The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA182,k 1L/2~ ,5/5 r--~8:;J3 .-----iYfP,I 'if;;) SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEASIBILITY REPORT , ,'._.i VOLUME 7 APPENDIX 0 COORDINATION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FINAL DRAFT <D <n ~ <D LO i. M M ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &lnformatJon rvtces Anchorage.Alaska ,'---T__ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY __-J - ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ApPENDIX D PUBLIC PARTICIPATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 -PUBLIC CONCERNS 2.1 Concerns Expressed at the April 1980 CommUnity 12 meetings 2.2 Concerns Expressed at the March 1981 Workshops 13 2.3 Public Concerns as Expressed through the Action 16 System - F" i .... 1 -THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Community Needs 1.3 Workshops 1.4 The Action System 1.5 Newsletters 1.6 Mailing Lists 3 ~MAJOR CHANGES THAT RESULTED FROM PUBLIC CONCERN 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Changes to the Plan of Study 3.3 Changes in Access Planning 3.4 Changes in Recreatioh Planning EXHIBIT 1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE ACCESS REPORT EXHIBIT 2 LETTERS FROM ACTION SYSTEM EXHIBIT 3 RECREATION PLANNING INFORMATION 1 2 3 6 7 9 17 18 20 22 1 -THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM 1.1 Introduction From the start of Susitna Hydroelectric Project a goal has been to incorporate the interests,concerns,and the opinions of the public in the decision making process.To ensure pUblic participation in the project,a major effort has been made to inform and involve the pUblic, and to see to it that such involvement does in fact influence the course of the work. The Susitna Hydroelectric Study Public Participation Program is conducted by the Alaska Power Authority.The Director of Public Participation (DPP)is a key member of the Power Authority staff.The opp is responsible to the Executive.Directorfor designing and implementing all aspects of the Public Participation Program.From time to time,the Acres American Project Team is called upon to make presentations and to assist in responding to questions and concerns,but responsibility for the program rests with the Power Authority. Traditionally,public information programs have focused on the pUblicts right to know what is happening when an important action may effect the future.The Power Authority program has attempted togo beyond this traditional approach.Because it seeks to establish interaction with the public and provide a two ..way communicatioh process,the progratnis emphasis has been placed on "par ticipation"rather than simply "information."Major objectives include:, To distribute information to the public concerning the issues, problems,alternative choices,opportunities,and impacts regarding the plans and decisions to be made on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. To solicit information from the pUblic about values, attitudes,and opinions bearing upon the plans and decisions to be made. To ensure that information provided by the public is fully and carefully considered along with technical,economic,and environmental data collected and analyzed in the planning and decision-making process. To achieve these objectives,the program provides regularly scheduled meetings and workshops as well as continuing effort to inform the public about the Susitna Project through a series of newsletters.An "Action"system was also established to give a timely response to comments and questions received through the mail. ARLIS 1 Alaska Resources Library &lnformation Services Anchor:,gt>,Alaska 1.2 Community Meetings Four community meetings were held in April,1980,to provide the public an opportunity to comment on the adequacy of the Plan of Study for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project and to contribute opinions and concerns for consideration by the Alaska Power Authority.The meeting was publicized in several ways.Personal letters were sent to the presidents and contact person of groups and organizations in various Railbelt communities,including commercial fishing groups,sportmen's groups,general public interest groups,energy-related groups,business groups,and mining groups.Large display ads were placed in community newspapers one week before the meetings.Paid radio ads and public service announcements were aired on local stations.Press releases were issued informing the public that Plans of Study were available for review in libraries and giving the dates of the community meetings.The Fairbanks Daily News Miner wrote a five-part series on the Susitna project that was published a week prior to the meeting and served to inform people of the issues and the meetings. The Plan of Study was described in three formal presentations.First, Acres American presented a slide show outlining the Plan of Study. Second,the Alaska Power Authority presented information on how alternatives would be reviewed and evaluated.Finally,the Public Participation Program and Action System were described.Cards were provided for people to ask questions.In addition table top discussions were held in Fairbanks,Talkeetna,Wasilla,and Anchorage.These discussions gave each participant a chance to voice her or his opinion in small groups.All comments were recorded and the results reported by a participant chosen by the group. Attendance at the first meetings,by community,was as follows: - Fairbanks Talkeetna Wasi 11 a Anchorage 70 31 42 109 -., In total,there were 182 comments received on the adequacy of the Plan of Study.These are recorded in a summary report entitled "A Report on the first series of community meetings on the feasibility studies for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project and other power alternatives."This same report also lists (by task)the 165 questions asked at all four meetings.A copy of the report is included at the end of this Appendix. The report was distributed to the 252 people who attended meetings, public libraries within the Railbelt area,commercial fishing groups, public interest groups,recreation groups,business groups,media, •.0\.,.• 2 - - -I sportmen's groups,environmental groups,energy groups,mlnlng groups, State and Federal agencies,Acres and all Acres 'subcontractors,the Office of the Governor,Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories (who was later selected to conduct the energy alternatives study),and individuals upon request.In addition to the report,a permanent record of all proceedings is available through verbatim transcripts. In mid-March 1982,community meetings will be held to present information on the findings of the feasibility study.In April 1982,a third and final series of meetings will be held to allow public testimony concerni ng the feas i bil ity study.The I\~a rch and Apri 1 1982 meetings are planned for Talkeetna,Fairbanks,and Anchorage. 1.3 Workshops Workshops were held during the course of the study to permit members of the Acres'study team and the Power Authority staff to discuss and evaluate specific issues with members of State and Federal resource agencies,special interest groups,and the general public. (a)Workshop #1:June 11,1980 The first workshop was held in Anchorage.It dealt with load forecasting,electrical energy forecasting,and conservation. Members of the Alaska Power Authority,Woodward Clyde Inc.,and the Institute for Social and Economic Research participated in the workshop.Twenty-five people attended.Although more information on conservation,electrical energy forecasting,and l=nd-use data was desired,people attending the workshop reported that it met most of their needs and the presentations were clear and understandable. (b)Workshop #2:July 17,1980 The second workshop was also held in Anchorage and gave an overview of the FERC licensing process and identified specific licensing needs of the Susitna project.Only two people attended and the meeting was not considered to have furnished the two attendees with clear information on the FERC process. (c)Workshop #3:March 16,17,&19,1981 The third workshop was actually a series of workshops held in Anchorage,Talkeetna,and Fairbanks.The meetings focused on the subjects of access and recreation planning.The purpose of the workshops was to present information on several access and recreation plans and to hear comments that could be used in 3 formulating plans for inclusion in the feasibility study.Members of the Power Authority,Acres American,Terrestral Environmental Specialists,Inc.,Frank Orth and Associates,the University of Alaska,and R &M Consultants participated in the meetings. Included in the presentations was preliminary information on environmental and social impacts of the various access routes.The attendance at each workshop was as follows: Fairbanks -36 Talkeetna -38 Anchorage -40 More than 300 comments were heard and recorded.In addition,49 questionnaires that were passed out at the workshop were returned. The information from the comments and questionnaires was used in a report prepared by the Public Participation Office concerning public preferences on access and in a recreational plan prepared by the University of Alaska.The access report was used by Acres in determining what access plan would be recommended in the feasibility report.A copy is included in this Appendix as Exhibit 1. Prior to the workshops,questionnaires were sent to Game Guides registered in the Upper Susitna Basin,to the Trappers Associations in Fairbanks and Anchorage,and to members of the Alaska Miners Association.Questions concerning access and recreation were asked,and the results of these questionnaires are included in Exhi bit 1. (d)Workshop #4:October 21 &22,1981 Two follow-up workshops on the access routes were held in Talkeetna/Trapper Creek and Cantwell.The purpose of these meetings was:1)to check back and confirm what the Public Participation Office had interpreted as community preference in the March meetings;2)to confirm what Stephen Braund and Associates had discovered as part of their socio-cultural study;and 3)to provide the most recent information concerning access planning, environmental impacts,and socio-economic impacts.Papers prepared by Stephen Braund and Associates and the Public Participation Office (see Exhibit 1)concerning local community preference were mailed to residents prior to the meetings.Approximately 50 people attended the Talkeetna/Trapper Creek meeting and 25 attended the Cantwell meeting.The local community preferneces as recorded by Stephen Braund and Associates and the Public Participation Office were confirmed at these meetings. 4 "",!,, !i.! -:1 - e)Workshop #5:October 1981 Originally a series of four workshops focusing on environmental issues were planned for October 1981.The major topics to be covered were fish and wildlife,as well as downstream changes expected to occur in the Susitna River.Workshops were planned for Anchorage,Talkeetna,Fairbanks,and the Kenai Peninsula. After much planning and discussion,the workshops were cancelled in September 1981.The primary reason was the lack of fishery information.The Alaska Department of Fish and Game was completing their first full year of field work and had not had time to develop their data.Because the impact of the project on the Susitna River and Cook Inlet fisheries was expected to be the most controversial topic,the decision was made to cancel the workshops. In place of the environmental workshops,the Public Participation Office (PPO)did several things.First,the PPO gave members of the conservation community the opportunity to speak directly with members of the fish and wildlife mitigation core groups.On two occasions,several members of active conservation organizations were invited to discuss issues related to fish and wildlife.The first was October,1981 with Dr.Richard Taber and Dr.Frank Banfield,members of the Wildlife Mitigation Core Group.The second meeting was held October 22,1981 with Dr.Clint Atkinson, Milo Bell,Bob Williams,and Kevin Young,members of the Fish Mitigation Task Force.Both occasions provided opportunities to answer questions and discuss the most re~ent information available from environmental studies. Second,when fisheries information was available,a sixth workshop was held in Soldotna. Third,as further compensation for the cancelled workshops,the entire third newsletter was devoted to fish and wildlife issues. f)Workshop #6:lJanuary 21,1982 Workshop #6 was held in Soldotna on the Kenai Peninsula on January 21,1982.This workshop dealt with the potential impact of the project on the salmon fishery in Cook Inlet.Members of the Power Authority staff and the Fish Mitigation Task Force participated,as well as representatives of the Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association. More than sixty people attended the meeting. 5 In addition,a media briefing was held in Anchorage at the Power Authority office before the Soldotna meeting.Thirteen members of the print media,radio,and television attended.The same information presented at the Soldotna meeting was presented to the members of the media. 1.4 The Action System A unique aspect of the Public PartiGipation Program involved a specially designed "action system."Recognizing the importance of getting questions answered in encouraging public dialogue,the action system provides a vehicle by which every comment or question was given careful consideration and a personal response was given.To minimize the burden of letter writing,forms were distr"ibuted for use by the public, although the forms are not a prerequisite for processing written comments. Forty-six letters were received through the Action system in 1980.Each letter averaged three issues,so that 156 questions and comments received responses. Of the 46 letters,19 contained questions or comments about the alternatives study,and copies were forwarded directly to Fran Ulmer in the Office of the Governor for a response.This rendered the alternatives study the top-priority item in 1980. The second priority included questions and comments on the environmental studies (including life style,industrialization,and local hire issues),and the third priority included questions and comments on the public participation program.The most questions and comments (about half of the total 156)came from the Talkeetna/Trapper Creek area. Thirty-two letters were received through to action system in 1981.A total of 52 questions and comments were received,and responses were provided for each. No one issue stood out in the 1981 action correspondence.Questions and comments relating to environmental issues,access,and recreation were most common.In addition,six letters requested documents on reports concerning the study.The questions and comments were fairly evenly distributed among the Anchorage,Fairbanks,and Talkeetna areas. As the result of the State of Alaska making the Indian River remote area available in 1981 in the state lottery,people who had staked property at Indian River in the summer of 1981 were contacted.The Indian River remote people were informed of various alternative access routes being considered for the proposed Susitna project and asked their preference. 6 -. i Of 37 letters sent,14 people responded.These letters have been entered into the Action System. Copies of all letters sent to the Action System and the responses provided are included as Exhibit 2. 1.5 Newsletters Three news 1etters entitl ed "The Sus itna Hydro Studi es II have been produced in 1980-82.Two more newsletters are being planned:one in March 1982 and the final in April 1982.The purpose of the newsletter is to present objective information on the progress of the Susitna Feasibility study so that public can draw their own conclusions based on accurate information.Each newsletter was eight pages long and printed on a 11 x 17 inch format.Copies of the first three newsletters are included at the end of this Appendix. In addition,a supplementary publication was produced that featured interviews with members of the Exterral Review Panel for the Susitna Project.The interviews were conducted in February 1981 by the Publ ic Participation Office.One of the interviews (Dr.H.Bolton Seed)was published in the September 1981 newsletter.Because all the interviews were felt to be informative and the Power Authority desired to make the public aware of the function of the Review Panel,the interviews with all six members of the panel were published in Novemher 1981.Due to limited number of copies (1000 copies),the large number of requests for it after distribution,and the cost of reprinting,the publication is not included in this appendix. a)Newsletter #1:November 1980 The first newsletter was produced in November 1980.Contents included articles on the following subjects: -Energy decision facing Railbelt -Social and economic impacts -Susitna vicinity map and background information -Energy needs expected to double -Tunnel option -Earthquake studies -Wildlife and small mammal studies -Hydrology studies -Susitna fish studies -Potential recreation sites -Bird studies -How to be involved -Public comment changes study plan 7 b)Newsletter #2:September 1981 Contents of the second newsletter contained articles on the following topics: Earthquakes and seismic issues including interviews with a member of the firm conducting the seismic studies,and a member of the External Review Panel -Earth and rockfill dams -Senate Bill 25 - A comparison of Susitna to other existing dams -Staging construction to meet power demand -Background on the External Review Panel -The recommendation of a dam at Devil Canyon over a tunnel c)Newsletter #3:January 1982 Because environmental workshops had been cancelled,the entire newsletter focused on fish and wildlife issues.The following topics were covered: -The fisheries field studies conducted during the summer of 1981 -Questions and answers concerning impacts on fish with two members of the Fish Mitigation Task Force -An interview with Dr.Frank Banfield concerning caribou -Impacts and suggested mitigation for several species of wildlife d)Newsletter #4:March 1982 A fourth newsletter will appear in March 1982.It will include articles on: -The Railbelt Electric Energy Alternatives draft report -The Tidal Power Study -Access to the project -Floods and spillways -Changes in downstream morphology e)Newsletter #5:April 1982 The final newsletter will feature summaries of both the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Report and the Railbelt Electric Energy Alternatives Report.This newsletter will appear in late March. f)Number of newsletters printed 8 - - All newsletters were distributed to approximately 30,000 people, mostly through direct mail.The mailing list information is discussed in the following section. 1.6 Mailing Lists The Public Participation Office compiled and used three mailing lists. The first was a list of 46 groups and organizations (about 225 individuals)interested in following the progress of the Susitna studies.The list was originally obtained by telephone interviews with known groups and organizations,and is continually being expanded as new groups are identified. The list of organizations is generally considered to be representative of pro,con,and neutral groups.It is divided into categories: commercial fishing groups,sportsmen's groups (mostly fishing,some game),general public interest groups,conservation groups,recreation groups,energy groups,business groups,and mining groups. The following information was recorded for each organization after interviewing up to five people within the organization: anticipated level of interest in studies names,addresses,and phone numbers of contact people (staff, key officers,newsletter editor and others identified as particularly interested in the studies) type of mernbershi p,number and di stri buti on (community, state-wide,national) information about organizations's newsletter,including circulation,when published and deadlines for submitting articles any other information that would be helpful to the Public Participation Office in working with the organization. Contact with these groups has been person-to-person,by telephone,and by mail.Mailings are generally notices of meetings or information about the study.Information is sent when it becomes available or when growing concern or considerable interest develops in a particular aspect of the study. The following list of groups and organization was developed by the Public Participation Office in February and March,1980.Besides each group is shown the level of interest that each group initially expressed 9 in following the progress of the Susitna studies.The Public Participation Office uses this to determine the content and frequency of communications with the groups. Sportmen's Groups (Mostly fishing interests,some game) 1.Alaska Sports Fishing Association 2.Eagle River Sportsmen's Game Preservation Society 3.Izaac Walton League of America 4.Tanana Valley Sportsmen Association 5.Real Alaska Coalition 6.Alaska Sportsmen's Council Commercial Fishing Groups 1.Cook Inlet Aquacultural Association 2.Commercial Fisherman of Cook's Inlet 3.Cook Inlet Fisherman's Fund 4.North Pacific Fisherman's Association 5.Kenai Peninsula Fishermen's Cooperative 6.Cook Inlet Fishermen's Association 7.West Side Set Netters General Public Interest Groups 1.State League of Women Voters 2.League of Women Voters -Anchorage 3.League of Women Voters -Fairbanks 4.Federati on of Community Counci 1s -Anchorage 5.AkPIRG 6.Talkeetna Community Education Program 7.Wasilla Community Education Program Conservation Groups 1.Alaska Chapter -Sierra Club 2.Sierra Club -Anchorage/Alaska Office 3.Sierra Club -Knik Chapter (Anchorage) 4.Sierra Club -Denali Chapter (Fairbanks) 5.Alaska Conservation Society -Statewide/ Fairbanks 6.Alaska Conservation Society -Anchorage Group 7.Kenai Peninsula Conservation Society 8.Alaska Center for the Environment 9.Fairbanks Environmental Center 10.National Audubon Society -Alaska Regional 10 -High -Moderately High -High -Uncertain -r10derate -High -High -High -High High -No response yet -High -No response yet -r10derate -Moderate -Low -Low -Moderately High -High -Moderate -High -High -High -Moderate -Low -High -High -Low - Office 11.Arctic Audubon Society -Fairbanks 12.Anchorage Audubon Society 13.Friends of the Earth 14.Greenpeace 15.Denali Citizen's Council 16.Trustees for Alaska 17.National Wildlife Federation Recreation Groups -None -Low -~1oderate -Low -High -Moderate to high -High 1. 2. Mountaineering Club of Alaska Knik Kanoers and Kayakers -~1oderate -High Energy Groups 1. 2. Alaskans for Alternative Energy Alaska Rural Electric Coop Association -High -High Business Groups 1. 2. 3. 4. Susitna Power Now Resource Development Council/Pacific Legal Foundation Commonwealth North Devil Canyon Corporation -High -Moderately High -Moderate -High ~~i ning Groups 1.Alaska Miners Association -I~oderate -I The second mailing list compiled and used by the Public Participation Program is computerized.The final list had about 7600 names.Names were continually added to the list throughout the study.This list was used primarily to mail newsletters. The following method of compiling the computer mailing list was used: 1.70,000 inserts were placed with the Anchorge Municipality's utility bill in February,1980.About ten percent were returned,with 6500 individulas asking to be placed on the mailing list in Anchorage. ,...., I - 2.Coupons were available in the Matanuska Electric Association's publication Ruralite in July,1980 to solicit responses from the MEA area.Coupons were also available in Golden Valley Electric Association's issue of Ruralite for the Fairbanks area. 11 3.Coupons for interested persons to send to the Public Participation Office were included in the November,1980 and September,1981 and January,1982 newsletters which had a distribution of about 30,000 in the Fairbanks,Anchorage,Talkeetna,Valdez,Glennallen,and Kenai Peninsula locations.The first two newsletters were sent to all persons on the voter registration listing in Fairbanks and Kenai.Half of those on the list received the first newsletter; the other half the second.All those who returned the coupon in the newsletter were placed on the permanent newsletter mailing 1 i st. 4.Names were continually added to the list in the following ways: All persons submitting ite~s to the Action System were added. Organizations and individuals identified as needing information were added. Persons who attend workshops and community meetings were automatically added. Newspaper ads with return coupons were placed in Railbelt newspapers immediately after the release of the second and third newsletters.Names from the returning coupons were added. The third type of mailing list does not include the names of individuals.It is rather a listing of 1500 boxholders and star route boxholders in the communities listed below. -, \ Talkeetna Wi 11 ow Usibe11 i 2 -PUBLIC CONCERNS Cantwell McKinley Park Trapper Creek Healy Community meetings,workshops,informal meetings,surveys,and the action system have produced a comprehensive profile of frequently mentioned concerns and comments.The following section summaries these comments and concerns.Exhibit 2 contains copies of the Action correspondence;Exhibit 1 contains a tabulation of responses from workshops and surveys conducted during the feasibility study.Actual changes to the planning process will be discussed in Section 3.0. 2.1 Concerns Expressed ~the April 1980 Community Meetings 12 Figure 1,reproduced from the report of the April 1980 community meetings,notes concerns,questions,and discussion areas.Of particular note is the heavy emphasis on the determination of future energy needs (forecasts)and of how such needs might be satisfied in the future (alternatives). 2.2 Concerns Expressed at the March 1981 Workshops There were four categories of questions and comments from the March 1981 workshops:a)access;b)recreation;c)community impacts;and d) environmental.More than 300 comments were heard and recorded and 49 questionnaires passed out at the meeting were returned. - (a)Access Comments Workshop participants were given information on four alternative access plans that used various combinations of road and rail access connecting with existing transportation routes (see page 19 of Exhibit 1).The following table shows the response of the workshop participants to the questionnaire on access. Route Fairbanks Talkeetna Anchorage Mail*Total r,Route A 1 3 0 1 5 Route B 13 12 1 5 30-Route C 3 2 0 3 8 Route D 0 0 3 2 5 No Preference 1 1 0 0 2 Route A -Road from Parks Highway to Devil Canyon and Watana sites Route B -Railroad to Devil Canyon and Watana sites Route C -Road from Denali Highway to Watana and Devil Canyon sites; rail spur to Gold Creek Route D -Roads from both Denali and Parks Highway;service road between dams *Mail responses were mostly from the Anchorage area and reflect the thinking of that area. The table shows that most of the people attending the workshops in Fairbanks and Talkeetna favor all rail access during and after construction.Additionally,almost half the people in Anchorage favored the rail only alternative.About half the people in Anchorage and one-third of the people in Fairbanks and Talkeetna favored some type of road access because they could gain access to an area that they feel is currently inaccessible.The Anchorage people tended to favor a route 13 going south from the Denali Highway,but in Fairbanks and Talkeetna several people spoke out against it because of the potential adverse effects on caribou calving grounds near that route. In addition,some people at each workshop indicated they favored no or very limited access to the project.Pages 20 to 31 of Exhibit 1 are summary of the responses from the March 1981 workshops concerning access. (b)Recreation Comments The workshop participants were presented with five recreation plans ranging from no development with limited access to maximum development with full access.The various plans addressed development on or near the Watana and Devil Canyon reservoirs and not along any of the proposed access routes .•Exhibit 3 contains information passed out at the workshops as well as results of the questionnaire. Many people at the Talkeetna workshop and some at the Anchorage workshop expressed concern that even with good planning,it would be impossible to control recreation development in the project area.Most of the Fairbanks participants and one-third of the Talkeetna participants favored no recreation and limited access. They were concerned that access to the area would spoil its present value as a wilderness area.About one-third of all workshop participants favored some recreation development,ranging from primitive campsites to improved campsites with facilities for trailers and campers.Only a few participants favored high development with restaurants and lodging at one or both reservoirs. (c)Community Impacts Community impacts of the proposed Susitna project would be most evident in Talkeetna,Trapper Creek,the railroad communities north of Talkeetna,and Cantwell.The people at the Talkeetna workshop were concerned about impacts to their community during construction. Concern was expressed that small,unincorporated communities,such as Talkeetna,do not have resources to handle major changes.They expressed concern that increases in population would put a strain on police and fire protection,water services,and septic systems. Questions were raised about who would pay for these additional services should they be needed. 14 - 8 MAJOR CONCERNS The foUowina areas received the mOSI commenlS durin. the Iable lOp discuuionl: 15 commenusayin.Plan of Slud)'adcquale. 29 commcnlsaayinJlallernativcs Ilud)'nOI adequale and wh)'. 2S IUllellions (or enerl)'sourccslhatshould be COlllldered in allernalivessludy. I'IUUesllons for serious consideralion of decentralized a1lemallycs. I'commenu describinl whallhelClCiocconomic sludies should address. II commenls IUlleSlina aleyei or e(fon on dudies on Ibh.wildlife and planta. a CllmJIIClIU dcscribin.COIICCnII aboullransmluion .lIdies• •IUDallons for 'Clllnlinformallon fO Ihe public. TABLE TOP DISCUSSION SUMMARY FIGURE 1 THE 8 MOST ASKED QUESTIONS Wrinen queslions were uked mOSI oflin In Ihe rollowin, areas (Iisled in rank order): 27 queslions expressin.concern for compleleneu or alllrnalivcssludy U questions on adequac)'or enerJl),rorccull t I queslions on ObjecliV;I)'or lhose conduCllnllhe allernalivcs slud)' 10 questions on Ihe decision makina procen and Ihe Iimlnl or decisions 10 qUlnions on conllructlon coslland schedules ,queslions on markclinl and financinl or Susilna 7 questions on access roads to damsiles 7 questions on local hire In feaslbllily sludles QUESTION AND ANSWER SUMMARY This chan shows how man)'quesllons were uked aboul each TASK in Ihe Plan of Slud)'. - 'I1IlI chart summarizcs IhelOlal number o(lable lOp CIIllIIIICIlU receiyed on Ihe adequac)'or the Plan of Study. 'of "of _menu 100al Plan o(Saud)'29 16'1'. Tuk I:Power Saudies 84 '46'1'. TUk 2:SUfYe)'S and Slle Facilities aone ~ Tuk ]:HydrololY 7 .OV. Tuk 4:Seismlc •2OV. TUk 5:Ocolcchnlcal aone ~ Tuk 6:Desiln Development 2 ~.. Tuk 7:itnYironmenll1 ]0 .,.. Tuk.:Tranlmlsslon ,.OV. Tuk 9:ConllruC1ion Cosu &lid Schedules none ~ Tuk 10:Lleensinl none ~ Tuk t t:Markelinl and Flnaneln.•2" Tuk 12:P'ublic Parlicipalion 14 ''1. TOTALS 182 100'1. Plan of Sludy Tuk I:Power Sludies Tuk 2:Surve)'s and Site Facllilles Tuk 3:Hydrolol)' Tuk 4:Seismic Tuk 5:Ocolechnlcal Tuk 6:Desiln Development Tuk 7:EnYirunmenlal Tuk .:Transmiulon Tuk 9:ConslruC1ion Cons and Schedules Tuk 10:Licenllnll Tuk t t:Markelina and Flnancln, Tuk 12:Public Participation Miscellaneous TOTALS 'or quesllons uked 5 ?9 9 2 7 2 7 t 5 13 1 I, 12 I" "of tow queslions 3'1'1...". 'OV. IOV.... I" .OV.,.. 3..... leu than t'l'l 5.. .'1'1 "'.100.,. SUMMARY RESULTS OF APRIL COMMUNITY MEETINGS - -(d) People were also concerned that a great many trailers and campers would be parked in the area.Questions were asked about who would control this and provide and maintain facilities for trailers. Some ideas were discussed for dealing with or avoiding possible change.There was considerable discussion on whether Talkeetna should develop a plan for controlling change or whether the community should develop a plan to resist change.As a way to avoid impacts,the suggestion was made that worker1s families be housed at the construction site. Anchorage and Fairbanks participants were concerned about construction employment and population increases.Questions were asked about construction schedules,where workers would come from, and how additional jobs would effect unemployment.Other questions were asked about the effect of population increases on the larger urban areas as well as the smaller Railbelt corrmunities.Concerns were expressed about Susitna basin hunting and fishing resources being adversely impacted by increased numbers of people in the area.Both Anchorage and Fairbanks participants expressed concern that socioeconomic studies would not adequately analyze possible impacts on subsistence hunting and fishing. Environmental Comments Comments and concerns were also expressed at the workshops about how access would not only effect the environment,but also how the entire project would effect the environment.Many of the people who attended the Fairbanks and Anchorage workshops were concerned that increased access to the project would adversely effect the environment.Some people felt that construction activities,the presence of construction workers,and easy access by the public would have adverse impacts on wildlife.Much of the concern was for added hunting and fishing pressure in areas that many felt had too much activity already. In Talkeetna most people were concerned about how the dams might change the Susitna River.People asked questions about whether there would be more or less flooding,whether the river would continue to freeze over in the winter,and whether boating access would be possible.Some people expressed concern about possible silt build-up behind the dams causing damage and possible flooding. People at all three workshops felt that there would not be enough data available to make a good decision on the project's feasibil ity.Numerous questions were asked about resident and anadromous fish. 15 2.3 Public Concerns ~Expressed Through the Action System (a)Summary of Letters Received Through the Action System The Action System was introduced to the public during the week of the community meetings in April,1980.Initially the system was designed to accommodate suggestions by the public for changes and additions to the Plan of Study.All items submitted to the System are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American, Inc.,and receive a written response.Most of the items submitted, however,have been questions or expressions of opinions. Consequently,the Action system also became a method for monitoring,recording,and responding to questions and concerns raised by the public outside the format of the workshops and community meetings. The three primary areas of concern expressed through letters received in 1980 were,in order: l. 2. 3. the alternatives study; environmental studies;and public participation. The primary concerns in Talkeetna were environmental (including lifestyle questions,local hire,and concern that inexpensive energy would result in industrialization).Fairbanks had a high number of questions and comments on environmental issues and public participation. In all other communities (Anchorage,Fairbanks,and the Matanuska Valley),the top concern expressed in 1980 was for the alternatives study. The Action system letters received in 1981 were more varied in content. The major areas of concern expressed in the letters were: 1)environmental studies; 2)access planning; 3)recreation planning; 4)public participation;and 5)requests for documents and general information about the project. No one area had a significantly greater number of letters than any other area.The concerns of the Talkeetna area residents focused on access and recreational planning.Other communities'questions and comments were more general in nature,although there were several letters from the Fairbanks area on environmental issues. (b)Responses to Letters 16 -1 - - (c) (d) Letters received through the Action System in 1980 and 1981 averaged two questions and/or comments.More"than one resource person was usually required for an adequate answer.Three staff members from Acres American,Inc.were involved in writing responses and seven members of the Power Authority.An attempt was made to make the letters friendly and not bureaucratic. An attempt was also made to educate the public.For instance,in the response to the 19 letters on the alternatives studies,enough information was included so that the person knew what changes had been made,why,how the two separate studies would relate,and where to go for follow-up. Questions on Alternatives Study When the alternatives study was turned over to the Office of the Governor in July,1980,questions about the study were forwarded to that office.In an attempt to avoid the perception by those using the Action system that the buck was being passed from one state office to another,specific names of those conducting the Alternative Study in the Governor's office were included in the response letter.In addition information was provided explaining why the Aternative Study was no longer being conducted by the Power Authority or Acres American.In total,19 letters were sent to Fran Ulmer in the Office of the Governor. Response Time Initially,the average response time for letters received through the Action System was five months due to problems in setting up the system.By the end of 1980,however,the system was operating smoothly and many letters that were received in December,1980, were also answered in December,1980.Most files were closed in less than six weeks,and many much sooner.Questions of a more technical nature took longer if the answer required from Acres American dealt with a phase of the study that was currently in the process of completion or information was being refined. - 3 -MAlJOR CHANGES THAT RESULTED FROM PUBL IC CONCERN 3.1 Introduction The Public Participation Program was designed to provide a means for the general public to express concerns and ask questions about the feasibil ity studies.Several components of the overall studies were changed due in part to input from the public.The major influence the public has had on changes in the studies resulted from the April 1980 17 meetings that were held to receive public comment on the adequacy of Acres American's Plan of Study.The Plan of Study was conceived as a dynamic document and it was anticipated from the beginning of the studies that changes could and would be made in response to public input. During 1981 the public's preferences and comments concerning access to the proposed project contributed to changes in the emphasis of the study.Due to concerns expressed in the March 1981 access and recreation workshops,several changes were made in the study and the decision making process concerning access and recreation. The following section summarizes these changes and discusses some of the events that precipitated them. 3.2 Changes to the Plan of Study A concern for what the public had to say regarding the energy development of the Railbelt region prompted the Alaska Power Authority to make several changes to the Plan of Study (paS)during 1980.The original pas was distributed to over 250 persons,including State and Federal gencies,groups and organizations,and individuals,and placed in libraries throughout the Railbelt.In April 1980 community meetings were held in Anchorage,Wasilla,Talkeetna,and Fairbanks.Questions and comments were collected and recorded.The results of these meetings were summarized in Section 2.0 and are fully recorded in the report included at the end of this Appendix.In September 1980 a revised Plan of Study was published and again widely distributed.This revised version contained a complete description of the changes.The changes are briefly summarized below. (a)Expanding the Alternatives Study The main conclusion of the April 1980 community meetings was that there was a need for greater emphasis on a study devoted to alternative energy sources. Many people were concerned that the scope of work as outlined in the February 1980 Plan of Study favored the Susitna project,and that more time and more money was needed to look at alternatives. Some concern was also expressed about the ability of Acres American to conduct an objective assessment of alternatives to Susitna. In May 1980 a report to the Legislature by Arlon Tussing and Associates Incorporated reemphasized the need for expanded work in this area by an organization other than Acres.The Power Authority subsequently requested funds for an expanded study of alternatives 18 .... .- (b) (c) to Susitna.In June the Legislature granted additional funding. They also requested that an independent consulting firm conduct the study and transferred the study from the Power Authority to the Governor's office.To assist in the public's understanding of the proposed alternatives study,the Public Participation Office wrote a brief summary of the Request for Proposals developed by the Governor's office for the alternatives study.This summary was circulated to interested groups,organizations,and individuals. Comments received by the Public Participation Office indicated that this summary was well received and proved to be helpful in the public's understanding of the proposed study. The addition of a Sociocultural Study As the result of concerns expressed at the April 1980 community meeting in Talkeetna,a sociocultural study was added to the revised Plan of Study.The concern was articulated by one speaker in thi sway:II~Jhen the Pl an of Study speaks of cultural impacts, it does so in terms of archaeology and historical investigation.I feel that it is desirable and timely that the plan recognize the existence of that concept which is sociocultural in a contempora~y sense.1I As a result of this comment and similar comments expressed by people in the Talkeetna/Trapper Creek area,the Power Authority concluded that a study should be made of the effect that the construction of Susitna might have op the life-style of the people living in the immediate vicinity of the project. This study was done during 1981 by Stephen Braund and Associates and was coordinated with Frank Orth and Associates'work on the indentification and analysis of socioeconomic conditions. Additonal changes to the Plan of Study Public input and concern brought about other changes to the Plan of Study.One concern that was repeatedly expressed during community meetings dealt with the possibility that the Susitna project would result in lIexcess power.1I The Fairbanks Environmental Center referred to this as "cheap blocks of power"or "gluts of power"in their written material.The public perceived that excessive power would be produced by the Susltna project and this would encourage heavy industry,such as aluminum smelting,to locate in the Ra il belt regi on. These concerns were reinterated in June 1980 when the University of Alaska's Institute for Social and Economic Research published a 19 report entitled "Electrical Power Consumption for the Rail belt:A Projection of Requirements.1I The load and growth projections in this report indicated that future load growth would be lower than what had previously been reported by the Corps of Engineers.Since the Corps work was serving as a basis for much of the feasibility study,this meant that the Corps two dam scheme needed to be reassessed and a more detailed study of alternative levels of development needed to be considered. As a result,the following studies were added: Additional work on on investigating a tunnel alernative to the Devil Canyon Dam; additional work exploring the possibility of smaller hydro facilities at the Devil Canyon and Watana sites; additional work on identifying how hydro development can be staged within the Susitna basin; work to provide cost information and characteristics of the fossil-fueled generating resources in the Railbelt and cost characteristics of other hydro projects smaller and not competitive with Susitna; environmental screening of proposed thermal,hydro,and tidal generating facilities;and work to determine the effects of load management and conservation on power needs. 3.3 Changes ~Access Planning As previously discussed,workshops were held in March 1981 that focused on access and recreational planning.More than 300 comments and questions were given.A summary of the results of the workshop is included as Exhibit 1. Workshop participants were presented with four alternative route selections.Almost 60%of the participants favored rail access.Many other questions and comments focused on environmental concerns, socioeconomic and sociocultural concerns,and the process by which the four routes were selected. Because of comments and questions from the public and comments from state and federal resource agencies,the original time frame for making a decision of access was delayed.Originally,a single route 20 recommendation was to be made in May 1981.In order to have more environmental and engineering data available,the decision was delayed to July.Instead of analyzing one route,three main corridors or routes were assessed in greater detail in order that a route could be selected in late 1981.This assessment included environmental and engineering studies,aerial photography,and geologic mapping. Public and agency comments resulted in routes being dropped or changed in three environmentally sensitive areas: In addition,the sociocultural study conducted by Stephen Braund and Associates was expanded to include sociocultural information on access. The reason for this was to ascertain whether or not information gained from public workshops was accurate and what attitudes and values concerning access to the Susitna project existed in the communities nearest the project. - - 1) 2) 3) the Portage Creek area was eliminated; the Denali Highway route to the Watana site was realigned moving it further from a known caribou calving area;and changes were made in the route through the Fog Lakes area. As a result of the workshop responses and discussions with members of the Public Participation Office,Stephen Braund and Associates,Frank Orth and Associates,and Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,another route was added for consideration.This is discussed fully in Exhibit 1. The access plan recommended by Acres American (a road from the Parks Highway to the damsites)in December 1981 did not reflect local community preference for all rail on the Denali Highway route. Nevertheless,local community preference was one of the objectives considered in evaluation the access routes.Because of a strong preference for limiting change in the Talkeetna/Trapper Creek area, preliminary mitigation measures were suggested to reduce socioeconomic and sociocultural impacts in these areas.Acres recommended that: IIThough the implementation of a relatively self contained construction camp,restriction of private vehicles from the construction site,implementation of mass transit modes for community workers,incentives to encourage workers to remain on site,and controlled public access east of Devil Canyon following construction,it is considered that changes in the local communities of TaHeetna/Trapper Creek will be m"in"imized.1I 21 In considering the access decision,Acres determined that mitigation of the socioeconomic and environmental impacts resulting from the recommended plan is a more reasonable approach than attempting to mitigate impacts from the Denali route.In addition,it was Acres· opinion that the recommended access plan with associated mitigation would produce less change in the Talkeetna/Trapper Creek area than on all-rail access plan.The preferences of local communities as formulated by the Public Participation Office were major factors in the suggested mitigation. 3.4 Changes ~Recreation Planning Results of Workshop #3 comments on recreation were incorporated with the results of larger,random sample surveys done earlier by the University of Alaska.The LJ of A survey results showed a split between a high level development and a low level of development.As previously discussed,the Public Participation workshop results tended to favor either a low or moderate level of development or no development. The workshop results were used to moderate the survey results toward a fairly low level of development.In developing a recommended recreation plan,the suggested pattern of development was a lower level of development in the initial stages of the operation of the project until a use pattern became evident.This would include a user survey after three years of operation to determine if expansion was desired and to what extent the future recreational facilities would be developed. 22 - ..... .~ -EXH IBIT 1 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY - - - 334 WEST 5th AVENUE -ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE ACCESS REPORT October 12,1981 Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-0001 i .~ I ,~ I - SECTION 1 Summary and Conclusions SECTION 2 Back-up Data Community Workshops Fairbanks Talkeetna Anchorage Mail Responses Miner and Game Guide Questionnaires Results of Recreation Questionnaire EXHIBITS - -, Section I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS March 1981 Workshop Results The results of three workshops held and questionnaires sent out by the Public Participation Office concerning the question of access to the proposed Watana and Devil Canyon hydroelectric sites show a preference for a rail only alternative.Sixty (60)percent of the participants in the workshops held in Fairbanks,Talkeetna,and Anchorage preferred rail access.Almost 80%of the Talkeetna respondents and more than 80%of the Fairbanks participants favored the rail only alternative.Likewise,a sizeable portion of the game guides registered in Unit 13 (Upper Susitna Basin)who responded to a questionnaire favored the rail access. The reasons for this preference varied somewhat among communities and interest groups.Nevertheless,a pattern did emerge.The partici- pants at the Talkeetna meeting felt that their way of life would be al- tered if road access through any nearby community was selected.The workshop participants'choice of rail only access reflects their concern for the potential amount of change that could occur if such an access road were selected. A second factor in the choice of the rail only route was the desire to limit the impact on wildlife and the ecology of the Upper Susitna Basin that increased recreational opportunity would cause.This was es- pecially true of the participants in Fairbanks and the responses of the game guides.Both these groups did not respond to limiting impacts on the communities along the Parks Highway,but tended to focus on the po- tential impacts on game and the environment.Of primary concern was the Nelchina caribou herd and also the moose and bear populations.All three groups mentioned potential impacts from all terrain vehicles (ATVls)and increased hunting and fishing opportunities. Page 2 In analyzing these responses and in recent discussions with Robert Anderson of Terrestial Environmental Specialists (TES),Peter Rogers of Frank Orth &Associates,and Stephen Braund who is conducting the socio- cultural study,several variables need to be considered in respect to a rail only alternative.Although the rail only alternative may result in minimum impacts,it is our thinking that several potential impacts could result from a rail only access that were not considered by these communi- ties.One would be the size and location of a staging or stockpiling area for construction materials (and its possible visual impact or the size of the work force needed to operate it).A second would be the regularity that workers would be allowed to ride the train to the con- struction site.If workers could ride in either daily,weekly,or bi- weekly,impacts in the southern communities could be nearly as great as with a road access.This would include the need for parking facili- ties some where -Talkeetna,Hurricane,andlor towards Willow -and the result of workers and their families relocating in the southern communi- ties.The increased demand in service could potentially impact a broad range of activities that the Talkeetna participants expressed an interest in limiting. The Public Participation Office (PPO)intends to point out these things to the communities when we hold our next workshop sessions the week of October 19 ..As the result of recent discussions among the PPO staff,Stephen Braund,Peter Rogers,and Robert Anderson,one possible way to reduce impacts on the southern communities is a northern access from the Denali Highway,with a full service construction camp,com- muter schedules,and clearly defined state policies,in combination with no access from the west (either rail or road).Although a north- ern route ~was orginally considered,it was not among the options presented at the community workshops in March 1981.Another option to reduce impacts would be all rail access to the sites or rail to Gold Creek with workers commuting to and from the Anchorage or Palmeri Hasilla areas by airplane.This option was not presented either.We suggest that these access options and the explanation of the possible impacts of the rail only access need to be presented to the southern communities in order that a more informed decision can be made.Especially because the thinking of these communities tend- ed to reflect the idea that the rail only access would have the least '~ I ~, ."""". - - - Page 3 impact on their communities.It is possible that the full range of impacts,both primary and secondary,have not been understood or con- sidered.The primary consideration appeared to be the long term im- plications of public access after construction.Nevertheless,con- struction related impacts may be of greatest concern to these commu- nities given the 10 to 15 year time span of construction. In addition,the results of the recreational development question- naire that was also distributed at the community workshops also showed a preference for limiting development and access in Talkeetna and Fair- banks,while the Anchorage participants favored more highly developed recreational opportunities and more access.More than 60%of the Tal- keetna participants and 70%of the Fairbanks participants favored a minimally developed and managed wilderness.This choice demonstrated a desire to either limit or permit no access to the project area.Rail access was mentioned several times as the best method of access.In contrast,almost 90%of the Anchorage area participants favored a higher level of recreational development and access.The majority of these, however,favored developing the Devil Canyon area and maintaining the wilderness character of the Watana site. Communities Where No Workshops Were Held Willow,Houston,Wasilla,and Palmer: It should be pointed out that community workshops were not held in the communities south of Talkeetna (Willow,Houston,Wasilla,and Palmer) and no one from these areas attended the March 1981 workshop in Talkeetna. Generally,the Mat-Su area has been economically slow in recent years (the capital move to Willow has not occurred)and people in some of these communities may well perceive changes and impacts brought about by the Susitna project as beneficial if economic development is stimulated. Data from a study conducted in the Mat-Su Borough by the Overall Economic Development Program,Inc.(Economic Conditions,Development Options and Projections,July 1980)indicates that people in Willow,Houston,Wasilla, and Palmer tend to favor a higher rate of development than the communities north of Willow.Additional information from planners at the Mat-Su Borough,the Borough Manager,Asse~bly,Planning and Zoning Commission, and local residents might be useful. Trapper Creek: The lack of representation from Trapper Creek at the March workshop at Talkeetna also limits the information from that meeting.The community of Trapper Creek did not seem to perceive the Susitna projects as having a potential impact on their community.One member of the community coun- cil later expressed the perception that Trapper Creek would be less af- fected than Talkeenta would be by Susitna.In addition.the workshop was held in Talkeetna which is a 60 mile round trip for Trapper Creek residents and,given the public sentiment as reflected by the above statement,it doesn't seem likely that people would make the trip.Stephen Braund has recently spent some time in the Trapper Creek area and his information should help in assissing the preference of that community.A joint meeting with Trapper Creek and Talkeetna is being planned for Wednesday,October 21. It will be held at Susitna Valley High School.located half way between Trapper Creek and Talkeetna,and we hope to get representation from both these communities. People living along the railroad north of Talkeetna: The small clusters of people north of Talkeetna along the railroad were also not well represented at the Talkeetna workshop.Some people from the Chase area attended the workshop,but people further north a- long the railroad (Lane Creek,Sherman,and Gold Creek)did not attend. The PPO did communicate with people living or owning land at Lane Creek and Sherman during the public participation work on the intertie project. The general feeling in these areas was one of strong opposition to the transmission lines because people had moved to the area to get away from development.We would expect strong resistance to any access choice which would cause changes along the railroad in these areas. Cantwell and McKinely Park areas: Another area where the PPO had no contact conerning access is the Cantwell and r'1cKinley Park areas.In communications with both these areas on the intertie issue,Cantwell has been generally pro-development and pro-intertie.Community sentiment indicated the desire for a sub- station at Cantwell (along with distribution lines)so the community would not have to rely on diesel generation for electricity.Discussions with Stephen Braund and Tom Lonner have indicated that the McKinley - - - - - .... Page 5 Park area would not be greatly affected by access plans,but Cantwell would, especially if the Denali Highway access is selected.To better under- stand the concerns of the Cantwell community,a community workshop is bei ng planned for Thursday,October 22. Indian River Subdivision and Indian River Remote lands: A final group of people whose preference was not obtained was the Indian River Subdivision owners and the Indian River remote parcel owners. The subdivision contains about 140 parcels on or near the Parks Highway in the area of the proposed road access to Devil Canyon.The Department of Natural Resources estimates that 90 of these sites have been awarded since July 1981.Consequently the people who are now owners have not been contacted concerning their views on either Susitna in general or on the question of access.DNR also reports that demand was not great for the subdivision lands except along the highway.This was not the case for the Indian River remote parcels.Because these remote parcels had railroad access and most remote parcels have no access at all,DNR re- ports that it was one of the more popular remote parcel offerings the state has had.Seventy-fi ve persons were given authori zati on to stake in this area. Conclusions 1.\~hat emerges from the responses received in the community work- shops,both on access and recreation,is the desire to limit growth and development that could occur should the Susitna project be constructed, especially in the Talkeetna area and the railroad communities north of Talkeetna.One of the drivers of the type and magnitude of the impacts on the southern communities is the location of the access route and the mode of transportation used on the route.Although the clear preference stated is for a rail only access,more information needs to be presented to the potentially impacted communities concerning the nature of impacts during the construction phase if a rail only route is selected. Page 6 2.In recent di,scuss i,ons wtth.Stephen Rraund,ROJert ft.nclerson,and Peter Rogers,it has become c1ear that tfie question of access and mode alone are not the only constderattons that need to be presented to the potenti ally impacted communities.An equally important cons iderati on is the size and nature of the construction facility.Various options are available and depending on what is selected the impacts on the surround- ing communities will vary.A full service,planned community providing the widest range of services for the workers and their families would have a much different impact than a low service,construction camp with no family facilities.This type of decision,as well as the policies that the State of Alaska (through the Power Authority)would adopt or not adopt concerning the nature of the construction site,access to the site,and the schedul i ng of commuti ng workers to and from the site wi 11 be the primary factor in determining the impacts on local communities. 3.PPO suggests the following method for looking at how various options would either decrease or encourage the amount of change that could potentially occur in local communities.Six possible objectives are given below.We recognize that some of these objectives appear mutually exclusive.They do,however,reflect the range of preferences that have been heard in the communities so far.PPO would like more community input to determine which preference reflects the majority of a given community. The six objectives are: l.To encourage changes in the Willow,Houston,li!JS;11 a and Palmer areas. 2.To limit changes in the railroad communities north of Talkeetna. 3.To limit changes in the Talkeetna and Trapper Creek areas. 4.To encourage changes in the the Talkeetna and Trapper Creek areas. 5.To encourage changes in the Cantwell area. 6.To limit changes in the Cantwell area. -1'" - :~. - Page 7 The next four pages are a preliminary discussion Of how decisions could be made to implement either one or a combination of these objec- tives.The information on these pages was written in a work session with Robert Anderson~Peter Rogers,Stephen Braund,anc PPD staff.More time could be spent in refining this.In addition,the thinking of several other disciplines is needed to make the picture more complete. Based on what we know now,the Power Authority's "access/recrea"Uonl construction facilities/construction policies"objectives would be to: 1)encourage change in the Willow,Houston,Wasilla,and Palmer areas; and 2)to limit changes in the railroad communities north of Talkeetna. We do not yet have enough information to establish clear planning ob- jectives for the Trapper Creek,Talkeetna,and Cantwell areas.*** The remainder of the report (Section II)is the back-up data that supports the summary and conclusions from the workshops and question~ naires.Included as exhibits are copies of the various questionnaires used to solicit reSponses. ..... ***PPO ;s relying on th~sociocultural study being conducted by Stephen Braund and Associates to supply additional information in order to better articulate these objectives.In addition,we intend to check our perceptions of community preferences one more time with the communities the week of October 19th . OBJECTIVE I:To encourage changes in Willow,Houston,Wasilla,and Palmer ar~as. PLAN A: 1.Access Corridor:access from the west;no access at all from the Denali Highway. 2.r,10de:road. 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:Minimal construction camp:trailers,mess hall, recreation hall~some family facilities for supervisory personnel. 4.Policies: a.Individuals drive their own private vehicles to the sites. b.No policies about when workers come and go,from where,or use of private vehicles. 5.Commuter Schedules: a.None. b.No policy on public access. c.No policy on use of fish and game. """0 P> lOm 0::> J ~..1 ....l _J 1 l']-1 1 J ))}l 1 -1 • Objective I~To e1'1'courag,e changes ifl~~inow~HOuston,l4,asilla,and Palmer areas. PLAN B: 1.Access Corridor: rail access~either thrOtlgh Gold Creek with road to site or rail directly to Devil Canyon. 2.Mod,e :rai l 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:MinimaT constructioA camp:trailers,mess hall, recreation han,some family facil Hies f,or supervisory personnel. 4.Policies: a.Pol icy rea'g,a.rdi ng use of persQina 11 vehicl ,es by wo'rkers. b.Policy to control public acce'ss toa,r,ea. '5.Commuter Schedules:Organized comuter schedule using aircraft from the Wasilla- Pa'lmerarea . Ororga,niz'ed raflcommuter schedule with workers getting on and off the train i 11 the'Palm:erand Ha s n 1aa reas . -c PI lC rD <..0 OBJECTIVE II:To limit changes in railroad communities north of Talkeetna. PLAN A: 1.Access Corridor:Road from Denali Highway to Watana;service road from Watana to Devil Canyon;no access at all from the west (neither rail nor road). 2.~10de :road. 3.Nature of constru~tion camp facilities: The larger the camp,and the more services,the less the impacts on surrounding local communities.Services that would help reduce impacts include:stores,post office,schools. Proposal:.to construct a "mixed camp",meaning a camp where workers live with their families if desired,or where workers live in trailers or barracks without"families if deSired. Part of the construction camp could/would become .a permanent city for the operating phase. The temporary camp could be sited and located so that it would be inundated by water later. The sitfng of a permanent.camp for families would be important so that the experience is as pleasant as possible:meaning,it was sited on dry land so people could get out and walk, and near trees and sun exposure if possible.The more pleasant the place is to live,the more families will enjoy living there and impact existing local communities less. Limited r &r would be available at camp;workers or families would periodically get out to other areas (larger areas like Anchorage and Fairbanks)for more extended r &r and cultural activities,etc.--0 QJ ~ro o t\:.._~J)c} 4..Pol i ci es: a.strict regulations where people can go in the upper basin to protect resources,especially hunting and fishing. b.No private planes flying in and out. c.Policy regarding use of personal vehicles. d.Policy to control public access off corridor. ,,Ic__, 1 1 OBJECTIVE II:Plan A cont. ~l ]-I 1 1 ~.-J 1 ) 5.Commuter Schedules: a.ORGANIZED commuter schedule for those who don1t live with families.Could be busing from Fairbanks,Anchorage,or Cantwell. b.ORGMlIZEO air commuting from Anchorage.or fom Palmer and ~'asilla. -0 PI tom ......l ......l OBJECTIVE II:To limit changes in railroad communities north of Talkeetna. PLAN B: 1.Access Corridor:All rail to both sites or rail to Devil Canyon and then road to Watana. 2.Mode:rail. 3.Nature of the construction camp facilities: Something other than a full-service camp appears adequate if workers can commute every week or two weeks to be with their families or have recreation outside the construction camp site. 4.Policies: a.Policy to control use of personal vehicles. b.No private planes flying in and out. c.Strict regulations where people can go in the upper basin to protect resorces, especially hunting and fishing. d.Possible state subsidy of workers commuting by rail. 5.Commuter Schedules: a.ORGANIZED commuter schedule using rail from either Anchorage,Wasilla,or Palmer areas.Incentives for workers to use the rail from Wasilla.Palmer,Anchorage,and not Talkeetna. b.OR ORGANIZE~air commuting from ~nchorage.or from Palmer an~~asilla. ""0 PJ lOro N ,if.[·.·..·lJ ,..J .]I .'.)cc.c.,.,1 ;'t ...J ,...0].]J 1 )~..l )0-,))1 1 I 1 J OJBECTIVE III:To encourage changes in the Talkeetna and Trapper Creek areas. 1.Access Corridor:access from the west;no access at all from the Denali Highway. 2.Mode:railroad or road.** 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:~1inimal construction camp:trailers~mess hall, recreation hall,some family facilities for supervisory personnel. 4.Policies: a.Individuals drive their own private vehicles to the sites. b.No policies about when workers come and go,from where~or use of private vehicles. 5.Cormnuter Schedules: a.None. b.No policy on public access. c.No policy on use of fish and game. **Road access would likely impact Trapper Creek more than Talkeetna due to its proximity to the Parks Highway;however a rail only access could impact Talkeetna more if workers drove to the Talkeetna area~parked their cars there,and boarded the train.""C lJJ to CD -' w OBJECTIVE IV:To limit changes in the Talkeetna and Trapper Creek areas. PLAN A: 1.Access Corridor:Road from Denali Highway to Watana. Service roa.d from Watana to Devil Canyon;no access at all from the west (neither .rail .nor road). 2.Mode:road.** 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:The larger the camp,and the more services,the less the impacts on surrounding local communities.Services that would help reduce impacts include:~tores,post office,schools. Proposal:to construct a "mixed camp",meaning a camp where workers live with their families if desired,or where workers live in trailers or barracks without families if desired. Part of the construction camp could/would become a permanent city for the operating phase. The temporary camp could be sited and located so that it would be inundated by water later. The siting of a permanent camp for families would be important so that the experience is as pleasant as possible:~eaning,it was sited on dry land so people could get out and walk, and near trees and sun exposure if possible.The more pleasant the place is to live,the more families will enjoy living there and impact existing local communities less, Limited r &r would be available at camp;workers or families would periodically get out to other areas (larger areas like Anchorage and Fairbanks)for more extended r &r and cultural activities,etc. 4.Po 1i c i es : a.strict regulations where people can go in the upper basin to protect resources,especially hunting and fishing. b.!lo private planes flying in and out. c.Policy regarding use of personal vehicles. d.Policy to control public access off corridor. -u PJ lOro ~ ,),,~..J ,,<I "...,,~J "c",.•J :.c cJ ec..J J ..:1 J J }I 1 J 1 t -].]~ OBJECTIVE IV:Plan A.cont. 5.Commuter Schedules: a.ORGANIZED commuter scedule for those who don't live with families.Could be busing from Fairbanks,Anchorage,or Cantwell. b.Assumption was made that air commuter would not be reliable enoug.h because of weather. **Rail on this route could be feasible,but was not considered. -u OJ <.0: CD <.n OBJECTIVE IV:To 1imi t changes in the Talkeetna and TraEI2Etr ••&r.3J1.lI..Eiil§",; PLAN B: 1.Access Corridor:Either rail to revil Canyon orGold Creek,or all rail. No direct road access from the west or north. 2.Mode:rail. 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:Something less than a full service camp would appropriate if the workers can commute in and out to be with their families on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. 4.Policies:the same policies would apply as in Plan A. 5.Commuter Schedules: a.ORGANIZED commuter air and rail schedules from the Anchorage and Wasilla-Palmer areas. "Ql \.Clro 0'1 ".~.....1 ..J ,~."_.,1 J l.-.1 ,...1 ..J --j J 1 i j J ))I 1 ]j .J ]] OBJECTIVE V:To encourage changes in the Cantwell area, 1.Access Corridor:access from the Denali Highway only,with a railhead at Cantwell.No access from the west. 2.Mode:rail to Cantwell and road from Cantwell to the Watana site. 3.Nature of construction cam facilities:Minimal facilities:trailers to sleep in (or barracks,mess hall,recreation hall,some family housing for supervisory personnel. 4.Policies: a.Individual~drive their own private vehicles to the sites. b.No policies about when workers come and go,from where,or use of private vehicles. Again,the same as in Objective III:the absence of policies by the state of Alaska (through the Power Authority)might result in the most changes in Cantwell. Another kind of policy would be the lack of assertive action:for instance,a state policy to upgrade only the west side of the Denali Highway (and not the entire route)would encourage users to come from Cantwell and go back out to Cantwell,rather than driving on through to the Richardson Highway. 5.Commuter Schedules: a.None. b.No policy on public access. c.No policy on use of fish and game along corridor. -u 01 (.Q I'D...... •-..J OBJECTIVE VI:To limit changes in the Cantwell area. 1.Access Corridor:access from the Parks Highway on the west;no access at all from the Denali Highway. 2.Mode:either road or railroad. 3.Nature of construction camp facilities:Full service camp,with complete services for all who wish to bring their families.Same description that limits changes in the southern communities would also help to limit changes in Cantwell.See Objective IVa. 4.Pol ices: Same policies that limit changes in the southern communities would help to limit changes in Cantwell also.See Objective IVa. 5.Commuter Schedules: ORGANIZED commuter schedules on some regular basis (weekly or bi-weekly.) ""U l:II to I'D co 1L~"_1 ,..],1 c.1 ]k •..<·...J .J .J I ""'"r L .... """i ..... .- Page 19 SECTION 2 BACK-UP DATA COTJIMUNITY WORKSHOPS Community workshops were held in Fairbanks,Talkeetna,and Anchorage in ~1a rch 1981 in an attempt to determi ne what concerns the people of these areas had relating to recreation and access planning on the Susitna hydroelectric feasibility study.Information was presented at each workshop concerning several access and recreation plans and comments recorded that could be used to help in access and recreation planning . In all,more than 300 comments were received in response to printed questionnaires.Of these 50 pertained directly to the question of access. Questionnaires were also received relating to recreation,but these comments also often related to access. Participants in the workshops were presented with four alternative access plans which used various combinations of road and rail access in combination with existing routes (Figure 1).They were:1)Access Route A -construction of a new road from Hurricane to the Devil Canyon and Watana sites;2)Access Route B -construction of a railroad to both dam sites from Gold Creek;3)Access Route C -construction of a road from the Denali Highway to the Watana site,construction of a service road from Watana to Devil Canyon,and construction of a railroad spur from Gold Creek to Devil Canyon;and 4)Access Route D-the same as Route C except that a new road from the Parks Highway would replace the rail spur. The following table shows the response of the workshop participants. Page 20 Route 'Fairbanks ,Talkeetna Anchorage .t~ail *Total Route A 1 3 0 1 5 Route B 13 12 1 5 30 Route C 3 2 0 3 8 Route 0 0 0 3 2 5 No Preference 1 1 0 0 2 *Mail responses were mostly from the Anchorage area and reflect the thinking of that area. .... ~I - Page 21 This table shows that most of the people attending the workshops in Fairbanks and Talkeetna favor rail access during and after construction. Additionally,almost half the people in Anchorage favored the rail only alternative.Some of the reasons given were:1)fewer environmental impacts;2)easier to limit the number of people and types of activity in surrounding areas;3)less expensive;and 4)more energy efficient. About ha1f the people in Anchorage and one-third of the people in Fairbanks and Talkeetna favored some type of road access because they could gain access to areas they feel are currently inaccessible.The Anchorage people tended to favor the Denali route,but in Fairbanks several people spoke out against it because of the potential adverse effects on caribou calving grounds near that route. In addition,some people at each workshop indicated they favored no access or very limited access.Suggestions ranged from brining in supplies during the winter on snow roads io access by a~r.Those in favor of air access suggested it as a way to bring workers to the construction site that would lessen impacts on other railbelt communities. The following is a detailed breakdown of the reasons behind the preferences expressed in the Fairbanks~Talkeetna,and Anchorage workshops. Page 22 FAIRBANKS (36 attended,17 responded) One who preferred access Route A gave this reason: 1.As a land owner (lottery winner -20 acres in area east of Indian River and north of Susitna)I'm in favor of access Route A for ac- cessibility into my property.There are a total of 75 people who will be staking up to 20 acres each in the area I've mentioned ... Marilyn Stark Those who preferred access Route B gave these reasons: 1.Less environmental damage;less public access the better.Also lower cost.I don't want any access. 2.Route B would give the least access and thus cause the least human impact onto land and wildlife.This is the only hope for preserving any of the Nelchina caribou herd. 3.I prefer the all rail alternative because it curtails unlimited public road access.If a road is built,I don't think there's any doubt that pressure will be exerted eventually to open it to the public (as with the haul road).The mere presence of the reservoir(s) will greatly increase boat and float (and ski)plane access,and I think that's enough (too much,in fact).A railroad is the best approach to controlling unlimited access.If alternative route A-2 is feasible,then a rail link from Gold Creek to Devil Canyon should be included,and a road on the north side to Watana,just so there isn't road access all the way in. 4.a)lowest $cost to build and operate b)possible interruptions in imported oil supply make more fuel- efficient railroads desirable - -. - - 5. - ;.... Page 23 c)1 1 m concerned about impact on Denali Highway Minimal cost;minimal impact on fish and wildlife,wetlands;minimal access;minimal fuel consumption;minimal other energy waste. In short RAIL ONLY IS THE NEXT ROUTE TO NONE AT ALL. 6.This choice minimizes impact if I must choose an access. I also see this as a way to control access as if it is a public project sponsored by public $and the public can legally demand access (i.e.the haul road).But if A,could be fully controlled I'd go with that because as reads it causes minimal impact. 7.I would prefer no access from the Denali Highway and I think this is the only access route that prevents this.Also,I think maybe a railroad line could be built to Devil Canyon then a service road could be built on the north side of the river to Watana.The engineering concerns might put construction back two or three years, but this would save 100 years effect on wildlife and environmental concerns. 8.Since feasibility studies on the whole hydro studies are incomplete and inconclusive,as well as studies on access routes,one cannot make a well informed decision at this time.Therefore,I cannot find any particular route acceptable.However,since a rail access route would be most limiting to private vehicular traffic,I favor it over others,since I value the existing recreational and scenic potential,and hope for a minimal change in those potentials. 9.a)railroad right-of-way has less impact than a road or highway. b)access of the general public is better controlled into the area. c)construction of the railroad appears to be less costly way to go.You can haul more material or freight on one train than what 60 trucks could do. Page 24 W.to limit the access to recreationalists;no recreational vehicles; no speed boats. 11.no road;costs less;costs less to maintain road. 12.Rail.Q.!!.l.l has the least long term impact.I feel this should be considered even if it puts your starting date for construction back 1-3 years.The added time (i.e.setback)will be the best for the long term.I favor as little impact.(I prefer no Susitna dam). If the dam was built --'rail should be the ~access. 13.With a railroad spur which will be needed to move in the big turbines and other pieces of equipment you will not need a road system and it is also the less costly of all of the access routes and it will keep the area wilderness and limit public access. Those who favored access Route C gave these reasons: 1.The highway access via the Denali should be eliminated if "C"is considered (environmental concerns and mainstream development to the south are prime reasons for this choice.I would like to see interconstruction development at rail nodes kept to a minimum and a consistent awareness for the local habitants kept as a forerunning concern. 2.Most expedient,hence lowest cost especially as regards Watana. 3.Apparently lowest impact on wildlife habitat along Denali Highway. Watana route,depending on recreational plan decided on. 4.The least environmental impact. No reason for favoring Route D. One comment with no choice: 1.I don1t feel I have enough information as to the pros and cons of .., , - - I~ ,.... ,.". - Page 25 route. Each one interferes with wildlife habitat and migration routes in about equal ways,it seems. Using a railroad seems a less disturbing way --it can control access --but a road cannot.P.ven the railroad will allow off road vehicles to get in there. TALKEETNA (38 attended,17 responded) Those who favored access Route A did so for these reasons: 1.Keep the countryside as much like it is as possible. 2.a)Retain the wilderness status of this area as much as possible. b)I do not accept the assumption that there will be public access. c)Rail access from Gold Creek with tourists riding in and out may be acceptable. d)I especially donlt want to see Q,oats on the lake and their as- sociated hunting and fishing,camping,etc.pose a great threat to the wilderness. e)Large buffer zones of no access on the lake and power lines. 3.Minimum road access. Those who favored access Route B did so for these reasons: 1.a)restrict private and commercial vehicles to the sites. b)environmental impact of railroad (after construction)would appear to be much less severe than a road. 1)no stopping,parking,shooting,etc.from the side of the road. 2)no 4 x 4 1 s or ATVls driving off into the wilderness. Page 26 c)cheapest alternative d)least impact on communities. 1)would limit the manpower to air transport. 2.Least public impact~yet allowing those that are willing to go through the trouble to get there~the ways and the means to do so. Also~once completed possibly would be less problem maintaining. 3.Least adverse effect on environment over long term. 4.The railroad would at least minimize impact on the area. 5.Limit access for construction and maintenance only;no public road needed;railroad easiest to regulate in this manner could be removed after construction is finished. 6.Railbelt area already handles population.Expanding this~service is easier than developing new population centers or areas.Public access is contained to certain places (designated by train stops). 7.Railroad only gives greater control over access.Americans must and can learn to divorce themselves from their vehicles.With railroad only~you gain greater control over total numbers going to the site and also control over developments along the route. 8.Would get the project completed with the least amount of ___ 9.The railroad would be far more economical way to move materials with the least long-lasting impact. 10.Least impact on area and future generations will get to see and enjoy it as it was.People don't bring their ATV with them on the train~ nor do they have the ability to stop everywhere.The area along rail- roads is less impacted than areas along roads.And people in the future will travel via public transportation not private cars. 11.Limits access by the masses by train or air.I am 100%opposed to any road use especially as it applies to vehicular (private autos). - - Page 27 One favored C over A for this reason: 1.The reason foro-my choi ce between A or Cis cost.I 1i ve close to Mile 99!-:l Parks Highway.I'm not necessarily excited about more roads but there is a need.If a road is put in hopefully the wildlife would be protected for all to see and enjoy.No hunting permitted close to the highway.Perhaps park rangers would teach people how to appreciate and care for their state.lid just like to see people enjoy Alaska as we did 16 years ago before it became overcrowded. No one favored D. One didn1t mark a choice,but noted this comment: This meeting is supposed to be part of a feasibility study so you shou1dn 1 t be giving just four options to choose from.I resent the feeling you give meLthat you are trying to sell me a plan with a few options to choose from. If I must accept this dam then I favor access routes that allow the least amount of public access and the least amount of human population growth. The social and economic aspects of the dam will have the greatest impact on the natural environment,and they should be minimized.The haphazard way you gather comments is not good.It favors people who are most vocal and doesnlt give a true consensus of opinion.The less people that enter the area the better.M.C.Schwab ANCHORAGE (40 attended,4 responded) No one preferred access Route A. Page 28 One preferred access Route B for this reason: 1.Access B will limit impacts. Is it possible to mail materials ahead of time so public can study? Why hasn't Corps study been read? Has effect of overall population on recreation been considered? Why isn't more hard data available to public? No one preferred C. Three preferred D for these reasons: 1.This alternative will provide quick access for construction with later maximum recreational benefit.C is second choice,A is third, B is fourth. 2.Provides maximum public access to otherwise inaccessible areas. Provides better access from Anchorage to Denali Highway area.The greater length of highway system decreases hunting pressure on any segment of road or nearby fly in lakes. Additional routes allow for flexibility and diverstiy in hauling in materials,equipment and supplies. The service road between the dam MUST be open for the public as public funds will be used for This access to this area is required regardless of dam constructton. 3.Prefer D with modifications' Road mode is most flexible during construction phase and most useable by the public after construction --I am very familiar with the country and favor a road from Rurricane to Devil Canyon,then cross the river and on to Watana on the north side --this segment will have south slope aspect (much better than south side of river),a lot of wind ex- Page 29 posure so will be easier to keep snow free --I do not favor con- struction from Denali Highway south to Watana that is unnecessary if the above scheme were followed --permafrost~wetlands impacts and deep snow problems abound on this route --the preferred "Watana construction first"can be accomplished with this proposal as you will have to cross at Devil Canyon anyway --this routing would also avoid some very difficult construction along south side of Su east of Devil Canyon. MAIL (11 responded~mostly from the Anchorage area) One who preferred access Route A gave this reason: 1.Felt a road to both dam sites would be of benefit to all parties, both during and after construction. 2.No practical reason to build road from Denali;the majority of workers will be coming from Anchorage and Fairbanks and for the few workers from Delta,Glennallen~and Paxon the extra distance wouldn't justify the cost.Tourists will come from Anchorage also. minimal disruption to existing recreation patterns minimal tax dollar waste to accommodate governmentally contrived recreation programs,frivolity in a time of serious national needs. minimal imposed detriments to the habitat. rail access sufficient for construction and maintenance delay is a plus -more time to study environmental implications such as impact on Cook Inlet fisheries. rail access least expensive. a) b) c) c) a) b) 2. Those who favored access Route B gave these reasons. 1. Page 30 3.rail access lesser evil as access could be more effectively limited. The potential loss of wetlands and raptor nesting habitat is par- ticularly disturbing. 4.a)cheapest (don't waste money) b)disturbs the wilderness least;can be removed when both dams are bui It. c)access for maintenance by float plane or helicopter. B)hard to maintain either a railroad or highway in heavy snow or cold winters. 5.restricts or limits access and has minimal effect to the area. One who favored C or D gave these reasons. 1.Gets away from the scheduling problems of A and B. 2.Economically best after B. 3.Opens up large new area for recreation. 4.Preserves the environmental integrity of the roadless south side of the ri ver. Two who favored access Route C gave these reasons. 1.Having worked for the Dept.of Highways in the area for 20 years, observation that a road from the Denali would be easiest to build and maintain;less hills,less wetlands,and is more suited to road construction. 2.a)provides easy access for construction and opens up beautiful areas for recreational purposes. - - Page 31 b)highway access is important not only for construction but for continued public access not dependent of train schedules or passenger services limitations. Two who favored access Route D gave these reasons: 1.Would let most all highway travellers see one dam area while keeping the Watana area under less pressure by people. Don't want to see State and Federal governments involved in railroad unless the State purchases the railroad before the dams are constructed. 2.a)no service road between dams. b)construct and service power lines between dams with helicopters. c)boat access to reservoirs;road access would make it look like Big Lake. MINERS AND GAME GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRES Two separate questionnaires were distributed:-one to game guides registefed in Unit 13 of the Upper Susitna Basin;the other to members of the Alaska Miners Association in Fairbanks and Anchorage.The game guide questionnaire was mailed to 200 guides and 29 responses were received,a return of 15%.The miners'questionnaires were given to members of the Miners Association in Fairbanks and the Board of Directors in Anchorage.It is not known how many were distributed.Eighteen were returned. Fifty-six (56)percent of the game guides were in favor of public access while 31%were opposed.Responses on what game habitats should not be disturbed were varied,but tended to indicate several areas of concern.One was the Deadman's Creek drainage and the area south of the Page 32 Denali Highway that is utilized by the Nelchina caribou herd.Other areas mentioned were the Susitna River proper and several of its major tributary areas.The project area in general was seen to be a prime game and fishing area.Over 40%of the guides favored rail only access and this was often mentioned as first choice with others listed second or thi rd. The questionnaire included a map (Figure 2)that showed four access routes.These were not the same routes that were presented at the com- munity workshops.The reason for this is the route north of the Susitna was eliminated from consideration due to environmental and engineering problems around the Portage Creek area. Almost all the miners (90%)favored some type of public access, but the questionnaire did not present alternative routes.Most of this group used the general project area for some type of mineral related activity and use was limited to summer months. I~ ..... Page 33 GAtJIE GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE -February and March 1981 1.-What areas of the Susitna River basin do you use? General answers included Upper Susitna,Tsusena Valley,Clark Creek, Talkeetna River to Kosina Creek,Denali Creek area,Clarence Lake, Lake Louise,Watana Creek. 8 said they used all or most of it.5 said they used none of it. 2.What kind of use? 25 considered themselves primarily game guides.Of these,19 included the words "hunting and fishing"as part of their occupation,such as in "guiding hunting and fishing trips".A total of 22 included 'Ihunting or "fishing"~some other use,such as "mining,prospecting","rock- hounding",IItrapping ll ,"rafting",or "photography". 3.What level of use do you give these areas? The words "heavy","mo derate",and IIlight"were used in similar pro- portion.The seasons listed most were spring through fall.Three persons responded that they use the area from eight months to all year. Speci fi ca lly: - May -October:3 June -October:2 July -AUgust:1 June -Sept.:1 August -Sept.:2 July -Sept.: ~1ay -Dec.: 10 mo./year: Apr.-May/Aug.