HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA817I
J
0
[1.
u
]
u
LJ
J
Tech n i c a I R e port
Number 88
Social and Economic
Studies Program
Sponsor:
Minerals Management
Service
Alaska Outer
Cont i nen t al
Shelf Region
U DIAPIR FIELD STATEVVIDE AND REGIONAL .ECONOMIC
LJ AND DEMOGRAPHIC SYSTEMS IMPACTS ANALYSIS
u
Ll
AD .
242.5
A4
us
No.88
I
I ~
r
r·~
i '~·
['I
[
L~
r
L
c
[
[
r~
L
' '
Contract No. AA851-CT1-30
Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program
DIAPIR FIELD STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL
ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC SYSTEMS
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Prepared for
Minerals Management Service
Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office
Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program
Prepared by
Gunnar Knapp, Brian Reeder, and Scott Goldsmith
Institute of Social and Economic Research
University of Alaska
June 1983
UBRJJlY
usnvs
Anchorage
[
[
[
[
L~
r
L
' ~.
ABSTRACT
This study projects economic and demographic impacts of OCS
Lease Sale 87, scheduled for June of 1984 in the Beaufort Sea. Base
case and impact project ions are developed for the state of Alaska
and for Anchorage and Fairbanks using the MAP econometric model.
The maximum projected impact of a 3.0 BBBL oil development on
Sale 87 leases is an increase of about 3 percent in total state
population and employment. Similar impacts occur for Anchorage and
Fairbanks. In both absolute and percentage terms, projected impacts
are greater after the year 2000 than in the 1990s, when peak direct
employment associated_ with the sale would occur. This is because
most future growth in Alaska is associated with support sector
expansion; the effect of Sale 87 is to cause this growth to occur
earlier.
iii
r
I' I
c
E
c
c
[
' '·
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES • .
LIST OF FIGURES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS •
I. INTRODUCTION •
II. METHODOLOGY
Introduction •
The M.!\.P Model
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The M.!\.P Regional Model •
II I. HODEL ASSU}iPTIONS
IV.
Base Case Assumptions
Impact Case Assumptions
BASE CASE PROJECTIONS
Statewide Base Case Project ions
Anchorage Base Case Projections
Fairbanks Base Case Projectiops
V. IMPACT CASE PROJECTIONS •.••
Statewide Impact Projections •.•••
Anchorage and Fairbanks Impact Projections •
VI. CONCLUSIONS
' REFERENCES • • • •
APPENDIX A. STATEWIDE BASE CASE PROJECTIONS
APPENDIX B. STATEWIDE IMPACT PROJECTIONS •. • •
APPENDIX C. REGIONAL BASE CASE AND I}fPACT PROJECTIONS
APPE~~IX D. REGIONAL ABSOLUTE IMPACT PROJECTIONS
APPENDIX E. REGIONAL PERCENT IMPACT PROJECTIONS
• * • " • •
APPE~~IX F. :~p MODEL BASE CASE EMPLOTI1ENT ASSU~1PTIONS
APPENDIX G. HISTORICAL OVERVIE\-1' OF ALASKA ECONOHY
v
iii
v
xii
1
3
3
6
9
11
11
21
25
25
27
30
33
33
38
43
47
A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
[
[
[
[
I'
[
[~
L
r
l
c
c
E
c
c
[
r·
L
r~
L
' ....
1.
2.
