therefore
come from a combination of local, state, and private sources.
While coal-field development would eventually contribute financially
to service provision through the property tax, capital improvements are
likely to be required before these new tax revenues become available. This
problem with the timing of property tax revenues can be alleviated through
the prepayment of industry taxes. Several states, including Oregon and
Montana, have passed legislation to allow for the prepayment of taxes. In
exchange for the tax prepayment, the industrial developer is usually offered
a reduction in future taxes directly or, indirectly, through a reduced tax
assessment. The reduction should never exceed the total amount of the pre-
payment plus interest.
In another example, Skagit County in Washington State recently executed
a tax prepayment agreement with Puget Sound Power and Light Company as a
condition of a zone change agreement for a proposed nuclear power plant.
The agreement provides for construction impact payments to.the school district
and for law enforcement. The school impact payments are designed to cover
6-13
whatever additional maintenance, operation, and capital costs the school
district incurs as a result of enrollments during project construction. The
developer also agrees to pay the cost of portable classrooms, if they are
required, and any law enforcement staff and equipment costs incurred as a
result of the construction-period population influx. Tax prepayment agree-
ments should be investigated as a possibility for Beluga-area development.
6-14
BIBLIOGRAPHY
DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS
Alaska Consultants, Inc. City of Lost River Pre-Application Proposal. Draft.
U.S. Department of Housing ad Urban Development. Anchorage, AK. October 1972.
Argonne National Laboratories. A Framework for Projecting Employment and Population Changes Accompanying Energy Development. Argonne, IL. 1976.
CH2M HILL, INC. Community Impacts of Alumax Aluminum Reduction Plant Port of Umatilla. Alumax Pacific Corp. April 1975.
CH2M HILL, INC. Offshore Oil Development in Lower Cook Inlet: Implications
for the Kenai Peninsula. July 1978.
Institute for Social and Economic Research. Energy Intensive Industry for
Alaska, Phase IV: Social and Economic Impacts. Draft. June 1978.
Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department. Comprehensive Community Develop-
ment Plan for Tyonek. Soldotna, AK. September 1972.
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. Annual Financial Report FY 1976-77. 1977.
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. Enrollment Projections and School
Construction Report. April 1977.
Klockenteger, G. "Impact Model of Sub-Regional Alaskan Employment: Economic
Analysis." State of Alaska Department of Labor. 1972.
Land Design/Research, Inc. Cost Effective Site Planning. Washington, D.C..
National Association of Home Builders. 1976.
Placer Amex, Inc. Beluga Coal Project Status Report. San Francisco, December 1977.
Spencer, R. F., et al. The Native Americans. New York, Harper and Row. 1965.
State of Alaska, Division of Energy and Power Development, Department of
Commerce and Economic Development. Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning
Project. Draft Report, Phase 2, Vol. 3. July 1978.
State of Alaska, Office of the Governor, Division of Planning & Research.
Review of Preliminary Plan for Development City of Lost River, Alaska.
Juneau, AK. September 1973. :
7-1
Susskind, Lawrence and Michael O'Hare. Managing the Social and Economic Impacts of Energy Development. Summary Report: Phase I, MIT Energy Impacts Project. Cambridge, MA. Laboratory of Architecture and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 1977.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Rapid Growth from Energy Projects: Ideas for State and Local Action, 1976.
U.S. Public Health Service. "Tyonek House to House Survey." May 1978.
Watts, Griffis and McQuat Limited. Community Development Program for the New City of Lost River, Alaska. Lost River Mining Corporation Limited. Toronto, 1972.