-Sept. 1 1 1 1 ,"" i~ 4.What game habitats should not be disturbed? Specific locations mentioned included Watana Creek,Kosina Creek, Jay Creek,the area along the Susitna River,Fog Creek,north and southwest of Moosehorn Lake,Stephan Lake,Clarence Lake,Big Lake, along the Alaska Railroad proposed,Portage Creek,Butte Lake,Otter Lake.One person expressed concern about the poss·ible disturbance of swan and salmon spawning grounds.Several expressed concern for the habitats of moose,grizzly and black bear,and caribou.Some specific statements were: Impossible to list,Big Su is a key game habitat;effort should be made to stay near water with all travel. Caribou migration routes,winter moose areas,black and grizzly bear denning,areas. The area bounded by Portage Creek to the west,the Susitna River to the south and east and the Denali Highway to the north is the best game country left in the Talkeetna Mountains. Wintering areas in all major drainages should not be disturbed. Those who saw no problems if game habitats are disturbed:9. Those who mentioned concern about the disturbance in specific locations, or of specific animals,or disturbance of the wilderness in general:16. Page 34 5.Which access do you prefer? The guides were given four choices:Corridor 1 -North side of Susitna River from Talkeetna;Corridor 2 -South side of Susitna River from Talkeetna;Corridor 3-North from Denali Highway;and Railroad -South side of Susitna River.They were also allowed to check all the boxes they felt were acceptable. Corri dor 1 Corridor 2 Corri dor 3 6 11 10 Rai1road 18 Left it blank 4 Answered "none of the above"1 Answered "whatever is cheapest and best"1 6.Reasons for the above choice~ Comments supporti ng the rail road i ncl uded:"1 ess vehi cl e access means less impact on the animal population and the environment";OR lilt would be more direct."When specific corridors were chosen, the comments tended to be general about the possible distrubance of one or another anima1 population.Occasionally there was a specific individua1 comment,such as,"I suppose itls just selfishness but Corridor 1 come closest to the access I use." 7.Would you like to see public access to the project area by pri vate ly- owned vehicles after construction is completed? IIM\\ Yes:18 Not sure:1 No:10 Limited access only:1 J, No response:2 8.Reason for position on public access: Those who said yes:Il m paying for it so I'11 use it;I support hydro power;a11 Americans have the right to a11 of America with the ex- ception of 1and that is private1y owned;we need tourist deve10pment and recreationa1 development. Those who said no:There wi11 be an innundationof people;business wi11 suffer;animal habitats will be destroyed a10ng the river;would prefer the area be left a wi1derness;what will happen to the fish; this is a power project,not a recreationa1 facility. Respondents to this questionnaire reside in: Anchorage 9 Haines 1 Eagle River 1 Chugiak 2 Palmer 3 Homer 1 Cantwel1 1 Ketchikan 1 Willow 3 Juneau 1 Gustavus 1 Kasilof 1 Fairbanks 1 Wasilla 1 Tok Highway 1 No name or address 1 Page 35 MINERS QUESTIONNAIRE --February and March 1981 1""1" I 1.Member of what group or groups: Fairbanks Alaska Miners 11 Anchorage Alaska Miners 6 Nome Alaska Miners 1 Interior Alaska Trappers 0 Southcentral Trappers 0 Registered guide 1 Other:Fur Takers of America 1 Miners reside in: Fairbanks 10 Anchorage 6 Maclaren River 1 Palmer 1 '"'", , 2.What part of the Upper Susitna basin is of particular interest to you: Almost every respondent had a different answer.Specifically they were: Watana Creek 1 Butte Creek 1 Coal Creek 1 Clearwater Mtns.1 Portage Creek-Fog Lakes 1 Tsusena Creek 1 Gold Creek 1 Valdez Creek 1 Chulitna 1 Oshetna and Maclaren 1 Black Rivers 1 All parts 4 Devil Canyon 1 No parts 1 Upper Susitna Basin 1 One respondent who answered the form in detail said,"0f course, the Maclaren is of major interest to me since that is my home base. However,I would be violently opposed to using the Denali Highway as as dam access.Aside from the esthetic reasons,it would be an economic disaster for me,as a major portion of my trapline runs from Mile 7 Denal i Highway to ~1ile 71." 3.What area of the river basin do you currently use: Answers mirrored those above.Specifically: Watana Creek 2 Butte Creek 1 Coal Creek 1 Clearwater Mtns.1 Chulitna Canyon 1 Lower Susitna 1 Chulitna Creek 1 Upper Susitna 1 Stephan-Fog Lakes 1 Upper +Middle 1 South side-Susitna Upper Tsusena Creek 1 drainage of Devil Canyon 1 Fhunilma Creek 1 N/A 1 None 4 4.Hhat kind of use? r'"Minerals exploration 2 Recreation/rest 2 Trapping wolves that Mining 5 prey on wintering 1 Hunting/fishing 4 moose Hardrock minerals 1.-.Mineral development 1 None 1 Trapping 1 N/A 1 Page 36 5.What level of use do you give the areas: Light use was listed most frequently,though moderate and heavy use were also put down.Specific dates: June -September 7 Oct.15 -April 1 plus Se~t.deer hunt 1 None 1 N/A 1 Fall and Winter 2 Year-round 1 September -October 1 6.Would you like to see public access via privately-owned vehicle after construction is completed? Yes 16 No 2 7.What is the principal reason for your position on access? Yes answers: Access to potentially productive mineral deposits 5 Public funds,public use 10 Recreation use 3 Hunting and fishing 1 One respondent who answered yes,added,"I strongly feel we should extract all minerals from this area before we complete the dam and begin flooding the area." No answers: The area is undisturbed now,don't want to lose that 1 The game population will be driven down 1 EXHIBIT 2 - - OCtober 31.1980 ACTION File "umber:A-OOl-SO J.T.Rogers 632 West 6th Anchorage ..Alaska 99510 Dear J.T.Rogers: You asked a question about the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies.Here is the answer to that question followed by a response from Peter Tucker of Acres American.Inc. Your gU&st10,n: What is Acres American,Inc.,success rate or experience with licensing? Response: Acres American.Inc ••mafntains a very active liaison with the Federal Energy Regulatory COIl1IIission (FERC)to assure that we are funy informed concerning specific rules,negotiations and opinions and also with FERC·s planned rule irapl ementatfon measures.By working closely with FElC.Acres is able to provide the manage... ment an<l technical expertise to projects uncler implemen- tation.Acres has tn the past been active 1n preparing preliminary permit and major project Hcense applications before FERC. The recent -.101"projects incl ude: (1)Granby ~droelectr1c development submitted in February 1978 and receiving license 1n April 1980 and (2)Upper MechAnicville hydroelectric development, submitted in January 1981. The Upper Mechanicville project license application was dete1'llined adequate on May 29th.without deficiency. Approximately 75%of applications submitted bave de- ficiencies that need correcting.a process which usually take'several mDIIths. All COt1IJfents.questions,and requests for info....tion received by our office are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority staff and Acres American. Page 2 October 31,1980 I.T.Rogers Inc ••and will be included in a report that will be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made on Sus1tn•• Enclosed is an ACTION form which you may use if you have further eoaaents.questions,or need additional information.We have had a few problems implementing the ACTION SYSTEM.However,some of the circumstances that held up the process have been corrected and we beHeve your next connent or question w111 be handled more quickly.Please keep in 1II1nd,however, that because a mabel"of people will review,and in some cases,cormtent on each item submitted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sincerely, Hancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres American,Inc. A-DOl-SO~---------------------_....., I <:OMMENTS,QUIISTIONS &REQUESTS I r-i Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date_______I I Ir-I An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name __=.j"__·_T'---·B..:.......L:()=-,(.=~:....:lC=R----'-~_·name I--I address _C;-"-'-~''''"3''__·:'''_:A_'_W_b::::;_''-"--..::(,=''-\_~-'-----#of members_____________I I city ---lB'-\',.:...~-'--'-\-\-'------------address --------------I 1""1'"I state bLf\S,\::"A.zip 11,5 JD city IIdayphone__'d--"'-.'_C:_Lf'-.--_lf'-S=-------'-y_L_____contact person day phone____I -I IIIndividualcitizensorcommunitygroupsandorganizationsareencouragedtosubmitwrittencomments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible,_ I W ~(.\\\".3 C\Z.£S \"\E.ULt.\~~'Nc...S \jc-cE.5S'I "')I"'~~a ~te:::E,(L""'ENe~w <,--,~"t=iCr-<=-LIcBVSIN 6.IkyqJJl''I ~~I I 1/0 I I r-:I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I F I I I I I I -I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I 1-I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I I,, ~----------------------------------_.# ..... October 27 J 1980 Mr.David Finkelstein 425 East 16th Avenue.#2 Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Finkelstein: You submitted to our office some COJR'!nts regarding the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasib1l1t.Y studies.Two COIlIDeDts Wlfch related directly to the alternatives study were forwarded to the Governor's office as explained to you in my letter of October 8.1980.Your other COIIIBent was, "I am opposed to the SusitM Dam.The costs are just too high.II Your CCD1ent,as well as all other COIIIRents and questions received by our office,will be included in a report that will be sent to the Alaska Power Authority's board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made on the feasibil1ty of the Susitna hydroelectric project. Enclosed is an ACTION form which you may use if you have further coaaents,quest1oas,or need addftional information.We have had a few problems 1~lementing the ACTIOH SYSTEM.However,SOIJe of the circlllStances that held up the process have been corrected and we believe your next COIlIIent or question w111 be handled more quickly.Please keep in lIind,however, that because a number of people will review,and in some cases,CCIIIRent on each item submitted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sincerely, Nancy 81 unek Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres American.Inc. A-002-80,-----------------------------I IICOMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I ~ I The eommeot,00 th;,'o<m are "bmltted by.Date ~D I I ~An Individu~1 ~tizh ,\k '\__An Organization I I name '\)C1 \J \h'\<t ~l V'.name I!::re"D~i-=-:-f--~-Ae--,_.7_'_#_2.__::~r::~b_e_rs==============R=.E=:~C-)=~=I=,v=1::::....:--,8"_"D-~:...._,-i I state ;1 b 'ZiP CZ e;5?J city /.I",A,~U POWER AIITHORIT'('I I!IlIl!; 1.--IIdayphone-------------contactperson dayphone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I ~.II------,.------~~--____r---_____t""-<:--------..--;;r-.f----'¥'":::~I ., I t (h-..tJ G1.J tY 1 I J I \,e~hJhl!I I "I~~ I ~ "0,IJ"I 1.I ""t I ~~I I ::f I.aI.~I,:~I H I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~\~t-II 0}1J,cr 0>'75 II ~~•~}--/-t::>o L...;....~•use extra sheets if you need them 'I Acres American',Inc.~he Alaska Power Authority wi~view and respond to all comments in writing.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisformandleaveitatacommunitymeetingormailitto:I """". I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I --i I I,, ~----------------------------------_# October 27 It 1980 Mr.David J.Hawes 400 W.11th Avenue,116 Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Hawes: You submitted to our office some c:onnents regarding tl\e Susitna hydro- electric feasibility studies.One COIIIlent which related directly to the altematives study was forwarded to the Governor's office,as I explained to you in my letter of OCtober 8.1980.Your other COIIIent is listed below. followed by a response from Don Baxter.engineer with the Alaska Power Authority. Your COtmIent: Marketing and Finance Study ..Task III -should be delayed until environmental studies indicate that the project is feasible from an environmental perspective (difficulties range from earthquake dangers to potentially severe wildlife impacts).I don't think taxpayers'money should be spent studying the financing of an ultimately unfeasible project. ResP2nse: Themarket1ng and financing studies are a crucial element of the overall feasibility studtes program.Just as the results of the environaental and seismic studies will determine if. tft fact,the project is feasible.the marketing and financing will eqyally influence project feasibility.This is particularly 1B1fJOrtaRt with respect to uncertain bon<1 markets and to user support and marketability of Susitna power with respect to other potential power sources.These erucial items constitute one of the largest hurdles the project will have to Ovet"'COlRe if it is ever constructed.Indeed.the financial feasibility and IIJIrketabl1fty studies IIIIst be conducted early in the program for the same reasons the environmental studies IIIst be. All conaents,questions,and requests for information received by our office are reviewed bY the Alaska Power Author1~staff and Acres American. Inc ••and will be inc'uded in a report that wilt be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made on Susitna .. Enclosed is an ACTION form which you may use if you have further COllleftts.questions.or need additional information.We hive had a few problems implementing the ACTIOII SYSTEM.HoweYer.SOlIe of the c1rctlRStances Page 2 October '1.7,1980 Mr.David Hawes that held up the process have been eorrec:.ted and we believe 'your next conuent or question will be handled more quickly.Please keep in mind.however. that because a nUmber of people win review.and in some cases.cOIIIent on each item subtn1tted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:mg!l Enclosure cc:Acres Amerfcan t tnc. " I j - '1"";m,nsrre"",. A-003-80 city _ name _ #of members _ contact person day phone _ address _ __An Organization Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number e omment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.------:-----:------r;--:--- (f:\-' The comments on this form are submitted by: XAn Individu,al Citizen name Cbvv I d ~(--!etvJe<) address tiro LJ,1I~1ve -#Ie; city An c hoco..c:f < state_A h,;~zip qq.::o I day phone 211-3(Q9,S J2}(,-S281I S(!I/Y-ce A res American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing,You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Date i /(1/30 I • ,~---------------------------I I I ~I I F""I I I I I I t-":I I I",..I I r~.I vI I I I I """I I I-.I I I I I t''''';1 I I I I I I I I """1 III Alaska Power Authority r:.~.:r J (' r-I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 ,,,;.>"'",. ~(OVa-):",..~----_._-------------_._-------------_.# ~ I ~ I' - October 8.1980 M.C.Verkes 2544 Kensington Drive Anchorage.Alaska 99504 Dear MVerkes: The attached eotmtents on alternatives to $usftna hydroelectric development. that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SVSTEM have been forwarded to Fran Ulmer.chairperson of the Ral1belt Energy AlternaUves Policy Review CoMD1ttee.This CODAittee will be providing pol1cy direction to the Susitna alternatives study that Batten. Northwest Laboratories is conducting. As you may know.the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Sus1tna should be completed in such.way that there would be no guestion of its objectivity.Therefore.the legiSlature.directed triat an fi'ldtijiinaiii'tTfria hi selected to conduct the .'ternatives study ttself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres American.Inc.continue its work on studying the feasfbility of Sus1tna. The Office of the Governor is managing the feasibility study of alternatives. The Alaska Powr Authority is mallaging the feasibility study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies will help determine whether or not the State should develop n;aroelectric power on the Sus1tna River IItd/or pursue other energy "terMtives..Since the State of Alaska will make a decision by April 1982 whether to fne a 1 teense application for Sus1tna hydroelectric, Battelle is directed to complete their alternatives study well in advance of this date to permit an informed dec1siort. Since Acres will not conduct the alternatives study,we directed them not to respond to your ACTION request..It did not make much sense to us to have them respond to your COIBeftu.if they were not going to be conducting the study.We thought it better to bold your ACTION request until the ..consultant was selected. In July a request for proposals was sent out seeking consulting services to conduct an alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ranbelt.The energy plan will include an evaluation of alternatives.emerging technologies,conservation,and load management..The plan win review.and where necessary.improve the existing data base and demand forecast.It will examine the alternatfve types of electric generation and help deten;1ne whether or not the state should concentrate its efforts on development of the hydroelectric potential of the Susitra River andlor pursue other alternatives. In Septed>er.Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories (with Ebasco Sel"'V1ce and the Institute of Social and Economic Research)was selected to conduct the alternatives study.Their contract with the Office of the Governor is now signed.Battelle is preparing a work plan which is expected to be finished by the end of OCtober.Battelle anticipates begt""tng work in Koftllber. M.C.Yerkes Page 2 OCtober 8 t 1980 In the meantime.further questions and COlm1etlts concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone number and and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,"Attention:Tom Singer,"Division of Policy Development and Planning.Pouch AD.Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (9(7)465-3577. You lIlIY .'so wish to contact IIleR>ers of the Raflbelt Energy Alternatives Po11cy Review CoIIm1ttee.They are: Ms.Clartssa Quinlan,Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Dena 11 Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Charl es Conway..Chai ...n Alaska Power Authorf ty Board of Directors 2702 G..11 Street,Suite 200 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron lettr,Director Division of Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau,Alaska "811 If you have further questions or COIIIenu about the Sus1tna feasibility studies (other than the .alte1"na.tfvu study)coatinue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,SUite 31.Anchonge.Alaska 99501.(907)276-0001. Sincerely, Nancy Sluack Director Public Participation Office Attachment HB:JIl9h -i I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS til REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelec'lric Feasibility Study "~''''A-004-80 use extra sheets if you need them Date _ name _._An Organization #of members _ . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIndividualcitizensorcommunitygroupsandorganizationsareencouragedtosubmitwrittencomments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.,_",,":":':'::~; e::-...,.~-..LZ ,"'l:-J./,..,.."I /,':oJ.""G I'//7)~'"/7''''''':-5-'/..::?7'f~I ;!I~.~' -~/.·J"I~#,/':>l-.~.~I·t;;<7/'/;;:'-'~''; -//,/,';';/,/h .j 'r/?,~I..<Z/..,.L',.),3'2../.'...../"I {; ~I #I~ r'I~ t I"~I:,' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I city d~,b-Kd?2:r address _ state..d£-""'.'_·ZiP.~;~~>/city _ 779·,;-K7/JZ'"contact person day phone _ The comments on this form are submitted by: ~An Individual Citizen name #/q~<f"5 address "P~:r'ykP:~#jc'~&/{l?t>'kit: ,~---------------------II I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I ~.I I I I I I I I I I,I~I~I.I I ~I\I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority r I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,, ~-----------------------------------_# "'-, - r:- I October 8,1980 Mr.Gary Friedmann SRA Box 23S8-M Anchorage.Alaska 99507 Dear Mr.Fr1edmaftn: The attached CODJBent on alternatives to Susitna hydroelectric development, that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ulmer.chairperson of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Policy Review Coam1ttee.Th1sCOhla1ttee will be providing pol1cy direction to the Susitna alternatives study that Battelle Northwest Laboratories is conducting. As you may know,the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Susitna should be COIlPleted in such a way that there would be no guestion of in o_~jectiv1~.Therefore,the legislature directed 'tlilt an {nde"jii'nai'it-nrm be selected to conduct the alternatives study itsel f (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres American.Inc.continue its work on studying the feasfbl1 ity of Susftna.. The Office of the Governor is managing the feasibl1ity study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority is managing the feasibility study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies will help determine whether or not the State should develop 'Jii'Qroelectric power OR the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will make a decision by Aprtl 1982 whether to fl1e &license application for Susitna hydroelectric, Battell e is directed to complete their a1 tematfves study well 1n advance of this date to permit an infonaed decision. Since Acres will not conduct the alwf'ftlt1ves study,we directed them not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not make much sense to us to have them respond to your COIIReftt,if they were not going to be conducting the study.We thought it better .to hold your ACTION request untH the new consultant was selected. In July a request for proposals was sent out seeking consulting services to conduct an alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt..The energy plan will include an evaluation of alternatives,emerging technologies,conservation.and load management.The plan will review.and where necessary.improve the existing data base and demand forecast.It will ex.ine the alternative types of electric generation and help determine whether or not the state should concentrate its efforts on development of the hydroelectric potential of the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other alternatives. In Septemer.Batten.Pacific Northwest Laboratories (with Ebasco Se.-v1ce and the Institute of Soctal and Economic Research)was selected to conduct the alternatives study.Their contract with the Offtce of the Governor 11 ROW signed.Battelle is preparing a work plan which is expected to be finished by the end of OCtober.Battelle anticipates beginning work in NoVtlllbel". Mr.Gary Friedman Page 2: OCtober 8,1980 In the meantime.further questions and comtents coneeming the alternatives study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to·Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone number and and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be maned."Attention:Tom Singer,"Divisfon of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Jumtau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577. You may also wish to contact IIIeIlbers of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Po11cy Review Conn1ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan,Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,Chafnnan Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors 2702 Gambell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron Lehr I 01 rector Division of Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau t Alaska 99811 If'you have furthe....questions or coaments about the Susitna feasfbl1 tty studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue.Suite 31,Anchorage,Alaska 99501,(901)216-0001. Sincerely, ." Haney 81 unck Director Publie Participation Office Attaellaent NB:mgh I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A-005-80 use extra sheets if you need them iJ j,l- Date,_---/.7-/-J-,-,-<'7,-'-,<-';:=:.'~"'-,-'rL·,_--r"r /-,~.,\'it'. city _ address _ contact person------day phone--- #of members _ name __An Organization _I_~:~;,~'('"---zip 19 S"c s" Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 state day phone __:_.:~(:'_;'+-"i_'.._'~_.,.'__'••-.;.r-'·_ The comments on this form are submitted by: city __I--'-}_,..,_i'::-'-!-.I-'-';',-'-~'_.,.:'_i..;.'_J'______ ~An Individual Citizen name G ,*/2}E;;i'.{£LH/i/V/1) Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,----------------------------•/""',I I I -II IrI I I I I f""'>I I I ,-.I I I I Ir-~ , \ I I I I I I I r-,I I I I I I I I I I I -I I I I I f"'"I I,, ~----------------------------------_.# ..- I MEMO TO THE RECORD FROM:Dave Wozniak,Project Engineer SUBJECT:Testimony,Floyd Heimbuch,Executive Director Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association April 1980 Community Meeting in Anchorage DATE:November 25,1980 Mr.Heimbuch submitted testimony at the April 1980 community meeting in Anchorage.His testimony was entered into the ACTION system for comment by Acres American,Inc.Enclosed in this file is a written response to Mr. Heimbuch's comments. On November 5,1980,he met with the Susitna hydroelectric steering committee.On November 14,1980,he met with Bob Williams,fisheries investigator for TES,and myself.And,on November 15,1980,Eric Yould appeared before the Cook Inlet Aquaculture Board of Directors.The concerns Mr.Heimbuch expressed in his testimony were addressed in these various forums. Therefore,I recommend that the ACTION file be closed.I believe that the testimony has been adequately responded to at the various meetings in Novp.mber and that it would be redundant to send the written response to him at this time. ~-----------------------------------,t IICOMMENTS,QUESTIONS tTl REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study,I I ~(l7lI7:h IIThecommentsonthisformaresubmittedby:Date ~,~.I I __An Individual Citizen ~Organization I I C~.J/'/1 ;::::-/1..L./{!-ttJ/.:~/{'I /lr//idC (<.--lhL'-r-e/Inamet/{.cL ~de//'Jn.{2!·!(Il name I />r byI/l /:L?c'/-/.-4<7/7.IIaddress?,..(),00 y (1 :"<)'(2 #of members I I city ,-S;/t!t./-/?6t.j /-/.-1::Qc/66Z address I I state zip city I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,, ~----------------------------------_.# - - - - A-006-30 }'le are jus t They will probably beaboutanySusitnaRivermodification. unhappy with any project that even threatens it. I am Floyd E.Heimbuch,Executive Director of Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association.We are a regional aquaculture association and are recogni zed by ADF &G,the Dept.0 f Corrunerce &Economic Development and other state departments as such for the Cook Inlet area.All salmon user groups have representation on our Board of Directors.Our goal is to produce more salmon in Cook Inlet. It is safe to say that salmon fishermen are very concerned f ' enough up to now to be much better than an office generated Cash payments will Therefore,estimates based on present run Nor will a plan to fund research activities salmon returns than now are there. not be acceptable. levels are now low. strengths become highly suspect as indicators of the full prod- uction potential of that river system. Any mitigation plan or system will have to have payment In In all likelihood for it to be fair it will have to be now becoming fully aware that the Susitna system contribution to historic salmon run strengths was greater than was thought. In the time from about 1940 to 1975 there was considerable disregard for several factors in its salmon production. It is also quite sure that Susitna River salmon production be an acceptable method.One reason greater numbers of salmon will be required as fair mitigation is that when the system is now studied and it is determined what amount of habitat supports 1 salmon -there still remains unanswered the amount of salmon that that same size habitat would support given sufficient brood stock for eggs and the added nutrients from those carcasses. The study plan indicates stock seperation work will be accomplished to answer certa'in biological ques tions.The technology to do that is not yet developed,it will have to be as part of this study.So if stock ~eperation of all 5 salmon species lS critical to £Ull evaluation it should be recognized this task·c-,-__ good chance for failure. F""There is to be an attempt to develop a quantitative description rearing and spawning habi tat.There are only highly debateable procedures for this.It probably canlt be done.No one has done &(Je are doubtful that the engineering portion of the study and the biological portion of the study will mesh to provide realistic answers to questions about salmon.)1§e are not opposed to the Susitna Dam project;)~e are willing to help provide as many answers as we can to the many and complex questions of the impact on fish.) q This is not a statement against progress.It is a statement tha t acknowledges both pockets are ours /the pocket contain~~?'iftp~"o'~' energy development from this river and the pocket with fish'in this river.We may be able to put more into both rather than trade one against the other.CIAA believes this possibility is worth working on.If you think we can help you/calIon us. Thank you. ','('/ /,::J.',! / (':7 /1~ie i{c:./,--)' ~ (7 1;:/1/, I.;~':.I.e ;' .._d L l ---((c'" j ;;>'/ttf c /L/dC'j ~ L (.'{ ltJ c;;L-J ~.' j-'1't l u ~'C Z{;;?i1J--C c'to-C o!-/{f c'~ ,',l l. .""'. .- r I r A-006-80 Date submitted:4/17/80 Floyd E.Heimbuch P.O.Box 850 Soldotna,Alaska 99669 (1)It is safe to say that salmon fishermen are very concerned about any StJsitna River modification.They will probably be unhappywHh any project that'even threatens it.We are just now becoming flJllY aware·that the Sus itnasystem contribution to historic salmon run strengths was greater than was thought.In the time from about 1940 to 1975 there was considerable disregard for several factors in its salmon production. (2)It is also quite sure that Susitna River salmon production levels are now low.Therefore,estimates based on present run strengths become highly suspect as indicators of the full production potential of that river system. (3)Any mitigation plan or system will have to have payment in salmon. In all liklihoodfor it to be fair it will have to be greater salmon returns than now are there.Cash payments will not be acceptable.Nor will a plan to fund research activities be~an acceptable method~One reason greater numbers of salmon will be required as far as mitigation is thatiWhenthesystem is now studied and·it is determined what amount of ha9'itatsupports 1 salmon ....there still remains unanswered the amount of salmon that that same size habitat would support given sufficient brood stock for eggs and the added nutrients from those carcasses. (4)The study plan indicates stock separation work will be accomplished to answer certain biological questions.The technology to do that is not yet developed;it will have to be as part of this study.So if stock A-006-80 Continued,page 2 separation of all 5 salmon species is critical to full evaluation, it should be recognized this task has a good chance for failure. (5)There is to be an attempt to develop a quantitative description of rearing and spawning habitat.There are only highly debateable procedures for this.It probably can't be done.No one has done it well enough up to now to be much better than an office generated guess. (6)We are doubtful that the engineering portion of the study and the biological portion of the study will mesh to provide realistic answers to questions about salmon. (7)We are not opposed to the Susitna Dam project. (8)We are willing to help provide as many answers as we can to the many and complex questions of the impact on fish. (9)This is not a statement against progress.It is a statement that acknowledges both pockets are ours,the pocket containing the energy development from this river and the pocket with fish produced from this river.We may be able to put more into both rather than trade one against the other.CIAA believes this possibility is worth working on.If you think we can help you~call on us. (10)We are worried that the effects of darning the river will be underestimated by many fold. (11)Let's not just look at the system and say why.Letls not be sat- isfied by understanding what is there and trying to maintain it.Let's build a challenging goal and work toward accomplishing it. """l I ;~ - ..... i october 8.1980 Mr.Kenneth Taroox 6890 Burlwoo4 Drive Anchor.~ll A1.!i~99501 Deer MY""Tarbox: Thi!attach~ques~1oO$()I\al~rnat1v~$to Susitna hydroeltlCtric develoPllleftt, that YQ~SUbm1tte4 to the Alaska PQWerAuthor1ty thrQWh ttlo ACTION SYSTEM hilves bee ...fo",arc;$ed to Fr.,.Ul~rt cfJ41rpe1"$o"of ~~f1belt Energy Alte""t.1~Po1h:y Revt,*Cotml1ttee.Th1$COI8I1ttee ,,111 bf:! providing P91i~y di~tion to the Sy,'tnt lltern4t1ve$stu4Y that ~ttelle Northwest Laboratories is conducting" As you may know.the 1980 leg1s1at~dee1ded that the .'temat1ves stydy fqr Susitna should be complete4 in WCh ~way that there would ~ .,0 ~ues.tl.()..~..iAA.gbjectiv1ty..TherefOre,t.he 18 91S..'.ltu1"e.directed.·.....tJia an n -.ntflrm Iii silected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres American,lnc.continue its work on studying the feasibility of Susftna. The Office of the Governor is managing the feasibility study of alterQaUves. The Alaska Power Author1~is managing the feasibility study of Sus1tnt. The results of both $tud1~will help determine whether'or not the State shotlld develop l"ijCrroelectric power on the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will illake a decision by April 1982 whether to file a license application for Sus1tna hydroelectric, Battelle is directed to complete their alternatives study ~n in advll~e of this date to permit an infonDed decision. Since Ac:res will not conduct the alternatives study,we directed them not to respond to your ACTION request.I t did not make much sense to us to have them ilnswer your quest1Oft$,if they were not 9Qing to be ~duct1ng the study.We thought it better to hold your ACTIOti request until the new consultant was selected. In July a request for proposals was Simt out seeking CORsult11l9 services to conduct an alternatives study.net prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt.The energy plan win include an evaluation of alternatives,emerging technologies.conservati()D,and load lilnagement.;The plan will review.and where necessary"improve the existing data base .4 demand forecast.It will exurlne the alterMtive types of ele«:tric:generation and help detenrtne whether or not ~$tiJte should ccmcentrate its efforts on development of the bydroelec:.tric potential of the Sus1~R1Ytilr and/Qr pursue other .'temat1V", In Sep~e,r.rsattelle Pa~ific Northwest ....bonltor1es (with EbasGO Seryfqta and 'the In$t1tu~of Social and EcoftOfl'lc Re$~~)was selectt!d to ctn4uct the alternatives stll<!y.Their contrat;t with the Qfff~of the Governor 1$..$1ped.Battelle is prepariMa work pl_"which is E!~~to "f1nished by the emt of Oc~r.BiltWlle Iftt1e1p4. begirm1pg wor~fa Hov..r. Mr.Kenneth E.Tarbox Page 2 OCtober 8 J 1980 In themeant1me,further questions and cOImlents concerning the alternatives study {or response to your ACTION request}should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone number and and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,II Attenti on:Tom Singer,"Division of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577. You may also wish to contact members of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Poliey Review Com1ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director Oivision of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Hr.Charles Conway.Chairman Alaska Power AuthoM ty Board of 01 reetors 2702 Gambell Street.Suite 200 Anchorage,A1asta 99503 Mr.Ron Lahr.01 ~tor Division of Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau,Alaska 99811 If you have further questions or cOllRents about the Sus1tna feas1bll fty studies (other than the alternatiYes study)continue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 west 4th Avenue,Suite 31.Anchorage,Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director Public Participation Office Attachment NB:mgh - - - - - - COMMENTS,QUESTIO,NSa REGUESTS Susitna HydroeleclricFeaslbUilyStudy A-DOl-SO city name _ A'_ASI~,t,.,POWER AUTHORITY contact person day phone _ address -'"-J"(L+:J.,..).'),.~'L\'-l~~---,1~·~~2.~:_ ___An Organization #of members --"-R-=--:E=---=-C--=E=--=I,--,V,-E,-'_1)_ Zipo...'\~) Q~"2.7iD·2~~S name Kcnne.#,S IA-F-,be>x address b890 ~~~r>\)B- city fhoc.X\O'tf'<)..C!\e.." state ft\o....,\<..B. day phone a,,,\,,\-(;:Sslo The comments on this form are sul}mHted by: ~An Individual Citizen , I ••I I•I I I I••••••Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number • each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.."-""·":;'.'·o·':"""ircA..,0\''''0'''''meA""'_0<;'o..s;.&,"'}",.,....,'''~"'4 ;.~,:,I.' "rb e~:\-.p..~¥.."1:.l...:I -t"\,,::>CD"(\~-\;,\~s\(.A..-'\>~~~~. ,..------------------_.._-_._.'.-•I""'"I I P"I I I .-I I I I I I F'"I I I I I p"I I I ,.-I I I I I rjJ~ \I I I -: I I'"'"I I I I I I I I I -II Alaska Power Authority !"""I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I_t , ~-----------------------_.._-------_. October ..8 •.19~O Delr Ms.Gates: The attaehedc~~tson ,1,1 te~J1V."'j)to ,~u~,;~aj~Y1l~1"qt ..1c,de••lo~~' thatyous'Otdf't~~tftothq'"Ala$~'i;~~t:'~u~~1Jy;th~Jt!~!ACl!IQIJfJI.~ SYST£Mballe 'b~Q 'f()~T"decJjWFl"".".qlIPe1"•..~1~iof;~rR4illd:telt Energy jMtema~:.es {Pol1cy"ReV1ew •COiIIb1ttee •.·....·Thi$c.,.t~wil'liJ;be providing policy d1rectiqnto the SUs1tna~1 ~rn4~j!l~;,.~tlflY!U~t;f~ttelleNorthwestlaboratoriesis'condqcti~~..j , • "••.• As you may kROW.~,1980 legislature ~cided thlt;,~e,~1~~t1v.,)y:1 studyfor'Susttila soouldbecOI1pleted iosUch ~.,.Y.;,~t,~~!,would·be n09!@t1on of 1tsobject1i1ftt•.There'Qre.~iJegt,~l~;tMmj4h~~eted> that '.an fnd~t-nJ"lr be sel~ted,~,C9~MCt,,~i.'~t1veSiS!tudy ftsel f(Batte11 ewas chosen)and'~jt.Ac~~jj'j,~1,~nl'IJ'C!~!~tt,nu.j!1!!ts! work Oft studying the fea$1bl1ityofSus1~.~'. The Office oftbe ,Governor is ,..g1ngthe,feas1b1lfty s~y,ofalternat1".s,,· The Alaska Power AuthOr1ty is Il1Inag1"9tbe;teasfbHl1ty;$tuciY~fSus1tna.. The results ofboth.tudf~will help .~nt1¥ii'4tetherj.prpot,the State should develop bydroeleetr:1c power on .the $us1tna R1".r ..•nd/qr pursue; other energy alternatfves...Sin~theStateofAlast•.;¥111 i.ke:<adec1ston by April 1?82>.tber~f11,;a lfceR$~apPU~t1QnfOf'i~~s1tnalhydroelectr1e. Batte'le·,s <l1~te4 tcf compl~~ttte'r-alttrnat~.~~sturJy.l1i,fn advance of tlrfsidate jto'permitan infQ~.~ci~1~th ..' ;'~;,'f>.1.",,',"',',-.--,,".-,-L Since Ac...s.w111~tc;onduct~"~""t1Yes~~...directed ,.the&l; not to respond tOyourACTl0rfr~~'t.Jt d1d not make .lIUch Sf!I\Se to us to haYethemr'E!spond.to your.~p~·~i,f they were not going to be conduet,fngthestudy..We thoughtft'better to hc)ld your ACTIOH requast untflthenew consultant vas selected.. In July a request forpropoS41 ~•.~s~ePt~t ,~k1Rgq)ns~1 tl,.g services to conduct an'alte~t,1vess~j ·.~·.,r~,re "'~"~ipJaqforthe el ectr1calnee<is;()f ·tn,··r~1il~1~~);j;rhe <.~planwfn'f~l~.•n evaluation of altetnat1v....~1n~1 ~eCmlQl~f••~~tl)t,l'fj.,&nd.;..]ri', load man&gement.·..The plim~11 ....•rev1 ••ii~d .~,~f.ry,.;f~.··..u. exbtfngdata base.and ··cIemalfd....forec:$$~..It wll r~1~.¥t;be A}.t8rnat1ve' types of elt!CUic>,enera~1gn ahd·~Jpdete~1.~rwt:.e~()r ..t !the$tate should "COnd!ntrate .'.fts··effo~.po d.y,e,l()~!;~,!C)f ~11~4~1.tr,'~ll"" potent1aloftiteSusltn1 R1Yer~()r,~~.·CJ~~~1'te~J<t~$~;;"\·" In 5eptednlr.Bat~ne Pa~ff1c;.tmrt~t,L.qort~rf~,(~tb.~~i" Serviee····and··the I~~tttute})fSCJG1al~~~:c;)I\..~G~~~$~"..};wa$sel;~ted to coAdudthe ..1te,.~1~~s\~.'•.The1,,~,~~~,";~:;j~_()f(1(#,jf.r the Governor 1srJqW·;"~...••$4 'Jl~is~~r"1nQ.i~,ttIOtk';Rl'fl ;;,••ctli,is expeeted·to 'l)e"'f1 ~f~~~X'~··~·()if:OC~.··..~ttell ••qt1(.1Mtesj: beg1rming.rk1nHq.~~·~.·..". -'c:\,""'.1':::",:,-,,-,'.- Ms.Carol A.Gates Page 2 October 8,1980 In the meantime,further questions and comments concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone ntm"ber and and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,"Attentio.n:Tom Singer.II Division of Policy Development and Planning.Pouch AD.Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577. You may also wish to contact members of the Raflbelt Energy Alternatives Policy Review Conm1ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan,Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 MY".Charl es Conway I Cha 1man Alask.a Power Authority ~rd of 01nctors 2702 Gambell Str"t,Suite 200 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron Lebr,Director Oiv1sion of Budget and ~nageM!nt Pouch A.'t Juneau.Alaska 9981l If you have further questions or C08Dltnts about the Sus1tna feattbl1ity studies (other than the alten\ltfves atudy)contlwue to dfrect those to the Publfc -P«rtfcfpatfon O1ffa of the A'aska P~r Authority,333-west 4th Avenue.Suite 3~AncheNge.A1ana 99501.(907)276..OQG~• .-.-Sf nceI"-*'Y ,' Haney Blunck Director Pt1bl'c-Partfcipat1011 Off~ce AttAchllent NB:mgh ..,..... - - A-OOS-SO Carol A.Gates May 8,1980 8457 Greenhill Way·Anchorage~AK 99502 Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Gentlemen: RECEIVED :'"\J ,"j - NJ.S;(A POW::R AL'Tr:ORITY I understand that another study will soon be underway to determine the need for the Susitna Hydro-Project.This particular study (I know there have been many studies done,at a great expense to taxpayers)is supposed to evaluate alternatives to the dam project,which has been deemed environmentally unsound by numerous environmental groups,beside~which the money for all the studies and the actual project could be.put to much better use in alternate energy plans,not only for Alaska,but for the entire country. I also understand that the money and time allotedfor the study of the important alternative plans are extremely meager in comparison to the rest of the study.Cost estimates,seismic rronitoring,risk analysis, and biological studies are not evenaccomp1 ished before a decision is due on the alternatives.This makes no sense.This is really not much of a study,is it,\'Jhen you consider.you have already made up your mind that this huge,wasteful,dangerous dam project is the only way?We need an honest appraisal of the situation--not this biased approach. Let1s use our heads for a change and take all the factors into consideration. Sin ce rE~1y , ( )'<-r/.d :-t-;::--_{i..~{jc ~zl{Iz~....5 Ca ro 1 Gates r ,~ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 June 4,1980 Tom Trent Regional Supervisor Habitat Protection Section 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Dear Tom, This is a short note to let you know we have received your comments and questions on the Susitna hydroelectric feasibility studies. Because of the high interest in the studies and over 100 requests we have had for information since the April meetings,we have not been able to respond to your request as quickly as we would like.We do want you to know,however,that staff members within the Alaska Power Authority and Acres are presently reviewing your comments.You will receive a written response soon. Sincerely, ~~Zhr Nancy B1unck Director Public Participation Program DEPART:tIENT OF FISH AND GAME May 14,1980 .L4 Y S.HAMMONO.GOYERNOR ~.t~4!blBlC A-DOg-3D R ECEI VED Mr.John Hayden Acres-American,Inc. Liberty Bank Buildling Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear John: AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY On May 6,I accompanied Brent Drage of R&M and Brent Petrie on an overflight of the Susitna River from its mouth on Cook Inlet to a point a few miles above the Watana Dam site.During the flight and at a post- flight meeting,Brent Petrie and I pointed out to Brent Drage,areas which were particularly important from recreational,fish and wildlife and navigational standpoint,and proposed l0cations for detail aerial black and white photography sites along the river. R&M1s planned activities will extend downriver from the proposed dam sites to the Susitna station area below the Yentna River confluence. Both ADF&G and DNR have a concern that some effort be given to examining the Alexander Creek area downstream of Susitna Station,however.Approx- imately 4-5 miles upstream of the Alexander Creek confluence with a side channel of the Susitna river is the origin of that side channel from the main stem of the Susitna River.At low flows this channel,which is important for recreational access downriver to Alexander Creek,can become marginally passable or impassable to all water craft except airboats.Since Alexander Creek is an important recreational area and fishery,and also an area where major subdivision disposals by the DNR will take place this year,it is important,I believe,that the question of the access provided by the Susitna River flow be detenmined. If flow through the side channel of the Susitna River by Alexander Creek is restricted during the May to October period,when most recreational traffic or boat traffic to homesites in the area occurs,it would result that traffic going downstream to Cook Inlet on the main stem Susitna and detouring a distanc~of about 27 miles to get to Alexander Creek.- - J.Hayden .-2-5/14/80 r-, Drage indicated R&M was not budgeted to look at the Susitna down to the head of the side channel to Alexander Creek,but I believe the problem live outlined should receive some further review and possible addition to the study area by Acres and APA. Sincerely, ./j~~~ Thomas W.Trent Regional Supervisor Habitat Protection Section (907)344-0541 cc:Brent Petrie -DNR Robert Mohn -APA Don Baxter -APA RQbert Bowker -USF&WSJ,m Gill -Acres -, Hr.i~n is.smney SRA Bot 41-t HOMer.Alaska 99603 Dear Mr.$mil..,: You asked tebe platef1 on the ~1Hng Ust toO receive tAfufitMtion on the Susltaa ftYd.roelecu-ic feasibtlity stUdies aDd ..the Bradley lake hY4t;o PrGJec~.we have ,lae~4 ~"-00 the _111119 list for the Sus1tM:studies. ~wr,the Alaska,.."AUthOrlt1.i$notilaRaging the Bradley L~I!project.It 1$beift9~by the Anay Corps of Engineers .. Tilerefort!..we hav.9i..,our,""to the project manager.Sob Oeftbril'lk. He can be ...tMd.t~ Telephoale~;152...4042 I suggest you ccmtact Mr.~1"if IOU have Ui quut10niW'~ts. ~tlGHd.is a ct)py ofa ftlna~DJa1use ffyou have ~ts at- queS.fOB Oft the:Sw1tM feuibtlitj $tudtes. Slnterely. ma M oIiEtfoa Of PUBLIC'MTICIPAfIWi dl/tl9ft tHJ"SvtbanaaAct1_obtctiW 01 Publtc hrticipation :ON 3NOHd3l31 :oN 3l1,j V\J no NVtJOlAl31/\l -+ilL I ~ I - A-010-80 use extra sheets if you need them Oate _ contact person day phone _ city _ #of members _ name address _ ~_An Organization Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 The comments on this form are submitted by: day phone Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. name address sRA eO>,~__ city ~()~r state _-AJ<~__ZiP q q'a 3 2.35'-134'-4-'1 __ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: -LAn Individual Citizen Ste.,,~Vl B.SM,l~y COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,... ~.._--........._---------------------------.' ~---------------------I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -. 3 '3 3{JJ .lfiSA tJ€.- ,~~~?I aLLC~,ttk 1c1.~Oj f ,-. , , .r}>p~-L--~~~ifV~r~~~~ .LJI~~~~~-~~/~~~ 7''£JlC.l«o(<-:"'-O xlv,cx;kc~-Z~dG f!jd~~-<r ~.L/c-~[~&aaUd()~b.4~r~J 7£4~- I?~~ ,P'd--'~.Y1~/5 ....••..."-IZ') ~C;r&2/t:?-tU fl.5m/lbf' r [)/J.&J)t.../{/~G.-.."),Ie f /1 J-(0111 e12./11/<.err 603 ,(qo()?--_?s -73 ¥r ..... March 19,1981 ACTION FILE Number:A-Oll-S0 Mr.Ken Kastner West Side Fisherman1s Assn. P.o.nox 1062 Homer ,Al aska 99603 Dear Mr.Kastner: ¥Qu submitted t~aur office san~q~~stiQns regqrdinQ tt~Susitna ~ydroelectric feasibility studies.Your questiQns ~re listed below followed by a response from Acres Americ.an,Inc ..the consulting firm ~anagfng the studies. Your question: HQW many anadromous fish stream$will be affected by the Susitna Project? ResEonse: Existing data to date indicates that under present COnditions Devil Canyon acts as a natural barrier to sallllOnll1igration.Ass\Jll1ing this 1s confirmed by ttre flsh~ry st~dles befng conducted,t~only anadromous fish region which will pptentiall~be affec~by the Sllsitna project is that dOWllstre-am of Devnc.nyon.No tributarY streiUlls of the Susitna presently utilized by anadromous fish will be directly Inundated.llQWever,the mainst~,bet~,n Devll Canyon and the Cook lnletw()uldbe subject to alteriltiofls in f10\11.Qur $tY4i~s will aS$eSs the potenti~l ~ffects Of various flPW$in ma1nstem Susitna with respect to salmon --. 1)spawning 2)residency ~)aod tral'lsportatiQn tQ tributary streams. Ypur question. CPuld you sell(i us information on fisheries stud;,s being c.onducted? Re$epnse~ We have attached to this letter t~tta.~tlme,.t A)sections of the Plan of StUdY thAlt outl ine the fistler1es stl.ldleS being conducted • Page 2 Ken Kastner March 19,1981 Your question: What data do you have available concerning species and run sizes? Response.: We have attached a list of references (attachment B)we have gathered to date which directly relate to the Susitna salmon fisheries. Enclosed is an ACTION form which you may use if you have further comments,questions,or need additional infonnation.Next time,it w1ll not take so 100g to respond to your request.We had,unfortunately a few problems implementing the ACTION System.However,the circumstances that neld up IHie proeess have been corrected.Because a number of people review,and 1nssome cases,coovnent on each item submitted to the Action System,it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB/mgh Enclosures. CONCUR:WOZNIAK1MOHN •I •I I •I I I I I I •I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I•I I I••I I •I•I I A-Oll.,.80 t:iddress -P.f)..%~\D b G city tk ~r I tJiVb\l~9 J~~.3 contact personJl\,.l>?Ci~dayphone z..s~.,gO)".,.--..".,. #of members---=L=--=~_ -LAn Organization name W~~+-£idC~~J&4:W\W\bbuC" ________zip~--state city ~------- Individual citizens or comm~nity groups and organizations are encQ~raged to 51.\bmit written comments.Please number each cOmment,qUl9stion or request separt:ilely.Be as brief and specific as possible.~-------_ address _ daY phone _ The c:omments on this form arl9 s!Jbrnittl9d by: __An Ind!vid~al Citizen )~ic:," /./~/'"'~S·:';x'l<'o/t;//';v /'.I "'"name ~ COMMENTS,QUESTIONS"REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Fea,ibilily Study ,~~.~...~-~~~-~.~~~..~-~...-.-•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I ,~/k!i?;O~~,%/CA I AC"rI9S A,meric,an,Inc.and t,h e AlaskaPo\iVer A~thorit,y,will re,V"iew,"an,d r,e,s,pond,to''JoJIV"J}IJ "nay make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:"T;pV!" ;Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,~lJite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99p01/(a07)?76~Q001 I II, ~.~_~-..-.~.~_, !,.." - ,,- I December 24,1980 ACTION FILE NUlnber:,1\-012-30 Mr.Wallace H.Chapin 3214 Wy~ning Drive Anchorage~Alaska 99503 Dear r~r.Chapin: Thank you for sending your COimients on the Susitna hydroelectric project that is presently undergoing feasibility study. You C0l11nents~along \"lith an others v.'e receive ~Jill be reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres Ar;1erican,Inc.,the firm conducting the feasibility studies.Before a decision is made on Susitna,all corrlnents we receive "Jill be included in a report that will be sent to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the Governor1s office. Enclosed is a form that you may use if you have other comnents on the feasibility studies. Sincerely~ [iancy 81 unck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres American,Inc. ,_-----------------------------1 A-012-80•I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date December 1,1980 I I -LAn Individual Citizen __An Organization i·.....·.,",,-;:n:',i;;-,-';----'I I Wallace H.Chapin name I:,';;:zfr~.,·.~";l I :::~:..321 4 Wyomi n9 Dr i ve 'of memb.".--F F -: I city Anchorage,address I I state Al aska zip 99503 city I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. •IIIIResponsetonewsletter.I I I I IITheideaofahydroelectricpowerfacilityinthisareahasbeenofgreatI I interest to me since I cam here in 1972.IIIthinkthepossibilitiesareendlessandthebenefitstoAlaskansintheI I near and distant future are also without a doubt endless.I •IIPleaseconsidermeanardentsupporteroftheprojectandkeepmeonyourI I mailing list for all future publications.I I I •I •I •III I I I • •III I I 1-use extra sheets if you need them I I.Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make .1 your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:••I Alaska Power Authority • •333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 ••••,, ~-----------------------------------_# - 11/?5/'Rn GentlRrnen: The idea of a Hydroelectric Power Facilitv in this area has been of great interest to me since I rame here in 1~7?I think the possibilities are Rnd18s~and the bpnifits to Alaskans in the near and distant futurFl are also IlJithout a doubt endless. PleasR considpr me an ardent supportFlr of the project and keRp me on your mailing list for all future publications. Sincerely yours,I' :.(C~;,.-!\.../ Wally Chapin - ,-. December 23~1980 Ms.Louise G.Spach 7800 DeBarr Road,Space 469 Anchorage,Alaska 99504 Dea r ~ls.Spach: Thank you for sending us your COirrllents regarding the Susitna hydroelectric project.Your COHment,along with all others we receive, will be reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc., the finn conducting the studies.Before a decision is made on Susitna, all conn~nts we receive will be sent to the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors and the Governor's office. Enclosed is a fonn that you may use when submitting your COfl"iUents on the plans for campgrounds. Sincerely. Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure Acres American,Inc. CONCUR:Wozniak Hohn ""''J - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them t M--",,~--.'r-~l;-;:;·'i:·\:;l.~;-:"'.\ I<,~-j'i,Ttw Ii U) Date December 1,1980 contact person day phone _ city _ name address _ #of members,_ __An Organization Alaska. I will write later about plans for campgrounds. I am very happy and interested in the development of anything to do with Reponse to newsletter. state city _~A'-'Jn'-'-'c"-'h_'_"o'_'_r_"'a~g-"'.e---------- _A_la_s_k_a zip 99504 Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. day phone _ add ress -<7w;8.u.OI.l.JOLJ.tDet:--lB.JJ:a:w.r-l-r--ARud__SJ+pwaw..c.s::.p-'4'=tJ6.L9"---_ The comments on this form are submitted by: name _L,=-,o"-,u,,-,;,-,,s,-,=e'---"".G-'-..-'S"-l'p=-'=a=-'=c"-'hc--_ ---X-An Individual Citizen Acres American;Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study .....:,;~~~~,..L-A-013-80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,.. ~~----------------------------------_# I~ !""'" I - - December 23,1980 Mr.Douglas Lottridge 4641 San Roberto Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99504 Dear Mr.Lottridge: When you returned a coupon asking to be put on the mailing list to l~ecei ve i nforrnati on on the Sus itna hydroe 1ectri c feas i bi 1i ty studi es , you also asked for infonnation regarding the alternatives study. The Alaska Power Authority is not managing the alternatives study. Therefore,we are sending your request for infonnation to Fran Ulmer, Chai\"\'JOman of the Policy Review COfiJ'flittee,which is lI1anaging the alternatives study.The alternatives study are being conducted by Battelle Pacific North\'les t Labora tori es. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:rngh cc:Acres American,Inc. lId also like more information on the alternatives being considered Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study December 1,1980 I I I I I ~.':':''.-.-'(~~:~~:;;,1 ;~.~)I :....'-L2.!-.LltQ.'..oJ j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them Date contact person __day phone _ address ~_ name city ----- ~_An Organization #of members,~_ Douglas Lottridge -,-A~l=a=sk=a"----ziP 99504 and the predicted reqllirements vis-a-vis cllrrent sO'lrces. Pl ease conti nIH.?send;09 the news]etter Response to newsletter. Thank you. day phone ~ name state city ~----LA.llnu.co.Lh""'o'-'-r.....a~g.....e _ The comments on this form are submitted by: address ----=:J:4J.1.6.::I4-'-1-'S.LIa.....n.L.-LR"'Q'-"'b"'"e-'-r....tQ""----'AcLv"-'e-.lnJ.J.11'-'-e~_ ---x'--An Individual Citizen D 1 !,.J IIBl1i1n ,l6ifi:Jl!l.-' ,.------------------------------A-014-80•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I ,J ~------------------------------------, r I .- - December 23,1980 Nr ..Thomas R.Anthony SRA 1795 Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Dear Hr.Anthony: Thank you for sending up your canments regarding the alternatives study for the Susitna hydroelectric project.We have made note of your concerns and are forwarding them to Fran Ulmer,chairwoman of the Policy Review COrmlittee,which is managing the alternatives study.The alternatives study is being conducted by Battelle Pac;fie Northwest Laboratories. The Alaska Power Authority is managing the studies that Acres American,Inc.,is conducting on the feasibility of the hydroelectric development in the Susitna basin.These studies are separate from the alternatives study being conducted by Battelle .. If you have any further questions on the alternatives study,please address them to r~.Fran Ulmer Director of the Division of Policy .Deve 1opment and Pl ann i ng OPOP Pouch AD Juneau,Alaska 99811 If you have any comrnents on the Susitna hydroelectric feasibility studies,you may use the enclosed fonn for your con~nts • Your nan~has been included on our mailing list for future Susitna newsletters. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres An~rican,Inc. concur.ow RM Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all commel"lts in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: A-015-80 use extra sheets If you need them I I I I Date I r2 rd..·.J r::/?rt\\r.,"r'~-r mi.IIl~\V-l"~~~-'::~LuJ,-!1iE-QL.I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I #of members contact person-----day phone---- city name address _ __An Organization J'ef!.- state Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately_Be as brief and specific as possible._ day phone _ add ress --""S'-"'RL.lI9-'----~----'-11"'_~c!5"=___ city _----'--Ilu:.I1L.>e""-'J,C'..'(J....y--"tII..,~~e..=j-)_ _--L-JJ4CL.:K~ZiP 99541 name The comments on this form are submitted by: LAn Individual Citizen COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,~---------------------------~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,. ~----------------------------------_.# Thomas R.Anthony eRA 1795 hcnerap-99507 ..~- 2 1980 ~,..: l 'J":'0I"_-J- "..c .•',.'_.,:"'I(ITYi,_,_...'i '''"-'''' i1alka Po.er Authority Publlc Part1elpatlGD Offic. 333 w.~th Sui t.31 An ehorage ,.....k.99501 De ..B1re:: -~lIy atreAge_t r•.,otioD 'e th.updatsd Suaita.~c1r.BDdj.«. feu eo l1ndly lent m'1.to the foll••1ng bit of 1n ermatio.: onl milli••4.11 ...;ar.:'N'1ag ap.n't.study alterna1t1Te'S',and thirty lI1ill loa to nu4,.the ct .... The alteraetiTe I.ergy tor.I,•.,listed 1.you:t By4r.Studt•• •n.l«t_I,arl Wi1lld,solar,p ••roleWl,au.olear,.o.d,coal,t1d.al _d OODllfty.1...Th.,tsounelogy .f ontadn ot th•••altern&t1T••'i. pr•••ntly not,_11 unde ratoN &ad thHefer"I ..·.WI.,Tlry e ...,.to .. brue.GY'er:'wdth a fe.'thousad dollarl.St1l1 dealt inwlt my intell- 1geu..D1 mal1n&the implication that the ••allernatty••are getti.g a f~ir .hate at~20,OOO apiec..Th1.i.0 ••dollar ap.nt t.Itud,.a hom.....p.r.-t.d...inc1llill oompazefJj to the to atully a .ontral1_d.p .... plaut.With auch a buelget I w111 b.Apr..ely __4 1f SMt.l1. el ....anythlng bu.t rubber-.tap ,.8ur Sun 1;115 p_r pl..y. Unfertwlately tor us both I find.I ..able to do 11'1 on r ••earn. Cen..qu.n.tly I rill n'v,%"euppert your 4_ido.a!becau••I haye found that for tb.'30 000 per bella.held.you espeClt i'1j to o••t I -.IlQt enly put alternatlve .nergy 1••,h •••,but I 0_bui])4 th.:hov.~ (...walng I preT1".the labor)azul buy the let.It ..oule I t be at.:4000 .qu.....t ••t oarp.t atuff.tt oraos.,bG:.I:,bee•••ne",i.g _hat I de &bout the pr••••'world r ••ouro.aitu&*1oll II,.••J1.-t.no~wouldn't &110..III t.build one.But 1 t .eu14l ~a a••d.e.·lga".4.th future> genH&tiona ef 1xwIan beinga in 8111.4 ..e11te:thlt'meate.pr..-ntl,. getting finano"by thet:'.urplus oil mon.y IJ:'()ahesp1y pined.'at the' .'spen••ot mere=:>euvirouent&1 luwotl?ill Prli_.W111i_Bound and!til.. B"f~t 8.....nO.l to .ention peint.i.b.~D.11.01'1"aimpl,.,en~ udge 119,•rUDct on of lif••tI1.and tho••'Who l'T...atur"8Ild GcHt' _4 ebilldren and llf."11 a wat..he••'8i •.,to lty."••.that~they do not 'bttoOJle thi"..whet reb frem lIIul .urdu·the ••••they prof..... to l ••~.'fa.S.ate .oan st.al and bribe ba 8Windl.:~dl it.CULl""to, but 1 t Will be to th.."entual diama.,.of all who ,art1el,...f.r suft ~ier-quio:kly tt1tn.it...ort prGulurii••o1tlhnl againn it. S.here,'••y r.cemmendation.Ge ahead!and study th.a1tnn&t1T"". I pernX1&aly guu:&nt...ther•.••bette ODe..htde 1t right ar1<t epft4.130 mil11&u ()..nib Otl.t whicb i ••340 m111:101l ••'1111 710 .t 1W1'prejettted coet for the-SUll tn.uta.Tatee -.11 thfr 1;Uu,'feu ••d. Thi.1.,th•.•~ly fair-way tede it.btl'all thtl:1nferaatlu .-.hfted. _ailable'tel1aat••,bu,'teep eopyt"1gh'b te 1t~'hi~1"the,:retUrD. Oil ft%'i.T..~._t.!M.er140.u ..it lP IlindWilll. Me.dill.',.the bU11dozers,ldllh.v._lted &'few mor •..years. the ,.pulat~ol1 wtllh".s:rown 11.muoh leeo thd 1fU ):rejeot.4.'he- peopl.,of Al...k&,re.ouroeful ...th•.,Uft'..111 h.e'f.und ..•••11 110rit' ..,..te.dOlisdt'.On the enarat tni1 alreadyu••,and ••••,lf oerta.111 m..,.1'oO~"r.tl~~be'gi:n tl p"t)'rlapatibtl1 red ,au.amt....1.w111 h..... thetJluoh ••1''''bcrpe that GJUr gratldO'hlldten wall be born into •world th'Y b:A l ••~.......... SinoH'ly yourl.'~"'ll;""".....f'",41···ir-JfJ..fi,ttJ1;.,'IU1{/An..,...:/~fr:I L-P'''''Lt-.. r February 10.1981 ACTION File Number:A-016-80 Ms.Dona M.Agosti 2324 Loussac Drive Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Dear Ms.Agosti: When you submitted your request to be placed on our mailing list to rec1eve future newsletters regarding the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility study.you also asked for some infomation.Your question is listed below.followed by a response from Robert Mohn.Director of Engineering for the Alaska Power Authority. Your guestion: Why can't Devil Canyon be built first and Watana added later? Response: The Sus1tna River flow is very seasonal,with high summer flows and low winter flows.A,large reservoir is required to provide enough storage to regulate this uneven flow and thereby provide dependable power when it is needed.The Devil Canyon reservoir. by itself,1s not large ~nough to even out the seasonal flow. and therefore,electrical output from the project is reduced. The project benefits are'reduced accordingly.and the project 1s not economically viable by itself. Building Watana first,with its much larger reservoir,provides upstream storage.Thus,.when the flow reaches Devil Canyon.the seasonal variation has ~en removed.For this reason.Devil Canyon should not be constructe9 without Watana or some other large storage facility already in plac~upstream. Your question has been submitted to our ACTION system which means that it was reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American. Inc ••the finn conducting the feasibility studies.You question,as wen Page 2 Ms.Dona M.Agosti February lO,1981 as all other questions and comments we receive on the Susitna feasibility studies.will be included in a report that will be sent to the Alaska Power Authoritys'board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made on the feasibility of the Sus1tna hydroelectric project. Enclosed is an ACTION form which you may use if you have further questions,comments,or need additional information. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB/mgh Enclosure CONCUR:WOZNIAK """1" - .011I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A-016-80 use extra sheets if you need them Date December 16,1980 #of members,_ contact person day phone _ city _ __An Organization address _ name _ be built first and Watana added later if needed. I would like to hear more about why Devil's Canyon can't Your first issue is very informative. _Atil.uaL:suk....uaL-------zip 99503 Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ city __~At:lJnwc...lh.J..I.oL1.r..l.la~g.t;;.e--------- The comments on this form are submitted by: add ress _--"2~3u..2..::I4'__'_1"""OI......J s......s......a"-'-c'--'-'O-'---r-L;V.ue _ day phone _ name _---ID..LLoJ.LnwaL..L:lM-..JA~g;'o.L;;s:LJ.t<-.1i------- state _x _An Individual Citizen Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS ell REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,~l •I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,. ~-----------------------------------_# - - - ,- If you want to get future newsletters ,JII1IIJ -------~,This public information document on the Susitna hydropower project was developed by the Alaska Power Authority I Public Participation Office,Nancy Blunck,Director.Comments on the substance of this newsletter and ideas for future publications should be forwarded to the Public Participation Office by way of the following coupon.I Last First Initial Name ,I'I :;~::~s I 'A/'~v/~c/J/,,'I City """""--'-L--r--.....--r---.---.---r--'I""""""--'State ~I i)"J/L/'i,,~;~'\'~I and mail to:Alaska Power Authority I l,//f"-''\J,--\'Public Participation Office ~.--333 W.4th·Suite 31 .Anchorage,AK 99501 .'t .......v·,.,~j ",,;/\(;:<,-THANKYOUFORYO~I~~~____" {.,.( ,>-~~l"" , \f,,.,'"I /"',,( '-- 'L [J 1\/" /- ,",,-c,j ,) - May 12,1981 ActiOD Fl1e Number:A-OOl-81 Mr.Tboirias R.Anthony SRA 1795 Aad1orage,Alaska 99507 Dear MJ".Anthony: In December you sent us your COIIIIenU regarding the proposed SusitDa hydroelectric project and your ideas concerning the best way to meet energyMeds.I want you to know that your COIIIIents have been received by the Power Authority and fonarded to Acres American.Inc•• the finn conducting the feasibility studies for Susitna. I have also forwarded a copy of youJ"cCRlents to Charles Sitkin. the project manager of the Ratlbelt Energy Alternatives Study which is being conducted by Battelle Pacific Northwest laboratories.The purpose of the Battelle study is to examine alternatives and ~re tbell to SusitM hydroelectric development.The alternative study was begun in October 1980 and is expected to be completed in April 1982..If yOU have questiODS on this study.you may contact the project I1IMger or Fran Ulllltr.who is chafrper'$Gft of the COIII1ttee that is assisting the Govemor·s office in managing the studies.Both addresses are listed below. Charles Sftk1n.Project Manager'Fran Ul.r~Director Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Study Divisionaf Policy Developllellt Arthur Young ami CoIapuY aJKl P1 ann1ng 730 I Street Pouch AD Anchorage.Alaska 9t601 Juneau,Alaska 99811 Your COIIIeI)ts have been rev1f1J1ed by the Alaska Power Authority and ttave beea sent to Acres AlIerican.Inc ••the fi,.conducting the studies .. Your COIDents will also be im:luded fn a report our office will Brake to the Power Authority Board of Directors and the Governor next spring fJI"'Ior to a dee1sfon Oft Susitna. EQClosed is an ACTIOK form you may use if you have further COIIIIIents or bY questions. Sincerely. Jean Buchanan Public Participation Office JB/mgh Enclosure ~---------------------------~A-OOl-81,"'i'"~•'j~fL_",_,~...~~,_"."..""".".'o,,,.'<'"'~..~.,-~.,,,~. ;COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I ;Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ; I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date 28 De.c..i:s"D I --_ X An Individual Citizen __An Organization _I Mm.Tf1()I~G-~~.41~O h)-Mm,: I address SR ft 1715 -#of members I _city JfHKtl CV<}';j €...."address _ -state t41~ta....zip qqSo 7 city IIdayphone31qr;775"contact person day phone : -IIasPIllf_ -II_ -II_ I I --I _ I II_ ---I -I---II0"I --I u/:.u \..I I ,VI.lei i:al1:'L~·..IIlJ.Iiv.,r j,Ctlt.M IIJ 1M,!i i I'm !Z~sed.a ,]ifo e.ve..;f,d:H-..m<,-I _&e [,lie i1tUtPt l2f,<tria*,~dJ.u.f/t/:d,PLd,/t14he·(,"JH tL I2d~Zt1.l:C _ I ~~rtJw,w,.J l\..bt1-,e~~~,;:;t1MVidMu~W1.-VJ-I I ~;C ky t:-I-IlLI.i£.i~~&flJMA!in fo be.Mt1idRcu _ II -{lti)trJ Hr..v I1iJtu.tv f#U}<i:l")tU<"kl ftu..-JUt£."~t tl'Vn It lEUttYf!.,_I use exIra sheets if you need them -I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make -_ your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: IRE eEl V E 0 Alaska Power Authority : -'.\1\333 Wf3S t Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 _ _J,,11;3 1961 I ,AUTHORITY •~~~~-------------------------------_# """'" :-t ""'" ~?tn;fI?(!(J fXJ111hl-/-n .dOf-j f"~fl71('11 ,.; CJ o-plf~1J ~J 0Uf pvtvt!(J J'l1'fl IMJ!if V7W.0t hWtMf O-Of l/1J?A -rtJJ V •?/J'?1j c;h1 ~:?1?f ~#1r?J1J l.'tV'P[YYKf 9f ~07 ~'?I~1Jf?17J7vn-q -1f11J -J~71?rrTPr~Af-~i)J1?1 PA,9-:1?'?d -rr;I,lAn1.fiJJ '?-;~,1//';'l1/~7lf -I!1f )rf,7 .~jJ1711~ 7:Jr'VYl ~;c:lYVJ/lJ4/~'rrJht1 't11/)~0Yti't;;;~(CJ:-:rr'f~/P'_M''!)Jm?!,Y11l .J'"l~JiJ '~-vfIVrro'~:PI1f'J I~?J ~t11J1?J ~;b~1?Jf7JA l~.hU ?1'J+-r:'7 rp-17~+~'~r?rVf'l-t?1"'~'X1?11J 'l1 !..p-o~~1?;tt;,"\<f.,,-nutn1~~t4 rr yPrJI'V7 fl·?x;,.vvn1~1,1111 '{?h1"l1n11/(J'J!Yf7 i71JJL,'01/t?7V&~-A ,PY'/fJ C7 Wi/I'?P'???7.Pfea~n~Of ~~1 ~ry -J:Pz~7~(/~~~I7Ji ':I4j ~1"\N1W -C?'1tfij ~~.AI ~vUhj lfW?Of ~?721r;h-W~~1 7Jrf -??j,rnt1 . t),~~9-'nv3 (Tl7J1,)11 _'n~,ffJ (771~0Yj1.1f?1.!JM --f71p",J ~'~lfi/l ,'1W r;'l-rywnnt ~oOO'Of,.'~rp 7~1J ·CM .1 147/1 l1-vnH-f1l 01''07l1?J-:'J.r-_~51W ~~n1?'?~~orJj(/_~~~M11y:J,tq i/H-:rJd hg:n1-g-P?,M£ri)?IJA'J ~~'~~Of ~rn?f ~1f,C~~tI -'..~,PJM~w.vn:1IIf 7!1 IJ?ff 'J '1 nlf'll nw>~,"".1(1.,hntl L.e1?11-?V-J.?-J1JJ •./V><:!"'tI ~"'"1~"'?7 J"TM7 w>pnffuf/1-171fI''1l!t~?J hr;p..'('wtd .,11 11lJ u --- ?.AtZl)¥r:!l72-t~~1w~71f c:''0 ,fYJft1 f1l1JrJ'!.11J1 /11111>ll7?-fS 0/1-.1:f:!1111()'14 pJ-rvlIJW f !rrc71~?7?Cf /').1/l77J?11)~~~~1I.1-M :;?In;,flP{~Of ?-111?7'?,)???pnz,'J I Vvv:JnrnHj -* I'1-'VrJrvrn:-rJ r I,::'1~12f,wry<l7f'11J11 l7r?-JY1f-,~7?--"1'fMA1::::e ///J(\?,."'-"."li-irvlfi/ -wJ}~v:u../}U '01#~/,4'1"/1.r1~r()..Ai,.,.~,~~W:lJ1:P OW'A.P/)jNJrY/,~~IP!(f.Oe<i"r!:;;"i '-PW"?1;/)~/!'"II ~!....w.1-'J'Vll-1 -MM1'f17 ilYIlf ~ell,'O-;P1A .'fA 't1 /rw~Jrl/YJ hvp Uf1(}.~'Olf/~TJ,;0/-/YVI'YJ?'l//f7Vo/,~(Y'~/11r-1--' 'f"">V rrI!m.VI")':17 'vii .WMJ'l'Y"rrm:J '''''''P C'W1V 01'f'l1 ~1ll -1-"1 "'/(f4rJ?0fP1/'-' ."'1"(7(J 1/Wr7.T',A'1M(;f rny.?TI'W-r .:mr vVlT>Jf ?Wil7 ?iM'JP[/(»'?JYI/'!"-r;;.W(/":"t '''?1(f C"'¢JJ '1ry-"7 ~--v !"7JAj:WY.r.?::vmJI-l1f 1,!v'P Cl'V}T?1.V>11 (11'/U "1!l-?XJ,'I/J'I "'I-f 0J7l-Prf,[2f -Jej1-1.P ~f;.!Zl r7J7 r:t/1,.ryc!;"'!Pl?pwtl ~J?"WV,£JNrJWf'IJYMA-nf'ARj C1'7 A~,,?Jd~~'}~~·cI5:&hli1lJVYO ,0'0 )CJf ~J?!;c~f?10/0 I w-nn1Jl 'JA(J or'l} YtU?1 -nIl'};~/IjL '~K7ynprll ~/,;;:',/-,:.d '~,;lint 'Y'1,Yl}~0r/f)~:1P ?:?)/7 --v?CJ(!,;?frJ717mJ I ?141J:)j.~.hbA'fV14 ---pn~~;V:?1?f 1'(7 }~f/J/YIJ 7?;/JJ17 P"Yrf /:>il?7 ?-?7-I ddlJl?1 A-r '?-flJ!I f(}1t?1~Jad IAt;:lJ1_WY411 ?;;.J- "./'(f}l1?1t11 ?1!7'!fP?:Jt rtf''1r1l(v~prnPAd CrJ ,j.11 I ~'??"'~'''X1'7?-O:n OS ,IJI:"?",{!o/17 '?'>'Ji I~""'117;;,Q,IY/.A11Q Wifn "'f 11~1'?1 w7:"'7?!<1Mf 7Jf C7/J ~~'o/"r1'-/.w.~~~ ·'/v.."YO 7J ..... -- Action File Jll.8ber:A-002-81 Mr.ABtboRy Golden Oregon Polytechnic Institute 812 S.w.10th AYeDue . Portland.Gregoa 97205 Dear Mr.&olden: John Lawrence of Acres _rican.Inc ••forwarded to us a copy of your letter to him and to Jill Duncan.both written earHer this year. We want you to know that your COBleftts have beeD entered into the ACTION systera,a lletbod we have for monitoring COI'l8efttsreceived regarding the proposed Sus1tfta ttydroelectric project. Your CtJ ••mts.along with others ..receive.w111 be included 1.a report which will be given to the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors aDd the Governor prior to -.king a decision next spr1",about Susitna hydroeleetrfe developtleftt. Enclosed is a copy of an ACTIOfC ce_Ult 10...which you are.1C0111!1 to use if you have other CORDeI1ts or any questiORS regarding the St.ts1tf1i. Ilydroelec:tric feasibility studies. Sincerely,{:' Jean BucbauJl Public Participation Office Enclosure I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I "1 ~ ,)j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I•I I I I I I A-G02-B1 use a.lra sheets I!you need lhem Date February-6.]981 city _P_o~rt_l~a_n_d-L,_Or_e-'--'g'-'o_n'---"-9'-72,-0,-5 _ contact personAntbony Gal d6~phone 227 -5449 ~An Organization name OREGON POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE 1/of members (s,-=.c-'.'-ho=--o=-:l:....l)~~_ address 812 S.W.10th Avenue ____zip _ '-----._------------- -AUACHED !FTIER TO ,JOHtL.Ulli,"-'-RE.......Nu..Co.kE~._~_ -_._----------------_..__._--- --------_._--------_._---- __An Individual Citizen state_~__ The comments on this form are submitted by: address city name Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.-----'l!-~\.-,.....,--,,__,"'" j To"~': ,":","'l~~C,__./!'1.!l!..(._ day phone Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,~---------------------------•I I I I I I I I I I I I m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I•I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276·0001 I I,J~~--------------------------------~-- ~ ! 227-5449 OREGON POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY 812 S.W.10TH AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97205 RECEIVED r [--3 6 1981 Dear Mr.Lawrence, AL\SKA POW"k AUTHORITY Je.nuary 26,1981 I~ Earlier this month,I noted that we reco~~end full height and power production capability for Watana Dam on the Susitna River.in Alaska.We know many possible uses for the 708,000 kilovratts.Some are noted in this recent letter to Alaska state representative Jim Duncan. And there are more.One is making electric furnace steel from iron are deposits discoverec near Anchorage two decades ago.Another involves sending electricity into British Columbia and meet part of a certain treaty obligation. \ In 1964,the United states and Canada ratified the Colu~bia River Development Treaty.It called for British Columbia Hydro &Power Authorit; (the provincially-01,T·med utili ty which generates and distributes nearly all the electricity used in B.C.)to construct three storage dams in the upfer Columbia ~iver basin.All are now completed and operating.Mica Creek,Keenleyside and Duncan Dams control 51-i ring floods.Stored Viater is released during fall and winter to increase power production at 11 dovmstream dams in Washington and Oregon.Under provisions of the Treaty, Canada is entitled to half of this extra juice. If electric po~er is supplied f~om Alaska,Washington and Oregon 1""l can keep more of Ylhat T s generated on the lower Columbia River.They just about fUlly developed.Additional needs ,are being met with coal and nuclear fueled thermal stations. Sincerely yours tZnil<>ttt';,~~j ANTHONY J.GOLDEN OREGON POLYTECHNIC INS1-ITUTE COLLEGE OF'ENGINEERING TECHNOl.OGY 812 S.W.10TH AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97205 227-5449 January 19,1981 Dear XI'.tuncan, 1 am an instructor here at Oregon rolytecr~ic Institute,a school 1"""'in Portland city center which trains engineers and technicians.me knoVT Acres ft~erican Inc.of Ruffalo,N.Y.Is doing the planning for VTatana and revil Canyon rams on the fusitna "8.iver.Please roe.ke your va· a ~for requested fund~to continue this work.There ·are several reasons why Alaska should build these two hydro-electric de.ms. Together they can produce 6.9 billion kilowatt-hour~of electric energy each year.Floods will be controlled,and river flow rate kept uniform all the time.Periodic hi-?rater condi tions which prese'ntly de~troy salmon eggs in that stretch of river below the revil Canyon damsi te (dor:nstre.s.m daw of the proposed tViO)will be eliminated.Va.rler level discharge makes it possible to regulate temperature of releasec v!ater too.Of course it will be whatever's best for fish dO'!!TIstream, fairly close to 39 degrees ~ahrenheit. Row will Alaskans use electricity generated at these dams?There l more than enough to just light cities and farms,as well as the usual household functions of water heating,laundry,cooking,radio "'=TV etc The city of Anchorage may get light-rail transit.And more important' regarding rail use,'the Alaska Railroad can be electrified.Recent de-, velopments with solid-~tate rectifiers now permit a locomotive to run on 60-cycle alternating current directly from the po~er lines.Convert· (1) AN INDEPENDENT NON·PROFIT SCHOOL stations,mercury tubes or special 25-cycle generating units are no longer necessary. Aluminum reauction,a process which consumes much electric power, is another possibility.Of course the state of Alaska will monitor any smelters belonging to Alco?.or !\eynolc.s to make sure they don't pollute the environment. Pollution is no pr-oblem with solid-state electronic manufacturing. Why might this industry locate in Alaska---it isn 1 t close to any major world market area.But it is in the geographic center of all of them. Finished wares are small a.nd light in weight.Therefore they can easily be transported to destinations by airplane. A pipeline will soon carry natural gas from Prudhoe Pay south into Canada and the smaller states.Alaska has coal reserves too,but artifi gas made from the coal can't substitute directly for natural gas (methe Heating value is too low.Methane yields 1,100 B.t.u.per cubic foot, ;;.. coal gas only 600.A cubic foot of hydrogen delivers 2,800 B.t.u.80 a mixture containing three-fourths coal gas and one-fourth hydrogen wil-~ duplicate natural gas.Eow will we obtain the hydrogen?Contrary to pop ular belief,no catalyst is able to separate water into its component elements hydrogen and oxygen.Only electrolysis <:ioes it.VIe'11 use ~ra tar. and Ilevil Canyon Dams as sources of juice to make .the electrolysis go. .- i fincerely yours ANTHONY J.GOLDE~I (2) .... r--, May 13.1981 Action file ltIIber:A-004-S1 Ms.Joanne Sedgwick 1827 East 21th Anchorage t Alaska 99504 Dear Joanne: Nancy gave IlIe your note aad the copy of your friend's idea for developing tidal power.She asked that 1 pass the 1dea OIl to those conducti",the Cook talet Tidal Power Study and the RaUbelt £aergy Altematives Study. Both of these studies are being IIIIlaged by the Governor-s office 18 the Division of Policy Development and Mamling.If you Mish more information regardingtbe studies.I suggest you contact Fran U11IeP at the following address:Division of Policy DeYelo.-nt Hd P1IMing, Pouch AD •.Ju8eau.Alaska 99811. Phase 10f the Tidal Study.being conducted by Acres Afaer1can., Inc ••began last January and will be cmlPleted this June..If Phase I shows that there 15 a reaSOft to amt1nue studying the potential of tidal potier 1n Cook Iftlet,Phase II w111 follow. I .ve talked to a member of the T1dal{Study team at Acres #aerie•• Inc••udhe said thattbey are faII11iar with Mr.Rabie's 1c1ea aad bad a copy of what ,JOU sent u.s 1n tlleir files.Therefore.I did not forward a copy of his infonaatfon to them. However,.I have seat a copy of Mr.Rabi~b'$paper to the project manager of the Ral1be1t Energy Al'tenlatives Stucl.r fOt"COftS1derat100 as part of the invest1gatlons of tidal J)OIIIeI",which 1s OM of the alterMtfves to Sus1tna hydro deYelQJDeflt be1ag studied.(The Railbelt Energy Altematt¥8S Study began in OCtober 1980 and is expected to be CCIIIPleted next spriag.) If .YOU wisb to contact the project manager,Chattles SittiG.his address is Arthur Youag aad Company,730 I Stl'eet,Mchorage,Alaska 99501. We have entered your letter and MJ-.KaMcb's co_nu irrto our ACTION system.which is a .au we Use for keeping tract of publ1c COIIUOts received outside the format of Ii'l8et1ngs and wortshop$__All COIIlIeDts we receive are reviewed by tbe Alaska Power Avtbority and Acres Page 2 HI.Joanne $edgw1ck May 13.1981 American.Inc ••ind will also be included in a report to the Alaska Power Authortty Board of Directors and the Sovemor prfor to •decision on Susitftl next spring. Enclosed is ..COP),of a form you may use If you have COIIIlents or questions on the SusitJ\t studies. Sf ncerely. Jeen 8uc:hanan Public Participation Office J8/11gb EnelosuN -. ~, '....,i; i -I May 13.1981 Action File Humber:A-oQ04 ..81 Mr.Charles Sitkfn Arthur Toung and Company 730 I Street Anchorage.Alaska 99S01 Dear Cbuek: Enclosed is a copy of an idea for generating electricity from tidal power in Cook Inlet.The information was sent to us by Joatme Sedgwick. 1827 El.$t 27th,Aftcboragell Alaska 99504.She asked that we pas it on to those studying tidal power .. I know that other ~pleh&ve Mr.RaMeh's proposal.I would anticipate that someone may ask Battelle to COIIIJJ8ftt OIl his idea at the upcoIItng ...tings in May. Sincerely. ~flBucJwlnan Public fJ....t1c1pat1on Office JB/lI9h Enclosure:Copy Mr.Rablcb's ·proposal. I g -. "'1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A-004-81 use extra sheets if you need them Date,__...!....~!__.!..c?_'_"_p_'_/_J__ _____day phone _contact person address _-'----_ city _ #of members _ name _ __An OrganizationAnIndividualCitizen state Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ "city ----=-I--'-";-'--'''\'-''c'::...-f1~',"-~,'r_,~="l•..;:;.;'2--,-""_"-_ day phone _ The comments on this form are submitted by: Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,----------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 995011 (907)276-0001 I I,. ~-----------------------------------_# !L:..-::.;;'..6-t~<".J,..)l-r Jj fa Y'l=~o ,~IfI/'" /;:[.,1~>:/{15;Ii?; Cook Inlet is one of the few places on earth where there are huge variations in the tide.Anyone who has witnessed its swift movement has been impressed with the relentl~ss power exhibited by the force of these mighty currents. Harnessing the tides is not new -there have been tidal mills for centuries.Most of these installations have involved penning the waters and then allowing the impounded water to turn a wheel or turbine. Cook Inlet on the whole offers a more exciting alternative- This concept in utilizing Cook Inlet tidal currents could be a blend of old and new technologies.In its most simplistic terms, the scheme would work like this: The areas selected would have a current velocity of at least seven knots and a depth of water of at least thirty feet at mean low water.Huge pontoon-like structures would be floated into position and ~hored.The pontoons would support a number of wheels- fifty or sixty feet wide-that would be turned by the tide.These wheels would power the generators that would provide electricity. A simple mechanism would reverse the machines so the current would power the wheels on the incoming as well as outgoing tides. If a fly wheel were placed between the tide wheel and the generator, the power supply could be continued in periods of slack water. Underwater cables could bring the power ashore to underground substations that would feed into the existin~power grid. Ice guards front and rear would allo~l the wheels to remain undamaged by ice flow.The wheels would be covered to prevent icing in severe winter weather.In extremely windy areas,wind mills could be used to augment the current wheels. These artificial islands could be landscaped with plants to satisfy those who are concerned with aesthetics.The recreational aspects could be enhanced to provide areas for fishermen and harbors of refuge for boatmen'.Cook Inlet could support an indefinite number of these non-polluting generating sites. - - r !. .... I I I .... I""" i - Would not this scheme reduce the need for hydro in this area? I have been a life long supporter of hydro,but I think we are now twenty or thirty years too late.The excessive increase in costs and the almost intolerable "permitting"process has long since made the economics questionable as far as cheap power is concerned. I would like to hear from the engineers some estimates of the power which could be generated by Cook Inlet tidal wheels.I believe the calculations would show that the horsepower or kilowatts available would be astronomical. The fact that these installations could be floated into position means they could be fabricated in areas far from the power site.The environmental effect of these wheels would be minimal and .the power sites could be aesthetically pleasing. I would welcome a public dialog in regard to this scheme. William L.Rabich SR Box 905 Anchor Point,Alaska 99556 ,..,.. I i r- I April 20,1981 lin SoJmenberg Sferra Cl .......Alaski Cttapter 4421 Coll1J1bl. Juneau,Alaska 99801 Dear M.Sormetlberg: The full aad careful aS$8SS11fHtt of the Sus1tDa H.Y*oelectr1c JToject requires the forIIulattoD of a develoc-nt pl.end the eftlu- ation of that pl.'s impact.In other words.a _tsi.OD the feasibl1f\y and desirability of tbe project CUftOt be reached without kftOWlD9 what the project COMfsts of and how it .lIPIets our cost of living.quality of l1fe aad the Ral1belt's Htu:ral sys.... The .reereatioo C(lIIfJOfteftt ad tbe access plan are 1ntegNl aspects oft SusitllacleYelop11e1ltplan and are requfredby the Federal Eaergy Regulatory e-'1sston..Tbere is no doubt tbat _tlIOUld receive sharp attic!sm if ..atu.p.te(J to assess project illi*ts and feastbfl'lty wi tbout addressing prejec:t aspects as fIIportaat as the access ad recreation ~. 1M deYelopmeat of the recreatiGD pIau is the ftSIM.IQSfbt11ty of the PotIer AuUlo..1ty as the applicant for tile fERC 1ic:eue to coastnlCttbe projec~.The U1I1versity of Alasb is developing the....plan OIl COIItJ'act to Acre$(IUd thus for the ,...Autbority).They are working closely with the Division of h'r'ks fn this effort. In conelus10ft.the fo.....lat1on of the nJCN&t1oa aad access·~ of the Susttaa H,ydreelectr1c Pro.Mct is ROt preaature and is wltIl1n the IIIDdate of tile Alaska Power Authority.. We note 101ft"choice of Approach .,..-1.....is. S1ftCerelYll FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Roltet"t A.Mobn Director of Engiaeer1ng CONCUR:yauto ~----------------------------~,~A-00S-81 •"AL'"~'""'''-'"'''''''"'~~'--'"'"'''~';'~'--r~'I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date Apri 1 10,1981 I I IIAnIndividualCitizen_X_An Organization I I name name SIERRA CLUB--ALASKA CHAPTER IIaddress#of members I I city address 4421 Co 1umb i a I I state zip city Juneau,Alaska 99801 I I .IIdayphonecontactpersonL1nSonnenb~h~PhOne I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.~~_I ATTACHED 1 ETTER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •I I I I I I I I I I use exIra sheets if you need them • •1 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond \0 all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~---------------------------------_.# .... - RRACLUB .Y·i 1 ')1981 j •~•~ Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: 4421 Columbia Juneau,AK 99801 8 April 1981 r 1 I. The APA's document uRecreational Planning for the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project"(11 March 1981)has been received with some surprise.Timely planning is most always desirable,but this kind of uearl y bird"planning seems inappro- priate for several reaSons,such as 1.The proposed Susitna hydroelectric project has not reached even its own final planning stages, and there should not be a foregone conclusion that it necessarily will. 2.Recreational planning falls under the purview of the Division of Parks (DNR);it seem peculiar that this authority should suddenly be transferred to APA. We find the whole idea of this document both highly premature and not part of the APA mandate.Thus,we choose Approach "F"- LEAVE AS IS.When and if this hydroelectric project becomes a legislative and financial reality,then will be enough time for the proper agency to perform this kind of planning. Sincerely, Lin Sonnenberg Chairperson,ACCC "Not blind opposition to progre.f.f,but opposition to blind progreH.,) April 7,1980 P5700.02.02 TOOOl4A Mrs.Lino J.Agosti 2324 Loussac Drive Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Dear Mrs.Agosti: Thank you for your interesting and informative letter concerning the Susitna Hydroelectric Power Project. I have forwarded your letter to the Public Affairs·Office for the Alaska Power Authority so that they may also share your enthusiasm and interest. I am enclosing for your information a copy of the public notice announcing several upcoming Community Meetings.You might like to attend the meeting scheduled in Anchorage. JDGjja r cc:Nancy Blunk APA - - - -, ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••'.••••••• A-006-81 April 16,1981 use extra sheets if you need them Date contact person day phone _ city _ address _ name #of members,_ __An Organization ATTACHED LETTER TO JAMES GILL.ACRES.RESIDENT MANAGER.ANCHORAGE. Dona 1\1.Agosti Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. day phone _ state city __--LAllnLloCillh"""o-'-ra""'9:.1-leoLl.I---_ ---,--A:....:..1~as.:....:k-'-"a"'--zip 99503 2324 Loussac Driveaddress _ The comments on this form are submitted by: name _X_An Individual Citizen Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS tTl REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,---------------------------_.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••I••••••••••••I Alaska Power Authority •333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001••,,,-----------------------------------_# - 2324 Loussac Drive Anchorage,AK 99503 April 1,1980 Mr.Jim Gill Resident Manager Acres-American,Inc. 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,AK 99503 Dear Mr.Gill: I have been interested in the Susitna dam project since we arrived in Alaska in 1959 and the old Bureau of Reclamation had finished compiling results of its studies in 1957.I watched environmentalists win the battle of Rampart and wondered how soon we could get Susitna off the ground.I certainly didnlt think it would take twenty years.I was elated when I heard that your company had finally been awarded a contract. I wasnlt too thrilled that it was for more studies rather than actual construction,but I understand you folks are going ahead with a positive frame of reference.I was also puzzled as to why a New York company had been awarded the contract until I heard that Chuck Dibelius was involved;us Turnagain earthquake people knew him well.I was also amused to hear that the Alaska Department of Fish and Game had been awarded a million dollar contract to do the environmental studies.If that rumor is true,you people are geniuses.I never heard of a private company giving a contract to a public organization. May I,a non-engineer,a non-anything except an interested lay person, pass on some observations about this project? I have been the hiking chairman for the Mountaineering Club of Alaska for six years and several years ago led a hike to Devil IS Canyon.We took the train to Gold Creek,then crossed a rampaging Gold Creek on foot and walked the twenty miles to Devil IS Canyon.We enjoyed Howard McWilliams road for sixteen of the miles,then battled the brush for the last four.We were awestruck at the amount of water pouring through those rock walls -Greiner in the Don Sheldon book,Wager with the Wind, says itls 6,750,000 gallons per minute.We explored the cliffs above the canyon and noted a fissure near the highest point.I wondered if that had occurred during the earthquake.Then when I saw the old corings still stored in the porcupine-riddled cabin,it occurred to me that these could be compared with present data to determine extent of ea~thquike damage.I wish you luck,however,in trying to get data out of the Corps of Engineers,I tried for two weeks to learn if there was a trail to the canyon and not even a USGS map showed one.I finally learned about McWilliams (miner)from an old timer at BLM. Another point that has come up from time to time is damage to the fish population ..From Ross Jardine (power ~ant,Ft.Rich)who has fished at Portage Creek two miles downstream,the salmon stop there.I understand it takes about two miles for excessive oxygen to be reduced to a point where it will not kill salmon.Frankly,I think a dam would be much less "oxygen-producing"than that horrendous flood tha t comes through those narrow rock palisades right now. Which brings up another concern which I have heard voiced by old timers. We all know that Susitna comes from Sushitna which means sandy river in Tanaina.Many of us have heard the horror stories about dam failures in the lower 48 because of silt buildup.When I mentioned this to Vern Hickel he said,"That's easy.They just let the water and silt come through the bottom of the dam."Would that it were so easy.I mention it only because the general public is concerned about it -at least a few people are. You will be getting a lot of static about the Nelchina caribou herd and the Wantana dam.My husband and I accompanied the Nordic Ski Club to Lake Louise last week.I could not believe my eyes as I watched a band of 27 caribou quite unconcerned as we skied by.Their sentinels did not sound the warning until a dog from the lodge bounded on to the lake. They were equa 11 y unconcerned with snow machines asl ong as the sound of the engine was continuous.I have also hiked through the Arctic Wild Life Range and learned first hand from the Eskimos that the Porcupine herd largely ignores the pipeline.But books have been written on that subject.What 1 1 m trying to convey is that your public relations people should allay the fears of those who say the dam and its lake are going to be in the way of the migrating Nelchina herd. One last concern which you will probably hear about:As we were returning and crossing Gold Creek on July 4,within a ten minute period we experienced clouds,drizzle,lightening,thunder,heavy rain and hailstones.Your meteorologists will tell you about lightning in that area.Grice and Comiskey of the National Weather Service authored a paper on Thunderstorm Climatology in the Fairbanks area,and lightning is a definite factor in interior weather. Aside from porcupines,I don1t think you have another thing to worry about. I have backpacked over 2000 miles of Alaska,and I can't think of a better place to put a dam with a minimum of environmental damage.I hope your public relations people will cover some of the above positive points when you finally release your findings to the public. Thanks for listening. Sincerely, /r ~'_'-'_.