LIST OF TABLES
S~ARY OF BASE CASE ASSUMPTIONS FOR MAP MODEL,
DIAPIR FIELD (Sale 87) STUDY •..••••••
EXOGENOUS EHPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS FOR HA.P
STATEHIDE MODEL
3. EXOGENOUS REVEt."UE ASSUMPTIONS FOR MAP STATEWIDE MODEL
4. EXPLOYMENT AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS, 3.0 BBBL CASE
5. EMPLOYMENT AND REVENUE ASSUHPTIONS, 2. 2 BBBL CASE
6. MAP MODEL STATEWIDE BASE CASE PROJECTIONS, SUMMARY
7. MAP MODEL STATEWIDE BASE CASE PROJECTIONS, STATE
GOVERIDfENT REVENUES
8. KAP MODEL REGIONAL PROJECTIONS, BASE CASE AND IMPACT
CASES, ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION, TOTAL POPULATION
9. I-1.-\P HODEL REGIONAL PROJECTIONS, BASE CASE AND IMPACT
CASES, FAIRBAt.~S CENSUS DIVISION, TOTAL POPULATION
10. MAP MODEL STATEWIDE IMPACT PROJECTIONS, OCS.SALE 87
3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE, TOTAL POPULATION
11. M.AP MODEL STATEWIDE IMPACT PROJECTIONS, OCS SALE 87
3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE, TOTAL EMPLOYMENT ••
12. M.AP HODEL STATEWISE IMPACT PROJECTIONS, OCS SALE 87
2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE, TOTAL POPULATION ••••
13. MAP MODEL STATEWIDE IMPACT PROJECTIONS, OCS SALE 87
14. MAP MODEL REGIONAL ABSOLUTE IMPACT PROJECTIONS,
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION, TOTAL POPULATION
v~~
15
18
20
22
23
26
28
29
31
34
35
36
37
39
APPENDIX A Tables: MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
A.l Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
A.2 Population and Components of Change . . . . . . A-2
A. 3 Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3
A.4 Real Personal Income . . . . . . . . . A-4
A.5 Real Wage Rates . . . A-5
A. 6 State Government Revenues . A-6
A. 7 State General Fund Expenditures A-7
A. 8 Combined Funds Balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-8
APPE!--.TDIX B Tables: H:\P Model Statewide Impact Projections
3.0 BBBL Case Impacts
B.l
B.2
B.3
B.4
B.5
B.6
B.7
B.8
B.9
B. 10
B .11
B .12
B .13
B.l4
B .15
Total Population
Basic Sector Employment ••
Services Sector Employment
Government Employment •
Total Employment • • • • •
Real Personal Income •••
Real Per Capita Personal Income •
Basic Sector Real Wage Rate • • •
Services Sector Real Wage Rate ••••
Government Sector Real Wage Rate
Total Real State Government Revenues ••••
Real State Government General Fund Expenditures •
General Fund Expenditures • • • • •. • • • • • •
Real Combined Fund Expenditures ••••••••
Real Per Capita Combined Funds Balance • • ••
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
• B-10
• • B-11
B-12
B-13
•• B-14
• • B-15
2.2 BBBL Case Impacts
B .16
B. 17
B .18
B. 19
B .20
B.21
B.22
B.23
B .24
B .25
B .26
B .2 7
B .2 8
B.2 9
B.30
Total Population • • • • • •
Basic Sector Employment ••
Services Sector Employment •••
Government Employment •
Total Employment ••••••
Real Personal Income
Real Per Capita Personal Income •
Basic Sector Real Wage Rate •••
Services Sector Real Wage Rate
Government Sector Real Wage Rate
Total Real State Government Revenues
B-16
B-17
• •••• B-18
• • • • • • • B-19
• B-20
•• B-21
B-22
• • • • • B-2 3
• • • • • • • B-24
• • • • • • B-25
• • ••• B-26
Real State Government General Fund Expenditures • • B-27
General Fund Expenditures • • • • • • • • •••• B-28
Real Combined Fund Expenditures • • • • • • • • B-29
Real Per Capita Combined Funds Balance ••• B-30
[
c
L
[
[
[
L
·[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
r~
L
[
c
[
r·
L
, APPENDIX C Tables: K~P Model REgional Projections, Base Case and
"·. Impact Cases
Anchorage
C.l Total Population . . . . .
C.2 Total Employment
C.3 Basic Sector Employment . .
C.4 Support Sector Employment . . .
C.5 Government Sector Employment
Fairbanks
C.6
C.7
C.8
C.9
C.lO
Total Population • • • •
Total Employment • • • •
Basic Sector Employment • • ••
Support Sector Employment •
Government Sector Employment
.
. . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . .
. . . .
.
. .
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-7
C-8
C-9
C-10
APPENDIX D Tables: K~P Model Regional Absolute Impact Projections
Anchorage
D.l Total Population ••••
D.2 Total Employment
D.3 Basic Sector Employment •
D.4 Support Sector Employment •
D.5 Government Sector Employment
Fairbanks
. . . .
D-1
D-2
D-3
D-4
D-5
D. 6
D. 7
D.8
D.9
D .10
Total Population . • ••
Total Employment
• • • • D-6
Basic Sector Employment ••••
Support S~ctor Employment •
Government Sector Employment
D-7
D-8
D-9
• D-10
APPENDIX E Tables: K~P Model Regional Percentage Impact Projections
Anchorage
E.l
E.2
E.3
E.4
E.5
Total Population • • • • •
Total Employment ••••
Basic Sector Employment ••••.•••••••••
Support Sector Employment • • ••••.