CONTACTS
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Chief Chester Davis, Nikiski Fire Service Area, Kenai Peninsula Borough
Jim Hall, Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
Frank McIlhargy, Overall Economic Development Program, Kenai Peninsula Borough
Ron Rice, Engineer, Kenai Peninsula Borough
Ike Waits, Planner, Kenai Peninsula Bcrough
Philip Waring, Planning Director, Kenai Peninsula Borough
State of Alaska
Glenn Akins, Division of Planning, Department of Environmental Conservation
Carol Bennett, Division of Energy and Power Development, Department of Commerce and Economic Development
Lloyd Cavasos, Division of Land & Water Management, Department of Natural Resources
Kyle Cherry, Anchorage District Director, Department of Environmental Conser- vation
John Clark, Habitat Protection, Department of Fish and Game
Romain Clark, Forestry Division, Department of Natural Resources
Matt Connover, Division of Community Planning, Department of Community and Regional Affairs
7-2
Nick Coti, Department of Health and Social Services
Jim Deagan, Division of Economic Enterprise, Department of Commerce and
Economic Development
Larry Eccles, Cook Inlet Housing Authority
George Gee, Division of Lands, Department of Natural Resources
John Halterman, Office of the Governor, Division of Policy Development and
Planning
Tom Hanna, Director, Air Quality Division, Department of Environmental Con-
servation
Bob Jenks, Municipal Land Trustee, Department of Community and Regional Affairs
Keith Kelton, Director, Water Quality Division, Department of Commerce and
Economic Development
Dr. Dona Lehr, Office of the Governor, Division of Policy Development and
Planning
Jeff Louenfels, District Attorney General's Office
Don McGee, Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys, Department of Natural
Resources
Pete Nelson, Division of Lands, Department of Natural Resources
Karen Paulick, Division of Economic Enterprise, Department of Commerce and
Economic Development
Mr. Plessinger, Safety Compliance Section, Department of Labor
Pat Poland, Local Government Assistance Division, Department of Community and
Regional Affairs
Gene Rutledge, Division of Energy and Power Development, Department of
Commerce and Economic Development
Corporal Schaedle, D Detachment, Soldotna Office, Alaska State Troopers
Mark Stephens, Division of Community Planning, Department of Community and
Regional Affairs
Tom Trent, District Habitat Protection Officer, Department of Fish and Game
Jim Weideman, Director, Division of Economic Enterprise, Department of
Commerce and Economic Development j
7-3
Maurice Wilson, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Federal
Jim Martin, Director, Johnson-0'Malley Program, Bureau of Indian Affairs
dames Patterson, Environmental Health Branch, U.S. Department of HEW
Wallace Riehle, Farmers Home Administration, Soldotna Area Office, U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture
Frank Urabeck, Director, South Central Water Resources Planning Study
Jim Wolfe, Permits Section, Corps of Engineers
Other
Agnes Brown, President, Tyonek Native Corporation
Curtis Dowden, Marathon 0i1 Company
Charles Evans, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska
Roy Huhndorf, President, Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
Roger Imhoff, Tyonek Timber Company
Michael Jones, Habitat North
Esther Kaloa, Village of Tyonek
Carl Marrs, Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
Bonnie McCord, Tyonek Village Council
Kirk McGee, Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
Stan Miller, General Manager, ATCO Structures, Inc.
Bill Moran, Chugach Electric Assoc.
Jerry Munson, Chugach Electric Assoc.
Benno Patsch, Project Engineer, Placer Amex, Inc.
Tom Riley, PG&E, San Francisco
L. J. Schultz, General Manager, Chugach Electric Assoc.
7-4
George Spernak, Spernak Airways Company
William Stewart, Simasko Production Co.
Ward Swift, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington
Jay Weedenbach, Kodiak Lumber Company
Pat Wennekens, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska
Weiner Wiesinger, Tyonek Timber Company
Ron Winn, Tyonek Timber Company
7-5
APPENDIX A
TYONEK HOUSE-TO-HOUSE SURVEY*
Total number of dwellings in Tyonek - 57 hourse and 9 trailers
Total number of dwellings surveyed - 52
No. of
Sewage Systems Houses Percent
No sewage problems in past few years 13 25
Leaching problems 20 38
New seepage pit or septic tank within
past 3 years 15 29
Septic tank pumped within last 2 years V1 21
Pipes breaking or seepage pit or septic
tank freezing 7 13
Water System
Like the water 26 50
Dislike water because of: 22 42
Swampy taste or smell ( 8) (15)
Cl, taste or sme11 ( 4) ( 8)
Iron taste or smell ( 8) (15)
Sulfur smell (1) ( 2)
"Bad" smell ( 2) ( 4)
Do not drink the water but use for washing
clothes and bathing purposes 6 12
NOTE: Some houses had multiple sewage and multiple water problems. Above
columns may add up to more than 52 houses or more than 100 percent.
*23 May 1978.
“f ’ 2)
3)
APPENDIX B
COMMUNITY SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Facultative Lagoon. This system could only be used if ample land is
available (requires the most land).
A facultative pond is a way of treatment using bacteria that have the
ability to survive with or without oxygen to break down the organic load.
Aerated Lagoon. An aerated lagoon is a basin in which wastewater contents
are kept in suspension and to which oxygen is supplied, to provide a
primarily aerobic environment for the microorganisms. (Similar to
activated-sludge system, without sludge recycle. )
Mechanical Systems
Biological
Activated sludge. Uses a concentrated mass of microorganisms capable
of aerobically stabilizing a waste in conjunction with diffusion or
mechanical aeration to maintain the aerobic environment.
RBS. A fixed film reactor, in which media are continuously rotated
through wastewater. Biological degradation occurs through both
aerobic and anaerobic processes. A low operating cost system for
small installations.