__ Dona M.Agosti (Mrs.Lino J.) - - ,.... - - June 18,1981 Action file fkIIBber:A-001-81 Mr..Thomas R.Anthony SRA 1795 Anchorage.Alaska 99507 Dear Mr.AntbOfty: In your rectmt ACnON request you uked this quest.oa:-How IIU1 corwetIt1onal batrlbs will it take to ruin our"beautiful dIII?- 1 am guessiftg that your question indicates a coacem that the ratlbelt ra1ghtbe particularly vulnerable 1n the event of war if its prima.,.polIItr source was in cmeplace.I hope you will correct ..if yOU bad something else in mAd. lour question 1$not onetlat win be answered withia tbe scope of tIM!current feasibl1ity study.. &tclosed 1$an ACTION fo...if you !laVe further questiOOs or coeaeRts Oft the Sus1tna feasibility studies. JB/I1gh Eftclosure ~----------------------------•A-DD7 -81 Lr:c~gMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQU'ESTS"r"'~~ I,/.,{(,~.:'1981 Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I\V>I'"PO';.1~",c,,,ru"I""0"th;,101m ate ,"bmllted bY'Date i,~:)..~,(,l)L : I AAn Individual Citizen "__An Organization I ~ I name .""')~"~H'~f)f-"'Ii iH d I '.~.name I I .()",.-.ii --IIaddress,'-:>t,1-1 I /I 'J #of members I - I I 'I city t:rLi"L'address I I I state-t4r<zip t,f)~(-;city II - I day phone '~;',-:;<)L:77 S-contact person day phone I I IIIndividualcitizensorcommunitygroupsandorganizationsareencouragedtosubmitwrittencomments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.I .:1-.4'(.,-,iIL l,i'"(-tCU\{{!;(~t;L~·).".[I iT -fr-zf'«-Ie II ""'" I vuu'\tx{,({!..-Frji,)((c),u;'""I II~/I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:~ I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I ~ I I,. ~~---------------------------------_.# r- !r , --,, ""'", """' r "... I - ~, July 1.1981 Action File Number:A-009-81 Thomas E.Mears Fishery Biologist Cook Inlet Aquaculture Assoctatioa P.O.Box 850·. Soldotna.Alaska 99669 Dear Mr.Mears: Acres American.Inc••referred to the Publ tc.Participation Office of the Alaska Power Autbority your letter to Jim Gf1l.dated February 12, 1981.Your letter was circulated through the Acres ol"9l81zat100.They prepared this response which I am forwarding to you. Y~r Q!!!!ti~: Is there any reason to be c.oucemed that a COftt1"o11ed flow reg1lle fft.the mafastem St,ts1tna will result 1a •reduc:t1Oft of the I80UIrt of tributary streallbed ..feb will be supplied with grouadwater infn- tration?lf the prev10usty stated c:oacem bas validity.will the Su$1tna Hy4ro study address thts com::am? Res2!!!se fnJll Acres: The eorteem Oft changes 1A state affecting grouadwater is well taken.SOlIe prel1e1nary esti.tes of aama1 flows 1udfQte average decreases in stage of 17 pen:nt at Gold Creek and 3 percent at Susitoa Station.The dowBstreIJI affect of the project would be to decrease the seasonal varfability of tbe Susftna River qd.tbeftfore. yield IIOre stable grouadwater levels.This would ....11'indicate less recharge to grounclleter in suae,.and less deplet10a dur111g winter.These affects to grouadwater would tend to be Irin111t1zed as distance away fl'OJl the Susftna'River increases. Detailed studies w111 be restrietecl to the .tastes Sus1tRa t.the CU'l'T'eftt Phase 1 of the studies.At this t1_spec1 fie affects to tributary streallS and slougH cannot be detaned but .n1 be in up¢OI11Qg studies if present studtes indicate the Qf!Cessity. Mr.Thomas E.Mears Page 2 July 1.1981 As part of OW"fisheries studies we are 11lvest1gat1ng the uttl1zatioa of the lower sections of tributary streallS as sa.ll1)ft1d spawing habitat whicb will anow \IS to put into perspective the potential 1J1P&Cts if the seeMno you address did occur. 1 hope Acres'response aDS\fe1"ed your question5-.If not.I hope you will let us.Of'Acres bow. Your concerns expressed tn your questions haft been filed in the ACTION s)'SteII wh1dt is a record we keep of all concems.CCIIIIeDts,and qgestiORS raised by the public regarding the SUs1tDa feasfbnity studtes.. These concems will he forwarded to the Alaska Power Authority Board of. Directors.the Goveraor.and the legislature prior to a decision on Susitna next spriag. Enclosed 15 an ACTION fot'll you IIa.Y use if yOU have further COIIIIEmts or quest1cms. Sincerely. Jean Buchanan Public Participation Office JB/lI8b enclosure Concur: RM OW - tt~1 '/~sa Cook Inlet Aquaculture Assn. P.O.Box 850 -Soldotna,Alaska 99669 262-4441,Ext.257/296 ALASKA POWeR AUTHORIlY SUSITNA FILE P • •0 February 12,1981 / ;QlJENCE NO.-. ..../45"711 As I stated in our recent telephone conversation,this letter addresses two questions.Is there any reason to be concerned ~l'..,i ;,that a controlled flow regime in the mainstem Susi tna will ,-----L result in a reduction of the amount of tributary streambed ' 1_i,,.which will be supplied with grqundwater infiltration?If ~---~the previously stated concern has validit~will the Susitna r-L ~:~~,Hydro hydrology study address this concern?Neither theL-person who originally raised this question nor I are '.,jE~-r---hydrologists so there may be fundamental errors in the scenario ~;R&M we have envisioned. ADF&G -~..~~Mr.James D.Gill,Resident Manager ..~!!~;Acres American,Incorporated o -2207 Spenard Road -G:~c:;,'/-Anchorage,AI<99503 "I /oJB ..+-Dear Mr.Gill:';~L t 1'··..~''--. ""': I BUFF The scenario':In the summertime,flow regulation of theI •~~~COL----~~Susitnawill result in a steeper gradient in the near-channel watertable.Steeper gradient will increase groundwater discharge.Increased discharge will result in a lowering of the water table for substantial distances away from the mainstem channel and up the tributary valleys.Decreasing water table elevations in the tributary valleys will result in a shorter section of tributary stream being fed by ground- water seepage.Loss of groundwater fed streambed is loss of choice salmonid spawning habitat. Thank you for taking the time to consider our questions. Sincerely, ~t,~ Thomas E,.Mears Fishery Biologit TEM:sa cc.Ivan "Hank ll Every Rt.1,Box 970 Kenai,AK 99611 ".." SUBJECT:Response to Thomas Mear1s letter of February 12,1981. The concern on changes in stage affecting groundwater is we11 taken. Some preliminary estimates of annual flows indicate average decreases in stage of 17 percent at Gold Creek and 3 percent at Susitna Station. The downstream affect of the project would be to decrease the seasonal variability of the Susitna River and,therefore,yield more stable groundwater levels.This wou1d normal1y indicate less recharge to groundwater in summer and less depletion during winter.These affects to groundwater would tend to be minimized as distance away from the Susitna River increases. Detailed studies wi11 be restricted to the main stem Susitna in the current Phase 1 of the studies.At this time specific affects to tributary streams and sloughs cannot be detailed but should be in upcoming studies. As part of our fisheries studies we are investigating the utilization of the lower sections of tributary streams as sa1monid spawning habitat which will allow us to put into perspective the potential impacts if the scenario you address did occur. - - - November 25,1981 Daniel f.Malick President Manag~nt and Planning Services AlaskaaooBasinRoad Juneau,A1asb 99801 Dear Mr.Malick: Thank.you again for your kind words regarding our public participation effort on the Sus1tna project.The questions you asked were submitted to Robert MoM,Director of Engineering,Alaska Power Authority,for review and comment.H1s responses follow. !lYestion: DO current electric demand estimates assUIlle or require any improve- ments to the current power transmission and distribution grids? ResP9nse b,x Robert MoM: It 1s my unuersundtng tbat Battelle Northwest's demand estillates assume the proposed Willow--Healy transmiss1cm 1ntertie will be.In place in 1984.This would allow limited eco~transfer and reserve sharing. That is the only such assumption of which 1 am aware Question: Does fUnding of these Susltna projects via sa l5 produce utility rates different from those currently experienced in Anchorage and Fair... banks? Res~b.l Robert Mohn: .~1ete 'fuMing under sa 25,wilh1ch 1$certainly only a bypotittUcal case.would result in it statfnj1de average wholesale rate of about 3f./KWHintoday's dollars.. !&t!stion,:. How would electric deJAand:estimates be affected by expansion 01 the transmission grid into outlJ'1tl9 areas? Resp!ftJe bl Robert.!19!!!:.. ..Th15 question tas not been adGressed as part of the Susltna 'eas1 ... bil ity studies. Daniel f.Malick November 25.1981 question: ,X$sum1ng a transmission line was built from the Sus1tna dam sites to Bethel.Nome and Kotzebue.what would the power sell for at these cities given existing line costs and sa 25 hYdro financing? ,Resppp,se b-l Robe~Mohn: Assuming full 58 25 f1narJCing,the wholesale rate to such counun1- ties would be about 31/KWH in todayls dollars.since the:rata is man- dated as a statewide average.' All corwents.questions.and requests for information received by our office are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority staff and Acres American. Inc.Eacft letter And respon$e ts filed in QUI"ACTION System.The Public Participation Office will compile all questions and comments in a report to be submitted to the:Power Authority Board of Directors and the Governor tefore a decision is made on the Sus1tna project. Sincerely. kncy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:ct and rnanagement planning services alaska d rr,,' Nancy Blunck,Director Public Participation Office Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Nancy: November 10,1981 A-0l2-81 - I am writing this note with praises for your public participation program,as well as a number of questions concerning the Susitna hydro studies. In my six years of consulting,I have not seen a study project handled so professionally from the public participation angle.My interest in the Susitna project is keen and your periodic newsletters are just what I feel I need to keep abreast.A public participation program of this sort does not require me to attend meetings,write formal letters,and/or read lengthy report documents.My hats off to you and your office. I would like to ask a couple of questions concerning the scope of these Susitna studies,and potentially,the results of ongoing study efforts. o Do the current electr ic demand est imates assume or require any improvements to the current power transmission and distribution grids? o Does funding of these Susitna projects via SB 25 produce utility rates different from those currently experienced in Anchorage and Fairbanks? o Assuming a transmission line was built from the Susitna Dam sites to Bethel,Nome,and Kotzebue,what would the power sell for at these cities given existing transmission line costs and SB 25 hydro financing? o How would expansion areas. electric of the demand estimates be affected by transmission grid into outlying I would appreciate any effort you might give me in this regard.. Sincerely, AND PLANNING 'SERVICES-ALASKA MBA,AICP - ..- ~ I - Ruth Andersson Secretary.Alaska Sportfisbing Association 5306 Arctic Boulevard.Suite 2 AnchoriHJth Alaska 99502 Dear Ms.Andersson: Thank-you for infonning us of the preference of the membership of the Sportfish1ng Association concern1ngaccess to the Sus1tna~dro electric project.The Alaska Power AutbOrity will receive a recom- mendation concerning the preferred access route from Acres Amer1can around the first of the year.Shortly thereafter t1 preliminary dec1s10 sion will be lffide concerning the nature and mode of access that w111 be incorporated into the Susttna Feasibl1it;y report tbat w111 be sub.. mitted to the Power Authority Board of Directors and the Governor in Aprl1 1981. The preference expressed in your letter has been filed ill the Public Participation Office's ACTIOfi system which is a record we keep of all COftIl!ents.concerns.and questions raised by the public regarding the Susftnafeas1b111ty studies.These concerns will be included in the report that will be presented to tbe Board and the Governor prior to a decision on Sus1tna next spring. Sincerely. George E.Gleason Assistant Director Public Paft1cipation Office GEG:ct Alaska Sportflshlng Association 5306 Arctic Blvd.,Suite #2 •Anchorage,Alaska 99502 •Phone (90712n-5203 HECEIVED .~ November 5,1981 Ms.Nancy Blunk Director of Public Participation Alaska Power Authority 334 W.5th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Ms.Blunk: On November 2nd we,the Board of Directors of the Alaska Sportfishing Association,reviewed the various access proposals to theSusitna Hydroelectric Project site. Keeping in mind the outdoor interests of our 1300 members, located in southcentral Alaska,we unanimously endorsed the option which allows the maximum access to our members. That being the extension of the Denali Highway to the Wantana Dam site and road on the south side to Devil's Canyon with a north access link between the devil's Canyon and Want ana Dam sites. We feel this will be a wonderful opportunity to develop a small and scenic portion of our state into a new and much needed recreational area. Sincerely, ~r s'"s....o""n- i '-"-"",-,,"-'" Se~retary ~, ...... - - - - ...... - ,...., i I December 7,1981 Ms.Jennifer Browning Route 2.Box 217 Sterling.Alaska 99672 Dear Jenn1 fer. Due to a limited supply of the Susitna Hydroelectric ·Project Plan of Study we are unable to send you a copy.The following reports relating to the current project have been placed on reserve short terra loan at the Kenai Pub lie L1 brary. Susitp~!!l!lroelectric prpject Plait of S,~fi1..february 1980. P1AI}of S~--Revision,Susitna H.ldroelectr1c Project,•. September 1980. Sus1tna HYdroelectric Proj~t Mid R~por:t ,to Govern~r Jay ~~ H.ammond and the Legis1atur:e of the S,tate of A,laska.• Harch 1931. Phase I Studt Plan for JJsh and Wildlife Studi~s for the Sus i tna.Hydroe1ectr1 c Feas,t bill t,¥~tqd,l,ftS.June 1980.. Environmental Studies Annual Pr£Sress ReJ?Qrt Subusk 7:111.B,i'g Game I Mardi '1981..'..,- 1 am enclosing the first two newletters produced as part of the "'blic participation program.I hope you find them informative.Please let me know if you have difficulty in obtaining information from the li- brary.There have been problems in other areas • Sincerely, George E..Gleason Assistant Director Public Participation &EG:ct Enclosures ..".. - - - - October 27.1980 Mr.Hi ke Bronsoa P..O.Box 2176 Palmer.Alaska 99645 Dear Mr.Bronson: You submitted to our office a COIIIIeIlt regarding the Susitna hydro- electric feasibility studies.Your COflll'tent is written below.follC*ed by a response from Oon Baxter.engineer with the Alaska Power Authority.. Your COJRent: Besides cost-effecti,eness.environmental and soe1al factors should constitute criteria for determining the feasibility of the dams •.Just as benefit-cost ratio ex- ceediag one is necessary (and Mstorically significant) so should attainment of pre-speciffed standards be re- quired in the areas of environment and society before the dams are termed desirable or feasible. Specifically.the levels of degradation of water.wild- life.fisk.historical sites.and·socfal fabric·of local COIIIIUJl1t1es which.agree to tolerate should be spelled out and made public.As currently p14rmed.studies of' such factors are only to function in .ft1gatioR of the dams'effeets a J!!Sterforf. Re5J!ORse: Certa1u tasks of the Acres Plan of Study win thoroughly and I"1gorously investigate eftv1ro11118ntal factors.Specifi- cally.the environmental studies will address water resources (including water quality),socioeconomics (including the ·social fabric·of toeal COIIIUft1t1es).cultural resouI"C8S (including Mstorlcal sites).land use analysis.recreation . planning,fish ecology studies and geological analySis. Specifically.the Federal Energy Regulatory CoIIB1ss1on bas pre-specifled standards in all of these areas wh1cb ...st be satisfied prior to their issuance of a license to construct a project.Should the studies reveal that an excessive or intolerable UIGUIIt of dlmlge will occur in any one or combination of the above environmental areas,and II1t1gation ..sures are not capable of meeting Federal Energy Regulatory C0IIII11s10n standards.the project would be dee.ed unfeasible and cancelled.. Page 2 October 27.1980 Mr.Hi ke Bronson All coaaents.questions,and requests for 1nfo...tfon received by our office are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority staff and Acres American. Inc ••and will be included fft I report that will be giyen to the Alaska Power Authority board 01 directors and the Governor before a decision is made on Susitna. Enclosed 1$an ACTION form which you may use if you have further cOIlIRents.questions,or need additional 1nfonnatfon.We have had a few probltlllS Implementing the ACTION SYSTEM.However.some of the circumstances that held up the process have been corrected and we believe your next COIIRent or question win be bandled IDre quickly.Please keep in mind,however, that because a number of people w111 review.and in some cases.comnent on each itell submttted fn the ACTION SYSTEM.it will taka at least six weeks to process yow request. Sincerely, Haney Blunck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres AMerican,Inc. r-t ..---------------------------L~-OOl-8-0--_j p~I COMMENTS,QU_STIONS II REQUESTS I r I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study!_I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date ()i~it,,.(/G/I'Jy2J .1 r-.VI~An In~ividual Citizen r .'._,<i __An Organization I I name (hikE bR L:/1/S/A.name I--I address l2i,&,A Ii(I 7[.#of members______________I I city _-<1--12-",-4.J-'~t:..LIi-"-'4'-"'t'_'_I<'__"1"__________address --------------I .....I state _4!J.b=A"----l.'--"-5:!:.--.!...:J<~.c:...JA-L-ZiP 916 '!~..-city I I IIdayphone37b--5fi t./2 contactperson-----dayphone____I ~I I ~~: I I I I A I I I I I I F I I I~I-~~I ! \I I ~I I I I ~I t;k I I I ~I I I I r I I I I I I ~I I I use extra sheets if you need them I I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I....I your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:I I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~~------------------------------------, W-001-80 Date submitted:April 16,1980 Mike Bronson P.O.Box2176 Palmer,Alaska 99645 (I)Besides cost-effectiveness,environmental and social factors should constitute criteria for determining the feasibility of the dams.Just as benefit-cost ratio exceeding one is necessary (and historically significant) so should attainment of pre-specified standards be required in the areas of environment and society before the dams are termed desirable or feasible. Specifically,the levels of degradation of water,wildlife,fish, historical sites,and "social fabric"of local communities which we agree to tolerate should be spelled out and made public.As currently planned, studies of such factors are only to function in mitigation of the dams· effects a posteriori. ...... W-OOl-80 Don Baxter Certain tasks of the Acres Plan of Study will thoroughly and rigorously investigate environmental factors.Specifically,the environmental studies will address water resources (inc1uding water quality),socioeconomics (including the II soc ial fabric ll of local communities,cultural resources (including historical sites),land use analysis,recreation planning,fish ecology studies and geological analysis.Specifically,the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has pre-specified standards in all of these areas which must be satisfied prior to their issuance of a license to construct the project. Should the studies reveal that an excessive or intolerable amount of damage will occur in anyone or combination of the above environmental areas and mitigation measures are not capable of meeting Federal Energy Regulatory Commission standards,the project would be deemed unfeasable and cancelled. .- - ..... March 24,1981 Action File Number:W-002-80 Mi chae 1 Bronson P.O.Box 2176 Palmer,Alaska 99645 Dear Mr.Bronson: Recently I reviewed questions,comments,and requests for information on the Susitna feasibility studies received in the public participation office over tJ~past year.I noted that your letter (copy enclosed)was received by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc.,the consulting firm conducting the feasibility studies. Your comments,along with all others we receive,will be included in a report that our office will send to the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors and the governor prior to a decision being made on Susitna next spri ng. The following comments from Eric Yould,Executive Director of the Power Authority,have been included as a response to your comments.I thought you would like a copy of his cOlll11ents even though your letter was written some time ago. Mr.Yould's res~onse: You are incorrect in your assumptions that the feasibility of the project will be detennined by the Alaska Power Authority and that the dete~ination will be based only on evaluation of "financial costs"without consideration of other social and environmental factors. A decision whether or not to build the project will be made by Alaskals governor and legislature,with advice from the Power Authority and from many other indiViduals,agencies and organizations. Any decision to build the project cannot be implemented until a federal license 1s granted.That license cannot be granted until a very detailed environmental impact statement is prepared and reviewed.The impact statement wll1 be prepared,not by the Power Authority,but by the lead federal agency--the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).The FERC licensing must comply with such federal laws and regulations as:the Coordination Act,the Endangered Species Act,the Historical Preservation Act,the Coastal Zone ~nagement Act,the Anadromous Fish Act,••• The decision whether or not the Power Authority should apply for a project license will not be made until the completion of 30-months of detailed investigations costing approximately $30 million. Page 2 Michael Bronson t4arch 24,1981 The studies include assessments of costs,seismic risks,social and environmental impacts and financiabi1ity--a11 in relation to any viable alternative solutions to the Raflbe1t's electrical energy problems. And,to go the last step,the decision whether or not to even continue pursuing the feasibility studies after the first year "1111 not be made until a reassessment of future electrical needs and generation alternatives is completed. The point of explaining the sequential decision process prior to construction and the many actors involved is to show that no irreversible decision 1s go1ng to be made without adequate information covering the full range of people's concerns.If the Susitna River hydroelectric project 1s built,it will be as a result of extensive and painstaking analysis tllat shows it to be the preferred electrical generation option of the citizens of Railbelt Alaska. We thank you for your comments on the Susitna feasibility studies. Enclosed is an ACTION form you may use if you have other cOIlIl1ents or any questions.The comments we are receiving now ususally take four to six weeks to process through the system.Therefore,any future conments you send us should receive a response within six weeks. Sincerely, Jean Buchanan Assistant Director of Public Participation JB:mgh Enclosures CONCUR:Mohn Blunck Wozniak ~ !1- '-l -I ~ -, :;;- ""'" - {: 7' ,---------------------------~..._~-002-~~\ I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS tTl REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility S'tudy I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date I I LAn Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name ----M i CobaLt Bra Y\.so (\name IIaddresseo.20'/.2 17 b #of members I I city fh..l m ~r address I I state Ale;ZiP~city I I IIdayphonecontactperso[1 day phone I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. I I :A~wri-!leV\c.OWlrne.its : I I I I I ~B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheels il you need them I I.Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~-----------------------------------_# /f ./',.. .ApI)i1 Ie.,lc(.~Cj p.O.;)0,";:~)j./t) PH1~rorJ j\tr~.:·1kn Nancy Blunck Div.Public Parttcj~ation SusitnR HydroelectrIc Project Alaska Power Author1tv 333 Wt1~;t Lt th Av e .,S u \.t F;3 J Anchor8~e.Alaska Q9S01 DonI'Madarn, This letter is to suggest that the feasibility of the Susitna dams proposal rest,not only on the fulfillment of the economic criterion of 8 benofit-to-cost ratio Bxcneding one,but also on the achievement of B priori environmental nnd social crlterta.As it now gtands,your DlFiD of stud:,-' orOD03~S that monetRry cost-eff~rtivenoss be the 8010 fActor determining whether the hydroelectric complex should he built or not.Accordln~to your oJ Fn,the study of environmental Bnd social costs will function only tn dedsions of how to rr.:l..tir;ate the harmful eff'Acts or tflA nroject,and will hnve no critical role 1n decidinr whether the comnlex should be built or not. It is undArs1~8nd8t;le why monetorv cost-terlefit ~ralvsis t':cL3 bel}!)trIO sole t1 slJf 'flc1.ent CDtlSe n f··or declstcln!~:on the feasibility of dam projects in genera],and r a~r00 that it is neceSSAry.In the first clace,finAncial benofIts and e 03 t OJ R r (;i:)R 3 Y to 011 H n t i r y 8 n d Ll n d f,r s t :,;-]d •Soc 0 n d L';.un t i 1 recently the Rreatest concorn of the public about dB~S was thHt tnt!lnvestm(mt II psy o1'r l1 e,>.)r.or:ically tc the commurd ty. I believe,however,~tE t additional considerations should now be elevated to the status of the cost-benefit ratio when decidln~whether to build dams.As the cumulative number of dams 1n this country has increased, the number or canyons Bnd free rivers has decreased.The ]038 of such landscapes as the Canvon of the Tuolumne River and Glenn Canyon rRl~es the nvalue~of remaining rivers. At the same time,incremental increases in electrical Dower croduction per capita have become relativoly less valuable.At what point,then,should environmental and d~rect social costs override dam oroposals which have achieved cost-effectiveness measured in dollars?That is thf)problem to be solved at this immediate stage of study, SA politically Bnd philosophically dirPicult as it may be. - ? The leaders of the Alaska POWfH',il,uthorj ty should adopt beforehand the environmental and socia]DtBnrl~rds whlch mi"lstbe-met to Drove the hydroelectr1c COn'nlex fess.tble. -i ", - OCtober 28.1980 ACTION Fne NlBber:\1-003-80 Mr ..8111 Patrick P.O.Box 1108 WAsnl ••Alaska 99687 Dear Mr.Patrick. You asked two questions about the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies..Here are the answers to your questions.Tour questions are wr1t~below.followed directly by respoases 'I"0Il Don Baxter,engineer wi til the A1uta Power Authority.. Your guestion: Has the Corps of Engineers aCCQIIP11shed any studies in this area thatls of value to this project? ReSPQI1Se: The COrps of Engineers bas ACCOIIPltSbed feasibility studies in the past which are of ext,...value and Mye.1ft fact. provfded the basis for the Acres American.Inc ••study. The Acres study bas picked up where the Corps left off and is suppllllenting and refiRing those studies done in the past.FurtheJw)re,the extst1n9 Corps data base w111 be expaaded and a",gaps whieb exist 10 this base will be filled.The expanded~dati base will be .'pfu1 in furtber detenB1n189 the feasibility of the project and will be useful in the ftu1 design.if 1t is bu11t. Your guestion: What is the hang-up about buOd1",an .ir-str1p?I would s.X PUt 1t in~ Respot!Se: Since the airstrip represents a rather large capital i.yest-_t.Acres is presently evaluating tbe econoB1c feasibility of butldiag all air strip.After one seaSOft of using heli- copters.Acres has _re 1I11o..-t108 upoa.wbieb to .te • dec1sion. Page 2 October 28,1980 Mr.8111 Patrick All COIIIents.questions,and requests for information received by our office are reviewed by the Alaska Power Author1ty staff and Acres American. Inc ••and will be included in a report that win be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made on Sus1tH. Enclosed is an ACTION forti which you may use 1f you have further CORIIIeftts.questions.or need additional information.We have had a few problems 1mplenmtfng the ACTION SYSTEM.However,some of the circumstances that held up the process have been corrected Ind we beHeve your next COIaIent or question will be handled IIIOre quickly.Please keep in mind,however. that because a number of people will review.and in SOIM cases.COIIIent on each item subrritted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sf ncerely, Haney B1 unck Director of Public Participation NB:mgh Enclosure cc:Acres AmeriC1.n,Inc. .~ , J., ~ I••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• .-':"; -::::'<~"'~'._~L4<""""l use extra sheets if you need them I // Date /(-/b name address ~_ #of members _ __An Organization 7'. .../'An Individual Citizen !1 ",name ~.-l.L. Individual citizens or community groups a.nd organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ /)/~/~./C-F1'~~;;~1 ,~~r A·-'--I..::,~.~._~,.'"t'>_(~..;7~/~~t;l The comments on this form are submitted by: ".r ~-e /-/'1".',r"' state ,;·l..z-/~":-·i,'.'-,-:-~zip Z7 b-j'-7 city _ day Phone']76 -t;'-2 ,:;--/7 contact person day phone _ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: r=r"mZ7'nt ,_---------------------------,.W-003-80·-----I COMMENTS,QU_STIONS II REQUESTS I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study •••••I•••••••.......ItiU' ~.•~. ~t z,•~.••••••••••••••••I Alaska Power Authority •333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001••,. ~----------------------------------_.# - .... ..... il .... ..... (6L10{'Aal:!!'cHOO-im December Z,1980 ACTION FILE Number:W-fJ(')4-W (ltr ..WitU.C..Knutson S.R..Box I 5190 was i11Il.A1asta 99687 Dear Mr.Knutson: You subat tted to our office some cOIDents regarding the SUst tIia ftyGrgelectr1c feasi»nita's~ies.Tw COII8eots which rela.ted directly to the alternatives study wert forwarded to tAe Governor·s office as explained tn a.'letter.·of Oc:tQbe..r.8,1980.Your other COIIIIIIIlts are Hsted below.fOllOl1edb1 a brief relPOll5e ".our off1ee• Your cooraent:., Toe sbleb'j$an overkill '08 ..."areas that have alrear.lY beeD studied for years • :ON 3NOHd3131 r As you read the enclo.se,fnewsletter,you w111 DOte that sea.of the 1Rto...Ucm to begA'~'fs aecessary for final design of tbe project. Also lJIil8,Yof the stud1es,,',aecessary to \be pn>ject 'will continue durflli COJIStnlCtion.DeveliP'fit9 bydroelectric projects is •time COJlSUIl1n~i)l process.There are ~tll steps that -.st be taken before other lI\InONVt:lOll\l3l1\1 (6l10 I"AaCl hfI oo-~o 1.:1':l December 2,1980 Mr..Wi 11 1am C.Knutson steps:,nfo....tlon must be gathered to determine whether the project 1s feasible or ftOt.to ~tisfy ltC8ASing requirelieftts,and to design a project so that It '1111 be safe and provide reliable power. We apprecetate your takirlg time to send us your opinions. All COIIDenU,questions.aad reqUests for information received by our office are reviewed by the Al.ska Power Authority staff and Acres American. Inc".and win be tneludeG 1na report that will be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of dt~tors and the Governor before a decision is ..Oft Sus itnil. Enclosed is an ACTIOR foi,s which you may use 1f you have further CClI1IIIRts.questfou.or Reed 44dit1onal information.We have bad a few problems 1mplllll8Rt1ag tile ACTION·SYSTEK.However J S~of the e1r'C1.8$tances that held up theproeess baYe,been eorrec~and we believe your next c...-mt or question win be hafK11ed I19"e quiCkly..Please keep in 111M,however, that because a ........of people will revt_.ud 1n scrae eases.COIZIBent OIl each 1tea suIRttted 1ft the ACTI01t SYSTEM,it 'I'll take at least six weeks to process .JOUI"request. '.ii - fOR TI£DIRECTOR Of PUBLIC PARTltlPATIOM JB:mgb Ene10St1J'es cc:kTeS American.Inc. Jean Bucbanan Acting Director of Public Participation CONCURRENCE:Wozniak Mohn - :ON 3NOHd3l31 :ON 311::1 :01 V\lnaN\f~OV\l3V\1 ~iarch 24~1981 Action File Number:W-005-80 Jeanne E.Tweten P.O.Box 867 Palmer.Alaska 99645 Dear Jeanne, Recently I reviewed questions.coo1ilents,and requests for infonnation about the Susitna feasibility studies received by our office over the past year.I noted that Nancy Blunck responded to your concerns by tele- phone.I also noted that you had never received a copy of the responses to your comments and questions that are on file in the ACTION system.I thought you might like to have a copy for your own records. Your concerns are written below,followed by a response written by Acres or Alaska Power Authority staff. Your request for information: Please send me results of revised study of comparisons between Dam and other alternat1ves--as specified 1n Tuss1ng 1 s report.I would like a revised logistical plan and time line which compensate for expansion of comprehensive studies.I )iOuld l1ke results of analysis of cost and risks for Susitna and each viable alternative. Response from Acres American,Inc.:(Updated March 1981) Alternatives to the Susitna hydroelectric development are being studied by Battelle Pacific Northwest laboratories and managed by the Policy Review Committee appointed by the governor.The eighteen month stuQy will be completed by April 1982.By April 30.1982,the Policy Review Conmittee will make a reconmendation to the legislature and the governor regarding the most cost effective way to meet the electrical energy needs of the Anchorage to Fairbanks ral1bel t.The first series of workshops in connection with the alternative studies will be held in mid-April 1981.For IOOre info1"ft1ition~contact Sherry Valentine. workshop coordinator.Her address is 3501 Heartwood~Anchorage,99501. The Alaska Power Authority will 'also be making a recotmrendation to the legislature and governor by April 30,1982,as to whether or not to begin procedures for f11ing for a FERC license for hydroelectric development on the Susitna River. A report on the first year of studies was subnl1tted to the legislature March 30,1981.Copies of that report,which recomend continuation of the studies through April 1982,should be in the Wasilla library by the end of April. Page 2 Jeanne E.Tweten March 24,1981 The electric energy forecasts have been accomplished by the University of Alaska Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER).To develop their forecast,ISER developed a three component model.The three components are:an economic model analysis of employment and other econmnic variables,a demographic model which estimates population levels required to support the economic activity projected.and an electricity use analysis which determines,on the basis of the other two components,the electricity consuned in various Railbelt activities.Input into these model components can be modified as more data becomes available. The economi c anal ys i s included an econometri c model to cal cul ate 8 total level of employment and other economic variables on the basis of both basic sector activity and state government economic activity and the corresponding response of support sectors.Basic sector activity included petroleum and other mining,Federal government,agr1 cul ture-forestry-fi sheries,touri sm,and components of construction.Thus,the economic model deals with sectors of industry rather than specific industries. Population statistics are based on outputs from economic analysis. Major demographic assumptions include:The major detenn1nant of population will be the availability of jobs;and during periods of rapid growth in jobs,many will be filled by inmigration.Demand forecasts are then based upon economic sector and residential use using the economic and demographic analysis outputs. For a more detailed explanation of these inputs and the forecasting approach,consult the May 23,1980,.ISER Report,"Electric Power Consumption for the Railbelt - A Projection of Requirements, Technical Appendices.If Types of industries that are most likely to locate in the Railbelt area will be addressed by Subtask 7.05, Socioeconomic Analysis. Your question: What data will be utilized to determine load forecasts in the future-- at varying intervals?Are studies probing what industries are likely to move into the affected area?How are population statistics and demand f1 gures to be computed? Respgnse from Alaska Power Authority: The load forecasts studies,as you know.were conducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research of the University of Alaska. Their load forecasts~made independent of the Acres studies,are the ones that we are using.ISER,independent of any connection with the Alaska Power Authority,.w111 be updating the forecasts as part of the Battelle study of power alternatives.In cOMection with the Acres studies)Frank Orth It Associates of Bellevue.Washington.is examining the soclo-economic impacts the dam would have. Your COIIIfent: Mr.Yould:I find it interesting that some of the same doubts I expressed concerning data collection at the pUblic meeting in Wasilla have come to light through Tussing &Assoc.study:Evidently.it is not so easy - - - ..... - Page 3 Jeanne E.Tweten March 24,1901 to ignore findings by a credible source which are published by the press~ 1 am now -'appeased"that the study will more thoroughly investigate and compare alternative power sources with Susitna. Response from Acres ~nerican.Inc.:(Updated March 1981) Comments on the POS made by Arlon Tussing and others.have led to numerous revisions to the PaS.~rost notably: a)The State has appointed an independent consultant,Battelle Pacif1c Northwest,to evaluate the alternatives to Susitna in the manner and to the extent recommended by Tussing. b}The Acres study has been amended so that study of Sus1tna Basin alternative developments will be undertaken to a greater depth than had been previously proposed. c)For 1nfonaation on the Battelle studies,you may contact: Charles Sitkin,Project t~nager,Battelle Pacific NW labora- tories,P.O.Box 999,Richland,Washington 99352. Your cOlmlents and questions lI along with all other COOIOOnts and questions received by our office,are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority staff and Acres American,Inc.,and will be included in a report that will be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the governor before a dec1 s ion 1s made on Sus 1tna. I've enclosed an ACTION fonn you may use if you have any further questions or comments. Sincerely, Jean Buchanan Assistant Director of Public Participation JB:mgh Enclosure CONCUR:Mohn Blunck Wozniak - ,..---------------------------[W-005-80.~---I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS It REQUESTS I!Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility SDtaUted~/)l(.·~i I Tzecments on this form are submitted by:-~~L I I -An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name J£/IIJN£&,ru.!,-::-rrtJ name IIaddress?()-0 ('0 301 #of members RE eEl V E 0 I I city "tyflt11£-:&address ,",1"::-0:)r,.",'"I I state---fi<:::1151(4:zip 99(.."5<sr--city IIAlASKAPOWE;'Z AUTHORITY IIdayphone7f./:)-W 0 contact person day phone I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._12'~.-I ££'1tL tlJi.,reS {/Ii5 "rei'3d 'i«df cl (i,~rl{pdY'501>/AS,&""~~.. :;"(_/;1,..'/"JZ.y ,t?.v/1tf 7Ye S-ct./-(f!,;!t'C'.'~r t (5S /}CC'\t.I V€f'°y £-T <"I'dd'(i{;:c ';rt',';;af /efT:'I;C[c('P&uc {u,i{f,)n.(I .."~liN.!~vJU(~!L {tC~FZL-t)et!race iff c~;?Cpa/t~J/?Y((1~'(n1LlJnkU\S'/1/fslc{//('~ i ~[T tidU cd 111:,."rreJ~d 15 (/vA:tlAd(~{\,'S ,,,"({'sis (lAtd I , I c,':)ts ...,r-;/'~{(;inc-(/{/y~(l.efU!.t,,-.Ttl k {//e tl /1.:~~/l1.d Yc:/I I I ~ I -/;:)c~~k/~tl.?l)1..(/ee:,:!JI" I ~1 A J)'V II l.d'l,t!a.r ~{1'&j i}(ie~t/t:f.,(~.II '\LV'I't"&2J....t rttfrf/-(.....,~I .I(e~?fA-?7't..-S!-a·h-'5bc-s I /It i:1 o-1~'[,'~yt Ul.f.5 :/U hL ~(,L2tL:kd ~~I I'I!!!\i '----./(/I ,I I fYlr:)/{)U Lb ~I-I @ _l j;eui ;"l tft1~lere~h?r ~e;tv-l-s ~~.'~jf ylu ,rtL~dtH-UfiS JI .I L,'n 5<<",II..",c,/"11'jc!a ','lip ""I?"','VI!.:.f-bl?2;I - ~-f'PJlb'Yra in WM:!k h4J'(~(i1V1.£70 IF '.fIvLtUfp.!uss07.I I jf.5SL1'~<;/v.tMJ 1 f::-v,d'tfLfty,/1-/5 LU1-So etUf !o LCI/ttm'.I,L~.. i/----I hu tt.erre.al//e..·s~rce [~,aye pt<.-h/ISkd btfeCJiietpo;.es~ml I~,II --tcres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make')I your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:,;I I ·-furn ptA..;rt---?'>I I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I J)I INJ,, (~~~---------------------------------_.# I w,-z,LlYt'tl UJ ,~J,brU:r:f'}1~rE'--<5 PcH1..~.-G 4ifryYlO ! ~ I MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTION FILE Humber 1tI-006-8O State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: ~JE1:J.1980 Mrs.Deborab M.Dunkle P.o.Box 1716 Palller,Alaska 99645 Dear Mrs.Dunkle: You submitted to.our office SOlIe questfons rega1"d.lng the Susttna hydroelectric feastbl1ft.Y stt.a.Jiea.YGU1"questions are listed below. fol1caMKl directly by a NSPOR~1n:B Dave Woutta".Project Engineer. Alaska Power Authorf t.Y. Your!lU!!\tOll: 1 ...ld like to ftad out as 8IUdl infontattrm as possible regardfll9.the Sus1taa n.,ptGjec:t sclladuled to take place in tbe HataauskaValley."Specifically.bas tbe project been ~..bucige'tIJd for1. ReYIPJe: Ro.f1aal pNJect approyal win not GC;CUI"few seveta1 years. Your wst1..: tIheois construct1.sdJeduled to beg1n! Re!l!!!l: !!.dec1s1Oh is .de tu construct,.......1'DOt bef01"8 1985. tout"pltloa: I.S.the .state of Alaskt ptuaiR9 .to .bul1d it .(tlIe "l.or willtileprojectbeawaNedqapr1.U coatractorl ae..,: 11 a dec1stOD is ..to'"COIIStruct the ptOject.the construction.1'n be done _•priv.q CODtr~tor. 02-001 A(Rev.10/79) MEMORANDUM Page Z December 17"1900 TO:Mrs.Deborah "..Dunkle State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: y~pst1on:TELEPHONE NO: FROM:Is tbeJ"e a private contractor iDyo1WdJft:this point?If so.What is the name and address qf the company? Re.sJ!!AS!: Since no decision bas been .de to construct the project.there is no contractor 4t tbis tise to bond the project.HoleYer.Acres American.Inc.Is a ffrm )hat is conductfng the feasibility studies.. Their address is 22.01 SPQDiIrd Road.Attchorage.99503. Your 9!!$t1cm: How long Is tbe project Upee;ted to last?Wbat is the appt'OX1.te m8ber of employees the project win provide jobs for? Resp!!!!: Constructfon could take lrora a1ne to.fourteen years.depending on how extellS1ve a ClllPlp is finanyautbortzecl.PoteRtial emploJll!ftt oppot"tuIlit1es,wfll vary with the phase of constnlettoa: a peat of 1.%00 to 1.500 ,jobs iA not tmreasoaable. Your qt!!!tton: waere euctl1 is the construet~cm site located!This and other in""'tion,.can supply"wttb l"egWding the P1'Qject will be appreciated. J!sI09se: Oft tbe SusitM Rt ..between oevU·s taftYOh Irld tcatana Creek. He win put your ..OIl our .iliilg list to .-ecetve 1nforMt1on. An Cl8Uts.qIleStfons."_aad requests for fnf.-don received by our office ere reviewed b.r the Al.,a Power Autllortty staff ueI Acres -"fcaA. lac••and will be tacluded tlJ-"a report that win be given to tfJe Alaska Power Authority lJoanl of d1~Ud the Governor before a dec1stOft is ...011 SusitM._ Enclosed 'Is 18 ACTIOft foiIt wtdeb .YOU..,..If 10U have furUtero CGIIIIIAts.questt...or need Iddtt1cmal tafonRatton.lie have bid a f. probleras tJtpll1llllatfll9 tale AtTfOlt SYSTEM..Ho.-ver.SOlIe .,the c1~tIIIce$ .02-001A(Rev.loq9)_ - MEMORANDUM TO:Page 3 uecedler 17.1980 Mrs.Deborah K.Dunkle State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: I""" i ~ I FROM:..SU~ECT·that lteldup the process hive been COrrec:wcJ iJid we belfeve your next cornent or question Win be l1aIldled IDQre quickly.Please keep in .tnd."'ver. that because a I1l111ber of people will rev",-.and io some cases.C13IIIIeAt on each item sw.itted tn tbe AtIIOI SYSTEM.it win take at least six weeks to process your request. S1BCeJ'ely. HaIlC1 81 UIlCk Director of Public Participation ftB:ragh EnelOSVN cc:Acres Alar1CUt,IftC. 02-001A(Rev.l0j79) - •JL &II&a W-006-80~----------------------------f',I . :COMMENTS,QUESTIONS It REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study [(((C I'~('d h y I I ,H'P)+_II~"If 1"1("';;IIThecommentsonthisformaresubmittedby:Date .""'..'!.",~'.j I I An Individual Citizen __An Organization I ./\...,'",,rIname_'...:,«_7.:...,"....::,<.-.-:...-'----I:I-=-)-=(;~~/Jd..'·_c_=_·_r_(_l_f_.:.~_I_!1...:.1_.--=,U:::..;'~=-i--,-rl--,-J-,---,-(1-(name IIaddress;-::.n 7~~.A;,r '47 (c.#ofmembers'______________: I city _--l{--'::...(7.::..~..1.I..!.,._'_'·r'_.:,0~·~Ar~)----------address ---------------,I I state ..Lc->.,-.LI_r ZiP 9e;rc tj ~city I I IIdayphone---------------contact person day phone_____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately,Be as brief and specific as possible. I I JII would like to find out as ~uch information as possible I~ega~di~g,the ~usitna Dawn Pro¢e?t sched~led ~o take placefn1;n e !':a L:a nus r:a Vall ey •S:p eel f lea11 y,n c'.S t;'2 e pro:j ec t '0 eeL l apP!ov~d an~bUdget~d.for,if so when i~const~u~t~o~scheduled ~ "to Degln?lS the S'ta'te of A12ska plannlng to bUllcl It,or will ",1)11; Ithe project be awarded 'to a nrivate contractor?Is there a ~~ I p r i vat e con L:rae tor invol ved at t his poi nt,i f so\','h;::]tis the "I..,/0r\JI'.L)./ Iname and ad~ress of the company?How long is the project .o· I e:~I'~cted to.125'1,.and wl:at is tl:~a~P!Oxi.m8te n~:r:ber of .y;1L. le~pLoyees ~~e proJect wlll provlo8 JOOS lor?~nere exac~ly ~ is the co~str~ction site located?This and other inform8Tio~ you can supply me with regarding the project will be nppreci2ted. use extra sheets if you need them Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,, ~~----------------------------------_# (6LIOI'IIal:j hfIOO·,m Fehrvary 4 ~1981 M.F.Ebling St."Route C1>Bex 115 Willow.Alaska 99Sea tear M.f.Ebling: We recehed your 1 etter .'king for .ss1stance in constrvctift9 selar energy projects.I rIm sorry we can 1t help you.Howeyer ......e forwarded your letter tG the Al.ska Center for the EftYfroflHftt.I hoJ)e they C4n hel,you.I .1so s\lfgest you contact Clarfts.quialan.0irector,Al.skl state Division of Energy aad Power Development.The divisionis address and phone number ere ~3~Denal1 Street.ARcborage99501,(276-050S.'The At.sta Center to,"the FnviroMHmt's address .ttd phone I1tmber l1"e 1069 W.6th Avenue.Aftduwege 9~S01..('74-16~1.) T f.K\pe these sUMestioftS Will be he1 pfu1 to you. Siacerely. Jean Sueha'ttan,,, :V\l0l:l.:l :ON 3NOHd313.l ce.Actrol '1st-f11 e :ON 311.:l :01 lI\InONVHOll\l3l1\1 .~, Public Part1c1patinn Proqram Bebruary Il.1981 - Nancy lee Alaska Center for the Environment Dear Nancy. !don't know if you are still providing assistance to people in construct- ing solar energy project:however.if you are,T thought you ""qht be able to help~.F.rbli"~(see attache~letter.)r also thouqht you mf~ht lik@ to have his name to add to any 'fsts you might have nf 1ndfviduals interested in pri- vate solar energy projects. In a letter to ~r.(?)E~11"~~t menti~ned r had forwar~ed his request to the Alaska Center for the Environment.!also suq~ested he contact the Division ~ 1069 West 6th Avenue Anchorage.Alaska 99501 of Energy and Power Development. I expect to receive other requests for information similar to this one.lfien I do.should I send them on tayou?If I don't hear otherwise from you.r·ll assume you want requests for information forwarded tn yotl. Thanks fftr your assfstance.I hope I haven't inconvenienced you ton !'Imch by send1nq fblinq'!letter on to you. Sincerely. ene:one! _.J~n Cue haJUI.n cc:ACTIO'f system ff1@ i-/""../ (..{~OO~-8_0 ___....- I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date December 15,1980 IIII-LAn Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name M.F.Ebling name I I Iaddress-~S;)..1t,..(;au-r'--l'\,R-I.-t...---\C"'"":!,,..---l;;lBLUOAX-l-l---lh5J.------#of members,_I IIcityW!!-lL'lLlu,oU!WL-.-----------address ---------------I I state ~A(ll-'-la.Lsuk>..lo'aL__zip 99688 city I I IIdayphone---------------contact person day phone----I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I If your office gives individuals help in constructing solar energy I I projects for self,could you please send such information to us.I I I I We are interested in a greenhollse solar energized construction.I I IIThankyou.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II·Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,.,------------------------------------, - - - MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTION FILE ttuIIber:T-001-00 State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: December 15»1900 SUBJECT: "'"'One is tbe -ca._llrei.},i'Ddustr1al.goveJ"lllent ..•Tilts group 02-001A(ReY.IOj79).•, fVl~¥ORANDUM Ms.Sheldon December-Ii,1900 TO: State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: FROM: is included in the baseline us~!m:0~1~plann1ag,UIlfortunate1y the three segments are lumped together.we to data contraints. Accordingl,)'it 1s difficult to decid~J~l how much 1$industrial vs.comercial or government.However,vliised on the general demographic composition of the ran~lt area,it 15 probably fair to say the industrial component is "light-industry.and a small part of the oYera11 category. let's see wtlere that category is,and when!it is projected to go. Also.let's use the IS£R "iIOSt likely"projection.which 1s the Susitoa planning baseline.Actual 1978 rai1belt COftsUtlPt1on was 1020 x 109 btb for "residential lt and 1154 x 109 kwh for ftCCUlercial. industrial.govemD1el1t"."<or sn of the ~tal for the latter.In yelr 2010.the projKt 1s for 3270 x 1~kwh -residential",4542 x l<r'kwh DCOIIiterc:ial.tndtl,str'fal.govemaentB •01"58S for the latter. Clearly,the "most Ukely·projection preserves the existing mix relationships.. The seamd _jar category1s "self supplied industry.tl Tbese are for the &1Ost part "beavl~industry,and they make their own electricity. It is important to note ~t the self generation aSSUllPtfOtt holds throughout the forecast,.and alsuch are not in the SusitN planning b4selhte.lt4Mtbeless.jtis interesting to see what tSER thinks will happen relative to heavy industry. Briefly t the ans.r is,DOt raucb.In 1918,tbis c.~WiIS 414 x 109 kwh.In 1985 it 1s projected to grow to 511 x 10 kwh,with IlO growth thereafter.ThisJ)I"oject1on is based on construction of the northwest gasU.,water flooding at Prudhoe Bay,SOlIe increased gas production in the upper Cook Inlet,development of the tiat10nal Petr'Ole.reserve and ~Outer Continental Shelf,Alpeteo and an LNG terRI".l.Existing 1ndustry is considered to experience very moderate to no growth. Based 011 tile above,it wOuld 5eSI tlftfatr witb cbargiag ISER (and, since ISm data is the ~1fne for $u.s1tM planning,Sus1tna)with emplta$1%1ng or favoring ~18dustr1al"COASWlPt10ft.In the SlIDe Yein,it would be iupp,..r1ate to delete existing 1I1Rdustry"fne the baseline,or deny tb«t CAtegory power f1"Oll SUs1tna.The Sus1tna dill concept coat1nues lobe ••••to meet tile electrical Reeds of the ranhalt res1deAts."~definit10a of .-esideots 4des (and lUSt) 'lactude all existing anCJ'1"OJectecl COftSt8ers.Restrfct101lS on any oaecategory best eBJer9!fl'Oll the CG.JRtt1 OR a local basts.rather than being illlJK)Sed by an_external entity. Your COI8eJlt: Page 2-7 (a)COftf11ct1Dg"1I'lterests.A list of special interest groups is giVeR. This should include "IndUstr1.1 and COIiIIercial business concerns who wish to expand their ~bus1ness interests aI1d prcaote iDdustrtal growth." ;j. - r M~ry10RANDUM MI.Roberta Sheldon okember 16.1980 TO: FROM: 02-001 Al Rev.1 0/79) State of Alaska DATE: M.~JY10RANDUM Ms.Roberta Sheldon DeceIIber 16.1980 TO: State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: FROM: As 1istecl on page 5-205 of tile POS.the t.WH of detai led soc10ec0RODJ1c profiles to be developed _1ncludJfLcPHONE r:f<f:-- -business act1vlt.Y."level ,and t.1"Milk-attitudes towards growth SU~"jE~T: -attitudes towards 1ffestyle and quality of 11fe The first profile wn 1 characterize recent and current industry activities and trends.Ihe latter bfO profl1es will address past and curnmt attitudes ~~gf'OWtil.l1festiYle,aDd the quality of Ufe.Possible c~in industry activities aDd trends -caused by SUs1tna ~lectr1c:project-and the Influence of such chaRge OIl lifestyles aDd,the qual1ty of life w111 then be discussed. People's attItudes totrardstbese poss1bleehanges will be ckta.aented. Your CG.ellt:.. Page 5-228.Paragraph two:Man questiOllDalre. CGlDeat:This quest10rmaire should not be 1imited to Ancborage- Fa1rbuks residents..Talkeetna and other area COIIlIUll1t1es should be included.Ideally.tbe choice and won11ng of questions should be judged by an objective panel before being chosen and printed. ~se p!!p!red !W KevtA '!U!'St.Acres American!Inc.: We &gfte w1tb ,your suggestlO1laod have instructed ourrecreatioul investigator to iac:lude f,esideats 1A the area of Talkeetna.tantwll. Curry.and Clwlitna 011 tlle maiUng list. As stated 011 page 5-228 of our PaS."the design of the questtORfti,irewinbec:rtttcally revtet]led and pretested prior to distribution." The .ta purpose of th1srev1ew is to enkuce CJl)jectirity.The formation of an obJectiYe puel ~ld be difficult to adl1eve..This suggestion was discussed with the ~t1GDal investigator. Your COlInei'll:. Page 5·369 (ll)A list of"groups to be addl"essed. ceareat:Tbis list should toelude the following group:"Area res1deats t~by tb!.4aL. ~f ..Public PartiefSt1 on Offlee: Tbank you for your suggesttOR.It was our latention to iaclude ....nstdents.We ~t8eII UDder -others with whoJa coordtaat1ou is needed."we agree ttl'.t it ..,14 haft been belpful to Hst tIleIl separate1,.since area ~1dents are such aa iIIportHt gt'Oup. ~.Mlt1.: 'age 5-3"(b)AlJfIS per$oanel to be ·beused in Acres'project office. cc.aats.Does ADf'1I pay ,for use of tilts facUity? •Qev.l 0/7.9l MEMORANDUM Page 5 Ms..Roberta Sheldon T°December 16.1900 State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: - FROM: Raspo;ns,e by Don Baxter,Alaska PtMetHAtttiWi:t,l: ADFItG does not pay for their office SjtftiCl:n Acres project office. Acres is required,85 part of their contract with the Alaska Power Authority,to provide this space free of cbarge to ADf&G. Your CORJeBt: Page 6-15 (e)TMUl$IliS$iOn Corridor AsseuDJel1t. CODIIimt:No IlJeAtion is made whether this bl.lf-ilUe w1decorrtdor impacts open-to-entry property..No _ntion is .de of the residents living on tilts open-entry property and the poteRtial for social impact on same ... Thel1st of studies on ttl1s page should be broadeaed to include impact on thts 9l'OUP of area re$idents. ~$po!!!!preeare4 bl Kevin Young,Acres American 2 Int.: Clearly the sec:t1on of c:orr1dor of COftCam is that close'to Talkeetna. Tbis operation should,tilerefore.be addressed by the intertte (AAdIorage to Fairbanks transmission cormectiOll)contractor.Coruorawealth Associates. ReSf!!l!se froa ~ve Woza18t,Project ~inee..,Alaska,Power AutboritX: We are proceeding on thel,asts of one north-south transmission rigbt of way for both SusttDa trad tnterUe.That final right of way .111 be 400 feet or less wide)well under the balf .ne you have noted.The routing of this rigbt of.WAY is befng coordiftated wtth the Alaska DepartlleAt of Lands;tbey are the agency that "lnisten tile open to _try progr-. ReSJ?0!!!8.ff'OlR Public ,Part1cip!t1on Office: There will be a meet1ag is Talkeetna regarding the pr'OpO$ed trustaiss'lcm COIUleCt1.\letweeA Aacherage and Fa1rbaAks.The lleet1ag is scheduled for 1:00 p.'!••Tuesday.January 20th.at tile Talkeetna el_tar.v school.We urge you to attet1d and address .,)'OUI'"questions torepresentaUves frcm ~lth Associates. Your CCIBIeIlt; When tilts 'OS speaks of ioc.'1&1 or buIJaa.It ".lip&(:ts.•It CGDStsteDtly labels this ·socioeconomlc.·When it speaks of cultural Impaet. it does so 1n te...of atcbeOlog1cal 4Dd h1stoMcal fBVeStigattOft. I feel tbilt it is desira~le and t1_1,y that tile·Pl.of study .recog- ntze *extsteRce of t114t COIICept tdlicb is sociocultural.in a c:oatempoNry sense.1b1$POS 1s clefftct.t til that it does DOt. R!!ponse J?!"!P!!!!:t V Kerin YOU!J.Ac:res American.Inc.: llnlree tbat soc1ocultuNl aspects are importaRt.Urlder subtask 7.07 and 7.05,weilaYe "tlCl"the develOf8Jlt of prvtflesGft lud use.... f\1~~ORANDUM tts.Roberta SbeldoR OeallllbeJ"16.1900 TO: State of Alaska DATE: FROM: 2-001A(Rev.lO/79l FILE NO: patterns and trends.Uncler subtask '.OS we have included the develop .. ment of profiles of attitudes t.tiWiil"ifSN~f'festyle and qual1ty of 11fe. attitudes .towards growth*,and fish.and wildl i fe.resource use patterns. All of these profiles have soc1ocul&fi.,caspecu associated with them. In our review of generllsoc1ocvltural tond1t1'ons (POS page 5...2(7). we will review literature perta1niny to the Alaska.social/cultural env1roraent and social qmd1ticns.Attitudes of the general public will also be acquired througb pubUc participation meetings and open workshops .. We 40.however.accept yOur CC*i1Mt tbat in our preseat 'OS emphasis is _fie Oft the soe1oec.oA01111c aspects than on COfttellporary soc1ocultura 1 Ispects..As a result.",real1zed we taight beabletofull,yusess the eul-tYral itupaets at the l()Cal or even regional level.Therefore.we are addfng a special stuc:lY to deal with sociocultural hlpacts of construction and ex1s~of the project.This studY wi 11 begin SOGle time in 1981..It will be coordinated with the soeioeCOllOlD1c studies wtden are now tnprogress. '..r~t: Page 8-3.(2)-we tatencfto produce a high qualttiY.tedIIlfcally correct. econoa1cally sOU8<l.enVirotDmtally acceptable report...on \1111 and without pe......t damages in the project area.· C t:One WOBders bow Acres can do 411 that without introducing pe t ges. Re!l?!!$e ,oave Wom1ak.,Project Enst .....,Al.,Q P!lWr Atlt,hor1t,l: We are doiag our best to"safeguard tile project area from permanent daJage.Access and field work.bas been permitted by the Bureau of Land ....gelleDt ..bIIt only with strict stipulatioras Oft peraissible KU..tUes.1ft part.~cost of the progr.is IIUCh greater than it otherwise .,.,ld due t<!the use of roll1goRS.belicopters.lir transportable drill rigs.e"-.-all for tbepurpose of leaving the least evidellce possible 'f our having been 1a the bast •• your ..-.t: '.ge 2-19 tel Role of API..This stau-at professes that total objectivity co be acM.Jed ttIrough the .,1018&5 of the Power Mt.bor1ty. C_t:This is questtOaable.I nave observed Ertc Yould.£xeQIt1ve Director of APA.1n saVeta}meetfDg$.He impresses •••Ilarbor1ng strollg btas 1o ,favor of ~proposed....fan••og ts •quote f,. the ~...__'~T1"fr 1lec8Iber 19.1979.1nclucled ,.aa articl. OR ~•ould said be is glad to see the group of coaeeree4 cfti..(SPN)J"s been fol'lled 'to _ke ~'y aware of tile need.for a project Ijte SusitM.··t also obsened b1 ••t •8LM _t1ag tfl 1978 ...he .rgued wttb u enYi .......tal lawyer 1ft a ,.'\\ M.~.ORANDUM I8ce1bierta She 1dolt . Decellber 16.1900 TO· State of Alaska DATE: - - ~' .- very condescending lIi...r.1 do A01fltJeMeve such bebilv10r represents I desire for objectivity.nor does it create a Cltllilte for objectivity within the Alaska Power Authort~PHc{tftOtw:written at April COBIDUft1ty meeting:Mr.Yould was very helpful and cordial at tonight's fIle.UOi FROM:1ft Talkeetna.}SUBJECT: COI8fl1lt:ODe is heartened by tbe closing two paragraphs (Keeping Objectivity)of tbe stud,y. Re!p!!§!from Public Participation Office: We bave noted .)"OUl"concerQ$which have been passed Oft to Acres American and the Alaska ~r Authority_Your CClllilents.along with all COIIUeftU and questions reG8ived by our office,will be included tn a report that will be ,given to the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors and the govttrROr before a decision is made on Susitna. Enclosed is an ACTIOI form which you MaY use if you have further COIaeftts,quest10DSlI or need additional information.we have had a few problems impl,elleDtiag the ACTION SYSTEM.Howeve,.s.-of the c1~UlllStuces that held up the process have Jaeen corrected &Ad we believe your next COMlIe8t or questIon will be haRdled mqre quickly.Please keep in mind.~vert that because a nUllber of people will reviews and in SOfIe cases,COIIIent OR each item submitted in the ACTIOH SYSTEM.it will take at lead six weekS to process your request.. Sincerely, Nney 81 UftCk Director of Public Part1c1pat1. NB:mgb Enclosure ":Acres Amel"iCAft.lac • 02-001 A(Rev.l 0/79) r--;;;~;~;;~~;~;;;~;';-~~~1 I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I ~ I The ,omma'"00 'hi,lo,m a,e "bmil'"by,Data~'Q _I J I LAn Individual Citizen __An Organization I JoI!!- I name ~obc.rtQ.~e..ki<.n name IIaddress#of members I .-, I city ~kec..-t-r\C'...address I I state ------A K zip j9 (,1 ~city I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I Arrac..heel wn*e..~C,OWHY\£.V\tS.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:~ I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~~----------------------------------_# - ...~ i "i' ~/rittcn Cormnents or; Acres !\merican Plan of ':'Lllc1V 19PO I am R life>long Alaskan and hav(o lived in Talkeetna [or sixteen years.I have read the lqRO A.A.I.Plan of ~Lucty and consider'it to be superior to the olans of study published by the Corps of Eng inect's for thp Das t fi'l(,'It'd rs.The ir-a DDrO;:lch \"a5 ah.;ays dinosaun~an with little,if Ciny,consic1c'ration for oublic opinion. This POS expresses what appc<:1rs to be c()nCc~r.;l tor social, environmental ann other elements that fac,?ootentia1 impact from both the proposed dam and indeed thc's rudy it SC'1 f.Cne hopes this concern is genuine. ~y comments are as follows, order of the pas:....."''''''F'ii ~ Pap,p l_L~(i)"Determine the flJLure elr'ct:Tic,ll nOVJC'r and iiIlis,.~ energy need s of the Ra i 1 be 1 t /\rea ..."I~l.,D;~"I.. D'>r>e 1 5 (1','~"oroJ'pct=d ("e~'.-,n('1 "l.t:.~'-'),-,_/•••>-:-,'-:...l:_lllC:l,l~'~. Comment I Future anything is an intanf',Lble.Ll the ~)ast, projected power needs encouravE'cl the constcuction ()f li'any clar:ls _f: and facilities rhat enderi un C:\~'~,\TI":C'the dC'mant1 that 11;1(1 bee',Ii., .d 'f hI'l'1 k../'q·DcoJccte....he POS S lOU.cl assure tnat the ;::<rojectcc oc.'manc.1 studies "'ill take strongly into consider:ation such clements as 1 Dol i tic a 1 1 elim d ,ate,5 a cia ~0 pin i 0ctJ n,a n ci .S OJ cia c ~llit U I;'31 nee cl 5 •?J;,~ For examp.e,0 area res1dents .esire lncustr1a GCVelODment. If not,this would eliminate industrial power dema:lcl from the ".~" Drojected demand._-"-.----===~.....-, ~/Ll.. L":' \ 'Piige 2-7.(a)Conflictini',Intl-~rc!sts..\list of s;)ccial @ interest groups is ,l',iven.;1.," Comment:This list should include "Incl 1Jstrial anrl ConmlclTial business concerns who \-.'ish to eXDand trwtr husiness interests clnd promote industrial growth."'. c:~:-....-'""~,_" Page 2-19.(e)Role of APt\.This statement p[of(~s~)es that------"", total obiectivity can be achiev('d thro 1 w,h the eITlnloye(~s of the Pov-;cr ,\uthori ty. Comment:This is questionable.I hav\"ob.servc(~,~ric Youlc~,' :~xecut ive nirec tor of !\FA,in severa 1 mept in[',s .Ee imDresses me r' as harboring strong bias in favor of the prooosed dam.Followin~ is a quote from the Anchorae:,e Daily Times,December 19,1979,'(2 included in an article on Susi tna Power :'\ov-;I "Yould sa id he is..?J'...• glad to see the group of concerned citizens (SPO)has been formed,"'" 'to make everyone m"are of the need for a Droject 1.ike Susitna.'" I aJso observed him at a BU1 meetinQ',in 1978 \"hen he argued v:ith t.,.- an environmental lawyer in a very condescending manner.I do not " believe such behavior represents a desire for objectivity,nor \1 does it create a climate for objectivity within the Alaska Power ,\. Aut-hori ty"\;' .,1 / '-]1.{vl:<./7{!.ytrk1..1 tc/~lA.-Cl-t1'~L~,O/.jL 'j/.'j; (L-rcl (!.~4~~t:;--'-YtA-'t ~/!n~u-L~t ~n 7O..-~z.r-./',. are :ore consumersSLxcatee,or-Les 0 f OIOj ec ted is this profJosi'\l be av 3 i.la t)1 (~• ('\I)) Alaskan attitudes,cuSt0'11S,0tC •••" By what criteria \v.}s this oerson cllosc~n?~'ost this 00rson Obj0cciv0 with re~ard to Alaskan customs? PaBe 6-14.(c)Socioeconomic Analysi~. Comment I See General Comments. Page 4 -24.(a)"...an A1£1 skan res iden t h'i th thorour,h background of Commentl imDort;u1t,is attitudes ano Page 5-5.(f) Commen t I \'lha t ;infonna t ion shoulrl list~d. Comment:Of the six consumer catei2,ories,fully half are industrial."',ilw this enohasis on industrial use?,:\'hen the Susitna Darn conceDt was initially proposed publicly,it was "to meet the electrical needs of the railbelt arca rosi.dents."'7\")'\ow \.;re Clre faced with the prosnect of '50~~industrial use.I object strongly to this proposed consumer list.In connection wi th my comment on Dage 1-1+,a conceDt such as "undes trccl tndustrial"should influence tllis consumer list.1 ,._,__.•.__..J6::..~:~...:-.~t.«.".."d'~#"., -Pa~e 5-205.(e)A list of socioeconomic prOfilC.S ..toDe.c>.~7.."""/. developed.\.I J /'" .Comment.:This li.st should inclu(~e a catep;ory enti.tled,..._.",.!t-·. "Potential for indtlstri,q1.growth,and desirabi.lity or''.lnd(~sira-. (J~'.~..',.1'·f ."1D1 1 t yo.same.,_,' 4il -.~':s;it-H ......'.".•~,"._,."... ,. Pa~e 5-228.Para~raDh two.Vail questionnair0."_I /:_"Comment I Thi s questionnai.rc'S!IOU]<i not he 1 Lni.red to )/\,...r~"t\nchorar.e-FClirbanks resict""nts.Ta1.k.pptna and ('tr-H'r area CO<I1~[1\J[li®".';" t if'S ~hOlllc1 be inc 1u(:ed •Idea 11:;,~he choicp i1nd,\"0 n:1 [';'?f ~If. qupstlons should be Judp,ec1 by i1r1 oh.Jc"'ctlve oW1('1 ~)c'forr-'~)(,ln?,.,,,/~ c h 0 Sf'nand p r i n t eel •-~.,.';;!i;;.,d',r"'r'~-'7.-1 Ii:!.nage 5-309.(h)A list of gro",>s to be address(·':.""1'1:)J ';V-/,.Comment I This list should i.nclu(]c~the follmd.ni'('YOUPI~!.,.i£~' ,;"Area residents impactec1 by the dam."~="7J....,:::",,-~j PaGe 5-393.(b)!\DFSD p0rsonnel to be housed in ",.,["ns~"IT)!~ojcct office.:\'·'"'t/Q)\-~,,-,t Comment:Does 1\Df,',:r;pay for usc of this faei 1 i Ly?~..,"1'\..J ".I ., --..,__..~_""'".~~-~.i""""'.t;.,.-.;,,,'_,.J),....;;,,.'l&o'~~.._.-.f "-"~ Page 6-15.(e)Transmission Corridor Assessment. Comment:\'0 mention is made whether this half-mile 'I'lide corridor impacts open-to-entry property.:\0 mention is made of the residents livin~on this open-entry property and the potential <,for social impact on same.Tho li.st of studies on this page 0.","should be broadened to inclucJ e imoac t on this p;rOllD of area residents. ;y'J Pat~e Three \.\. \( a high quali ty,J"~\ environmentally I f'?~·.J>.}·l introducinr~,rcnnanenc~r ~ 1 .,""r (10 a.1.Ln·~l t \H tnout~J ~.~~...General Comments:~--I 1.hlhe'n this POS sneaks of [)ocL,ll or }lum,Ul ir:l[)(1ctO:i,it @·'"....,If1}o,.;..~,.··•.; consistently labels this "socioeconomic.",'hen it spC'nks of .", cult1.Jral impact it does so in U'IT1S of 3r'ctlC'olo;-',ical and historical investi~ation.I feel that it is desirable and timely tila [the Plan of ~;rudy recor;n ize t~'le exi stance of tha t COnC('T)L \-lhich is Sociocultural t in a contemporary SPrlse.ThL~FOS is deficient in that it does not. '.....,---~ Page 8 -3.(2)"I,T e intend to produce technically correct,economically sound, I acceptable report •••on time and without damages in the proiect area." Comment I One wonders how Acres'can introducing permanent damaf,es. l .. 2.One is heartened by the inr,Objectivity)of this stud/yo 15 r\pril 1980 - -------~-~~ /(:c_~-£'~-<-,L·"tA....-..- -.. - October B.1980 Mr.Thomas Mercer Box 92 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Dear Mr.Mercer: The attached ccxanent on alternatives to Susitna hydroelectric development, that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ulmer,chairperson of the Ra 11 bel t Energy Alternatives Policy Review Comn1ttee.This c:oat1ttee will be providing policy direction to the Sus1tna alternatives study that Battelle ttortm.est Laboratories fs conducting. As you aay know.the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Susftna should be completed in such a way tbat there would be no question of its ~JeetiY1tl.Therefore,the legislature directed tliat an 1aa~tftna be selected to conduet the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and thi.t Acres Atner'feaR.Inc.continue its work on studying the feastb.111ty of SusitDa. The Office of the Governor is _naging the feasibility study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority 'Is managing the feastbility study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies will help determine whether or not the State should develop JiY(1i=Oelectnc power Oft the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other energy altem«t1ves.Since the State of Alaska will make a decision by Aprfl 1982 whether to fl1e a l1censeappHcatton for Susitn&hydroelectric, Battelle is directed to COIIP'ete their alternatives study well in advance of this date to permit an 1nfol"llled decision.. Since Acres will not conduct the alternatives study.we directed theIR not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not nsake mucb sense to us. to have theIa respond to your CGIIIent,if they were not going to be conducting the study.we thought it better to hold your ACTION request until the new consultant was selected. In July a request for proposals was sent out seeking consulting services to conduct an alternatives study ud prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt.The eoerqy plan will include u evaluation of alternatives.emerging technologfes.conservation,and load management.The plan will review.and where necessary,fl1P.-ove the exist1ag data base and demand forecast.It will exudne the alternative types of electric generation and help determine whether or not the state should concentrate fts efforts on developuent of the hydroelectric potentfal of the Svsftna River and/or pursue other alternatives. In Septeuber.Battelle Pacific Northwest laboratories (with Ebasco Service and the Institute of Social aad ECGROIIic Research)was selected to conduct the alternatfves study.Thetr contract with the Office of the Governor is now signed.Battelle is preparing a tiOrk plan which is expected to be fin1s1leel by the end of OCtober.Battelle ut1c1pates beginning work 111 NoveMber .. Mr.Tom Mercer Page 2 OCtober 8.1980 In the .antfme"further'questions and c:oanents concerning the alternatfves study (or response to your ACTION request)should be d1rected to Fran Ulmer or Tom Sfngef'.Both can be reaehed at the t41ephone rtt.tmer and and address Hsted below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked."Attentfon:Tom Singer.II Division of Po11cy oevelopment and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau.Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577 .. You may also wish to contact ~rs of the Raflbelt Energy Alternatfves Policy Review eomfttee..They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director DiviSion of Energy and Power Dtvelopment 338 Denali Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Mr..Charles tomtay t Chairman Alaska Power Authority Board of Oirectors 2702 Gambell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Mr..Ron Lenr"Di rector Division of 8udg$t and Management Pouch AM Juneau,Alaska 99811 If you have further questions or coanents about the Susftna feasibility studtes (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage.Alaska 99501.(907)276-0001. Sincerely, Na,ney Blunck Director Publ ic Participation Office Attactnent HB:lRgh -) DeceIIber 2.1980 ACTION fILE Humber:T-002-80 Mr.Thomas f.Mercer Box 92 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Dear Mr.Mercer: You submitted to our office some COlillieftts regarding the Sus,1tna Ilydroelectric feas1bl1 tty stu4ies.ODe CUiillent whicb related directly to the alternatives study was forwarded to the Governor's office as explained inNaDcy Blunck's letter of O~tober 8,1980.Your other COIIIeftts are listed below s followed direct),y by responses fran staff of the Alaska Powr Authority. Your CCIIIIeIlt:..... The Watua rumey will decrease the cost in that fixed wing is less expens1ft and JIOf'e pract1cal than rotary wing,$3.50 peP'hour for chopper versus $1.30 per"hour fixed wing. Res2<!@$!p!!@1"ed baY i.lOft Buter: Your potnt is .n taken"'w1th respect to the cost d1ffereat1al bebJeeD rotary wtng and {txed wing aircraft.If it I"lInW8,Y were built.fixed wiag aircraft would primarily be used as transportation to ud froID camp and rota,ry tdng aircraft would stnl have to be used to pnmde t~ttOD for the stud,y tufaS work1ngtn reeaote areas. Since tile airstrip ~ts a rather .large capital 1nvestmeAt. it is felt that •dec151..about wbethef or not it is «Ol1OIIically feasible must be made aff;er evaluattag oae field seaSOB.Jut evaluation is iA progress.with a decision due this year." YOQ1"~t: Suggest a Talkeetna based emplo,)'llellt service fftII whicb Acres c:an obtain personae1. :183r81!:;;:~Ol:l::l ~bl!!!Sf Blunck.Director of Public Partlc1eation: :ON 3NOHd3131 several Talkeetna residenU suggested having a Talkeetna based emplo)'JBeftt se"ice.:o~gave eoasiderat1011 to this suggestion but detenriDed it was not pr~ticalat tnis time because of the type of ailing it fs doing JIGIWr4l .If the project toes into .,construction 01 phase.a local hire Offi91 could possibly be set up within the Talkeetna area. 11\1 no NV}:JOIl\l3 11\1 (6llor M l:ll'lfloo-im Right nov.beeause of the natur'e of ttaework.the people Acres has htred largely include engineers,geologists.and.eftviromental scientists. Since the project is already eleven lUGRths tnto the first phase of •30 .nth study periQd.it .1$probably fatr to say that not many more people wfth these Mgbly...tedm1cal skills w1llbe hired.Also,for this reason.it does not seem practical to open ..TalkeetM-based eatploYJDfJllt service,.'though Acres gave considera- tion to this satggest10n "feb etrlIII fnJID several residents.If the project goes 'Into a COJlstructiOil phase.a local ..hire office could po••1bly be set up within the Talkeetna ....... It should be noted that kres'$VbCOntractors have hired locally 0t1 611 ..........basts fOl"cleart",.CUIP conSt1"UCt1oa.and 1091 stics suppon.SoIte of those ,.t1"ed were Talkeetna residents,while others we1"efroa wasilla and Willow areas.In addition,base len1C8S such as wat"etJous1ng and supply lOAdfng hive been provided b.y_ll bust ... MIAS located in T.lkee~becl,use bids were competitive and tIlere was •requ1l'"erl1eflt for '09411,y-perf01"l*1 service. Stat1sties show that as of the middle of June 1900 approximately 24 Talkeetna rutdents were employed .ither by Acres or its subcoR .. trae:ton.Jill Gtn,Ac.,.t Anchorage offtee manager,said this figure will flvctuate fIW t,1 __to time. Your~t:$-...... More public:1raput the batter.1 was generally ittpresseci with Acres 1atal1s tleeting. !PP!!B @t!Nred bl Jet.~hMut '''bUt:Part1cil!!tion Off1ce: ThMk 1011 tor 1OU"a_ent. " :ON 3NOHd3131 Eaclosed is ..ACTIOH foN wlI1ch you lIlY ..1f you have further CG I 11 ..=..,.t1.s.or ...-,a.11t1_1 1.1o..t108.We have bad •few ,.,.1..'1IP1_t1.the ACTtOH SYST£Il.HoRver.s..of the c1rct11Staru:es :31VO :01 V\lnONVClOV\l3V\1 Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.~_ T-002-80 day phone ~_ The comments on this form are submitted by: ---------------------------"I ~. ••I••••r-• I•-.. ••.-. i • ItS I1M~It J I'".• COMMENTS,QUIISTIONS til RE-.s.....r..--~ //~usitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I ~..oa,"~1S:?l5 I =-(l;:4-~.I #of members ~• address 0e'j.~P ~9 7 I ~~~~__zip f%76 citydUb-=~~•• contact person~-day phone I ••I•I••I•~~-I ,~.1~rl~~~~E~ .Cv-I~yzlA~~~~ALlff ~-.,h.~h1.I-c.-;:;:~~~i-7W=--4':'~~~r-~1 I I••-.. •use extra sheets if you need them • I.Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I. your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I ~.333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 • •I,, ~----------------------------------_.# (6L1orllal::l Il:ftQo-zo Page 2 December 2,1980 Mr.Thomas f.tt.ercer that held up the process have ·beeft corrected and we bet ieve yOUr next ~OI1Dftnt or question will be handled more qu1ek.ly.Please keep in mind.howeVer. that because a number of people ,,111 review.and in some cases.COimlent OR each item submitted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will take at least sh<weeks to process yovrrequest. Sincerely, FOR THE DIR£CTOR OF PUBLIC PARTIC IPAT 100 J8;mgh EnclQsure cc:Acres Alleric:aa"Inc. ..Jean BuebaMA Acting Director of PubliG Participation :~Otl:J .-j '} :ON 3NOHd3131 :ON 311:1 01 II\JnONV801l\J311\1 - - (6LlorAa~hfIOO-C:O Page 2 November 26,1900 Hr.Michael J.fisber Thaftk.you for sending 'Wlcy Robinson's COIIIents to us. All eosJIl!flts,questfons.and ,-equests for 1nfonaatioo received by Ottr office are reviewed by the Alaska Power Authortty staff aDd Acres American. Ine••and will be1ncluded 1n,.&report tbat will be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the Governor before a dec1s10A is made Oft Susftna. Enclosed is an ACTION fonu which yOU IINl.Y use 11 YOll have further c.-eIIts.questions.or .neeG additional information.We have had a few proble11S imple11e11tiog the ACTION SYSTEM.However,SOI9l!of the CircUMStances that held up the process have,beeR corrected and we believe your aext COImImt or question will be baRdled mgre quickly.Please keep in mind.bowever. that becluse •RUIIber of people will 1"eY1ew,and in S1De cases,COIIIIetlt on eae ttee sutllitted in tlte ACTION SYSTDf.it win take at lease six weeks to process yevr .......t. S1acerely. MalIC,)'B1WlCk Director of Public Participation HB:ragb EAClosure ec:Acres American.lac .. Ituc1 Rob1ason.Trapper (reek CONCURRENCE:WOZNIAK MOliN :ON 3NOHd313.l :ON 311::1 II\InONV80ll'J3l1'J T-003-80 contactpenlon day phone _ address _ city --=-/JJ.A...::.....;S_KA_PO_W_E_R_A_UT_H_OR_llY_ name ------.....,R~E..,.C~EiHII-\VI-l!lI-AD-- ,otmembersl ---,,---::-:::-::-::--- !'.PP 2 5 1980 __An Organization Individual citizens or community groups and organlzatlons.are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number comment,question or request separately.sea brief and specific as poulble._-If/Egg AM ee/(rAdi Do?oc £5S£S I dAT ltV TIi£pgE$&:ttJT" COMMENTS,QU_STIONS liRE.... Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study /~-------------------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .,, ~------------------~--------------_.# ~/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I f-~I I I1i~I ,.... - October 8"1980 Ms.Anna fountain Box 277 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 near Ms.Fountain: The attached questions on alternatives to Sus1tna b:Ydt'Oelectric develoPMRt. that you sublaitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ulmer,chairperson of the aal1belt Energy Alternatives Policy Review COIBfttee.This COlIIDittee will be providing pol1cy direction to the Sus1tna alternatives study that Battelle Northwest laboratories is conducting. As you may Imow.the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Sus1tna should be completed fn such a way that there would be no !J!!!!tt~objectivity.Therefore.thelegisllture directed tliat an .-ntTtI'll hi selected to conduct the alternatives study ftself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres Amer1cu.Inc.continue its work on studying the feasibility of Sus1tna. The Office of the Governor is JiIfIag1ng the feasibility study of alterut1ves. The Alaska Power Authority is managing the feasibility study of Susftna. The results of both studies .,11 belp detenl1ne .ther or not the State should develop ~lectr1e Jl(*er on the Sus1tna River ud/or pursue other energy alternatfves.Since the State of Alaska "nl ate a decision by April 1982 tlhether to file a license application for $usftna hydroelectric. Battelle is dfrected to complete their alternatives study wen in advance of this date to permit an 1nforlled dee1s1OR/ Since Acres "nl not conduct the alternatives study,we dfnc:ted th8I not to respond to your ACTltIt request.It did not _ke JJIUdl sense to us to have the answer your questions.if they were ROt going to be conducting the study.We thougbt it better to hold your·ACTIOH request until the aew consultant was selected. In July I request for proposals was sent out seeking consulting services to conduct an altenatfves study aad prepare an energy plan for the e1ectr1cal needs of the rallbel t.The energy plan wi 11 incl ude an evaluation of alternatives,emerging tedanologies.COIlSenation,and load .~t.The plan will review.aDd where necessary.improve the existing data base and demand forecast.It will exwlne the alternative types of electric generation and belp detenrine whetherOf'not the state should c:oacentrate its efforts on developl1ent of the hydroelectric potential of the Susftna River and/or pursue other alternatives. In September.Battelle 'ae1ffc Northwest laboratories (with Ebasco 5enice and the Institute of Social andEC'OIIOII1c Research)was selected to conduct the alternatives study.Their contract with the Office of the Governor is new signed.Battelle 1s preparing •wrt pl.,.feh 1s expected to be finished by the end of October.Battelle utictpates beginning writ 1n NoYt!llber. Ms.Anna FOtmu1n Page 2 OCtober 8,1980 In the meantime.further questions and coaaents concerning the alternatives study (or ftSponse to your ACTIon request)should be directed to Fran UllD8t"or Tom Singer.Both ean be reached at the telephone m.md>er and and address 1 tsted below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,"Attention:Tom Singer,"Division of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau.Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577. You may also wish to contact members of the RaflbeltEnergy Alternatives Policy Review ConIn1ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Dena 1f Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway.Chafnnaft Alaska Power Author1ty Board of Directors 2702 Gambell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron leftr.Director Division of Budget and ManagllRent Pouch AM Jtmelu.A1aska 99811 If you have further questions or COIIIJeftts about the Susitna feasibility studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to dtrect those to the Public PartfcfJNlt10n Office of the Alaska Power Authority.333 west 4th Aveue.Svfte 31.Anchorage.Alaska 99501,(901)276-0001. Sincerely. Nancy Blunck Director Publ fc Plrt1c1paUon Office AttacllReAt MS:mgb -, ,.... ....., ~l~EMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTIOH FILE Nullber T..OQ4-8O Ms.AMa Fountain Box 217 Talkeetna.Alaska 99616 State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: December 15.1980 SUBJECT: Del"Ms.Founta1ft: You submitted to our office a ftt.IIber of questioos regarding the SUsiba hydroelectric feasibility studies.One of your quest'iOllS related to the alternatives studies wts fonfIrded to the govenor's office ilS explained tA Naoc:y 8lunck's 1,tter to you in OCtober.Your otber'questions are listed below.follcwe4 by responses fraI Acres American.Inc...the 11m conducting the studies!or ~Alam Powr AuthoM~.. Y~1";Mst1on: Whe1"e win the ~be?I live OR the east side:of 'the SUs1ma at 2335 A.it ..R..1 ~ere2!~by Kevin lqung,Aci"!!s ~'c ..,IRe ..,: No $usima project ~'1ines am pl.ned for yooF area..~rl!l the proposed Ane~tq fa1~tranaissioa line comTidor., be dose to ....ytJU'l'1he. Note f,.Publ,ic Part1cii!ti~~fiC!t ~td~Al!$~Po,wer ~uthor:1g: Ob T~.~20th";at 7:00 p..m.'there will be ..~ting in lalueu.a at \lddeh the p~ulamiu100 QDMCtion ~tween MdIorage Md f'ail"blmks ~11 be discussed..We suggest you .~~ that IDeeting..It 1$~ied to be beld 11'ttlt Talkeew gf'~school. Yqm"9!!Yttoo: Win ~r-is1ea he ~for local hire N@~,l~of the p~t sttuat.OJh ~eftp!reG 1>1 ')i.~6nll __ger of tM ~rap Ac~s9"~ri:Clm o c:e: I l't r Rtgllt ROW,because .f tb8 .tuN of tM wort.tmt people Acr'H hAd bired 1.rgMy iaclude -ai...-s.geologists.and eav1~tal 02-001 A(Rev,10/79' MEMORANDUMPage2 December 15,1900 TOMs.Anna fountain State of Alaska DATE: FROM: 02-001A(Rev.IO/79j sdeat1sts.Since the project is all~tid~oeleven IIOftths into the first phase of a thirty month ~tudy ptr~tl~:lt~!$probably fair to say that not many more people with ~se highly":teefuncal skills will be hired. Statbtics 5110II that as qf the middl~leJ.tc4Wle 1980 approximately twenty-four residents were employed el:tner by Acres or its subcontractors .. This figure .ill f1"c:tua~from time to time. It is important to note tbat the Acres'subcontrKtors have hired locally on an as-needed tlasis for clearing,camp (.OBstruction.and logistics support•.SorRe,of those hired were TalkeetAa residents, wnUe others werefraa wasilla and Willow areas.In addition, base services svdl as warelMKtstng and supply loading have been provided by 511&11 busi~ses locabMl 111 Talkeetna because bids ,",Te CODJMttit1ve and there _$a requirement for locally performed service.. Several Talkeetna resictents suggested haYing a Talkeetna based eli{Jl0,Yrellt service..Ac..gave consideration to this SlIggest10l1 but determined it was not;.practical at this time beeause of the type of hiring it is doing now..If the project goes fato II constntc:t1on phase.a local-hire.off1(:8 could pOSsibly be set up within the Talkeetna area. Tour !lU!!t101!: Impact on the river -fiSh,water lnel.silt? Re!R!!!!!mP!red bl KeYto '!!!'it Acres AmerfCM.lrJe•.: As part of our present studies,we are collectiag exteashe 1afonlllt1oa OIl the fisheries.i\Ydrol"-y.and water quality of the Susttna River. Following the acqaistt1~of tIIis data aad a review of tbe selected proje¢t design...will tI,e able to predict the 111PKt Oft these resources and BIlka recc:ngendatiOft fof".litigation measures as requfred.This infOl'llltioa will DOt be ,vaneole until the spl"189 of 1982 wfth additional studies coatfl)U1ng beyond that date. ,YQ!r gU!sttoa;: What wtn be the effeci$of quakes or sltdes behind or UDder tile dill? Flood,Talkeetna? Ru.P!!S!mp!reelbl lCeYi',\''-Slt Acres ;.r191!.lac.: lbe dIM will be desIgned to safely tritbstMclthe MaXi..credible earthquake.Sufflcteat fJ ....rd will be pro,ided over and above tbe .-1 required to CCJ,Atatnwaves that could be generoated .,y eartltqvakes or sUdes w1~'tift the resematr for eartbftll/roc:tft11 ~ 'I ~MORANDUM ~r 15,1980 Ms..Amla Fountain TO: State of Alaska DATE: SUBJECT: - FROM: 02·00 lAC Rev.lO/79) dam construction.COnsideration ""'lLallO be given to special Btajor crest protection se that .110 damaQe would occur 1.the URllkely event the dam is over-topped.TrrEPHONE NO: Yaur 9!!!tion: What about oebrf$floatiq down during construc.tioa7 ~pq!!S!,,.,.Kevin ~ouagl Acres Ameri~!IneaL: The COftdit1ons of tile corlstruc:t'loa indicate p~to be followed to minill1ze tntroduct1onof debris into the river during construction activities.A fIODitor1ng ud 1nspectioa Pf'09rIII will be undertaken to insure these proceclu..are followed.Provision will he _de to look Into specific COIIPlatnts and to develop acceptable solutions.Thi$ approach shOuldprevut iP1Y major problems. Your 9!!!st1on: Wbat will be the level of the river "U.the reservoir is fillingl After? ReH!!!!prepa~9l Kstvla '!*BIt Acres AmeMc_,Inc..: PJoelia1nal"1 calculations indicate that the contribution to the stream flow froM the Chulitna aad Talkeetu.Rivers 1s about the$"as the n.ill the ~tA$tem above the cooflueace.Therefore. ~cutbac.kin Susitna flow ..,ld have.a SIlIIUer effect 011 flow . below the TalkeetH .j~iOft. Reservoir 1Uling sequeaces win be developed IIICb later 1n OUf'stud,y progr_.However.it ~be said at this stage that a 11'1.1...flow ia the river will he ruiflta1ned at an tilles W I18et the requirlllellts of fish Iftd wildlife.ao4 an,y atber't~needs that are 1deatifled during the ~of tile study.The required flow wtn be establ {sled 1ft conjunc;t1oe .Ith ageac.te$StICh as ADflG and ADKR and be based OD extens1v,field data and _lysis.It w111probably DOt be las thaD tba mtDI __flow'recorded in the river to date. After the resenoir is CC8dss1oaed.the Mver flow w111 be more or lus UR110N ~t ~,yeuo..Wiater flow at Talkeetaa would be.about 10.000 cfs as cqIIPared to till curreat average flows OR the .......of 2500 cfs.The ,venae SurBer flows will be about 80S of their PftSaIIt nlues. Tour 9!!!t1on: Would Ute t8 blow the na.of the legislative 1BdepeAdeftt task fon:el HO NUKES .. b • M~ORANDUM DeceDlber 15.1980 Ms.Anna-Fountain TO: State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: FROM: "'t~!x ~MohltiEMftICtGr.o(Engineering.~l~ta ....!&l SUBJECT: Brian Rogers and Huth Mal00e comprised the legislative subcomittee that COGducted 1nde~t &SS8SS1llmU of Susitna alternatives. Your questions.alOftg with all COIIIeDts and concerns received by our office are reviewed by the Ala.ska Power Authori~staff and Acres American, Inc••aad win be included tn.J.repon that will be given to the Alaska Power AuthGri t.Y board of d1~and the Governor before a decision is ..Oft Sus1tna. Enclosed 1,an ACTIOH fora whieb yw My use if )IDU have further telaclents.questions.or need 4<ktit1onal infenutioft..We have had a few proble11S 11Dpleraent1ng the ACTION SYSTEM.However,.SOlIe of the ciraestaJleestba'held up the process ha_,been corrected and we believe .YtU'next CCUlent or question win be haBdlecl .-quickly.Please keep in IItII4.however. that because •...,.of people will review.and in some cases.COIIAent 00 each item suIJm1tted 1ft the ACTION SYSTEM.it win tate at least six weeks to process ,your request.' 1aftC1 81unct Director of Public Partkipat10a 02-001A(Rev.lOj79) ~{T-004-80 ----i i COMMENTS,QU_STIONS II REQUESTS I -I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date ~,I -:;-.~.0 I~,I IIAnIndividualCitizen__An Organization I I name -A LA '"v..r;;."\",,-l-bOJ;t;'--'h."'----___name IIaddress:R",*:?7J #of members_____________I I city ---r;-{t....",e'-''t~j.L'-'-"'~'-""..""-"'--------address --------------I ""'"I state ,---'8L....W.'l""""--ZiP L1Citt·",0,city I I IIdayphone--------------contactperson dayphone____I F""I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.- ~-~"i,..ll-II .'~,(.{,":>{.j'(,'i .-__(~,-,-.l 1 ··,---I.·/•.·.:.,·:·~':tl--:r:WY ..,...0,.··-<....,(1 xL.l·lC _'_H '-'k,:,'"Iv's.-'__.t..~,--.£h, 1 I 1......==-=~'-------"'.0""".'-"-J,>.:-:A-",-,\.---..::~;-'~d.",,"'-4'_.::s.'.t~L.>'-4~-'.~""-'-:t"i"C,;,,"""".•.'------f~"'-'-'-/,--,-,---=-c=__"-'-.'----"'......""".)"'""'::s~::i~-,-,>-(#----,-d..L··w!~~.~~.====--_L- ----'''-=-'''''''':I----'--'-~:::.,.-----'-l/~.LL!=...--''-c-'=C....=--<..'''''.-,--'''-''-'',~''-'·'-''''-...:>.·v'-----''=-l=-....--'-',"'~.""'~.""••.£.A-'='·'-"-----'i,-.i A(H,c.,,~.t "'~v 'l":.J~(vxL.&,.\::\J .11"';..-'1 I "J__'') ' I tA I~nJ ....-.::r:---'"'--r_~""-'-_ty="~~O<,-'------"r"""'h"-'.I""u::"='~""".""":tt"'-'.h~&"""_<'-'-'-------------~===="'--.~,."fI"h r lV.~,::>.,_.I, "-::>l'-'L..L t'\I"Y'YiI;...A .-,:~..\....--"'.- "l;jp~1"1 .<,,'~,.\J :;);\±~.._...-....". ;-.I ~u b-L 1J\:"L \;~'·4 ((~':::.c -\-'i,(.,,-,k ~s.<:"'f ~II dc';"I 1;)~,k/L ~~,i V~-+\-l::'h~,=,,-~.--------,O"AL'c......."..__..--;_·---.!....,.;'~;;;;;;!;;~OC~c,'--'----..--!-(-f:,,-.==!k~t~·e:=:*=·l.....~4._'7....:...-~_'w..,-C-I""'L.~ d I ;:,,-....-\r-t--\.t.'''-Ir"I i I ---"'(Z'--';\t'-"~=4""'""__c'__/=j,-~~."'".c.-'-c..."_'L=_~__'=c'_"¢-_'....h ~a~,,,,,,L....i """,,-<b:""C"'--'-'--(~_-'J,--""",-,,'i'----'-"~ri..""'·..""'··...."7..'--·_-c-:>...,,>.c·,,---lc'""'.\.~J'l.-:'.trc;,''!o_··""'\-"~k"-'"~'t~,,,-,-·c:::,~~:·~_A.:1f~p~~I----'-<'-~'------'--=----:.::=~-'---+.'----''''''--''t~..l...--~~~~''''-'''----=--------;-''"~!....-=.:::,;:::"l~):,:::\\=------':~=I :;-;..:...-(---"~t:....~s.·'').'iiiIiI!IIl"I_'••_"'..i I-~ 1~r N ",OA-t~-~ /'Ft.d I Pt 7 k)e..o~,+l~v \~C'C \.\"\'"-\\.L '-;;}y'.Q... ,"'2.I ,,~"--';,(~-\J"\v-\S A--Ck,...·:'l i f +-_.,,,.~.~......'''''""-1 ').\.Jei,Lk.~,\u ,\i\'-L.__(_~_?~t \et~.t:.IC-~lc)'2\..((:!.:c~'''t'''L\.>i..;-i'~--~"-\;.e 50 "~..".."~.",""~:'"~~-Ef I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I 'i'I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,.,......,,----_._----------------------------_.