Government Sec tor Employment • • . • . . • • •
l.X
E-1
E-2
E-3
E-4
E-5
Fairbanks
E.6
E.7
E.8
E.9
E .10
Total Population
Total Employment ••••
Basic Sector Employment •••••••••
Support Sector Employment • • ••••••••
Government Sector Employment
E-6
E-7
E-8
E-9
•• E-10
APPENDIX F: MAP Model Base Case Employment Assumptions
F .1
F.2
F.3
F.4
F.5
F.6
F.7
F.8
F.9
F. 10
F .11
F .12
F .13
F .14
F .15
F.l6
F. 17
F.l8
F. 19
F .20
F.21
F .22
F .23
F.24
F .25
Trans-Alaska Pipeline • • ••••
North Slope Petroleum •••
Upper Cook Inlet Petroleum
OCS Federal/State Lease Sale
OCS Sale 55 (Gulf of Alaska) ••••••
OCS Sale 57 (Bering/Norton) ••
OCS Sale 60 (Lower Cook Inlet) ••••••••
OCS Sale 70 (St. George)
OCS Sale 71 (Beaufort Sea)
OCS Sale 83 (Navarin B~sin
North Slope Gas • • • •
Beluga Coal Development ••
APA Hydro Projects • • • •
Tyee and Terror Lakes Hydro Projects
U.S. Borax • • • • • •••
Greens Creek Mine • • • • • •
F-6
. • • . F-7
F-8
F-9
F-10
.• F-ll
• • F-12
•• F-13
F-14
•• F-15
• F-16
•• F-17
• F-18
•• F-19
• F-20
Red Dog Mine • • • • • • • • •
• F-21
•• F-22
Other Mining • • • • • • • • • • • • F-23
Agriculture • • • • • • • • F-24
Logging and Sawmills • • • • • • • • • F-25
Pulp Mills • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• • F-26
Commercial Fishing (Nonbottomfish) ••••
Bottomfishing • • ••••••••
Federal Military
Feder a 1 Civilian
x.
. . .
• F-27
• • • • F-2 8
•• F-2 9
F-30
[
[
[
L
[
[.
c
c
c
L
r-
L
[
-::;1
9
od
---.
---'
..--,
--
3
c
[
I
I
L
r
b.~
f ~
' "·
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
LIST OF FIGURES
The MA.P Model
Base Case and Impact Case Projections,
Statewide Population • • • • • • • •
Base Case and Impact Case Projections,
Anchorage Population • • • • • • • •
Base Case and Impact Case Projections,
Fairbanks Population
Figure G.l Alaska Employment Growth
Figure G.2 Average Annual Wage and Per Capita Income
Figure G.3 Real Disposable Personal Income •
Figure G.4 Pecent of Civilians Employed
Figure G.S Ratio of Anchorage to U.S. CPI
X~
7
44
45
46
G-2
G-8
. G-10
G-12
••• G-13
[
[
..
" ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
[
[
This study was prepared between November of 1982 and March of
[ 1983 by Gunnar Knapp, Scott Goldsmith, Brian Reeder, Matt Berman,
and Karen White of the University of Alaska's Institute of Social
I and Economic Research. Gunnar Knapp wrote the report, Scott
Goldsmith revised sections of the MAP model and prepared a
historical overview of the Alaska economy, and Brian Reeder ran ·the
model and prepared the computer outputs. Matt Berman contributed
extensively to revisions of the base case assumptions, and Karen
White assisted in revisions of the MAP regional model. The report
r was typed by Cathi Dwyer and Darelyn Cooper and assembled by Anna
l Williams.
We are grateful to Kevin Banks, Jim Sullivan, Jack Heesch,
c and Tom Warren of the Alaska OCS Office of the Minerals Management
Service for their suggestions.
[
[
r
L
xiii
INTRODUCTION
This study projects economic and demographic impacts of the proposed
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lease Sale 87, scheduled for June of
1984 for-leases in the Diapir Field (Beaufort Sea) along the north
coast of Alaska. Earlier Beaufort Sea lease sales took place in
October of 1982 (Sale 71) and in December of 1979 (Sale BF, held
jointly with the State of Alaska).
The analysis of the study is carried out both for the state of
Alaska as a whole and for the Anchorage and Fairbanks census
divisions. We developed our projections using the MAP (Man-in-the-
Arctic Program) econometric models which have been developed over a
. .
number of years at the University of Alaska's Institute of Social
and Economic Research. We discuss our projection methodology in
Chapter-II.
The MAP models require a variety of assumptions. We discuss these
assumptions in Chapter III.
We projected impacts of the lease sale by pr-eparing economic and
demographic projections without the sale (the base case) and with
the sale (the impact cases). The projected impacts are the
differences between the impact case projection and the base case
1
projections. We discuss the base case projections 1.n Chapter IV,
and the impact projections in Chapter V.
We review the results of the study in Chapter VI. The appendixes
provide a variety of supporting materials.
2
r~
I
('
L
[
[
L_;
[
[
[
[
r·
L
r u
L
II. METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This study focuses on several specific impacts of OCS Sale 87.