ABF. A fixed film reactor, in which wastewater is circulated over
solid media (wood, plastic, rock); it is often used in conjunction
with aeration (see activated sludge).
Physical/Chemical
Chemicals are used to enhance physical reactions (i.e., lime, ferric
chloride, alum). This system requires high maintenance.
9-1
« Location
T13N, RIOW
Section 13
24
25
27
34
35
TI2N, RIOW
Section 4a
4b
8
9
T12N, RIIW
Section 8
TIIN, RIIW
Section 1
APPENDIX C
USGS SURFACE FLOW AND WELL RECORDS FOR THE BELUGA AREA
Flow
Well Records (Permit)
50 gpm
50 gpm
75 gpm
40 gpm, 50 gpm, 500 gpm
(144,000 gpd)
27 gpm, 10 gpm (28,400 gpd)
8 gpm
60 gpm (2,000 gpd)
25 gpm (1,000 gpd)
25 gpm
5,000 gpd
12 gpm, 16 gpm, 16 gpm
22 gpm
10-1
Type
(In Permit)
Ground water
Ground water
Surface
Surface
Surface
PNL-RAP-29
UC-11
DISTRIBUTION
No. of No. of Copies Copies
OFFSITE a Helen McCammon W. W. Burr DOE Office of Health and DOE Office of Health and
Environmental Research
Washington, DC 20545
E. S. Burton
DOE Resource Applications
and Evaluation
Washington, DC 20545
C. E. Carter
DOE Office of Environmental
Research
Washington, DC 20545
Environmental Research
Washington, DC 20545
A. J. Goldberg DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
Dr. Joan Hock
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
P. W. House Paul Cho DOE Office of Technology DOE Office of Technology Impacts : Impacts Washington, DC 20545 Washington, DC 20545
A. A. Churm
DOE Chicago Patent Group
9800 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, IL 60439
Mrs. Ruth Clusen
DOE Assistant Secretary for Environment
Washington, DC 20545
J. A. Coleman
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
A. B. Joseph
DOE Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research
Washington, DC 20555
J. L. Liverman
DOE Deputy Assistant Secre-
tary for Environment
Washington, DC 20545
F. G. Lowman
DOE Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research
Washington, DC 20555
J. Maher C. W. Edington DOE Office of Technology DOE Office of Health and Impacts Environmental Research
Washington, DC 20545
Distr-1
Washington, DC 20545
No. of
Copies
S. P. Mathur
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
W. J. McCool
DOE Office of Environmental
Compliance and Overview
Washington, DC 20545
D. M. Monti
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
W. E. Mott
DOE Office of Environmental
Compliance and Overview Washington, DC 20545
M. Reilly
DOE Division of Fossil Energy
Washington, DC 20545
G. J. Rotariu
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
R. D. Shull
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
B. W. Wachholz
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
W. H. Weyzen
DOE Office of Health and
Environmental Research
Washington, DC 20545
Distr-2
No. of
Copies
E. R. Williams
DOE Office of Technology
Impacts
Washington, DC 20545
R. W. Wood
DOE Office of Environmental
Research
Washington, DC 20545
S. Ballou
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439
L. J. Hoover
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, IL 60439
P. M. Meier
Building 475
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, NY 11973
W. E. Siri
University of California
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720
D. Layton : University of California
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory P.0. Box 808
Livermore, CA 94550
R. K. Lohrding
Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory
P.O. Box 1663
University of California
Los Alamos, NM 87545
DOE Technical. Information
Center
No. of
Copies
150
R. M. Davis
Oak Ridge National
Laboratory
P.O. Box X
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
W. Fulkerson
Oak Ridge National
Laboratory
P.O. Box X
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
D. Lyon
Department of Commerce and
Economic Development
MacKay Building
328 Denali Street
Anchorage, AK 99501
ONSITE
DOE Richland Operations Office
P. W. Gottschalk
H. E. Ransom
Pacific Northwest Laboratory
W. J. Bair
C. H. Bloomster
J. B. Brown
D. B. Cearlock
J. W. Currie
D. E. Deonigi
D. L. Hessel (5)
S. Marks
W. H. Swift
M. L. Warner L. D. Williams
G. L. Wilfert
Economics Library (5) Publishing Coordination (2)
No. of
Copies
20 S. Brody
CHoM Hill Company
Suite 602
310 "K" Street
Anchorage, AK 99501
Technical Information Files (5)
Human Affairs Research Center
J. A. Hebert
S. M. Nealey
M. E. Olsen (15)
Distr-3
PROPERTY OF; Alaska Power Authorj 334 W. 5th Ave. Anchorage, Alaska 99504