# r -i I - ..- i I ~ ACTION fILE lumber:T-OO~-BO ~.Enc DeAkewa 1ter F,.o.Sox 305 lalkeetna~Alaska 99676 Dear Mr.Deakewalter: You .sked three questionS.&wut thtt Susitna bydroelectl1c:feasibilit,y studies.Your questions a~wrfttcm below ..followed directly by answers 91veJt by the staff of the Ai.f1$ka Power Authority_ !~g~stton: The Cot'f,lS ~f Eng1~n!~!"t (Jamary 1911)showS a PUIIber of alienmt1ve traasrahsh,,!.coJT1don.Is the present studY COD- slder''btg these same rou~1 Send me a up will 8n the possible routes to date .. !!:!Ps'!nse.from ~IJSY.BJueLBJ...~tor'of Public f1.rtici2!t1on: It is not clur to me .ti~j'QU are asking about the t1'U5lt1ssion corridor fl'Oll the Susitru!River dam sites or ...tIetner you areasting about tile proposed tran$lliis.slon line to connect Anc:ho....ge and fair- baDks:",Perhaps you I.~4$l:1ag Uout both.The stud.v of the east- west leg ftUI the dam d~$ii be1ag done by Aeres Aaerfcu.Inc •• the fh'til conducting the $USltr-.a feasibility studies.The stucly of the pl~d .AfiChora~jF~irbaob traosmtssion c:ouecttoo is being doae ~.J'~lth AS$ge1ates.Ioc.Both studies will 1ftClu<fe route$suggested by the Corps of Engineers. The .1ylI&P ..h&ve available to 5eft4 you.at this Utile·is included with the eaclosed iD~t1.sheet 09 tile proposed fairbanks to Andlorage tranSlDissfoa line.More IIlaPS "Ul baavanable at tbe puhlfe meettll9 to he be14 1a ~rly 1961 111 Talkeetna. ~~1!:~!i,.: ~n~.;(t ~H~~ti~t~~ld pMO!"to trenslrtsston con1dor <t,,,,,,,;:",,,,,,,,{~",.••""L:J3rens ...:V\Im::u .'P~~~-:?tJ"t;":;..~!,~~.' jr-r V\lnONVi:lOV\J3V\1 j' The ftntpublie meeting relating to the proposed uoansl'l1ss1on t:OmleCt1on betweeRAnchorage and fairbaftks is tentatively scheduled for Tuesdly 8V",tng.January 20.1981. Y~r,W!t'.: Why 1$APA against direct fundiu9 of the project?(Statement by Yov1d during welCQ11e.) ~..~.~~,p1rectorof Eng1oeert!!1l: It hI$been the position of 'the Alaska Power Authority that direct state funding of the SU$jtnt ».vdroelectr1c Project is 1MdY1sable, since the stote would be better off to eonserve itsfiBaRC1alresources by.1mptrt1ag tnvestRvmt capital.This would be dcme 'tttroagh tile $ale of P1'"OJeei nmmue bonds,Ofl national ..rteu.The funds that would ha•.Qefm spent on Susitol could theft be used fOJ"oU-""$8$,.At tbe $-"t1.,it is apHrent that state policy is dictating 1IIX1IuB 1,....sttte fnvestltetlt of surplus revenues.If the decision is made to invest in Al.sk.Pf'Ojec:~tbclt offer a finaac1al retum Oft that 1oYes-"t..then it would.Seell 'tAI:t c1irect equity ttrfe$VDeftt by the state in tfte SUsttu.pmjeet would ~•logical priority.. To ,.._r1a,tft _period of surplus revemtes direct state funding of $attN..,.te setlS'h while such a I'll"-.ld .......l1y not be ldvtAble fft a ...........1 period of capital shOrtage. All ~'t$.quest1oll$.,.nd requests for 1aforNtt.received by 0&Jr offie.are ....ieweci by the Al_su Power Authority staff and Acres "'1can. lac.....will be included 1ft .•pepon tbat will be given to the Alaska Power AvUaority bean!of di~ton aftd the 6o¥emQl"before a ctee1s1on f $ ....Susttaa.. Em:10Md i$••ACTION f .....,en you .,use if 10U have furtber CQRUts.quest1ou.or aeed fddittcmal tnf..-t101l.We nave had a few problems '.l_tlng the ACTJOtt SYSTEM.However.,..of thal.eircUEunc:es that held up the ~baYe"Deem corrected and _believe your next COIIIIIeIlt or quest1"will behafldled mqre quickly.Pl ••keep 1n .1m1.however. that.bee..........of people '1111 revtew.and i"SOlIe cases.coament OR eldlttea SldR1tted 1a tile ACtIOI SYSTEM.itwHl take at leu-s1x Meeks to process yOUr reqwest"'1:J3r8nSV\iOd.:J S1nc:eJ'e1" ·ON 3"JOHd1l31 ~ I :ON 31i:Je 18:. £l~~lB~s Naacy Blunck Director of PulJUc 'art1dpat106 11\1 no NVtlOll\l3 11\1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I" I I"1-- I I \-./1)\C" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T-005-80 cC /I£L~ S ELcc 7/£J.,tt./., use extra sheets if you need them H££7/NC- co,cRI /)~e WflC 0/1 C ) ;0£XI fUeL.le -rk.dAJS I1IS.$ION of Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,aUIiSTIONS 6 RE ... Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study The comments on this form are submitted by;Date 4,/S b 0 ---X-An Individual Citizen __An Organization name £R.leO [IJ k f ~1JA tie~name R_E_C_E_I_V_E_D _ address (So X 3 0 S-#of members,'.:..,::'"~'-'--'-='-~~_ cl'ty '7/)I.'''::c:-P,.-/"/V /J address -------L.~~~~~frt:};R+Pr'~-~'""'f"'.-c.--!!:_/It.~!/-A P(l\,\I=:~:,,:":-:-EO!<IT'( state /4-1 Ii sJc A ziPC{i67 (;,city _ day phone N 0 tV £...contact person day phone _ ,----------------------------•I I I I I I I I I I I '"'"'I I'-I r-I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number ;;'~.&h,90mment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._,....:i d)'TfI~coRPS 01=E"N(;./tJEF:I<.S Rt:Pa/C-r (.:rI1AJ 1977) ,,1 i SHowS .4 NUI18t:/L of fiL 7'C!;'V/JTltJC 7RAAJs/-?/SSltJ/./ ~I ~~COj2 12/DDe.S •IS tfiE pI([Sf:/'./1".:s 7wiJy CCJ;tJSIA::-flAJ6- I i lH £.S E .sAti£'R,o U T£S ?SEN D Me It HAP {,II/I HAiL ,'1 1THe f05Sf8Lf.gouz£S Ie)DA7£.--,II '\iji.-""~ft'1o\':~ .-:1,'~WJL.L THeIe,E r,,tJ iCI" --II :'1 ~I i I I IrI I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,, .~----------------------------------_# 'F"'", ,~ r- ! OCtober a,1980 Ms.Rebecca long Box 344 Talkeetna,Alaska 99676 Dear Ms.Long: The attached COIIDeot Oft alternatives to Susitna hydroelectric development, that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ulmer,chairperson of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives PoHey Review Coamittee.This aIIIIftteew111 be providing policy direction to the Sus1tna alternatives study that U.ttelle Northwest laboratories is conducting. As you .y know,the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Sus1tna should be completed in such a way that there would be no guestton of its oh~ect1Yftt.Therefore.the legislature directed that an iiide'jiiRdcmt-nrm De selected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres Amertcan.Inc.continue its work on studying the feasibility of Sus1tna. The Office of the Governor is managing the feasibility study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority 15 ""91"9 the feasibility study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies ,,111 help detenaine whetberor not the State should develop tiydroelectr1c power on the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will make I decision by April 1982 whether toftle a license application for Susftna bydroelectr1c. Battens'ls directed to complete their alternatiyes study wen tnadvHCe of this date to pena1t an 'Informed decision. Since Acres will not conduct the alternatives study,we directed tI8t not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not .ke BIUCb sense to us to have them respond to your caRlIIeDt ll if they were DOt gotnt to be conducting the study.We thought it better.to bold your ACT I Oft request until the new consultant was selected. In July.request for proposals was sent out seeking consulting services to condt.tet aft alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ranbelt.The energy plan will include an evaluatioa of alternatives.emerging technologies.CODSel"YattoD.and load management.The plan will review.aDd where necessary.improve the existing data base and deIlIand forecast.It will examine the alternative types of electric gelleration and help deterafne tlhether or not the state should concentrate its efforts Oft development of the hydroelectric: potential o.f the Susttna River and/or pursue other alternatives. In September.Battene Pactfic Nortbvest laboratories (with Ebasco Service and the Institute of Social and ECOfIOIII1c Research)was selected to conduct tbe alternatives study.Their contract with the Office of the Governor 15 now signed.Battelle is preparing a work plan which is expected to be ftntshed by the end of October.Battelle anticipates beg'lM1ng work fn Moveeer. Jots.Rebecca long Page 2 October 8,1980 1ft the meantime.further questions and CC)I!.IiI@IlU concerning the alternatives study (or response to ,your ACTIOft request)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone number a.nd and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be ..rked,"Attention:TOIl S1nger,D Divis10n of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)46s..3577. You lIlIY also wish to contact members,of the Ra11belt Energy Alternatives Polfcy Revi ..COJmtittee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 DenaU Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Mr.CMrl.eo.,."Cha1nnan Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors 2702 Gubell Street.Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron lehr I 01 rector Division of Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau,Aluka 99811 If you bave f\lrtber questions or co.ents about the SusltM feasibility studtes (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public:Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 west 4th Avenue.Suitt :51.Anchorage.Alaska 99501,(907)27~OOOl. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director Public Participation Office Attacbment R8:agh - -" r-, I ! r .... (6l10 I'1Ial:j hiIOO-C:O December 1.1980 fils.Rebecca long Box 344 Talkeetna.Alask.a.99676 ACTION FILE Number T-006-00 Dear Ms..Long: You submitted to our office a number of ~nts regarding the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies..One COOIieflt which related to the alternatives study lIRlsforwarded to the governorls office as explained ioHaney Blunck's letter of OCtober 8th..Your other COImlents are listed below.followed by responses from the Alaska Power Authority. Your COIiIIeut: 1 really WAnt to know whO actually is going tobeneftt from bydroelectr1c power .. ReS'p!!!5e preAAred by',Ro,bert MoM.Director of E!9ineer1ns: You have asked who will actually benefit from hydroelectric power..Anyone who 15 connected to tJle proposed interconnected Andtorage-Fairbanks electrical transmission and distribution s)'Stem would receive Susitna power.That would include anyone who is prov1dedelectricity from MauflUsakA Electric Association. whose service area inclu4es Talkeetna. Your COftIIent: I am concerned about the health affects of living near transmission liMS..There have been studies done showing the negative impacts. Respopse 2repared bl Dave Wozn1 ak I Project Engineer: A great deal of study has been done and a lot of data gathered conceming the effects oJlpeople.plants.and animals.In st.lEary~ there is no cause for concern at the voltage levels that will be used.However ...ackftO\fledge yourconcem.which hils been raised by others.Accordingly.we will have a workshop in TalkeetRI.in 1981 at which you win have the opportunity to question a recogniZed expert ~~,ffects of liVing.near traosmission.:L!'JOl:L:I lines • :ON 3NDHd3l31 Your COIIIDent: 1 • .:ON 3ll.:l I am amcemed that priorities and values and qua,lity of Ufe are not being quest~1Q your study ..:01 11\I no NVtfOll\l3 11\I (6LIOI'M~hfIOO-C:O Page 2 December 1,1980 Ms.Rebecca LOIlg ResJ!9!!se f!t"eI?!red by Jean Bucha~ft,P,ubl,ic Pa.r!1clp!t1on Off1~: You are not the only oaeto express the concern that qual1ty of 11 fe was not being given suffic1efttconsideration in the feas1bi 1- 1ty stud1e$~As a result of your concern and the same concern raised by others.the Alaska Power Authority concluded that an adGitional look should be made at how the constnact1on of the Sus1tna project and operation of the resulting project would affect the curftftt Ufe style of the people who live in the vicinity of the dam site.The study will begin in 1981 and will be coord1Mted with the other studies being done on the economic implications of the project. Your c_nt: E.lectricity is like a sacred god.I really question fts uninhibited use.Of course.that leads to questioning an affluent lifestyle dependent on electric devices? As you maybave noticed.there are a tootingent of people hI ttlis area who desire to live •ROD electric life style.We put •lot of work into proYid1ag and ~nasport1f)g oureoergy and avoid time saving de¥tces~We don't want to 11ve like the cavemen but use tedmology moderately.Perhaps you can understand why the idea of a dam and power l1nes is abhorrent! ResppnH2!'!P!red by Daye Wozn1a,k.Project E!91neer: We recognize the uniqueness of the Alaskan's lifestyle and that tftd1viduals have _de choices to live without electricity.The decisIon to develop ~lectr1c power on the Susitna River will not be based solely 01'"e~eR prlarily on ecoootII1c feasibility.~al and etlY1rounental <,aspects will be g1venful1 weight in the dec1s1OD process. Tour eel l1e8t: - All opposition to this dam and even ttIe feasibl1ity studies occurs ..there is not effort,at local hire.We have •high level of unemployment around here",The,..aTe skined and UDsldlled worken_ The IIajori ty of workers J.aave f.t1tes to support.Mostbave to go .~ outside this area.away from home·and f.n1 to work.To me.it makes"lot 110ft ~rlRsbire local people because they have •:VlJOtl~ vital interest to do a .19!!!job_I th1nt the people OIl this proj~t should go out of ~:MYd'W31lire locatly_That's good pui)lic: relations .. :ON 311~~J!!!J!!red bl NaneX 8lunck,01~r of Public participation: :3.1'9'0,.:0.1 1 have talked to Ji.Gill,manager of the Andtorage office of Acres American,Inc••the firtR __~tfag the studies.I asked hi.if e>t~~~~t~:;.~:=ttftL~fm~1WY r (6LIOI"hlIl:j !'tHoo·em J Acember 1 t 1900 Ms.Rebecca long middle of June 19SG.approximately 24 Talkeetaares1dertts _re employed either by Acres Of'its s"bcontracton.Gill s4id this figure will fluctuate frout time to time .. Gill also noted that Acres'subcontractol"S have fttred locally em an as-Deeded basis for ~leariag.camp const1"UCtion.and logisticas support. Some of those hi red were ..T&1keetaa restdents J wilt Ie others were from wasnl.and W1110w areas..10 addit10f1.base services such as ware- hous1rtg and supply loading have be.provided by SIII11 bus1Mlsses located in Talkeetna bec4use bids were cf.li'lPetit1veud there was a requ1l"e1Jent for locally performed services. Rtght now.because of the nature of the werk.the people Acres bas hired la1"g(tly fncludeengineers.geologtsts,aDd env11"011111mtal K1ut1sU.Since tRe project is,already 11 IlO8tbS tnto tbe first phase of a 30 IBOfttb study pertod.it is probably fair to say that not I1tM1lQOre people witb these highly-technical skills wiH be hfre4 .. SoIle people bave suggestedopeA1l19 ..Talkeetfta-basea employDllmt service.Acres bas given consideration to tilis suggestion.ftotever. they bel ievethat at tJd~ti..SUCh &n office would DOt be practical. If the project goes into ,.eoastruction phase aDd access to the project is near Talkeetna ...1~1-h1re office could possibly be set up w1th1fl the Talkeetna area. Your ~...t: I alsoUl eoocemed abou~seiSllric probleas and bope that the checks ud balances you have ~ted1a this process work 1f eaougb infor- mation is fOWld out aga11,'lst the dam.**can env1r'01J1l1mtal,quaUty of life.etc.CORS1derat1ons and feas1b111t1es fight _y--the ecoaom1c:interests.. Re!f!!5e l!'!J!!reQ by Daye Wozniak,PNect Engineer: Insufficient data bas beU gathered at this point aad ti_to fully eval.te the seismic:p~lems.nsb.or lack thereof.However. tbOSe aspects are receiving detailed study.for _re 1"foration. seethe ucl0se4 Rovembe:t:newsletter.page 4,for an uplanatio&of the lletbodology being ~in the earthqUAke stwJtes • .... I think you should :"'~"'3publicmeetings tbaa you have planned. alttK».tgB I .-.11ze that 1t requires a lot of effort Oft your part. People at these ~'htt"J:l,tell otberswltatwas said so they are benefiting more tbu just people Prtlsent.Plus it w111 keep you people Oft top of cOIlIIImi t.Y feeHags :1JtUl .-.spopses..01 V\I no NVtlO V\l3.V\I (6l10 I"M!:llV IOO-ZO Page 4 December 1 t 1980 Ms.RebKea LOIlg First of all,1 want to 5&y that you did an excenent job at the Neet:tng. it·s orprdZlt1on.the p,ople involved --their consideration hi answering questtons • l!Uesee!!p!red.bl JeaR luella_.Publ1c Parttefp!t1on Office.: We agree ttlat public Ileet1ngs are an important way 'to hear the concems 01 the eel ....Wl1ty.We 8"tentatively plum189 a workshop Oft two aspects of U.hsital stud1..road access lAd recreation potential.We expect tile wor~.111 be tile ,first Tuesday eve_tog 1n Mardl 1n Talkeetna..We are elso pl_1ft9 to hav••pvbl1c meeting SGlJeti.during the f1rst week in Mu 1ft relkeetu.We,&1$0 waat you to BOte that there will be ill workshop h.JIMtr,y "11",with the proposed tranSJIhstOD COJmeCt1on betweeA ~.....'a1r"'s.(lbe tratlSllisSloa project 1$separate from the SUi_feas1bt11v studies.)The.crksttop is ten~t1¥ely sebed¥1e4 for T...,e..-.in9,J--.ry 20th,1n Tallteetna. AU c••,.u.quest1~........sts for tnfo...tton received by our office I""rev1we4 b1 the Al'SA 'OWl"Authority staff aDd Acres ._r1"o, IIIC......nl betacluded 1.,.'report.tblt.will be given to the Alaska "...Authorltl board of dt~tor'$..Ute GoYemor before a decision is ...Oft SusltM. £.1.ed 1s ...AtTIOI fora which ,.aa.y use if .YOU baye further cal lilt".qtl8$ttcms J Gr Geed "ddt ttoaal fnf.-t10fl.We be.Md a few probl_b:tpl_t1av the ACT~OIi SYSTEM.However.sa.of the circuastaaces that held up the process ttaveJleen C01'1'eCted aad ..believe your next cement or .-'fOll .nl ..hanelled ....quickly_Please keep fa .tAd.llGwever. that tala...........,.of people will review._fa ..cases.(',lQf?went on .eIl f.__1tted in the ACTIOIt SYSTEM.it will tate at least six weeks to process JOur .......t. Sincerely • .... FOR THE OlRlcroa OF PUlLIC PARTICIPATIOtl ..~ ,,"1ag Director of Public hrt1c1pat1on II:.:.1~Hr~nS Enclosures cc:Acres ....C8fI.1ft@'!3NOHd313.1 :ON 311.::1 :3.1 va CONCURRENCE:Wozniak Mobn :V\I0H.::I :0.1 e~selV 10 8lBlS II\InONVt:lOll\l3l1\1 RE:T-006-80 Date submitted:4-16-80 Rebecca Long Box 344 Talkeetna,AK 99676 (1)It seems that the course of action for energy sources depends mainly on economic feasibility.That it is a sin to choose a more expensive source even if it means a better choice environmentally. - - ""'" ., ! T-006-80 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review a pond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: ~---------------------------[.------=I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:DateCi {JJJ..l Iv I I II~An Individual Citizen ~_An Organization I I name I;,(',bE (I (1[._L ('/JCJ,i name ----------lR--F'ft-I~lHl'-f'l---IIt--RECEIVED I address nu 1.3L i Ll #of members i~jp=-_,=()----,~~,-/-'1:-::"0-p-n---I I city TCLlbf~eJI'\A address '_"_'_'_-_._._'_','_,c'_'--I I statehLf'~:::JKM zip etc/Lv J &':city MA_,_SK_A_P_O_W_E_R_AU_T_H_OR_'TY__II__I I day phone -------------contact person day phone____I I }I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I ch comment,question or request separately,Be as brief and specific as possible.\0 f I j .~J11fJtA.,.,;_,,,0 --lclt.ALZ ft 1 ,<"{:{:."--J V' {6Pv.-: ~I I I I I L ~L_~~,.t of'lT....cl .~.j~IJ~~J~:::'~-"=------l..~~~~:....A--(...~~--i---4-.l"....."-..-~~~~~~~~~~:±-"-/~j /ll,S I I l, {bP'ti~I ~,I I . tft/~ #n I j I I;(~1 fi I "3 I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 _ I I., ~~-----------------------------------' ~. ""'" ~ ~ ~ r e-C?~'/.{:?~nd:"V7'>--.:t"7V7'7.j1l rT'i!:i:7 Y 1'",'05'?J c7p '-7 '~;n--2L?7?'7~?7}!J~/17f'"/?-;rv~'C'TY'n7f1!)-pr ~;rC/O";rc/--?7rliJ!?T .?Y7 r;.'7f ~t/?fDT7!t-L-I-?(!"I()C~?7Jw,/.p--'';:kl.-r]l.''~M7'2;I Rpr'/...¥7~-,l7XvT MYVV7~j?~?'i~;J ~./7rYV ~~?7\,,70:/~,).,~,?f ~7?t7~r L; ~'?dt '~Yqp77t;';,~C/r->?TYvVV/"??7 ?V 'V'VI??!7--;J.7;~,.X:7 ?'pJ{7}l-L ,nil-·<.7YT;yrO}-y)-J---p717~;vn,vr7 ~ ~--p-~---r?/fJ-;ry?~;rx '·7y?~rfJ7.!/77)7'1J ' ~r:DtAr;m?/?7Y7?/r~.rrr )J '?O?l'y'"7(1},---yr/r (r4P '7-)1}:r-tV~.(?In ,iD-;r'Yr)n,1~.f""'2 T7Y7 7t:r ;X)~Trr-z:n~"7'1f7{·/rh7 . ~,;/V1/}./V /'¥7f 0/~}(;v:.~7)?(7c/{)c?J7f7J ./C-v'-?JY7-'-P y)!.~ ,7:/-;;C;7J'~V7r --Y-,ff?7,?y/-;D /I-t-'~P,;).J ,-vn7':7'0-p-j.,f::5?~"V) /(7)Y~nn7~CU'--)7-nf ~V)I-rr{j ·---I!-,'rrXl..7f ?7,Xr ;l.r ,,,,)--,Cf,?-.d-Y'J,Y,/IJ ~?:J--"?JVI-7 ':)::7?r?~(;v,)it1...--'-fl77Jt(-)-"?-V-A . y;y?,1~')7 'n?7;If r">:--V [)/1)'Ii')p----rn)"<;';r2 n 7(1)7 nn 77}(.'" ,''0''..-;/1.2 F"If')-P7h 7 r!/it!n3'-rnr!,I~)O g'2P'Pc7;'7t-:7Y :.,z ~?'-"'9 ~-K:,!/j/v7)fl?:-d-<0-/---l/7 -;;yt-u?'7]fJ :+rYJ1),/:r~/ .(r(IJ-'--;rtr?..;J:G.-y1~"r ,~v7J:::ff)rr:r "")t.7:l-V .'J?:!Z07-J '')-)-'~)iV,;"}7/<~J -:Dr7..J c -:'--'0 '/V"~;rcI--~~}1J~(/rb1<'j "1 CI(),)V ---;:Y;-'/?'Y'7;1j.'."):7 n ~~-';/"--'..-",.yvy'\/!.,YI tv.,..,,£~,I } .r ,"i')7??}./.;;.r -;r l?J7 .7/':'1.0 IN Tl ...,77~;J .?J 7 -"--;')~'..7,"" ---:n7}.,-7'j(~''L)-7,/-~,'t{/DtJ""'~-g-{)/)!;~:J7{)drl7J (ffiJ 7/7:;4 tjr :~/)/v/:rt~//,~"?1/)?-'((cr,'7)/,~(),T;'0fr,·/lo-;-;(rl7--",")~IZ)~,\.' 7 k (7 ~_,~/'r-y(/??.::;;~'v?//()1'7'5'):/(/?r 1:7}~H "--n7-7~/7~)Ire)t ,..-rrr].y},?rr~~;v7~,;Y/',)/7,7 s:-.~l ,,?r"!~/?~?LJ77?--0 1fi/--:Jcr)"'1 tr,1i',,"~.... ,-r-\"}~:JO'V <\:::7'::7y7 7 'S"7 J ~~-:;r~I t'l ,'J?vi7-2:'v ~----t , l,/l !.,/,~".-".,.;::::J~ .S:;L::1 :?O-';C-f).~)'7'"f)"+u&-:nt-.:n/~~'i(")7)L:f'£,."' ~!!"-'4'o'~77'Y)/}/,/;~"'l ,.../-·L/~//'fL£.- /' ,"hhE ,Xv? --,~.,',",',-']..~~/:.;7."~~~r-,:"'jY;l',_".'0.,,...//',',.'!/..-~ aJ:'~~ _.<'! ,/' A7"7 j ., ,.....•...ii. .oj ./'l .• >1L h~~--c~)(--';.. .(~ ,_/ '--fX<-~,':--L ">0Iui,!-d~C;<:JLJ7Y--/t.f~>c It>c~Icc~~(."-~ _LJ!Z:~kf.C .7;tk-/(T ~;n.>{z L/..f£-&-.f-L-(,Y"..{';P~C2-( -,,)("(.(..1-<-'){'L IlL (7 (fl/L CLC )L (CC cc,l'-t L <-Jt '-.2_LA:"-~)/r)L L --C:, )~(CljC-C-/yVLJ)()It,olJ-('-,X--~/lf..-~t iL-f,--~L~,--L.C Ie£)/'0;'- v (.J(fJe ~Cl!.-c../.lj zt·L-i..v/~-<--,<~(:Lc'J2.-Izc~{f,,--,lL/~eL"> lP~L:(i ..(".J,;;1''-Z L't-elf:...c;b;v~c~'-~:'-I--c:C -;-']<£CU clJ~ L'4 1..-1C~{1Lt,;(..((J,{--c-/A L/(lA.:.--JC2'C Y-I~C~:Y7--!6iI//0t.~e.£-<-1~~~~-~~~~~;~:::~~t;:~lJt::;f9:d!1--;7L·}LG~/-Y--tLG u:-U,l-c.f11CC ~[/L U1-L~....-~d~:u~~ F" , .- 1'v1EMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTION FILE Number:T-OOl-8() 02-001A(Rev.10/79) State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: MEMORANDUM Page 2 December 11.1980 TO Mr.Ketth Keffner State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: FROM: Res2!!!$e: We uve noted your concem and pas~BftC~to the Alaska Power Authority staff working 011 the project and to Acres American.Inc.It the firm conducting the feasibt1ity studies..Your CfJRIIDts.along with all other COIIIteIlU ~nd quest10RS received by our office will be included 'In a report ~.on be giveR to the Alaska Power Autbor1ty Boal"d of Dtrcton and the Governor before a decision is IIilde 00 SltsttM.' Enclosed is ID ACTION form which .YOU ...,.use If ,YOU have further c...ts.questions.or Reed ilddtt10Ml information.We have bad "few problems fllPleRIeDting the ACTJOI SYSTEM.However.$..01 the c1r'Q1l1Stances tbatheld up the process haft ..beea correctedaBd we believe your next COMIsnt or question will be baftdled &l9re quickly.Please keep 'fA mind.however. that beciuse •IKIIIber of people will review.and 18 some cases ..COIlIIeftt OR eadt ftell subtattted 1.the ACnon SYSTEM.it will tate at least six weeks to process yourreque-st. Narq Blunck Dlnetorof Public Parttc1pat100 D:mgb £Dclosure cc:Acres 1faeric:an.IftC. - - 02-00IA(Rev.IO/79) ~ I October 8.1980 Mr.Keith E.Heffner P.o.Box 137 Talkeetna,Alaska 99676 Dear Mr..Heffner: The attached COllDeftts on alternatives to Susftna hYdroelectric development. that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority througb the ACTIOlt SYSTEM have beeR forwarded to fran Ulmer.chairperson of the Railbelt Energy Alternatives Policy Review eo.tttee.This COIIIittee will be providing polic)'direction to tbe Sus1tna alternatives study that Battelle Iortbwest Laboratories is conducting. As you .y know.the 1980 legislature decided ttwat the alternatives study for Susftna should be completed in such a way that there would be no guestl~objectiYity.Therefore.the legislature directed that 1ft t"""flrlll 68 selected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres American,Inc.e<mt1nue its work on study1ng the feasibility of Susitna. The Office of the Governor is IllIfl8g1ng the feasibility study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority is lllnag1ng the feas1bil1v study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies will belp determtne .tiler or not the State should develop ~roelec:trfc power on the Susitna River andlor pursue other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will .ake a decision by April 1982 whether to fne a license application for Sus1tnahydroelectric, Battelle is directed to COIIPlete their alternatives study well in advance of this date to permft an informed dec1s1011. Since Acres wnt not conduct the alternatives study,we directed them ROt to respond to your ACTION request.It did not .lce IUdt sense to us to baye thea respond to your COI&eots.if they were not going to be conductfng the study..We thought it better to hold )"OW"ACTION request untl1 the new COIlSultant was selected..- In July I.request for proposals was sent out seeking consultfng services to conduct an alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt.The energy plan will inc:lude an evaluation of alternatives,sergio\}tedmolog1es,conservation,and load IDlnagement..The plan will reYiew,and when!necessary,fmprove the existing data base and d8llllld forecast..It will examine the alternatfve types of electric generatien ud help detent1.ather or not the state should concentrate its elforts 011 development of the hydroelectr1c potential of the SUsttna River ud/or pursue other alternatives. In Septellber,Battelle Pacific Northwest laboratories (with £basco Service and the Institute of Social and EcotJOll1c Research)was selected to ccmduetthe .'tematives study.Thefr contract with the Office of the Govemor is ftGW signed.Battelle 11 preparing a work plan .ida 15 expected to be f1.1shed by the end of October.Battelle entic1piltes beginning work i.Nov...... Mr.Ketth.E.Heffner Page 2 Oc:tober 8,1980 In the_ntf.,further quest10RS and eonraenu concerning the alternatives study (Of"respcmse to your ACTION request)should be directed to Fran U1111"or Tom S1nger.Both can be reached at the telephone number and and address listed below.we suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ul.,.be ...ked,-Attentfon:Tom Singer,·Divfsion of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau,Alaska 99811..Phone (907)465-3577 .. You -.v .'so wish to conuct I!IIIDbers of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Po11cy Review C0IlI91ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan,D1rectoY" Division of Energy and Power Development 338 DeMl1 Street Anchorage,A'aska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,cnairman Al asb Power Authority Board.of Oi nK:tors 2702 Getabell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage,A1asta 99503 Mr .Roft Lah,.,01 rector Division 01 Budget and MaRa~t Pouch AM .Juneau,Al.ska 99811 If you have f~r questions or COllllleftts about the Sus1tna feasfbt1fty studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage,Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sinc....,y, Haney Blunck Director Public Participation Office Attact.Dt HI:mgh - - ~ I ,------------------------------------,1,1ICOMMBNTS,aUBlTlONI &REQUESTS I r ;Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date April 17.1980 I I __An Individual Citizen An Organlzatlon Page 2 • I name Keith E.Heffner name I F'"I address P.O.Box 137 ,of members I I city Talkee tna,Alaska address I I"""I state Alaska zip 99676 city • I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI """I I I IndiYidual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.pt....number. each comment,Question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. I Another benefit would be a dramatic reduction in transmission line costs II as the plants are near the load centers.It is a well known fact that trans-I mission line costs have increased astronomically in the past decade.The .' I poficy of placing new generation facilities near load centers because of the I I ~'I~economics involved is a common practice of private power companies in the rest I of the United States.,I I I r-I II, ~I (I 4 1 Ii-I I I ~I n I'I F"!I -t,·....,1 lIM ext,.~1')'OIl lIMIt tfIem ~, ' I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will reyiew and respond to all comment.In wrIting.You may'....' your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mall it to: I Alaska Power Authority I -I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)27'&<JOCri1 I I•'I~~--------------------------------._-- t-••_--;'---~'----------------.[T-007-80 ~ I c rns,QUIISTIONS a REQUESTS I I SUsitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date ApR.I L tJ.l j 80 II~1-II -An Individual Citizen An Organization I I name L<etru E.\-\£EFNa name IIaddr...90 60'><131 'ofmembers,____________I I city _:t-"Ao\-!:L~k.Ood"E_"rrr.....J._N~·u.A~'address -------'FI__E....:C....:E::...;r=-'-'V:...:E=-D~:~______IIstate_Ac::J...JI'\;;""--_-----'---__~Zip 49616 city -----I"Ati"'.P~R~2:----::5J-1~.9'i'«BO+-------I I dayphone 133-246 5"contact~:rowu ~y phone_.....-,.__I I I,.Individual ciUz.ens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.P4....number I each comment,qu$Stion or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible, I IITwasunabletoattendthemeetinginTalkeetnaonApril15.concerning I. I the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study.Many of my friends andneiSihbors,I I however,did attend.Most of 'those in attendance seemed pleased with the I I IIattitudeandsincerityofthemeetingsponsorsandhosts.I I Since I was not in attendance I would like to submit some comments for I I'\1-\'Ii~\"i consideration.My primary concern is that a sincere and honest effort be made I I to evaluate viable alternatives to the Susitna Pro"ect.I ~b--/I I will not go into the usual dialogue of "life style",quality of life,I I \tlP:riviranmental impac t,etc,in aEE as irian to this Ero j ec to Even though they I'1~"are real concerns and in my estimation are worthy of as much consi~eratian as I ALW/h "f h P .-\ItIfP",-t e econom1.CS 0 t e rOlect'l I /--..There are several alternatives to the Susitna Project.The most promising I )\is construction of coal fired plants in the areas where the load actually exists •• ,.1..~Whe..n all the rhetoric is sifted out the on going load growth exists in the I 18 I-Anchorage area.I I A major cQal fired plant could be in the Beluga Area.or Palmer-Wasilla I area for that matter.A coal fired plant could be constructed-more economically,. ~A..~n line sooner,and provide more jobs for on going operation.•I ~--UM utnI .....if yOU"'''''I I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska PVNer Authority will review and respond to an comments In witting.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisiormandleaveItatacommunitymeetingormailitto:IIAlaskaPowerAuthorityi,c.I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31lAnchorage,Alaska 99501/(901)276-OOf111 I I I ..I._-----------------------------...-_# With the coal option we confine our environmental impact to tbeareas As you can readily see the "spin-off"from the coal fired option are With The real long range value The tekhnology exists.however, in the future will.be wortbwhich We need not tamper with the ecosystem ofa It is 'an expensive problem,to be sure,but no more We must recognize as Alaskans that we have q corner on the market Qt- Many of the positive aspects of the coal alternative we have cov~red. ~'We realize that all alternatives have their negative trade-offs. Alaska Power Authority 333.West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)27e-oQ01 " a commodity,namely natural beanty, of the Upper Susitna Valley lies in it's virtually untapped potential for considerable and even more far reaching than I have gone into here. recreati on.both winter and summer. major river which is the thoroughfare for millions of spawning salmon and the incalculably more than megawatts of power created from the death of·a river, to minimize the problem. so than construction of EHV transmission lines. coal,of course,it is atmospheric emissions. of extraction and consumption. stantial savings on energy in the long run. wintering area for millions of other sports fish. Some others are more difficult to define and assign dollar values. Acrea American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to an comments ~n wnUng.you...,.... your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mall it to:.. I I•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I.,,., ~------------------------------_._--_# ,-----------------------------------~I ....•I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS A BEGU_ITS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date Apr j 1 17 ••1980 I (""'"I __.An Individual Citizen An Organization Page 3 I I name Keith E.Heffner name I r"'"I address P.O.Box 137 'ofmembere IIIIcityTalkeetna,address I 1""".I state Alaska zip 99676 city I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphOneI !"'"I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments."""iWMber each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as poS8lb~e. I 1"'"'.I I I I"'"'I I I I M't~~' r-I I I,....,I I I,....,I I I ,--_.•.-------------------------------,•.IICOM._Nn,QU_SnONSAREQU8~I I Susltna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I 1 I1Thecommentsonthisformaresubmittedby:Da~April 17,1980 I I --X-A"Individual Citizen __An Organization Page 4 I I name Keith Eo Heffner name IIaddressP.Q.Box 137 .ofmembers I I city Talkeetna.Alaska address I I state Alaska zip 99676 city I I IIclayphonecontactpersondayphoneI I I 1 IndtvlduaJ citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.PIeae number ,. each comment,question or request separalely.Be as brief and specific as possible. I 1IsbippedacoupleofhundredmilesandwastedinsomeonesJacuzzi.I 1 I I Respectfully.I I I I IIKeithEoHeffnerI I II'IIcc:Mr oj 0 Usibelli IIUsibelliGoalMineIIa~aly,Alaska I I I.I Valley Sun I I I I IIRobertaSheldonI I I 1'1 I I I I I I I I I I I lie.ext,.·s/l8MII il YCIIiI ......1IliIfIl I II AcreaAmerlcan,Inc,and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to au comments in writing.You may ...,I yOU(e~ta on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail It to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I ..•,,.".,., ~------------------------------_._-_# - J r ..- - October 8.1980 Ms.Mary E.McCrtG General Delivery Talkeetna.Alask.a 99676 Dear Ms.McCrum: The attached CORIDellU on alternatives to Susitna hydroelectric development. that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ulmer.chairperson of the Railbelt Energy A1terMtives Policy Review Counittee.This COIl1nittee will be providing policy direction to the Susitna alternatives study that Battelle Northwest laboratories is conducting. As you may know.the 1980 legislature decided that the altematives study for Sus1tna should be COIDPleted in such a way that there would be no guestl~ts otlject1v1ty.Therefore,the legislature directed that an .-ent"'"ffnn be selected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres American.Inc:.continue its wort on studying the feasibility of Susitna• The Office of the Governor is managing the feasibility study of alternatives. The AlasltaPower Authority is managing the feasibility study of Sus1tna .. The results of both studies w111 help detem1ne whether or not the State should develop 'ti,Y"irroelectric power on the Susftna River aOO!or pursue other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will make a decision by April 1982 whether to file a license application for Sus1tna hydroelectric. Battelle is directed to complete their alternatives study well in advance of this date to permit an informed decision. Since Acres will not conduct the alternatives study.we directed them not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not make I!llch sense to us to have them respond to your COBIIteJ1ts.if they were not going to be cOllducUng the study.We thought it better to hold your ACTION request until the new consultant .as selected. In July a request for proposals was sent out seelctag consulting services to con4uct an alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt..The energy plan '1111 include an evaluation of alternatives.emerging 'technologies.conservation.And load lIilMgemer&t.The plan will review.and where necessary.improve the existing data base and demand forecast..It will examine the alternative types of electric ganerat10n and help determine whether or not the state should concentrate its efforts on development of the hydroelectric potential of the Sus1tna River and/or punU8 other alternatives. In Septellber.Battelle Pacific No1"thllilest Laboratories (with Ebasco Service and the Institute of Social and ECOt'IOlI1c Research)was selected to conduct"the alternatives study.Their contract with the Office of the Governor is now signed.Battelle is preparing a work plan which is expected to be finhhed by the end of October.Bettelle anticipates beginning work in fjovfllber. Ms.Mary E.McCrum Page 2 October a.1980 In the meantime,further questions and COUIIents concerning the a1 ternat1ves study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone nlJllt>er and and address listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,BAttention:Tom Singer."Division of Policy Development and P1 ann1 ng,Pouch AD,'Juneau,Al aske.99811.Phone (907)465--3577. You may also wish to contact ~rs of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives PoHcy Review Coam1ttee.They are: Hs.Clarissa Qufnlan,Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage,Al asta 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,Chairman Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors 2702 Gambell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 ~tr.Ron lehr,D1 rector Division of Budget and Managamnt Pouch AM Juneau,Alaska 99811 If you have further questions 01"COll&enU about the Susitna feasibility studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Partfcipation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue.Sufte 31.Anchorage,Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director Public Participation Office Attachment NB:mgh - - - ..- ,~ October 21,1980 Ms.Mary E.McCrum General Del ivery Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Dear Ms,.McCrum: You submitted to our office some questions and a COBIIet1t regarding the SusftM bydroelec:trfc feasibility studies.Your cormaent,whfch related directly to the alternatives study,was forwarded to the Governor's office as explained to you in Iq letter of OCtober 8.1980.Your questions are listed below.followed by the name of the person frotI the Alaska Power Authority making the response. Your question: Who are the legislators who want to hear public opinion about SusftM project? ~se from Eric Yould,Executive Director: Realizing the magnftude of the State',COIIIlIttment to assess the viability of Susitna and its alternatives ••st all legislators.especially those who represent the Ranbelt comun1t1es.would be interested in public opinion.Cbair- man of the House and Senate Resources CoIIRittee would be particularly interested in public input.as would Senator Kertulla and Representative HalfoN,both of llIbOID represent Talkeetna.Finally,Representative Rogers and Representative Malone.IlelSben of the House eo-1ttee on Alternative Energy. would also be receptive to your input. ~guest1on: If the state dec1dedto COftStn&ct trusmisston l1nes early from Anchorage to fairbanks.win the enY1l"OnmeDta1 study have any merit seeing as its completion won't be until 1984-851 Resl?!!!Se from Robert MohR,01 rector of Engineer1 ns: You are correct in stating that'the Sus1tna En\'1ror&enul Impact Stat.-t win not be finalized until about 1984.However.the state.tIlrough supplemental capital project appropriations,bas decided to proceed with electrical tnnsm1ss10fl intercormee:tion of Anchong.and fairbanks.COIIR»IlIMlth Associates is the ffrm doing those studies,..1eb include route selection.design, and developl1lDt of •f1nuc1ng plan.eo.onwealtb will also complete all envtrotBefttal analysis ••deb will collectively address the requ1reaents of federal,state.and local agencies Page 2 October t'1.19ao Ms..Mary McCrum responsible for the approval of the transmfsston connection. Antictpating that a federal Environmental Impact Statement win also be required.CoRIonwealth will meet with the affected agency or agencies to initiate the early designation of the Federal Lead Agency.Such interaction allows COIIIl1OmIl!llth to structure its ertvironmental analysis in at manner that will provide the designated federal Lead Agency with ..,ch of the information it will require in the £IS..As you can see.the planning and development of the tTanmss10n 1nten:onaeet1on will stand on its own and be accompanied by applicable agency clearance and permits. (For more information on the fairbanks to Anchorage transmbs10n connection,see the enclosed information sheet.) Your que,stion: Who will be conducting the study of the transmission lines eRvfrorlMfttal compabtlU;y1 And when?And what are they looking for?Are peoplets lifestyle to be considered? A l"eSp!!!!e from ~Ye Wozniak,,p~Ject Eng1n~r: The environmental analysb of the tranS81fssfon Hnes between F.irbanks and Anchorage will be evaluated by •firm called COIlROftW8Ilth Associates.Inc.They have highly skilled penon- nel on their staff who win be Ible to provide substantial data IS to the biological effects end eft,,1l"Of11J1ntal effects 01 proxilll1ty to high .cJltage transmission l1MS. A r8Spo!!!!fraa MaR Blunck,Dire~of PUblic,Part1cieat1on: Wet,.received a hfgh leftl of c.encem aftd questions on the tranSll1ss1on line from Talkeetna resfdeRts such as yourself. Because of that.we'ft plamed an extensive pubHc participation program that bagta with this infoNlt1cm sheet (enclosed)on the Fairbanks to AftCMraP tr~Mmission UMl"Talkeetna w111 Mve three 0'"flU'meetings in the first six w:mtils of 1981 including one .,rbhop on tM ~f~l mad bifJlogteal effecb 0' ~1\Ktf'1c tnnsmbs1cm lintiQ Ufestyle C~can be expf'eS~ at thole IDIMt1ngs., All ~a.qcsat1ou.~M ~a~ts fot'"ird@ftllticft r'Ke1~by ~ offtce are reviewed tile Alallta ~r Authority ~tlff and Acnd IeMeM~ Inc.It ad ~n btl ir~u~in ~~r-t that \rin M 91~to tj~Al~$b p~Autb.~,.ity board of d1W'~~t@r~tL~the GD~~?~f~"l4 ~1~ion hi ~~~00 S~~fmi..-. -. - ,..,. - Page 3 October 27,1980 Ms.Mary MCCnJIR Enclosed 15 an ACTION form which you may use if you have further COfIIJIents.questions,or need additional information.We have had I few problems implementing the ACTION SYSTEM.However.some of the circumstances that held up the process have been corrected and we believe your next eoment or question will be handled more quickly.Please keep in mind.however, that because a ntalber of people will review.and in some cases,eormtent on each item submitted1n the ACTIOH SYSTEM,it win take at least six weeks to process your request. Nancy 81 unck Oirector of Public Participation N8:mgh Enelosuress cc:Acres Amer1ean.Inc. RE:T-008-80 Date submitted:4-18-80 Mary E.McCrum General Delivery Talkeetna~AK 99676 (3)Alternatives should be given more priority in regards to environmental benefits as opposed to economic benefits.1 1 m opposed to Nuclear Power - lId rather have health than wealth.A program of conservation is needed and alternatives.so that industry and individuals can generate power for them- selves.lid like the pursuit of alternatives continued until feasibility study is completed. - ~---------------------------~T-008-80i IICOMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUES I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date I F-I ~An Individual Citizen __An Organization I ,..:"me ILf (iY?"e,!"!1(rv,'Y)Mme RECEIVED : I address UfJ,be {-#of members I I city 7 cL-L/it"e~L-address i.',--J .'.~:.;'}I ,-I state.A1d-/V:-~-zip q1tt lfe city JJ.ASKA POWER AUTHORITY I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI -I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I ea comment, question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.~_ ~'I-':G'i (2)~hL'Cir;'!JJ£.~~;M~,I,"IV!"Ott,",-Iv f=J«61{~qe;7/4n ~l'l1 .v k .r;d4."",..-it:;61l.--I-- rtIA ')1 G 'fie s-k.k {ie-CtdeJ ~L£JrJ5tn.«.f ~¢~.Jm6:s,ds&./;r;:-:.J -L-f\;r~~£GrL=j;k(....-cr/7A/7C/»-a~.b 7i.,;k4Jy r/U l'L(~It '.'%I rtJ...ef}v~'6JmeJil ,rk'!7 http-<-tZ~fYlert'f Sa10 C:u '-f.5 (O/~rc·C'.!:t.0'"'1-' :':J 1~{A.J(j'1 II ,J-«/11'1 -fi-:c 1-13)_.'n '.J':/lt~?-(;. I"""I ~-::?~/1PitC-.'7)<£r-,<--c:s,;tl-:if 11.)('11.])£~~/P -ell t/,'",,/Y!eL~/&0'fjih rl.J r""l-k m t.:,'? 1LJ~~\~~"'--'=---~~~='--------tL~~~'-lt....-.J~~~~~i(:L701 r-l I ~·I .~ I I I-tv'If /'y_~II.r'~I L:~~,en /0'-<h?I -~/'use extra sheets if you need them ~_• •1 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to:I I Alaska Power Authority I 1 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,.. ~~------------------------------------' MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTION fiLE NulRber:T-009-80 State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: SUBJECT: Dea!llber 1S.1980 Ms.Rose M.jenne Box 300 Talkeetna.Alaska 99610 Dear Hs..JeftJl8: You submftted to our office aRUlllber of cOIIIents and questions concerning the SUs1tna feasibility studies.Your CODII'IeIlts are written beltHil.followed by f'e$ponses from the Alaska Power Authority or Acres American,Inc:.the f1na con~1ftg the feasibtlity studies. Yourc:oncem: An explaDI.tfon of vbat k.1Dds and types of recreation the dill would create • .Resp!!!!': Please see the article on recreation potential t.the eac:losed newsletter.page 7. Your CQ8llnt:- More empbas1s OIl present and ftltura power needs.aaps to show wbere the ,.....would go. ~sP!?J!S!from the Public:"Parttc:ip!t1on Office,Alaska Power Author1t..l: We bave Mud your suggestion regarding .ore maps to Show ttlere the pcMer will go. OD MayS in Talkeetna.we are tentatively planning to have a c..,.'t,y .-et1ng.At t~t llleettng we will try to usw..your quest1.s.The meeting Is scheduled W be held tn the Talkeetu El_tary School at 1:00 p....We are also adding your DIme to our _11109 Ustso tbat_....you win race.i.Ye t.fo.-t100 tbat .- per1od1c.l1y.n to the.public regardtl't9 various aspects of tbestudy. 'oar COIlCeI"!!: Tran.1ss1onL1nes:Rovm.Hazard.etc -- 02-001A(Rev.lOj79) MEMORANDUM Page 2 December 15.1980 TO:Ms.Rose M..Jenne State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: FROM:Re!p!!!!!.froaa the PUbl1~CPart1c:1p.tfOWJ£Wl1ce!Alaska.Power Authority: In response to your ccmcem and the concern of others._have tentatively scheduled a ~on the biological affects of lhing al~tranSll1ss1~Unes.we plan to Ilold the workshop in Talkeetna samet1.tn 19f$1 (separate frGIQ the May meetint).. lbere .Ulbea sertes of worksbops on the proposed wan.tlston connection between Anchorage and Fairbanks..The first workshop .nl be held January ZOll.1981.at 7:00 p.lI..in the Talkeetna El_tary School.See the section ftPubl1ePart1cipat1onD in the enclosed 1ftfOf'Jlation sheet on the tNnSlltss10n l1ne for a description of the three :workshops plUl'dHt before next s_r.. Your F9!1l!!!'l!t: Talkeetu lifestyle:1 I have a 1 ifest,yle too _.but it 1$not the least bit s11111ar to._-hippie-or "up the tract-neighbor. In fkt --what is their 1 Ifestyle7 A good l'Utber of wlfare cases.not subsistence Ufe as they would bave Otle be11eve. Rufc!!!$!from the Pu;bl1c 'Participation Office"Alaska Power Autbor1tZ: We haft neted 'y0Ut"apin1...It win be included in a report that will be given to Acres AmertC4R.Inc ••their subcol'ltractors.the Alaska Pewer AuthoMt1 Ud the Alaska Power AuthOrity BoArd of Directors. the Goveraor .. ,ow-ggelt!..: A survey of the -opea ent...,-land owers up tbe tract to establish .....11,are pe.........t ...res1dents would be tnterest1ng.How would tbose parcels be effeete4 --I.e.road.POW"Unes.wteverl RtlHOfMol,Da!!Noa1ak;ProJect £ginee,.Altsta POMe..A!ftt!oI1t.Y: To the extent possible.We will a¥Oid houses.etc.wIlere 1t is absolutely aecessary to ~ss already elat-.d land (and this could be fecleNl.state.nati ...or private)we wtn aegottate with the .......a right of -l -.se.R't.Tlds bas heeD the cernl••practice both here ud tattle 1....48-for 4ecacIes.. OJ;!·OOlA(Rev.I0/79J f"" I MEMORANDUM P~ge 3 OecefIber 15"1900 TO:Ms.Rose K.Jenne State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: Power Authority board of direCtors udutlt.,tGowmor before a decision 1$ _de on Susitna. FROM:SUBJECT: Enclosed is an ACTION fot'll which you .y use if you have further c.-nts.quest1oas.or Deed additional 1nformat10A.Vebave had a few problems IIlpl_nting the ACT~OH SYSTEM.t1oMl¥er.$OHIe of the c1raastances tbit held up tbeprocess have been corrected and le believe your nextauu.nt or question.w111 be bandled Wi,)1'e quickly.Pl"se keep in rnDd.howeVer. that because a maaber of people will review.and in SOlRe cues.CGllll8Bt Oft each item submitted in the ACTIOH SYSTEM.it will take at least six wets to process )'OUr request.. Sincerely. fianc,y Blwck Director of Public Participation HB:lllgh Enclosure ce:Aefts American.Inc.. 02-001A(Rev.lO/79j use extra sheets if you need them Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I I I I I I ,_--------------------------{T_-O_O_9_-_8_0 \ I COMMENTS,aU_STIONS til REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date ~d -I /-J<,I I II~An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name /J~.~)~c / }I..J(.'j'~'.'.~name -----i'lRi-fiE...C~Ert_I_vV~E;..IDJ__---IIaddress-,,-F.<-~',-"--"l_,----=~....:..~-(--',(--'.'---------#I of members .....:..,.,."..,..:-=---.~......:-"\·~'+E,-C----I -r,'.":;i .'/_,-,~I city I (,'-.\(.c 1,1.r address ---------------I I l N....b"SKA POWER Al:THORITY Istate-h Ie ,.i <:,l:,.;zip (>~'t.,,{<city _ I IIdayphone>~.~->--»<9 (c contact person day phone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. (~~I~do,~i"J D~IT~,'1 ".-L "....~~.\\.~_.:.2~-~r~1_(?_ ,f""" ""'"I .- - (6LIOI'~;;1J h:fTOlh':O ACTION FILE H\Aber T-010-00 Hr.Steven C.Cross P.O.Box %1 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Dear Mr.Cross: You subDl1tted to our Qfflcetwo COIIIIIents regarding tbe SUs1tna hydroelectric feasib111tystuq1es.Each of your COlIIIellts is written below.followed directly by &"respoRSe froll Acres AI1eriean.Inc••the firm conducting tbe studies.'I'tbe Alaska Power Autbority. Your 'fO!!!1!!!t: "Local hire"is IIY .iA iequest.There should be an ha ...tO\ftl job S8rv1c;e office.There are III&flY J"eHJ'.willing.and able bodies fA Talkeetna tbat,are unemployed.The one way that you ...ld win over tbe op1niQllS and consent of the local peoples is to give tn.it jo&-1t·s.,1JaP9!'tUt. Res!!!!.''!JII Jim 6111,MaRa.r of AoF!!!!S!'s office at Acres American: Rigllt DOW.because Of ttae nature of tile work.the people Acres bas hired largel1 include eng1aeers.geologists.and erwironmental sci· _tists.Sfuce the ProJ@ct is already eleven IlORtbs fnto the first phase of a thi1"tll1D1lth ~tudy period.it is probably fair to say tbat aot --.v IIOJ"e peeplt with these highly tedm1c:al stills will be hiNd.Also.fer tIlis .......1t does not seem practical to open a Talkeetu based elllP10J1118tt service.although Acres bas given considera- dOll to JOUI'suggestion...If the projer;t goes tate A COflstrvctiOil pIaase.a loc:a14dre off1~could possibly be set up within the Talkeetla area. AcNS's"tncton ha".ired locally on u as~basis for clearing.camp c:outruetton.ancl logistics support.ScBe of those h1red were Talkeetna 1"aS1de1lts.-Ue others \II8f"e ff'UI Wasilla &Ad Willow a....s.In addition,laue S8l"VtceS such as warehousing aooV\JotJ:J supply loading baYe·~Pfoytded by SIIln businesses located 1. T.lkeetRa becUse bids were cMJetit1.lAd there _5 a requ1f"81fmt for locall,y-perf~~ce~l As of the ..ddl.of:~~t80 _pprut_tel,.tweaty.tour Talkeetna res1dents.~re..8IPloyed either by Ac:Tes or its.svbcoft-:01 tractors..Thts f1 __o,.,l11 fluctuate frail time to tt... lI\InON\ftJOll\l3l1\1 (6lfOrM l:lhnoo-c:o •1900 ;...~tevan C~Cross Y9Yt:C<.IIIilen ~: Air traffic over populated areas is a great intrusion upon one's residence.The I"ailbeltis a populated area up to ten miles wide to the east of it.The~is nothing more annoying than to have a hel'ieopter bearing down on you with its trEmendoos noise pollutions. My request is that air support be strictly nQ,t over where anyone 11fts. ~SP!m~Prn,Paredbl Boyd Brownfield,Acres Amer:ican: Your ~nt concerning air traffic oYer populated areas has been received and 15 certainly apP1'eciated. It 1$difficult to prohibit helicopter flights over all existing dwellings,However.,your concern is real and certainly understandable. In this respect aM in an effort to minimize noise pollution,all pilots supporting the Su$ttna bydt-oelectr'ic feasibil ity studies have beeft asked to avoid bunt-up areas to the extent possible and maintain reasonable altitudes while in such congested areas.I would appreciate".nag your evaluation of bow the pilots are responding to the directive. All COlllellts.questions.Ind requests for information received by our of11ce are rey1ewed by the Alaska Power Authority staff and Acres American. Inc ••and wn1 be iacluded 1ft.8 report that w111 be given to the Alaska Power Authority board of di~ton and the Governor before a decision is ..de Oft Sus 1tna.. Enelosed 1$an ACTION fON which you may vse if you have further ~nts.questlous.or need additional information.We have had a few probl-.s tfDP1 ....Ung the ACTIOft SYSTEM.However.some of the c1n:umstances that held up tJle process have ,been corrected ud we believe your next COlllleftt or question ..11 be handled more quickly.Please keep in mind.however, that because a mlllber of people .111 review.and in some cases.COIIIIent on each itaa subls1tted ifl the ACTION SYSTEM,it w111 take at least six weeks to process your request.' FOR THE DIRECTOR Of PUBLIC PARTICIPATION TJ3rsm,;: Sincerely,. Afj ,j"f~"B~~n ./:> Acting Director of Public P4rt1c1pat~::l.I..:ON 3NOHd3l3.1 £m;losure cc:Acres Mltric:aR.1JtcnN 3ll::l_ :0.1 - II\JnONV8011\1311\1 I~---------------------------{----~I~~_T-010-80 • ~I COMMENTS,QU_STIONS fa REQUESTS I r-I Susi'tna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date RECE, V E0 I,...I LA~lndividual Citizen __An Organization ••')1 r 2 _}SfJ I I name ~,)i (:~i t h L C<n:'')5 S name -----------/,.b'\;Sl0l.--~M=_._r......._.IIDI..LJ\SKA POWER AUTHORITY I I address Do ~11 #of members,______________I I city ~J:1-'I-li.)o--J('-"'·!L-------address ---~-----------I I f\r Cl t:,"L~'I ?"""state ~l (';S'r~(...zip lC'16 city _ I IIdayphone_----IkuV"-"-"-~_'_\~(---------contact person day phone____I .-I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I .~'"'...I -I 1fI)}.,(j i)r-.,....J... I (}/~"(1 V~J/hL·(Y:'lY-i---t:._,----.....I ~~~k --,..I A(\...{.,...-L."--Q I l-\OV----\-If'\i~,i ~IJ .I I I ---I~---""-'----"'-cyCV<0-...-O,-trr.;,--(-db)I I ~ I I I I I ~I I f i ~I 1"~.I¥.~IMMrz'I J I fi.r'!f ~~~~~~~~~~._:___.l..~~~~L;~I !~;1 I".I§~ I ~~,6.'-,.Ck-..-..-u\C<"Af......II ~'~!l'J ~~.~,,~:9!6~(.use extra sheets if you need them I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisformandleaveitatacommunitymeetingormailitto:I I Alaska Power Authority I ,'"I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,,~~J -. I.... OCtober 8.1980 Mr.aill Slude General Delivery Trapper Creek.Alaska 99688 Dear Mr..Gl ude: The attached coa&ents on alternatives to Sus1tna hydroelectric development. that you submitted to the Alaska Powr Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM bas been forwarded to Fran Ulmer,chairperson of the Rai1belt Energy Altemat1ves Policy Revfe\ll C0fiIR1ttee..TMs CODltttee will be providing policy direction to the SUs1tna altef"naUves study that Bittelle Northwest laboratories is conducting. As you .Y know li the 1900 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Sus1tna soould be completed in such (1 way that there would be no r:t1on of its Ob1ectiV1tX•Therefore lt the legislature directed tha an tidePinQiit"l m hi selected to amduct the altef"'MUves stud)' 1tself (Batt.el1e was choseft)and that Acres American.Inc.COftt1noo its work on studying the feasibility of Susima. The Office of the Governor 15 managing the fusibility study of altemat1ves .. The Alaska Power Author1~15 managing the 'feasibility study of Sus1tna .. The results of both studies win help detenrlne whether or not the State should develop ~leetMc power on the Susfa.River and/of'~ other energy altenmtfves..Since the State of Alaska win mite a dec1s10il by April 1982 wether to file a license application for Susitna hydrooleetrlc@ Battelle is directed to complete their alternatives study .n in advance of tMs date to permit an informed decision. Since AcNs mn not amduet the alteI"Mt1ves study.we directed thai not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not Eke au:h sense to UI to have them nspond to your ~tSll if they _n not going to be conducting the study..We thought it better to hold your ACTION ~t ~Rtn the new consultant was selected.. In July a request for proposals was sent out seeking coosultiftg sef'Yfees to conduct an altermat.ivesstudy >iAd prepare M energy plan for the electrical needs of the f'ai1belt.The ~plM will include u evaluation of alternatives.emerging tecbftolog1es.eonserftt:hm~and load management.The plan win review.and where necesury II improve ttte existtng data base and demand forecast..It win eDiriRe the alternative types of electrfc geMratfon and hel1J datc.moine whether or not the state should concentrate fts efforts 00 development of the hydroelectric: potential of the Sus1tM Riyer and/or punue ot.w al~ti"es.. In Septeuber,Battelle Pacific H~st laboratories (tlf1th Ebasco Service and the Instttute of Social and Ee~e Research)~selac~ to amductthe alternatives study.Their cont1"~t with the Office @f .the Governor is ROW sfgfted_Battene is prftp&ring ~MOn plan ~i~h 11 expected to be finished by the end of OCtober'..Bettelle .t1c1~tes beg1mt1nt wort in November. Mr.anl Glude Page 2 October 8,1980 In the meantime.further questions and CODIIenU concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTIOtt request)should be directed to Fran Ulller or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone nUlttter and and address listed below.We suggest tbat all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked."Attention:Tom Singer,"Division of Pol1cy Development and Plamfng.Pouch AD.Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577. You may also wish to contact members of the Raflbelt Energy Alternatives Policy Review Couu1ttee.They are: Ms.Cl ar'!ssa QUinlan,D1 rector Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,Cha11"918D Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors 2702 Gambell Street,Sulte 200 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron Lehr.01 rector Division of Budget and Management Povch AM Juneau,Al aska 99811 If'you have further questions or eonaents about the $usima feasibl1ity studies (other than the alternatives study)conttnue to direct those to the Public Partfc1pat1on Office of the Alaska Power Authority.333 West 4th Avenue.Suite 31,Anchorage,Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sincerely, /"'",/ Nancy 81 unck Director Public Participation Office Attae:t.nt H8:mgh -r:OI/-~O ~y /?J I CfJ-o It I t:i(..s v-..po vve.-"'-~.y1r._GJ'",;I-y r-~3.3 (...,j 4.t -rt...."th/4 5'<-·t'~31 fr1'"c l '-~~C2 /A /<... C:>;1'q_r:-t:J / RECEIVED. MAY 271980 ALASKA POWER AUTHORlTV .1\ilRlL, - ,'-' ~/!o/ T~4t?\.-s e>t~7117 S ~7 .,e;,.....-H-..a--St-1,Si-h---,,-D~- .s;'''--'Vl I ty(,---e-I CA...~~-f -':-'--4 ,.0 ~"-<Z..V"I ~Hr;'"eP P t-t~ --~_.... C1 !~~t-'f 1/'c..s 1 ;........c../f-A~t "''j a J1"t ("It -...b c..;.-~-r c 1:/.-............/;f ...i-fy- S't2-d.~.s~/I f.,ldYo.t1/rOjQ:c.n ,J.-C;J~~e.c.e.-.~/7'"Z-.e.A ~.......s C)r t>0 h/d:r-.~y"C>p/.fA c....f-f'<::!.......!/~-F...--;p Ac..-I t:::'~t:;...._~i' c-f:'.....,S a.yo v At.rf ,,~t"c·-tIA.,.$VI ...·a..oS'('"-c...O's 7-~#~.se ..-u-c.Q--zr:'.....-l ,./frf......:;.-;...."pl",Y 1·,r(:!Vr.;::l.!,-~-"'I,';p~~v.r ill .........e":t'!i'fl.-............,f,s",-,....,,//f -I$d,......../'"f .-.J b 0;e v 4II't I ~/-«-ttJI.F~'--..i('''"-1 -f'e;1'J~I CJ -f '"i ~~-h-vc-,J rv-t tAJ +b (£..~~...f-e-.;--0-1;",",J 4A"'"r~T--r-'t"7 ,tII1'f y¢.~r ~4 1'1 J /.:?.ss ~J 0 ve,.,..-.J {:.,+'1---.5'~y IS ..j...i,b.~7 ~J,J"e ~;v Q,.J Gl +-}12.0(.5+till..oS V"".cA e-t.-..lII-.'"~oS t-....,£A.t 01 "CIl't?f a 1/eJ~ +-c c.c."'·t~rQ>'(G-v~-1.f--'';;}''-''of~~-P'!1~~·I ..tV(L,J'&:($+-0 c_oJ-!$'7~4-;__ o -f.f'·'··C.e-1:7 j ~d <PC "-t::i /~7-7100'Q..• -?f~~ ,{3j/I6-/~ G-a..~I z::::;e IT ""e..""y -r~,~c."CIo"C e k, A r~..r k:,.4Jt 99 -~$? P.>-I'I ..~.se tfJ fA +----..Q __Y t'J ".1'"~-4lt l'1.,-:;I P..$+. -::r:..~rik,r:.:.+r;.':_£e~'ZP .~.:Dv-w~+rs ~tI"t?C~7J ~'i ..r!".....~~...5 vU I ~p...-~J CL e-'+-'; ,~ ,"'"'" (6L10 r"haC!>'<"100-;::0 ACTION File HUlJber T-012-80 Ms.Nancy RDb111$01l P.O.Box 1,7 Trapper Creek.Alaska 99688 Dear Ms.Rob1ftSOft: You submitted a.COI8eRt Ngard1ng the Susitna hydroelectric feas1biUty 5tudies.Here 1$•response to your co._eRt, YaUTcOIRent: The plM sounds good jlmf CCIIPreheRsive as pres_ted.Seeiag it put into action 1$_the...t111ag.One thing I feel ..ld ISsure Acres _rfeu Pft!$eftts a truly tlftbtased report WOUl4 be to elillinate uy possibility of that 11t'11 reaping blftefft ia preseat1ng a pro....ntptrt.Acres should ftOt be eligible to bid Oft or receive any f~r contracts relating to tile .. after they complete this ,stud,)'. R,espgt,!5e fna ~bert MohR,Director of Enj1neerirw: Tile issue of obJectivity"1s recognized .s an fflPOrtant one. It is being Addressed by botll the Board of Directors of the Alaska Power Autborit,y aJd by tbeState legislature.Wbat eaen of these two groups.is doing to 1nsure obJec:ttv1ty is explained ill tie follow1.paragrapJIs. As )'011 pt'ObUly bow.the OI1g1 ..1 plan of study called for Acres to conduct the_studtes that examined alteruthu to Susttu hyclroelectr1c.,deYel.-.t.However.tile legisla- ture.receptz1ag that ~.objectiYity mght be ..t1 ..... IIafldated 1ft the 1980 ~tOD that the altel'Uttves study be deleted f..-tile Acres ~traet. 18 sep~lattelle Pacific Nortlalest.Labor«.tories (wttll Ebasco Senice ...the ~1vers1~of Alaska's lastitute of Social ud £COROIdC3Rwsearcb was cboseB to COl1duct.the :Lf>JOtl:J a.lteraat1ves study..Their select1.was Mete by tile Pol'cy Review ee-1ttee which ~appo'latefiby tile 68......to provide.d1~tiOft to the,study.The Policy Rev1 ..e-1ttee is chaired by Fr.UtIJren:JDh'ec:tor of the Oiris1011 of Poltcy Devel....t ud PlaMia!".Other ..'!1tP"$of tile ee-itt.ee are Clarissa Quinlan.OiNlCtfr of Ute Division of Energy ud :01 Power Developareat;RoD le.br.Director of the Divist.of 8lJdget ami MaHgemeat.aDd Charles Ccmway,0ta1....of tne e~~~..ft3e~:;~D1~~l!fOll\J3l1\J (6l1orllal;j J'<flOO·cO Page 2 November 26 J 1900 Ms.«ARtY Rob1nson The alternatives study will be conducted independent of the Acres ffflerican.Inc..study of Susftna.When Battelle ev.J~s ,1tet"tlflt1ves.it ",111 also consi~r the SUs1tna iydro .preferred planil wb1dlwill pnsent the type of hydroelectric develOf,'lRent that is re~l<ied for the Susitna basin..(A mJftber of different types of h,ydroelec:trtc development.other thanMe""alKl Devil s tanyon,d.ams II are being coos 1dered.)The Alaska Power Au.thorlty vtl1 give the Rpref.M'Ted plan"to Battelle in March of 1981. In April 198Z the f1w...member Alasn Power AuthOrity Board of Directors will formulate its rec~Uon to the governor and the legislature in regard to power development along the ratlbelt. At approxttMtely the ume time.the goYern~r·s Policy Review CoaRittee will 00 forwarding its 1~ent~t1on.Final determin&t1on 00 the iubjectresU ~1th:t.-tu.t state in 1982.. The Al.lto ~f'Avthority Board of Dh'ect"n expects that Acres _r1ean win gi\V~theN unbiased tnformat1@;n"However,to insure that the board fl $~t1ons ..-ba$fid on Acres field L«)rk--are objective.tHy &111 biJ"fl A tix ~\'"ax~mal Nview panel. TM review peMl win beJade up of hKfi.,1duals who are experts in the following ~~tg1t1Hr1_AM schmt1fit::fields: h~l~ enviJ"Oi.,.nt e~'iC5 geo~f~l~ Mi~l~ ~~l~~tri~.eag1neeri~g 1M e~.pem.~~fn tie biNd by t!i~i~ft1 of D1rec;tors.will be ;~"te fna J~r!'1ti _rican.Iwe"~1r task win be to review the ~",$iWd1~$~~"~t1ou i!lOO ~ki~~an t~t asses$liitnt iM~fil ttwt ip,1f~~t1~is ~l~t\h tr<iil&rar~h~QM 1BClus1ve of all rjt,·t'i~..1l'~'h"t'i~~~1~1Jilin ~g"hr~d'~!f":ietlJf to the Board of })1~m~'1h &'Wt,~j.>A1'~'Uff of the Al~r.A ~{~AutMr1ty or Acres !!_~i f.afll t>I f'.A:.. l't'fi@iJ E,~~r.l ~~'l?1h:J,It '~mtl ~f'~~~~{~.~~to be retained !~j1jlti ~v~Hl!Ilbl$!.t.~~rd of Oi~~W-"S'~1 ~_1-.01 of Jamlary ~~L It hi.~1~~!t~~~tMt t~1 t:f~n ~li\1anable to the ~w~fJf tUif~~n fer ~~t<d~~f tt~Acres ll studies. '\~""~,""'~"'1i'JIO ,"Mi""',"'.-#""....,.'~-~~~"""""t<ll:,f-:~.:;"",+-...~-"'1-""..4 ,""v _....•~~~~l!.~,,g;;i'J<~~-~t~.~\iI~~-~~~ii ~~~!$~-.",~~'!.)i-~~:lO-'1f;~fFl~•_1IilrV Yt:U u#vw. ·!i·,/'·F';;.,,'x"".",r."$~!1"\\!'O.~~.p)j il';,~""kd ::-~@...,Gl\li?..."".....,.,;>i;...w.;"';;';:.'...'rt~,.""~.""..ll.""..Il 1I __4!A............;,j/\jO!::l.:lJiI>-<;,,~~~~.~-Vi!t\i.ia!f!~,"".$""""#-W~R§!iS~~~r~~"iO't3 A~~~.._.~.@~l~1t!r~~I'1L.IV..1J:1'IIIIIiI:'"J~n. 1 ~~1~~1~1ft I."~rt t1~t l1iU 1 ~~1'Am to the Alaska "''',;-j',ffiro;''OP ,,~,':.~i;~t!,$lF~t1 bi;p$.~fflf d'~'-~~t~(1)~~m@;r before 4 decision is ~~'l"-i;a¥~})iiil!i~j).is q ACTlOO fom wMch Y'~~nW ~i~Hi you have fuf'ther ~~rt)~1!'.~lt~~thM~t Of'~~~i~ioft~ll We b.lve hact a 1.,°1 -(6LlorABl::Ihnoo-,m ,'age 3 November 26.1980 Ms.HaftC.Y Robinson problss 1cJplementfD9 the ACTION SYSTEM.Howeyer.SOlIe of the ctr'QllStaRCeS that beldup the process bave,been corrected and we believe ,your next CC81eAt or question win be hudle4 IIlOFequfckly.'lease keep 1n iliAd.however. tbatbec:ause a IU8ber of people wt11 NV1ew,aDd 1ft SOlIe cases,CCII'IIleflt on each item subrattted1n the ACTION SYSTEM~it will take at least stx weeks to process your request." rtuq 81wu;k Director of Public Participation NB:nagb EKlosure c:c:Acres Alaer1c:aa.lftc. CONCURRENCE:WlZHIAK. MOItM :~Ol::l:l :ON 3NOHd3l31 :ON 3ll:l :01 V\lnON'VtlOV\l3V\1 (---------------------------~T_-_O_l_2_-_8_0__i :COMMENTS,QUESTIONS Ir REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study : I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date »)J)",'":/'(S ~:IIjiII'L-An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name tvu I ti i -.IU tJ I j ',"(}"-'name I I /.t 9,.1 '1 I I address I '0(.1\D.i #of membersi -____I -Ii l-I city J j ltf/~l I'"L it"t''\address ---------------I I state fI,--4/:.:-:-...,t$'-1&~I__"'i,ZiP hl~'~city ~__________I I IIdayphone__'7,---'"-,{,,,-j_.=)-'1"",:;-,--'-=--1---------contact person------day phone----I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I ~CJ~~,o:_ment,quest!on or request separately.~e as brief and spec~fic as Po~sible.__,_ I ..\>!"'}I l>J )j~,I f ("'t "I ,I 1/1>-J ',""'!'<'1/>n /:I,I I ~~~Irt I""·{l,,,,-'..<''''IIt.{.I "C:,:,to .t:~...'"Itce ,.Lt ,<',J:..'<."L~,J V _"£11<\,,('.0'1:,I i'"~,1 7 I rt*1(IO"""~"J .~..".,-l!i ••l_'t I 'i 1-'..,.~...~I \iI".,L r "/-:;/J ~.'tu"%'Ii'/~L'I:L II ":<~.~I _/!!"",.,t~IJ"'''~~';J,'~"f:"',.,o'"":"'''''''''::"'-,."~,.,;~..,0 "'~.-i4J>.-\:'*.-i~,,w ~ I Jul '-((?!d/{(.lj.j(I~tt(~,J"Ct.,;t-~.ui I.'J.i t'.k /.l~U i 1:i-t~,§I~\I {Lt<{/iUuJ/,?t.,)(.'lL k~t2;lt "«-t ,It t:(//liiZV:t:/1;:f-;L·'C...,t/i;;/,./f;Cj 1 ""'i J I -j ../i.r ,/';r f',./,.•'J 'c'i ;'•vi .,,,r"}r,.';1 Ail l.-i 1lf.,//'JItJii'ld /'··'l.(''"'')!/{~I~__.>.J ...:;_<.Jt."...'U!/f.-,(?i..~~..)~~-r:...ft:l/;...--,vJ i~«1- r-I t ··r··I·I i r '.t Iju?J("&i~"{Lt.:/),L J {)1 ~li/.'/'-L (;it>I "(;.t i .,ll.l~~((')v·! I ~,.t -!J_'j "5 II(.').,.~.(iil,'t..,a~""i'«,Lj),17 ....;tJ!I';,Ltjl /Li~?t.i!£v'Ie'It....:,Lit",~.,I I l !.-_,,'(r ,:~ I LLf }_--'-t-"-'k=I.._LIyc---"(=~t_"_i=i!.rl-"""ib.""-..,.,...C"=c__--'-t"""z,={A.::::.:·i--...:rLJ)·{{"-".I'-"'[£"-'t"""~:t_,i -.--.,'.""_'~-_''''~_,.......I I .I J 'II)c/ I I I I I I I I I IIRECEIVEDI I IIji.':\~~~::.~3iJ I I AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY I I I I I I I I use exIra sheels if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on thus 'form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority :. I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,, ~~---------------~------------------_# ~, March 24 ,1 1981 Action File Number:T-013-80 Mr.Tom Mercer Chunilna Community Assn.,Inc. P.O.Box 292 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Your cOIIIllents and questions sent to us last fall have been submitted to the ACTION system which means that they have been reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc.It also means that your conments and questions,along with all others we receive,will be included 1n a report that will be submi tted to the Alaska Power Author;ty Board of Director's and the Governor prior to a decision on Sus1tna in the spring of 1982. We are including in this letter responses from the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc.to your COIm'ents,questions,and requests for information. Request for infonnatlon: 1.One copy of the plan of study. 2.Two hearing transcripts from the Anchorage and fairbanks meetings in April 1980. 3.All written information available giving final results of Acres' feasibility studies. Response: As menti oned 1n Nancy Blunck's letter to you 1n November,copies of the plan of study can be found at the Talkeetna library.With that letter we included copies of the verbatim transcripts of the April c0llll1Urt1ty meetings and a sUJIIllary report on the April meetings. To date,there are no written reports available on study results. next month,however.the Alaska Power Authority will be releasing its own report reconmending whether the feasibility study program should continue.This report»directed to the legislature.should be in the Talkeetna library by the end of April. guestion: What are the expected water levels of the Susitna River after the dam is built? ~esponse: Our studies have,so far,not progressed sufficiently to recommend a selected Susitna scheme.Preliminary indications are.however.that the Watana-Devil Canyon development is the most promising.The COIIBleJ'lts r-age 2 Tom Mercer March 24 ~1981 below.therefore,pertain to this development. After the first dam is built and the hydropower station is in operation,the regulated flows in the river will differ from the natural flows.Average flows in the Winter and early Spring months will be higher than the natural flows resul ting in higher water levels .. On the other hand,average sumner flows will be lower than the natural flows as this is the period when the reservoir is filled.These changes win be the most apparent at the dam.with only minor changes apparent at the Cook Inlet confluence.The maximum change in water levels and average levels are currently being assessed.There may be fluctuations in water levels due to peaking operations at the power- houses.These are.however.not expected to raise water levels significantly above the average levels.particularly as far downstream as the Talkeetna area. Detailed assessment of water levels in the downstream reaches below the dam sites is scheduled to commence this spring.Studies are currently underway to develop baseline information.These include river cross-section surveys.reservoir operation studies and river ice observation programs. guestion: How does that level compare to the Chulitna? Response: It is difficult to give any numbers until the analyses of water levels. which will coomence this spring.are completed.The effect of the project on Chulitna water levels near its confluence with the Sus;tna w111 be to back-up the water in the winter months slightly increasing the water level and to reduce the water level slightly in the slJDlDer months.The effect described above w111 only be felt on the lower part of the ri ver • Question: What erosional changes will occur that would effect Talkeetna? ResP9ftse: With a large reservo1r(s)on the river.the sediment transport characteristics of the river may be altered.Our studies on the morpholog1cal changes in the downstream river reaches are scheduled to cOBIJIence Spring 1981 and results should be available by late sUJm'Ier. It 1s difficult to present any figure at this time.The proposed studies w111 SUfficiently address the changes 1n the erosional characteristics of the river reach downstream of the dams due to changes in river flows and sediment deposition in the reservoirs. Cmnent: Your selection of nevil's Ca~as a subtle backdrop for Alaska Power Authority letterhead is highly questionable.We members of Talkeetna regard this area as home ground and greatly object to the j ..- -., Page 3 Tom Mercer March 24 ~1981 direct association between the magnific1ent nevi 1 IS Canyon and Alaska Power Authority.We feel this premature assumption exhibits the poorest of taste. ResP9nse: Regarding your comment about the Alaska Power Authority stat1onery~ your feelings are quite understandable.Devil·s Canyon is magn1ficient and in Talkeetna l s back yard.At the same time.it is a resource that belongs to all Alaskans and it happens to offer renewable energy potential of great magnitude.As the Power Authority began operation several years ago~it seemed appropriate symbol to associate with an organization whose charge was to develop sources of renewable energy with the goal of insuring lowest reasonable cost energy to the people of Alaska. We appreciate hearing from you.Enclosed 1s another ACTION fom you may use if you have additional questions or comments. Sincerely, )' Jean Buchanan Assistant Director of Public Participation JB:mgh Enclusure Concur:Mohn Wozniak j ..~ Ji RL:C;::IVED use extra sheets if you need them Date /0'- state Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ day phone ~__~_ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: (---------------------~-----i[~~~T~-~O~1~3=-8~O~-~I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS Ir REQUESTS I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I The comments on this form are submitted by:~tJ1 ~~t!..Z~ I __Aenl(diVidU~1 C~tizen ~1'')rJ ~~An organi 1 zation I "ame ~""~~me-"..~~U/I II address 1iL1i:;q ~~#of members-r-t-=S:........=O"---_ y 7/·-/J./J /I city ~c</:;Lecr/..;-t.-t/....U..J/a.J-·1Lc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I /1..%4.~8-~--------~------&4~-'---F-----"--~--,,------~-F-7'---7'4'------1"\-~~~- I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority OCT 2:J 1980 I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001IALASKAPO'NE:::AUThORiTY I,. ~----------------------------------~,.) - - March 11,1981 Action File Number:T-014-80 "1r.Keith Ny1tray Box 84 Talkeetna.Alaska 99676 Dear Mr.Nyftray: We have delayed responding to your letter of November 7.1980, because most of the information you requested was still under develop- ment.Since some of that information will not be available for several more months.we are responding now to your requests as best we can,and we will indicate how you may obtain the other data when it 1s developed. Your cORments and questions are 1 isted below.followed by a response from Alaska Power Authority s~ff.Also included is a copy of your or1ginalletter. Com1ent: •••1 would like to be placed on both the Commonwealth Associates and Acres American mailing lists for future written materials, study reports and analyses,and descriptions of the work and research done to date.•••1 would also appreciate it if I could continue to receive any of your (APA)printed materials and notices of upcoming events •••suc~as public meetings to be scheduled 1n Anchorage,Fairbanks,and Talkeetna. Response: Your name has been added to our mailing list to receive informational materials and notices of,meetings for the Susitna feasibility studies and the transmission line studies.At this time,we have no general information materials.Presently it 15 our policy to send all Talkeetna boxholders notices of any cCl!J[RJnity meetings or workshops we hold. COtm1ent: lUI 4~p~~Re1-BWiastt;d tRe ACRES "Plan of StudyU put out on February 4 (1980)•••andwould 1ike to receive a copy of that study and .&1 so the finished reports of that study. Response: Your public library in Talkeetna has a copy of the plan of study. We caned to insure that they had 1t. CoImient: I am particularly interesting in the findings of Talks 7 and subtasks 7.05 through 7.08. Page 2 Ke i th Nyi tray March 17 ~1981 Response: We appreciate your interest in those studies which are currently underway.A newsletter will be available this sumner which wi 11 sUIIIl1arize the results of the first year of study.The second sunmer of field activities will not be completed until late this year. Subsequent analysis and report writing carry through until April 1982.Written results of this w111 not be available in advance of the fi na 1 s tLKiy report in 1982.However.we are hopi og to hold a workshop next fall at which time we will review the available environmental study infonnatfon.This workshop,we emphasize.is only tentativel~ scheduled at this time. Question: "BtS 881~1ft lRal'1mmhlike mysel f obtain copies of that 1nfonnation (reports on Task 7)for review? Response: Copies of the final report will be placed in the Talkeetna library. COImIent: The same interests apply-to the Commonwealthts economic feasibility studies for the proposedintertie. Response: Hopefully.your questions relative to the economic feasibility analysis of the ra1lbelt intertie were addressed at the coollllmity workshop of January 20~1981 ~in Talk.eetna.If you have subsequent questions,we suggest you write another letter. COIlI'IIent: In as far as illY personal,thoughts and feelings go on the project.I would have to adnrtt I am currently "cautiously optimistic."Unfortunately.I realize that even the best laid plans of mice and men •••can run amuck. I strongly feel that wi~out propoer consideration of the alternatives, current demands and proposed demands,and costs •••such as economic, scenic,and objective ha;ards •••such a large scale project as tbismay at best become a minor cl1S4ster/f1asco. Response: Those managing the stUdies share your concern.That is the reason the studies are long and 1nvQlved.Any opinions you have relating to alternatives to dcvlop1ng hydropower on the Susftna River should be directed to Charles Sitkin~Aruthur Little &Company,730 "I H Street. Anchorage.99501.He is project manager for the Battelle Pacific Northwest laboratories contract.They are doing the ranbelt area alternative energy studies. iuesfion:. ".n!any current designs of what either of the dams may look like?I am curious about their design and nature ••• - .... - Page 3 Keith Nyitray March 17 t 1901 Response: No detailed designs are existent nor will they be generated for the dams prior to a decision in April 1982 to proceed or not to proceed with hydro development on the Sus;tna.Concept designs.however. are being developed as apart of Task 6 and will be summarized in this sunJner's newsletters.More details will be reflected 1n the April 1982 final report. Question: Which corporation would be handling the construction •••lf any? iesPorse:t !h f Hili it 1s not known whether the project will be built.If a decision is made in April 1982 to proceed with the project.a license from the Federal Energy R.egulatory COl1IfIission must be obtained.a lengthy process.Therefore,the mechanics of contracting for construction w111 not be es tab1i shed for about three more years .. Your questions and cOIfIl1ents have been entered into the Action system. That means that they will be reviewed by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc.All questions and cooments entered into the ACTION system will be sUIlIJUir1zed in a report that will be given to the Alaska Power Authority Board of 01rec;:tors and the governor prior to their making a decision on Susitna next spri~9. Enclosed is an ACTION form that you may use if you have further questions or conoonts. Thank you for taking time to send us your COIIJIIents. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation NB/mgh Enclosurea ~ i T-014-80,----------------------------~.-------.- ;COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS ; ;Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility S'ludy ; I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date Ii=_A_n_In~~,--,iv~:....:d:_.~:....:I,,:....:.Ci_ti_ze-L~'7I-IJLI.--'-f;~r,""'J-=f-------na-m-e- AO O"8",,,tloo lJ~I_';r!ro)i ;address __-"'BoL.:o....p-x_-"'~'___"L__#ofmembers_____________; I city flf.--.""''--''I-'--'/('-''e.='-=..If;--'n~a....=_______address --------------I I state __....LI1-"--'K'--1-ZiP 19'7("city I I IIdayphone--------------contact person day phone'____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I Atlae.-6c.'&rre.f!J(mrle-n c.e IIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American.Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: ;Alaska Power Authority ; I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~~----------------------------------_# 1"""'. I ...... I Box.84 Talkeetna,~99676 November 7th,1980 Nancy Blunck Dir.of .Public .?articipation Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th -Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Nancy; RECEIVED NOV 101980 JJ,ASKA POWER AUTHORITY Having recently recieved your "Transmission Intertle lt leaflet several Cd.uesti:Jns have come to mind and I was hoping youw::>uld be able t::>supply some further Inf::>rmati::>n t::>t1enlighten'1 myself as to many of the future conse~uences of the~proposed Susitna Hydroelctric Project. First,T would like to be placed on b::>th the Commonwealth Associates and Acres ~~erican mailings lists for future written materials,study reports and analyses,and descritions of the w::>rk and research done to date.If your office cannot handle this detail I would apprecl&te that information ::>r particular a-ddresses to whicb I'd have to turn to.I would a15::>appreciate if I could continue to recieve any ::>f your (A.P.A.) printed materials und notices of upcoming events •••such as public meetings to be schedUled in Anchorage,Fairbanks,and Talkeetna. I am also dt:eply inteTested in the ACRES IIPlan of StUdy"put out on Febuary 4th of this year and would like to recieve a copy of that study- and 8+S::>the finished reports of that study.I am particularly interested in the findings of task #7 and subtasks 7.05 through 7.08.To what extent has t,he Acres stUdy been completed?.And how does an individual like my- self ::>btain copies of that information for review? The same interests apply to the Commonwealth's economic feasibility studies f::>r the proposed intertie. I realize that these requests will result in a mass of reports,leafl~ts, and studies but I also realize the importance of the Susitna Hydroelectric Projeot and the need to be informed.Here in Talkeetna feelings and thoughts can be all to easily swayed one way or the other by comments often based on ign::>ronce.Besides •••I've lots of time ror reading~ In as far as my pers::>nal,thoughts and f~elings go on the project I would have to a~mit I am curr~ntly "cautiousiy optimistic."Unfortunately I realize that even the best laid plans of mice and man (APA~.dCRES;etc.). can run amuck.I strongly feel that with::>ut proper consicieration of the alternatives,current demands and proposed demands,and costs •.•such as economic;scenic,and objective hazards •••such a large scale project as this may at best bec0me a m~n::>r diaster/fiasco. ~2 - Are there an.y cUI'rEnt designs :Jf ',vh'::.it 81 ther of the dam.ns me.y lQ;)k like?I am cur1Qus about their design and nature and Qf Which company or cornoretion WJuld be handling the constructi:Jn •••if any. I look foward to the coning deluge of materials and perhaps a meeting at one of the upcoming public meetings •••sche"uled when? Si.ncer~.. CJL,;:l:"fj/ Kei th NYl tray -- i~ Kenneth 1".Allen Box 6 Cantwell,Alaska 99729 Dear Mr.Allen: You wrote us a'tfnq for information about the process by which the people in Cant- well ..uld obtain an electric utility. We cannot help you in this regard.However,!have forwarded a copy of your letter to Gordon Zerbetz.chairman of the Alaska Public Utflities C~iss1on.I hope he will be able to send you the fnformation you need. r remember seeing you at a meeting we held 1n Cantwtl1 a few weeks agl.Hopefully, some of your questions and concerns relating to your energy problems were addressed at that meeting. Please let us know if we can be of further assfstance to you. Sincerely, cc =ACT!ON file system c.lo')<:d [ ••-----------------------------------'~I•_T-015-80 .. I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS A REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date December 17 t 1980 IIII__X_An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name _-----l:K""'eu..Jo.....o...et-"'-lh'-'----'-P-"te.-.L.JALL1J-le""-'n'-'-----_____name I I IIaddress--t:IBLYO-hx--:6lJ.---------------#of members_____________I I city __---'C......aUJoLLt....w=e-Ll.Ll ---------address --------------I I state _-JI1~'I_Ei"'~c:~I,Q_"'------zip 99729 city II~1~~~~I I day phone --------------contact person day phone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I IIPleasetellmeaprocessbywhichthepeopleinourcommunityIIcall]d obta i n an el ectri c uti]ity.I I I I Any suggestions or sources of help are appreciated.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets jf you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I II.I ~---------------------------------_.# 1]IIiilliII(', -, {??rt i~,{(:ft&CL,'c~' ,Ei-~x { CetA.\('t'--{'{(J,t{-7'c/';.z,;;:::''1'I', //.//i"YI/Fe (. 4/Cl j kc,13 ~--t::i'AHtiN'I:f '- 3 ']'3 .!'ItI,':1 .7.,t l/-~)~~;n 3( J/...J,~,'t.j~!41.?tS7-; 7)<c.i:I '5~r ) "'t'/'o ,~"/'7 ~iuc ~ """-~'-"-,,,~,~"I j .!d<L~c. ~, i ......, , Action file Number:1-001-81 Mr ..JoM Ireland Murder lake Talkeetna.Alaska 99616 Dear Mr.Ireland: Enclosed you will find ~to several coacems that you raised regarding the proposed Svs1tna b;ydrHlectric.project.These responses were mtteft by Acres AIler'ICB.fpc.,the fina conducting the feasibility studies. 'four concpr.P: The reservoir lIight be too wide for anilllls.. ResRqq!!: We Kbowledge receipt of ,)lOUf"COJIC8I"8 that tile reservoir afpt be too vide for most ani.l,other tbaIl -.ture aeose or caribou to swill and thus would create a barrier fer ._'5 drivea to its shere by predators. This COACel"a w111 be forwarded to our wildlife eoord1aater ..will address it as part of our iJDPaCt prediction and ait1gatioa p1_1",. lie have to date identified a-.1or ~m 10 relatfOB to the effects of the l'eSerYOtr on CIJ1!JOu migration.especially as Nlated to drawdowR ami Poteatial for fce .1vl89 aloag tbe Uores.To date our coacem bas ...less for DOD-IItp'&tory species. As the Nsenoir(s)is less than It .n••1de to IIOSt places it Illy be that it win ereatt'l less of a berrier thaD the ufsting fast flOirlIlg SusitM River.Howeft.r.as stated aboYe.our wildlife teiII will addras the ~you bave ra1 •• yOW"~: Talteetu ilight be flooded if tbe daJl(s}failed• Res@O!!se: The proposed design of d8IIS would tate 1Ato ACCount"the llUiaR credible eal"thquake bel maxilUl probable flood that u.Y b.e expeeted Page 2 Mr.JoIm Ireland .dune 18.1981 ~, P in tbe river basin at the daII sites.However.eYfm with a CMsena- the cles1gn the r1sk of d8&I failure carmot be totally eliminated. A study of a potential dam break problem and an ~Actton Plan (EAP)will nave to be prepared prior to the COMtruetton of the project as part of federal regulations.Tile EAP win be draw up by APA ift consultation with State and local agencies.During the development of tttisplan.it 15 expected that tM poteat1al . extent of flooding at Talkeetna and all aloag the river reach below the Gala will be defined and discussed with all affected parttes .. Tbe ClUT'eIIt studies will not address this problem 1ft detail except 1a identifying likely eaxilUl water'levels in the dowastreaM reaches ..1119 passage of la.J"ge natural floods in theJMtreaa.. Your COftCerQ: •_P ...,pC lit , There will be cou14erable losses of electr1c1ty in trus111ssioa lines to fairbanks Ud Andlorage. £lectr1cal tAnsaisslOil systeM til Korth AlIer1ca aN usually destged to 11.tt ..",losses to 5 percent of tile energy trUSlritted. Lhe desfps are arrived at by takfag lCCOUftt of the econoefes of a . ........line againt the val ••f enerv loss fn a SIIIller HM. Losses ,.the Sa".~ss10Jl ant estimated as about 217 perceat to ~ud 1.5 pet"C8Ilt to fairbanks.The reHcm for lC'J1111!r los$~1a tile fa1rbaaks 11..is the lower ...t of -1"1)' t1'U$IIitted. Regarding your ....-rt that Altchorate JIaY do better to consider eaergy frcll T1.1Power...would lite to direct you to the "Altemat1ves S~b:e1ngCODducted by Datelle Laborator1es.The address of the contact per$OIl is below: Mr.Jfll Souby D1recter of the Div1si.of Poliey DeYelopmeat &ad Plamdag IPIP.Pouch AD Juneau.Alaska 99811 four ~1"'Il:.. -'J ,..,. i ~, Page 3 Mr.John Ireland June 21.1981 Res2!!!se: Your concem on gale force winds developing in the area due to tile long reservoir is -.n taken..Our studies win address the ameem as part of the bydrolog1ca1 criteria for the dam design.to OW" study so far on Susitna and based on OW"experience 1n other long lakes we haft eagb,eered.it does not appear that s.evere local gale force winds will be "used by Ute watana and Devil Canyon reservoirs. due .1ft1y to the relatively short stratght stretd1es of water surfaces in camtrlnat10n with PJ"8(IoII1na.nt wind d1reeticms in the area. Most of the wind ettergy will be expended in creating a surface water wave which will be contained in the reservoir.The maxiIuD height of wiftd...generated waves is estimated at some 4 feet in our preliminary studies.More detailed studies will be COJIPleted before the et1d of 1981 and the potential of such wtft'ls better established by that tillle.Additioully.an evaluation of local effects and chuges in local eli_tic condit1cms.due to tbe large reservoirs.will be presented as part of our studies. You DOW have responses to all the conceru that your raised in yew letter of Decellber 13.1980.If you hayeo'tber COIlOlmS 01"additional quest1oas.please cootKt U$again.EftClosec1 is ...ACTION fOl"lt for that purpose or you may send lIS another letter. Sincerely. Jean BudIarMm Public Part1cpat1on Office,., JB/mab enclosure #\etten fl1e NUllber:r-OOl-81 Mr.Jobn Ireland Murder late.Alaska Dear Mr.Ireland: In January we received a letter froJl you in which )'OU expressed ,YOw ccmcems regarding the proposed Susitna bydr'oelectr1e projeet.s tau asked that your letter be read to each COII1'IUft1ty meeting as your -input.- Your letter was read at &CODIIURtty worksbop held in Talkeetna on March 11th.It WA$also included 1ft a packet of iaf'o.-ticm g1Ye11 to people who atteaded a CQ.IBIQ1\y workshop infafrbaDks on March 16th.. Your letter bas also been entered in the ACTION system.which means it will be reviewed by the Alaska Power Author1ty aad Acres AMrlcu. Inc ••tile finu CODdueting the feasibility studies.Your ctmeerU.along wtth 6n other questious end CClH1BDU ..reee1ye duriag the thirty IDftth study period.win be fncl"ill a I"eport that win be g1YeIJ to tile Alaska Power Author1ts1 Board of O1Y'8Ctors aJtd the Governor prior to a deciston Oft Susttu. We i&¥e 1nforlled Acres Amerfc:aa of the frustra'tioa you feel retarding the level of activity of study team III!IIbers around your home.We uaderstand it takes ti.to answer their quest1cms ....ver.it is important for them to talk to those who have 1ived in tlJe ~rea.Your observations are helpful.particularly since .)"OU are one of the few people with exteRdecl living experfetlCe in the study area.. We M¥e also tlOtedthat you are vigorously opposed to a road 011 the south stde of tile river.As yOU can He fl'(tll the enclosed set of maps. a soutbem access is one of the possible cboices..The decision about wh1e1l access will be rKGtILeade4,if the project is bui1t~win not be made _til RUt year.The decision will Uke into ams1deratton: ca..the impacts on the envf'l"ORllEmt (people.animals.archaeology. plnts.ete.) b.the «mg1_Mag costs and 1.1icat10ns (expense aDd diffIculties) c..sdtedul1A9 implications (1~of time to CODStnIct) d..11lPlfcations of c:otmeCt1rag with mstiag access from s.ply po1ftts (costs.COlWeRfRCe.lengti.of route.•S.triUbtlitl f'or type of equ1fllleBt and sappl ias to be brougbt to project) ~ I .... .~ - Page 2 Mr.John Ireland April 9,.1981 In your lett.eJ'>,you registered.IUIber of coac:ems wbida we ttave forwarded to Acres AJaerican.Inc.They will prepln a response which we expect to send to you by the end of May.Your concems fonrerded to Aa'es are -- a.Concern about possible t'1000d1ng at TalteetM if ..broke. b.eoncem that project of size of Susitu is too f8l"from Fa1rbaats . and there 1tIOUld be consi....ble power losses along the 11ne. c.co.ncem about reservoir generatiq -gale-t'orceft w1lK1s, d.and ccmcem that the reservoir wnl be too wide for aost ae1.1s,other than -ture IIOOse 01'"caribou to swim across. You letter also 1neluded a SuggeStiOA to deftlop tidal power at Whittier..That suggestion.along wtth a coPY of ,your letter bas beea forwarded to Charles S1ttiD.Project Maaager.Arthur 'fota9 afld CoIIpaay. 