These are primarily the effects of the sale upon population,
employment, and statewide revenues and wealth. Obviously, these are
only a few of the many variables which we might have considered.
However, it is these variables which have been most interesting and
useful 1n projecting impacts of earlier sales. A carefully
developed model is available to project them, and they provide a
basis for the discussion of a variety of indirect impacts of the
sale.
Our choices of regions to study--the state, Anchorage, and
Fairbanks--were based partly upon the capabilities of the MAP model,
and partly on the fact that the effects of the sale are of interest
both at the statewide level as well· as for these two regions. An
obvious third region in which Sale 87 might have impacts is the
North Slope Borough. However, for several reasons, we do not
examine these impacts in this study. First, as has been the case
[· for oil development to date, Sale 87 is likely to have few direct
impacts upon North Slope resident population and employment.
Instead, those impacts are likely to be indirect, resulting from
changes 1n the tax base of the Borough and changes 1n the number of
3
workers who may be included as residents in calculating the legal
limit of property taxes collected by the Borough for operating
revenues. Second, the North Slope is atypical of Alaska census
divisions in that such a large share of employment is held by
nonresidents, and in the significance of the local tax revenues to
the regional economy. As a result, the MAP model is ill-suited for
examining the impacts of OCS development upon the North Slope
Borough. We are examining impacts upon the North Slope in
connection with other studies currently underway for the Minerals
Management Service (Kruse et. al, "A Description of the
Socioeconomics of the North Slope Borough"; Knapp, "Impact Analysis
of the Barrow Arch Lease Offering" [October 1984]).
We include a historical overview of tqe Alaska economy as
Appendix G. In this study we do not discuss the historical or
current Anchorage and Fairbanks regional economies. A variety of
information on the statewide economy as well as the Anchorage and
Fairbanks econoplies is available elsewhere. "Beaufort Sea Statewide
and Regional Demographic and Economic Systems Impacts" (Social and
Economic Studies Program Technical Report 62), prepared by ISER in
August 1981, provides a baseline description of the statewide
economy and the two regional economies. "Economic and Demographic
Structural Change in Alaska" (Technical Report 73) discusses
economic and demographic structural changes which may accompany
economic growth.
4
[
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
[
F·
L
I'
L
r:
L
[
I .
l-.-~
We projected impacts of the lease sale by preparing economic and
demographic projections without the sale (the base case) and with
the sale (the impact cases). We then measured impacts of the sale
as the difference between the impact case and base case projections.
Projections using economic and demographic models are based upon a
variety of assumptions. Some of these assumptions are about the way
the economy works and will work in the future. These assumptions
are incorporated in the structure of the model. Other assumptions
[ are about the future values of particular varibles such as oil
revenues or employment in basic industries. The accuracy of the
~ projections depends upon the accuracy of the assumptions. Many of
L~
our base case assumptions are highly uncertain. For instance, the
r ~ future economy of Alaska depends greatly upon world oil prices,
5 which are extremely uncertain.
c •'
Fortunately, the projected impacts of an OCS Lease Sale are likely
to be less sensitive to uncertain assumptions than the base case.
c It J.s easier to predict the change in population that will result
G
from new OCS jobs than it is to predict what the total population
will be. For example, the future development of the fishing and
C· timber industries will be important in determining the future
economy of the state, but will have less of an effect upon the
[ impacts which might result from Lease Sale 87. Since the primary
r, purpose of the study is to examine impacts of the lease sale rather
L
r'
L
L 5
··\._ than to project the future of the Alaskan or regional economies, we
can be somewhat less concerned about the accuracy of the projected
base case.
The MAP Model
In order to project statewide economic and demographic variables, we
have used the Man-in-the-Arctic Program (MAP) model. This model was
developed at ISER over a number of years, and has been used
extensively in past OCS impact studies. A description of the model
may be found in Scott Goldsmith • s Man-in-the-Arctic (MAP) Economic
Modeling System Technical Documentation Report (ISER), prepared for
the Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture in June, 1983.
The MAP statewide model is actually a system of models composed of
economic, fiscal, and population models. The three are
interdependent, as shown schematically in Figure 1. The economic
model receives input from the fiscal and population models, the
fiscal model re~eives input from the economic and population models,
and the population model utilizes input from the economic models,
but not directly from the fiscal model. The population-economic
model link is the source of population estimates; population
reflects both natural population change and migration induced by
changes in economic conditions. The population estimates are also
used by the economic model for purposes of computing various per
capita values for economic variables.
6
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
f'
L
r:
L
L
FIGURE 1.