730 I Street.AtH:borage.Alaska.99501. Mr ..Sitt1n is 111Mgel'of the Rai1belt EHrgy AlteJ!'Mtives Study being CODducted by Battelle Pac1f1e ~t laboratories of RiehlDd. Washington.Tb1s study is separate 1roJI the Sus1tna.studies ami is being _gee by tile goveJ"ftOr'S office.It is expected to be COIIPleted nextspring.The Alternatives Study w111 evaluate Sus1tna Dydroelec:trfe developlUt in relation to other altemat1ve energy sources fer the raUbelt ..... ThHkyou for tat1119 tille to ....ite us...We've included a copy of the lItilter1als given out at the meetings you did JlOt attend 1A Ma.-ch. Enclosect is an ACTIOR fGnl that you _use if you have other·<:G.Bllts or ClUeStiORs :regardiD9 the studies. Sincerely. {.- ~r.' "eaa~Public Partfc:ipat101l Office J8/11gb Ellclosures Murder Lake,.t~laska Dec.13/'80 Alaska Power Authority Anchorage Greetings; I have been faithful to respond,to prior CO~D~~ications,which heret~fore sU9plied a prepaid,addressed form fJr ~nsw8r;illW it 3d8l~we l:lUst lnve.':it l-lostage l tJC,J~her'lLLtll our time,if,we wish continuing receipt of l!news Ie ::tars II re:..;us i tna hydro pow er pro j ec t -which could vi t'::illy affec t our lives.But this is the trend. I am one of very few who live,in my case almJst 15 years now, closest to,the proposed project.Other people,who don't,live here,make decisions which could 0estroy my chosen lifestyle;no one asks me.Glory- seeking politicians and big money are going to do what they are going to dD;- a few individual lives are considered expendable. I am in favor of,the concept of energy from ren~able resources; but am scornful of the drastically wasteful way of going about it,notably this project ~countless,exorbitantl~expensive helicopter flights;apparent- ly no restraint practiced.I should know,most fly directly over,here;swarms of super-educated experts studying every facet of the local environment;they, ask me -what I have learned,from living With,and obserVing,the local flora and fauna.Sometimes I feel I might be on the payroll,too. Now I worry lest they decide to put in a road Dear here;I moved out here near a decade and 8 half ago tD get away from,roads;easy 3CC8SS to this really narrow strip of wilderness -to vacationing sports with their meuhanized equipment,could SDDn make it b,:iJTen as the Moon.I am vigorously opposed to any road running along South of the Susitna River. Then there is Talkeetna;they have u different,problem:in case a Susitna ~am were built,they would be in constant danger of flouding,in case the dam broke;p "operyy va lues would deteriora te,oec::llJ.S e of unw i lling- ness to invest considering the risk.I'm not saying it would,break,but no ~ one dare say it couldn't,with integrity.I thibk it would be backing up of the 'falkeetna River,against raised wuters of the Susi tna,would be the cause of d3D~ge.rhe,concept of midway power source,supplying both Lnchorage and Fairbanks sounds sensible;but the source is about 1/3 the distance be- tween,Anchorage and Fairbanks.I'd think there'd be considerable loss along the long wi~e system to reach Fairbanks.as for ~nchorage,I think they'd do better to conside~energy from Tidal Power,~ay from Whittier,ice-free and hav~ng the long narrow Passage Canal -and already with a railroad spur for haullllg equipment or whatever.And it's much il'3arer to Anchorage. I have no intention to attend any "community mee~ings",to sit ""'l around and listen to some expert confuse the attendants with high-sounding phraseology;I wouldn't have the time;it is quite expensive to travel in and out here by air,the only reasonable accesss;and I expect the town-bound ~ wouldn't have considered that time for suoh meetings might coincide with a1 period of no,travel -except by helicopter.This,is to be my input,my "vot~,~" if.any such is allowed;and since the very few of us who live ol.qs..est to J the proposed projeot,as olJposed to many thousands who do not;mme vote from the very center should equal in gravity against thousands from farther away. unless,of course,we are to be considered expendable. It is my desire that this letter be readd once to the assembly- of each "corJllluni ty meeting"for public input re:Susi tna hydropower proj eet. Vrey truly yours,~~ P.S.In d~s?ussions of,this project,I haven't noticed any dwealing upon the p~obabI1Ity that the long lake backed up by proposed dam would encourage generatIon of gale-force winds,the destruction and discomfort of which would ?e felt over an extend~d,area;an~,the lake being too wide to swim Bcrasss oy 1:s8 t~an a mature Moose or CarIbou,would Bct as a trap for animals Jriven to Its snore by vredators. .... .... r March 12,1981 ACTION FILE Number:T-002-81 Ms.Noreen Mercer P.O.Box 92 Talkeetna,Alaska 99676 Dear Noreen, I have your tetter dated March 6,198!. You seem frustrated by the lack of infonnation currently available about these aspects of the Susitna studies: the alternative"energy studies --the environmental impact studies --the geological reports You wrote Uthese are the important matters prior to decision time,not 'possible recreational plans ~t proposed reservoirs.'I suggest that no recreational development be p~rt of your consideration." I would l1ke to respond to each of these: a)regarding the alternative energy stUdies.There will be a future workshop on the alternative energy stUdies.It will be conducted by Battelle and not ~he Power Authority.I suggest you check with the project manager to find out when and where.He is: Chuck Sitkin Project Manager of Battelle StUdies 730 U I g Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 b)regarding the environmental impact studies.Evironmental impacts will be discussed next week.at the workshop.Terrestrial Environmental Specialists is conducting that work and Cathie Baumgartner from there will report on the environmental considera- tions of selecting a~access route• I am also anticipating a future workshop in Talkeetna that Just has to do with enYi~ntal issues and questions. c}regarding the geological studies.Geotechnical work began last sUUlRer and will continue this SUlDDer.This work relates directly to questions of safe.·and sound dam design.and a future meeting (and future newslettl!rs)will also report these findings. As a note:When I schedule workshops.1 limit the topics to one (or two at most)so we can cover them in depth and have lots of time to answer peopl~·s questions. the environmental information you want. .,".--i I Sincerelyi Page 2 Nooeen Mercer March 12,1981 d)regarding the timing of the recreation workshop.Here is the situation:There is a FERC requirement for the development of a recreation plan within the project boundaries.Dr.Alan Jubenville from the University of Alaska is developing this plan.Last fall he sent out over 2,000 random surveys to people in Fairbanks, Anchorage and the cOJ;IJlUnities in between.A number of people in Talkeetna received tile survey but few returned it.I was con- cerned about the low return,as was the consul tant from the University.We wanted a stronger level of participation from your cOflIlIunity,and we felt that one way to do this would be to discuss recreation at the upcoming workshop and ask for people's cOfiltlents.I realized at the time I made the decision that there was some awkwardness about the timing.But I was willing to live with that to allow an expanded opportunity for Talkeetna to cooment. 1 appreciate your corrments.They help me plan a meaningful program. In future newsletters and meetings in Talkeetna,you will see more detail about the areas you requested. Again,I encourage you to come next week,as you will begin getting //<------- Haney Blunck Director of Public Participation NB/mgh RSC;;:lVED L1AR 1 J 1981 N.ASKA POWE-R AJrriCRITY ~ I f"" I Action file IuJlber:T-002-81 Mr.James W.HeConaick North Star Bible CUp Box 4 Willow.Alaska 99688 Dear Mr.McConrick:. we have DOted your COIRftts~ndin9 the develos-at of tidal power fa toot Inlet.rather thaD·tbe development of Susitua ~leetrfc power.You felt that tidal power uould be less dangerous.bave fewer &RYil"0118lmtal effects.and that it would be 1.$cos:tly.pu'ttaalAT'ly since the capitol is expected to IIOYe to the W1110w &I'U. You also ~tblt there be a joint ~Q.'lIIbtR1119 a .~with t1.1 energy product1oa.We have passed these ~e.ts to Sherry Yal.tiRe.who is handling the public participation for the Ral1belt ERergy Alternatives Study ROW being CORducted by Battelle Pacific Northwest.(The Alteratives Study win evaluate SusitM bydnr electric ....,op1ieRt 1nrelation to other eaergy sources.This study. u.peeted to be eompleted aext spring.is betftg ~by the Governorts offlce.). Thaak 10U for sendiDl us your COl'.lints.11MlY have beeD.entered into our ACTIOftsl$tem whiCh "$they will be reviewed by the Alasb ,....AutbOrlt1 and Acres Ameriean.lac...tile fint conducting the feasibilfty sbadfes.An COfllTfUlts we receive t.Iwougb the ACTIOR systelll will be Stalar1z.ed tft a repOrt we will give to the Alaska Power AuthoMt,y Board of Directors and the QovelW)r prior to _tag a deeis10a Oft Sus1t:na aext spring. Enclosed is a copy of an ACTION f01"ll which you may use if you have add1 tiCAl·CGIIIeDts or any questicms regarding the Sui ba bydroelectrie feasibility studies... Sincerely. Jean 8udaaun Publ1~Part1~ipatiOD Office JB/Il9h EKlosure ,(~----------------------------~~~T~-~O=O=2-~8=1~_]~l I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I ~I IISusitnaHydroelectricFeasibilityStudyI ~ I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date~I I IIAnIndividualCitizen__An Organization I I name _....::J=Q~f\'I=-""<......s'------'\I""-'--._~'--.:..:::c.,-"C.....o,--,-Y'--,-,M,-,--,-ic.=-(=--___name IIaddress_....I.:}J!l!Oo'-t:-~±_l..h"_'_'S>L~.llQ~\-L--'B~i...lIob'-"\e..------'C....O"""----UY'f\.L*'~-#of members_____________I I city 'BO)(4 ,_W-'-'=~-=-\\_=...:o=_..:tAI~address --------------I I state _-=-A-"-\o.=--"'S'--'-\<-=O-ZiP qq (p fg city I .. I IIdayphone--------------contact person day phone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I A2....:±t~a.=e.""~e"--l.d.!L_~\..=e.~tt.!....:c...~."..~.----------I I III ~ I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III ~ I -----.--------------------~-__I I I ~ I use extra sheets if you need them I I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisformandleaveitatacommunitymeetingormailitto:I ~ I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I .., I I,, ~~----------------------------------_# North Star D Bible Camp ~4 Guiding Light --Matt.5.14 harch 28,1981 Nancy .Blunck Alaska Power Authority Fublic Participation Office, 3JJiest 4th-Suite 31,Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Nancy, RECEIVED /\PR - 2 1981 ALASKA POVV:::~;AlCTHORITY Thank you for the information recently placed in our box inliillow. lie have been hearing for some time a-bout using the tides for generating electric power.~know the tides of the Cook inlet have been considered before,but in the light of the causeway seeming to be more of a reality now, I think this would be a good time to consider joint ventures,not only for the causeway and power generation,but the railroad and power cables,which have been reported to be giving problems under the water of the inlet. This would be good use of the money and a real Gvidence of there being a real concern about energy by those in higher office. There would be no concern about backing up wate~and inundating land as there is behind a dam.No endangering of lives by a possible dam break. The Hat-3u valleys and the Anchorage areas are the most populated areas in the state,so much money could be saved by shorter transmission lines. i'iith the plans for the Capitol move,there will be more growth close to the causeway,making more needs for electricity,close at hand. I would be more favorable of an all electric home or business if the power was from this renewable source,close at hand. Flease keep me informed of any studies in regards to this. Yours truly,__.'..""I . ( Yd11t-tJ)I.';J1(~'f'~ (I James Ii.l'IcCormick-!',Ianager. - r - May 26.1981 Action file Nullber:1-003-81 Dear Mr.Mawhinney: In a receftt letter to the publ ic participatfon office of the Alaska Power Atfthortty,you exp1"essed several coneems regarding the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies. Your first concem was.that the flyer for tile March _rksbop gave you the ilJlP"SSions that the proposed Sus1tM project is an "assured thing"liIln our Yi.~it is not a certi1aty.Before the Power Atfthortty can recomend whether or not to build the project.IIUY questions need to be answred concerning env1ro&11ental iapaets.cost feasibility,potential seismic problems.and avanable_nets for the power.Thereftwe.the feasibl1ity studies are erucfal .. Next spring.study results will be analyzed and the Alaska PClef' Authority win make a l"eCOB4e:ndatioo to the Govemor and the legislature ~ag whether or ·not to build tile Susitml project.The f1.,decision 011 Susftna win be Mde by the legislature and the Govemor. 1 blow it seeIIS like &waste of time to pl_before a dec1sicm is tilde;no-ver.t iiOii8 you can now see that the plADD1ng that is done affects the decidoR about whether or not to build a ~lectr1c project of this type.If people are to influence those plus.they IlUSt do so f!!!,1l,fll the plannfag proce$S. Pege 2 D.Mawhinney May 26,1961 A third concam you bad wa$that you felt we should be dfscussfttg the possible alternatives if tile studies indicate the Sust.project not feasible.Probably by ROW you have heard about the Ral1belt Energy Alter- M.t1ves Study that 1sbeint done by Batten.Pacific Not"thwest labOratories WIder the direction of the 6o¥ernor's office.Th«t studY.which is expected to be completed next $pring,wnl look at alternat.ives to Susitml and eompare them with SUS1tM.If you have questions or ~ts regaJ"d1ag tile Battene studies,please contKt Nora la~t P..O.Box 10-1509.Anchorage, Alaska 99511.345·5370. A final concern that yOU expressed was that ...should be discussing the relevant issues concerning the studies wb1eh effect the determination on this project.·We hope that yOU win let us know what hsues you have in mind.Enclosed is I form you can use to list those concerns.or you can send them in a letter,wtl1chever is easier for you. We appNc1ate your takfng time to ten us your COAeeI"M.TOUt' eo_nts.along with 8n other COIIItenU received in our offiee.are rev1ewd by the Alaska Power AutIIOrity and Acres _Mean.Inc:.t the f1,.who fs conducting the studies.Your C01IIIIl!mU will also be included in a report to the Governor aad the Alaska Power Autbol"'1ty Board of D11"CtCtOn prior tC)a deC1s1on on Sus1tna next spring. Sincerely, 1'/ Jean 8ud1aMn Publ ic Participation Office \tB'. En4:1osure cc:Jay ....Ad Eric 'fould Jeff We1t:z1 It 'at Petty - r! t ,__----------------------------1 T-003-81 J I -------.I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I 1 Susi'tna Hydroelectric Feasibility S'tudy 1 I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date ~1a rch 10,1981 I I II---X----An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name ---'D"-!.'---'--'M""'a.!..!.w!..!.h'-'--'·nC!.ln-'-"e'-J.y ~name I1address...!,BL'.Q!.L'.X'-----"'2~2 #ofmembers.______________I I city __T.:....:a:::...1:...-k::..=e:...=e=-=t..:..:.n=a-,-,---=-A--'--1=-=a::..=s--'--kc=a_9::...:9:....:6:...:7--=6'----__address ---------------I I state zip city I I IIdayphone--------------contactperson dayphone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.8e as brief and specific as possible._ I ATTACHED LETTER.III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority .1 I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I t •~----------------------------------_.# - - Actfcm FUe Humber:1-004--81 Erin Aull1iUl Box 28 Talkeetna,Alaska 99676 Dear M.Aulman: You returned a questionna1re from the recent recreation and road access .o1"kshop Ileld fft Talkeetna in March.On the back you wrote SGIIe COIJIIeflts about how you feel about the pUbl Ie participation pt"OCeSS and the proposed SusitM bydroeleetr1c project.You are obviously frustra- ted and .ngry about the way thing.s have been done.I am sorry that you feel tbat way. I cu understand that it 1$frustrating fot"you to speRd time discussing plans for something you do not wet.Wt\etber the project is developed or DOt,however.access iWJ recreation planning IBUSt begin now.The kind of recreation aDd access proposed figures highly iBto the fea$1bi11ty of tile project.Therefore.CQIIIIDts froIJ the public now win bave the most 1aflueACe. I hope that in spite of your frustration you will continue to follow the studies and speak your miDd. Your CGlRnU have been entered into the ACTION system,a method we use to keep track of public CORIIenU we receive tlmmgh the lilt). CoJmteats are reviated by the Alaska Power Authority ud Acres AlBeMc:an, lac.,the fil'll COftducting tbe studies.All C08leDts will be ..-r1ad in it report given to the Alaska Power Autbor1ty Board of Directors and the Govemor prior to their mating.dec1siOQ Oft SUs1tAa AeXt spring. Your note ·wss also forwarded to the study teams for access (RIM COnsultants)aDd recreation planning (the University of Alaska at fa1rbaftks). Enclosed is a fonI that .)IOU .Y use if you have questions or additiOMl UJIJllants .. Sincerely. Jean BvchaQao Public Participation Office .dB/tIgh EAeloSUN Rt-~~_::'4i.~·~"i'i.l:;:~J'~.~~~!Aif~~;', I ,....----..----....---....----..-.....--T-004-8J ~ In .--~1 :COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS : I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study : I April 3,1981 IIThecommentsonthisformaresubmittedby:Date I I __X_An I ndividual Citizen _ _An Organization I I name Eri n Aulman name I I Box 28 IIaddress-~-----#of members I I city _-__Ta 1~~et~~~__~__address I I state ~laska ziP~_99676 city I I IIdayphone-contact person day phone I I I I I ndividual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. :l\II.6Q1EO"lJTTE~:...______I I -----~--------I I II---~-----------~------I I -----~------------------I I I I II-----------I I ---------------------------I I I I I I I I __~~____I I I I I I I I ~___I I II----------------------~--------I I ---------------------------------------------I I -------I I ---------------------------------0_______I I I I ---------------------------------------------------·----0----------0 I u....Ir••""1.II you .-It""" I,Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments In writing.You may make ,I your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I•••~~--------------------~------------_.# - - - -. .-. MY'.HmIeft MehIne Mile 274\ Alaska Raflmad Pouch 7-2111 ABdJoragell Alaska 99510 1. r""I z. ".,., I 3 .. - - Harden Mebane came to the Al.ska Power Authority Office on May 1.1981. He asked that his.concerns be registered throog:h the ACTIOI systell. He live OIl the ra111'03d at aile 274J:i. Itts .eoneet"ftS: He hopes that access from the Parks bighway will ROt be selected. If it is cbosea...hopes it will not go Mar bis ~He does not wet the D01se aad dust. He is not ill favor of the Susitna Hydroelectric project. He thought it ...1d be a-disaster-to ~up t.he areabettIeeDwatanaadtheDenaUtdghwaybyputtingaccessthroughthatarea. lespcmse to hi$.ccm.cems: 1.lie was giWD Ikma Gutcber's phone mIIlber so tbat he could can and tell hi.tile exact location of his-property.. 2..He was al$O given J1.6nl's ....r iDease he could not re&dI RorL (Jeu Budlanan called both NonD ud Jim to let U.know that Mr. Meb&fte II1gbt telephone them.) No wrftten response fs needed.Please consider thts file closed. SUbiI1tted b,y. Copy sent to Kevin YGUIlt. Nay 15.1981 -\ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them city #of members _ address _ contact person ~day phone _ name ___An Organization 11-,-,---'L=--__~zip qqS/tJ Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. day phone _ state. Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: 1-An Individual Citizen (-----------------------------{T-005-81 I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS 6 REQUESTS I Susi'tna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study . I The comments on this form are submitted by:•Date·.612 s /r-/I /I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,, ~--------------------~--------------_# - - ~I :~ - f'""", August 18,.1981 Action file rlUmber:T-001-81 Tony Martin P..O.Box 374 Talkeetna.Alaska 99616 Dear Mr.Martin: In a recent letter you requested information regarding the Susftna hydroelectric project feas1bil ity stu4yllld tile Aftcborageto Fa1rbaRts Intertie project. I regret we do BOt have extra copies of tedm1cal rep01"ts on either project to send to you.Reports are available,bowver a at the Talkeetna library.. Enclosed is some written information ntlating to both projects.,,1 hope it will be helpful .. Thank you for your interest in both projects.. Sincerely, fOR 11£EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Jean Buchafiaa Public Participation Office -JB/Ililb enclosures P.S.:Mr.Al Carson forwarded your letter to hi.of July 27.1981 on the same subject.we wi sta you to know that this is II1so a response to that letter.. I T-007-81,~-1 .----------------------~-,I '------IICOMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I Tho oomm,,"00 !hI''o,m a<e ,"bm''''''by,Dslo 7/,;,If;II~7 IIX-An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name -;dnr Ol/IVI-U name IIaddresseO.gOP(37/#ofmembers_____________I I city -..:2!I2~/C Eer»It address --------------I I state--AI--j'!-:-=:-zipq1~7'£city ~________I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphone____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I. your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority : I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I II,._----------------------------------_# - .. - RECEIVED :":-33 6 1981 t?-- ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 7/2 ;;/?! Tc/~AI<' ,- , r- I - -, August 17.1.1 Mr.KeYS.Youag Acres ......c:aa.lac .. 900 Liberty 8aRk 8uU41ag Buffalo.Hew fort 14Z0Z ·Dear levill: The .-ary results of tt'le .-ttonaires ..circulated tid.SpMIII 011 road access Ilaft beeR filed wttll the ACTIOI SIS-'.0..C8P7 Ills beeft filed t.tile Talkeeba Met1.....f.U.F.1 ......secttoa. ·T......I"$....: Herefs a MUW'f1.r'Gr.''.YtNr.....Ntt.fnes•.....""T-omJ··,~n . f-Q11-81 St_ly. MINERS QUESTIONNAIRE --February and March 1981 This questionnaire was given to the members of the Alaska Miners Association in Fairbanks and the Board of Directors of the Alaska Miners Association in Anchorage.It is not known exactly how many were distributed.Eighteen questionnaires were returned. ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 ,ll,ll parts 4 No parts 1 Upper Susitna Basin 1 One respondent who answered the form in detail said,"Of course,the Maclaren is of major interest to me since that is my home base.However,I would be violently opposed to using the Denali Highway as a dam access.Aside from the esthetic reasons,it would be an economic disaster for me,as a major portion of my trapl ine runs from ~,1i1e 7 Denal i Highway to Mile 71." What part of the Upper~S_us_l_'t_n__a__b_a_s_in~l_'s__o_f~p_a_r~t_ic_u~_l~a~r~i~n~t~e~re_s~t~t~o~y_o~u: Almost every respondent had a different answer.Specifically they are: Watana Creek 1 Butte Creek 1 Coal Creek 1 Clearwater Mtns.1 Portage Creek-Fog Lakes 1 Tsusena Creek 1 Gold Creek 1 Valdez Creek 1 Valdez Creek 1 Oshetna and Chul i tna 1 Black Rivers 1 Maclaren 1 Devils Canyon 1 A C C E S S l.Member of what group or groups:Miners Reside in: Fairbanks Alaska Miners 11 Fairbanks 10 Anchorage Alaska Miners 6 Anchorage 6 Nome Alaska Miners 1 Maclaren River 1 Interior Alaska Trappers 0 Palmer 1 Southcentral Trappers 0 Registered guide 1 Other:Fur Takers of America 1 2. 3.What areas of the river basin do your currently use: Answers mirrored those above.Specifically: Watana Creek 2 Butte Creek Coal Creek 1 Clearwater Mtns. Chulitna Canyon 1 Lower Susitna Chulitna Creek 1 Upper Susitna Stephan-Fog Lakes 1 Upper +Middle South side-Susitna Upper Tsusena Creek drainage of Fhunilma Creek 1 Devil's Canyon N/A None - Miners Questionnaire continued. 4.What kind of use? Minerals exploration Trapping wolves that on wintering moose Prospecting Mineral development Trapping 2 prey 1 3 1 1 Recreation/rest Mining Hunting/fishing Hardrock Minerals None N/A 2 5 4 1 1 1 ..- 5. 6. What level of use do you give the areas: Light use was listed most frequently,though moderate and heavy use were also put down.Specific dates: June-September 7 Oct.15-April 1 pl us September hunt deer 1 None 1 N/A 1 Fall and Winter 2 Year-round 1 September-October 1 Would you like to see pUblic access via private]y-owner vehicle after construction completed? Yes 16 No 2 7.What is the principal reason for your ~osition on access? Yes answers: Access to potentially-productive mineral deposits 5 Public funds,public use 10 Recreation use 3 Hunting and fishing 1 One respondent who answered yes,added:"I strongly feel vJe should extract all minerals from this area before we complete the dam and begin flooding the area." No answers:-The area is undisturbed now,don't want to lose that The game population will be driven down 1 1 !""" I OCtober 8.1980 Ms.Belle Mickelsonsa20040 Fairbanks.Alaska 99701 Dear Ms.Mickelson: The attached requests for infonation about Sus1tDa Qdroeleetr1c develos-u that you sublritted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTI0t4 SYSTEM havesbeert forwarded to Fran Ulmer.chairperson of tbe Railbelt Energy Altematfves Policy Review COIDittee.Tb1sCGDllittee will be providing polley direction to the Sus1tna .'tematfves study that Battene Nortl\West Laboratories is conducting. As 10u .y know.the 1980 legislature decided tbat the alternatives study for Sus f tna should be COIIpl eted III such a way that there would be no gut!!t1Oft of its oWect1v1ty;.Therefore.the legislature directed that an liiaePiRiiiit"'"'ft1"lD Iii selected to COftduct the .'temat1.,.s study fuelf (Battene was chosen)and that Acres American.Inc:.continue Its work on studying the feasibility of Susttna. The Office of the Governor 1s manag1ng the feasfbflfta'study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority 1s _gl"9 the feas1b11tty study of Susftna. The results of both studies win belp detenllne tdlether or not the State - should develop 1ij'(1ioelectrfc ,..,.on the Susitna River and/or pursue .other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will lIIte a decision by April 1982 .metner to f11 ••ltamse application for Susftna hydroelectric. Battelle 1s directed to COIIPlete their alternatives study well ,.advance of this date to perIlft antnfo"-decision. Since Acres will not conduct the .'tematfves study.we directed them not to respond to your ACTION request.It did not lllke IIJCb sense to us to have tbeIa fill yeur requesU,if they were not going to be conducting the study.We thought it better to hold ,.,1Ii"ACTIOM request unttl the new COftSUltaat was selected. In July a request for proposals was sent out seekfng consulting services to ccmduct an .ltemat1ves study aad prepare aft energy plan for the electr1cal .need$of the ral1belt.The energy pl.will include u evaluation of alteNat1ves.emerging tedmologfes,COftServat1on,and load unaf}8leDt.The plan will review,and where necessary,111fWOVe the extst1ft9 data base and deIud forecast.It will examine the alternative types of electric g.....t1on ad help detel"lrtne whether'or not the state should ccmceatrate 1ts efforts on deYeloplel'lt of the I\Yd1"OelectMc potential of tile Sus1tna River aad!orpursue other altel"ftat1ves. In 5eptellMr.Battene Pacific HortIwest laboratories (with Ebasco service ud the ·Institute of SOC1al ud EcoBom1e Research)was selected to conduct the alternatives study.Their coatract with the Office of the Gover...11 now s1gaed.Battelle is preparing fa wI"t plan .lela is 8Xl*ted to be fiefshed b.r tile end of OCtober.Bettene aat1c1pates beg'nning ..-tfft Io.....r. Ms.Belle Mickelson Page 2 October 8.1980 In the meantfme.further questions and eotmtents concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTIOHrequest)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone nLUber and and address listed below.We suggest that all con"'espondence to ~".. Ulmer be maned.-Attention:Tom Singer.it Division of Policy Development and Planning,Pouch AD,Juneau,Alaska 99811..Phone (907)465-3577. You IftIY also wish to contact I1elIIbers 'of the Ranbelt Energy Alternatives Policy Review CouIfttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Dena 11 Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,Chafnaan Alaska Power Autbor1~Board of Directors 2702 Gambell Street.Sui te 200 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Roo LIb....01 rector Division of Budget and ManageDl8l1t Pouch AM Juneau.Alaska 99811 If you have further questions or COlllftenU about the Susftna feasibility studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Part1cfP4tfon Off1ce of the Alaska Power Authority.333 West 4th Avenue,Sufte 31 t Anchorage.Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sincerely. Hancy Blunck Director Public Participation Office .AttadRent N&:lII9h Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 F-OOl-80 use extra sheets if you need them contact person day phone _ city ----~ address ----- name #of members _ ~_An Organization zip qq101 n .r·\, (bnc;.N lV:tt\1~V')t The comments on this form are submitted by: J-An Individual Citizen name j3?\\c.Mi cKL='\---,S="=~-"'----'-'_~~__ address S;K 2W4-0 city J:'a ;r b:tr,L(::. state Ai Ct So ko. day phone Jlf-7f::,31 COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Date Apt:')}4,JQZD , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,'.~~---------------------------------_.# - r---------------------------~I -I I I I I F'"II I I I I I -I I I !"""I I I.-I I I.-I,I'-VI I~ I -.I April 15.1980 Ms.Trish Anderson SR 20685 Fairbanks.Alaska 99701 Dear Trish: I went through ~slfdesffrst thing this morning and I found 21 of them that I think may help you with your student display.I think the slfdes are sel f explanatory.If you get stuck on what one 15.feel free to give me I call. I am interested to know more about the display you are putting together. I will be doing displays too and mey find some of your ideas useful.Do you mind sharing? Sincerely. Nancy Blunck Director.Public Participation Program Enclosures: as DOted address _ contact person day phone'_ ~ I -: I I I I I I I I I I IIndividualcitizensorcommunitygroupsandorganizationsareencouragedtosubmitwrittencomments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.__~,---_n \'S "S 0..t=8bu&<s.±--±n=C ~L ci.cz-S I ~. 1 J\\.LtJ (V£e(I ~¥_L_l~.L_L:>"""'-lI-"""'\----~~~~""""-~~--'----t--.~-leko ~~ ~--'"""'JL.+__:"'_"___~-><--L~,iL--______'t---'-'""""_'__-----"''''_'''_'__'_'''''''~+___---:-')'--'-ry~-..I ,I I ----:....,L.J".i.~~~--l..L.~~~..\.-.._._,__--"q-~~=~~~"'""""''''''''''-+_---___7'''-+..I---.::=:...1~fIoL_!~~~'::--t----'.~~~----r~~~:::::::_:::;~~~"""--.L---!..-!...:q_,._,:~~.L....::::.-----".baS!It,I d-~~.'I '.' I I I I I I I I _. '$ I I~ I J II ~ I I I I I day ~hone N 5~'{ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: /f /l;,:'..l' r-------------------------------~---,•.~...~..;:/~7 • I COMMENTS,aU_ST.ONS •REf",F-OO~-BO . I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Stud" I The c~nts on this form are submitted by:Date L)-.I '-1-ceo I _V_A"'nn II.rndivld~ai.Citizen .:..__An Organization ii name ~rt~h ~~vr'S~-t'\name _I address S&2-Dl99-.S #of members,_ I city -E~\tJ,L..f.Cx,O---_----- I state J.A--'r-·,J-\(.ziP~1 city _ I I I I I I I I I,\b-t// {~'VI (VI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,. ~-----------------------------------_# October 8,1980 Mr.Karl Han ingers lnst.Mlrfne Sci.,U of A Fafrbanks I Alaska 99708 Dear Mr.He fi1 ngers : The attached comments on alternatives to Susftna hydroelectric development, that you submitted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTION SYSTEM have been forwarded to Fran Ulmer,chairperson of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Policy Review CoIIIBittee.This C0IlIQ1ttee win be provid1ng policy direction to the Sus1tna alternatives study that Battelle Northwest Laboratories is conducting. As you -.v know,the 1980 legislature decfded that the alternatives study for Sus1tna should be completed in such a way that there would be no 1uastion of its obJecttv1$b Therefore,the legislature directed ifi&an iiiafijiinGiit-nrm be selected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battene wes chosen)and that Acres AmerfeaR.Inc.continue its work on studying the feastbl1 tty of Sus1tna. Tb.Office of the Governor 1s managing the feasibility study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority 15 managing the feas1bility study of Susitna. The results of both studies will help determine whether or not the State should develop 'liQroelect,.fc power on the Sus1tRa River aad/or pursue othel"energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska will make a decision by April 1982 whether to fne I liceRse appl1cation for Susfw f\ydroelectr1c. Battelle is directed to COI'IPlete their alternatives study well in advuce of this date to permit an informed decision. Since Acres win not conduct the alternatives study.we directed theIII not to respond to 10""ACTION request.It did not make IIICh sense to us to bave them respond to your eonaertts.if they were not going to be conducting tbestudy.We thought it bette,.to hold YO""ACTION request untn the new consultant was selected. In July a request for proposals was sent outseek1ng consult1ng services to coaduct an alternatives study and prepare an energy plan for the electrical needs of the ,.allhalt.The energy plan will include an evaluation of alternatives,_rg1ng technologies.COftservat1on.and load ....gement.The plan will review.and where necessary.improve the existing data base and deMnd forecast.It win exuatne the altemat1ve types of electric generation and help detena1ne whethe,.0"not the state should concentrate fts efforts on development of the hydroelect,.1c potential of the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other alternatives. In September,Battene Pacific Northwest laboratories (with Ebasco Service and the Institute of Sotial and ECODOII1c Research)wu selected to conduct the alternatives study.Thefr contract with the Office of the GoYernor bnow signed.Battelle is preparing a work pla"which is expected to be finished by the end of October.Battelle aat1cfpates beginning work In Novflllber. Hr.Karl Haflfngers Page 2 OCtober 8 ~19ao In the meantime.further questions and COII1Ients concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to ~I.n Ulmer or Tom Singer..Both can be reached at the telephone ~and and address listed below.we suggest that all correspOndence to Ms. Ulmer be ..ned."Attention:Tom Singer.It Division of Pol1cy Development and Planning.Pouch AD.Juneau.Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-35n.. You I8IlY also wish to contact members of the RAl1belt Energy Altemat1ves Po11cy Review COIJDfttee.They are: Ms.ClaMssa Quinlan.Director Division of Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway.Chaf ....n A1 uka Power Author1 ty Board of 01 rectors 2702 Gambell Street.Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska.99503 Mr.Ron lebr.Director D1'11s1onof Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau.A1asta 99811 If you have further questions or CGIIIIenu about the Susftna feasibility studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Public Participation Office of the Alaska Power Author1ty,333 West 4th Avenue.SUite 31 It Anc:hoNg&.Alaska 99501.(907)276-0001. Sincerely. ftane)'81 unck D1recter Public Participation Office AttadMnt NB:aagh - use extra sheets if you need them Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing,You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: IlABI I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,_---------------.\------------F-003-80 ~ •I ~I COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS'I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date'________I I ~An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name f;!2'1/{4/"j,(.'}:~'~;,:c;name I I'rei f-l ;V71'.'/f'$.(,,"IJ f':'Ir--I address /;f),,-J''/'(/,h'",".:.,t/·1/'.....It.#ofmembers,______________I 1"..'·,11 1'1"'.,.,I city --"l.Lt-'-'·://-"-k~'/.L...;._"_I_),.:....)"'-'"------------address ---------------I ..~'"I state/dL /1::;;;;';?zip t(y""JdC city I I )ly-?t,!3/IIdayphone---'-----'-------------contact pe[son day phone_____I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.8e as brief and specific as possible._ I I- I 1'----;(-------..--------:-------.--,../_-_,------------=..,,::::·~=iW'l!~.,..I If /.,I ''!,..j"I /L 'jii'.s:v'...pl I ,',,/,<1,//;//'I{'"i/!,}If /.:,\I I ./.~{/~.:'.~/(,~~..~./Ji;v::'l':'lt_C/l.~.',t~.'.~f,"'·A-_;l'i,:;'ffd ..-;,"'4 j"I'1 'fi IfjsL"lke &I,,?£/:~;'t,;>l'\1 I r 1//.'V/'",,~l //,.;",'"'.,;if:IJ//J cf'll"/l/'/..t·/,t>-"-$'?I"I-';_'~'I ~!-:,I m dt It:1 q/,~/tV .f,'4//""'17"[',A:1 ,<,)III ."V .I -k ,-',/(/IIZt'/',I .J /;';v, ,MI',f II I '",.....,._.',.:...~~.j'.•...,•.."•.;!'.,,1--....(),>'d''1~I:rZ I1j/J ///(1(I/l J.j.)i /f!(!(/'/"//IV ~I .''.'.I~",/,;..,..•.f.;.,lr.'c...''I..'.','""",.1'.i..../..:",,'".f('..""..'t I)!!1:.P ,.'c~·'t!.lJ(ku ~r 1'1/{/1 "iJ tHe){.',t'.e..~~~('~I~••. ./1..''/.',,0'./....:I",•.'..7.1 1',..',F~/'".,/,','J,;,/)':C~/',>,.il.'('I./1,1'7"!~t·{·A '"iJ /~'l'"..~'i 71,- I L-:"v 0 /f..~_Ii./.,",(,,>(,{//,j(".'.,~.,l/''-/"1f,.k'.',~C'_//[(,p;-.-,v,,,I(:-~C.(...-;~-I,lL ~~T f e"""'",I J I jA/(;;"~<i/(F.//-///'o/,JJV'1 I &,/~i<';'i·"(/'f1'!.1;<'"i////-/!/f;j f',';(,f,f::{--i<.>j v-~I I /~I _________,-----'~'iiI!!!!:~...I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,, ~----------------------------------_.# October 31.1980 ACTION File Humber:f-004-80 Hr.Mike Keny 1433 Dogwood Fairbanks.Alaska 99701 Dear Mr.Kelly: You submitted to our office two COIIIDents regarding the Susftna hydroelectric feasfbility studies.Your COIIneftts were. -Don't study it to death.but do perf01'11 all the reasonable investigations required for a prudent decision.Your plan looks good. -Maybe we should lillit the UJOunt of power one entity could tate,-such as an alum1nuR1 plant. We appreciate having your COIIIIents on the SUsftna hydroelectric project.Your COIIIleIlU and all other COIEeI'Its and questfODS we receive will be included in a report that will be sent to the Alaska Power Authority's board of directors and the Governor before a decision is made 011 the feasibility of the Susftna hydroelectric project. Enclosed fs an ACTIon fona Wafch yOU may use if you have further c--.ts,questions.or need additional tnforwatfon.We have bad a few problems implementing the ACTION SYSTEM.However.SOllIe of the c1raastances that held up the process have been corrected and we believe your next eo.eat or question will be hudled IlOre quickly.Please keep in .fad.however. that because a ftUIIIber of people will review.and in SOlIe cases.CC1_ent em each 1te11 submitted in the ACTION SYSTEM,it will tate at least sfx weeks to process your request. Sincerely, Nucy Blunck Director of Public Participation N8:mgb Enclosure ec:Acres AMr1can.Inc. F-004-80 Date submitted:4/14/80 Mike Kelly 1433 Dogwood Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 (1)Don't study it to death,but do perform all the reasonable investigations required for a prudent decision.Your plan looks good. Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 F-004-80 use extra sheets if you need them Date contact person day phone _ #of members._ address _ city _ name _ __An Organization state Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number e ch comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible.__---;;-_ /"""'~<:t ,."."1-\,'1 The comments on this form are submitted by: v-;.:n Individual Citizen name --LI-ML-Li--=-t_c.---tt~,'4~/2-j/l~--- :~:re_ss__-"-----'F:~:c,,:=:;::.---".-h:.",:~=.f:l~":;I-.--J::I£...",,-~:o:o:_rlt!J_-'==== ---1A=-~1£.""-:'ZiP day phone --:.1-+-.'...J.iI-·"'-&;b",-·--'-'<1L2.f1-i-3.....'-~"'-·--- COMMENTS,QU_STIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study tt -ILI-,¥o i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~~~~~Il!l!::--.f'---~~=---"---!;~~~~~~------JJ,.L-/--'~"----J~~~"'j~~J 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, ~-----------------------------------_# #---------------------------~.•I I I ~I I I r-I I I -I I I I I r-I I I --I I\l.0S I,I I I I ~ I I I~~c/-------------- !""'"I I I I I I I I I --I I I -\ -- (6L10 I"Aal:l)'<1'IOO-ZD ACTIOI FILE Nultber:F-OOS-OO HI-..r.weingartnersa10080 fairbanks.Alaska 99101 Dear t4r ..Weingartner: You submitted to our office a COIIIIeIlt and two questions regarding tile Sus1tM hydroelectric fea~1bn1ty studies.One qQe$ticm ..1eh related directb to the al1:eJ'iat1ves study was forwarded to the Govemorts office as explained i.II,Y let1;er of oc~8.1900.Your COBent and other question are 11sted belqw.followed directly by a response fraa the Alaska Powr Authority s~ff. 'M M!!iqa: Who .kes tbe ftnal decis100 and wtIO pays 101'"it? ~sJ!!!!!preal"ed bel lob8rt Holm,Director of Eg,1neer1nS: The decision OR SUsttAa deYelo~t is ae:tually a series of decisions lllde ovet a period of years by sevenl different _tittes.In early 1981.the Alaska Power Authority "'11 nea.naAd to the 6oYemor and legislature tbat the studies be continued.redirected,or halted.n.Power Authority w111 ttIetI receive its d1rect1@R tbrouga tbe state govemmentts appropn.t1on process..}n ..td-l982.the Power Autiorit.Y.after a set ofpubUc meetings.will dedde wbetber or not to subl1tto the federal EiJergy Regu14tory co.1S$loa (FERC)aD a"licaUoa for a license 'to coas~t the project..If suIlIa1 tted aDd found acceptable for processing.the FERC would OYer'the next tt.Jo or tbne years prepare a drtft eel tIleD a ffaal en¥1l'OMeAtal impact statelleDt.After review_aDd c..-t by all taterested parties. FERC -.ld e1ttJe1"grant ir not ....t the ltcease.If tile license ts gruted.the ,..,.~ty.the Governor.aad the legislature will.fa coac:ert.dectde1.•ttter or aot to beg1.coastnlcttOll..~o8:J The studies are pa1oN'fuabJ9-.ppropriations fnID tile legislature. The a~r1ations are ftoll the general operatiag blMlget..It bas not beeR detera1Redca3 t1!1$tiM who will pay for COD$tnlCt1on if tile dects1.is to deYeltp a hydroelectr1c project on tbe Sus1tM Rt ....Task 11 of ~s~es will exaa1ne .r1ows opttGflS..01 {6ilo {"MIl:!lb'I OO-G'O November 26,1900 Mr.Tom Weingartner Your C01IIDIIlt:. flaD of study broad enoujtl,but 1 could not assess PUff because of lACk of detail,which,.I realize wa$difficult to iO wtn time allotted. Resele 1I"0Il Jon 8uchanan.Public P~rt1cfp!t1on O,fr1ce st!lf: Your c~t.as wen as an other c......U aM questions received by our office.will be 1flClttded tn a report that will be sent to the Alaska Powttr Author1\y'S board of directors and the Governor before a decision fs ••Oft the feas1b1Hty of the SusttRa hydroelectric fWOject. IMl..fl••u ACTION fon.which 10U may use 1f you have further c...U.q.stions.or need tddittonal htfonuatiOft.We have had a few probltlllS tllPl_t1q the ACT {OK SYSTEM.Howeve......of the c1rQIIStanees that held up the procets .ave.,been corrected and ..believe your MXt ee-nt or question w111 be hbdlec1 D»re quickly.Please keep in IItnd,hOwever. that beCause.fWIIber of people will rev1_,ud in some cues,aAllnt on each itell sutettteel ill tile ACTION SYSTEM.it wt11 take at leese six weeks to PNCeSS your request.. Sincerely. Naaq Blunck Director of Public Participation D:IIg_ Eftclosure <:c:Acres Aller1ca.Inc. :ON 3NOHd3l31 :ON 3113 - :31VO :01 V\lnONVtlOll\J3V\1 'f 'J r' .-"t.F-005-80 _, (Ir:COMMENTS,QUESTIONS til REQUESTS I :Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date I r-I V'An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name ~vv,Wc,;.I ~c--,\4f'C 0;0""name I ~I add ress S ((,10 (7 q'"'"#of members I I city T"A-((c..~.cfi 1'.)Ie ::address I I state .t,I.<:zip q'i '7(),city I II day phone '-t 11 -'1 C'(-:3 /contact person day phone I I I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ {'r;::I,',f):(i)f i "~'t s ~,L~-~r °"l"&'~:)I1CC"~,I ':-t--rl_~LClJ l &\-1.t"T c-.....$e t.::.'I \1,,1 I tid eC'(c......--....c &t o..t::~,0 eJ.,V'o"';'i l-<.)'c T (""c<"l \,':J.-<..~«-$I I I"t:I ..u.4 """-",,"J<!bIflll;wm,,'I1"':',-(0 ',',',d t"[I.-{',tt <Ii .....I:;)"....l.+~\cr-t (....~\~,.e.J..eA'-"-'-~G ,,·c ,~S I F~I..u..Dt/r!~'l\jJto)c",'J d<.'J<("c,,-ll G ..Q 0<:)~,Ali ·:(~)S;I"~,6,\it',j ~~'II",.s,,~,~~tl.-,,'o".~\~·dc::...~~=":u...Q<2....e.'~I 'I ,s:;~.c,;:;c ~fL".''"".\CLc""a.n (I...\:3..e.s ,2"~I I ".j \J ~~I l?'1li I ~4.L"~"C1 rleL\S'CI'\-~~k P9 <~,.:T?i I I !"'"I I I I I I ,.-,I I I I I I r I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,.I ~----------------------------------_.# I..... """I ~\ 18:11911 ERclosure August 20 t 1980 N&Acy 81uoc:t Director Public:Part1cfpa:t1oa Office Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESn Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study F-006-80 use extra sheets if you need them Date,_ contact person day phone _ name address _ #of members._ __An Organization state day phone _ The comments on this form are submitted by: VAn Individual Citizen name .~ny S (.-o-4:t-fJe t!l.rce,. address _~H..:...=O...::L::...:D~_ city __L----=-.o_LLz-=----]jr-::-e._ ---'A:........L-.L..-IL_.ziP 41'70 I city _ " I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~~----------------------------------_# ~--------------------------~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I!~_.~--E----~~_:ya_'",_~_-~_._,-c__0e_~_~------L./?_.z_t5:_rC<__d__/,;l_~_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BECEIVEQ JUN 3 )1980 1 .i··C·~-L- ;/ I:~0-ccl Ai&- 7tk I!Ol/.y~0;:c~of .~+Jh-~~<~JpjLi .~;:... '.-poi- -/ '" A9 ..... - ..... I F' I A letter was sent on June 4,1980 to named person in file~~~~: 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 June 4,1980 To: Dear This is a short note to let you know we have received your comments and questions on the Susitna hydroelectric feasibility studies. Because of the high interest in the studies and over 100 requests we have had for information since the April meetings,we have not been able to respond to your request as quickly as we would like.We do want you to know,however,that staff members within the Alaska Power Authority and Acres are presently reviewing your comments.You will receive a written response soon. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director Public Participation Program 11SJd ,>ft~(L yL.)IJ!Jl ~n2 cd--e>u':l-.J~~~j,)ijL,j5o-W'-(?1cUJ~<:t lHU)~,~tJ, ,i.,i-rk --c'C ~~*w<"7 c~;,~~a,.l ~-,-")'J;...L",,-, 'I ,~0-(;.;t '- i., - - ~, OCtober 27,1980 Mr.R.F.&arlson P..O.Box 80234 College.Alaska 99703 Dear Mr.carlson: You subln1tted to our office SOlIe cOIIlIents regarding the Susttna hydroelectrfc feas1bnf~studies.One COIlI1I88t which related directly to the alternatives study .s forwarded to the Governor's offfee as ex- plained to you 1ft my letter of OCtober 8~1980..Your other .COD8Ients are listed below.followed by responses fn8 staff of the Alaska Power Authority. Your counent: This project will end up be1ng subsidized by general revenue funds. Resl!!nse from Robert MoM,Director of Eng1neer1!!S: It bas been the position of the Alaska Power Authority that direct state funding of the Sus1 tna hydroelectric project fs 1nadvfsable.since the state would be better of1 to conserve its f1MIlC1al resources by ilQPOrt1ng 1nvestMftt capital.This would be done through the sale of project revenue bonds on national IIIrkets.The funds that would lieve been spent on Sus1tna could then be used for other purposes.At the s_ t1.,it is apparent that state policy is dletat'ng IIIIXtlUll in-state 1fWestment of surplus reveaues.If the decision is made to invest In Alaskan projects that offer a flnuc:1al return on that 1nvestment.then it would seem that direct equity tnvest- _t by the state in the Sus1tna project would becoMe a logical priority. To s.-arize,fn a period of surplus revenues direct state funding of Svsttna 1111 flake sense.while such a plan would generally not be advisable fa a IDOJ"e 80.,..'period of cap1tal shortage. Your eOllllent: Single.central.large power sources,controlled by gover....t is an idea whose ti_ts put. ResJ!OI!!e frail Jean Buchanan,Public Part1c1p!tfon Office: Please see the enclosed information sheet on the Fairbanks to AnchO'rage trUSlliss10n 1ntertl..The section titled --rhe Questt.of Ceatral1z.t1oft·~contains a d1scusstOft 01 the tssae of C88ti'"al1zed vs.decentral1zed energy generatfon. Page 2 October 2.7 t 1980 R.F..cartton Your COIIlIeft~: This project win be inflationary. It will not be efficient. This is •boorner project.It 15 proIII)ted by the government buNaucrats,real estate agents.overpaid ut111~managers-- all with a narrow-Minded,.short tenD interest.If we really need the project it will look even better in ten years. One good thing is that the Corps is not promoting it. Respo~e f ....Jean Buchanan,Public Participation Offie-: We appreciate your letting us know how you feel about the project. Your COIIIIeftts,as .n as all other CORItents and questions our offtce receives t will be included in a report that wf11 be sent to the Alaska Power Authority board of directors and the office of the Goyernor before a decision fs made on the 'easfbni~of the Sus1 tna hydroelectrf c project. Enclosed 15 an ACTION form which you may use if YOU have further e~ts.questions.or need addftional fnfonaatfon.We have had I ,. problems 1q>1l1'18ntfng the ACTION SYSTEM.Howver.some of the c11"'ClBStances that held up the process hive been COM"eCted and we believe your next COIIRnt or question will be handled IAON quickly..Please keep 1ft mind.however, that because a n......of people will review.and in SOlIe caseS.COIIftent on each item subta1ttad in the ACTION SYSTEM ..it will take at least six weeks to process your request. Sincerely. Nancy 81 unct 01nactor of Public Participation NB:agh Enclosures (2) cc:Acres American.Inc. -- - - - .... '""'" October a.1980 R.F.Carlson Box 80234 COllege.Alaska 99108 Dear M caro'son: The attached COII8eftt on alternatives to Susitna hydroelectric:development, that you submitted to the Alasb Power Authof'1ty through the ACTION SYSTEM has been fOl'Wrded to Fran Ulmer.chairperson of the Ral1belt £nert,Y A1temat1ves Po11cy Review Committee.This COIIftittee will be providing pol1cy direction to the Sus1tna alternatives study that Battelle Northwest Laboratories ts conducting.. As you .y know,the 1980 legislature decided that the alternatives study for Sus1tM should be COIIPleted in such a way that there would be no guest10n of its ob~eet1vf~Therefore.the legislature directed tiat an fnae~t'""'flrm Iii selected to conduct the alternatives study itself (Battelle was chosen)and that Acres Mer1can,Inc.continue its work Oft studYing the feasibility of Susitna. The Offfct of the Governorts managing the feasibnity study of alternatives. The Alaska Power Authority is .naging the feasibility study of Sus1tna. The results of both studies will help detendne whether or not the Sute should develop li'cTioelKtr1c power'on the Sus1tna River and/or pursue other energy alternatfves.Since the State of Alaska will IIIIke a decision by April 1982 whether to f11e a lfcense appHcation for Susitna hydroelectric. Battelle is directed to complete their alternatives study well in advance of this date to permit an informed dectsfon. Since Acres win not conduct the alternatives study.we directed them not to respond to yocw ACTION request..It did not .ke IltUch sense to us to have tbe8 respond to your COIIlleRt,if they were ROt going to be conducting the study.we thought it better to hold your ACTION request until the new consul taRt was sel ecte4• In July a request for proposals _s sent out seeking consulting services to conduct an alternatives study and J)Npare.tae1"9Y plan for the electrical needs of the ral1belt.The energy plaD will include an evaluation of altemat1ves.emerging technologies.conservation.and load .anlgelllmt.The plan will review.and where necessary.111Prove the existing data bese and deand forecast.It win ...1ne the alternatfve types of electr1c generation and help c:tetenl1ne whether'or not the state should coneentrattl 1ts.fforts on development of the hydroelectric potential of theSus1tRA River and/or pursue othef'.'ternatives. In Septerllber.Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories (with Ebasco Service and the Institute of Soci.,and Economic Research)was selected to conduct the alternatives study.Their contract with the Office of the Governor is now signed.Battelle 1s prepuofng •WOf"k pl.whieb is expected to be ffftisbed by tile end of October.Battelle anticipates beg1nntRg work 1ft Hov...... R.F.Carlson Page 2 OCtober 8,1980 In the meantime.fU1"ther questions and COIIIIents concerning the alternatives study (or response to your ACTION request)should be directed to Fran Ulmer or Tom Singer.Both can be reached at the telephone nuni>er and and address 1fsted below..We suggest tbat all correspondence to Ms. Ulmer be marked,-Attention:Tom Singer."l)iv1s1on of Policy DeveloPMllt and Plannfng,Pouch AD.Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3577 .. You -1 also wish to contact ltellt>ers of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatiyes Pol icy Review CoDftfttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan,Director D1riston of Energy and Power Oevetopment 338 DeMl f Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Charles Conway,Chatrman Alaska Power Authority Board of Dfrectors 2702 Gambell Street,Suite 200 Anchorage.Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron lehr.Director Division of Budget and Management Pouch AM Juneau.Alaska 99811 If you have further questions or ca.ents about theSusttna f.sfb111ty studies (other than the alternatives study)continue to direct those to the Publ fc Participation Office of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,SUite 31.Anchorage.Alaska 99501,(907)276-0001. Sincerely. Hanq 81 uncle: Director Public Pa~ticfpatton Office - J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I If F-007-80 ".,...,....,9 ~.a,;f :Y Date'_ _day phone city _ address _ #of members._ name contact person __An Organization ','\,'"'"':;1I-.....~Y 'i ,~ ,, ~...-L'.----::l-<i;:.e I ; \ V)( ." t't \).('.,,\1.-')J , \ ,Ii L,0 -t ~,\. i;i \Q :~.,'v,,--e t::(0 J.j ,e>-~~--\~_·v ..._:-.~ L. 4. rr I ',,>.'",_\ Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. .""\I I _l (I •::':',;\~~\,VI "'\u-"I )I <Ie 'J i~(Q 0 ~i!,r 'S (J v_r (C.~"C (;It\-;'t 0,e « state day phone ~_ city _-"''",'''-.,.-''''~.,'__''\__'i,...::.!i_'__,,:_',:>.t------------- The comments on this form are submitted by: ~An Individual Citizen Q r o ,C ' name _--'.\\....L!:..--..:.\-_.=--'--,=,,-c';"';(\~--~:_',,--I'''''~'>_'''--;.!...-i..L\_ COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ...... ~--------------------------_.( I I I ;-I I I,-I I F'I I I I I I I I.If~1 r \I I I w'Vl:\,I I I I I I ~y,: I : I I I I I ~t--.s •o~·f (}""",j -Hi i ~'"p '"f'.,.,+t\(,C (,::-t':,f'<.VLt1'y?~"'o ~,-,,~J f"'0J ;7,I -.)use extra sheets if you need them II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may makeI;1iC0mm.o"00 thl,lo,m .od I·..·Z~~:";::;~~~~rity I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,, ~~-----------------------------------' !"""" I '- (6L!Ot'M~hfIOO-ZC 0eceBber 2.1900 ACTION fILE H1.tIIber:F-ooa..OO Mr.Tony Gasbarro Sr 20249 fairbaftu.Alaska 99701 Dear Hr.Gasbarro: You sutll1tted to our office brio eClrllJlents regarding the SusUa bydroelectric:feasibni",studies.Your COIIri1eQts are M"itten below. foll'*1d by responses from Ac,.-es American.Inc.,the finD conduct1Dg the studies.and by the Alaska PCMef'Authority. Your COIS3ent,: It $eeIIIS that the plM Of study lacks a section that wutd dtscvss the proposed b,ydroelectric project and its alternatives 1.relatton to the ~4ft4 quality of Ufe goals of the differeat ranbeIt COIIIUftities or.for that matter.the loog tent development goals of tne')tate.The estimated impacts of the proJect{s)should ~be put 1ft perspect1 ••with what diffenmt fntenlst group~and CQIIGWlities want to see bappem in the ratlbelt. ResP!M!.2"!P!red bl Kevin 'f'OUJls.A¢res _MeH,Inc..:; UDder subtask 7.05.socioecoaoraic analysis profiles will be developed for {l}attitudes towards ,.11festyle and quality of Hfe (2)and attitudes towards growth. These profiles will be ~Mloped fJ'Oli infonuaUon and studies tbat are already aVllnable of"the Ral1belt aDd upper Sus1tna areas and frail iaput prov14ed throwh the public participation process. Potential changes 1.tbqe profiles that could occur as a result of COUtructtOll and opeRtiqa of &Susftna hydroelectric project win be qualitatively aaalyze4 and d1SQiSsed. !i=~q Bl~.Director of Public:Part1c11?!tfOD t --.!.L ~s .V\lOtl:l In 1981 Aft additioMliJ~~lJ!111 be ..to assess the tllpacts of constnletion and'tIie ~$Jtaa projec:.t OR the current lifestyles of peopl...11ft iftO~l,1~1ate ¥1cia1ty of the proposed ..sites. This stud.v will be caord1nated with the studies cuf'TeRtly in precess 011 the fdentiflcat:~~aa4ualysts of socioeconomic CORd1t1ons taeIl~1oned abo..b)'Mr.Touat.. V\lnONVl::IOV\l3V\1 (6LIOI"Aat:l hflOO-ZO Page Z December 2 It 1900 Mr.Tony Gasbarro Your COIIIIeRt: Tbaak yOU for the effortS you _de to 1nfont tile public about the plan of study. ResPQ!!S!froe Hanel 81tmdt: We appre<;jate the tbanks"for our efforts.Your ..bas beeR Added to our 111111ng l1st to rece've newsletters.such as tile one eaclosed lJ wbtell will periodically report Oft the progNSS of the studtes. we also ....t to let you k&OW of _t1ags sdleduled to be held fn Fairbanks.The day.aDd tt.are teatat1Ye. Marcia 2.1:30 p.m.:Workshop on rGId access aad recreat10a poteaUaI. May 4.1:30 p.III.:~bl1c aettag liv1.uPdate OR Susttfta studies. All ceo tats,quest1cms ..aad .,....ts for 1..,.,.t1......tved b,our office are reviewed by the Al'ska Powr Autllortty staff and Acres ANriCift. lAC ••and win be 1acluded 1ft,.report tMt will be ,t..totbe Ala.. ,...Authority board of d1t"e4t0rs and the 6ovemor before •4eets.ims is IIlde on Sus1tn&. Enclosed is u ACTION for.wich you.,...f .YOII ha.further c_ts,questions,or AeecI tddtt10ft11 inf..-tioa.We ....had a few probl81S 1mpl..-t1ng the ACT!OH SYSTEM..........s-.of the ctra.:tRces that held up the process baveJ.a corrected aad •beltete ,.,...t C(lUlftt or question will be handled .....quickly.Please keep 1A llifJd.taowetrer. that because a .....rol peop\ew111 revl_.Md 1...cues.co_ellt on eacb item svbll1tted in U.ACtION SYSlBI.it wnl take at least stx weeks to process your requert. -. FOR THE DIRECTOR Of PURl IePARTICIPATIOtt~-'":T~3r8ns :ON 3NOl-kl3131 :ON 311.:J V\JnONVtlOV\J3V\J ~ --I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I F-008-80 use extra sheets if you need them {)ate,_~1C).:-...:-A+p:..:-t~d_'___=B::.:o=____ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITYcity _ name ------JR~E-\;CHE5__f_1I'v_I_eE_I:DJ------ address _ __An Organization .contact person day phone _day phone Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: The comments on this form are submitted by: L An Individual Citizen name To Vl '/C:r-u:s,b ~'(YC:l, address S Q dO;)'4 '; city Fo.l ,...bCd"!t:S I Aic.s (CC,- state zip 9C:i-o I co ::ct ~ee,W1s.+k+i-k~e let ~of stlA.6 y (ue:-h:tl.~t"'c..nt'o1 +~a:t wOk-lef dlSc..fNS<;+~c p~eO'iie~hvd\rl'>e/cc+~c.p)ooJec.:tc<';;Its u.-It-a\-lA--tvL"'.5 l~ yelCt.-h·tlr\t~+k q'vowth U-'v1,d ~t~c<{,fy of rtf!l0a-(s oft~(;J,ffO'"~Yl.f Y'c(.(l ~e(+c..£>\'l\mtJ\Il,ti/'.)Or 01.1i~t-h-lc..f+-e.I..-tit,16lt\tOUNi d€vdo l'!<teY\+' '1 Q c..ls of+k Sf-u+e.~~~~t:t-s o{+le.pt1'~ec.$)S~iJL<{J ~O'vl1e..t,.()W to e.p IA.-T IVI Ptot S f <c..h II£.Lv Itt,tv he...+d Iff t "te...,.:t-''''+0-<$+')YOl-L.ps &...d ~""u.Yl.t":e~we-.,t to ~krpev.\~4k.~t(beJ,{-> - _---------------------------G,, I I F"'I COMMENTS,aU_STIONS til REQUESTS I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I -11 1 I ..v tpt!'1 ~/1 1 1 I -I ~i,(~~®__""i"t~l_c.._~_k-.ly--=-o_=_=L...'_______'_f.:...:ot_t-1____=lI\=_€_e-'--'fF_~_·-JyL_O_'k=_\Iv\_C.J=_e._+_()_\"'_t-,--Ol_"",__tk-_,_ ~l~_--'f'~-=lv-=--:~l----=\'G=-----.:U-c..::.:6o:::...::.lA_:t_-+tc--:,,--Y,----l-=--u...'-'--------'1G:{t-~-=-w--'-ly'-'-,_ 116'-------------- I I I 1 I 1 1 11 Alaska Power Authority 1 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,, ~---------------------------------_.# ""'" ,,~ ".. I - - April 25.1980 Mr.Chad ChapmaD 2 T111berllftd Drive Fairbanks.A1aska 99701 Oar Mr.Cbaptan: You askeel 1M!to send )'011 the price of a copy of_the relief IIIP of the Sus1tDa studY area.A print qf the map would be $59.50. The Alaska Power Autbor1Q'owns the uegat1ve from ..ddt the map is pMnUd.we IIIOUld be glad 'to,Jta.a print made for you upoft receipt of a cbeck in the aIiOUIIt of $59.§O m.you._As,.recall fnID the -.ting tale IIilP is large aDd ..14 have to be sent in a t&Ibe.The cost 01 postage ud the cost of a·tube.1fOUld be in a4G1t1011 to the price ofthe.,. Please let vs blow if )'OU wisaus to baye •print_de.I realize the price is high.For tbat rea.,.1"'11 ~..1t further cCIIIUl1cat1on froM 10U before proceeding. RECEIVED, , I '7LEI4..i" i.jAY C ~1980 ALASKA POWER AUTHORllY FOR -rife DE C:;/l<.E:D 171/4 ;7~!lO/A..;BL/E 1<I T /Vcr ~,I!/L-y -;0fl IVK 7/-1 E prz {C e'(STOD /II (~'I'./;r "T/.(/P'Ie-I T j 5 0 B 'S C e}J~L V If I G-I-/., 11./C LvDED S OJ/f1 r=So /C.T OF '#;7/t P //Y/?/-///;/~ CF Y'ou K - - - CHilD CI-l4P/lll1ll -2 T Im8 e1<.LPr/0 r)D72 , Ie /4 I R BA /(J Ie 5 I A Ie 997ri1 ~ .':;;)/2/CS-/<eL >j d~ I'fIi'" - - -MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: ACTION FILE lUtber:f ..Olo-8O State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: Decelllber 15__1980 SUBJECT: Ms.Shirley M.Tm-s P.o.Box 6S Fort Yukon.Alaska 99740 Dear Ms.1boNs: You subBitted to our office SOlIe COBRlftts reganitAl the Sust tM hydroeleGtric project.Your ~nts _re: 1.Here's express1at cay opposttioa to tile Saas1tna ll,Ydr'oelectr'tc. prGjec.t. 2.I'd bate to see what would bappea to the Alaskan lifestyle if this ..were to be a-ul1t.More coas1deratt.needs to be given to tb1s plan... 3.This project -.ld .riag lION dtanges to Alaska thaD the pipe11Re projects.tfore people Md 111dustry --..can do without.Right DOW,~J don't see the need for the Susttaa dill.r 4.It $eetRS to ..tJlatth1s project is ~t biased. s.Don't bund the dill. we have noted your c:oac:etuS,_ida will be reYtewed by tbe Alaska Pewer Autbortt,y and Acres -fiCIn.Inc••the f1na COIlducttog the feas1bi11t1 studies.Tour COltWellts,alS989 with an other a_IAts .. receive.win be included in •nport tJaat wtn be sent to the Alaska Power AutbOrtt,y Board of D1~tors &ad tile Govemor'$office before a dec1lfoa is ...Sus1tna. We are 41so adding your ...to ••nfag list.so that you will receive ..-e 1.1o.-t1011 on tt)eproJect.to_Imtty _ttags are plUBed for Marcb 2ftci and May 4th 18 fat ..taaats DDt year....iopeyou w111 attend.Watehfor ..tice of ....the _t1ags "Ul be belet. £Aelosed is aa ACTIOI f.".which you 181 use if yeN have further e-ts.quest.iOD$.,or Deed tdd1t1onal 1nfo.,.tioa.fIIe.ve bad a few 02-001A(Rev.;l 0/79) MEMORANDUM Page Z Ms.Sb11"1e)'M.T"'s TO:DeceIlIJer 15.1980 State of Alaska DATE: FILE NO: S1 acerely11 laney 81UftCk Director of Public Participation NB:agIa £Bel .... ct:Ac:1"8$Aller1caa,Inc.. ..." 2.00;lA(Rev.l0t7 Qi ·' - - ..... Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 COMMENn,QU_STIONS til REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study F-010-80 __An Organization state day phone The comments on this form are submitted by: ~An Individual Citizen -1 ('/-,/.1..-..,.)1 \IF;":R 1:"C E J VEDname,j -ILL t(t'l J I,"*IL!-I tUL ..../name c_"_~=-=-. address ~{(i I l>rti/)(Ie f #of members,~_~)--l1.498~OI:f- city \,l.6A i Yi'l i..ti!.!-7 c..address Ii;'tl vhf:~z;p C;C;71<J city '----/L-~f(f!...)contact person day phone _ I I I I I I I I I I I I,. ~-----------------------------------_# I I I I I I ©J)",h '-/j,,,,I r(ft'---'-=iL=[----=.C'--=.:lt=ji./~I7-='-=_____.t,_I--------------I ~use extra sheets il you need them II V Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I I I I .-, "..., - I~ - - - OCtober 8.1980 IT.Roger Kate 1161 Hess Avenue College.Alaska 99701 Deer Mr.Kate: The attached COIIIleftt on alternatives to Susftna hydroelectric:develOf*811t. that you submftted to the Alaska Power Authority through the ACTIOIl SYSTEM has been forwarded to Fran Ul ...,cbatrperson of the Ral1belt Energy Alternatives Policy ReYlew eo.1ttee.This ee-1ttee .n11 be proYlding po11ey direction to the Susttna .'temat1ves study that Battelle Northwest LUorator1es 1s corutucttng. As you 1181 know.tile 1980 legislature clec:1ded that the altematfves study for Sus1tna should be COIBPleted 1n sudt •way that there \tOUld be no 9!'@tton of its o))Ject1,'t,.Therefore,the legislature direeted &t an fide~t"""ftna be selected to CORduct the alternatfY8Sstudy 1tself (Battelle was choseft)and that Acres Mer1ean.Inc.continue fts work on studying the feasibility of Susftu.. The Office of the Governor 1s _g1ag the feas1bf1itystudy of al ternatfves. The Alaska Powr Authority is Illlla9fftg the f.sibn tty study of Susfw. The results of both.studies will help deterltfae .ther or ROt tile State should develop 1iCfi=Oelectrtc:power on tile Sus1tM R1ver UlJ/or pars. other energy alternatives.Since the State of Alaska w111 _0 a decision by April 1982 whether'to ftl.a lfceDSe applicatf.for Sustma Jwdroalectric. Batten.1s directed to COIIP'ete their altemat1¥eS study well 18 advance of this date to pennft all fAf~dec1s10A.f Since Acres will not COftduct the altenat1ves study...dlrec:tecl tJ8 not to respond to your ACTIOI request.It did DOt .te IIUCh sease to us to lave them respond to )'OU1"COP ent.1f they were not going to be conduc:t1ag the study.We tbought it better to hold your ACTI......t until the new consultant .s selected... In duly.request for proposals .5 sent out seeking consult1ag services to COAduct an alternatives stucb'ancI prepare ..eaerv plao for the electrical Deeds of the ratlbelL The eteJVpl.win include _ evaluat101l of altematives .........1ng tedmologfes.COIISeI"ftt1oa.IIId load .......t.The pl.will revIew,IIId wIleN necessary.1111P"OY8 the exfsting data base &tid d8Iud forecast.It wtn ......tile .'temat1.. types of electric generation and help detenrlne whetller or not tile state should coaceatr&te its efforts Oft deYel ....t of the hydroelectric: potential .f the Susttaa River attdIor ,..,...otller altenlattves. In Septellber.Battene Pac:ific:Northwst laboratories (with £basco Service Mel tile Ift$t1tute of Social ad EconGIRfe Research)was selected to C08duct the al ....tlves stud,y.Their contract with the Office of the 60verMr is now st,,*,.Battelle 1s prepariRg ..work pl••tell 1. expected to be ffnftbed by tIM end of OCt*r.Battelle utfcipates begl.1at ..-t 1n 1Io¥eIIber. Mr.Roger Kate Page 2 October 8.1980 In the "',,_.ftwther questions and cc.ents coracemfng the alternatives stvd,y (or ...,...to your ACYl.request)should be dtNCted to Fran Ul or Tam Singer'.Both can be reached at the telephone ftUIIt1er and altd s listed below.We suggest that all correspondence to Ms. U1JDe1'be .rted."Attention:TOIl Singer.It Divis'on of Policy Development and Ptunfll9.Pouch AD.Juneau,Alaska 99811.Phone (907)465-3517. You lIllY also wish to ecmtact lllllbers.of the Ral1bslt Energy Alternatfves Policy Review CoaB1ttee.They are: Ms.Clarissa Quinlan.Director Division of EM."and Powm-DevelOpt1eRt 338 Deaal1 Street Ancbonge.A1U1ta 99501 Mr.Charl.CoftWa)'.CM1 ..n Alaska Power Authorttl BoaN of Directors 2702 &ubel1 Street,Suite 200 AncboNge.Alaska 99503 Mr.Ron lehr.DfNCtOr Division of Budget and Management PotIeh AM Juneau_Atub 99811 tf you hive ftartMr questions Of"COIIllents about the Susitna feasibility studtes (other than the .'tematfves study)continue to direct those to the MUc Panic1~tfon Office of the Al.ka Power Authority.333 West 4th A......Su1te 31.Aftchorage.Alaska 99501.(907)276-0001. S1Itcerel,. ,,, / Rancy Bll1Rck Director Public Participation Office AttaclDeftt "1:lI9h - - - - (6Llo I"Aal:\)\1 100-<:0 December 2 II 1900 ACTIOH fILE Number:F-Oll-80 Mr.Roger late 1161 Hess Avenue tollege.Alaska 99701 Dear Mr.Kate: You sublJl1tted to our offfce some amnents and questions regarding the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies.One c::.CIlIIient wb1cb related directly to the altematives study was forwarded to too governor's office as explained to you in ilaney Blunck's letter'of October 8,1980.Your other eoaoeAts and questitms .,-e Hsted below,followed directly by respoDSe$from Acres Amenean.1m:.II the firm coDduct1ng the studies.or tbeAluka POWI'"Authority. '(our gues~ion: ATe the demand forecasts realistic-and if so.BlUst we meet them in spite of the costs?. Re!P!D5e p1"epared by Jobfi l~,ProJ.ect Maui!r,Acres Amertcan,Inc.: forecasts have been developed by ISER (Institute of Social and Economic Research,University of Alaska)and it is readily acknowledged that l1au1t&tions of schedule ~resources severely influenced their work. Several critiques exist Qft this foreeast which will be the subjeet of an Acres report due in late,.l900.This report .ill seek.to bracket the range of likely forec:ast$so tbat-toe remainder of the Susitna studies can be undertaken.ODe objective of these studies will be to dave lop il future generation mix sceaar10 which will involve the least risk and cost to the consumer wbHe preserving enY1ro.-ntal t social t and legal values to the greatest ~teftt.. Tile purpose of any selected developmeot to 11 be to help meet future energy demands r.~r than creating an excess of energy which .igbt promoteL~ted industrialization.However.ISER.~Ol:L:l as part of their energy "lid.forecast bas im:luded aft esUmate of 1acreased enef'9YJl~lt)'industry.OUr socioeconomic: protr.wtll address tbeJIIpK'ts &Ssociated with this tRC1'Use. :ON 3ll::J A study independent of ACres'Sus1tna studies will have similar objectives but c~~much broader range of a1 tentatives..TheSi! studies will be coftducteq by ISER.but t.mder contract to Battelle. tile fil'll conducting the independent study.Battellels contract is B>tSBIV lO alBlS lI\J no NV80 lI\I3l1\J (6L!or M l:thfLOO-ZO Page 2 December 2,.1900 Mr.Roger Kate being managed by the Policy Review Cotuittee under the governor's office.fran Ulmer.Oirector of the Division of PoUcy Development and Planning,is chairwoman of the eotmIittee. The quest1onof plaM1ng capKity to meet forecasts is a matter of public policy as mandated on the power utilities by state and federal govenants. Your quesUon: More consideration needs to be 91ven to the impact of DeW industry attracted by the creation of excess energy on the Alaskan lifestyle. What is special about l1fe tn Alaska that would be lost by industrial- ization resulting from the product1oa of surplus energy? ResRO!!!,e e.rep!reO by Kevin Y!!f!9t Acres American,Inc.: The purpose of any selected development will be to help meet future energy demands rather than create an excess of energy whfd't aright promote Uft\1IfHted 1ndustr1altzat1on.However.ISER,as part of their energy demaad forecast,~included an estimate of increased energy demand by industry.Our socioeeonomtc:progr&lt win address the 1l1paCt associated with this increase. ~se P"!P!nld bz ria,Del Blunck,01~tor of P~l1c Partic1patio.n: The possible impacts upon Alaskan l1festyle wtl1 be the subject of a special socio-cultural S"t.Ud1 tet haS been added to the plan of study largely because of concerns raised by the public.This study Nill begi"some time in 1981 CUld will be coordinated with the studies cuJTentty un4erwa,y on tilt 1dent1f1cathm and analysis of soc:1oecono111c; coaditions and impacts. Your comeat: 'J .r . I 1eI1d like to express lI.Y opposition to the Susitna project. Re!f!.O!S!f..-Nansl BlunCk,0,1 restor of Public 'artiel2!t1on: We have noted youropinien that you are opposed to the project.We are mckfag the number of tiMeS this COllIDent Is expressed on the studies and this informa~1on is given to the Alaska Power Authority and Acres staff. - - V\I0l:J:l An CC81ents.quest.'iW.Oliid3 l-equests for Info...tiOl1 rece'ved by our office are revfewe4 by the Al~Power Authority staff and Acl"es Aaterican. Inc ••and win be 1ntl~'llt'a report that .111 be given to the Alaska Pow..Authority board of directors and the Governor before a decision ismadeOftSus1tna.:3.iVO ·O.i lI\InONVtlOll\l311\J ,,- f (6L10I'Aatj h:l r Page 3 December Zt 19aO Mr.Ragel'"tate Enclosed is aa ACTION form which you .y use if you have further C08II1ents t questions,or need 4d4ition.al 1nfonrratiOft.we have bad ..few problems tmplellfenting the ACTlON SYSTEM.HolifeYer,s-.e of the c1raamstances that held up the process have ,been correctedlfld ..believe your ReXt awlmnlt or question win be lt4Ddled more quickly.Please keep in .'nd.hoI!Iev.... that because afUllber of people willrev1ew,and tn SOlIe eases,COI'Il'leJlt on each item sutsitted in the ACtION SYSTEM,it will tate at lease six wets to process your request. Sincerely, Nucy Bluock Director of Pvbltc Part'cipation NB:mgb fm:losure cc:Acres AmeriQfl t Inc. :ON 3NOHd3l3.1 :ON 3ll:::l :0.1 II\J no NVtlOII\J3 11\1 · _., - j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F-Oll-80 name -----,-...".--_ #of members f./_1A_Y_r_J-,2,-_=19,-,-8"",0,-"_ address JJ...A_S_KA_PO=W'-'-'E...,R......A....I '+I1TH'ltO:7l<R'lTIT'lv-r contact person day phone _ city _ __An Organization ;tl --.!...:.!-.cz,I-~':.!.....:q'.:.-~~:..:;::~~=-=~4__~~kL::!~~f~:=....~~---.£.~-~__4\_\ ~---"-~",~;.---l~:::::-~1:8=~C-...----.f~~~::..:.........~~';2---...1t.~~-!:.::::=::::~~~~~~...0::.~~~-_f___L ~~. 'li" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ _,.""",...J"",:~;.f.Ji:~~';'..,~.. Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ The comments on this form are submitted by: L~"dual CIlI,.o name '0 6-1£/f...A1t '{IE- address 1/6 J dess /Iv€- oily C<,,01~ state I9-h(,f ?.....~ day phone 4-79-Z ?tJ-Z COMMENTS,QUIISTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Dat.30 /ljJSt RECEIVED ,~---------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~I Ii1MJ-1 I I I I ~.I'~JI I ([J ItiftY ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ li~\(V I /_-1.__~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---,- ~.......,rlf~)~"~~~~~~~~~~~~~I f!:J .'use extra sheets if you need them I,.cres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: :IJ!?--Alaska Power Authority ,333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I I~----------------------------------_.# ifJ'4"J'" 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 June 4,1980 Donald Vernam Box 81120 College,Alaska 99708 Dear Mr.Vernam, We1ve received your letter and I have put you on the mailing list to receive information about the Susitna hydroelectric feasibility studies. Enclosed is an Action form to use if you have specific questions or comments you wish to make regarding the 5usitna plan of study. 5i ncereJy,---e&/''-p L~:-'v;·~.d'-r'>U-h/~ Nancy Blunck Director Public Participation Program r'.:,:.::f'?~~~;;);::_':(t~'~'"1,i,:;:'i'<Jtill~-~(~tqll.f_-----------------------i----~F-072-80'" ({,;;,,,,,,",,",,,,,,,,,,,,.IICOMMENTS,QU_STIONS &RI!QUEITs'~"~"1 I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I :.-::/17/1 Q IIThecommentsonthisformaresubmittedby:Date ~-I I ,-"",'An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I n~me ,l?'-,'",,'If'l;>V£;2:,y'dT'?name REG EIVE 0 IIaddressB~)X J'II.)O #ofmembers injJv I "J -""'f'I I city Cr,Ll f f-f,ilK.address .........'-~)0~I I slate zip 99 Zok city ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY I I IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI "I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ 1M.t-1 r=pit'(";J e /)iCt (f t')'11 nUn)t'tv")yo t./t r /Yl CU l'A7!J I (..r+: /z,I 'J\),;1 Cf!!r1 J'-'f;'fIJe Ju f ,+r,c...poVJ,r l~rQJ e c:f.I .~·I I!l::~:~~rz~~i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I lAthes American,ln6:'lIlnd the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisformandleaveitatacommunitymeetingormailitto:I I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska'99501/(907)276-0001 I I I 'I ..•~----~-------------~---_._---------_# - / I I, 'f...." ;I - 333 WEST 4th AVENUE -SUITE 31 -ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 October 30,1980 Mr.John Hayden Acres American,Inc. 900 Liberty Bank Building Main at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear John: Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-2715 I am attaching two subjects that warrant investigation.They initially sur- faced as Action Requests via the Public Participation Program,but perhaps are more appropriately addressed in specific task studies.They are: Letter from ADF&G to yourself,May 14,1980 raising questions as to navig- ability of Alexander Creek subsequent to dam construction. -An article from the Spring,1980 (Volume 12,Number 1)issue of the "North- ern Engineer"titled "Potential Caribou-Ice Problems in the Watana Reser- voir",which poses several caribou impact questions. Please advise us as to your proposed actions regarding addressing these two subjects. FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Enclosures:Two as noted cc:J.Gill Sincerely, '\'J,'J) I i 1'.1 .'I '.,., ~)//./,1 ~..., II '//,-?/.."L ..c/(/!clr.'{.''.I/L.v·-_.\ David Wozniak I 'Project Manager - - - -. F-013-80 use exira sheets if you need them ----------------------~- contact person day phone________ __An Organization II I I I I I I I name ~p~~t -rV\~ii+LJ:+e.tlotA I I #of members I address _~R.Q~~liAL5~±i~hA~~.(:Ak I city r~"y bo-~Ks,-Ii k 1'1 70 f I,I I I I I I I I I I I R I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---.--------_. _~_zip _ .------- An Individual Citizen Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31 JAnchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 ---._-------_._------------------------------..-~-------._------------------_._------------------- _______._-_~-~----~eri ~I l!:'O Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged \0 submit written comments.Please number each comment,Question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: day phone _ state city address _~___ name The comments on this form are submitted by: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ~m, I I I I I I I I I I B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,. ~~----------------------------------_# THE NORTHERN ENGINEER applied sCIence &technology in the north RECEIVED, JUN091980 .....~....,-,POWER AUTHORITY SPRING 1980 VOLUME 12,NUMBER '1 A l'UIlUCfl.TION OF THE GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA by J.T.Hanscom and T.E.Osterkamp Potential Caribou Ice Problellls o 5 10 SCALE 15 in the Watana Reservo] 20 Miles Figure 1.Susitna hydroelectric site. -, r - INTRODUCTION Caribou frOIll the Nelchina herr!cross the Susllna River bianllually in the vicino ity of tlH~proposed Susitna Hydroelec- tric Project.It appears that the Walana Reservoir will be sited near m on three car ibou crossinU ,lfeas_Since past studies 1 of caribou behavior have shown thaI dis- turbance of their natural habitat by vari· ous construction projects (e.g.roads, pipelines etc.'can (lisrupt their normal behavior,It is importiJllt to tlY to deter- mine what effect the Susitna Hydroelec- tric Project will have on the Nelchina caribou herd.The purposes of this article are to show that the Watana Reservoir does have the potential to affect caribou migrations an~f to raise some qlH)stjon~_ thaI should he answered be fore the nature and extent of the effects that the presence of the reservoir may have on the caribou can be predic,ted. The Watana Reservoir on the Susitna River witl be 54 miles (90 krnl in length with the dam located about 134 miles {216 km)from the mouth of the river (Fig.1).Tht~reservoir will be cuntained The Northern Engir>eer,Vol.12.No.1 - - usitna Hydroelectric Project - .- WI th in J narrow canyon 1/3 to 1 mi Ie (0.5 to 1.6 km)wide for much of its length,except near the tributaries where it will be wider,particularly at Watana Creek and 10 a lesser extent at Jay and Kosin~l Creeks and the Osl1etna River.2 The re5er'/oir level is expected to vary 80 10 125 II {24.4 to 38.1 ml from Octo· ber to Apr iI 01 the hydrologic year which corresponds to the period of ice forma' tion ami growth in the reservoir.Maxi· I1lUIll daily variations should be less than 2 It (.61 m).Table 1 shows the minimum draw·down schedule for the pool,starting al It s max imum level 01 2185 It (666.4 m). ParIs 01 the Nelchina caribou herd, consisting of 15,000 animals,cross the Susitna River from the north to south in late April and early May to reach their calving grounds.Later in the summer Ilate July to early September),they reo cross the river going north,3 Although very Illtle work hJS been done on current migration routes,anti these may change periodically 01 may even be random,it is thought that the Watana Reservoir will affect three general crossing areas at Fog Creek,J,ly Cret'k,and the Oshelna River. Caribou have been observed in these areas <II the time of breakup,possibly waiting unlll the largest ice Iloes clear from the .4 I'k'Ivel betore cllJsslng.I IS /lot nown eXilclly how many caribou cross at these jloints. POTENTIAL PROBLEMS AND QUESTIONS Possibly the mo~t serious problem may be the presence of the reservoir:the caribou may not even attempt to cross it.We leave this important problem to The Northern Engineer,Vol.12,No., The two caribou photographs in this article are courtesy of Dr.David Klein. TABLE 1 Maximum Water Level -Minimum Draw-down Schedule ,HiJ'III,!II/Ii SIIir/Il/g /.I'r'I'/1:'lIdil/g !.('I'('/('}IIJltxe Oct.2185'2185'0 Nov.21 BS'21 B~i'{] Dec.2185'2175'·10' Jan.2175'2145'·30' Feb.2145'2130'·15' March 2130'2115'·15' April 2115'2105'·10' May 210S'2125'+20' June 2125'2170'+45' July 2170'2185'+15' Auy.2185'2185',0 Sept.2185'2185'0 5 Figure 2.Eklutna Lake showing ice shelving on a gel1tly sloping shore.(Photograph by C.Stephens.l Ihe lar~lesl draW-llown horn max irnurn pool. are ~lraphs of the slope north and south shores studenlS 01 cari!lo\l behavior and proceed 10 Jlol'~llli<l1 p/olJlems caused by tlw phy, lcal naltJle of the reSI~rVOlr. Wallll watel rell~ilsed from the 1(~Sel' VIW Will prevent a slabll~i(;e cover (l(lIn forll1in~1 on Ih{~river.This Ol,,~n W,ll(~l Ina'y'ex lend clownstl cam to T 'Jlkl.'"tn<l or fanhcr.depending on weather condi· tions,so that the Fog Creek crossin\J will be open water at all times of the year,This should not create a problem for the cari- bou since rhev normally swim the river. unless th(~y somehow depend 011 the ice cover for crossing at certain times. Winte:draw-down of the reservoir will produce ice-covE:!red shores or so·called iCE:!shelves.These ice shelves are formed when the floating reservoir ice cover be- 6 comes ql o\lIHle(t on tlw shm(~s ,\S Ihe I es· (~,voir I/~vel d(~cre;lS(~S durin\j thl~Wlllt(~,. An ,~x;/rnplc of Ice shelyin(]on ,I qently slupinlj shole <It Ekltrtna Lak(~.IWdl Anchor,HII',is shown ,1\Fi(llrrr~?Tlil~ 'II Ulllltll~t1 icc CDver may ,ISSllllle Ilw SaI1H~ Shil!}f!as lh,'shUll.'or it l]lay fractl"", creating deep cracks,or it may even re· 'l11ain suspended in some places.We su,,- "est that an ice-covered shore thaI is steep, contains cracks.or has the potential tor caving under the weight of caribou,may present ,1 se,ious ohstacle to their clossin!) the reservoir. The slope of the ice·covered shOles ill the df aw-down lone can be us"d to give an indication of the location of very steep areas that the caribou may have tlif· ficully lle(JO\iall'l(l.We h"ve I11C,lSllITti the slope of th,'north ,rnd sOllth shor,~s of the reservoir uSrntl ,I 1,63.360 seide !nap.The slope was nwasllrl~d helwl~erl the 2075 fl (532.9 rn)COI1\OIH lillC illHI the 2185 ft (666.4 111)cOl1tour line which COl rr:spol1ds to when starting Fi~lures 3 and 4 values along the of the reservoir, The north shore of Watana Reservoir will be 67.1 miles (108 km)in length and the sou th shore 51.5 miles (83 kml ,n lenqth.Jay Crcr:k area lies betwf~cn 38,8 -45.1 miles (62.5·72.5 km}on the north shorc and'8.6·28 miles (30·45 km}on the south shore,The Oshelna River is at The Nonhern Engineer.Vol.12,No.1 -, ,..'" - ------i ------J -~j --1---,-~l ---1 --=) -I.. Z Q § m '"~. ~ <Q -W '"Q. 0 Z --I Q (/)I n n /./\ i \ I '\I i,I \II.In I /,I ,.I N j\,./~\J \1 n, \I /I·\ /~\ NORTH SHORE II ~,Ii rd JAY CREEK Iii!Ii II/I I\i \.'!I II i OSHETNA fliVER I\",II .1\~v\1_J \JV\r in .!IWVIv{''vJ VJ ..IcV ~;IJ I \ll ~\ ~ DISTANCE (km) Figure 3.%slope vs.distance along the north shore.The two crossing areas of Jay Creek and Oshetna River are marked on the graphs both where they flow into the proposed reservoir and on the opposite shore.It should be noted that the scale map from which these slopes were taken would not show features such as a small gully which could enable caribou to negotiate easily an area that the graphs indicate would be difficult~ Figure 4.%slope vs.distance along south shore of Watana Reservoir. SOUTH SHORE 110 E-I I '-1 100 90 t:-II JAYCREEK 80 70 ~60 ~lJJJy\~~iI OSHETNA RIVER g 50 !n(\(/)40 i )IJ \ 30 o \}\J\J20 10 a I a 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 DISTANCE (km) ·~.,.~_....l ..-....~.•. .,..,.•",.,.,"..n~•.·._~, 65 .67.1 miles (104.5 '108 km)on the north shore and 47.8 .51.6 miles (77 .83 kill)on the sOlflh shore.It appears that the two areas have little in common and must be considered separately as caribou crossings. Realistic assessment of the effects of ice shelving requires consideration at hath caribou behavior and ice conditions.With regard to the ice conditions,the greatest need is for :I realistic model of the fonna· tlOn,(Jlowtll and decay of the reservoir ice cover.Some questions that shouLd be add,essed are:Wha t are the shore 'conditions or slope values that may cause the selllin(J ice cover to break,leaving cracks in which caribou could be injur.ed or possibly trapped?What is the Timing o~ this settling,cracking and snow cover de· velopment that might masK the cracks? The thickness of the settling ice cover will increase through the winter but what will the thickness distribution be?Will the wind keep the ice clear of snow?What are the max imum slOpes of clear ice and snow·covered ice thilt caribou can nego~i· ilte?How long will the ice shelves rema.in after hrf'Jkufl,and will caribou be forced to negotiate melting (wet)ice shelves? During the spring caribou mi~jration, the reservoir may still be frozen in the Jay Creek area,where the caribou will be coming from the nonh clown a slope that varies from 109%to 21.5%with much of the shore IJetween 40·60%slope.Prob· ably the onlv problems The caribou woulel have getting clown this shore would he falling into cracks formed as the ice sheet settles or breaking through the areas where the ice has bridged gilpS.The south bank has a slope that varies from 109%ro 9.0°/", with much of the shore between 30 .GO'J{, slope,so it is possible the caribou would have trouble climbing out on the south side. The breilkup oates of Jay and Kosinil Creeks would also he importan 1.I f these two creeks lJreak up before the cilribou try to cross,there could be water flowin~l on top of the reservoir'ice,and melted areilS formed at the mouths of the creeks. An overflow,b'l itsl'lf,would prohably cause no problems unlpss it cut a channel through the Ice,Then the caribou might have trouble clilT1b'lrl~1 out on the tloiltlll~1 ice cover after swjmmln~1 or walkin(j through the overflow. In the Oshetna River areJ these sarne questions need [0 be answered,but the situation is a l'ltt!e different.The slope Dn the north shore varies from 53.8%to 6.8% and on the south shore from 35.9'Yc,to 6.8%,so both shores have a more gradual slope than do those at JilY Creek.This area may be affected by the breakllp of the Tyone River as well as the Oshctna River.For 3.7 miles (6 km)LJpstre~m of the Oshetna River,the draw·down of the reservoir may leave an ice sheet 0/\the river bed and flood plain.When the Tyone River breaks up,water-will be rlowing in· to this ice·coverr~rl area.The actrJill effect is unknown hut there CQuid b(~ice iilms and/ol ice chunks floating in the areil which would make it difficul,or Impos· Sible for caribou to cross., In conclusion,it seems likely that the reservoir will calise the caribou some prob· lems,but the seriousness of the rrob:enls cannot he realistically assessed until more information has been gaThered on caribou behdvior ami on thr~Ice conditions in the reservoir. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Geophysicilf Institute ilcknDw, Ir'lines with thanks the assistance of the Depanmenl of Community &Reqional Affairs,State of Alaska,and the United Swtrs Government,Derilrtment of Lahor, for providin(]funding for the labor on this report under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act. We also wish to thank Dr.D.Klein,JllIIIf't.. University of Alaska;Mr.Jim Davis, Department of Fish and Game,Fair· bal1ks;and Mr.STerling EirJe,Depart·... ment of Fish and G:Hlle.Glenallen,for information on caribo\!behavior, REFERENCES 1 Klein,D.1971.Reaction of reindeer to obstructions and disturbances, Sci('l/c('July 30,Vol.173,pp.393 . 398. 2lJ.S.Army Corps of Engineers.1975. Draft Environmental Impact St~te' ment,Suuthcentral Ralibelt Area; Hydroelectric Power Development,Up· per Susitna River Basin,U,S.Army Corns o[Engineers,AJilska District, AnchoraQ(~,Alilskil. 3 Eide ,Sll~rlin~l.1979.Personal communi· cation. - Janice Hanscom rel:eived her B,S.in Biology from the University of Maine at Orono.She has been a technician for Dr, T.Osterkamp for the last year. T.E.Osterkamp is Associate Professor of Physics,Geophysical Institute,Univer· sity of Alaska,Fairban ks.His interests lie in the scientific aspects of environmen· tal and engineering problems involv ing snow and ice,inclLlding permafrost and frozen ground. B The Nonhern Enqineer,Vol.12,No.1 r May 21.1981 Action fUefUlber:f-014-80 Ms.libby Y.Fiaesm1th P.0,.Box 81393 Fairbanks"Alasta99108 Dear Ms.fiaesmi tb: Thank you for your thoughtful letter 1n which you expressed COIlCefttS for the proposed Su$ttrJa I1ydroeleetrtc:project. We have beard frOIil a AUilber of people •share your appreciation for the Sus1tDa River and who also valve.lifestyle without electricity. Your letter has been read by tbe eagineer wbo is project IIMager for the Susitaa feasibility studies.It has .1so been fol"WU'ded to Acres American,Inc.••the I1I"1i1 COI\duct1ng the Sus1tna studies.Your CCIIIIeAts will be included in a report we will ,ive to the 'GOYenIOr and the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors prt....to a decisfoD on Sus1tna next AprIl. £aclosed is a copy of an 'ACTION aDnnt fona that )101I ..,use if YCJU ,have further co_eDts. S1ftCerely. r 1..... I I r FOR HAKCT'BltIU J8/1lgJJ Enclosure Jean Iuchaun Public Participation Office J - ;.;;,:. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F-014-80 use extra sheets If you need them Date I 2.b-\.....v.=-u_- ['~:?;~f[ft][0 contact person day phone _ name #of members,_ address _ __An Organization day phone _ state Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. The comments on this form are submitted by: name _=l-,-,'b"'-'b......y'f-----_V::....:.._~_i__'_'V\'_=e.'"""'S'__'_M__'_\"'_-\'_'_b_'_____ address _e~.-",OC!...~a..."ClCL)£'-----------'ca"--'-\3~q""'3L-_ city _--I.-l="--"G.OLi'-'-Y'--'b....,Il=¥\!..L¥..u"s""'·_ -----LA.!-JK~ZiP 9'\1 ()B'city _ ~An Individual Citizen Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelec'tric Feasibility Study ,----------------------------~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I •~~----------------------------------_# !"""" - ~1arch 19,1981 ACTION fILE Number:F-Ol5-80 Sister Marie Bertrand 757 Illinois Street Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Dear Sister Bertrand: You requested from our office information on the various plant. animal and geological studies now being performed as part of the Sus1tna hydroelectric feasibility studies. The studies that you are interested in are still in progress and will not be .completed until early 1982.Therefore.we cannot send you any slIfIDaries at this time.I suggest you write us again in February 1982.if subsequent newsletters do not answer your questions. Enclosed 1s a copy of a form which yo,u may use if your have ques- tions,c.orrments.or need infOrmation regarding the feasibility studies. Sincerely. Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation HB/mgh Enclosure CONCUR:Wozniak Mohn - - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F-015-80 use extra sheets if you need them D~e December l~]980 city _ #of members _ address _ contact person day phone _ __An Organization Thank yOI1 for this service. animals that are being conducted--also,in the geologic studies too. Would appreciate summaries of the various studies in plants, --'-'A"-'K zip 99701 ' Request: Response to newsletter. state city ----i=F-Cla-l-;./-rbLLia:un..uk....:SL----_ day phone _ The comments on this form are submitted by: Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ name _-",,-5--<-;s",-t...,e"-'.r-----,--M""a,,--r--,--ie"'----'B:..::e::..=.r---=t:..:...r-=:a.:...:.nd=----_ address _7_5_7_1_1_1_i_no_,_"s_S_t_r_e_et _ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: -----X..-An Individual Citizen COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility S'tudy ,~--------'--------------I•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 311 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I ,f,-----------------------------------_# ..... ! ,-,. ! Todd Hoener P.O.Box 80343 College,Alaska 99708 Dear ~r.Hoener: We received your note indicating that you are interested in wind power and storage systems for rural areas. Since we cannot ful~fi11 your request.I have fOr'Warrfed your request for in- formation to Clarissa Quinlan.Director of the state Divfsion of ~ner9Y and Power Development.I believe that state office has 1nformatt'b they can send to you. We appreciate your interest in being included 6n our mailing l1!t for future newsletters relating to the Susitna hydroelectric feas1bllit,Y stu11es. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely. /"./r-·",- Jean Buchanan Public Participation Program February 3,1981 cc:ACTION system file Clarisisiotn an ,n'lr~~cr Dfvt$'f.onnf Energy and ~owerDe'.Tf)pment 33?tYena11 Street Anehorage.Alaska 9950'" Dear Ms.Qu1nlan: We received a requ.st from Todd Hoener for information about wind power and storage systems for rura1 areas.We have no information to send M~.There- fore.I am forward1ng.MS,r~quest to you wfth the hope thetOFPtlwHl be ab1e to provide him with the1n*drmat1on he needs.. Mr.Hoener\s addN!Ss hP.0 •.Box g0341.Colle!Jl!.~Maska 9970~. Thank you for yourassfs,tance. Jean RU¢~~1t~"·· ~bl.fc.-Pa1oHclp..·~ft'n·Progtt'trl '~~bru~rYl.~19al -, \.;../ - - ~•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• F-016-80 use extra sheets if you need them Date December J9,1980 address _ city _ #of members,_ contact person day phone _ name _ __An Organization FOR RIJRAI AREAS. I am particularly interested in WIND POWER and STORAGE SYSTH1S day phone _ state address _--LP------'O'-'---"...J.B'-"o""x~8""0"'_'3.t.:C4~3L___ city ----.lC"""oJ--ll-J.l~eY'get:--.--------- --i'A:\-.ll--Oa~sA.lkau__zip 99708 Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ The comments on this form are submitted by: name _-----IT..uoudu..d--.lH.ll.o.LJ:e;JJnL<:;.eLr _ ~An Individual Citizen Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,----------------------------I••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••I Alaska Power Authority •333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001••,, ~----------------------------------_.# ~- _. - ALASKA I~OWER AUTHORITY 333 WEST 4th A~UE .SUITE 31 .ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 January 30,1981 ACTION FILE No.:F-OOl-8l Mr.Jeff Weltzin FAIRBANKS ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER 218 Driveway Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-2715 Dear Jeff, We have your letter dated January 21,1981 suggesting that radio tagging be considered in the fish ecology studies on the Susitna River. The following response comes from Kevin Young,Evnironmental Coordinator for Acres American,Inc.: "A major objective of the fish studies is to define the major migragion corridors and critical habitat.We are currently assessing the use of radio telemetry (as it compares to other methodologies)to do that. We are aware of the Alaska Department of Fish &Game's successful use of radio-tagging in other Alaskan glacial rivers.In fact,the fisheries coordinator,Dana Schmidt, hired by TES (Terrestrial Environmental Specialists)was actively involved on the radio tagging efforts on the Kenai River.In his mandate to interface directly with ADF&G,he will be assisting in the decision on whether to apply radio tagging to the Susitna Rivers studies. Presently Acres is in the process of redirecting funds to allow the use of radio tagging if that is the method selected. Discussions are ongoing right now between Acres,ADF&G and TES.A decision is expected in the next month.We appreciate the timeliness of your comment and am pleased respond that it is being fully considered. We will let you know the outcome of our current discussions near the end of February.1I Thanks,Jeff. Sincerely, Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation N8:mgh Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ~' - -- - I ,."". -I F-001-81 use extra sheets if you need them Date January 28,1981 218 Driveway 'lI I I I I I I I I I I I city Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 I contact person J.Weltzin dayphone 907-452-5021 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I name FAIRBANKS ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER #of members 4_O_O _ address --X--An Organization COMMENTS ATTACHED. _________zip _ An Individual Citizen city _ state name The comments on this form are submitted by: day phone _ address _ ,----------------------------_.:•I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I••~-----------------------------------_# '::-0 ,£>(1P Fairbanks Environmental Center 218 DRIVEWAY FAIRBANKS,ALASKA 99701 (907)452·5021 21 January 1981 FROM: TO: RE: Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority i\VJeffWeltzin,Energy Coordinator~~" ".1 Sub Task 7.10 Fish Ecology Studies REO 'E.r'J E.0 l ~,~,\'26 19&\ ,,'",-,",-,,;.\ft ~,-'~A,-~,r:j,.'\- - - 'rhe fish ecology studies of the Susitna River Hydro Feasibility study perform an important role by helping to ensure that the best uses of the Susitna's natural resources can be determined for the long-term benefit of Alaskan citizens. The fish ecology studies'function of determining relative abun- dance,distribution,spatial and seasonal habitat requirements for adult and juvenile anadromous fish populations in the Susitna is complicated by the river's glacial braided nature.As a result, state-of-the-art equipment and techniques must be employed to adequately assess adult and juvenile salmon stock escapement and critical habitat. In reviewing sub task 7.10,it has come to our attention that the use of radio telemetry to define major migration corridors and critical habitat has not been included in the budget of the fish ecology studies.This appears to have happened because of an early conclusion that radio-tagging is ineffective for use in the Susitna. But since then,radio-tagging has been determined to indeed be a useful tool for these important studies.This conclusion is also substantiated by Alaska Department of Fish &Game's successful use of radio-tagging in other Alaskan glacial rivers. Considering the difficulty that the Susitna's complex nature presents in salmon stock assessment and the resulting need for useful techniques such as radio-tagging,do you plan to seek additional funding to employ this technique? We urge you to consider this technique as a valuable part of the fish ecology studies and seek the necessary funds to implement the use of radio-tagging in these studies. We look forward to hearing from you on this matter. "Cherish,Conserve,Consider,Create" ..... ,.... ,....., ~arch 13)1981 Jeff We1tz1n Fairbanks Environmental Center 218 Driveway Fairbanks,Alaska 99101 Dear Jeff, I have your letter dated February 25 raising a number of conc~rns and recommendations about workshop 13 on recreation and access.M~st points you raised were concerned with assessing impacts on existing recreational uses. The following response was developed by Robftrt Mohn of the POWEr Authority and Kevin Young,the Env1ronmantal COlridnator from Acres: uWe have made a clear distinction between l)the FERC requirement for the development of a recreation plan within the project boundaries and 2)an overall assessment of recreation resc.rees andf-.,.ttsoant'heeereeeo....s. Subtask 7:08 responds directly to the FEPC recreation plan formulation re- quirements and is directed towards a reservoir recreation plan that would be implemented if a Susitna development occurEd.Thus the study focus is on recreltional opportunities fn the impoundment and surrounding area and does assume that the plan would only be iclplemented 1f the Sus1tna dam is huilt. The assessment of existing and plannfd recreation resources.uses and programs and the impacts upon them are addressed under appropriate subtakks,specifically 7:07 (land Use Analysis)and 7:05 (Socioeconomic Analysis). The approach for these subtasks,as for all subtasks addressing project impacts, is to formulate a tiwithout project"scenario for compar1sion to II "with project"scenario.The llw1thout project ll condition 1s developed from a review of current and planned recreation resources.uses and programs.All appropp1ate local t state and federal agendes will he contacted to provide the information needed to fortmllate the "without project"scenario.The type of 'fnforlllation is presented in the attache~outl1ne.ft You alsG requested that procedure manuals for tasks covered by the recreation and raadeaccess workshop be Iv4'lable at the workshop --they will be. You also requested that a resource person be available at the workshop to provide information on f1sh t moose and caribou.That person is Cathie Baumgartner Irom Terrestrial Environmental Specialists t Inc.and she will be there 91v1ng the environmental impacts presentation. You also noted that the workshop should <nttt leetswd.h any recreational . development based on the premise of a Susitna hydro project.I disagree with that.and here is my thinking: page 2 Jeff Weltzin March 13 9 1981 Ibeh a recreational plan and the potential impacts of that recreation pl.n are F£RC requirements.Last fall)Dr.Alan Jubenville of the University of Alaska.Fairbanks began the development of that plan by sending out over 2000 random surveys to people in Fairbanks.Anchorage and the communities in between.A number of people responded (about 25$).This will form the major input into determintn9 what level ofrrecreational development is seen as iesirable by the public.Both Or.Jubenville and myself were concerned about the lack of oppo~y for special interest groups such as the Fairbanks Environmental Center (and the other 45 groups that!regularly communicate with)to have input into Ih.erminfng this desired leyel of e~e.eational development.We looked at a variety of ways to get this in~lt anrl add1n9 this item to the warY-shop was our choice. It had the added advantage of providing an opportunfty to any member of the general public to comment who didn't previously get the raadom 5urvey. last week I sent out a special mailing to all groups and organizations on the recreation question.You should have received that.You may choose to take advantage of it and!encourage you to do so.You may al~o ehoose not to.In any case~i felt it was very important that people had the opportunftx to comment.I realized at the time I made the decision that there was some awkardness about the timing.But I was willing to live with that to allow the expanded opportunity to comment. Sincerely. ~ Nancy Blunck Director of Public Part1cipatfon - ""'!, - ,- 1lIIffi"- - ~, L . A.Utilizing fish &Wildli7'e ?esotJrcns 1.Sport Fishery a.All species 2.Wildlife a.Caribou b.Moose c.Black Bear d.6rown Sear e.f.lountain Goats f.Sheep g.Wolverine .i,Waterfowl,Birds j.Other Furbearers *Variables to be consid~rcd for above 1.Historical 2.Present a.area (acres 2nd lncation) b.effort (visitor rlays/f of visitors)- c.Success (harvrst) d.Resident (pt.of ori9in/%of total) e.Non-Resident (92n.geo.pt.of origin/ %oftotal) f.Species (stats relative to State) g.Subsistence (personal consumption/ business) h.Trophy i.Management Plans i.Reoulations ii.Re~e~ues (total/relative to state/flow of money) iii .Enforcement (i'lays/nu;nbers/cap ac i ty) B.Not Related to Fish &Wildlife Reserves 1.Water Sports (canoe,kayak,rafting) a.Historical b.Area 1.effort 2.resident/non-resident pt.of ongln 2.Land Sports (hiking,picnicing,climbing) a.Historical b.Area 1.effort 2.resident/non-resident pt.of origin C.Other ...."\'~(~C!1-)\I ;• •...:'• D.Re1cted Business 1.Guides (#/S) 2.Air Taxi Operators (#/S) 3:Lodae Owners (#/$) 4.Lana Owners (#)- E.Projections - .,-, _. -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F-002-81 use extra sheets if you need them Date.__~3J-f/--L.2+1.u8-J..l-,--·__ Fairbanks Environmental Centername #of members _ city Fairbanks.Alaska 99701 contact person Jeff We Hz i fbay phone 452-5-21 address _.r....2-!-J]8U--.>D..ur--l;-"v""e""w.....,ay.¥--_ ~An Organization ATTACHED LETTER. _________zip _ An Individual Citizen city _ state The comments on this form are submitted by: day phone _ name _ Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ address _ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS Susi'tna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,~---------------------------_.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,J~------------------------------------ I""" 1, ! r I r j r:! !i Fairbanks Environmental Center 218 DRIVEWAY FAIRBANKS,ALASKA 99701 (907)452-5021 25 February 1981 Nancy Blunck Public Participation Program Alaska Power Authority 333 w.4th Anchorage,Alaska 99501 - Dear Nancy~ The public participation program as described in the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Plan of Study proposes to keep the public fully informed and provide the means by which the public can influence the study's course of work. with this in mind,the Fairbanks Environmental Center would like to raise some concerns and offer recommendations regarding the upcoming workshop on Recreation Planning and Road Access. 1.The Susitna River drainage and its fish and wildlife resources provide tremendous recreational opportunity and support heavy recreational use from varied groups of recreation- ists.It is our hope that the workshop will acknowledge the Susitna's diverse recreational value by seeking public input on the existing recreational resources and by informing the ,public how the project may change such uses. In this regard,we feel it is essential that representatives from the Fish and Wildlife study tasks be present to provide the pUblic needed information on recreational resources such as fish,moose and caribou. 2.The recreation portion of the workshop should focus on recreational resources,uses and impacts downstream from Devil's Canyon to the mouth of the Susitna.The workshop should not focus on the impoundment area and should not deal with any recreational development based on the premise of a Susitna hydro project. Discussion of recreational facilities prior to a decision on the Susitna project is premature.Rather,the workshop should assess existing recreational potential,uses and capabilities without a hydro project and then compare how this type of project could affect these uses. 3.The road access portion of the workshop should also focus on assessing how proposed routes could change existing recre- ational uses and fish and wildlife populations. 4.The Recreation Planning and Road Access workshop should "The Environmental Voice oJ Northern Alaska" - ""'"i - - -I -. ilI!!!!PJP Recreation Planning and Road Access workshop page two provide an opportunity for coordination and information exchange between subcontractors performing the fish and wildlife studies,recreation and road access planners and the public. 5.The procedure manuals for the tasks covered by the Recreation and Road Access workshop should be available at the workshop to provide more detailed information to those requesting it. rnconclusion,the area proposed for hydro development is the heartland of range for the 22,000 head Nelchina caribou herd.This area also contains significant critical moose winter habitat.Both the caribou and moose of the upper Susitna River provide tremendous recreational opportunities to the sportsmen_of the railbelt.Down- stream of the proposed dams are the Susitna1s abundant salmon fisheries and additional moose populations which provide accessible recreation opportunities for Alaskans.The proposed hydro project could have a large effect on these resources and their recreational users. The pUblic participation program will have failed in its role to inform and receive input from the public if the upcoming workshop ignores the Susitna's existing recreational resources and uses by focusing on recreational development of the proposed dam project. We hope this is not the case,for effects to the recreation users of the Susitna basin could be significant and consideration of such uses should be the prime focus of the Recreation Planning and Road Access workshop. We look forward to hearing from you on this matter. Sincerely, (.'jl;/'"/I'f 1\+;,1-:,J /,'/J~'.-. Je~f ~~el tzJin / Energy Coordinator JW/il cc:Paul Carrier,FERC Mark Robinson,FERC April 16.1981 lei til Hogarth P.0 ..Box 604 .DeltaJUDcUen.Alaska 99137 Dear Mr.Hogarth ; We received your letter of JIfarch 9th in which Y'OUvoiced a strong rec_endat101l that the Susitu River f\ydroe1ectrlc pY'Qjeet IJe bunt because of the high cost of electric1 ty ill Del ta .Jtmetioo. As you may already know.1993 is tile earl1est that Susftna poteI" would be nable..At preset.De one is able to MY precisely at the con.-,"Delta tkincttcm would pay fer electricity if thePl"OJeet _rebuilt.liowever'.IIOSt people agree that Gol ..Valley cus.tGIIer'S would ROt pay less than what you ...paying today.It is aaticipated that SUs1.hydro development would keep the cost ofelectr1cfty from r1stng as rapidly u It would if Gol ..Vaney COfJt1auesto be deperadeat upoD fossil fuels to ......te elec:tr1ctty.More deftnete answn will be .vanable at the ead of the feasibility stud11a early 1982.. Tou also aentiOMd in your letter tttatyou fm:weclral1J"01d ac:cess .. ..will pass your 0,1.1.8ft to tIrOse who will be recoil e:a4iag ..prefetTedaccess·reute by next spr'Iag.. Your CCIIIIBftts have beeA eatared fJJto our AC'TIOB systara.wb1e1l IIeD$ tllat the Alaska ,.,..Authority aad Acres Iaer1caa.Inc...(the f1l"1D c:onduetfag tile ..dat}._11 .....iew wlJat you IIa¥e saiel.Also.1OU'" COI8BU aad all ottaer c_e.ts ..receive trillbe'1aeluded ia a report we will give to tile Alesta Potier Authority Boai'd of 01rectors.aDd tbe 6oYentor prior to a deeisicm OR Stasi_Qext sprill9. Enclosed is a copy of aa ACTION fora you are wlC011eto use to sead us other «'WIts 01"uyquestioas you kaYe. llumk .YOU for takiq the ti.to share your ep1.,oas wi tI't us. S1ucerely. Jea~ Publ1cPart1cipatfoa Office F-003-81r---------------------------•jICOMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date_______I I V An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I K .I I t ~I \4,\Iname_--"C"'-'""e,-,-I,-,-T.!:..b-,--------,!\i-'L'-'--'---l....ti'-"o'-;"q!-"P.'-'-V-'i....::..\t'i-'-.name _ I 'J IIaddress__P.u.-'"O'--'-._B>LO"'-'X~____'k"_'O"_4......·-------#of members______________I ""\\I -'.I city _---"'I,:v'-""e."-'\'--'j-=::"-~_'...._'_'\.\.o=_.V':....:\_"'(.___'t_'_Io=...c.-V\'----______address ---------------I I 'I~k,00'1'"Istate__Jf::'c=..:.-'",-",zip J~I ~Q I city I IIdayphone--------------contact person day phone____I I I ~ I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. I I I I(',d \\I \IIHt'io.C.h£d L.e 11"o(''''~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets it you need them I I Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make IIyourcommentsonthisformandleaveitatacommunitymeetingormailitto:I Ill!!!! I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I ""'!! I I,. ~------------------------------------, - - I'\..~~ .....-V_£\.i-W Keith W.Hogarth P.O.Box 604 Delta Jet.,AK 99737 Dear Sir: I strongly recommend the building of the Susitna River hydroelectric project with railroads as access.The electric light bills in Delta Junction are a crushing burden to the working man. Sincerely: Keith W.Hogarth Jean Buebanan Public Participat.ion Office ..... June18~1981 Action F'le Nurlber:f ..OO4.fll J ..s and Priscilla Karl Alaska Native lantUlge Center University of Alaska Fairbaaks.Alaska 99701 Dear ~and Priscilla Kart: EDclosed is •response from Acres American.Inc.to your letter received bylaS in March of tids year regan:t1ng the Sus1tna bydroelctric featbl1fty studies .. Resl!P5e.fro,At.t:eS ~canl I~..: we aebowledge receipt of your letter regarding ethllohtstor1c - etbaogeograplrlc studies in the Upper Susitna Bas1a. Although pouibly ftOt to tbe:level you envision.our archaeological studies are befng ~with ettmograpb1e and.histortctapact. For your 11lfonat1on I bfWe attadled the sections of our 1980 Cul- tunl Resource Report deaHng tritb these subjects. Our initial useSSlIeDt is that .additional studies in this subject a!"ea &J'e not warraated at this title..However.as we COftt1rwe to re-evaluate our progl'"lll .0.outline Pbase II studies.your COEeIlU will be taken into aecouat. Thank you for your participation. I f you have MY fut'tIIer CUlIlINm'tS or questloos...hope that you v'lll send to.to us..Enclosed 1$an ACTJOl fona wldck you ay use for that purpose• fOR NANCY 11J.IftCl Jlfmgh Enclosures:ACTION f'ona. 1980 Cultural Resource Report dealiag with etMotl1stor1c aM e~1c studies. April '"1981 ActiOfl file~:F-004-81 JaMs and Priscilla KaM Alaska Illative Language Center UR1venity of Alaska f'airblmk.s.Alaska 99701 Dear James ami Priscilla Kart: Thank you for your letter coneeming a suggestion for a cbange ia the Sus1tml Hydroelectric Fea,,1biltty studies.We haw passed your letter lAd article 011 to Acr-es American.Inc.,the ftm coaduet1ng the studies.(TES is Oft contract to theIa ..) You should receive Ii respcmse fnB Acres througb our office witb1a s1x weks. Sincerely. r l /.~/ Jeaa Bueftanan Assistant Dft"eCtOr of Publ1c Participation - - - May 4.1981 Mr"Kevin YoUDg Acres Amerfcan.Inc" The Liberty Bank Sul1diag Maia at Court 8uffalo~ffewYort 14202 ~Kerin. Two respoases""'"ACRES to ACTIM requests are overdue.Could you track them ..for ..and give tbem a pUSh to move theII aloag througb the system faster? The ·two responses are·to .requests from: John lreland,T-601-81 James and PrIscilla brill'f-004-81 IfJClu4ed ia a copy of each ACTIOR request.If the N$pOII$ft$.nl ROt be cclldag by the first of next week,please let ..kaow.I need to ftOt1fy eaell peFSOA that his or tier response bas beert delaytMf. ( Whcm the responses are sent to d1.G111,could you pleue let .. taoaf7 1 can then.ask bt.to look for theIt and 1cmMr'd tbem tef·...ctly" Thanb .for your asststanee,KeY1D•. Sincerely. Jean BucbaDaB Public 'an.1c1pat1OD Office JB/Itgb Enclosures .~---------------------------~F-004-81 • :COMMENTS,QUESTIONS II REQUESTS I I Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study I I !I I The comments on this form are submitted by:Date -,-!I '1 i 1?!I '-;'·<I I I ~An Individual Citizen __An Organization I I name \\o..Y-i J JaVl"les/'Pn·sc.iilA-name I :address AK Ncdil/("It\V''\£1\.l.CU£~'/l+E'v #of members I I city \,)oJ A'f;I address I I state +='o..~V bo..l'\~~AIS zip q q 1 0'\city I I 'IIdayphonecontactpersondayphoneI I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ I I I 1\I ,I I \ \IIHttac..hetl I...e TIQ.""",I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I use extra sheets if you need them I II Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make II your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,. ~----------------------------------_.# """: 1 University of Alaska,Fairbanks Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 March 17,1981 Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th,suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Ms.Blunck: '. I My both done if"'" il .1., I recently sent a similar letter to TES but have not received a reply.I attended the hearing held in Fairbanks yesterday,and I understand a little more now about the research work in progress on the dam.It concerns me that research on both archaeological sites and on flora and fauna in the middle Susitna is being done without any ethnohistoric- ethnogeographic context.The one paper I've seen on historic use of the area (by Bacon)draws only upon the early 20th century records of non-Native incursion into the area. My wife,Priscilla,and I are interested in future research projects relating to the proposed Susitna dam. am a linguist who specializes in Athabaskan languages. wife is a botanist-anthropologist.We have worked with the Ahtna and Tanaina languages since 1973,and we have considerable research on the language,ethnohistory and ethnogeography of the Upper Inlet Tanaina and the Western Ahtna.I have published an Ahtna noun dictionary (co-authored with Mildred Buck),a Tanaina (more properly Dena'ina)Noun Dictionary,which catalogues the flora and fauna as well as many other semantic topics that are known by these people. In addition,I am at present compiling large,comprehensive dictionaries for both Ahtna and Tanaina.My wife has pub- lished a popular ethnobotany of the Tanaina,and has gathered extensive ethnobotanical information of the Ahtna.She is pre- sently writing a thesis which analyzes Tanaina ethnobotany and environmental diversity. It strikes me that a major gap in the Susitna Research design has been a portrayal of the Native use of that area both in the early 20th century and in the pre-contact period. I feel that there is a wealth of information available with Ahtna and Tanaina elders who are from this region.Enclosed is a paper I published in 1977 which details linguistic diffusions between Ahtna and Tanaina languages.The Susitna River and the Matanuska River have been areas of ancient contact between the,Ahtna and the Tanaina.This article makes mention of the (now extinct)Talkeetna River-Stepan Lake band that was actually a bilingual band.I have done language work with descendants of this band and with other elders who knew members of this band.I feel that quite a bit of ethnohistoric informa- tion can be assembled about these Middle Susitna people. A Division or the University of Alaska Statewide System of Higher Education UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA 2 In addition,I have collected hundreds of Native place names in both Ahtna and Tanaina along the Susitna River.For example for the Upper Susitna above Devils Canyon,135 Ahtna place names have been recorded to date.From this data,a detailed ethnogeography could be compiled.The place names coverage is remarkably detailed and could be refined with further research.The ideal approach would be to make a series of tapes in Ahtna and Tanaina with elders in a conference setting and in the field.Transcripts of such tapes would be valuable both as linguistic and as historic documents.Far too often,oral history with Native elders is under regarded as a source of data due to the severe limitations of working thbugh English. An ethnogeography of the Susitna River,with detailed information on Athabaskan trails,place names,subsistence use and historic events would complement and provide depth to both the archaeological and environmental research and would be of value in future plans for use of the area.Most signi- ficantly,such a project would directly involve the Ahtna and Tanaina elders who have ancestral ties with the middle Susitna and ensure that their perspective on the area is being recog- nized and preserved. Please keep us informed of plans for futures reseach contracts.We can make a specific proposal for a research project. Sincerely, (1\~vty:j/6~ i!Jam7S Kari Asslstant Professor Alaska Native Language Center ;h0 c \l~''-~'-~/\' Priscilla Kari ~I - August 20.1931 l«tiOfl F11eH~:f-005-81 Brian E.Lawhead Box 81920 College..1\1 aso 99708 near Brian: I bope you received a copy of the tunael sdleIIe repOrt .ned to you last IDOftth.. Enclosed are CORIBellts from Acres Amerfean~IK..and Eric Yould regarding your concern that the tunnel opt1cm be diSCVSsH ta a public fonra. _CoaIeftts ~Fric ,"oold l •Execut;i~P.:t~~.Ala§ta ,'.....~.;l.; Tile choi~of pursuing a tUftMl opttcm over a dUl at Devil C.,. entails much more 'than just engineering eus1der&tfons.The IIOre detailed select'Scm process is contained tft tbe D8YeJ,!!p!!!~le~ti..~rt.t now Clv.lnable at the Un1Yel"S1ty fGfAleska lTbNl"1 iid tM JkiT1fien Public library.A s.....,-.~.·o1'"Ute tulmel s.dleme proved 1aferior is 1.0""'. Added energy costs IlUSt be weighed qa1DSt reduced eavinmlRlmtal impacts.The tufmel sd1eIIe appean to_tecbR1eall,fe6tble.but a large .degn!e of ~1Rt1 exists 1A the uti.ted projCM:t costs because of tbe geotectm1ealprograat needed to locate 'tM tvMel. Convenely.a qualitative (tftvt~talassesSI&eDtbt TES indicates that the tunnel sdleJlle is superior If'Of1 an eavtroftfllEmtal studpoint•. However.the 'tImm!1 ~yields 26 percent les$energy at a significantly higher cost.III addition.the tutmel scbeme limits future eMr9Yaltel"Aat1ves.and is not as flexible as the two ..,. sdleIIe in meetiAg pre$f!Qt aM forecested ranbelt PQWel"demands. En¥1f'OnD!Bully.while the tmmel $~wuld perhaps preclude the immation of 3.600 acres.the 1apaet of the tunnel sctwse would probUly be no less than that of the two data ~OIl fisb ~ downstream of nevn canyon.The temporary iJlpact fmm tile tunnel construction would be spread over the leDGth of the turmel as access tuft~ls aad span areu wuld havetc be ~lfsbed. Brian Lawhead Page 2 August 20 ~1981 You should be aware that we do not view this selection of the Devil CAnyon 0.over-the tunnel as being irrevenfble..The important potftt isthlt the Vatana pttase is ~to bOth plans and would be the first phase constructed in either cue.The"is ample opportunity to reconsider this decision as tiD!goes 00. While this 1$only ..brief'synops.is of why the tunnel sct'~wa, se~out.you also raised specific qvestfOftS on tunnel t&c:hnology ud seiSilfcity~Acres Ame"ican"tne.has respooded to the two quest100s you ratsed. You!"Concern:'T ,__oJ J 'T......, There is &significantly lower risk of se1ms1e dUlige with a bedrock tunnel. Re.sM!$8 from #\eNS:.. Studies lave ~tWfe~structures in rock are less susceptible to earthqulke damage than surface structures.MDaiage to Reck Tumaels ffeom Earthquate Shaking"by Dowding and R~disc_..s this topic quite well.They show that.tunnels may be subjected to very sewre earthquakes and experience only minor damase.The most <leftsting type of damage is when.stn.JCture crosses a fault aM the fault displaces during an earthquake.·Soth dams aad tunnels eaa be designed to withstand shaking and boUt may experience "ge if •faultdisplaas uMer or throu9b them.However.the potential for d"98 for a dam due to fault d1splacemet\t will depend Oft tile type of ••i.e••eartb1ill 01"eoncrete..If the possibil1ty of a dtsplae1ag fault is e11m1ft1te4 botll unt¢tures ,,111 survive siart,.1'" "~kes but the potential for uy~.to the ttnmel would pros-bly be leu.In case of r»tenttal fault IHOvement under the dill...eartbf111/roctfi11 st.r't.leture is pref......d over conaete dam depend1ag on ,the type iWJ amount of displacement.and fn that else the pOtential damage to a dam probably will be ,,-ss than to • tunnel ..In either ease.bOthst~are deS1gMd to mitigate the effect of an earthquake. Your concera: -'__Ix 1 11'-. - - F,. r- I Brian Lawhead Page 3 August ZO~1981 {iespqUie from ~c.~.: This 1$not true..With the availability of "ideal·hydroelectric sites dec:reasing.the state of the art in both dam and tunnel tecbnology has increased to allow less favorable sites to be used effectively. Presently,most rock masses can be tunneled through with tunnel cost increasing as the rock mass quality decreases.Yer.v little 1$ bow about the detailed geology between the dam sites but the region is geolog1c.'1y complex with probable %ODeS of pOOl"rock quaHty.More detaned geologie 1nfomatfoa .long the tunnel ali~ts 1s req"ired before more accurate costs can be estimated. The cost of obta.1nfftg detailed geologie inf'onut1on &1009 the tunnel$can be quite high since the aHgnmentsare 15 to 30 miles long and the tuMel depth fn::s'i surface would vir-fe from 250 to 2,000 feet. If you have further questiOfts.please contact our office.We appree1ate ,you...tntanst 1nthe project. Sincerely. VOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Jaan luchanaft 'ubHe Part1cfpat1Oft Office JB/mab ,~-----------------------------------,•I:COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS I •Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study • I J /I •The comments on this form are submitted by:Date J.f/q /fl. •I 7 •I __X_An Individual Citizen An Organization I I name Bri an E.Lawhead name I :address Box 81920 #of members : I city Co 11 ege address I •state Alaska zip 99708 city I I •I day phone contact person day phone I I I I Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number I each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. :ATTACHED LETTER.: I I I • •III I • •II• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I •I I I •use extra sheets if you need them I I.Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make I. your comments on this form and leave it at a community meetinp Or mail it to: I Alaska Power Authority I I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I I,, ~--------------------~-------------~_# - - Ms.Nancy Blunck Public Information Officer Alaska Power Authority 333 W.Fourth Ave.~Suite 31 Anchorage~AK 99501 Dear Ms.Blunck: 7 April 1981 RSC~IVED i\PR 9 1981 PJ,ASKA POWER AUTHORITY - I apologize for the delay in writing you~but I have been burdened with a heavier-than-norma1 schedule in the three weeks sin~e the Fairbanks access and recreation workshop on the Susitna hydro project.I should explain that I am the fellow who spoke with you following the workshop about the Devil Canyon tunnel option,and I am herein responding to your request for a specific follow-up letter outlining my concerns. My primary concern is that the tunnel vs.dam option at Devil Canyon be presented and discussed "in a public forum.From my conversation with Jim Gill at the Fairbanks workshop~I got the impression that it is not simply an engineering matter;if such is the case~then the public should be allowed to review the question.Indeed~in talking with an R&M geologist at the Watana camp last September~I was told that tunneling technology is more highly developed than dam construction technology,and that there is a significantly lower risk of seismic damage with a bedrock tunnel.I~y initial impression is thus that a tunnel might be a better alternative from the standpoint of environmental and aesthetic impact in the Devil Canyon area.As a wildlife bio10gist~I am obviously interested in seeing the project carried out in the least environmentally damaging manner possible should it be undertaken~and I think that a substantial proportion of the public feels the same.I don't know the relative costs of tunnel vs.dam construction~but this is another question that is most appropriately addressed to the pub1ic~I think.In short~I would like to have the options explained more fully and be able to comment on them~and I think others should be afforded the same opportunity. In addition~I would greatly appreciate a copy of ISER's power demand projections;I neglected to request one at the workshop.In closing,I commend you on the public presentations you have o_rganized (although I am disappointed that earlier ones were not presented in Fairbanks)~and I thank you for being so responsive and helpful,both in the meetings and in your mailings.Keep up the good work! Sincere1y~J LJ (j ~~tM--'G.~ Brian E.Lawhead Box 81920 College,AK 99708 P.S.I just found out that we have a friend in cornmon --Donita Haynes.How bout dat... - 333 WEST 4th AVENUE -SUITE 31 -ANCHORAGE,ALASK,J\99501 April 21,1981 Action File Number:F-006-81 Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-2715 Ms.Sybil Bouett 865 B.Yak Estates Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Dear Sybi 1, Enclosed are the three information pieces I said I would send you: the November newsletter on the Susitna feasibility studies.report on the first series of community meetings on the Susitna feasibility studies, and the mid report to the governor and the legislature (dated March, 1981).You may keep all but the mid report to the governor and the legislature,which you agreed to return by mail or in person. I will also add your name to the mailing list for future newsletters as it sounds as if you are interested in following the studies thro~gh a decision next spring. It was interesting tal king to you and \>Je will try to anSVJer any further ~uestions you send as quickly as possible. Please do remember to interested in reading it. your instructor so I could paper's? NBjmgh Enclosures / (~."..t send a copy of your final paper as I am most Also,do you have the mailing address for write him directly to read other students Si ncere ly. ,~/;~~;:,'.:/ ,,// Nancy Blunck Director of Public Participation /./,;..//'-./.i.'" August 18.1981 "'.-._~..-' FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Action file Rt.Iaber:F-007-81 Timothy R.JeJvtiags Box 44 " Delta Junctionll Alask.a 99137' Dear Mr.Jermfngs: This st.IIlIer you wrote our office requestfAg the fol1ow1og infomat1oa Oft tAe proposed Sus1tfi4 hydroelectric project: (1)Costs and (2)benefits. The 1aformation you have .-equested is DOt avatlable at this point 1il the study process.It will be available tleXt spring.J s ....st you contact the Public ParticfpatiOft Office at the Alaska Power Autber1ty ill Hardt 1962..f TiMnk you for your Interest tn'the project. Sj~rely•..~, . ,..'.:~~~~"r.~_/'..-_..... ;c .. 'j7/ - Jeu Buchuan Public Participation Office J&/.b - ~ I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1I """'J 1 1 1 1 I. 1 1 1 F-007-81 use extra sheets if you need them Date _ contact person day phone _ #of members,_ name address _ __An Organization .srL ~r~-'.;r?-.--II dr~?1?,}:'-t"f co..!,::~j,c..(/frr hf.aLI p.,;;,..y~,t:., t'.rI;;y,~.f;./NSr/S /'~ph&?..r.<",S' J ..-I~S'h'1A /16./I'¢'"""h<r '»~h+S ?",,'S .:;~h (,oa.. Sen-....., Z ::) ow .> w -Wo Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written c,-omments.Please number each comment,question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible._ state The comments on this form are submitted by: Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: L-An Individual Citizen name If~o4"J i(,-:::r;r1n/;·Y"~ ":J V add ress 1?~f l.f (/ city De ft""J;;.f .) I-A"--,!,-,-",,,r,--,~_·C'o.._.zip q173?city _ g1s -tf&'3 "7dayphone_--=-~""'_2...__ COMMENTS,QUESTIONS &REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ;-----------~--------------_."I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I II Alaska Power Authority I 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 I I,. ~---------------------------------_.# - -I - August 20.1981 Action File Number:f-008-81 John AdallS..President Sierra Club Dena 11 Chapter c/o FEC 218 Driveway fairbanks,Atun 99101 Dear Mr.Adatu: In reviewing SOlIe questionnaires returned to our office after the workshops held this spring Oft access and ~tion for the Sus1tu HydJ"Oeleetric feasibility Study,a ~t was made by a person fdent1fying hil1Self as a ill!ltber of the Sierra Club.the Oenali Cbapur.Sirtee no name was 9ive'h we are Sfmd1.ng a response to you as president of the Sierra Club .. If the concern 1$ODe still Mld by II8IlbeI"$of your organ1zatfcm. 1 hope you w111 $bare this letter'with them. ,We ft.\Jl to see·wily /tPA has·takeD it upontbefllselves to 1'1.for recreation.Since wheft has anybody given you the authority to plan . .for recreation.we tbougbt Parts .s mandated to do so.for the State of Alaska.... Your D1rectorCOllPla1ns of a lack of staff then what is be trying to do to Mftdle something ""deb is not his lIaftdated area?.£f"T Robert ~Jmf D1r:ector of £!!9.fneeMgJ.f..qr_.~I\e.AlaAa .r thor tl: The full and careful auessment of the SusftAa Hydroe1eetr1e Project requires the fomulatiOR of a development plan aad the eaaluatfoo of the plcm's impact.1ft other words.a decision Oft the feasibnit,Y and des1roabl1 'tty of ttle prcject ~t be reached wfthtmt tnov1ng what the projectamsfsts of and how it ifiPacts our cost of liv1Rg, qualfty of life.and tbe b11belt's natural systeu'i$. John Adams Page ! August 20.1981 The recreat1oncompommt is an integral aspect 01 a Sus1tna develol'- metrt plan and is required by the Federal EneY'9YRequlatory C0P.m1,sfoo. There 1$no doubt t~tw would receive sharp criticism if we attempted to assess project impacts and feasibility without addressing project aspects as important as.the recreation component. The development of the recreation plm is the responsibility of the p~Authority as the applicant for the FERC license to const~t the P1"OJ~t.The University of Alaska is develep1n,the jJlan under contract to Acres (and thus for the Power Author1 tl).They are working closely with the DiVision of Parks in this effort. In c;onclus1an"the f01"llUlation of the rec....tlon coraponent of the Stls1tM.Hydroelettr1c Project is not P1"elRature and is within the mandate of tNt Alaska Power Author1~. It copy of this letter has been filed in the ACTION System.a process we have for keeping track of publ1e COIIDents received on the Susitna project outside the fonat of public meet1ft9s-.A s_ry of the concerns on fne tn the ACTION System will begtven to the herd of Directors Of the Ala$x.Power Authortt'yand the Governor prior to a decision on SU$~tnanext spring. Sincerely. FOR THE WCUTlYE DIRECTOR Jean BucbuaA Publ ie Participation Office - I••I•I•••••••••I••••••••••I I••I•I I I••I•••I•I I I I F-008-81 ~ VI("'\\J~hl"'2j use extra sheets if you need them 7 'l Date'_'-f-'frLj'If-..'~,,-rf-..'I _f , \="0--;:.G<9 -7"'1city-----.,---,--,--------c;:';--'-\-'---.L--'--v"'-'-_ H \\\\"'f -.4\'\1"f-l<:l./AWl:5 contact person day phone _ #of members,_ ~An Organization __________zip _ An Individual Citizen Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31/Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 state name _ day phone ---,--_ The comments on this form are submitted by: Individual citizens or community groups and organizations are encouraged to submit written comments.Please number each comment, question or request separately.Be as brief and specific as possible. city _ address _ Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority will review and respond to all comments in writing.You may make your comments on this form and leave it at a community meeting or mail it to: COMMENTS,QUESTIONS Ir REQUESTS Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study ,~--------------------------_.I I••••••••••••••••-.I I•••I I I••I I•I I I I•I I•I I I I I I I II ,,----------------------------------_.# - -. -, - ,- j j /}J c fu ~(fa S-ez-tV7 /j-P!f~N'J--'....i /?<~It ufJCLt 1to<~~.:21/P(;'<l h:n.~/'cf'~o-,..I Sit-:ce ,w..~Aas,tlbl.(001'j-'IlLite,lcJL<lie-I Cl J{,C',-,7.~p!IftL for-/'[c -ze...-.4p )u~I /'to I.<'i {..f--:,.4"Its/LV fL-~,....,crt d &.Ic-c}A;<;-:'J!~I ~S M '7le_<>1J:e 1-4f,;s.frc,<i /h<vl/J()w~JcJ/.('/~f/<?'~·-<l'co ~I 1-s:/~fC....-wc.,J:5 ~-r"//~?~d6-I 1 ·1r.I Il C A"A..eItl-~j ~Lt,c~I»V'L1/-::/--i..IS /}1 t7"'r JJc;1;;(J-I)0 'ld""c~----L;>l/~-\.,I ~~,/...I j ~j ~j }j j j j j j j j j ~I j j -, - I"" July 1.1981 Action Fne 1UJber:F-009-81 David F.DeLoDt 311 senate Loop Fairbanks.Alaska 99701 Dear Mr.Delong: 'OU wrote us asking for a c:opy of the seismic J'ePOrts.for 1980 ud 1981.if available.There has been no report issued for 1981.At .this time.regrettably.tile have DO extra coptes of the December.1980 report to give or sell to yOU.We are ill the process of baviag extra copieS printed to put fa the Noel W1en aDd £1....RaSMUSSon libraries in fa1rbaBb and to distribute at cost to interested ......rs of the public. I do ftOt IInow at tbis tf.when ..win nave extra copies in the libraries 0 ...available for purcbase.I also de not bow whit the cost per copy will be.but estimate it w111 be quite.hip (bet1lleeft $30 and $SO)because of the special way info.-t1oe is presented. If you come to AacIlorage,yOU are wela-.to review our copy ill the Power Authority l s office library.We vil1 .lso let you know when copies are annable ift public 11brarles and for 1Rd1\ftdual purchase. Sincerely. *~..Afubl1c Panic1pattCIII Office I~, ~,- , f k">.\b w."'(:\. -4.,-- l...-ti'""\..;.~,J:.(_.\l .:.. -t 1 ............."":'I \', 1 .\..' '- f"-'._L\~C -.,--,~ I ~• -c:..::''{j \,~..4..-,_,r\... .(...L C ,L-''''"'-~'"e .(.., \-.~ \<1fCl)'I.\ '\\---'--~'"-\.\ --\,elf:cr'"'2"! I.J .~-;.."""-i .,.;.~'"(l \t __~-t L}\~\\ .--\ \',~..,. ·-.·"t::..(."-~~_l -~_c. :::J f\C._.,-.,~ /<~"4-~ \,'')-0 .c....v),\..,..-0-\ ~ '-'\-~L-X';\~It:-€U~ .,'---. r ,_.\.--\..-\".,,"\, y~V\ -+- ~'r)0 '}LV\ C C:~P ':i ,~\ .,j r r-, I ( - August 17.1981 Mr.Jill 6111 Acres Amenean,IDe. 2207 Spenard Road Aadrorage.Alaska t9S03 Dear Jim: The $lDIilry results of the quelt10naires we circulateet this $prtll9 on road access have been fned with the ACTIOR system.One copy has beeR filed tn the Talkeema sect'on and one in the Fafrbuks secttcm. The mtIIbers U'e: Here is a copy forT,.....t1.fUes. F·0l1-81 1-oCl!-J!Sincerely. \JeeR IucbauB Public (Parttcipation Office Ace E S S F-011-8l GAME GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE -February and March 1981 This questionnaire was mailed to 200 game guides registered to hunt in Unit 13, the upper Susitna River basin area.Twenty-nine responded for a return of fifteen percent. 1.What areas of the Susitna River basin do you use? General answers included Upper Susitna,Tsusena Valley,Clark Creek, Talkeetna River to Kosina Creek,Denali Creek area,Clarence Lake,Lake Louise,Watana Creek. 8 said they used all or most of it. 5 said they used none of it. 2.What kind of use? -.1 25 considered themselves primarily game guides. word "fishing"as part of their occupation,such as trips."A total of 22 included "fishing"~some "rafting"or "photography." Of these,19 included the in "guiding and fishing other use,such as July -Sept.:1 May -Dec.:1 10 mo./year:1 Apr.-May/Aug.-Sept.:i 3.What level of use do you give these areas? The words,"heavy,""moderate,"and "light"were used in similar proportion. The seasons listed most were spring through fall. Specifi ca lly: May -October:3 June -October:2 July -August:1 June -Sept.:1 August -Sept:2 4.What game habitats should not be disturbed? There was no pattern to the answers,all were different.However,specific locations mentioned included Watana Creek,Kosina Creek,Jay Creek,the area along the Susitna River,Fog Creek,north and southwest of Moosehorn Lake,Stephan Lake,Clarence Lake,Big Lake,along the Alaska Railroad proposed,Portage Creek, Butte Lake,Otter Lake.One person expressed concern about the possible disturbance of swan and salmon spawning grounds,several expressed concern for the habitats of moose and grizzly bear. Those who specifically foresee no problems if game habitats are disturbed:9 Those who mentioned concern about the disturbance in specific locations,or of specific animals,or disturbance of the wilderness in general:16 --,J r ,,- 'I Game Guide questionnaire,page 2 5.Which access do you prefer? Corridor 1 5 Ra i1road 16 Corridor 2 10 Left it blank 4 Corridor 3 9 Ans\'lered "none of the above"1 6.Reasons for the above choice: As varied as the spread of the answers above.Comments supporting the rail- road included,"Less vehicle access means less impact on the animal population and the environment,"OR "It vlould be more direct."Hhen specific corridors were chosen,the comments tended to be general about the possible disturbance of one or another animal population.Occasionally there was a specific,individual comment,such as,"I suppose itls just selfishness but Corridor 1 comes closest to the access I use." 7.Would you like to see public access to the project area by privately-,....owned vehicles after construction is completed? Yes:15 Not 2sure: t"'""No:8 Limited access on ly:1 8.Reason for position on public access: Those who said yes:A combination of 1 'm paying for it so I'll use it;I support hydro power;all Americans have the right to all of America with the exception of land that is privately owned;we need tourist development and recreational development. Those who said no:There will be an innundation of people;business will suffer;animal habitats will be destroyed along the river;would prefer the area be left a wilderness;what will happen to the fish;this is a power project,not a recreational facility. Respondents to this questionnaire reside in: Anchorage 9 Haines 1 Eagle River 1 Chugiak 2 Palmer 3 Homer 1 Cantwe 11 .1 Ketchikan 1 Wi 11 ow 3 Juneau 1 Gustavus 1 Kasilof 1 Fairbanks 1 Wasilla 1 .I!"'"Tok Hwy 1 No name or address 1 r I - Itovesber 9,1981 Barbara Vlr1 ght. Mile 131~Denali Highway Cantwell,Alaska 99729 Dear Mrs.Wright: Thank you for your timely response concerning the question of access to the Susitna.Hydroeleetric project.Your response has been noted and incorporated into our f1ndtags concemtng 10<:a1 c0BmUn1ty preferences.We nave submitted your letter to our ACTION system.Your response.as wen as an other questions and ~ts we receive on the Sus1tna feasibility studies.wttl be 1ncl tided 1n a report sent to the Alaska Power Author1 ty·s Soard of Directors and the Governor before a decision is made on the feasibility of the Susitna Hyd,roeleetrie project. We will contact youus soon as we know what ~t1on con- cerning access win be made. Sincerely. George E.Gleason Assistant Director PlJblic Participation Office GEG:ct AIR TAXI/CHARTER ARCTIC CAT SAL.ES WIL.DERNESS OUTFITTERS PHONE,907-663-2231 MELVIN O.WRIGHT IJAMES M.WRIGHT iMILE 131Y.DENALI HWY. CANTWELL.,ALASKA 99729 AUHOHLnv I:aMod V)f~ ~»i12l~ F-013-81 -1 ./'!ie~W::t()/{;;'"':J& t Hi :--CJ~Ce..(_ CG~~1b~~fJ ,- )I! ; -, r"" I i Deceml';er 7.1981 Hr.Kirk Hlrtakis P.o.Box sa Cantwell.Alaska 99729 Dear Hr.Martakis: Somci time 4go you submitted a coupon to receive the Sus1tna Hydroel~ tr1c Project newsletter.On tne coupon yOU included twO requests: 1.!It'd like to know more a.bout the Alaska Power Authority.It 2.It'd like to know who to write in support of the dam project.It The Power Authority is a.public:corporation made up of a seven member RoaN of D1rectoJ"$who are appointed by the GOvernor and approved by tile legfslati.lre.Its offices are in Ancnorage Where a staff of thttty conducts the day-to-u.,y business of the Authority..The presetat mem- bers of tile Board of Directors are Mr.Charles COnway,Chairman;Or. Robert Wee<len;CoJiII1st1oner Ckarles ~r;Mr.John Schaeffer;C0m- missioner Robert Ward;Colim1sstoner Ernst Mueller;and Dr.Ronald lebr. The role of the Power Authority is to identify.evaluate and develop electrical power product1on facilities utilizing the most appropr1ate technology from among those that are c.ouaerc1ally 'available (except nuclea...power ~ratioR).The Power Authority's ~of hnfolve- mont variesdepend1ng upoA local deSires and capabilft1es.Whl1e pow- er project facilities ~for developMntcan be 1i~.am.. strKted.0M'led and operated by tbil Power Iw:thor1ty,.ift -.ny cases in- volvement is conf1Aad to·ftnlAc1flg atqne.or just to the early phases of projQCt evahaation aniJ development. Sy iU Q4ture as a publiC"corpo.ratiOll.tIW:Power Authority is e1191ble $Vbjec.t to IRS regulations to sell bonds Wbose interest to bondlloldenistaxfree.This stHus lowers 't.ha ~$t of debtca,ital .. For eertainprojec't$..eft as Susitna.legislation dictates il multi... step process lead1Ag to power fKiltty construction.The Power Autborit.Y first perfonas _reamnausanee study to a5Se$$the electrical energy ~of a aJIlIIlUIIit.y or regioa and to 1deat1fN the power pr'O<Wc't1on alttlrnatives avanable to saUsfay those ~$.TM ~'$sance. $~dy serves as the ha$1s for ~tfti tIOrCt detailed data eol1ftC- tiOil activities.resourat ~"'t$,01".~ne4 feasibll1ty studies of oae Of".re specific:power project altemativ4S.ieconRAtSS&ftCe $tuQy results are Qsed to guide Power ~ii:y budget requests IfI4 ~...are p1"OV1dedto,the legislature.the Adm'Iaismt1on.arid to tbe COI8IUftitiu invOlved. Kirk NartaU$ uec~r 1..1981 Page " As a subsequent step.the Power AutttOrity performs feasibility studies to to obtain detailed information and analyze the tacbn1cal.economic.and environmental asfA.~ts of a particular project or program previously recc:m'l8ended in a reconnaissance study.In identifying the preferred project or program for a c0ImIW'l1ty or region ..the Power Authority con- sidere all available energy alternatives in terms of cost,technical suita.bil ity,0Av1n:mmental impact,and local preferences.Feasibil 1ty studies are accOlttpl hOOd at a level of detail comparable to that required for license applications submitted to the federal Energy Regvlatory Com- mission. Accompanying the feasibility report is a plan of finance that compare5 project financing alternatives and recommends the mst appropriate means to insure project financing while minimizing state assistance.Wilen state financial 4$$istance is reconwended,the plan of fiRance identifies the estimated value of the state assistance,whether it comes in the form of a.subordinated loan.loan guarantees,equity constribution ..or otner means. The Power Authority submisUfeasiDiltty reports and accompanying plans of finance to the 1.egislature.Concurrently the reports an:reviewed by the Oivision of Budget and ftianagement.and thts review is also submitted to the Legislature.The Power Autbor1ty caollot proceed with advanced en... g1neering or design of a proposed project untn the Legislature enacts law authorizing tne project.This sequential development process of re- connaiss,ance study,feasibility study,finance plan.Division of 8udget and Management review,and legislative authorization is required for any new project that will generate more tftau 1.5 megawatts of power and tbet either requires a.state approppiation or is based on a plan of finance requiring tbe issuance of general obligation boads or other pledge of the credit of the state.Specifically excepted,fTom thts criterion are certain projectswb1cb the Legislature has already acted upon • .As to whom youshottld ,",ita in support of tl,e $usitna project,we su~st you.write your prelfteftce to your State legislaton and tile Governor s Office.we have noted your preference and your CODIIIieJlt will be fl1ed in our ACTION Systeta.All questions,COIIIeRU,and requests for infonation win be ioclMded in a report that win be given to toe Power Autllor1ty Board of Df.rectors,the Govemor.and tile Legislature _fore a decision is ·DWle 00 Susitna. Sincerely, George E.Gleason A$$tstMt Director '.Ue Partie.ipat1cm . }:I- r ] r F-016-81 Is PU~lIC Infor~:~lon:::~:n~::e:u=a hy::wer:ct w=vel::Y t::ska:::r A::Y - -,_~ Public Participation Olllce,Nancy Blunck,Director.Comments on the substance 01 this newsletter and Ideas for :(---.,~.ure pUblications should be lorwarded to the Public Participation Office by way of the lollowing coupon.Ii"'''oll I .~.\L.L--':::;'I _.L I,\!J J-,\~0 Lf\Ou::::>('t\O~G-JO 0 ~ :'Last First Initial -t\-,f f.t.IMLA-VOu,)ti€..I~-t\..\(;\o:>~· Name ,~-.~.j Mailing ())"IcJ..\\'u?-k ~'l'-~,","':~l,...e'.~w~).;k· Address ,~5 \J prc~t \~t.:k:1 ~.~!~ City State~?(2.0<::J6'~t.'..~il and mail to:Alaska Power Authority THANK YOU FOR Public Participation Office I 333 W.4th·Suite 31·Anchorage,AK 99501 YOUR INTERES:'- ~ I. ,- ".... ! r November 19.1981 Dale L.:-lOrd P.O.Box 9 Cantwell.Uakka 99729 Dear Mr.Nord: Thank you for your timely response concerning the question of access to the Sus1tna Hydroelectric project.Your response has been noted and incorporated into our findings concerning local couaunity pref- erences.We have filed your letter in our ACTION system.Your res SPOl1Sft.I1S well asaall other questions and ~nts we receive on the Sus1tnafeasMnt;.y studies,will be included in a report sent to the Alaska Powr Authority's Board of Directors and the 6overnor before a decision is il4de on the feasibility of the Susitna hydroelectric project. We win contact you as sooo as we know what recOllDendation concerning access wi 11 be made. Sincerely, George E.Gleason AssIstant Director Public Participation Office GEti:ct Nov 5,1981 F-015-81 Dale L.Nord D.:).Box q, ~Antwell,Alaska 99'('29 George Gleason Al~ska Power Authority '.)ublic Dp.rticipation Office 334 i·Jest 5th Avenue, AnchoraRe,Alaska 99501 Sir; 'tr residence is located off the lJenali 'lighway,HiIf~131.5.I 09pose the Denali Highv-ray to 'J1atan<'l Roarl"Tay for the folloHing reasons. The unknown social and environmental imnacts it would im~ose unon the area of cantYlell and areas along the roadways. PlAn 8 has been shown to have the leRst environJ1entAl Impact according to 'Po,;"er Authori t;T studies..The ornosi te is true with the Denali to \,.lAtanA route. PlAn 8 has been shown to have the least expensive construction and logistics costs. :r::'l i\J-" .jj 'Phe orincinle advant;::lf!e sited :'or the Den "Ii to ~'JRtana route is the time element.I donlt t,elieve the time element sho1l1d be the oriority factor in deciding this route.This nroject is being advertised to the nublic as bein~built causinp:the least .'ldverse social And environmental imnacts.,This will not be true if more routes than neccessary are constructed to the site~ The Denali \".iatana route would ooen up more area to public access than routes to the southo I would like to see the whole Area left as unmSlturbed as possible. Dale L Nord ottA ~Jnc;~ (' I (j - -- -- I()··20 -:5-) S-.C)o:;) ALASKA .-()lVEII J\.(J'I~II()IIITY 333 WEST 4th AVENUE -SUITE 31 -ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99501 Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-2715 November 3,1981 Dear Kev in I received a phone call from F'rank Lowe of Anchorage who has staked property at Indian River remote.He was not in favor of a road from the Park Highway.He stated that he purchased the property because of its remote setting and felt that any road would change the character of the property. Frank Lowe 3105 Rrookside Drive Anchorage Ak 99503 (907)248 4312 Sincerely George Gleason Assitant Director of Public Participation , r 1"""" I - .- November 5,1981 Telephone conversation with Cliff Crabtree,husband of Kathryn Crabtree.one of the stakers at Indian River remote. They received our letter to the Indian River people and are opposed to access from Hurricane to Gold Creek by road.They would prefer rail from Gold Creek to the Devil C~yon site.They want no roads in the area.We forwarded them a list of the other owners of Indian River remote parcels,because they expressed the desire to contact the other owners . November 6,1981 Mr.Barry Moe came into the PUblic Participation Office.He was in favor of access by road from the Parks Highway and thought a road from Talkeetna would be even better.He was opposed to any road from the Denali.He felt that roads into the Indian River area were going to happen with or without Susitna. ~. i RECEIVED. Anchorage,Alaska November 3,1981 George E.Gleason Assistant Director of Public Participation Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Gleason: .....1 Thank you for your letter of October 29 advising of the various routes which are being contemplated for access to the hydroelectric dams on the upper Susitna. Please add the voice of my husband and myself to those persons who wish to keep the area remote --that is to have no access other than Railroad to our property in the Indian River area near Canyon. The main reason we participated in the lottery section of land which had limited visitation. area would ruin the privacy which we now have. was to gain access to a A highway into this remote -.;::~e~» c;:iir~~U-- Mrs.Bonita Prudence lll!!Il', I j - ".... I """, ALEX &MARIA BASKOUS 5432 Emmanuel Drive AlI£horage,AK 99504 Debra D.Vostry Rt.1 Box 394-1 Ketchikan,Alaska November 7,1981 99901 Alaska Power Authority 334 W.5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Attn:Mr.George E.Gleason Assistant Director of Public Participation Dear Mr.Gleason: This letter is in response to your October 29,1981 letter regarding possible access routes to the dam sites on the upper Susitna River. I have staked land in the Indian River remote parcel area and am very concerned with the possibility of an access road going through this area.My husband and I chose this area because it is "remote"and want you to be aware of our desire to keep it that way. Our first preference for an access route to the dam sites is a rail- road spur on the south side of the Susitn~River.Our second prefer- ence is the third alternative as stated in your letter.That is,a new road from the Denali Highway near Seattle Creek south along the Deadman's Creek drainage to Watana. We are hopeful that an access route will not go through our immediate area,and are grateful for the opportunity to express this.Thank you for taking the people in the Indian River area into consideration before making a decision on the access route. Sincerely, heci. November 6,1981 Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Attention:George E.Gleason Assistant Director of Public Participation Dear Sir: Thank you for your concern over the matter of a road to the Indian River area. 1 do not want a road to spoil the beauty of the area.If a road is built in the area,I don't see any way it could possibly benefit those of us who have staked remote parcels at Indian River simply because a road could not border all of our parcels.It would only be of benefit to those who would come to camp,hunt,and fish.Then there would be no beauty to the area. If there has to be a road,I believe it should start from the Denali Highway and go due south to the dam project. Thank YOU for your concern. - ..J.;..%'6 J - November 11,1981 :eorge ~.Gleason Ass't Director of Public Farticipation Alaska Power Authority 334 west 5th Anchorgge,Ak 99501 2e:Devils Canyon Froposed Dam Dear Mr.Gleason: Thank you for your letter of October 29,1981 regarding the access routes being considered in conjunction with the Susitna power study.I lease approximately ten acres three miles up the Susitna River from the confluence of the Susitna and Indian Rivers.Since my use of my land is recreational I am especially concerned that development of a Susitna dam not unduly detract from the recreational quality of the area. Before responding more specifically to the three proposed access routes mentioned in your letter I would appreciate your sending me a sketch of the proposed routes.It was unclear from your letter how the "Chulitna Pass"route would be charted from Indian River to the Devil Canyon or Watana sites. Thank you again for notifying me and inviting my input.I look forward to receiving a sketch of the three routes being considered. Very tr;:uly your$--,':/-/' ",',.'(/,_./<'1<~.It " ./ (";'f !(i /."(f/'J"::rf ;", (,Iw'~ Barbara L.Schuhmann S.R.Box 40465 Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 _J~ '"'"'!i. I r 0 \)....q ) tJM.le--h-~t2v-~ 33 4-tJ~S-cI!/h--e, ~~ttff-/~ fJO.~/6,p~ :su.vaAd/(Ltt'~.tL 7lc~~e'Vrt.ir-Vrj//jJ 6/ .-i . /2uvz-lJ'Vc./J&~ J#~~~~<ff~-:.Y ~./vf}~t?fa~~16 #-~ ~~~.,J'O/YYL 0V-oj~34 ~~ ~~cL tL~lcvudw~~,hr~ K~~fJtMeJ ~fJ£44/fYt~~WJhJ/~~/ ~/~~~tJU'~/V~()-1/.4uk ~#-~p~-~ ~.~-hn-.~7hj f't~~d1;tL ~cf clJ.dlotm'1 ~.~~~evdL ~ .~~IcLo ~~~~;fh-jJ~/I(gfv(A../d -Ia/V1V MtrptJ-UclP#v<~d&~9t<A~ ?t-~~y ~.h O.r ~/lcjltwtUJ/l-o-ttd ,6#~t'J~iv<£Z A'f-( ,~" ~o!AJ ~.~~~Io ~/n-R-ervV ~}?t~ .a/ytC~1e~~.tNd/~./?Ul-~Cr;v ~.~- ~. Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5 th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska,99501 Dear Ms Blunck, t\ECEIVi:.Q; NOV 1319B1 "".",...,.,.~-'·-·~'f SRA Box 1628 Anchorage,Ak.99607 10 November,1981 As a lease holder and a future prope~ty owrrer in the Indian River area (S.W. Corner,Sec.27,T32N,R2W), I want to thank you for the informational letter on the proposed status of the transportation corridor to the Susitna Dam site. I have already talked to you in person about my feelings and now I'd like to J take this opportunity to put them down in writing for the record along with my wife and family's feelings. Of all the original proposed routes,We would have prefered the construction of the highway from Talkeetna because of the long term benefits it would have.(It is the shortest driving distance from Anchorage,the major population center of the State,whoes population will use the impounded lake for a major recreation area after the completion of the project.)But in our discussions ,you stated this route was disregarded long ago because of the opposition from the people in the Talkeetna area on it.Also you stated that the route from the Parks Highway via Portage River was thrown out because of the high enviromental problems,both natural and construction wise. This leaves only three routes for discussion -from the Parks Highway via Indian River,from the Denali Highway,and either a railroad spur or a road from Gold Creek. Of the three routes left,we are in favor of the Denali Highway route since it will open up the greatest amount of undeveloped State (or Federal)land for the general public with the least amount of Native Land involved.The State and it's present administration over the last seven years has had a "hands off"policy for new road construction outside of developed communities which has caused a degradation of the recreation values along the exsisting road systems and has deprived the majority of the public the opportunity to see and use the vast areas of the State.The Denali Highway route,with the establishment of proper management quidelines,will help disperse the recreation minded Alaskans and would reduce the pressure on the exsisting roads. We oppose the Indian River route mainly because it will duplicate an already exsisting transportation corridor -The Alaska Railroad.All though the Railroad is a restricted means of transportation,the general public can use it to obtain access to the Indian River area at a reasonable cost.Also the limited amount of fishery and wildlife in the immediate vicinity will not support a higher consentration of sportsman the road would bring into the area,thus eliminating one of the main reasons for obtaining the land in the area.- !""" i r- I 2 Other reasons for obtaining land in the area were:1.It has limited access by the public.2.It has a reliable means of tansportation (other than a road )to and from the area at a reasonable cost. Another factor in opposing of the Indian River route is it will open up only a short distance of undeveloped State land (approximately 10 miles)between Gold Creek and the Native Land surrounding the dam projects to the public. The rest is on Native Land (approximately 45 miles)and public funds should not be used for the benefit of one particular private corporation when another route can be selected that will open up a greater amount of undeveloped State (or Federal)land at a comparable construction cost. As to the third route,either a railroad spur or road from Gold Creek,we oppose this because the route will not allow for readily accessible public access to the dam site for the general public.Base on prior knowlodge of dam projects,they have created a valuable water base source of recreation for the public and the public will want access to it.It is quite certain the Railroad would not have a schedualed passenger train to the dam site because of the high cost of operating it.As to the road,a person would have to leave a vehicle at Gold Creek if they wanted to use the area which would eliminate the use to a few individuals.A public bus system would not be practical because of the multi-trasportation system involved would discourage the people to use it. The local public sentiment the Alaska Power Authority has taken into consideration for the route selection is a very interesting aspect.The Talkeetna route was disregarded because you stated the majority of the people in the Talkeetna area ( a population of 407 )was opposed to the route.By the establishment of this precedent,the APA Board has no recoil but to disregard the Indian River route if the majority of the residences (a projected residency of approximately 133 )in the Indian River -Chuletna area are opposed to the route.The difference in population between the two areas is not that great.If the Board does not disregard the route because of this,then the residence of the area,affected have good grounds to take the APA to court for a reversal of the decision. As you stated,the residences along the Denali Highway route want the route not only for the economical benefits,but also they feel the new road would allow for better management of the wildlife resources in the immediate area of the road.This is a very sound reasoning for the APA to select this route since,according to Mr.Gleason in your offi.ce,the actual over all cost between this particular route over the Indian River route is nearly the same. 3 We would like to be kept fully informed on the outcome of the past public hearings or opinions you received on the proposed routes to the dam site and of any future hearings you may have on the project.At the same time,we would appreciate any material you have gathered or your consultants have prepared on the routes that the APA Board will use for making the route selection.Otherwise,there is no way a person can make any sound jUdgement on the particular routes or talk to other affected persons on the pro and cons of the project. Sincerly, !~lU;~ Wallace J.Watts ~~'"YY\.~ Carole M.Watts ~;?#'VA'/(X~~-~.'Watts - EXHIBIT 3 - PART I-BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON PROPOSED SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 1.Location:The two dam sites are in the upper Susitna River,about 125 air miles north of Anchorage,150 air miles south of Fairbanks,and 70 miles northeast of Talkeetna. 2.Dams:Two dams are currently proposed:one at Watana and one at Devil Canyon.The first to be built would be Watana,followed by Devil Canyon when needed (projected to begin about eight years later). 3.Reservoirs:The Watana reservoir would be about 50 miles long,one-half mile to five miles wide.The Devil Canyon reservoir would be about 30 miles long and one-half mile wide. 4.Land Ownership:The major land owners in the reservoir and access areas are:Cook Inlet Region,Inc.and its village corpora- tions,the State of Alaska,and the federal government. Inholdings include mining claims,native allotments, open-to-entry parcels,and homesteads. 5.Present Land Use:Hunters,private cabin owners,miners,trappers,lodge owners,and kayakers . ..... I ......~ ~ff0 Study area ...............Dam sites r~ \ '. \ PART II-POSSIBLE RECREATION DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES Please review the five possible approaches described on the pages that follow and indicate the acceptability of each.If you feel some modifications can improve the acceptability of an approach,include your sugges- tions in the space provided.The key given below explains the type of development represented by the vari- ous symbols used on each of the maps. (1) (2)(?) (3)II (4)D (5)CD (6)II Visitor Center:services would probably include information, natural history and resources' interpretive displays,tour schedules,gift shop/bookstore,restrooms,and a parking area all designed and operated to meet the needs of the majority of visitors.The most strate- gic location for a VIsitor center would be along the Parks Highway. Information:interpretive displays and oral and written information concerning facilities and services available to the public in sheltered locations. Picnic Area:would likely include picnic tables,a picnic shelter,a drinking water source, restrooms,and a parkmg area. Campground (Primitive/Boat-in):these sites would be relatively'small and include 5-10 camJ?sites spread over an area of 2 to 3 acres.Facilities avaIlable would probably be: picnlc tables,pit toilets,bear-proof food caches,and boat tie-ups where necessary. Campground (Developed):improved campsites consisting of parking spurs for vehicles, trailers and motor homes,picnic tables,fireplaces,and complete water and sanitary facilities. Camp~o.u.nd (Group):organizational campground that could be either developed or pnmltlve depending on location.Developed group facilities would include tent sites, tables,fireplaces,campfire circle,parking,restrooms,water supply and cooking shelters. Minimal facilities would be available at the primitive,backcountry group campgrounds. - - (9)II (10)6, I (11)II (12)CD (13)0 (14)== (7) (8) (IS).,. U Boat Ramp:a concrete boat ramp providing accesss to a reservoir;including parking for vehicles and boat trailers. Docking/Marina:simple docking facilities providin~mooring and docking space.A devel- oped marina would also offer parking and dockmg space for boats and storage of vehi- cles and boat trailers,on-shore restrooms,water and electric services,boat sanitary dump station,and boat fuel,as well as rentals and supplies.Developed marinas would probably be constructed only at major developments near the dam sites. Store:groceries,dry goods,and souvenirs. Service Station:full service for all types of recreation area users'vehicles. Lodging:complete overnight accommodations. Food Service:restaurants and other food outlets that mayor may not be associated with lodging facilities. Float Plane Access:suitable access,shelter,mooring and aviation fuel supplies provided at areas used heavily by aircraft. Guided Boat.Tour:would pr~bably be tied in wi~h a ~us tour originating at a visitor center or overmght accommodatlons complex.It mIght mclude a one-day tour of the Devil Canyon Reservoir. Scenic Trail:shon,(one or two mile)day~use trails to scenic areas or interesting natural features. - - APPROACH "A"-AMINIMALLY DEVELOPED AND MANAGED WILDERNESS This approach could be used in the event that public access by road to the Susitna reservoir areas is restricted or not permitted at all.In this case,development will probably be limited to a visitor information center on the Parks Highway.Access by float plane would likely be extended to include the reservoirs.Access by canoe,kayak,and riverboat via the upper Susitna,Maclaren,and Tyone rivers would continue.Land use within the project area would probably be much the same as at present with management limited to fish and game management and the regulation of mining activities. [<;:-:;:;:1 Elevation over 4000 It. - o Km. Mi. .5 '0 APPROACH "B"-LIMITED ACCESS WILDERNESS In the event that access to both reservoirs is possible,the area could be managed as a wilderness recreation area,with development limited to minimal interpretive services,primitive campgrounds,and simple boat ramps at both damsites.These ramps would facilitate access by boat to the reservoir shorelines and adjacent areas for camping,hunting,fishing,and other backcountry activities.As in Approach "A",a visitor center would be buift on the Parks Highway.Information would be provided on the Denali Highway should access be available at this location (see access map).A tour boat service would be offered at the Devil Canyon damsite for day tours of the reservoir. 1;:;:;:;:;:;:1 Elevation over 4000 It. o Km.15-~~:Mc.,.C-i.~--'>,'0 ....:...:-:.:-.... - - - -I - APPROACH "C"-WATANA RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT One possible approach to mme extensive recreational development is to offer highly developed facilities at the Watana damsite and only minimal interpretive services at the Devil Canyon damsite.In addition to the serVices offered at both reservoirs in Approach "B",there would be greater development at the Watana damsite to accommodate increased visitor use.Simple backcountry campsites would be provided at selected locations around the Watana reservoir,with additional improvements being made at the mouth of Jay Creek.More intensive resource management would be necessary around the Watana reservoir but the remaining project area would still be managed as wilderness.As in Approaches "A"and "B",visitor infor- mation would be available at highway entrance(s). I::;:':;:;:::l Elevation over 4000 fl. r- I o Km. Mi. '5 10 . ..... APPROAcH "D"-DEVIL CANYON RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT In this approach highly developed facilities would be offered at the Devil Canyon reservoir and damsite and only minimal facilities at the Watana damsite.The Devil Canyon area would be developed and managed intensively to provide a diversity of recreational opportunities,while the Watana reservoir area could be developed and managed in a manner that would maintain its wilderness character. [:;:;:::::1 Elevation over 4000 It. o o Km. Mi.10 ...»::::. - APPROACH "E"-HlGHLY DEVELOPED AND MANAGED THROUGHOUT This approach involves a high level of recreational development and offers a wide variety of recreation activ- ities around both reservoirs.Complete visitor facilities would be located at the dam sites,with additional improvements made at the Jay Creek site,and backcountry boat-in campsites built at 5 locations.Intensive resource management would be necessary throughout much of the recreation area to reduce conflicts between uses and to maintain the quality of the environment. [:;:::>:::!Elevation over 4000 It. r I""" I - ..... I o Km, Mi.'0 RESULTS OF RECREATION QUESTIONNAIRE AT WORKSHOPS #3,March 1981 Number of poeple responding in favor of Plan A was 26 (out of 43 questionnaires recei ved). By community workshop: Fairbanks 13 (Out of 17 questionnaires received.) Talkeetna '9 .(Out of 16 questionnaires received.) Anchorage 4 (Out of 10 questionnaires received.) - Number of times comment made. 19 2 2 1 1 1 1 Reason given for favoring plan: Retain the natural beauty and existing recreation uses of project area;recreational development would bring more people into the area and adversely irr~act the environment. Recreation development would promote other commercial develop- ment in the area. Unmanaged recreation area is preferred. Recreation development and management would cost taxpayers too much money. Less development is preferred:"Big is not necessarily better.II Recreation can be developed later:wait until we really need it. Alaska already has enough recreation areas. - - 2 1 1 Modifications suggested: ----------t-:c--------::-----..-------:---:-~-__----_:_-----___j 5 Access should be by backpacking/ski trails only and not by road. 5 No development and no access is preferred. 3 Provide no access at all. 1 The least access provided,the better. 3 Provide railroad access only. 1 Provide road access from Parks Highway to Gold Creek,and rail access from Gold Creek to reservoirs. Confine float plane access to specific areas,such as reservoirs. No float plane access should be allowed. Boat access should be only form of access allowed. - - - RESULTS OF RECREATION QUESTIONNAIRE AT WORKSHOPS #3,March 1981 Number of poeple responding in favor of Plan B was 5 (out of 43 questionnaires received). By community Fairbanks 2 Talkeetna 2 Anchorage 1 workshop: (Out of 17 (Out of 16 (Out of 10 questionnaires received.) questionnaires received.) questionnaires received.) r - ..- -I ! Number of times comment Reason given for favori ng plan: made. 1 People prefer camping at areas designated for that purpose. I 2 Some people would use the camp sites and the surrounding environment would be less impacted by camping. 1 Local people feel more comfortable knowing that there are campsites available for campers to use rather than just camping where they please. 1 Little recreation development is preferred because existing use is fine. f----.-----...--.-...-----_ Modifications suggested: 1 Provi de the lease amount of access possible. '-- RESULTS OF RECREATION QUESTIONNAIRE AT WORKSHOPS #3,March 1981 Number of poeple responding in favor of Plan C was 7 (out of 43 questionnaires received). By community,workshop: Fairbanks 1 (Out of 17 questionnaires received.) Talkeetna 4 (Out of 16 questionnaires received.) Anchorage 2 (Out of 10 questionnaires received.) -----------,-------- - - Number of times comment made. 2 2 1 I 1 1 Reason given for favoring plan: This p1an is a good balance of high and minimal development. We might as well develop the area;people will use it anyway. Recreation resources should be available to all people,not just those who enjoy primitive outdoor experiences. Watanais a better area for higher recreation development than Devil Canyon. There will be management problems,but they can be solved. Campsites are needed to protect the environment because people will camp in the area anyway. - -, f-----------------l---------------------------------i Modifications suggested: 3 1 1 Provide rail access,not road access. Add hotels. Develop Watana as a fishing area. - - - RESULTS OF RECREATION QUESTIONNAIRE AT WORKSHOPS #3,March 1981 Number of poeple responding in favor of Plan 0 was 4 (out of 43 questionnaires received). By community workshop: Fairbanks 1 (Out of 17 questionnaires received.) Talkeetna 1 (Out of 16 questionnaires received.) Anchorage 2 (Out of 10 questionnaires received.) Number of times co:r.ment made. Reason given for favoring plan: "'"i L 1 1 All people should be able to enjoy recreational resources of Alaska. There would be fewer environmental impacts if higher development occurred at Devil Canyon rather than at Watana.Particular concern was expressed for the caribou. 1 Alaskans need more camper/trailer camping sites. l-------------f----------------------------------; Modifications suggested: ---,-'--'--------1-----------------------------1 solid wates disposal chopped wood and fire pits d. e. Boating facilities should include: a.Provide well designed and paved ramps. b.Provide several boat ramps to accomodate peak traffic. c.Provide a marina with fuel facilities . d.Have a waterfront area with bar and hotel. e.Have freshwater facil ities for drinki ng and servi ce There shoul d be full facilit{es along the access roads, such as car turnouts,food service,and camping sites. Provide camp sites with electricity. Camping sites should include: a.barbeque pits b.water c.sewer 1 2 1 "'"I I 1 "..., I ..- use at the docks. RESULTS OF RECREATION QUESTIONNAIRE AT WORKSHOPS #3,March 1981 Number of poeple responding in favor of Plan E was 2 (out of 43 questionnaires received). By community workshop: Fairbanks 0 (Out of 17 questionnaires received.) Talkeetna 1 (Out of 16 questionnaires received.) Anchorage 1 (Out of 10 questionnaires received.) >------------+-----------------------------1 Number of times comment made. 1 1 1 1 1 Reason given for favoring plan: High level of development desired at both lakes. Recreation resources should be available to all Alaskans, not just those who are able to hike or fly to rClT\ote areas. Modifications suggested: Provide rail access. Development could be less as long as full (road,air) access is provided. It is possible to manage as other areas have been managed. - - ,'j 'il - - - - '_...._.~-,C--l ~-1 "---'~l ;"--1 ,-]---I -~--')r~l----l -'1 ,../~Ae...._••A"~O.'TV ..., BUSITNA~HYDROELECTRIC PRC.JECT ~I[i]RCAN o.~"~IIIR:"-:::":M:::"N '~=TO: ...-/~ A report on the first series of community meetings on the feasibility studies for the Susitna hydroelectric project and other power alternatives April 1980 Fairbanks Talkeetna Wasilla Anchorage ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 1 E j B J 1 J J i -]j CONTENTS I.Introduction How people were invited 4 How many attended ;4 How the meetings were organized 5 Role of the Alaska Power Authority,. the state legislature and the governor in the Susitna feasibility studies " 9 Why Acres American,Inc.was selected to conduct Susitna feasibility studies 10 Who the decision makers are 11 II.Summary of what the public said 12 III.Evaluation of the meetings 14 IV.The next step .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 V.What happens to this report?18 APPENDIX A:Complete list of table top discussion comments 19 APPENDIX:B:Complete list of questions .39 Credits 61 Compiled by THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE OF THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 333 West Fourth ~venue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501/(907)276-0001 EricP.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority Nancy Blunck Director,Public Participation Program Alaska Power Authority The April community meetings were actually a continua- tion of public participation in developing the Plan of Study,as shown in the following chronology: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION THROUGH APRIL 1980 INTRODUCTION /,r~'~iJ,-~'~",',~';;;"',,,'r~",",~,,_,,' I -..1.,.r;_.'~~,.-["... "f,!".-,..",'If \Y~""'.,"",,.a~ISG"','~~"-',, "f ""Q ttl , ':''.1,1,~{lY,~L\l@~",r (,,),,'(;,~,:J'<')",'!~:~~,/{~';~'-,j,\~~"I j I,"~'.Ll ;r If:)~\"\~,,1 i 'If,~,,1 {II \;\l:l:t;',;,1 ''<;,{.'," In April 1980,over 250 Alaskan citizens attended community meetings in Fairbanks,Talkeetna,Wasilla, and Anchorage to comment on the adequacy of the Plan of Study for the Susitna hydroelectric study. What is the Plan of Study?It is a 528-page document that describes the individual studies that will be conducted to determine the feasibility of Susitna hydroelectric development.It describes how the studies will be conducted,who will do each study,and the time frame for completion.There are two aspects to a final decision on Susitna.First,there is the question of technical feasibility. This is determined by engineering studies.The other aspect is how desirable any alternative or group of alternatives is, and this is the part the public is involved in.Together both parts form the basis for an informed decision on Susitna hydroelectric development. The Plan of Study is intended to be a dynamic document.That means it can be changed when changes are appropriate and the Plan of Study can be improved. Changes can be suggested from the public,from the legislature,from the governor,from state and federal agencies,from Acres American,Inc.,from utilities,from anyone.This report describes the comments,the questions,and the suggested changes that came from the public at the April community meetings. July 1979 September 1979 December 1979 February 1980 April 1980 Environmental panel raised key issues to engineering firms desiring contract for Susitna feasibility studies. Public reviews three plans of study, listens to presentations,questions top three engineering firms,and prefers Acres American,Inc. Agreement signed between state of Alaska and Acres American,Inc.,to conduct feasibility study. Acres American,Inc.publishes Plan of Study.Alaska Power Authority distributes for review to groups, agencies,individuals and public libraries. Fairbanks,Talkeetna,Wasilla and Anchorage citizens comment on adequacy of Plan of Study at community meetings. 2 "'ee,:II 1 I ••a ,.J ,I J j J J J - ..,. - HOW PEOPLE WERE INVITED 1.Personal letters were sent to the presidents and contact persons for 46 groups and organizations in the rail belt communities,induding commercial fishing groups, sportsmen's groups,general public interest groups, environmental groups,recreation groups,energy- related groups,business groups,and mining groups. 2.Personal phone calls were made to the groups and organizations. 3.Personal letters were sent to legislators,state and federal agencies,and utilities. 4.Personal letters were sent to members and subcontractors of the House Power Alternatives Study Committee. 5.Large display ads were published in community newspapers a week before the meetings. 6.Paid radio ads and public service announcements were aired on local stations. 7.Daily notices of meetings were placed in newspaper columns like "Today in Anchorage." 8.Press releases were issued informing the public that Plans of Study were available for review in public libraries and giving dates of upcoming community meetings. 9.The Fairbanks Daily News Miner wrote a five-part series on the Susitna hydroelectric project.The series ran the week prior to the meetings and helped-t:o inform people about the issues and invite them to the meetings. HOW MANY ATTENDED Fairbanks Aprill4 Travelers Inn Talkeetna April 15 Talkeetna Elementary School Wasilla Aprill6 Wasilla High School Anchorage April 17 Bartlett High School Eric Yould and Robert Mohn,Alaska Power Authority 70 persons 31 persons 42 persons 109 persons 252 TOTAL 4 I .1 ..J .1 I J -, J }1 1 j I 1 }1 1 1 J I 1 HOW THE MEETINGS WERE ORGANIZED The meetings were designed to meet three objectives: -to describe the Plan of Study in understandable terms -to give the public a variety of opportunities to comment on the adequacy of the Plan of Study and to suggest additional areas of concern that the Power Authority should be looking at -to record all comments and questions in a useful way for decision makers. This part of the report describes how information was given to the public and what methods were used to get information back from the public. Giving Information to the Public Describing the Plan of Study was accomplished by three formal presentations.It lasted about an hour and a half and included the following: SLIDE SHOW HIGHLIGHTING PLAN OF STUDY John Lawrence,Acres American,Inc.(consultants conducting the studies) SLIDE SHOW DESCRIBING HOW ALTERNA- TIVES WOULD BE REVIEWED AND EVALUATED Robert Mohn,Alaska Power Authority DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM AND ACTION SYSTEM Nancy Blunck,Alaska Power Authority Getting Information Back From the Public A variety of methods was used to listen to what the public said and to record it.The methods are summarized below with a brief description: QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. Questions were written on cards because of time F==~====:::;constraints and the large ~=::;:::7~.4rufit.~1::J.~~'t numbers at some of the meetings.165 questions were 1~-'=l-..:J.:1Lj~~~~~'received in writing at all four 1----:~I-.:.JL'.f:1:.~'f:/;.14_..1&.meetings.Only in Anchorage I./IA./f •was there not enough time to respond to all written questions.A complete list of questions is in Appendix B of this report. In all communities,some time was also given to informal questions from the floor.These questions are recorded in the verbatim transcript stored at the Alaska Power Authority offices but are not included in this report. Questions were answered by members of Acres American,Inc.study team and by members of the Alaska Power Authority. Nancy Blunck,Alaska Power Authority 5 ,. INFORMAL CONVERSATIONS. TABLE TOP DISCUSSIONS.6 • IIJI ..:-;; I •--...1\'~,~ These discussions were held in Fairbanks,Talkeetna,and Anchorage,and gave each participant a chance to voice his or her concerns and opinions in small groups of 6-8 people.**Each table had a group member record all comments in writing,and this provided the raw data for the tables in Appendix A of this report.Each group was asked to consider these two questions: •Is this an adequate Plan of Study? •Are there other concerns or questions that the Alaska Power Authority should address? The results of the table top discussions were reported to the Alaska Power Authority and to Acres American,. Inc.in a summary form that night.The complete results are in this report.There were 182 table top comments received on the adequacy of the Plan of Study. **Wasilla's meeting operated as a group o/the whole and did not include individual table top discussions. During breaks,during table top discussions,and after the meeting,members of the public individually talked with Acres American,Inc.and Alaska Power Authority staff. Top and below:Talkeetna citizens giving table top discussion reports. ,)I ••I I J J I '~,.""J J 1 J I I 1 ~-)1 1 .1 'J J }}.J l i J ] PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. There was a formal opportunity at each meeting for people to give written or oral comments to the groups as a whole. Three persons presented written comments they had prepared ahead of time.The complete texts are inchlded in the verbatim transcripts at the Alaska Power Authority offices.Additionally the testimonies have been entered into the ACTION SYSTEM and are being responded to in writing by Acres American,Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority. A summary of the testimonies is included here: TALKEETNA -'Roberta Sheldon: •Acres American,Inc.Plan of Study appears superior to previous Corps plans of study •concern for objectivity of Alaska Power Authority •concern for objectivity of public participation program •concern for potential impacts of industrial growth associated with Susitna •request that Talkeetna and other communities be included in recreation survey to be conducted by Acres American,Inc. •request that "area residents impacted by dam"be included in list of groups addressed in the public participation program •request that transmission corridor assessment include impact on open-to-entry property owners •request that Plan of Study include sociocultural analysis of Talkeetna area WASILLA -Michael Bronson: •concern that environmental and social criteria be used in combination with cost information in determining the feasibility of Susitna hydroelectric development •further concern that environmental and social standards be established prior to a decision ANCHORAGE -Floyd Heimbuch,Executive Director of Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association: •request that any mitigation plan or system have payment in salmon,not in cash payments,and not in a plan to fund research activities •concern that the technology of stock separation is not yet developed and request that the technology be developed as a part of the Plan of Study •concern that procedures for developing a quantitative description of rearing and spawning habitat are not well developed and therefore not highly accurate •statement that not necessarily opposed to Susitna project and will help to provide answers to complex questions of fish impact The following two persons gave oral comments: FAIRBANKS -Ron Punton: •support the immediate go ahead with the intertie between the Healy site and the Talkeetna site* *the Public Participation office interprets this to mean the intertie between Fairbanks and Anchorage ANCHORAGE -Paul Johnson,President of Anchorage Chapter of the Sierra Club: •concern that it is very important to not get locked into Susitna but take a fair and good look at alternatives and that the public be involved in this 7 ACTION SYSTEM. r;;;;;;;;'~;;;;;-;;;;;':;;;l........If_F__JIt-~_··~:--__I !