The HAP Hodel ·
Economic ---"' -Model
[ '~ -'f
r
I Population Fiscal
L; ... -Model Model r
I
t;
E
r ·. ~
C
~
" 0
[
[
r~
L
f'
L
[~ 7
'
The significant link with the fiscal model relates to the role of
.....
state government expenditures as a source of major economic stimulus
to the aggregate level of economic activity. In turn, state
government (and local government} expenditures are dependent upon
two key factors: the overall level of economic activity and the
level of activity in the petroleum industry.
In the economic model economic activity is classified as either
endogenous or exogenous. Exogenous activities include forestry,
fisheries, . agr-iculture and other manufacturing, as well as federal
government wages and salaries. Other exogenous sector activity
includes the petroleum industry and components of contract
construction such as major pipelines. State and local government
expenditures may also· be considered as exogenous for discussion
purposes, although there is some interdependence between these
expenditures and total economic activity.
These exogenous variables combine with demand from the support
sector and endogenous construction to generate total industrial
production. Industrial production, through a series of steps,
determines employment and income, and finally, real disposable
personal income, which in turn is a determinant of support sector
and endogenous construction economic activity. This means that
aggregate production depends on both exogenously determined and
endogenously determined economic activity, where endogenous activity
depends on total activity. As such, the system is a simultaneous
equation structure.
8
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
r·
L
L
I L_j
I'
[
c.
[
r
L
Certain other variables enter the model as well. In particular,
wage rates are used in determining total wage and salary payments,
where the wage rates are in part dependent upon U.S. wage rates,
which are determined exogenously.
A wide variety of assumptions are required to run the MAP model.
Chapter III discusses the assumptions which we used.
The MAP Regional Model
The MAP regional model disaggregates the MAP statewide model
projections for population and employment in the basic, support, and
government sectors among 20 regions, corresponding to 1970 census
divisions or combinations of census divisions. The disaggregation
1s based ·on proportions determined by 1980 .population, basic
employment in each region, assumptions about the relationship
between basic employment 1n each region and support sector
employment 1n that and other regions, and assumptions about the
relationship bet:ween employment in each region and population in
that and other regions. Thus, changes 1n basic employment in any
one region may affect both support sector employment and population
in other regions. In addition, the model allocates government
employment among regions based. on population and past trends.
9
10
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
c
C
L
c
[
r L
n
L
L
[
[
III. MODEL ASSUMPTIONS
[
[ In this chapter we discuss the assumptions which we used in running
r~ the HAP model. First we discuss the assumptions required to develop
l~ the base case projections. We then discuss the assumptions about
[ OCS direct impacts which we used in developing the impact case
projections.
[
[
Base Case Assumptions
Four types of assumptions are required in order to run the MAP
r model. These are national variable assumptions which directly or
L
indirectly affect Alaska economic activity; assumptions about
I'
b exogenous employment in special projects, basic industries, and
government; an assumption as to the number of tourists who will
E visit Alaska; and assumptions about state government revenues and
c •'
expenditures.
C Inasmuch as Alaska is an open· economy, developments in the state
hinge at least in part on the performance of the national economy.
G In particular, four assumptions about the U.S. economy are
C· required. First, a forecast of weekly earnings in the United States
is needed to estimate Alaskan wage rates. Second, insofar as most
[ goods consumed in Alaska are imported from the Lower 48, the U.S.
price level is an important determinant of Alaskan prices, so that
~== L estimates of such prices require some forecast of the U.S. consumer
p price index. Third, insofar as the income differential between
L
r= -"
-"
11
' .....
Alaska and the Lower 48 is a major determinant of migration between
Alaska and the Lower 48, a forecast is required of real per capita
disposable income in the United States. Finally, an estimate is
required of the unemployment rate in the United States.
In the base case, we assumed that the growth in U.S. consumer prices
slows to a long-run rate of 6. 5 percent by 1985, that real average
weekly earnings rise at a rate of 1 percent annually, that real per
capita income rises at 1.5 percent annually after 1984, and that
unemployment falls to a long-run rate of 6 percent. These are the
assumptions used in the Y..AP model projections prepared by ISER for
Harza-Ebasco energy demand projections (see page K-7 in the ¥..AP
model technical documentation report).
The MAP model requires assumptions about exogenous employment in ten
different categories. These are agricultural employment, mining
employment, high-wage exogenous construction employment, low-wage
exogenous coi\struction employment, exogenous transportation
employment, high-wage exogenous manufacturing employment,· low-wage
exogenous manufacturing employment, fish harvesting employment,
active-duty military employment, and civilian federal employment.
In order to develop these assumptions, we made assumptions about
employment levels in different industries as well as in special
projects. We arrived at our exogenous employment assumptions by
totaling the employment assumed for the different industries and
special projects.