=.....;.;;....=.-=:::r_·::;:::.;.....~~-••--i j I I Ii1 1 ~~:=:;;:.-_n-";"'~'~~.c::';....;;:,~:;:'.-:.••_-.::-:::iJ__~: I ,,,..,,._'.._~,.....,,~......,....._....-,'_.I •.~--~------------------~-_._--------, The Action System was introduced to the public during the week of the community meetings. Essentially this is a method for insuring that all questions or concerns raised by the public get a written response from theAlaska Power Authority and from Acres American, Inc.At the meetings,time did not allow adequate or full answers to all questions.An easy-to-use form was distributed at the meeting and people were encouraged to use it to get additional information.As of the writing of this report,over a hundred individual questions and concerns have been received by the Alaska Power Authority.Responses to these are being individually prepared and sent to the author of each request.The content of the Action System comments will be regularly summarized in future reports by the Public Participation office. Talkeetna community meeting 8 MEETING SUMMARY Fairbanks Talkeetna Wasilla Anchorage Number of table top discussion groups II groups 2 groups *14 groups Number of written com- ments from table top discussions 79 comments 25 comments *78 comments Number of written ques- tions received 23 26 37 79 Number of written questions responded to 23 26 37 27 Verbal com- ments given during public comment period I person none none I person Written com- mentssub- mUted during public comment period none *The same basic format was folio wed at all the meetings but was adapted to the size of the audience and to the community.Wasilla's meeting operated as a group of the whole and did not include individual table top discussions. J J I J -.J J .,.,l ,_I ,I .-.1 I ,)J I }I }J 1 I -1 1 I 1 1 )}J 1 ROLE OF THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY,THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR During the 1970's the federal government studied the feasibility of Susitna hydroelectric development through the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. In 1978 Alaska's congressional delegation advised the state of Alaska to consider its own sponsorship of the Susitna project because of the political climate in Washington D.C.Itdid not appear that any major hydroelectric project in Alaska would be funded with federal dollars. The Alaska Power Authority is a state corporation and is the vehicle set up by the state to conduct feasibility studies and to finance and construct electrical power projects.Policy is set by a five-member Board of Directors appointed by the governor.The Authority has a staff of eleven,including an Executive Director,a Director of Finance,a Director of Engineering,and a Director of Public Participation. Through the Alaska Power Authority Board,pre- liminary reports will be sent to the governor and the legislature.The first is due March 30,1981,and the second is due April 30,1982.Both reports will recommend whether to continue studies on Susitna and the other viable alternatives. Additionally,the Power Authority will: -manage the public participation process. -monitor the work of Acres American,Inc.on all Susitna feasibility studies except the alterna- tives study (this will be conducted by an independent contractor and be managed by the Office of the Governor). -submit a license application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission if Susitna hydroelectric development is selected as the most feasible and desirable alternative. -recommend a financing plan and sell bonds if bonds are a part of the financing plan. What is the role of the legislature and the governor? The legislature funds all studies and oversees the study process.The governor manages the alternatives study,and acts to accept,reject,or modify the recommendations from the Power Authority Board in selecting the most feasible and desirable way to meet future electrical needs. One of the roles of the Alaska Power Authority is to manage the public participation program,as seen at the Fairbanks community meeting. 9 WHY ACRES AMERICAN,INC. WAS SELECTED TO CONDUCT THE SUSITNA FEASIBILITY STUDIES At its November 1979 meeting,the Alaska Power Authority Board selected Acres American,Inc.to conduct Susitna feasibility studies.Comments from the public were included in this selection as were comments received from the House Power Alternatives Study Committee.Both the public comments and the House Power Alternatives Study Committee supported the choice of Acres American,Inc. Here is a summary of the reasons: 1.Acres American,Inc.possessed the greatest experience with sub-Arctic construction and planned to retain the most experienced firm in Alaska for geotechnical work. 2.Acres American,Inc.planned to spend a greater portion of its budget in-state than other firms. 3.The Acres American,Inc.proposal contained the most objective and detailed studies of power market demand and power alternatives. 4.The Acres American,Inc.proposal provided for the . most extensive and direct public participation process. • Chuck Debelius and John Lawrence,Acres American,Inc . 10 J 1 ..1 J I )J .1 J .J J 1 1 1 J 1 1 )1 I 1 )1 WHO THE DECISION MAKERS ARE... The Alaska Power Authority Board will make two preliminary reports to the governor and the legislature. The reports will be based on Acres American,Inc.'s work" on the work of the alternatives study,and on public input. The first report is due March 30,1981,and will recommend whether studies should continue on the Susitna hydroelectric project.If the recommendation is that study should continue,the report shall explain the following in detail:economic evaluations and preliminary environmental impact assessments for the Susitna Current members of the Alaska Power Authority Board are:(left to right) Charles Conway.Chairman (Sitka);Arnold Espe,Vice Chairman (Anchorage); Commissioner Charles Webber,Department of Commerce and Economic Development,member (Juneau);Robert Weeden,member (Fairbanks);and Tom Kelly,member (Anchorage). hydroelectric development and all viable alternatives;a description of the federal and state permits needed before construction can begin;and the expected construction start date. The second report is due April 30,1982 and shall again recommend if work should continue on the Susitna project and other viable alternatives.If the recommenda- tion is to continue Susitna studies,the report will give more detail on design,on phases of construction,expected completion dates of each phase of construction,expected costs of each phase,and the costs to the state and to the consumers of the project under different methods of project financing (including revenue bonds,general obligation bonds and general fund appropriations). Governor Hammond 11 II.SUMMARY OF WHAT THE PUBLIC SAID 8 MAJOR CONCERNS The following areas received the most comments during the table top discussions: 15 comments saying Plan of Study adequate. 29 comments saying alternatives study not adequate and why. 25 suggestions for energy sources that should be considered in alternatives study. 17 suggestions for serious consideration of decentralized alternatives. 17 comments describing what the socioeconomic studies should address. 11 comments suggesting a level of effort on studies on fish,wildlife and plants. 8 comments describing concerns about transmission studies. 8 suggestions for getting information to the public. THE 8 MOST ASKED QUESTIONS Written questions were asked most often in the following areas (listed in rank order): 27 questions expressing concern for completeness of alternatives study 13 questions on adequacy of energy forecasts 11 questions on objectivity of those conducting the alternatives study 10 questions on the decision making process and the timing of decisions 10 questions on construction costs and schedules 8 questions on marketing and financing of Susitna 7 questions on access roads to damsites 7 questions on local hire in feasibility studies 12 ~J J J .1 J ~)]J J j .t 1 1 I 1 1 -1 1 1 J })I ~l )J }1 TABLE TOP DISCUSSION SUMMARY QUESTION AND ANSWER SUMMARY This chart summarizes the total number of table top This chart shows how many questions were asked about comments received on the adequacy of the Plan of Study.each TASK in the Plan of Study. #of 070 of #of %of comments total questions total Plan of Study 29 16%asked questions Task 1:Power Studies 84 46%Plan of Study 5 3% Task 2:Surveys and Site Facilities none -0-Task 1:Power Studies 79 48% Task 3:Hydrology 7 4%Task 2:Surveys and Site Facilities 9 6% Task 4:Seismic 4 2%Task 3:Hydrology 2 1% Task 5:Geotechnical none -0-Task 4:Seismic 7 4% Task 6:Design Development 2 lh%Task 5:Geotechnical 2 1% Task 7:Environmental 30 17%Task 6:Design Development 7 4% Task 8:Transmission 8 4%Task 7:Environmental 9 6% Task 9:Construction Costs and Task 8:Transmission 5 3% Schedules none -0-Task 9:Construction Costs and Task 10:Licensing .none -0-Schedules 13 8% Task 11 :Marketing and Financing 4 2%Task 10:Licensing 1 less than 1% Task 12:Public Participation 14 8%Task 11:Marketing and Financing 8 5% ---- TOTALS 182 100%Task 12:Public Participation 6 4% Miscellaneous 12 7%---- TOTALS 165 100% 13 III.EVALUATION OF THE MEETINGS The following is a summary of the evaluations filled out by those attending all four community meetings. HOW UNDERSTANDABLE WAS EACH OF THE THREE PRESENTATIONS?(statistical averages) 1.Is the handout on the overall decision-making process clear enough to understand without a verbal description? 85%yes 15%no 2.Are the proposed methods for responding to public comments and questions adequate? 70%yes 10%tentative yes/perhaps/somewhat 11 %no 9010 other 100010 TOTAL 14 A.Plan of Study (first slide show by Acres American, Inc.) C.Public Participation Program (description by Nancy Blunck,Alaska Power Authority) B.Selection Process and List of Alternatives (second slide show by Robert Mohn,Alaska Power Authority) terribly confusing I 2 3 4 5 6 terribly confusing I 2 3 4 5 6 terribly confusing I 2 3 4 5 6 7 very 8 9 10 understandable very 8 9 10 understandable very 9 10 understandable 3.Anything else we could be doing to get information to the public? Mentioned the most ....USE OF TELEVISION (mentioned 19 times). Second USE OF NEWSPAPERS (mentioned 10 times). Third EXPAND MAILING LIST AND MAIL IN ADVANCE (mentioned 7 times). NOTE:"use oftelevision"was most often mentioned in Anchorage and Fairbanks,but was also mentioned in Talkeetna and Wasilla. 4.Other comments: There were 33 comments on the meeting format.About 75010 (24 comments)said that the table top discussions were very effective.Other issues appeared only once or twice. I J I ]-I )J J J J l ]}}---1 }1 1 J J -J 1 »1 Members of the public evaluate the content and design of the Talkeetna meeting. 15 " 16 The purpose of the public participation program is the incorporation of citizen ideas into the feasibility study ...that's what happens in the NEXT STEP. Wasilla cOllllllunity I1lcctinl! J J J J ,)J .1 I J 1 1 J i j J I ]]1 ~~)J 1 l 1 t,•i IV.THE NEXT STEP The 1980 Legislature appropriated an additional $1,365,000 to make changes in the Plan of Study.The revised plan was prepared by the Alaska Power Authority and Acres American,Inc.It reflected the suggestions for change from the public at the community meetings,from consultants to the House Power Alternatives Study Committee,and from state and federal agency review of the Plan of Study. The major suggested alterations in the alternatives study are summarized below: -change the time frame for decision making and stretch it over an additional year -increase the work allotted to identification and description of power alternatives,including conservation and load management -present a number of alternative power plans for public review during the second year -augment the demand forecast data base -increase the level of effort allotted to financial and marketing aspects of the alternatives,and to risk analyses -utilize a multidisciplinary review panel -increase the environmental studies of alternatives -conduct a more complete sensitivity analysis. Additionally,the Office of the Governor is now overseeing the alternatives study.An independent firm will be hired to conduct the alternatives study,and this effort will be entirely separate from the Acres American,Inc. work on Susitna feasibility.17 v.WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS REPORT? Several things: 1.Acres American,Inc.,their subcontractors,the Alaska Power Authority,and the Alaska Power Authority Board will have copies of this report so they are aware of the concerns expressed and so they can assure that the studies are responsive to the concerns. 2.The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will have this report to assist them in their determination of the adequacy of the public participation program:how was the public encouraged to participate and how were their comments incorporated into the study process? 3.This report is the first of several documents that will be the major part of the Public Participation Director's report to the governor and to the Alaska Power Authority Board prior to decision making on Susitna. (Also included in the report will be the reportsfrom future meetings,workshops and ACTION list comments.) 4.This report will help form the agenda for future workshops.The Public Participation office has kept track of those questions that were asked most frequently and those questions that were not adequately answered at the first set of meetings. 5.The Public Participation office will use this report to help plan the agenda for the next series of community meetings in 1981. 6.Communities will have the opportunity to see what concerns other communities had.The table top discus- sion comments and the questions are identified by community for comparison purposes. 7.This report will go to the Office of the Governor with the hope that it will be used in the conduct of the new alternatives study. 8.Others to receive this report: -public libraries within the railbelt region -commercial fishing groups -sportsmen~s groups -general public interest -environmental groups groups -energy groups -recreation groups -mining groups -business groups -individuals upon -media request 18 cJ J J }]~cJ cJ J _.1 ]1 1 -1 1 ~-)1 .--1 J J l .-~J 1 J ~+!~~ • APPENDIX A:COMPLETE LIST OF TABLE TOP DISCUSSION COMMENTS Following is a complete list of table top discussion comments received.They are organized by TASK in the same manner as the original Plan of Study document. 19 COMMENTS ON PLAN OF STUDY 20 Plan of Study- adequate Plan of Study- difficult to under- stand and evaluate Plan of Study- comments on scope of work Plan of Study- assumptions questioned Plan of Study considered adequate. Plan of Study adequate only if studies completed properly. Plan of Study more than adequate. Enough studies have been done already-build Susitna now. Studies are an improvement over previous studies. People conducting studies appear to be open'and objective. TOTAL Studies difficult to evaluate without knowing how studies will be done. Plan of Study should indicate more clearly what its priorities are. Plan of Study difficult to understand:break into smaller parts. TOTAL Plan of Study should include previous studies done by Corps of Engineers. Studies too broad,costly and are difficult to complete in time allowed. TOTAL Plan of Study appears to assume that railbelt people would favor converting to electric heat. Plan of Study appears to assume that we should be meeting future energy demands. Plan of Study appears to assume that hydro is best and only solution. TOTAL air banks ;~ftalkeetna ;4'~'nchorage )J ])-,I c"J J J ,.J !)'. j J )1 )1 I ) TASKl mCJm~ IIg(;]C POWER STUDIES •determine the need for power generation facilities in the rail belt •consider and evaluate all viable alternatives for satisfying the need ADEQUACY:113 comments on adequacy of power studies: alternatives study- not adequate Alternatives studies not adequate. Criteria for evaluating alternatives appears vague and too mechanical.Specific concerns raised for evaluating alternatives were: ....Will cost outweigh socioeconomic values? ....Will value of Alaska's wilderness be given any weight? ....Will "emotional public sentiment"outweigh economic considerations? Not enough money for alternatives studies. Acres American,Inc.experience and objectivity questioned. Not enough time to do adequate alternatives studies. Only "legitimate"alternatives should be considered. TOTAL ~~airbanks t~alkeetna t~mchorage continued 21 power studies,continued. alternatives study- suggestions centralization versus decentralization ,. Alternatives study should include CONSERVATION,both voluntary and government enforced. Alternatives study should include SMALL HYDROELECTRIC development . .Alternatives study should include TIDAL. Alternatives study should include SOLAR. Alternatives study should include BURNING WOOD TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY. Alternatives study should include GEOTHERMAL near Devils Canyon. Alternatives study should include North Slope NATURAL GAS via pipeline. Alternatives study should include BELUGA COAL. Alternatives study should include NUCLEAR. Alternatives study should incorporate new technologies as they develop. Alternatives study should take into consideration some kind of overall energy plan. TOTAL Alternatives study should consider decentralized alternatives to Susitna hydro;8 of 15 comments suggested studying various combinations of decentralized alternatives. Alternatives study should evaluate vulnerability of centralized .power source. TOTAL continued 22 ~J J I J ~..1 I I !,!I -C J ]1 -I I ]1 E j i 1 ) power studies.continued. energy forecasts- suggestions Load forecasts should identify seasonal variations as well as daily variations. Power studies should anticipate the effects of public reaction to increasing cost of energy and public desire to reduce energy consumption. Demand forecast should include possible electrification of Alaska Railroad. Load forecasts should provide for auxiliary back-up power in addition to main power supply. TOTAL power costs Studies should show how much of Susitna costs will be paid by consumer. Studies should compare consumer costs of Susitna relative to other alternatives. Studies should consider ways'to lower power costs. Studies should show how the most economic power production is determined. TOTAL energy independence decision making Studies should evaluate possibility of selecting a power plan that would achieve energy independence. TOTAL Plan of Study should allow flexibility of decision making. TOTAL liairbanks lIalkeetna I!nchorage continued 23 power studies.continued. QUESTIONS: VALUES: pro Susitna against Susitna four questions on power studies in table top reports: -What kinds of power (other than hydro)will be available in the future?(Talkeetna) -Looking beyond current technologies,what alternatives sources can be expected in the near future? -If natural gas generators are to be prohibited in the future and!or fossil fuels become prohibitively costly,what would be the alternatives or how much power would be available without the use of hydropower-in the next 20 years?(Talkeetna) -When will the Golden Valley Electric Association be bringing on capacity from the oil pipeline stations (the waste heat power project)?(Fairbanks) 27 values expressed on power studies during table top discussions: - I am in favor of it.(Fairbanks) -Agree that it is a good project.(Fairbanks) -Get going with project.(Anchorage) -Build the dam first,then develop alternatives.(Fairbanks) -Susitna is good,long term energy supplier.(Fairbanks) -Project is environmentally desirable and inflation proof.(Fairbanks) -Build dam now before costs are too high.(Fairbanks) -Susitna is large in cost,but not in capacity.It is less affected by inflation.(Fairbanks) -Feel that we lost out by not getting Rampart Dam-cost of energy will be too high if dam isn't built.(Fairbanks) -Opposed to dam.(Fairbanks) -Is Susitna a dinosaur egg that we'll be sorry we hatched?(Anchorage) -For the $3 billion cost of Susitna project,with existing technology,distribution of that amount on a per capita ($10,000 per person)basis should be considered to reduce consumption and eliminate need for more generation capacity.(Anchorage) continued 24 I I j I 1 I ,...~.J J J J ]j I power studies,continued. J I 1 1 1 ]j 1 ] pro hydro alternatives study power costs opposed to centralized power sources -In the presence of a shortage of energy,we shouldn't question hydro.(Anchorage) -Hydro should be used by those who have access to the renewable resource;the fossils should be saved for those who don't have hydro potential.(Anchorage) -Alaska does have hydro potential;it's clean and we should use it.(Fairbanks) -Stationary energy requirements should be supplied by large hydro in preference to using coal.(Fairbanks) -Hydro is the only form of energy other than nuclear that we could look to for the long term.(Fairbanks) -liThe water is all running down hill -Better get at it- The gas we can sell;water we can't. Never seen a hydroproject blow up-just get wet."(25-year Alaskan;Anchorage) -No need to study nuclear.(Anchorage) -Conservation should be a priority in any projection of needs,as Alaska has a uniquely large potential for saving in that area.(Anchorage) -Conservation is less costly than building new project.(Fairbanks) -Should not consider heating homes with electricity-not efficient.(Anchorage) -Reason for developing new energy sources should be lower cost of energy,not attracting new industry.(Talkeetna) -Fairbanks pays a lot for electricity.(Fairbanks) -Opposed to centralization of energy sources.(Fairbanks) -Opposed to government controlled centralization of energy sources.(Fairbanks) 25 TASK 2 AVA -A ... SURVEYS AND SITE FACILITIES 26 •provide safe,cost effective and environmentally acceptable logistical support for the feasibility studies •conduct topographic surveys of the project area •resolve real estate issues ADEQUACY:no table top comments received on adequacy of this section of Plan of Study.. QUESTIONS: VALUES: three questions included in table top reports: -Will native lands around dams be purchased at unreasonable prices?(Fairbanks,twice) -Who owns the land at dam sites?(Fairbanks) -Will any federal land withdrawals delay dam?(Fairbanks) no values expressed about the work to be done in this section of the Plan of Study. J )J I _<I J J ,I ..1 ,e]c.cl i 1 1 I J }-I I ~]-I 1 }1 1 TASK 3 HYDROLOGY •collect data and perform analysis for the hydrologic,hydraulic,ice and climatic factors in project planning and design ADEQUACY:seven comments on adequacy of hydrology studies: Studies should examine effects of large reservoirs on climate. Studies should examine silting problems both behind dam and in river. Studies should determine effects of ice break-up on Susitna. TOTAL QUESTIONS: VALUES: no questions on hydrology included in table top reports. no values expressed about the work to be done in the hydrology section of the Plan of Study. lairbanks 'T,:alkeetna jd;j IV~'n;l\ff./V,nchorage 27 TASK 4 SEISMIC STUDIES 28 •assess seismic potential of Susitna basin •determine seismic design criteria •evaluate seismic stability of project structures •assess the potential for reservoir-induced seismicity and lan"dslides ADEQUACY:four comments on adequacy of seismic studies: Studies should include extensive seismic analysis which would continue aftcr June 1982. Studies should evaluate reliability of current knowledge about the effects of large reservoirs on highly seismic areas. TOTAL QUESTIONS: VALUES: no questions on seismic studies included in table top reports. no values expressed about the work to be done in the seismic section of the Plan of Studies. Wf{'1airbanks ~];alkeetna'i nchorage J I ___J )J "I j j 1 }J J )J I 1 J 1 TASKS GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION •determine the surface and subsurface geology and geotechnical conditions of the project sites ADEQ UA CY:no table top comments received on adequacy of this section of Plan of Study. QUESTIONS: VALUES: no questions on geotechnical exploration included in table top reports. no values expressed about the work to be done in the geotechnical section of the Plan of Studies. 29 TASK 6 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 30 •prepare the optimal plan for Susitna hydroelectric development (includes whether tunnel or dam, number of dams,types,where,size and timing of development if staged) •prepare preliminary engineering and design information for the selected development plan ADEQUACY:two comments on adequacy of design development studies: Studies should identify appropriate minimum levels of stream flow during filling of reservoir. TOTAL QUESTIONS: VALUES: three questions included in table top reports: -How much voltage will be produced by the dam?(Talkeetna) -What impacts would there be on rail belt communities if there was a major breakdown of Susitna hydro while it was on the line at -60 degrees?(Talkeetna) -What is the life span of the dam project?(Fairbanks) no values expressed about the work to be done in the design development studies. ..1 .1 :~'iairbanks il~:i~lkeetna >;t\Wnchorage 1 j J t .J ,)I 1 1 i 1 1 .~ j'I I l -I I I 1 1 I 1 1 .~ TASK 7 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES •collect baseline data •compare alternative plans from an environmental standpoint •assess the socioeconomic,archaeological,historical,land use,recreational,water resource,fish, wildlife,and plant ecology impacts of Susitna development ADEQUACY:thirty comments on adequacy of environmental studies. socioeconomic Socioeconomic studies should address goals of railbelt. Studies should consider socioeconomic effects of Susitna hydro on railbelt communities. Specific concerns mentioned were: -Will the rate of inflation increase like it did during pipeline days? -What will the effects of new industrial development be? TOTAL :~airbanks ;~~alkeetnaAnchorage continued 31 environmental studies.continued. impact on fish, wildlife,plants environmental trade-offs Susitna as navigable river Studies should consider impact of fish populations in Susitn'a River and its tributaries. Studies should be more thorough and include inventory of plant and animal resources. Studies should continue for at least one normal animal cycle (a hare cycle is plus or minus ten years). Studies should consider impact on moose and caribou, particularly in Susitna flat estuary and Beluga calving grounds. TOTAL Studies should establish guidelines for acceptable environmental tradeoffs. TOTAL Studies should evaluate Susitna as a navigable river. TOTAL 32 QUESTIONS: VALUES: wilderness industrialization preserve river as natural system no environmental questions asked during table top discussions. three values expressed related to environmental studies: Alaska has plenty of wilderness areas.(Fairbanks) Opposed to industrialization-keep things the way they are.(Fairbanks) Susitna is a beautiful,unique river.(Fairbanks) J ) ~ltairbanks ;"jp,alkeetna't!;,nchorage ,_J _J I I I )1 J 1 -)1 1 1 )_.)-J I J }1 TASK 8 TRANSMISSION •select the transmission route •produce conceptual designs for transmission facilities ADEQUACY:eight comments on adequacy of transmission studies: Studies should examine negative aspects of intertie. Studies should identify health hazards of living near transmission lines. Studies should examine best routes for transmission lines. (NOTE:"best route"not defined at meetings.) Design of transmission lines should accommodate transmission of electricity from variety of sources. TOTAL QUESTIONS: VALUES: three questions included in table top reports: -Can you live near transmission lines and not receive power?(Talkeetna) -Why does there need to be new transmission lines if there's already a connecting power line from North Pole to Homer?(Talkeetna) -Will Cantwell be bypassed?(Fairbanks) two values expressed during table top discussions: -Build intertie now.(Fairbanks,three times) -Recommend putting transmission lines along highway and not along railroad-too many people live along railroad.(Talkeetna) lIairbanks Ijalkeetna ~!~nchorage 33 TASK 9 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULES 34 •develop cost estimates for the Susitna project •prepare detailed engineering and construction schedules •conduct risk analysis of all possible things that could affect cost overruns AD EQ UACY:no table top comments received on adequacy of this section of Plan of Study. QUESTIONS: VALUES: one question included in table top reports: -Is there a minimum acceptable benefit/cost ratio that will permit construction of the project?Will cost overruns be somehow included in contingency factor?(Anchorage) no values expressed about the work to be done in this section of the Plan of Study. ..1 J .j j J ,~J J 1 }1 i 1 )1 I ]J I i )1 I TASK 10 LICENSING •prepare and assemble all documentation for the license application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ADEQUACY:no table top comments received on adequacy of this section of Plan of Study. QUESTIONS: VALUES: one question included in table top reports: -If the state of Alaska funded a significant (major)portion of this project,would federal environmental guidelines need to be followed and met?(Anchorage) one value expressed during table top discussions: -Our consensus is that federal intervention is necessary to speed up the time frame of the project-to save real dollars and eliminate possible brownout.(Anchorage) 35 TASK 11 t-'f MARKETING AND FINANCING 36 •assess methods of financing the Susitna project •prepare draft support documentation for bond offering,including risk analysis ADEQUACY:four comments on adeqp.acy of marketing and financing studies: .. Studies should determine costs of Susitna hydroelectric development . Studies should determine whether or not Susitna project is economically feasible in a traditional sense (without big state inputs). Studies should evaluate whether state can afford to finance both gas pipeline and Susitna hydro. Financial studies should be delayed until conclusion of all other studies. TOTAL QUESTIONS:no questions on marketing and financing included in table top reports. VALUES:no values expressed about the work to be done in the marketing and financing section of the Plan of Study. ~Iairbanks ~,\ijalkeetna t!libchorage <_.1 .I I ],J i J J ~J 1 1 1 J J })1 1 1 1 J 1 TASK 12 .PUBLIC PARTICIPATION •keep the pubUc fully informed of plans,progress and findings •provide a means whereby the public can influence the course of the work ADEQUACY:fourteen comments on adequacy of public participation program: information to the public inputjrom the pubUc Need to educate public better.Suggestions included T.V.,radio, attending community council meetings,using shopping center displays,and finding ways to reach persons who are unable to attend meetings (such as those in Pioneer Home). Preliminary reports should be available to public prior to community meetings and decision times. Final reports should be concise and easy to read. TOTAL Public needs more input-more time to speak at meetings. Public needs to know how their comments influence decisions; 2 or 3 comments expressed doubt that public comment has any affect on decisions. TOTAL lairbanks IIalkeetna Inchorage continued 37 public participation,continued QUESTIONS: VALUES: one question on the public participation program included in table top reports: -Will the issue be brought up to a public vote?Possibility of making it so?(Fairbanks) five values expressed about the public participation program: -Governor appoints Alaska Power Authority Board,yet input of Acres and public goes to Board.(Talkeetna) -Four comments were included on the April 1980 community meetings: -Slide shows should have more numbers,fewer cartoons.(Fairbanks) -Slide show was clear,informative.(Fairbanks) -Rather than break for table top discussions,would have preferred you continue with written questions.(Anchorage) -The handout on alternatives did not emphasize alternatives enough. (Anchorage) 38 J J ,I ,I I ,.],.J .J )J -,I ,I J ,I j i , £J J j 1 -j I J J ]J J }i APPENDIX B:COMPLETE LIST OF QUESTIONS Following is a complete list of written questions submitted at the meetings.They are organized by TASK in the same manner as the original Plan of Study document. 39 use of past data cost of feasibility studies exchange of information GENERAL QUESTIONS ON THE PLAN OF STUDY 1.What's become of past data?Is it available?Will it be used?(Wasilla) 2.What additional information could possibly be needed after all the work that's been done?(Wasilla) 1.What is the total amount of the contract with Acres American,Inc.?(Anchorage) 1.Are there any avenues for exchange of information between Acres American,Inc.and engineering firms which have completed large earth or concrete dams in other Arctic locations-such as in Scandinavia or Siberia?(Talkeetna) 40 UNANSWERED QUESTION (in Anchorage this Was'not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) title of plan of study I.Doesn't the title ofthe project,"Hydroelectric Feasibility Study,"give the false assumption on the part of the general public that the study is not on all or many different power alternatives?Why was it named this? j j I it I J J I I J l j J TASKl m=m~ IIflQC POWER STUDIES ]-J l "~1 J --1 1 ]J J [B 1 }-1 ~l j •determine the need for power generation facilities in the rail belt •consider and evaluate all viable alternatives for satisfying the need general on alternatives budget for alternatives who is studying alternatives? 1.Can you outline top three alternatives?(Wasilla) 2.Will anybody evaluate employment opportunities provided by different alternatives, both immediate and long term?(Fairbanks) 1.How much money is in the budget for alternatives?(Talkeetna) 2.How much money is being spent on Susitna feasibility study?By contrast,how much is being spent on the alternative feasibility studies?(Anchorage) 3.How much of the study plan's budget will be spent on identifying and evaluating alternatives?What percentage?(Fairbanks) 1.Who exactly is studying alternatives to Susitna?(Talkeetna) 2.Please clarify who is doing the alternatives investigation and when results will be available?(Anchorage) continued 41 power studies,continued. decentralized vs. centralized power Susitna hydro how Susitna power used other hydro 1.Will Category 'B'on the lavender sheet attempt to quantify and/or compare the risks (costs and otherwise)of a centralized source of power as opposed to decentralized sources?Will this take into account the cost of necessary backup (standby) systems?(Anchorage) 2.Considering the immensity and high cost of this project and the favorability of local decentralized power sources (wind and solar),what kind of assurance can you give that these alternatives will receive proper consideration?(Fairbanks) 1.Is there really an alternative better than Susitna?No need to look at alternatives. (Wasilla) 1.What are the uses envisioned for Susitna electricity?Space heat for residences, industry,transportation?(Anchorage) 2.What is the purpose of the Susitna project?To provide power for increased population?residential use?provide power for industrial development and expansion?to create jobs?other?(Anchorage) 3.Would you anticipate total electrification of the railbelt area,Le.power substations for smaller communities which are currently without commercial electricity? (Fairbanks) 1.Will Acres American,Inc.evaluate the 64 potential hydro sites identified by the federal government in southcentral and interior Alaska?In what detail? (Fairbanks) 2.What are other possible hydro sites (outside the railbelt)?(Wasilla) 3.What other hydro sites are being studied?(Talkeetna) 42 tidal 1.Is tidal power feasible for Anchorage?(Talke~tna) 2.Is the Cook Inlet tidal power project an alternative which could be considered competitive in cost with Susitna?(Anchorage) continued J I ~I j ..c»J J ,I )....J J ~..•11 ]~]'~I 1 )~-J ]1 power studies,continued. other alternatives costs of Susitna to consumer 1.I understand there are questions concerning the availability of NATURAL GAS.How long will natural gas from Beluga and the Kenai Peninsula last?(Apchorage) 2.What has been done with the in-state GAS line idea and study of Bonner and Moor? (Fairbanks) 3.Why is the SOLAR alternative limited to centralized electrical generating units? (Anchorage) 4.What is the role of SOLAR residential applications (specifically,active and passive systems in new and existing housing stock)?(Anchorage) 5.With regard to WOOD,will the residential space heat potential be assessed (Le.wood used in wood stoves as opposed to being burned in a generator)?(Anchorage) 6.Are studies of alternatives limited to a specific geographic area (Le.railbelt)? GEOTHERMAL may not be a viable alternative for the rail belt but perhaps in the Copper River basin it would be.(Anchorage) 7.Will CONSERVATION,our #1 alternative,be tested extensively through application in existing facilities,or alternatively,will more efficient design be considered? (Anchorage) 8.Among the conservation measures considered,will direct LOAD CONTROL techniques and innovative rate structures be considered as a means of conserving generating capacity?(Anchorage) 1.I understand that Susitna power will be equal to $80/barrel of oil.Comment? (Fairbanks) 2.Whatever happened to the Rampart dam proposal?Is Susitna more cost effective? (Wasilla) 3.Will the Susitna project be economically viable?(Fairbanks) 4.If the federal government won't foot the construction bill,will power from Susitna (including transmission line costs)cost more than using natural gas in gas turbine, combined cycle power plants?(Fairbanks) continued 43 power studies,continued. costs of alternatives to consumer energy forecasts how decisions made 1.Do you have any estimated costs on the alternatives?(Wasilla) 1.What are power use trends in Alaska relative to nationwide trends?(Wasilla) 2.How have past population and power usage projection figures been formulated? (Talkeetna) 3.How will future population and power usage figures be formulated?(Talkeetna) 4.How are future energy projections determined?Is social opinion considered in making these projections?(Talkeetna) 5.How will we insure that our energy need projections will not be exaggerated? (Anchorage) 6.Doesn't a large forecast of energy become a self-fulfilling prophecy and be an invitation to industry to come in?(Wasilla) 7;Will the Susitna hydroelectric project produce excess energy?(Wasilla) 8.If the dam is to provide power for increased population-where are the people going to come from and what will they be doing?Hasn't population declined? (Anchorage) 9.Are energy load forecasts ready?Figures ready?(Wasilla) 10.What is the background for the Institute of Social and Economic Research (lSER)?Is it private?Is it funded?How long in Alaska?(Talkeetna) 11.Is anyone from ISER here?Their demand projections seem crucial and subject to conscious or unconscious bias.(Fairbanks) 12.ISER mentioned six consumer categories-half were industrial categories.Why the emphasis on industrial use?(Talkeetna) 1.Will the go/no go decision be made by the legislature or by a general voting opportunity?(Anchorage) 2.Will social and environmental factors be a part of the criteria for determining feasibility,or will cost be the only criteria?(Wasilla) continued 44 J "}I I I ..]I J I J 1 1 J power studies,continued. 1 ]1 i J J ~I 1 continued timing of decisions objectivity of Acres American objectivity of Alaska Power Authority 1.Why conduct detailed Susitna studies before alternative studies are complete? (Wasilla) 2.Why aren't considerations of environmental impacts involved in the first go/no go decision?Necessary environmental studies will not be completed in time for this important decision.(Fairbanks) 3.Will any decisions regarding Susitna (go/no go)be made before 1982?Or will phase I study results precede any decision at all?(Fairbanks) 4.Why is the decision schedule so long and drawn out?Considering the vast amount of studies already done,can't this process be expedited?(Fairbanks) 5.Why is the go-ahead decision being made in February 1981 before the seismic studies are done?(Talkeetna) 1.Acres American,Inc.seems to have a history of dam building proposals.Therefore I sense a predisposition to seeing Susitna as the only viable alternative.I would like Acres American,Inc.to tell in detail what past research they have done on alternatives to large-scale hydro?Has Acres American,Inc.ever done a study and decided a dam wasn't the best alternative?(Anchorage) 2.Can Acres American,Inc.be an advocate of such alternatives?(Anchorage) 3.We have seen many impressive slides of hydro projects in which Acres American,Inc. has been involved.What experience has Acres American,Inc.had in less imposing alternative energy sources such as solar and retrofitting of energy-saving alternatives?Have they been advocates for any alternatives?(Anchorage) 4.Acres American,Inc.has done feasibility studies on other dams.What percentage were actually built?(Talkeetna) 5.Isn't it in the financial interest of Acres American,Inc.to give a 'go'signal at the go/no go decision point?How can Acres American,Inc.be objective at this point?Who will review them?(Fairbanks) 6.Question to Acres American,Inc.:based on previous experience,what are the odds as you estimate them now that the study will be positive for hydro construction? (Fairbanks) 1.Does the Alaska Power Authority have a vested interest in the project?Le.How would your age·ncy and you as individuals be affected by cancellation of the project? (Anchorage)45 power studies,continued. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) 46 general on alternatives who is studying alternatives decentralized vs.centralized how Susitna power to be used industrial growth I.What types of power sources is the APA studying besides hydro? 2.Concerning "parameters for evaluating alternatives":Where will you look at the (I)environmental quality and (2)socioeconomic opportunity costs of present or probable future uses of resources affected? 3.Will assessment of alternatives take into account the "state of the art"in 1990 as well as projected "cost" or "need"? I.What sort of experts will be employed in evaluating the alternatives,such as conservation,solar, and wind? I.How can the value and advantages of a decentralized system be realistically compared to a centralized system?A specific area of concern is the reliability of a large centralized system. I.What is the potential power output of the Susitna project as it is now envisioned? 2.Will the dam meet all of Anchorage area energy needs? 3.For how many years will the Susitna Dam project (assuming Watana and Devils Canyon dams are built) be sufficient for our energy needs?I understand the Corps did a study showing that the dams will carry our energy'load for only a few years.Then new sources will be needed to supplement. I.I have heard conflicting justification for the second dam (Watana).Can you clarify what the purpose is for Watana:either additional storage or for anticipated industrial growth,or something else? 2.Will the dam cause heavy industry? cantin/Jed J ]~J I !I 'I J J J I I 1 1 )1 1 1 i 1 1 1 J J ]i power studies,continued. other alternatives cost of Susitna to consumer energy forecasts how decisions made timing of decisions objectivity of Acres experience of Acres I.Will you clarify passive solar and wood burning for heat? 2.Explain "additional aspects"under wind power on pink page 2 Power Alternatives? 3.To what degree is the possible reduced demand in electricity resulting from alternatively promoting conservation measures being studied? 4.What consideration is given to economic uses of waste heat from thermal generation plants (industrial, residential,agricultural,etc.)in the study? I.How many barrels of oil to produce an equivalent amount of electricity?of coal? I.Bucky Fuller made a speech in Anchorage in December 1979 and discussed his prediction regarding Alaska's future.Will these comments be used in your energy forecasting efforts? I.It appears that alternate energy advocates are continually voicing objection to this and other hydro projects without credible alternatives.How does the Alaska Power Authority intend to make afinal decision determination in order to prevent this project's being its life's work? I.How much time will there be between completion of the "project overview"and the go/no go decision? I.Question to Acres American,Inc.-Given the strong political support for the Susitna project,how seriously do you believe other viable alternatives will be considered? 2.Robert Mohn stated that AcresAmerican,Inc.and Woodward Clyde would study the power alternatives (Le.coal-fired generation).Doesn't it seem a conflict since Acres American,Inc.was hired to study a dam proposal and their experience is designing dams? I.Aside from hydroelectric projects in the north and elsewhere,what other energy developments has Acres American,Inc.been in charge of or involved with? 2.How many coal-fired plants has Acres American,Inc.designed? 47 TASK 2 A-VA -A. SURVEYS AND SITE FACILITIES 48 •provide safe,cost effective and environmentally acceptable logistical support for the feasibility studies •conduct topographic surveys of the project area •resolve real estate issues land ownership road access airport access 1.Who owns the land at the dam sites and upriver in the reservoir areas?(Wasilla) 1.What are the probable access routes?primary roads?secondary roads?(Talkeetna) 2.How will route selections for road access be made?(Wasilla) 1.Where would the runway be located and what size would it be?(Wasilla) UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because oftime and the very large number of written questions submitted) road access 1.At what stage of the planning process will a road be built to the construction site? 2.When is actual construction of road access? 3.What about roads and access? 4.If the dam(s)were constructed,how would the workers,officials,and general public gain access to the site(s)or to any developed recreational facilities or areas? 5.Once the right-of-way for the road has been established,will it be open for public use? I .1 j I I I I I J I J .1 »1 )j ")-~ j )1 J 1 ]J »1 TASK 3 HYDROLOGY •collect data and perform analysis for the hydrologic,hydraulic,ice and climatic factors in project planning and design No questions were asked in Fairbanks,Talkeetna and Wasilla. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) climate ice 1.Are there studies on the effects of large reservoirs on climate throughout the Susitna River area? 1.What types of studies are being planned to estimate the impact and problems of potential additional ice formation and icing problems in the lower reaches of the Susitna River (from Talkeetna to the mouth)and in Cook Inlet? 49 TASK 4 SEISMIC STUDIES 50 •assess seismic potential of Susitna basin •determine seismic design criteria •evaluate seismic stability of project structures •assess the potential for reservoir-induced seismicity and landslides general faults dam failure 1.What will two years of seismic monitoring tell us?(Talkeetna) 2.What is the maximum size quake that would preclude building a dam?(Wasilla) 1.Where does the Susitna fault lie?(Fairbanks) 2.How close is the Susitna fault to the dam sites?(Fairbanks) 3.How would major seismic activity on the Susitna fault affect the dams?(Fairbanks) 1.What would be the consequences if the dam broke?(Wasilla) UNANSWERED QUESTION (in Anchorage this was not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) J reservoir induced earthquake I 1.How does a large dam induce earthquakes? ,I 1 ]]1 1 I j 1 I J 1 j 1 1 TASKS ·N~···;;:" ~ @DB"~ GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION •determine the surface and subsurface geology and geotechnical conditions of the project site solis assessment mineral resource assessment 1.What soils assessment will be conducted?(Wasilla) 1.Will the Plan of Study undertake detailed mineral resource assessments?Concern that significant deposits not become inaccessible.(Wasilla) 51 TASK 6 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT .. 52 •prepare the optimal plan for Susitna hydroelectric development (includes whether tunnel or dam, number of dams,types,where,size,and timing of development if staged) •prepare preliminary engineering and design information for the selected development plan size of reservoir employment potential tunnel alternative 1.How large would the lake be?(Wasilla) 2.How many miles long would the reservoirs be?(Wasilla) 3.How wide would the reservoir be?(Wasilla) 1.How many people would the dam employ?(Wasilla) 2.What is the maintenance level of employment on the Susitna project?(Wasilla) 1.Explain the tunnel alternative:the cost,time,head,environment.(Fairbanks) (Head:vertical drop from top of tunnel to bottom of tunnel.) UNANSWERED QUESTION (in Anchorage (his was not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) how design for ice I.How do you get power from t.he dam when the river is frozen? .. I >.J ,I J i i I I J 1 1 1 ~'B -I 1 1 J 1 I ] TASK 7 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES •collect baseline data •compare alternative plans from an environmental standpoint •assess the socioeconomic,archaeological,historical,land use,recreational,water resource,fish, wildlife,and plant ecology impacts of Susitna development Talkeetna local hire recreational benefits of lake 1.Will there be more inclusion of local labor in the study?Many skilled,able and willing are unemployed here.(Talkeetna) 2.I would like to know what efforts are being made toward local hire of workers for this study?Local hire is good public relations.(Talkeetna) 3.To what extent is Alaskan hire involved in present feasibility work and if it is a go decision,what process will be used to hire skilled and unskilled laborers? (Talkeetna) 4.Could a Talkeetna-based job service roster be established on a preferred basis to fill Acres American,Inc.positions?(Talkeetna) 1.What possible benefits would the lake have?(Wasilla) continued 53 environmental studies,continued. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because oftime and the very large number of written questions submitted) 54 en vironmental objectivity Alaskan hire L The Department of Fish and Game is a state agency and so is the Alaska Power Authority.Both agencies are subject to the same bureaucratic pressures.Acres American,Inc.has been successful in getting dams built!Their job is to satisfy licensing requirements.Where does the objectivity for studying and reporting environmental impact come from? L How many Alaskans will be employed? 2.How big a non-Alaskan staff will be working on the plan of study?10ll/o,30%,or 50%?How much of this report will be done outside the state of Alaska?10%,30%or 50%? 3.How much money will not go directly to Alaskans? "~]J I ]_I J I 1 1 })}.1 )1 J J ]}I j i j TASK 8 TRANSMISSION •select the transmission route •produce conceptual designs for transmission facilities health impacts route selection intertie 1.In the report it stated that''transmission corridors will also be studied for environmental compatibility."Does this mean that the same type of transmission lines and towers that are now operating elsewhere will be studied as to the impact they have on the health of the people who live near them?(Talkeetna) 1.At this time what are alternative transmission corridors?(Talkeetna) 2.Do the transmission corridors encroach upon open-to-entry land in this area? (Talkeetna) 3.How will transmission route selection be done?(Wasilla) 1.Would an intertie between Anchorage and Fairbanks be of value at this time,before completion of studies?(Fairbanks) 55 TASK 9 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULES 56 •develop cost estimates for the Susitna project •prepare detailed engineering and construction schedules •conduct risk analysis of all possible things that could affect cost overruns costs timing transportation for construction 1.If two dams are constructed,what will be the cost of concrete,rebar,and temporary damming or channeling of the river?(Fairbanks) 2.SB 295:are these costs an accurate estimate?(Wasilla) .3.In the figure $4.3 billion:have cost overruns been considered?(Wasilla) 4.Have you looked at the pipeline history of cost overruns?(Wasilla) 1.If all goes to plan,when would the first phase of the dam be operational?(Wasilla) 2.When would construction begin?(Anchorage) 1.What kind of transportation would be used for construction activities?(Wasilla) continued .)J ),I ,I 1 -)1 I }1 }'I, jI 1 I )l }i 1 l j construction cost estimates and schedules,continued. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in A nchorage these were not answered because oftime and the very large number of written questions submitted) costs timing fast tracking the Susitna project I.How many barrels of oil will it take to build the Susitna dam? 2.What is the present estimated total cost of this project? 3.Aside from the direct cost of studies,what are the costs of escalation during the study period,i.e.what would be the cost of an extra year of studies? I.Based on long drawn out issuance of a FERC license,when will the first kilowatt of electricity leave the dam site? 2.Present generating facilities have fairly definite replacement dates.How well does the proposed Susitna construction schedule fit those replacement schedules? I.What are the procedures for placing the Susitna hydroelectric development on the federal "fast track" (the Energy Mobilization Board)assuming one is established? TASK 10 LICENSING •prepare and assemble all documentation for the license application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Why FERC review 1.Why does FERC have to review a license application to construct Susitna?(Fairbanks) 57 TASK 11 r~t MARKETING AND FINANCING 58 •assess methods of financing the Susitna project •prepare draft support documentation for bond offering,including risk analysis public or private funds 1.Would public or private entity finance,construct,and operate the Susitna dam? (Wasilla) 2.What state involvement would there be in the Susitna project?(Wasilla) UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because oftime and the very large number of written questions submitted) financing ownership of project I.What are the financing options for the dam (7.5070 or what?) 2.How will the Susitna project be financed?Bond issue?State sales tax? 3.What would the pro rata share for the federal government be? 4.What would the pro rata share for the state government be? I.As the project is now proposed,will other utilities have the opportunity for participation as joint owners or will the project be 100%state funded? 2.Is the Alaska Power Authority willing to allow other utilities to purchase a portion of the total project? }')J ,I J ,t J ,I ,....J !.1 1 ))}1 1 }J j I ))I j TASK 12 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION •keep the public fully informed of plans,progress and findings •provide a means whereby the public can influence the course of the work weight given to public input future workshops citizens'advisory board 1.What weight will be placed on public input in the evaluation process?(Talkeetna) 1.The first workshop was scheduled for May 1980 in the Plan of Study.When is it now scheduled?Will it be advertised?(Wasilla) 1.Is there an ongoing citizens'review and advisory board or citizens'review of each independent study?(Anchorage) UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answ"ered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) meeting location Kenai area public hearing 1.Why was this meeting held here rather than at a more central location that was more accessible to public transportation? 1.Why has the Kenai area been eliminated from having its own public hearing?Environmental impacts of this project on salmon resources may affect the available harvest allocated to this area. 59 Misc. ?• MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS 60 Acres relationship to Corps of Engineers how Acres selected who would build dam? who is the Alaska Power Authority? who appoints advisory board? other 1.What is the relationship between your proposed study and the Environmental Impact Statement,Upper Susitna River Basin,Southcentral Railbelt Area,Army Corps of Engineers?(Talkeetna) 2.What is the relationship of Acres American,Inc.to the Corps of Engineers or vice versa?(Talkeetna) 1.How was Acres American,Inc.selected as the prime consultant for the study? (Anchorage) 1.Who would build the actual dam if Acres American,Inc.okays feasibility?Would Acres American,Inc.build it?(Talkeetna) 1.With a change in administration (Le.governor and legislature)what effect would there be on the Power Authority?(Fairbanks) 2.By what authority is the Power Authority established?(Wasilla) 3.What is the purpose of the Alaska Power Authority?Why does it exist?(Anchorage) 1.Who will make the appointments to the $1 million Advisory Board?(Anchorage) 1.HB 967-what is MEA's Project?(Wasilla) 2.One slide John Lawrence showed states that manpower of Acres American,Inc.would peak at 45.This figure seems low.Is it correct?(Anchorage) UNANSWERED QUESTIONS (in Anchorage these were not answered because of time and the very large number of written questions submitted) I.If additional areas are requested for study by the Alaska Power Authority,Acres American,Inc.will be paid more money.Is there any chance that payroll could be reduced if the Power Authority weeded out some of the unnecessary study items? 2.Over the next 10 years,how much money will be spent per year? J "' ))t oj .,1 ...J C~~-I Credits '~~~),eeC""'Cl '-~-l e-----1 ~~'·l -~~-1 c,~-~~-l 1 ~"-] The following individuals assisted in conducting the community meetings and in the preparation of this report. Meeting Moderators Eric Yould,Executive Director,Alaska Power Authority Robert Mohn,Director of Engineering,Alaska Power Authority Nancy Blunck,Director of Public Participation,Alaska Power Authority Fairbanks Meeting Facilitators Fairbanks League of Women Voters: Rosemarie Davis Ann Swift Ruthann Swanson Arlayne Klein Sue Jones Talkeetna Meeting Facilitators Harriet Shaftel and Sharon Zandman Wasilla Meeting Facilitator Harriet Shaftel Staff Assistance Al Arnold -Photography Madeline Holdorf -Verbatim Transcripts and Typing Acres American staff John Lawrence,Project Manager Charles Debelius,Deputy Project Manager John Hayden,Technical Study Director James Gill,Manager of Alaska Office James Landman and Alex Vircol,Power Studies Engineers Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors Mr.Charles Conway,Chairman Mr.Arnold Espe,Vice Chairman P.O.Box 520 Alaska Pacific Bank Sitka,Alaska 99835 Post Office Box 420 Phone:465-2500 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 Phone:276-3110 Anchorage Meeting Facilitators Anchorage League of Women Voters: Virginia Breeze Harriet Shafte! Sharon Richards Barbara Newell Molly Crenshaw Mary Bookman Consultants Jean Buchanan -Program Development and Evaluation Sarah Winterburn -Report Design and Graphics Elizabeth Baldwin -Writing and Editing Assistance Commissioner Charles Webber, Department of Commerce & Economic Development Pouch D Juneau,Alaska 99811 Phone:465-2500 Mr.Thomas E.Kelly 225 Cordova Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Phone:274-9671 Mr.Robert B.Weeden 203 Bunnel Blvd. University of Alaska Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Phone:479-7095 61 The Public Participation Program of the Alaska Power Authority is funded by the State ofAlaska. \""})I --J i J ---))1 _."-l, J 1 IJiJ PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 333 WEST 4th·SUITE 31 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 BULK RATE U.S.POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO.272 ANCH.AK.99502 january 1982 ackground Information on propoHcl usitna reliminary information available on fish and wildlife impacts The downstream loss 01 moose habitat could be offset by habllat man.gement.This would entail encauragemenl 01 com- merclallogglng 01 mature balsam poplar.the burning 01 veget. tlon on selecled river Islands,and the use 01 a vegetation crusher In areas east of the river.s'"'""'ano2 Second,without the constant washing away.plant succession would continue and vegetation would become too tall or mature for moose to 8IIt.The problem would be greatest In years of deep snow because there would be more moose In the river competing for the same amount 01 browse. M re.m.'ar source 01 lood for.1l the p.ck.ldenlilled In the 01 the propo.ed Susltna re••rvolre.In the long '.rm, any reducllon In lhe number 01 moose would Ilia reduce the number 01 wolves for a conlklerabl.dI.I.nce Irom the proposed ..servolre. 2 Su~,,,,.Hyd~'ric ~l Of.', An.lty.J,0'tNlltllil.Mi"'1iOn ~f«M'. ~1t1'.r"'.Jtf1eJEtl~'" S~'/a,.attdAcu..A......ic..,.I"r:. I Sutftma H'~,trePro/eel Enw«Jn- ",.",~Sf6tdte"ANfllaIR~II~Sub- ,..'-7."·1iI19GMw.J.,/y 1911.r.".s/MI fnwi'O#I",en'.'$pK~l/st..Inr:. i ~ Fewer moose could mean fewer wolves First,many areas that currently are washed away by river flooding will no longer be washed away.This would stabilize thOse habltata and creata an Initiel 15 to 20 year Increase In the amount of moose browse In those areas. Studies of moose populations and habitat focused on two separate areas:upstream and downstream of the proposed dam sites. Upstream 01 the dams:Moose populations in the upper Susitna basin are estimated to be about 3,300 animals.The primary impact would be the loss of habitat (and the resultant loss of moose)in the portion of the basin to be inundated.Studies to date suggest that areas to be Inundated are used by moose during winter and spring.Loss of this habitat during this time would result in a reduced moose population for the area. These aress do not appear to be important for calving or breeding.It appears that the period of time moose occupy the impoundment areas is heavily dependent on winter severity. During the 1980-81 winter (which was mild)72 moose were counted In the impoundment areas.During severe winters significs_ntly more moose would use the area with a resultant larger impact. Available data indicate that the Watana impoundment Is likely to have a greater impact on moose than Devil Canyon. The only mitigation option that might prove usable in the upper Susitna ar,a is controlled burning of areas to improve moose habitat.However,moose habitat management in other areas could be used to compensate for moose habitat losses in the upper basin. Downstr.am 01 the dams:Current data by the Alaska Departm.nt of Fish and Game indicate that most moose use the areas nearest the Susilna Alver In the winter and tend to range away from It the rest of the year.Some moose remain year-round on the larger river islands. Changes in downstream river flow (due to operation 01 Busltna) may change the plant succession trends downstream.In the long run.lhis could reduce Ihe amount 01 winter browse available lor moose to eat. Moose feed on willow,belsam poplar,birch,high bush cranberry,and rose_These plants grow on the river bars and Islands that are created in part by natural floods. Two changes could occur by lessening the occurrence of the natural floodS. Studies de cribe possible changes I pstream and ownstream moose habitat 2 the susllna hydro al 1 Questions and answers on caribou Dr.FrIlnk Banfield II a wlld"'e access to the relatively Inac-drainages.In the case 01 Susltna,the zoologlll apac:lallzlng In tlla cesslble heartland of the Watana reservoir will be aver; study 01 mlmmall,partlcularty Nelchlna caribou herd.Other Important Issues In-deep reservoir with very stee clrtbou and relndaar;hi hll elude the dlsturbence to shorelines.The Ice shell will Itudled mammll.In lhe Soviet Unless controls are Imposed,caribou by the construction 01 be tilted Quite preclpltou Iy In Union,Japen,Canida,and the access road could provide ancillary facilities such as ac-spots.There will also be r~ Alelk•.He .110 .erva.on Ihe a Jumping oil point lor ail-cess roads,transmission areas of relatively flat shore Su.lln.Wlldlile MIIkla!lon terraln·vehlcles (ATV's)to takE lines,and the activities of con-Iceln the big bays.An e.ampl core "roup which I.......Ing all on unplanned trails across structlon workers and opera-01 this would be where atan8 the Impactl ollila proposed alpine tundra.In this case,it tionaI personnel on the pro-Creek comes Into the SusHn. Sualln.projecl on wlldlile.would become possible for Ject.This would Include vehi- campers,hunters,and cle traffic on the access roads,Que.lIon:How does Ice ahelv- Alter oblelnlng hI.PhD In 1951 fI.hermen to reach sensitive the use of aircraft,and any Ing create problems ror from the Unl.....lly 01 areas 01 caribou range such as hunting opportunities allowed caribou? Michigan {where he loculed calving grounds and main the Susitna project personnel. on lhe utlllzalion and mana"e·migratory paths.Benfield:In the spring th lOU" menl of caribou),Dr.Banfield Que.lIon:What is "Ice would have had some time lo bagan work for fhe Can.dlan Caribou blologlsls generaily shelving"?mell this Ice shell.This I the Wlldllfa Service.In 1957 IIa accept that certain sensitive time 01 the spring mlgrallon .a.appolntad chief 01 the areaa that caribou use Banfield:A reservoir with an and the caribou might h III zoology nellon oflhe Ha·necessitate special protec-Ice sheet on It,such as In cross areas 01 smooth tilled 1I0n.1 Munum 01 Canada and lion.These Include the calving northern parts 01 the contl-ice behind other areas olllil lrom 1883 to 18118 WII dlrIlctor grounds,the post-calving ag-nent,must be drawn down dur-up ridges 01 broken Ice n 01 tlla N.lIonal 01 gregatlon areas,as well as Ing the winter to prOVide the shore line. H.turll'Sclences_traditional migration routes.power.Not much water is be- Ing added to the reservoir lrom II the migration period w 'n 1_,Dr.Banlleld w•••~As you can well appreciate,the river during this time delayed Into late spring th polnled proleaaor 01 ecology such an unplanned network of because the rivers are freezing sun might have caused much at Brock Unl..rIllly near ATV tracks would make con-and drying up.01 the shore Ice to dlslnteqrale Hlagara F.II••01 hll mo...trol 01 hunting opportunities and the reservoir Ice might b from govemmenf he llye,"I 'ar more dlllicult for the agen-The ice In the middle 01 a rotlen and covered with pool~ became dllanch.nled wllh clea_Speaking 01 agencies,reservoir 15 really supported 01 melt water. govemmant WOIIt and __II·this would represenl a real and floating on the waler.As funed to the environmental Im-challenge to the state and you start drawing down the QUllllon:Are there nalUf1Il <» perIltl......I decldecllo try lederal agencies responsible water,the Ice collapses to the currences that caribou en- teaching the nexl",neratlon lor management 01 the caribou new water level.When you counter that are similar to i 10 recognlza the anvlronman·herd and adequate protection draw water down again,the Ice shelving? 1.1 crt.II."Bafore rellrlng In 01 the cartbou habitat.collapses again. 1979,IIa became director 01 Some public atlention has All wlnler long the Ice goes Banlleld:Ves.Ice shelves ar~ Brock'i In.lItute 01 Urban.nd also bean locused on the risk through a series of collapses naturally produced along river Environmanl.1 Sludl••.to caribou atlemptlng to cross lollowlng the level of the water banks after the first flood 01 the proposed Watana reservoir down to the minimum level of spring water and at ice jam" Dr.B.nfleld II curr.ntly a lull·during their migrations,par-the reservoir.Generally,however,I would lime conlullanlln the an·tlcularly during the spring say that Ice shelving will be a vlronm.nlalfleld lpacl.llzlng migration when the reservoir Something different happens new experience locally for lh on the problems 01 caribou.He would be at Itslowe"t level In on the sides 01 the reservoirs.Nelchlna caribou. hal vl.lled .nd worked In late April or mid-May.As the water racedeslrom theAllak.numarou.time.linea shoreline,the ice collapses1951IndhlllIudladtheC.n-At that time the shores 01 the onto the shore where the QUI.lIon:What ImpactstralArc11c.nd Intem.lIonal reservoir are expected to be shore Is now exposed_With could result Irom IcePorcupln.herda.He served ••covered with steeply sloping,each subsequent drawdown.shelving?• n environmenl.1 eonaultanl stranded Iceshelves.These Ice there Is more shore exposed.to Alllka Arctic Gil Company shelves are expected to be Each time the ice collapses on Banlleld:There are ...from 1971 to 19n,.Iudylng broken up and detached from the reservoir,more Ice comes levels 01 Impact that couldthealfectof.ltam.llve the 1I0ating ice covering the to rest onto the exposed re.ult Irom Ice shelving.pipeline roule.acroa.nor·middle 01 the reservoir.shore.lhem Alllk.on caribou.First,the Icing conditions Conditions like this are Furthermore,pressure from resulting from the OUl.llon:What are the rna/a,generally perceived as being the expanding Ice on the reser-drawdown may not prove te Issu8s concerning caribou on hazardous to migrating voir pushes the shore Ice up In-be a barrier to migrating the Susltna prolect?caribou,partiCUlarly pregnant to ridges that break up Into caribou.The situation m cows that are atlemptlng to chunks.Eventually you have a not be that much dillereni Banfield:I believe that the reach the calving area south of shell of Ice or ridges 01 plied from the existing Ice that most Important Isaue Is the In-the Susltna River In the Kosina Ice that lollow the slope 01 the now forms on the river direct ellect 01 prOViding new Creek end Oshetna River shore.banks. A: Spring:Iha waler I••t It. lowelt 'e..land tlla lhare Is eo_with Ice_Thlill lug- ",ltI...of Ice ahalvlng lhal eould occur on the W.I.n. raaervolr.The Ic.on WII.n. would be thicker th.n what Is .hown. B: Early summar.lhe w...,18 ,UII .t Its 10w••llev.1 bullhelca has melled.nd th.Ihora Is ex- posed. C: l.le lumm .lhe w.ter I.at IIll11Qhaal ....l 8nurce: D'P'emlcli of IIlfl Shor.V.,.on ot *'North $f/lHIVt H'Id«HI«tflt>l'.~o.lflf\f_ a.-~PetIOfl.t.l.d(llC)QfWt~"IU'" Ufllw,.lty.CMa,erN Ice shelving on a Swedish hydroelectric reservoir dlsturlled by tll~plll1llina-nd ftfoul There's also some Indication that walt predation on caribou is facilitaled along the haul road. Theral.t also some Indl tlon Ihat the pipe-lin corridor has tended to divide 'he north and south movements of the Cen- tral Arctic nerd into two parallel ribbons,one on each side of the pipeline corridor from winter ranges to the calv- ing grounds and not permit- ting or encouraging a cross- over during migration. Overall,however,the Central Arctic herd Is managing 10 maintain Its population.This points to the conclusion that the herd is coping with the disturbances caused by the pipeline. Sln'ctlon 0'Ine TranS·AIUks p(JltiII ne"? B.,lIIa d:Qaribou studies were conducted In connection with the original environmental assessment,prior to Ihe ap- proval of the Trans·Alaska pipeline.Probably most of the undesirable Impacts were alleviated by mitigative pro- cedures during construction. These procedures Included burying and Insulating sec- tions of the pipeline where caribou lend 10 cross.It ap- pears that the most negallve impacls Ihat were possible during construction did not occur. Banl..td:The Impacts that cur· rently occur along the pipeline and haul road are of a more subtle nature.For example, there has been an avoidance reaction to the haul road,par- ticularly by the cows and calves.The bulls are less Ou••tlon:What about ongoing Impacts on caribou from the pipeline and Its accompanying haul road? Qua.lIon:What was learned about caribou from Ihe can· croSllls i1ctLnJly Iha home Ia It 01 'ha alctllns ,,AI IIlIflous III111l1l1 In Ihe oast this plet has en occupied by oven larger number;01 caribou lhan are occupying It at th present. There could 1>&two prob· lems with the Denali access route. The first deals with aetl1l· ities during Ihe const c- tlon ph_:some losa of habitat to borrow pita for road construction,distur- bance by workers.and possible direct mortality of migrating caribou as a result of collisions with vehicles. A second problem could be crealed by providing pUblic access to the area after the construction period.This could bring campars with ATV's and hunters Into the calving and post·calving ago gregation areas. Qua.lIon:Are there any ac- cess roules that could im- pactlhe caribou more than others? This would result In a longer,but less hazardous route to the traditional calv- Ing grounds. too i'rlruIldo~U,e ,1110'1 .."uld l1jJva eas"".,d long lMe Mrlh shore 01 1M re~r· lolr and crosaabove lie Oshelna Alver where 'he ,hannel 01 the Impound· ment would be dry and covered by groundJld Ice or contain a natural flowing river. Banfield:Considering only caribou,the proposed ac· cess route from the Denali Highway south to the Watana reservol r wou Id have a greater Impact on caribou than other alter· native access routes to Ihe west (from the Parks Highway or from the Alaska Railroad at Gold Creek). This Is because the plateau that the Denali route would ~O-_'-----'-----=------'=---... Third.'he migrating herd lNIy fua 10 cross the _olr Mel would tum _to cal In the north- "em PQ{1lon ot their n 1l11a wc>uld probably ult In Ihcreased calt rnQnallty aince Ihe calves WOIllcl dJ'llpped In less ,n OJ)1If1J8l terrain. TIll,COllld allio contine the hmtlloamuch smaller par· lion ollis loul rB"1le.In this _"ill.IIl<e thata nd calYlng araa may be IJSlabll!ll1ed over time.The snll",mO\'1lJTlent pattern at 11'18 NeleN,Rol\Ilerd would be raorganlzed,Including the posslblllty 01 en isolated IIOI1lon 0'lhe herd tormlng In tllellOl1hweslern portion DIllie I'lInga. Fourth,the possibility ex- lat./I14t II file crossing Is The N.lehlna caribou herd ....1.boundad by four mount.ln range.:the Ala.k.R.nge;the Talkeetna Mountain.;the Chugach Mount.ln.;.....Ihe Wrangell Mount.ln•. Iftln Ihl.v.ry I.rge .1lIII then I,.a he.rtland range th.tl. mo.1 fraqu.ntly oCcupied by lhe core popul.llon olth. N.lehlna caribou herd.Thl••ra.la about halllhe slza of th.en· IIr.r.ng•. The caribou .t111 croa.the Rlchardaon .nd D_II Hlp.ya with .om.regul.rlty. major roulas R,hletoncRI b.currant minor roufeR c.current About 19621he Nelchlna caribou herd reached a peak of about 71,000 animals.Between 1962 and 1969lhe herd stopped grow· ing and began a steep decline which resulted In an estimated population of 8.000 cariboU In 1972. Biologists have allrlbuled this decline primarily to poor survival of calves 10 one yeer 01 age.A secondary reason was hunting (65,000 caribou were reported legally harvested between 1962 and 1972). Possible contributing factors 10 this decline included emlgra· tlons of caribou to olhar herds to the north and Increased natural mortality at adults by wolves and bears. In 1972,lhe Alaska Departmenl of Fish and Game Initiated restrictive hunting regUlations on the herd.Hunting is currently controlled by a permit system. Currently,the herd has recovered back to 20,700 caribou. 16,000 of theae are adults (one year old or older).This is ap- proaching the management goal of 20,000 adults.set by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.This goal may be reach· ed within the next several years.and Is the number of caribou the range can support without problems of overpopulallon, WriUen b,~Ptte_,A....-ch BIDtoglsl,AluQ ~m.nlof Fllh and a.m.. the 1Iuaitn11 hydro st sljanuary 1982 The following responses to questions about the effects of the proposed Susitna hydroelectric project on fish have been provided by Dana Schmidt and Woody Trihey,two members of the Fisheries MItigation core group. The Fisheries Mitigation core group has reviewed and concurred with them. Trihey The prt....ry._oI ..lmon II8hery ImpKt I.\tie .Iretch 01 DevIl CMyon .nd T.I IM.Appteel.bl.II•..."ImpKt I.nol.nllclpal8d be I'"Chullln.contlu.nc••Furth... .1 being pl.nRad 10 11ICN8..1...1_1 01 conllcl8nc8ln llIla _s.m.nl. 1.What portlons 01 ....Su."·high enough to cause a sur-In addition the sloughs provide M RIww ~you .luctIad?fllCe w.ter connection at their important rearing habitat for 'ower end.juvenile chinook and coho. Basically the river has been divided Into threa segment.Detailed measurement.10 7.In \tie ____of mitigation for.tudy:determine relatlolllhl~be-_.u_'-.llInlllcMl 1.from Cook Inlet 10 twean the water 1....1.In the _fcIl...chumaal_ Talkeetna;slough.and .tream flow In the Joaa be 10 ....Coollinfat 2.trom Talkeetna to Devil maln.tern ha...only been cam_IaI "....rt••? Canyon;and made at ••mall number at 3.the Impoundment areas sites.This year.data .ugge.t.that of the Devil canyon and 20,000 to 30,000 chum salmon Watana reservoirs.But It .ppears that virtually all spawn In the Devil canyon to of the slough.measured are Talkeetna reach of the river.If 2.~do you expact t'"Inacce••lble to adult salmon the spawning habitat lor these grsaleat changa.to occur?when maln.tem flows .re less fish were lo.t,It would mean a than 10,000 cf.at Gold Creek reduction In the Cook Inlet We expect the greatest (the U.S.G.S.gauging station).fl.hery of approximately change.to occur In the Im-70,000 chum salmon. poundment areas and In the 5.WOllkl .Iraam flow In \tie Talkeetna to Devil canyon r.ngs 0112,000 to 14,000 Over the laet 20 years,the total reach of the river.The flr.t cf••1 Oold CrMll m.lntaln Cook Inlet chum harvest has phasa 01 downstream fI.hery the .100000h hablt.l?ranged from 270,000 to 1.2 studies has concentrated on million fish. determining effects from the No.Stream flows In this range project In the river segment would only maintain access to With availabl.data,the best between Talkeetna and Devil the slough from Its estimate we can prOVide of the Canyon.downstream end.To maintain significance of the chum the slough habitat,signiflcant-salmon loss to the Cook Inlet 3.WillI...post·projeet flo_Iy larger flows would also have commercial fishery would be from th.dams significantly 10 be occasionally prOVided.approximately a 15%reduc· Iffeel th.fI.harfea be_tlon In harvestable chum Talkeetna Ind DevIl At present,stream flows In e.·salmon. Clnyon?cess of 25,000 cfs at Gold Creek are common during This parcentage Is based on The IInal decision regarding summer months.These flows two assumptions:1)a total post-project lIows has not enter lhe sloughs from the loss 01 the chum salmon been made.However,a set of upslream end and flush out population between Devil posl·project flows which op-undesirable sediments.Canyon and Talkeetna;and 2) timlze power production has Without parlodlc flows that this year's salmon spawn- been proposed as a starting through the sloughs,the ing data reflects the average point for Impact assessment sloughs would gradually sill·ln size of the run of chum salmon and mitigation planning.and become covered with using this portion 01 river duro •egetatlon.ing the last 20 years. Our assassment of these IIows Indicates that they will Our preliminary analysis of ex-8.How might other specie.be result In a major loss of spawn-istlng information indicates ."ected? Ing habitat between Devil that stream IIows In the range Canyon and Talkeetna for the of 19,000 cfs at Gold Creek are Sockeye salmon use spawning species of salmon which ha.e necessary to allow water to habitat.similar to chum traditionally used these IIow into the sloughs from the salmon In the Devil Canyon to habitats.upparend.Talkeetna reach,but this year's sockeye populations 4._..I.thl.spawning 6.Which fish species use t'"utilizing the sloughs are rather habltal?slOllllh habll.1?small in comparison to the chum population. Most of the spawning habitat All specie.of Pacific salmon is located within the side chan-except chinook have been Very little Is known about the nel.and sloughs that adjoin observed spawning in the side pink salmon runs that use this the malnstem Susltna.These channels and slough areas.rl.er segment.E.en-year runs sloughs are only accessible to The chum salmon is the (1980,82,84,etc_)are normally adult salmon when the ri.er Is predomlnan user.larger than odd-year run•. We will have to wait until spawning areas are studied in 1982 before an assessment can be made of project 1m· pacts on pink salmon spawn· Ing in the De.1l Canyon to Talkeetna River segment. Chinook and coho salmon primarily spawn In tributary streams below De.1I canyon. These streams should not be directly affected by post· project IIows. However,juvenile chinook and coho depend upon the side channels and sloughs of the malnstem Susitna for summer and winter rearing habitat. Rearing habitat in side channels and sloughs may be affected under flows which optimize power production. The a.erage monthly stream flows resulting from optimiz- Ing power production range from 5,000 to 17,000 cf.during the summer. II.Whaloptlons e.l.llor ml1lgMlng t ...loa.olt'" .Ida chMnaland .10'" hablllta? Several mitigation options are being explored at thl.time. Although the preferred method 01 mitigating this los.would be to avoid the Impect altogether (by adoplfng raser- .olr operating recommend. tlonsl,It seems unlikely that this can be done il the prolect Is operatjld for opU_1 power production. The next best method of mitigation would be e com· blnatlon of things.The first Is to provide adequate down- stream IIows and design struc- tural features into the dams to minimize ad.erse Impacts.The second Is to undertake feasi- ble mllfgatlve actions such as ri.er channel modilications (to pro.lde replacement spawning areas),in an attempt to offset the losses that do occur. However,numerous technical quesllons still remain concerning the overall feasibility 01 depending upon stream channel modillcatlons 'or th"continued propagation of salmon In this rl.er segment. Campen salary types of mitiga- tion alternatives such as fish hatcheries,artificial spawning channels,or enhancement ac· tI.ltles in other parts of the Cook Inlet basin are also being considered. 10.Bellda.""eetlng .t...m IIow,what 01h8r typa.01 ImpKt.on t ...f1 ....ry r.aourcetl era poulble fr_t ...con.tructlon of Su.Una? Oth.r concerns 10 the fishery that are being evaluated are: changes In Ice cover and chan· nel morphology;changea In In- tergravel temparature and IIow rates In spawning areas;as well as changes In stream temperatures,water quality, and su.pended sediment con- centrallons. the aualtna hydro studlesljanuary 1982 5 11.tlow wocdd the dama al·develop wllh conslruclion of mortalities.enough seasonal flows and period when the data are fllCllhe lurbldlty spawning areas in the main gradlenls which should available." uspendecl sedlmenl con-channel (as mitigation for Ihe 16.Wlltlhe rllSllfYOlrs cause downcut Ihrough their della ~enl..llonalln lhe SldUna lost slough habllals).any problema on lIaIlerlea fans to Ihe new level of the 20.Is il possible 10 cQn8llUClI River?above Ihe Canyon?Susltna River and eslabllsh a Ihe dama and Improve the Fish will allempllo relurn to new channel 10 Ihe malnslem lish.rl.s? QUrlno the summer,malnslem traditional spawning areas In Yes.Grayling habltalln Ihe river. fiversediment concenlratlons the sloughs.It is uncertain river and trlbulary slreams Yes,if il were decided to do hould b reduced by the whether Ihey will accepl new wilhln the Impoundment zones However,Ihe rearing habitat so,and Ihe fish cooperate. seIVolrs to levels thai would man·made spawning areas.will be lost as a consequence for the juvenile chinook and be similar to the lower Kenai This would be a mailer 01 can·of building the project.Com·coho from these slreams may Habltal Improvemenl would be Alv r.This should provide 1m·cern if the decision Is made to pensalory types of mltlgallon be adversely allecled.These mosl probable If we did ptO'Iemenls In malnslem rear·depend enllrely on man·made for this loss are being examin·young fish depend on the several Ihlngs In concert:1) in9 habltal for resident fish spawning areas in Ihe ed.slough habltal during the sum·provide adequale slream flows .Jlld rearing salmon.mainslem river (as replace·mer monlhs.These sfoughs to maintain or minimize the im- menl for losl slough habilal)to are expecled to be suslantlally pact on the slough habilals;2) TlJrbidlty should increase sustain the exisling run.17.Will there be any Impacla dewatered (left wlthoul store undesirable peak flows Dove the currenllevels In Ihe downel..am of the can·enough waler for fish to in the reservoirs to prevenl Hln'er.This is nol expected to lIuence 01 the Chuliina survive)If power production is deslructlon of mainstem versely allecl the IIsheries.14.Wlllih.Susltna proj.cl and Sualtna Rivers?optimized.spawning areas;and 3)Install alleel wal.r quallly?the necessary outlet works In 12.'Hili c alnwal.r There are severat unknowns 19.Is Ih.dala currently the Walana and Devil Canyon alily and t.mperalure Preliminary invesllgalions regarding the ellecls of the a.allable adequal.to dams to provide acceplable ,.venl .almon from have nol identified any chronic proposed Susllna proJecl on del.rmln.Ih.lull .xlenl downstream temperatures and mlllll (IIndlng th.lr waler quality problems which the river below Ihe Chulitna olliallary Impec1a from to prevent other waler quailly ,l.plIwnlng er...)?would cause a loxic down·confluence.No obvious SuaUna and 10 provide problems such as gas super· slream condillon for young adverse Impacls on fisheries delalled mlllgallon solu·saturation. No.Salmon use their fish or food organisms.have yel been delermined.In Ilona 10 lhe problema? sense of smell to find their part.this Is because Ihe Phase If these actions were taken,II spawning areas.Changes 15.Whal ...the poaslbl.I sludles have been concen·No.The dala base collecled by is quile likely Ihallhe exlsling In water quality and Impactalrom Incr.a..s In Iraled In Ihe Impoundmenl the Alaska Departmenl of Fish fishery resource could be .<itream temperature are wlnl.r alream lamper·areas and in Ihe Devil Canyon and Game to dale,as well as Improved. oat known 10 allecllhis.ature?10 Talkeelna reach.Ihe precision 01 the engineers' providing Ihe original currenl forecasls regarding Were additional malnslem scent source Is slill Increases In river It Is also due to the fact thai posl·projecl flows and waler spawning areas constructed, present.temperalures will affecl the the upper Susltna River con-temparalures,are adequale and the fish cooperale,the formallon of an Ice cover on trlbules aboul 40 parcent 01 only to Identify major areas of fishery could be improved Large decreases in stream the upper Susllna RI.er.It Is Ihe tolal Slream flow at the impacl and 10 support even more. temperature can delay Ihe predlcled thai an ice cover will conlluence.Waler from Ihe generalized slalemenls can· upstream migration of nol form above Talkeetna In Talkeelna and Chulitna Rivers cemlng the project's feasl·Conceplually.II may also be fish,poslpone Ihe time of mosl years.The ellecls of this will mule mosl projecl ellecls billly.possible to improve fish spawning and ultlmalely on fisheries are unknown,bul downslream of Ihls can flu·habllal elsewhere In Ihe lower allecllheir spawning suc·are nol suspecled as being ence during summer monlhs The acluel determlnallon of Susltna basin 10 more than all· cess.However.post·significant.when fish are mosl acllve.the degree 01 Impact and the sel the losses which would project slream developmenl of specific occur in lhe Talkeelna 10 Devil temperatures during the However,Ihe Increased wlnler Further sludles are being millgallon recommendallons Canyon reach.Olher melhods spawning pSflod are nol slream lemperatures may have planned 10 Increase the level will requlreaddltlonallnforma·to ollsellhe losses or to 1m· predlcled 10 be sulliclenl·a slgnlflcanl adverse effecl on of confidence In Ihe presenl lion and sludy.prove the fisheries Include the Iy dillereni from pre-salmon eggs IncUbating In assessment.conslrucllon of artilicial proJecl temperalures to af·streambed gravels.This was loreseen allhe spawning channels or fish fecllhe mlgralory beginning ollhe leasibillly hatcheries. behavtor ollhe fish.Warmer lemperalures in Ihe 18.Willi.....be adaqua1.sludy,however.In feci Acres' gravel may cause Ihe fry 10 lIows lor lhe IIsh thai February 19110 plan of sludy Each of these allernatlves Salmon In slreamaln Ihe emeroe early.If the newly spawn In major Irlbulary Includes a slalemenllo Ihls would require a feaslblilly low.r 48 that have been emerged fish swim down·ot...ma ........Ihe lown of elleet:sludy before making a decl- drastically altered by stream (below Talkeetna)they Telkeelna,lIolnd""sian. hydro projecls appear 10 will encounler cold wlnler River and Portega Creak?"A preliminary Impacl be able to home to Ihelr waler lemperalures and suffer analysis will be done prior nalal areas.These pro-nolable mortalllies due 10 The projeci will nol allecl to license appllcallon jecls often decreased temperalure change and a lack spawning areas In Ihese using Ihe dala available. salmon runs bul this Is al·ollood.streams,nor does Ihere ap-HowevSf many of Ihe trlbulable 10 faclors olher pear to be any problem wllh fisheries sludles will be than homing.Bolh pink and chum salmon posl·projecl slream flows exlended 10 Include a Juveniles oulmlgrale 10 Cook adversely allactlng Ihe ablllly complele life cycle ollhe 13.Could any olher homing Inlel wllhln a few weeks of of adult salmon to enler the fish,as much aa five years. probl.ma d.velop?emerging from alreambed major trlbulary slreama.The final impacl sludy will gravels.These Immalure IIsh be prepared during Ihe A homing problem could would likely Incur Ihe grealesl These slreams have high poel.llcense appllcellon 8 the susltna hydro studies/January 1982----------------------------_::...-__---:...-..:...~::...:..= ntensive fishery investigations conducted in 1981 by Alaska Department of Fish and Game During the summer of 1981 the fresh waler to spawn.The Low frequency radio transmlt-poundment areas. Alaska Department of Fish and predominant anadromous flsh ters were placed In the Game conducted baseline In Ihe Susltna River basin are stomachs of adult salmon col-Gill nets,hook and line,baach surveys of Ihe flshery Ihe flve species of Paciflc lected at two flshwheel slles seines,electrollshing,minnow rssources of the Susltna River salmon:coho,chum,chinook,near Curry and Talkeetna.Iraps,as well as tagging and basin.pink,and sockeye salmon.These radio-tagged Iish were recapture,were used to gsln tracked by boat and aircraft information on migration. These studies locuSed on Five monllorlng slatlons were during their migration and those portions of Ihe basin operated to 888888 the adult spawning.Data on numbers and habitat that would be most affected by anadromous fish returning to location of Arctic grayling, the proposed Susllna project:the Susltna River basin to The telemetry studies provld·rainbow trout,bUrbat,round the Impoundment areas above spawn.At nearly all 01 these ed Information on rate of whlleflllh,long nose suckers, the proposed dams and lhe stations,side scan sonar (SSS)movement and milling slimy sculplns,and other river between Devil canyon counters and flshwheels were behavior of adult satmon In the species were collected to and Tslkeetna.utilized.vicinity of Devil canyon.This determine the possible 1m· Investigation provided Infor-pacts of the Susltna project on The surveys were part 01 Sonar counters mstlon on salmon spawning resident flsh. Phase I of the Susltna Hydro areas which had not previously Aqustlc studies.Phase I is the Sonar counters are devices been known.The aquatic hebltat .tud'" beginning of the process by that use sound waves to count which the Impact of the Suslt·fish migrating upstream.The I_lie anadromoua The aquatic habitat and In- na project on Ihe rl_'s fishery stud".stream flow Investlgallons will be assessed and millga-An aluminum tube called a were undertaken to describe lion measures will be recom-substrate Is placed on the river Field Investlgallons focused physical and chemical mended_bottom.Fish are directed over on chinook and coho salmon,characterlsllcs 01 the various the aluminum tube by nets at-the predominant juvenile types of fish hlibitat within the The Phase I fish studies fall in-tached to the shore.salmon speclea that over·project area. to three major categories:winter In the Susllna River. -the adult anadromous A sound wave Is continuously Detailed water quality and studies;projected just above the tube.Information on the numbers hydraulic measurements were -the resident and juvenile When a fish peases over the and habltsts of juvenile collected at five side channel studies;and tube,sound waves are salmon were also collected.sloughs between Devil Canyon -the aquatIc habllat studies.raflected to the scanner.The These data are nec8ll88lY to and Talkeetna. scanner will not count objects determine the downstream ef· These categories cover all flah such as loga or boats because fec1a of the Suallna project on These data were used to species and habllats found In It sorts out echoes that are not the ~-wlnterlng habllat for esllmate the Susltna River the Susllna River and lis moving at the same speed ea juveniles.flow In areas of Important prlmsry trlbutarles.There are theflsh.fisheries habitats (I.e.the many elements to each of Although sockeye juveniles sloughs and side channels). these studies.Flshwheels also use the rlY.-,detailed In· formation gathering on the In addition,similar,but less Data collec1ed during the sum·Fishwheeis were used to cap-rearing habitats of this detailed,dsta were collected mer Is currently being analyzed ture and teg salmon.The species was not planned for at numerous malnstem and to Idenllfy generallmpects salmon were sampled dally for Ph_I study.other side channel slough and to disc....fishery mltlga-age,length,and sex,and _e locatlone. tlon on a conceptual basis.tagged wllh color and number Young pink and chum salmon codedtaga.outmlgrate to Cook Inlet short·Used In conjunction with the If developmental efforts on Iy after hetchlng and do not rest of the studies,the aquatic Susltna proceed,further study Data from flshwheel catches use the rtver for rearing.habitat Information clearly will be necessary to more and lrom the sonar counters demonstrates that clear water clearly deflnelmpects and to provide Information on how The realdent flail atudl..sloughs provldelhe moat 1m- prepare a detailed mitigation many fish sre migrating,when,portent salmon habltst In the plan raqulred by the Federal and where.The resident fish studies pro-Devil Canyon to Talkeetna Energy RegUlatory Commie-vlded Information on the segment of the river. sion (FERC)licensing process.types,numbers,migrational Soctn:.a:"AthlnA~.FlahwM.ho-Radio telemetry patterns,and hebltets of real·"',,."...,FItJaJ o.t,"-Pon."Subt•."r.'o,The edult anedromoua atudl..dent fish (fish that live year·AIiuM DepMt",.",01 FIth.,.GMN.su Radio telemetry studies were round In the river).Of par.Hrdto tflIIf. Anadrornous fish are fish conducted In the malnstem tleular Importance are the o.t'aI··J"""""'''~Flah'''''''''' which spawn In fresh waler,Susltna River between tributary creeks which will -.'FIM"""""","""..,~.. rear In salt water,and return 10 Talk..tna and Devtl Canyon.flow Inlo the proposed 1m·A,....~'oIF'ahMdO....SU H'fdt'o'llf. The side SC8n _counters are cIeftceII tflIt u..sound _ to count flail mlgratInQ u.-traem. This photograph aIlowtI a _r counter (Iaft)and 0ICI11oacope (rtvht~ FlatlwMela --.used to capture end teg ..Imoo. lhe susJtna hydro studies/January 1982 I_tipton PNP-"to .......a rlldlo-l8ggecI ..lmon while t,.cklng another chum In the Sua"na R......n..r the Cuny ata- tlon. 7 ThellllnamlUal1l w...pleclld In lhelronl portion of the stomach. Low InIq'*lCy rIIdIo IllInam"lera w..-plec:lld In the alomacha of lIdult ..Imon. an the Susitna be another Columbia? The hlslory of hydroelectric (Bonneville and McNary)were salmon migrating down·Downstream flow requlra- development on the Columbia quite far downstream and stream past the dams;and ments In the Columbia are River In Washington state Is a reduced access 10 upstream 3)lhe lack of adequate generally necessary to main· good Illustration of the con·spawning grounds.Later downstraam flows and taln outmlgratlng fish filet that can develop between downstream projects (Dalles,water quality conditions to passage. tha construction and opera·John Day,Prtest Rapids,and maintain the fisheries. tlon 01 dams and Ihe Wanapum)lurther blocked On the Susltna,adequate maintenance 01 a viable pessage and also ll00ded The first two 01 these sltU8-downstream flows would be salmon fishery.spawning arees.tlons,which occurred on the necessary to preserve access Columbia,would not occur on 10 Ihe side sloughs between Becauae 01 this,comparisons The large reservoirs also the Susltna.Because the Devil Canyon and Talkeetna. to Ihe Columbia River system caused problems lor young Sleep gradients and rapid These sloughs are the most are sometimes made when a salmon finding their way 1I0ws In Devil canyon already productive spawning and over· prolect Is proposed on a river downstream through the new prevent salmon migration Into wintering arees between Devil lhat supports a salmon laka-like conditions 01 the 1m-the upper Susltna,access 10 canyon and Talkeetna. IIshery.poundments.The fish sullered upstream spawning arees and high mortalities when Ihey downstream migration are not The loss 01 these side sloughs This article Is intended to reached the dams because problems lor Ihe Susitna between Devil canyon and clarlly some of the slmllarttles Ihey could only pass the dams hydroelectric project.Talkeetna has Implications for and dillerences which exist by going through the turbines the fishery resources In the between the Columbia and or over the spillways.The Ihlrd situation on the Susltna and In Cook Inlel.The Susltna systlll1ls.Columbia (that 01 Inadequate magnitude 01 these Impllca· In summery,Ihe fish Impacts downstream flows lor IIsh-tlons Is discussed In the Hydroelectric development on on the Columbia can be listed erles)hes some application 10 article entitled "We've Been the Columbia had severe ef·In Ihree general categories.the Suellna.On both rivers,the Asked..." fecta on the natural salmon Thayare:maintenance 01 adequate runs In that river.1)the blockage 01 upstream downstraam flows Is Impor-Source:enalW'-'.provkMd by MUo hll,Woody salmon migration and the lant.The reasons,however,T,ih~.end Bob WI.Ueml,ell rt'IlIm~01 lft41 The first large Columbia flooding 01 spawning areas;are dillerent.Fteh MltlQIIUon core groU9. hydroelectric projects 2)high mortalities of young , I I I I I I .-I State[D and mail to:Alaska Power Authority Public Participation Office ~--------------If t This public Inlormallon document on lhe Susllna hydropo_r project was daveloped by the Alaska Powar AuthorityyouwanPublicPsrtlclpatlonOlllce,Nancy Blunck,Dlreclor.Commanta on fhe substance of Ihla newalattar and Idaaa forIIUlurepubllcatlonashouldbelorwarclad10thePublicParticipationOllicebywayollhefollowingcoupon.to get future Last First Inlllal I I Name InewsettersMalllng~;:;:;:;:;:;::~~~~~~:::;::; I Address I City DIIIJJIIJIJ I I 334 W.5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 L.T~N.!S.Y<2!!.F~v.2.U~T.2'E~_ 8 the susltna hydro studies/January 1982 Overall,the ponds and lakes of the region support relatively few waterfowl during both summer and migratory periods. Overall impact on bird populations not seen as high During field studies of birds In the upper Suo tna basin,136 species of birds were identified.Twenty-on of these were waterfowl.No endangered species of birds were found or identified, Watana reservoir would inundate Dall sheep mineral lick Three populations of Dall sheep were identified in areas above 4,000 feet,well above the level of the proposed reservoirs. A possible project Impact on Dall sheep would be the partial In- undallon of a major minerai lick at Jay Creek. A minerai lick Is a place where sheep go to get certain mineral elements that are lacking In other parts of their range.The lick at Jay Creek appears Important to the Dall sheep populallon. The exact magnitude of Importance is currenlly u~~?~,:,~~2 SPfOCi."S.I$,Jnd A<:,~S"Americ.Jn,fllc J Su:;,',,,,Hydro cUIC Prvi«t En~iro,,' m~nla/Slutha Annual Re.port ,~.$ub· I,nk 7."Ift/lit/il.Er:olog't Birds ;}nQ Non· Game Irhmm.,s.Aplil 'M',Unj~r$iI'ttil "'.s".MUHUm MId ("rHlrl.'E,,-vIm""""'.'Sp~f.Ii$Nt.Inc. t.Susitn.Hydf04llecu1cProteelEnlHfOff· (ffPntd/Studi.$A"rru.1 ~t ,9r8tJSub- 'old 7.,r·BlgG.,me,.Jul'f '981.T""ft'~r'/;)1 Enwronmenu,'Specl(tli.~/S.1,,(';. 1.Su~j,,,.H'fd~triC Proj«1 DI." AINI'tsla 01 W;~I"Mit,..,1on Options. O«_lNr '981.r."es,rlef E""lrtl"m~'.' The project's overall impact on most bird populations should not be great because the habitats lost to fhe project are com- mon in otller parts of Alaska. The impoundments created by Susilna would reduce the number of suitable cliff nesting sites used by raptors.To lessen this impact,measures would be needed to keep people away from the remaining sites during sensitive nesting times, to avoid clearing In areas that could provide nesting habitat after flooding,and to restrict helicopter and air traffic over known nesting areas. The impoundments will a'so eliminate several nesting sites of bald eagles.Despite this,the bald eagle population could possibly Increase.Proper clearing of the reservoirs would be needed to leave clumps of tall spruce trees at half to one mile intervals along the reservoirs.The clumps would have to be far enough from the high water zone to keep the trees from being washed away.SOIJrr;fffi 2 Jnd J. Brown bears are less restricted to an~as that will be inundated by the dams than biack bears and will lose a lower proportion of their total annual habitat.Habitat used by brown bears. especially in the spring and early summer.however.will be affected by the dams. Black baars:Until the Susitna study,no black bear research had been done in the Susitna River basin.The abundance of black bears and relatively light hunting pressure has permitted light hunting restrictions. For this study,twenty-seven black bears were radio collared, Results indicate that black bear density is higher near Devil Canyon than near Watana. Black bear are more common on the north side of the river than on the south side.Overall black bear density in the area is moderate to high relative to other Alaskan black bear habitats. Because bear habitat loss cannot be directly mitigated,the only compensation possible for black bear is to Improve their habitat in some other area or to improve habitat for some other wildlife species. Both black and brown bear will lose habitat to the proposed Susitna impoundments.This loss will be more se\lere for black bear populations.which will lose both denning and foraging areas from the fill of the reserJoirs.Brown bear will lose hahilat utilized primarily in spring and early summer. Black bear populations in the area are rest.ricted to a.na.rrow band of spruce forests along the Susltna River during most of the year.These forests provide Important escape habitat from the surrounding iarge and heaithy population at brown bears. Brown bea,.:In the past twenty years,brown bear popuialions have increased,The current population Is thought to be abundant,young,and productive. Forty-two brown bear were captured and nineteen were suc, cessfully radio collared for this stUdy.Most brown bear were found to den at elevations well above the proposed impound' ment levels, Brown bear use of the impoundment areas was greatest in spring and early summer.These are the first areas to become clear of snow and the first areas where forage needed by bears after emergence from their winter dens Is available. In the summer,many brown bear migrate to the Prairie Creek area between Stephan Lake and the Talkeetna River where there is an abundant king salmon run.Source."!,:md 2. k ar opulatl ns to affected mor severely than b own bear opulations ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE 334 W.5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 phone (907)276-0001 the 5 sitna hydro studi~~ The state Is also funding a reiated but separate $1 million study to consider alternatives to Susltna hydroelectric power.That study, contracted by the governor's Polley Review Committee,is being conducted by Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories.It will be completed in the spring of 1982,concurrent with the Susltna feasibility studies. potential of the upper portion of the Susitna River.Initial funding was provided in July 1979,and the explorations were initiated In January 1980. Those explorations,never adequately undertaken before,are now 10 months into a 3O-month examination period.Acres American, Inc.(Acres)has been retained by the Power Authority to manage the $30 million effort. A BRIEF HISTORY INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY EXTERNAL CONSULTANTS As a part of the Susitna explorations,the Alaska Power Authority Is The purpose of this newsletter,the tlrst of several,is to present appointing an external review board composed of eminent what Is going on with the Susltna studies that are now underway.engineers,scienlists,and economists to review the feasibility The intent Is to present the Information objectively so that readers studies performed by Acres.Approximately $1 million has been may make their own conclusions based on facts.budgeted by the Alaska Power Authority for this review,which will Include an independent cost estimate of constructing the Susitna project. Information on the energy alternallves study can be anticipated from the Office of the Governor. Fairbanks,Anchorage and ailbelt face major energy decision ~i~:~~in the "rallbelt region"will face a maJor energy decision At that time,the feasibility studies on the proposed Susltna hydroelectric project and a study of the feasibility of a variety of other energy alternatives will both conclude with their findings. There has been a great deal of Interest for many years in the building of a hydroelectric project on the Susltna River. The previous assessments Indicated thet the Susltna project was economically feasible and that anticipated environmental Impacts would not be of such a magnitude as to warrant It undesirable.Con- sequentlY,ln 1976 the Alaska State Legislature created the Alaska Power Authority and asked the new state corporation to begin detailed feasibility studies on the development of the hydroelectric THE SUSITNA HYDRO STUDIES The Susltna Investlgallons fall Into 10 general categories.Not all the studies are going on at this time,nor are all described in this It was inilially lookad at In the 1940's by the U.S.Bureau of newsletter.They Include: Reclamallon and later studied by the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.-forecasts of future electrical needs in the rail bolt area between the Kenai Peninsula and Fairbanks from 1990 through 2010 -hydrologic analysis of the Susltna River -seismic examination -geotechnical explorallon near the dam sites -engineering design development -environmental data collection and Impact assessment -transmission line analysis continued on page 3 the susltn.hydro studies/november 1980 Firm brings extensive cold region experience to hydro studies Expertise applied to socioeconomic questions Jfm Gill,Re.ident Meuger, AlKllcwege olllce of Acres American,Inc. In November 1979,the Alaska Power Authority Board 01 Direc- tors selected Acres American, Inc.,an international consulting engineering firm,to conduct the feasibility studies on the Susltna hydroelectric project. Reasons for the selection in- cluded Acres'past experience with hydroeleclric projects in sub-arctic regions. Also important was Acres'deci- sion to utilize Alaskan expertise The conslructlon and operation of a hydroelectric project In the Susitna River basin might affect the lives of Alaskans,in both positive and adverse ways. While Railbelt residents generally mighl experience energy Independence and lower costs lor electricity (relative to other alternatives),certain groups 01 people might ex· perience population shifts, changes in service require- ments,tax rate and revenue changes,and changes In the general quality 01 life. Frank Orth &Associates,Inc., LOCATION The proposed Susitna River hydroelectric project is located on the upper Susitna River.ap- proximately 125 air miles north 01 Anchorage,150 air miles south of Fairbanks,and 70 miles northeast of Talkeetna. POTENTIAL POWER For a year with typical precipita- tion and climatic conditions,the average energy potential of the basin is about 7 billion Kwh. This is about twice what the railbelt generation was in 1979. There are a number of develop- ment concepts that can be designed to use all or a portion of this energy potential. SUSITNA ALTERNATIVES Between the Denali Highway upstream and Gold Creek downstream,twelve dam siles and two primary tunnel plans are being considered as pas· sible building blocks in the 10rri1Ulation of a prelerred development plan. PRESENT LAND USE The project area Is presently used by guided hunters operating principally out 01 the Stephan Lake area,with scat- tered private cabins being pre· sant on most of the larger lakes in lhe upper Susitna basin.In addition,mining claims have been flied on many of the tributary streams within the drainage.Access to the area is predominently by aircraft, although there is limited access by river from the east. LAND OWNERSHIP The major land ownership is by Cook Inlet Region,Inc.,and its Native village corporations. There are also some In holdings within the project area,such as mining claims,Native allot· ments,open-ta-entry parcels, and homesteads. in the field work (which would maximize the expenditure of monies within the state),and its proposal to provide for an extensive and direct public participation process. The selection was made wilh support from both lhe public and the Slate House Power Alternatives Study Committee. a legislative subcommittee set up to oversee the feasibility work. a firm with experience in conducting socioeconomic analyses,particularly In Alaska, Is presently conducting the first phase of a twa-phase stUdy that will identlly and analyze poten· tial changes in socioeconomic conditions. Between now and spring or 1981,the firm Is developing socioeconomic profiles for local,regional,and to some ex· tent,statewide areas.These profiles are descriptions of ex· isting conditions such as population levels,availability and type of housing,employ· The Acres organization is active in diversified fields of planning. engineering.feasibility studies, environmental assessment,and project management.Among other energy technologies,the company has more than fifty years of experience with large and small hydroelectric development. Included in these are the Churchill Falls project in Labrador and the Nelson River project In Canada,both of which ment and Income levels, business activity,education enrollment and cost,transporta· tlon facilities,and land use patterns. Later,between late spring and early laIl1981,these same can· dltions will then be described for a future without the Susltna project.The result will be a baseline 'rom which com· parlsons can be made.A preliminary assessment 01 socioeconomic impacts that couid result from a Susltna development will be made prior to a state decision on Susitna in H .....(1 are located in norlhern climates and presented problems similar to those the proposed Susitna project may encounter. The Susitna project is managed by Acres out of its main office in Buffalo,New York.Its resident olfice is in Anchorage and the field camp is in lhe upper Susitna basin close to Deadman Creek. 1982. II the state decides to file a license application in 1982,a detailed analysis or what affect construction and operation 01 the Susitna project might have on social and economic condl· tions will then be conducted. Frank Orth &Associates will identify and examine changes in socioeconomic conditions so that people can make their own evaluations of how such changes could affect their lile stytes. II Ts the susltn.hydro studies/november 1980 3 continued from page 1 ocost estimating opreparatlon of FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commis- sion)licensing documents,if appropriate omarketlng and financing anelysis THE SUSITNA WORK THUS FAR Last summer,scientists and engineers went Into the field to begin the Susllna work.An ex· planation and first examination of this work is the text that follows on the inside pages of this newsletter.Further in for· matlon will follow In subse· quent reports. FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON POWER DEVELOPMENT In April 1982 the five-member Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors will formulate Its recommendation to the gover- nor and the legislature in regard to power development along the rail belt.At approximately the same time,the governor's Policy Review Committee will be forwarding its Independent recommendation. THE DECISION Final determination on the sub- ject rests with the state in 1982. If the decision is made to pro- ceed with the development of Susitna,a license application for construction will be flied with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission In Washington,D.C. Who is the Alaska Power Authority The Alaska Power Authority Is a public corporation funded by the state and headed by a five- member board of directors appointed by the governor and approved by the legislature.Its day·to-day business is con- ducted by a sixteen-member staff located In Anchorage. The purpose of the Power Authority is to assist the residents of Alaska In both urban and rural areas in con- structing,acquiring,financing, and operating power production facilities of various types. Those types Include fossil fuel, wind power,tidal,geothermal, hydroelectric,solar energy pro- duction,and waste energy con- servation facilities.The Power Authority is currently develop- ing a number of hydropower and alternative energy projects statewide. Alternative energy study goes to Battelle Ward Swift 01 Battelle Northwesl explslns his IIrm's proposslto members of Ihe public and Ihe uovamor's Polley Review Com· mlttee this lall.Battells was selected to conduct the energy alternatives stUdy.Battelie's worto:Is expected to be compfeted at the same time as the Susltns leaalblllty studles In spring 1982. .~I .' ~-~.II .-r ~ '-~-,-1 ~....~ I To assure sufficient checks and balances,the 1980 state legislalure determined that an Independent consulting firm should conduct the Railbelt power alternatives study. In Ihe original plan of study presented to the Alaska Power Authority by Acres American, Inc.,Acres was to conduct the alternatives stUdy In parallel wllh feasibility level studies of the Susltna hydroelectric project. This 'all the governor's Policy Review Committee selected Batlelle-Paclflc Northwest laboratories to make the alter- natives study.A final report Is expected In the spring of 1982. Battelle-Pacific Laboratories,a Richland,Washington,research and development firm,Is the newest in a number of Battelle offices in the United States and Europe.The company,founded in 1929,has a staff today of 6,000.Research In the North· west office focuses primarily on the technological and environ- mental Issues of energy produc- tion and use. Recent studies by Battelle hsve included a national coal utlliza· tion assessment and an assess· ment of the effects of thermal power plant site and design alternatives on the cost of elec- tric power,both for the federal government. "Battelle has a lot of experience doing exactly what this request for proposal calls for,and they have a great amount of ex· perlence doing projects In Alaska,"said Fran Ulmer,chair- woman of the Pol icy Review Committee and director of Policy Development and Plan· ning in the governor's office. In addition to Ulmer,members of the Review Committee 1"- clude Clarissa Quinlan,director of the Division of Energy and Power Development;Ron Lehr, director of Ihe Division of Budgel and Management;and Charles Conway,chairman ot the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors. While Acres American,Inc. reports to the Alaska Power Authority for the Sus Una studies,Battelle will report directly to the Policy Review Committee. OBJECTIVE I COST The objective of the alternatives study is to determine if there are more cost effective ways to meet the energy needs of the Anchorage-Fairbanks rail belt area than through the develop, ment of the Susitna River's hydroelectric potential. Cost of the 1a-month stUdy is $1 million. WHAT ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION? When the Battelle study is com- pleted in April,1982,the Policy Review Committee and the Alaska Power Authority Board of Directors will consider the results in formUlating their respective recommendations for Rallbelt power develop· ments to the governor and the legislature. WHERE QUESTIONS SHOULD GO Questions regarding the alter· natives study should be directed to Fran Ulmer,Director of the Division of Policy Development and Planning (DPDP),Pouch AD,Juneeu, Alaska 99811,phone (907) 465·3577. Questions regarding the Susltna hydroelectric exploration should be sent to Eric Yould, Executive Director of the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage, Alaska 99501,phone (907) 276-0001. ISER expects more than doubling of electricity needs despite slower growth rate Iricity consumption growth rate times what it Is in the rail belt projections.today. Initial forecastiHrom the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER)in· dlcate that future growth of electric utility sales is expected to be slower than the historical Alaskan growth rate. Because of anticipated high rates of economic growth, Dr,Scott Goldsmlth,lnstltute 01 however,utility sales will equal Social end Economic Re.e.rch.or exceed recent national elec· Several forecasts were made to reflect the uncertainty surrounding both future economic activity and relative prices of energy.ISER's "most likely"forecast indicates that electrical utility sales in the year 2000 are likely to be about 2.4 The rail belt region generally in· eludes these areas:Fairbanks, Talkeetna,PalmerlWasilla, Anchorage,the Kenai Penin· sula,Glenalien,and Valdez. The ISER forecasts are can· slderably lower than previous forecasts that served as a basis of earlier studies of Ihe Susitna hydroelectric project by the Corps of Engineers. Historlcaliy,the annual growth rale from t965 to 1975 was about 14%.During the last five years,it has been 7%.The projected annual growth rate over the next 20 years averages 4fJ2%. .. NORrH pacts,safety and reliability. Tunnels are also being con· sidered In the options for development of power within the upper Susitna.Two concep· tual tunnel plans are shown in the map to the right,along with thrlie ot the potential dam sites. Previous pians Indicated a basin The siles and tunnels shown do preferred concept plan will be development preference rang-not Imply ali would be based on such things as an· Ing from a four-dam basin developed.Using a multi·tlcipated power needs,costs,The preferred concept plan Is development plan to the more disciplinary approach,the environmental and soclellm-expected in March 1981. recent preference for two dams r-....:.._--.:.--.:.~--------------------~--------.,. located at Devil Canyon and NO'lT"TUNNEL OPTION~ _o __.._ Watana. D,rir CI"Yon Sill Design options include tunnels the susltna hydro studlesfnovember 1980 Microearthquake studies review old data,collect new In addition to reviewing his·Analysis of the records (sels· torlcat earthquakes,seis·.mograms)from the selsmo· mologlsts have been monitoring graphs provides Information on microearthquake activity in the microearthquakes in the vicinity vicinity of the dam sites.During of the dam sites.This informa· this year 10 very sensitive tlon Includes the size,location, seismometers were installed in and depth of each microearth· shallow holes within a 25·mile quake. radius of the dam sites. The microearthquake data and geological data are studied 'by both geologists and seismol· ogists.This interdisciplinary ap· proach provides scientists with information to evaluate the seismic design criteria for the dam sites. mometerwas transmitted from radio to recording seismo- graphs that were installed at the Watana base camp. The seismometers measure ground motions for earthquakes as small as Richter magnitude zero (magnitude 3 or targer earthquakes usually can be felt). The signal from each seis· Seismic activity in the project area is being studied by Woodward·Clyde Consultants' seismologists. MICROEARTHQUAKE MEASURES 2.0: Portabla selamographs like thla one have been aet up at the Walana beae camp 10 reglater microearthquake activity.Thla particular microearthquake,with an epicenter In the aouthweat cor· ner 01 MI.McKlnl.y Park,meaaured 2.0 on the Rlcht.r acal.laat August 27th.Mlcroearthqu.k.a usually are not t.1t by hum.n beings.Th.y occur conalanlly throughout the rallbelt. The Ilgure above .hows a portion ot tl\8 .Aoa afllUnd tllll O....t Canyon dam alte.The location 01 a ....pped faulland ......llln..ment.are .hown on a hlgh·altltuda a.rlal photograph lakan by a U·2 alrerall.The..leatur••along with oth.ra In the vicinity 01 two dam .11 ••ara being analyzed by geologl.ta .nd selamologlsts lrom Woodward·Clyda Consultants.In addition,the Alaaka Pow.r Authority will retain Independent .x""rta to ..vlaw tha work don.by Woodward·Clyde,a con••r· vatl..policy much IIka "g.tllng a aecond opinion"within the medical prolesslon. How to study earthquake potential Geologic and selsmologlc studies are conducted to obtain an understanding of the seismic activity within an area.These studies begin with a com· prehenslve review ofthe literature and aerial photography to Identity all faults and lineaments.Faults and lineaments that may be potentially important to dam design are then studied in the field. A lineament Is a straight line leature observed on aerial photographs,maps or from an aircraft.A lineament may be pro- duced by glacial Ice,by fauits, or by other earth shaping forces.All lineaments are not necessarily faults. For the Susitna project,all potentially important faulls and lineaments within approxi· mately 60 miles of either dam site have been studied.During the past year,these preliminary studies have Included aerial reconnaissance with hell· copters and small airplanes. along with Investigations on the ground. Features that are considered to be of potential importance are scheduled to be studied In detail next year. The objective of these studies is to determine If the lineaments are faults and to estimate how recently the faults may have moved.Active faults,those that have moved during l'IlCent geological time,are Important to dam design. The Denali Faull is an example of a fault which has had move· ment during recent geologic time.The fault is 40 miles north of both the Devil Canyon and Watana dam sites.The Denali Fault is more than 800 miles long as It runs In generally an east-west direction through the Alaska Range. Studies by a number 01 geolo- gists show that movement has occurred along varloua sections of the Denali fault during large earthquakes that have occurred over several hundred thousand to several million years.The average rate of movement has been approximately one·half inch per year. Woodward·Clyde Consultants are working under contract to Acres American,Inc.,to evaluate potential seismic activity. The first data from Woodward· Clyde Consultants Is expected by the end of 1980.It will Include Information obtained to date and a discussion of lineaments and faults that need to be studied In more detail to understand their potential significance to the design of project facilities. The Alaska Power Authority will schedule meetings In Spring 1981 and Information collected and analyzed by the consultants will be presented to the public. Collins also notes that the plant studies will have a lasting value beyond the immediate role they are playing as part of the feasibility studies on the Susltna hydroelectric project. Plant study considers affects on moose habitat William Collins of the University Inch in diameter,are excellent of Alaska's Agricultural Experl.forage for moose,since the ment Station In Palmer notes animals cannot break large that plant ecology studi.s will branches with their mouths. support and assist the studies How will the disruption of river being made on wildllle within flows and flooding altect new the Susltna River besln.For plant growth that moose rely on instance,moose eat the leaves,lor adequate lood supplies? twigs,and bark 01 birch.cotton· wood,and willow.When these trees grow by rivers,they are subject to flooding,which exposes new sites for the trees to grow.Young trees,with branches no thicker than one For Instance,few descriptions of vegetation have been made for the area.Therelore,the species list of vegetation and the first detailed vegetation maps will be two Important pro- ducts 01 the current Susltna studies. The specific goals of the two- year plant ecology studies are to forecast what eltect can· struction of the dams would have on plant life within the area,to Identify the wetland areas,and to identify plants that are endangered,rare,or threatened.Collins and his assistants will accomplish this by studying old and new aerial photographs,and by observing the area on foot,noting such findings as the age 01 vegeta· tion and the effect of seasonal flooding on the establishment and maintenance of plants that are Important as forage for moose.Their first vegetation maps will be completed by December of this year. 5 This Is a schematic dlsgram of tha Susltna Rlvar system.An Impor- tant aspect of this system Is that the upper Susltna (the sres under consideration for hydroelectric development,contrlbutas less than 20 percent of the river's sverage total flow.Other trlbutarlea,In· cludlng tha Ventna,Chulitna,and Talkeetna Rivers,contribute the othar 80 percent. PARKS HIGHWAY B"IDGE The development of any hydro- electric scheme on the upper Susltna will result in seasonal changes In downstream flow patterns.Taking the two-dam GOlOCR••• proposal as an example.the three graphs show the difference between natural seasonal flow patterns and pro-f- ject seasonal flow patterns at three points along the Susltna River.As one goes downstream. the difference between natural and project flows begins to dissipate as the effects are diluted by the normal flows from the other tributaries. Changes In flow patterns can have a positive or negative impact on such things as fisheries,moose habitat, flooding,and navigation. Fisheries directly depend on water flow.Since the effects of flow are greater on the up- stream portion of the river,the initial emphasis of study efforts is most Intensive upstream. Following the review of the basic river hydraulics,Acres will determine the required extent of assessment of downstraam resources. GENERAL Flow studies are one of a number of types of hydrologic investigations.Also Included are assessments of reservoir operation,sediment yield.river morphology,glacial contribu- tion and ice formation. the susltna h)'dro studies/november 1980 Radio ollaring used to study wildlife What effect would the construc- tion of a large hydroelectric pro· ject have on the wildlife that in· habits the upper Susltna basin and downstream areas?Since this is a question of serious concern to those studying the feasibi1ity of building the pro- jectln the Susitna River basin,a number of respected scientists have been hired to find the answer. will continue this winter as the researchers note animal distribution,abundance,habitat preference,and movement pat- terns.it Is easier to study most animals during the winter months,because they are more visible and It Is easier to follow their tracks. The group of scientists headed by Gipson has begun a two-year study of the furbearlng animals that live within the area.Again, the purpose is to identify and count them,observe their seasonal habits,and determine what kind of habitat they need In order to live.In view of exisling fodder,how large a range,for instance,does a red fox need?Gipson and his col· leagues are studying the animals by tracking them in the snow and by radio collaring. Survey lines are established In representative types of vegela- tion and tracks of furbearers are identified In each vegetation type. As part of the Power Authority investigations,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game began monitoring big game I animals last summer by airplane following earlier tagging and radio collaring efforts.Studies "It Is Important that people know we are not politicians,that we are not here to decide If the Susitna project should be built in the first place,"said Dr.Phil Gipson of the University of Alaska,Fairbanks,Cooperative Wildlife Researct\.Unit. "We are here to study the area and to detenmlne the Impact on the animal life if construction takes place.The purpose of all the studIes Is to give the deci· slon makers the facts so that they can make the best decision with full knowledge of the positive and negative conse- quences."he said. There are vast numbers of animals that live within the Susitna basin.Bears,wolves, caribou,moose,fox,otter,and mink all live In abundance.Why do they live 'here?And could they live somewhere else lust as well? Karl Schneider of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game puts a radio coller on moose number 38.An Irldescant orange ..r tag makes the moose more visible from the elr.Schneider heads a team of reaearchBrs who have Identified big game enlmsls within the Susltna besln.The scientists began monitoring the animals laat summar by airplane following ..rller tagging and radio collaring efforts. 6 the susltn.hydro studies/november 1980 $3 million budgeted to studySusitna fish AI.Ii.[}epatlmenl 01 Fi5h aM Game W,ldUI.NOf<MJook Series The fish populations in the Susitna River system are malar contributors to commercial and recreational fisheries in the Cook Inlet basin.Susitna salmon,for example,occur in commercial fishery catches from the entrance of Cook Inlet to the mouth of the Susitna River. Some of the salmon for recrea· tlonal fisheries use the Susltna River for migration,spawning and rearing.The Susitna salmon inhabit an area as far south as Deep Creek on the Kenai Penin- sula and as far north as Portage Creek,which Is a short distance below the Devil Canyon site. Resident fish species,such as grayling and rainbow trout,also contribute to recreational fisheries throughout the Susltna system,from its mouth to its headwaters. The value of these fisheries to the State of Alaska requires that the potential for hydro impacts on resident and anadromous fish (such as salmon)be assessed. The Alaska Power Authority has budgeted about 3 million dollars for the study of the fisheries of the Susltna River. Fleid data on the fish popUla- tions and habitat of the Susitna River will be collected by biologists of the Alaska Depart- ment of Fish and Game (ADF&G).Utilizing data supplied by ADF&G,existing fisheries In· formation,and past experience, the private consulting firm of Terrestrial Environmental Specialists (TES)wlli assess the positive or negative impacts of development and operation of the proposed hydroelectric pro- ject and suggest measures to avoid,minimize,or compensate for possible adverse affects. Comparisons wtll be made to similar systems found In other cold regions of the world (for In· stance,Sweden and Russia). TES wili be assisted by noted specialists from the University of Washington,Dr.Clinton Atkinson and Dr.Mlio Bell.Clint Atkinson has extensive ex- perience with Alaska salmon fisheries,Including those In the Susitna basin,while Milo Bell has 50 years of experience working on related engineering problems throughout North America on hydropower projects. The Department of Fish and Games'responsibility during the field studies will be to deter- mine existing fisheries condi· tlons in the Susitna River.This includes identifying the distribution and abundance of saimon and resident fishes in the system as well as the seasonal importance of the river to their migration,spawning, and rearing. Initial field work for these studies will begin late in 1980 and continues for 15 months.If the project goes to the Federal government for license ap- proval,studies will continue through the post license application period. A major question in the fisheries study is what would happen to the Susitna River fisheries If the dams were bulit. For example,will important fish habitats for migration,spawn- ing,and rearing be favorably or unfavorably altered?If the im- pacts are negative,can they be minimized Or offset In some manner such as by hatchery pro- pagation of fish or through a scheme of regulation of river flows and discharge through the dams? Tom Trent,one of the study coordinators from the Depart- ment of Fish and Game,em- phasizes that study efforts of those conducting river hydrology and water quality studies must be closely coor- dinated. Mr.Trent also noted that,"The Department of Fish and Game conducted very limited assess- ment work during the years 1973 to 1978,but the intensity and design for the next fifteen months and beyond will be aim- ed at collecting information enabling the State to make ob- Jective judgements of probable project impacts on the Susltna River fishery resources." Environmental studies use Alaska experts ferrestlal Environmental Specialists (TES),the con- sulting firm retained by Acres American,Inc.,to conduct the environmental studies on the proposed Susltna project,has contracted with the University of Alaska on a number of the studies. They Include:furbearers,birds and small mammals,land use and recreation,cultural resources,and plant ecology. "We chose the university because experts there are familiar with environ menta' conditions in Alaska,"Jeffrey O.Barnes,TES president,said. TES Is headquartered in Phoenix,New York. Drilling program completes first year Deep drilling (over 700 feet per hole)into the areas around the proposed dam sites determines the types of rock,the rock struc- ture,Its strength,and the slability of the bedrock on which dams would sit or through which a lunnel would pass.Core samples are then retrieved and studied by geologists. R &M Consultants is the sub- contractor conducting the drill- ing program at the Watana and Devil Canyon sites. Keys to upper Susitna prehistory may be found "Before any land-disturbance activities may take llJace on federal or state lands,an inven- tory of cultural resource sites must be made and recommen· dations developed to lessen or avoid the impact of the project on them,"George Smith,an archaeologist with the Univer· sity of Alaska Museum in Fairbanks,noted last summer. In 01 her words.before the con- struction of a hydroelectric pro- ject In the Susitna River basin may begin,there must be an archaeological survey to locate sites within the area. Last summer archaeologists ex- amined 55 sampling sites,deter- mining that 33 of them were of archaeological Importance. Next summer the museum will send several crews Into the field to systematically test and anaiyze a portion of each site in order to evaluafe its significance and to then make recommendallons 10 minimize nn!QClihtp :trl~~AffftCts.Sites that might be adversely im- pacted by project construction will be excavated If the decision to construct the hydroelectric project is made. During the extensive testing scheduled for 1981,each site wlli be divided into a checker- board of squares one meter in size.Artifacts found In the sampled squares will be catalogued and become a part of the University of Alaska Museum's archeological collec- tion,where they will be available for display and research. Although It may be premalure to assess the significance of arti- facts before their analysis is complete,Dixon and Smith are excited about the results of the survey.They have discovered several sites which will help unravel the poorly understood prehistory of this area of the state and which will provide Im- portant information about the way people lived In the upper Susitna thousands of vears ago. Dr.E.Jam..Dixon and Mr.George S.Smith ollha Unlvarelty Museum head a team 01 eelantlefe who wllll""""tlgale the area for evldenca of human activity which,they say,mey extend back 10,000 y......Shown above a..Lee Baxter and George Smith. They are looking at burled animal bona fragmente. 8 Ho YOU can involved ... COMMUNITY MEETINGS are held prior to Important study decisions at four locations throughout the railbelt area. Meetings review the progress of studies and provide people with an opportunity to make com- ments and have questions answered. WORKSHOPS are held as needed in individual railbelt communities.Workshops are narrower in scope than com· munity meetings and serve as a forum for presenting in-depth in- formation on a limited number of subjects. NEWSLETIERS are widely distributed to the public and report factual information about the studies.This newsletter is the first of several.To receive future newsielters,clip and mail the coupon on page 7. The ACTION SYSTEM is a means of suggesting changes to the plan of study.Send comments to the Public Par- ticipation Office for review and comment by Acres and Power Authority staff. Ih1l8usltna h"ydro sludiesJnovember 1980 Community m..tings (like this one In Anchorage In April)will be held In spring 1931.They ere len· latlvaly scheduled for Fairbanks,Talkeetna,KenlUSoldolnl,Ind Anchorlge.Another sel of meetings will be held In sprtng 1982,Just prior to the decision on Susltna. Public concerns bring changes in study plan For about a year,individuals and agencies have had a number of opportunities to comment on the adequacy of the Susitna study plan.Their comments have steadily imprOVed the document.For instance,the 1980 legislature appropriated an additional $1,365,000 to add more resources and take more time in conducting the energy alternatives study.An indepen· dent firm was also hired to conduct the study_ Another example began with a concern expressed last spring. One person from Talkeetna articulated a concern for an- ticipated Impacts on life style with the following comment: "When this plan speaks of social or human Impacts,It con- sistently labels this 'socio- economic:When It speaks of cultural Impact,It does so In terms of archaeology and historical Investigation. "I feel that it is desirable and timely that the plan recognize the existence of that concept which is socfo-cultural,in a con- temporary sense.The Plan of Study Is deficient In that It does not." As a result of this comment and similer comments from other realdents of the Talkeetna area, th AI kaPowerAulhorllycon· eluded that an addilionallook should be made on the subject to which the comment spoke: how wouid the construction of the Susltna project affect the current life style of the people who live in the Immediate dam- site vicinity? The study will begin in 1981,and will be coordlnatad with Frank Orth's work on the Identification and analysis of socio-economlc conditIons. ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE 333 West 4th -Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 (907)276-0001 ARLIS Alaska ResOurces Ubrary &:IJl{onDaUOn SCrVlces AfICbOra,ge.AlaSka BULK RATE U.S.POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO.272 ANeH,AK.99502 • ~.Ies within .pproxlm.tely 82 miles of the dam.which are Judged to be .ctlve .re the Denali f.ult .nd the Castle Mountain feult. Beneath the upper 15to 20 mila.of the earth'.crust I.the Benioff Zone.Thl.I.al.o .n active fault zon••Th.depth 10 lhe Benioff Zone beneath the Su.ltna dam site.I••bout 34 mil ••. ~sit ~ro e For the Su.ltn.project .1I1.ult••nd lineament.(poe.lblel.ult.) within 100 km (82 mile.)of either dam have been complied Irom publlahed .nd unpubllahed relerence materlala,.etellltelm· agery,r.dar Imagery,hlgh-.ttltude .art.1 photography,and low altitude ..rI.1 photography. B••ed on thla..wort<,the only '.ult.In the Norlh American PI.te Source: Intetlm Repon on 'he 5el.mlc Studies for (the!SusUna HydroelectriC Project,December 1980, p~by Woodw.-d-elydaConaulfants'forJoc,..American,Inc.and UteA&e8Ju!~ AUlhcll1ty. 6.Preliminary estimates of ground motions at the sites were made for the Denali and Castle Mountain fauits and the BeniOff Zone.Of these sources,an earthquake of magnitude 8.5 occurring within the BeniOff Zone would create the max- imum ground shaking at the dam sites. 4.Within the site region,13 faults and lineaments (potential faults)are receiving additional study in summer 1981 to beller define their potential effect on dam design.Four of these faults and lineaments are near the Walana site and nine are in the area of the Devil Canyon site. 5.At present,the 13 features are not known to be faults with reo cent movement.If present studies show any recent move- ment,then the potential for surface rupture through either dam site and the ground motions associated with earth· quakes on the fault will need to be evaluated. Preliminary findings available on Susitna basin seismicity Thl.ls.us give.Information about the sel.mlclty ot th.upper Su.ltn.River ba.ln and dlscu....the qu••tlon of building s.f. d.m.In ••I.mlc .r•••. The following are the preliminary seismic conclusions. 1.No faults with known recent movement (movement In the last 100,000 years)pass through or near the proposed Susitna dam sites. 2.The known faults with recent movement are:the Denali fault (north of the sites),the Castle Mountain fault (south of the sites)and the Benioff Zone (about 34 miles beneath the sites). 3.The closest distances of these faults from each site and the preliminarY maximum credible earthquake magnitudes for the faults are the following: Fault Denali Castle Mountain Benioff Zone Preliminary Closest Distance of Fault Maximum Credible _---,.-::to=S"'it"'e"'(m=II"'e"'s)<-__ Earthquake Magnitude Watana Devil Canyon 8.5 43 40 7.4 65 71 8.5 31 37 2 The following are responses 10 frequently asked questions. The information was developed by Jon R. Lovegreen,Senior Project Geologist,Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1.Do earthquakes occur only along laul.s? No.There are lour general categories of earthquakes. These categories are col· Lovegreen lapse earthquakes, volcanic earthquakes,ex- plosion earthquakes,and tectonic earthquakes. Tetanic earthquakes are the most common type of earthquakes and are the earthquakes pertinent to the design of the Susitna project. Tectonic earthquakes result when stresses within the earth build up to the point that the strength of the rock is exceeded. Relatively instantaneous release of strain energy takes place along a zone of weakness.The energy release causes the ground shaking of the earthquake and the zone of weakness is the fault. 2.How do you ensure that you are identifying virtual· ly all sourcea of earth· quakes that could affect the dam? The identification of sources tor earthquakes in Alaska is based on ex· perience with faults and earthquakes in Alaska and worldwide.From this ex· perience,it is possible to make judgements about the potential sources of earthquakes in a region such as the Talkeetna Mounlains.These judgements do not ensure that all sources are iden· tlfied,rather,the judgements identify all sources of earthquakes which experience has shown could be possibie. For iarge proje~s such as the Susitna hydroelectric project,a conservative ap- proach is used.This ap· proach includes the study of faults which are only remotely possible sources of earthquakes. The past experience 01 the firm which is stUdying the faults and earthquakes (Woodward·Clyde Con- sultants)includes ex· amination of active faults and earthquakes in Alaska,California, Nevada,Utah,Central and South America,Europe, Africa,the Middle East. Australia,New Zealand, and Japan. 3.You uselhe term "max- Imum credible earthquake."What Is that? A Maximum Credible Ear· thquake is considered to be the most severe earth· quake associated with a fault and is assumed to ac- the susitna hydro studies/september 1981 Alaska is part of a large contlnenlallandmass (Ihe North American Plate)which lies adjacent to an oceanic mass (the Pacific Plate).The Pacific Plate is moving northwest at a rate of about 2 inches per year. This 2 inches of movement gets absorbed along a feature In the Gulf of Alaska called the Aleullan Trench.Here one plate Is thrust below Ihe other (In a process called subduction)as shown In the diagram.The zone of seismicity associated with Ihe subduction is referred 10 as the Benlofl Zone. Earthquakes can occur along the Benlofl Zone where the two plates are In contact.This is whare the 1964 earthqueke occurred as shown In the diagram. Earthquakes are also caused within the pla'ea themselves.Movement of the plate causes s'res..s to build up and the energy Is released by rapid movement along planes of weakness (faulls). To date no active faults have been Idenllfled In the Talkeetna Terrain Itself.Siudlealn 1981 are further evaluallng 13 laults and lineaments (potenllal faults)In the vicinity of the Watana and Devil Canyon damaites to determine whether or not the faults and lineaments may be active. One of those receiving addilional study is the Talkeetna Thrust Fault. cur at the point on the One is a magnitude 8.5 The Susitna dam sites lie fault closest to a proposed earthquake on the Denali within a region that is project,such as a dam fault,40 mites from the believed to be relatively site.dams;the other Is a stable.This region Is magnitude 8.5 earthquake known as the Talkeetna It is based on geological in the Benioff Zone,about Terrain, and historical data,and is 34 miles below the surface usually of a magnitude of the earth at the dams.The boundaries of the Ter- greater than historical rain are the Denali fault, earthquakes.6.How much ground shaking the Castle Mountain faUll, would that cause?and the Benioff Zone 4.How reliable is it?(which is about 34 miles The Maximum Credible The ground shaking that below the surface of the Earthquake is considered would occur at the dams earth).These ale all active to be a reliable parameter from a magnitude 8.5 fault areas. to use for dam design.earthquake on the Denali There are over 11,000 fault is considered to have Energy release appears to dams worldwide.Some of an average peak accelera·be occurring prlmari Iy these have been built in tlon of 2O%g.along the boundaries of moderate to high seismic the Talkeetna Terrain areas such as Oroville dam The ground shakl ng that rather than within it. in California and several would occur at'the dams dams in the San Francisco from a magnitude 8.5 Within the Terrain,no Bay Area along the San earthquake in the Benioff evidence of active faults Andreas fauit.Zone Is considered to have has been observed.Some an average peak acceJera-earthquake activity is oc· Several dams have been tion01 40%g.curring and has occurred damaged during earth·within the Terrain,but Ihe quakes.such as Kayna in 7.How does that compere to earthquakes are typically India and Hsinfengkiang in the 1964 earthquake?small to moderate in size. the People's Republic of Chi na.This damage was As a comparIson,the To date no active faults due in large part to the average peak acceleration have been Identilled in the absence of design con·estimated at Susitna Talkeetna Terrain itself. slderations tor reservoir·would be 1/3 to 1/2 as Studies In 1981 are further induced seismicity,much as the average peak evaluating 13 faults andaccelerallonestimatedatlineaments(potential 5.What are your esllmatea Valdez during the 1964 taults)In the vicinity of the for 'he larges'earth·earthquake.Watana and Devil Canyon quakes that could occur in damsites to determine the area of the proposed 8.Just how seismically ac·whether or not the faults dams?live is the area where the and lineaments may be proposed dam sites are?active. the susitna hydro studies/september 1981 3 Three ways to measure the force of an earthquake "'~J1lr'"3 J~MCd,h~d M'!'Cdr" ,n1cns.lyScillc 1 :;; {19Jl.Wooo,IOj NC'lnli1nl'll H ,E .-C 2 ~~ 5 ;~! ,Detecll'O only by !>cns.IIYI!l 10 14 _ ,nstrumanl!>~, ,.Fp.ll by lew ~eI90m;at re-..l. 10 15~~cially on \lPDtlr floors: delical~iy SUl>pendf"d obll!'c/:<;- mayswmq 3.F~U not'ceably.but nol -3:Jlways .ecognized .Ul earthquake.10 16 _ :;Iandu'!il ,tuIO$rock lihqtllly, '/IOr..I,onhlmpilSSlnQlruck 0,01n-.,F~a Indoor:;tly marty,outdoor:>by - Tt!w:"lnlql'1"orpe3\\Odklim;10\1dlsh{:~,winaOlllJ8.dllOT'S dlslurbeU: motor C,lr'f,rOCk noticeably -.,,Fell by moel peqol&,some br~..k.01 alllNs.wlrl<:fOWS,10 16dn.:!plalor;dl.klurn.:m:;eol 1,1110blllcts ~f-,005<1- Fell by ,..n,m<1n.,.lr'ghlcOMl and .un outdOOrs:IIliUir.g Wi'}r:'ash~1 :.nd Chto'~f-5d']ffidgelO~~ 1 Everybody runs outdoors;d,Jffiaqe 10 bulldmgs V':lfl8S dnpen1inq on ~QUdlil.,.or construCllOn;noticed 102() by drivers ot aulC'lmo~f'os '00 r-02..11- 8.Panel WotUS ''''rown QlIl of 'rames;~6fall01WioIUS,mOnumf!'nlS, chimn~s;'..uld and mud QI~cI.-d: I 1021dmer..olillulosdlblu~d.500 --05r;--9.BulldlnQs !;h,l!ec:I 011 found.:lhon. cracileo,lhrown oul 01 plumb: 'llOund crackod;uodEllp,ound ,027.pIpes orok.n -1 lO.Most ma,<;omy ",nd frAfTlC !,lruclUft'!'l dotlroy&d:ground ::!'cr,lckcd;ri1'(~benl,0611-plp"~brokon -lC.:!:! 11.few .,lruel\/'''S r~",a'n st.;vlljhl!l: brie!ieS (!iIllttoy,-'d;fisl'iuu:s in !Jlound;p,pftbrokan,I.:II1dslldes,f-8radsbunt 1024 "Darn.J.ge tolal:oHlWf:lIo ~n on 'lro:.md 5ur/,')(:0:Uf\ClS of Ilohl r-and level dil'totfed:objee-ll' thrown up in air 10;.'!' 9.How can Ihere be no ac· live laulls In the area 01 lhe dam siles when hilloric reconls show many earthquakes occur· ring lhera? In the area 01 the proposed Susitna dam sites earth· quakes occur within the North American Plale (which includes the upper 15 to 20 miles 01 the earih's crust)and in the Pacific Plate (which is be· ing subducted,or drawn downward,beneath the North American Plate). Preliminary evaluation of the seismlclty in these two plates,within the Talkeet· na Terrain,suggests that many of the earthquakes, including virtually all of the moderate to large earthquakes are occurring in the Pacillc Plate at dep· ths of at least 34 miles beneath the dam sites. Activity occurring in the North American Plate is associated with energy release on small faull planes which are too deep and too small to cause displacement at the earth's surface. 10.Why do your studies not consider faults that are In- acllve? All faults and possible faults within about 100 km (62 miles)of the Susitna dam sites have been eyaluated to determine whether or not they are ac· live faults.Those faults which have not had displacement in recent geologic time are can· sidered to be inactive. Faults which are inactive are not Important for seismic design of a dam because earthquakes are not expected to occur along Inactlye faults. 11.Whal is considered an ac- live laull? Various goyernmentai and regulatory agencies have deli ned acllYe faults in order to assess the impor· tance 01 faults to the design of critical facilities such as dams.Initially these definitions were based on how recently there has been movement along a fault. For example,the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation dellnes a fault which has moved in the last 100,000 years as active.The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers uses 35,000 years. Recenlly there has developed an increasing consensus that the activi- ty of a fault should be con- sidered by how often It moves,how much move- ment is likely 10 occur and what type of movement will occur.From this Infor- mation the likelihood of faul1 movement can be made and incorporated In- to dam design. 12.When you reler 10 active faulls,how long 8 period 01 lime are you relerring lo? As a guideline for the Susitna project,Acres American,Inc.has defined an actlye fault as one which has had movement. or displacement,in the last 100,000 years. ~nmA.ipolt on faMAmlC Sl~lOt SvsUna •C ,-niCem~ ...,.y . •:ely..Consultant.lor AcrQ Amerlean,Inc.lIInd the AlilIka Power Aulhority. In AnchOl"age.Copi"ere av",il&ble .,IN! ....Iaska Rnoufc"Library In rhe Fe()flral Bulldlng;.1 111.Uni'fll!rsl!y 01 AI.8fta Consor· tium Libr.ry;Ott the ArcUc EnYironmentalln- formatlon.no Data canter,.nd ilt Ihe Z.J. L01JliS~l,b~ry, In Fairo.nk.,coPl101t:t.ro ilYaI13bl"..llhe E:lm~r E,R.smu~on L.lbrary,Univttally or Alaska; ..nd .11 t~e Noel Wlen lib..,ry In Tdlkeetra...coO))'Is dyailable -11 Ihe T"lk!Mt- na PublIC library. MocUfled MercaJII'ClIl Thl.scala varhllly descrlb8. lhe affecls of aarthquake,. ~ Engln.."all."un Ie· e.I.,..UlIin 10 nHNlsu,..1he severlly of IIrthqUlIke "'~ lion••T1'MI rel.Uon.hlp of.c· e.tarallon 10 magnllude mu••lnclude a 4;onllda,.·"on 'or the dlltenc.lrom lhe nrthqulke source. Mllilnllud!.nd .mount of !!lI!IIY!I.!.uH Tha..two columns show that ••eh Increa.In magnitude (for e.emple, 'rom 5 106)Is Ipproklmiliely •3D·lold IneNu4 In .nergy r.I••••. Soarce: MooUled Irom£1'!..t.h-Aoc..!!_P~..!....E!!ilir:t~~~:.Q~9-' O_~,!d£9!tslructlon.J.L ShCtitld,A.J.Woodward, S.F,GlZWIntkl,W.A.Clevengef,JOhn WlIeYimd Sons.Inc., NewYOf1o:, (RIS)? p,.lImlll8lY mdfal1e a mlltll'likelihood 01 RIS t lICsnyon. Additional ftaJ lion of the likelihood of rllll8fYOlr· •sels lnt"'IllIOJIlii,.. t t 2._ _._-.tllqu...., 4 'he staei.na hydro studies/september 1981 Designing Dams in Earthquake Country -An I'nterview With Dr.Harry Seed Dr.H.JloltOf1 (Ha"Y)Seed,Is a specialist In aarthquake·reslstant design and professor of civil Ineerlng at the University ot California,Berkeley.He also serves on the Susltne External lIe.lew Penel which ia made up of six emln.nl engln"",and sclentlsta who provide independent ..view 01 the SoallN hydroelectric fe••lblUty atudy. Dr.Seed haa been a consultant on soli mechanics and seismic _Ign probl.ms since 1953.Over lbe yealll,he has keele-tenslvely with a vlriely 01 clients,including lhe U.S.Army Corps 01 Engineers,the Execullve Office of Ihe President 01 the United States,the World Blnk,the Fedellli Power Commission,Bechlel Corporation,Woodward·Clyde,the Metropolitan Water District 01 Los Anottles,the Canedlan Ministry 01 the Environmenl,and meny lorelgn government egtIncles.He has worked on about 80 dams worldwide,most 01 which were In seismic areas. Alter a dam tiliure In Cilifomi.in the early 70's,Dr.Seed authored design procedures lor Call1or· nla so that dam lallures would not happen again.Thue procedure.are now used Ihroughoutlhe wOftd to produce sale,seismic desl;""lor dems. FollowlllQ are excerpts Irom an Interview conducted by Nancy Blunck,Director 01 Public Par· IIclpellon,the Aleska Power Al(lhority.The complete text is available upon requesl. QUESTION:What Is your per·ed product which can salely means having responsibility vlronments 01 any dam in the sonal experience with dam withstand the effects of the for determining the adequacy world.Nevertheless,a safe design?earthquake shaking.of the seismic design.design has been worked out for that project. SEED:Since I am a specialist The primary construction pro-The Auburn dam in California in earthquakes,I tend to get in-cedure Involved in placing is a highly controversial dam.Incidentally,on all these volved more with dams In earth materials in dams is in Again,the design earthquake dams,designs have been pro- highly seismic regions than compacting the material to a is a magnitude 6.5 event direct·duced which have been ade· other areas.So,for example,high enough density to make It Iy at the dam site.The com-quate to accommodate the I've worked on a lot more dams strong enough to withstand plicating feature of that dam is motions produced by the in California than with dams In the earthquake shaking.That that there is much debate earthquakes.It is a matter of Texas or Florida,which are has been done in many areas,about the possibility of a fault how you build the dam,how nonselsmic regions.My ex·but first you must carefully going through the foundation you arrange the dam,what perience includes the design predict the effects of earth·of the dam and,therefore,materials you use in the dam, of perhaps 80 dams-SO or 80 quake shaking on the dam and directly through the dam.and how you place the dams for earthquake problems how dense the material needs matarlals in the dam.These of one kind or another.I to be to withstand a given level The Consultant Board on factors will determine whether suspect that I have worked on of earthquake motions.which I served determined that the dam will adequately wlth- more earthquake problems the dam ought to be designed stand the effects of the earth· related to dams than anybody QUESTION:What projects are for a fault offset in the founda-quaka. else In the world.you familiar with that resemble tion of about 6 inches.That the Susitna project?recommendation led to QUEST'lON:What about the redesign of the dam from the question of building safe dams SEED:Oroville Dam In Califor-thin arch dam to a concrete ....•on all these dams,In a seismic area?nia is a cobble and gravel IiII gravity dam.._ dam 700 feet high.Auburn dam designs have been pro· SEED:First of all,it is comfort-In California is a concrete dam The Urlbante-Caparo project In duced which have ing that at the present level of about 600 feet high...The Venezuela involves four dams been adequate to ac-knowledge of the Susitna pro-Urlbante-Gaparo project in and three powerhouses and ject the Intensity of shaking Venezuela is a complex of four some parts of this project are commodate the mo· which can be anticipated at dams and three powerhouses,built about 15 mlies from the tions produced by the either dam site is considerably with 400 to 500 foot high dams.Bocono fault,which Is one of earthquakes.It is alessthanthoseInareasforTheAlicuraprojectinArgen-the largest fauits In the world.matter of how youwhichwehavealreadydesign-tina Is a complex of three ed dams.Secondly.the people dams about 400 feet hlgh...The The seismic design of the pro·build the dam,how you in Alaska should know that Pueblo-Viejo dam in ject in Venezuela is an Impor.arrange the dam,whatdamshavebeen'proposed 10 Guatamala is a rockflil dam tant controlling aspect of the materials you use inbebuiltInsomeextremely500leelhlgh...And many project.The materials critical areas.others.available for building the dams the dam,and how you there are not the best in the place the materials in QUESTION:What must dam world.There is a lot 01 friable the dam."design in highly seismic areas "I suspect that I have sandstone (Iriable means take Into account?breaks easily,from solid toworkedonmoreearth·sand),and so it turns out that SEED:The first thing in a quake problems designing the dam to be highly seismic area Is to stUdy related to dams than seismically stable Is a critical QUESTION:What knolty pro- the dam site and find out If anybody else in the aspect of the deslgn...One of blems have you encountered there Is a fault in the founda·the design earthquakes is a on other hydroelectric tion of the dam orvelV close to world."magnitude 7.5 event occurring projects? the dam.We preler not 10 build about seven miles from the dams directly over faults,dam.This Is almoslldentical SEED:Any problems that you although once in a while we with one of the possible encounter are essentially have done that when there is QUESTION:How do these pro-design earthquakes for the related to three major no way to avoid it.jects resemble Susilna,and Watana dam unless Acres is ones-the amount of water to are there greater or lesser successluf In proving that the be stored and the,amount of Even If you avoid the faults in a problems?Talkeetna thrust is not active...flooding water that has to be highly seismic region,that stored at any given time;the doesn't eliminate the problem SEED:The Oroville dam Is in The Taikeetna thrust is a fault stability of the foundation of Ihe dam being subjected to California.The region in which near the Watana dam site materiels;and the possible el- extremely strong ground shako it was built was supposedly whose activity is questionable,fects of faults In the founda- ing In the event of a major nonseismlc,but In 1965 they but it is believed to be inactive.tion.The first is not my area of earthquake...had an earthquake very near If it remains in the inactive expertise.It Is a hydrological the dam.So the design earth·category,then the severity 01 problem and there are olher So the second aspect of the quake for Orovlile is now a shaking for Watana will be specialists who can handle problem is to design the dam magnitude 6.5 (on the Richter less than that for Urlbante-that part of the problem.I to remain stable even though It scale)earthquake occurring Caparo project In general.would say the most difficult is shaken by very strong mo-directly under the dam site,problems,in the earthquake tions from an earthquake.which is a very strong earth-The Pueblo Viejo project in sense,are primarily those of There are various ways in quake.Guatemala Is designed for a evaluating the stability of the which that is effected.One is magnitude 7.75 earthquake foundation materials on which by controlling the materials 01 Oroville Is about the same passing directly through the dams are to be built. which the dam is built.When I height as the proposed project site-not the site of say controlling them,I mean Watana dam and,as a matter the dam,but the overall pro-For example,there was much selecting materials which are of fact,was the one we sug-ject site.The fault passes debate about the safety during capable 01 withstanding earth-gested in our first report as through a power tunnel very earthqUakes of Revelstoke quakes better than others.probably being the best model close to the dam site.The Dam in Canada and what they Also,placing them in the dam for that particular dam.I have shaking there is of the order of should do about the founda· using construction techniques been on the consulting board 0.7g acceleration,lasting for tion.I was invited to be a con- which enhance their natural for that dam since it became maybe 45 seconds-one of the suitant on thet project abllitv.and Drovldinq a finish-an earthquake problem,which most severe seismic en·because of the different points the susitna hydro studies/september 1981 5 The design of the Oroville dam In California has been suggested as an appropriate mode'for preliminary design of the Watane dam.It is an earthflll dam like Watana Is proposed to be,is in a seismic area,and is of a similar height (Oroville la 770 fllllt,Watana is proposed to be 880 feet). The design earthquake for Oroville was a magnflude 8.5 earthquake occurring directly under the dam site.The Oroville dam design can accommodate strong ground molIons very near the dam for a relatively large earthquake. at view about the safety of the dam... They were dealing wilh a very difficult foundation soil.As a maller of fact,I laid lhem lhat lhe foundation soils in some paris of the dam foundation bore a great resemblance to lhose at Turnagain Heights in Alaska (the soils lhat failed In lhe 1964 earthquake).Some of the foundation malerial for Revelstoke Dam reminded me alot of Bootlegger Cove clay.I laid them that it was an unstable material,especially at the level of shaking they were designing for.I advised lhem 10 excavate the material out,and that's what Ihey elected to do.I would say that was a knolly problem. Other knotty problems involve faults In the foundation.After the San Fernando dam nearly failed in the San Fernando eerthquake in California,the people living downstream did not want another dam to be built at thai site,but it turns out to be a critical point of en· trance for water into California for the city of Los Angeles. Therefore,the Department of Water and Power In Los Angeles considered it essen· tlal to have a reservoir In that area,and it was necessary to rebuild the dam at thatloca· tion.There was a possibility of a fault movement in the faun· dation,so we had to devise .. special design which could ac· commodate a very high level of shaking and lhe possibility of a fault movement in the faun· dation both occurring at the same time.That was suc- cessfully done. .....it is a comforting fact that at the present level of knowledge of the Susitna project, the intensity of shako ing which can be an· ticipated at either dam site is considerably 'Iess than those areas for which we have already designed dams." The Teton dam involved pro- blems with highly erodible soils.The dam failed,but I believe that If the design had been modified,a safe dam could have been built at that site.The knolly problem there was assessing the effect of the jointing of the rock and the simultaneous erodibility of the soils used to build the dam on the safety of the dam.That was a tricky problem.The engineers who made the design thought they had solv- ed It,but as events evenlually proved,they had not.The dam fai led.I believe we know enough about it now that we could rebuild the dam very safely... To tell you the trulh,I don't know of any dam which doesn't involve one or two knolly problems. QUESTION:How does the seismicity of the Susitna area compare to the seismicity of other regions where you have worked? SEED:I would say that the seismicity of the Susltna area as It is presently understood (and if it is established)is somewhat less than that which I have encountered In other parts of the world.There are a number of faults whose activity has not yet been established In the Susitna area.They are believed to be inactive faults,but they are on record for being Investigated very carefully during the 1981 summer.The Talkeetna thrust fault is one of these and pro- bably the most Important of them.If all the faults that are presenlly not clearly recognlz· ed as active are found to be in· active,then Ihe seismicity of the Susltna area (or the inten· slty of ground shaklnll that would develop)would not be as strong as many of the dams that we have already designed. QUESTION:And what if the op- posite were true? ANSWER:If the opposite were true,If the Talkeetna trust turns out to be an active faufl, then the level of shaking at Susitna would be comparable to that of some of lhe strongest seismic regions where dams have been built. Since we have been able to buiid and design dams which can be shown to be seismical- ly stable in those regions,then I believe that the same techni- ques would be capable 01 demonstrating the same thing for the dams of the Susltna project. The design in any case will re- Quire great care,but it would require even more cafe if those faults like the Talkeetna thrust turn out to be active faults... There has been tremendous progress in the field of earth- Quake engineering,and the earthquake-resistant design of dams has been totally revolu- tionized In the last 10 years.It Is almost like the developments of space technology.Things we can do now,our understanding of the problems now,are so very much greater than they were 10 years ago that we can feel enormous confidence now In comparison.In those days people fefl confident because lhey didn't really understand the problems.Now we feel confident because we have a very good understanding of the problems. QUESTION:Can you give some examples of why you can be so confident? SEED:We can point 10 virtually dozens of dams which have withstood very strong earth- Quake shaking,even the strongest imaginable earth- Quake shaking.In California,in 1906 there were at least 15 dams within 5 miles of the San Andreas fault on which a magnitUde 8.3 earthquake oc- curred,and they were built by the rather orlmitlve ore-1900 construction methods.There wasn't a single one of them that suffered any major damage due to the earthquake. During the last10years we have learned what the proper- lies of those dams are that enabled them to do that.We can also point to a few dams that have failed during earth- Quakes and what we have learned over the lasl 10 years is what made those dams fail as compared with the other ones that haven't failed. .....the earthquake· resistant design of dams has been totally revolutionized in the last 10 years." The record is very positive. There have been literally hun- dreds of dams which have withstood strong earthquake motions.In the total his lory of the United States,so far as I know,I think there are only four or five known failures of dams during earthquakes,and some of those were quite small dams...We bettsr understand which ones are iikely to be vulnerable and which ones are likely to be safe and how to transform the unsafe ones j nto safe ones... In the most recent survey of the safety of dams In Califor- nia,the conclusion was that there are no dams in California which are a threat to the publlc...ln the last 10 years there have been a number of dams in California which have been recognized as earth- Quake hazards that have either been taken out of service or rebuilt or modified in some way to eliminate the lhreat to the public. California is obviously one of the more seismically active states In the United States, along with Alaska,and if we can do it here,you can do it In Alaska,too. 6 the susllna hydro studies/september 1981 Earth dams combine natural mate .als and carefu c n truction Earthlracklill dam: "Any dam conslrucled of excavaled materials placed without addilion of binding malerials other fhan those inherenl in the nalural material.The materials are usualty obtained at or near the dam site." -The International Commission on Large Dams Earth/rockfill dams contain about 25 percent earth to re- tain the water and 75 percent rack to hold the earth up and ensure stability. In seismically active regions it is not unusual to flatten the slopes of the darn more than In non-seismic areas.The actual slope and proportions at a par· ticular site is dependent on the materials available for can· struction and the size of the design earthquake. One of the most important reo Quirements for earth dams Is that the materials be selected and compacted-and the faun· dation stabilized-so that set· tlement of the earth and rock is minimized.For dams in high seismic regions,any river bed materials under the dam which would be unstable during earthquakes is either removed or Improved. The core The core is a membrane built within an earth dam 10 form an impermeabie barrier.It may be of nalural materials (clays, sands,etc.)or prepared materials (cement or asphaltic concrete),or of metal,plastic, orrubber. In the case of Watana,the core is proposed to be of glaclallill (a mixture of gravels.sands, sills,and clays).It would be more than 400 feet thick at the riverbed ievel,and tapered to aboul 30 feet In thickness at the crest of the dam. Unlike concrele,earth cores cannol support their own weight even though lhey are as effective as concrete at im· pounding water.Gently slop· ing man·made mounlains of compacted sand,gravel,and rock fill are needed to support the dam's core and keep It in position. Location 01 core in general,a cenlrally located core provides the best security under earthquake conditions. A central core Is illustraled in the diagram of the Watana cross-section. D Ign Each earthlrockflll dam is unl· Que -Its watertightness and stablillty are directly related to the materials used for its can· struction and the materials upon which It Is founded. Earth/rockflll dams are usually constructed in zones.The pri mary purpose of this is to ensure safety In terms of strength,control 01 seepage, and protection against crack- ing. Earthquake-r luI f18lur88 in earth/rackllll dame: Some of these provisions are being considered for the Watanadam. All earth/rackllll dams are compacted to make them dense.In earthquake areas the process 01 compaction Is no dillerent but more compaction is done because denser rock provides more stability.Most malerlals can be compacted by 3 to 8 passes with heavy machinery.Tests are made In the Ileid as the dam is being construcled to ensure thai maximum compaction Is achieved. All dams also have freeboard. This is the height above nor· mal water level and It allows for waves,floods,and Ice.In earthquake areas,additional height is added to allow for settlement. II there Is a potential for waves passing over the crest 01 earthlrockflll dams,the crest can be treated so that the waves pass safely.Such a wave could result from a seismic disturbance or aland· slide into the reservoir. Preliminary studies Indicate there is no potential for land· slides In the Watana reservoir because of the topographic character of the valley. Earthlrackflll dams are usually zoned for strength and stability. In earthquake areas,wider filter zones are provided to in· crease stability. In addition,the materials In the filter zones are selected to provide self-healing of cracks. This conservative approach in· creases the level 01 confidence In the design.The dam Is designed not to crack and also designed to self·heal II it did crack. Slope Protection Both faces of an earth dam must be protected against structural damage. The downstream face needs protection against natural erosion and may be covared with grassed sailor rack. The upstream face must be protected against damage by wave action,ice,or floating debris.Various methods include rock (rip- rap),precast concrete forms,soli cement,or the waterproofing membrane of the dam. Sourclt: ~ri':'~tO'Large Dams P"rt II,Hemy H.Thorn..1976.John Wiley '"Sons Publishels.New York,A Wil&y·lntersclenca Pubtlcallon. ...of. HI on •Impervious core [lJ Coarse filler Seml·pervious lone m Rock &granular fill Finelllter ~Slope prOhtction CQmpareUV8 view of Anchorage skyline ww.J ......._.DII 1.:=~~~=~~ ;:'i I 811I ptOOIWft. ~TIle::=~"::'==~'__'8lIl"1_1lIo"'~21 Susitna constructl not red bySB Cross-section view of proposed Watana earth dam 4.8825 DO dlff_~~IIa:I~.::S~::::~llIutltlll.lIftdthoMtotrtalAcconlin9,he legl the~"for IllduslrIeT not _lhen the ~..cllltrged rHld "'181_and II !NY boo the su Itna hydro studle Iseptember 1981 7 ackground information on proposed Susitna project The Susitna hydroelectric pro- ject as currently proposed in- volves two dams and reser- voirs on the Susitna Aiver in the Talkeetna Mountains of southcentral Alaska. The project area is about 50 miles northeast of Talkeetna, Alaska and 118 miles north- northeast of Anchorage, Alaska. The upstream dam,Watana,is proposed to be developed first.It is currently being con· sidered 85 an earth/rockfill dam,approximately 880 'eel high.This would make ilthe fifth highest dam in the world and the highest in North America.It would impound a 54-mile-long reservoir. The downstream dam at Devil Canyon is currently being con· sidered as a concrete arch dam approximately 635 feet high.II would impound a 28-mHe [ong reservoir. These dimensions are approx- imate and subject to change during detailed design. The feasibility study is being managed and conducted by Acres AmerIcan,Inc.for the Aiaska Power Authority.The studies conducted to date represent the first year of a planned two-year study (1980 and 1981).A draft feasibility report detailing research ef· forts in 10 different areas in· cluding economics,engineer- ing,and environmental aspects of the proposed power project is due in March next year. "'" ,... Yeolrol inllio1l opera·..... !i88 1.076 13,305 1.021 1.431 R"led R.I~d Ae&~~olf capacily capacity capacity Ito....planned ,n'll 10·{MWI (MWI--+-- '" Crest length m D.m type concrel. gravity USA USA Country Slale ~ PrOOflnce '''' NNrnt clly Port'-nd Colorado Riwer ~ eesin '94''Elonnewllle 'Glen Can.,on N.... How proposed Susitna projects compare with existing dams 1.272 11,795 7.4fiO 10.1130'Q,..ndCoul..1942 ,.,. Columbia CotOfado Wllsh{nglon USA USA canerele gralllly concrete ;)rcfllgfl1'lt., "0 J79 36,103 1,345 1,345 1942 ,.,. °Mlce 1973 ,...Columbia Fieln...Oro,lIIe Brmll'lColumbla Canilda earthl rackllli USA 245 235 792 24,670 1,736 2,316 4.'299 2.610 '" 1976 'Oe1'11 Canyon (PfOpoSeGJ SUIUn.. (2000 J AI,uke USA concrete ."eh '00 11ft l,nS 400 (Propo~edl,,on," ·e-",,,,,,.PIIIIIIIIIIIla....., 'W"_~a..,e-_. 100 {Propondl (t9'JJ J 1,662 12,347 oero-......._..e--o......=-_............................-.-.....--~ elrlhl rocklill USAAlashhlll"'n_-Welene jPropolledl SUItt". (1993 ) Construction timed to match power demand --, I I I I THANK YOU FOR I _Y~R INTERES:"- ,. ~ I ! 2)the addlllonal400 MW of capacity at Watana Is ready for operalion In 1995;and 3)the Oevll Canyon dam wilh 115 400 MW Is compleled in Ihe year 2000_ 1)The Watana dam wilh 400 MW would be completed In 1993, which is the earllesl possible dale because of lime periods involved In project evaluation,permitting,and construction; Possible slaging oj Susitna project This diagram shows how the Susltna developmenf would be slaged under lhe medium forecasl of fulure energy re- qulremenls_With this energy demand and ensuring Ihat ade- quate generating reserves are maintained,power costs would be minimized If: ready to buy it The energy consumption forecasts pro- vide estimates of how much power can be sold in the years ahead. The Power Authority's ap- proach,then,is to postpone spending money lor the next stage as long as possible to ensure that there is the de- mand for purchasing the pro- ject's power.Money spent on a project whose power cannot be sold Is money wasted. Waiting too long 10 construct the next stage,however,is unacceptable because there would be an increasing likelihood of not being able to meet the peak demands.If this occurred,customers would have to go with04t electricity during high use ~riods.Thus, a balance has to be struck be- tween postponing additional investments and ensuring ade- Quate generation to meet peak loads_ Meanwhile,the balancing has to be done in the midst of a great deal of uncertainty about what the actual demand for power is going to be in the future.As time goes on and future power demands become more certain,the plan· ned staging would be adjusted to suil actual conditions. 1)the Watana dam with in- stalled capacity of 400 MW; The proposed Susitna develop- ment is presently envisioned as having three distinct stages: Both the Watana capacity ad- dition and the Devil Canyon project could be brought on line earlier or at the same time, if needed,while alt three stages could be postponed if demand turned out to be less than anticipated, This staging grovldes some flexibility in ffie sequence and liming of construction.At the same time,there are certain constraints on that flexiblllty_ In staging the Susitna develop- ment,the prtmary objective Is to keep the cost of power as low as possible.This Is done by minimizing expenditures while selling as much of the available power as possible. But the power cannot be sold if there aren't consumers 3)the Devil Canyon dam with an Installed capacity of about 400 MW. 2)an addition to the Watana capacity of another 400 MW;and I I I I I .-------------•This public Information document an the Susi'nl hydropower project was developed by the Alaska Power Authority Publk:Participation OUlCI,Nancy Blunck,Director.Comments on the sub.tanee 0'thl.newsletter and Idea.for future publl~tton.should be fonlf.rded to the Public Participation Oftlce by wly at the following coupon. Last First Inilial Name I I I II I I I I I I I I I I II I I I II :;~I:~:s I I t I I [ I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I City II I I I I I I I I I I State [[]Zip I I I I I I and mail to:Alaska Power Authority Public Participation Office 333 W.4th·Suite 31 .Anchorage,AK 99501- If you want to get future newsletters 8 the susitna hydro studies/seplem r 1981 ndependent panel reviewing usitna feasibility stu ies Dam at Devil Canyon recommended over tunnel ExlalllalR...law Panlr Membe,,: Six leading scientists and government work on American Following 2,500 man hours of severely depleted because the engineers have been named to dams,he has extensive con-study (in excess of one man water would be flowing an independent exlernal suiting experience with Cana·year of effort)a twin power tun-through the tunnel instead. review panel by the Alaska dian hydroelectric projects.nel plan has been eliminated Power Authority Board of as an alternative to a dam at The kayaklng experience at Directors.The specialists,who Dr.A.Slar~.r Leopold is a Devil Canyon.Devil Canyon could be pre- collectively have more than distinguished zoologist who served,but not in the same 200 years'experience in their has been associated with the The tunnels,15 miles iong and way that it exists now.Wilh a fields,are reviewing the Suslt-University of California since 30 feet in diameter,were tunnel,kayaklng would be na feasibility studies con-1946.A one-time vice-eliminated from further con-dependent upon the controlled ducled by Acres American and president of the Sierra Club,sideratlon when it became release of water through the other research contrsctors.he has served on many wildlife ciear thai they would generate canyon. and conservation organiza-26%less electricity and would Interview wilh members of the tions and has conducted ex-cost $637 million more than a In addition,by virtue of size review panel will be available tensive research around the dam al Devil Canyon.alone,construction of the in fulure publications as the worfd.smaller re·regulatlon dam (245 specialisls comment on The difference in energy out-feet)would have less en- general plans for the Susitna Dr.Andrew H.Manltl is a put,primarily due to friction vironmenlal impact than the development and specific geologist who has been involv-losses along the length of the Devil Canyon dam.The river feasibility studies.ed in the research,design,and tunnel,is equivalent to about miles flooded and the reservoir review of major construction 30%of the total energy area created by the re- Exerpts from an interview with projecs around the world.A generated in 1980 by both An-regUlation dam for the tunnei Dr.Seed appear in this specialist In lunnels and rock chorage utilities (Municipal would be about half those of newslelter.work,he has extensive ex-Light and Power and Chugach the Devil Canyon dam,thereby perience with hydroelectric Electric Association).reducing negative conse- Merlin D.Copen is an expert and nuclear power projects.quences such as loss of on concrete dams.He has had In the long term,an additional wildlife habitat and possible major responslbll ity for the Dr.H.Bolton Seed is a former generating plant would have to archeological sites in the design of the Glenn Canyon chairman of the Department of be added to till this gap and reservoir area. Dam on the Colorado River,Civil Engineering at the this COUld create an additional California's Auburn Dam (pro-Berkeley campus of the source of environmental im-With the tunnel,there could posed as one of the longest University of California.A pact which has not been in-conceivably be a rare mitiga- concrete arch dams in the specialist in earthquake eluded in the comparison at tlon opportunity of creating world),and many others.He engineering problems,he has this time.new salmon spawning habitat has consulted on numerous in-consulted on dozens of the in an 11-mile section of the ternatlonal projects as well as world's iargest dam projects.Excluding consideration of river above Devil Canyon. other Alaskan developments.this additional generation to Presently,Devil Canyon Dr.Dennis M.Rohan is an make up the shortfall,the tun-presents a physical barrier to Jacob H.Douma served as economist with the Stanford nefs'main advantages were tish migration. chief of the Hydraulic Design Research Institute who environmental.The adverse et- Branch of the U.S.Army Corps specializes in energy matters.fects upon the aesthetic value Source: of Engineers prior to his retire-He has been inVOlved in and uniqueness of Devil Can-"5u$lI"a Hydroelectric Project,Tunnel Aller- ment from active government economic analyses of all yon would be lessened with a nativ.s RAport,Task 6.DesIgn Developmont,,. prnpared by AcrosAmerican,Ir'lC.for the service after more than 40 phases 01 energy production tunnel,allhough the flows Alidkol Pow~Aulhorily.July t980 years.In addition to his and consumption.through the canyon would be Douma RohanSeed Copen susitna hydro studies I THIS'SUE: ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OFFICE 333 West 4th -Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 (907)276-0001 I Alaska Resources lJbrarY &J.n1Ormal1on Servtces ~or-age,AlaSka "-'...