12
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
c
[
r ,
L
L
The vali'dity of the model statewide projections do not require that
the particular special projects which we assumed actually occur, but
rather that the assumed levels of employment actually occur. For
example, we assumed that the U.S. Borax, Greens Creek, and Red Dog
mines would be developed as part of our exogenous employment
assumptions. However, if other mines were developed instead of
these three, the model's statewide projections would be unchanged.
In general, we assumed a modest level of growth in most industries
I'
'-'
in developing our employment assumptions. We assumed that state
subsidization results in only a gradual expansion of agriculture in
r the state over the forecast period; that traditional commercial
l~
fisheries and their associated processing employment maintain their
,--,
current levels, while a new bottomfish industry is primarily
t=_j
offshore processing and provides relatively few jobs to resident
~-~""' Alaskans. We assumed that federal military employment stays
'"'"' ~ constant at its current level throughout the forecast 'period, while
civilian feder~) employment grows . slowly at one-half percent per
c year.
d
c--o
u With regard to specific projects, we included several major sources
c of employment. Oil-related development includes exploration and
production in the Beaufort Sea on Sale BF and Sale 71 leases;
[ continuing Upper Cook Inlet and Prudhoe Bay field production; the
Prudhoe Bay waterflood project; tertiary oil recovery on the North
r-:
L
rc
L
[ 13
'· Slope using natural gas; and the TAPS pipeline. We also assumed
~ ..
construction of new hydroelectric projects, development of the U.S.
Borax and Greens Creek mines in Southeastern Alaska, development of
the Red Dog Mine in Northwestern Alaska, and construction of a major
coal mining facility in the Beluga/Chuitna area of Cook Inlet.
The assumptions about state government revenues and expenditures are
critical to the MAP model projections, given the significance of
state government expenditures in the economy of Alaska. We based
our revenue projections upon the Alaska Department of Revenue
projections published in December of 1982. We assumed that state
expenditures would be at the levels determined by the
recently-passed spending limit until revenues fall below the levels
permit ted by this limit. Subseguen tly, we assumed . that the income
tax would be reinstated, subsidies and the permanent fund dividend
program would be eliminated, and expenditures would be cut to equal
total revenues.
Table 1 summarizes the assumptions we used in preparing the MAP
model base case projections. Table 2 summarizes our exogenous
employment assumptions for the ten categories of exogenous
employment used by the MAP model. These employment assumptions are
based on· the project assumptions shown in Table 1. Table 3
summarizes our exogenous revenue assumptions.
14
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
f'
L
r
I :
"'--'
[
[
[
r
I
1: L;
[
r
L
r-= L
The fluctuations in year-to-year employment in some categories
result from the timing of employment assumed for particular
projects. Small changes in timing · for the projects could
considerably change the employment assumptions for particular
years. Thus, year-to-year fluctuations in assumed or projected
levels of employment should not be overemphasized in interpreting
our projections.
The low wage exogenous construction employment assumptions fall to
zero in 1995 because we do not assume any major new projects after
this year. Our inability to foresee possible new projects decades
in the future may result in a downward bias in our projections, but
we have no basis for assuming any particular positive level of
exogenqus construction employment. The· high .wage exogenous
construction employment assumptions are zero for all years because
this category exists specifically in order to simulate historical
construction employment during the construction of the. Trans Alaska
Pipeline.
We provide a detailed discription of our employment assumptions in
Appendix F.
15
' "·
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF BASE CASE ASSUMPTIONS
FOR MAP MODEL, DIAPIR FIELD (SALE 87) STUDY
ASSUMPTIONS
National Variables Assumptions
U.S. Inflation Rate
Real Average Weekly Earnings
Real Per Capita Income
Unemployment Rate
Exogenous Employment Assumptions
Trans-Alaska Pipeline
North Slope Petroleum
Production
Upper Cook Inlet Petroleum
Production
OCS Development
DESCRIPTION( a)
Consumer prices rise at 6.5 percent
annually after 1985.
Growth in real average weekly earnings
averages 1 percent annually.
Growth
averages
19~4.
in real per
1. 5 percent
capita
annually
Long-run rate of 6 percent.
income
after
Operating employment remains constant
at 1,500 through 2010 (TAP.083).
Construction employment developing
Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk fields,.
including Prudhoe Bay waterflood
project, peaks at 2,400 in 1983 and
1986. Operating employment remains at
2, 502 through 2010 for overall North
Slope production (NS0.082).
Employment declines gradually
beginning in 1983 so as to reach 50
percent of the 1979 level (778), or
383 by 2010 (UPC.082).
Exploration employment only for Sales
CI, 55, 57, 60, 70, and 83. Develop-
ment of Sale BF and Sale 71 (Beaufort
Sea) lease area results in maximum
employment of 1, 771 in 1995, falling
to long-run oper.ating level of 1,359.
Development of Sale 83 results in
maximum employment of 3,391 in 1997.
(OCS.BFM, OCS.SSX, OCS.S7X, OCS.60X,
OCS.70L, OCS.71M, OCS.60X(+4),
OCS. 83M).
(a) Codes in parentheses indicate ISER names for MAP Model SCEN
case files.
16
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
L~
[
[
[
r ,
L
L
[
[
[
[
"
[_"
[
[
[
r' L
" 6
5
c >
'
c
G
C·
L
r_:
L
(5
L
L
North Slope Gas
Beluga Chuitna Coal Production
Hydroelectric Projects
U.S. Borax
Greens Creek Mine
Red Dog Mine
Other Mining Activity
Agriculture
Logging and Sawmills
Pulp Mills
Commercial Fishing-Nonbottomfish
Tertiary oil recovery project util-
izing North Slope natural gas occurs
in early 1990s with a peak annual
employment of 2,000 (NSO.TRC}.
Development of 4.4 million
mine for export beginning
provides total employment
(BCL.04T(-4}}.
ton/year
in 1990
of 524
Employment peaks at over 700-in 1990
for construction of several state-
funded hydroelectric projects around
the state (SHP.082, SHP.PJH).
The U.S. Borax mine near Ketchikan is
brought into production with operating
employment of 790 by 1988 (BXM.PJ.M).
Production from the Greens Creek Mine
on Admiralty Island results in
employment of 315 people from 1986
through 1996 (GCM.082).
The Red Dog Mine in the Western Brooks
Range reaches full production with
operating employment of 448 by 1988
(RED.PJH).
Employment increases from a 1979 level
of 3,140 at 1 percent annually
(OMN.EPH).
Moderate state support results in
expansion of agriculture to employment
o·f 508 in 2000 (AGR.PJM).
Employment expands to over 3,200 by
1990 before beginning to decline
gradually after 2000 to about 2,800 by
2010 (FLL.082).
Employment
1 percent
(FPU.082).
declines
per year
at a rate of
after 1982
Employment levels in fishing and fish
processing remain constant at 1979
levels of 6,323 and 6,874, respec-
tively (TCF.001).
17
Commercial Fishing-Bottomfish
Federal Military Employment
Federal Civilian Employment
Tourism Assumptions
The total u.s. bottomfish catch
expands at a constant rate to
allowable catch in 2000, with Alaska
resident harvesting employment rising
to 733. Onshore processing capacity
expands in the Aleutians and Kodiak
census divisions to provide total
resident employment of 971 by 2000
(BCF .183).
Employment remains constant at 23,333
(GFM.082).
Rises at 0. 6 percent annual rate from
17,800 in 1983 to 21,042 by 2010
(GFC.082).
Number of visitors to Alaska increases
by 50,000 per year from 630,000 in
1981 to over 2 million by 2010
(TRS.082).
State Revenue and Expenditure Assumptions
Revenues
Expenditures
State revenue projections are based
upon Alaska Department of Revenue·
projections published in December of
1982. Oil and gas corporate income
tax revenues are projected to grow at
a nominal rate of 8 percent per year
after 1985. Other petroleum revenues
are extrapolated forward to 2010 from
the last several years of projections
published by the Department of Revenue
(DOR.5D82).
State expenditures are at the levels
allowed by the recently-passed
spending limit, with subsidies and
capital expenditures equalling
one-third of total expenditures. As
revenue growth slows, the income tax
is reinstated, subsidies are. elimi-.
nated, the Permanent Fund dividend
program is phased out, and propor-
tional cuts in the operating and
capital budgets are made to keep total
expenditures equal to total revenues.
Also at that time, all Permanent Fund
earnings are transferred to the
general fund.
18
[
[
[
[
[
[ u
[
[
[
[
r·
L
r t :
L,.a
[
[
r: TABLE 2. MAP BASE CASE EXOGENOUS
[
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
(Thousands of Employees)
[ High Wage Low Wage
Agri-Exogenous Exogenous Exogenous
cultural Mining Con-Con-Trans-
r Employment Employment struction struction portation
l~ Employment Employment Employment
[ 1980 0.183 6.565 0.800 0.000 1.500
1981 0.188 7.788 1.433 0.000 1.500
1982 0.194 8.411 2.269 0.125 1.500
~ 1983 0.203 9.387 3.261 0.2 90 1.552
1984 0.211 9.983 2.203 0. 726 1.631
1985 0.219 11.279 2.627 0.863 1.949
[ 1986 0.228 12.400 2.911 0.850 2.15 7
1987 0.239 13.149 3.069 0.613 2.471
1988 0.250 14.062 3.128 0.401 2.804
1989 0.263 14.526 3.244 0.875 2.440
L 1990 0.276 14.797 4.276 1.025 2.752
L 1991 0.2 91 15.6 71 1.667 1.125 2.063
1992 0.306 16.557 6.301 1.075 2.753
r-' 1993 0.325 16.068 5.164 0.563 2.348
b 1994 0.343 16.969 2.141 0.100 3.14 7
1995 0.365 17.329 1.529 · o.ooo· 3.055
~ 1996 0.389 17.501 1.303 0.000 3.2 91
1997 0.414 17.3 90 1.303. 0.000 3.351
1998 0.442 16.994 1.070 0.000 3.423
1999 0.4 74 16.620 1.070 0.000 3.423 c 2000 0.508 16.226 1.070 0.000 . 3.423
2001 o. 52 7 15.957 1.070 0.000 3.423
2002 0.54~ 15.888 1.070 0.000 3.423
c 2003 0.568 16.089 1.070 0.000 3.423
2004 0.589 16.143 1.070 0.000 3.423
2005 0.611 16.197 1.070 0.000 3.423
2006 0.634 16.253 1.070 0.000 3.423
G 2007 0.660 16.309 1.063 0.000 3.351
2008 0.686 16.340 1.063 0.000 3.351
2009 o. 712 16.223 1.056 0.000 3.279
[. 2010 0.740 16.282 1.056 0.000 3.279
[ SOURCE: SCENARIOSB87.3--CREATED 4/83
r-= L
r' L
t 19
[
. •. TABLE 2. MAP BASE CASE EXOGENOUS [
' EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS (continued) '<.
(Thousands of Employees) [
High Wage Low Wage [~ Exogenous Exogenous Active
Manu-Manu-Fish Duty Civilian
facturing facturing Harvesting Military Federal
Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment r
L
1980 0.000 11.483 7. 139 23.323 17.820 c 1981 0.000 10.283 6.552 2 3. 32 3 17.600
1982 0.000 8. 771 5.217 23.323 17.900
1983 0.000 10.433 6.421 2 3.323 17.989 r-1 1984 0.000 10.5 71 6.444 23.323 18.079.
1985 0.000 10.749 6.471 2 3.323 18.170 ll_,
1986 0.000 10.929 6.499 23.323 18.2 61
1987 0.000 11.107 6.52 7 2 3. 323 18.352 n 1988 0.000 11.196 6.544 23.323 18.444 (!__,
1989 0.000 11.240 6.579 2 3. 323 18.536
1990 0.000 11.292 6. 592 23.323 18.629 ( 1991 0.000 11.2 99 6.608 2 3. 323 18.722 1-----:
1992 0.000 11.315 6.629 23.323 18.815 L~
1993 0.000 11.335 6.655 2 3. 32 3 18.909
1994 0.000 11.366 6.689 23.323 19.004
r~
L 1995 0.000 il.413 6. 731 2 3.323 19.099
1996 o.ooo 11.478 6.784 23.323 19.194
1997 0.000 11.571 6.851 2 3. 323 19.290 r :
1998 0.000 11.704 6.935 23.323 19.387 L,
1999 0.000 11.887 7.041 2 3. 323 19.484
2000 0.000 12. 122 7.096 23.323 19.581 c 2001 0.000 12.018 7.096 2 3. 323 19.679
2002 o.oop 11.807 7.096 23.323 19.777
2003 0.000 11.776 7.096 2 3. 323 19.876
2004 0.000 11.747 7.096 23.323 19.976 c .
2005 0.000 11.718 7.096 2 3.323 20.076
2006 0.000 11.641 7.096 23.323 20.176
2007 0.000 11.634 7.096 2 3.323 20.277 Q 2008 0.000 11.626 7. 096 23.323 20.378
2009 0.000 11.623 7.096 2 3. 32 3 20.480
2010 0.000 11.617 7. 096 23.323 20.583
·[
SOURCE: SCENARIOSB87.3--CREATED 4/83 [ '
r~
L
.... p ,. .· L.O
,, 20
[
[
[
TABLE 3. MAP BASE CASE EXOGENOUS
[ REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS
(Millions of Current Dollars)
r1 State
State State State State Corporate
Production Royalty Bonus Property Petroleum ,-, Tax Income Payment Tax Tax
l, Revenue .Revenue Revenue Revenue
[ 1980 506.500 688.200 456.500 168.900 54 7.500
1981 1170.2 00 1118.500 10.100 143.000 860.100
1982 1590.000 1530.000 6.700 142.700 668.900
I' 1983 1480.000 1430.000 26.100 148.600 235.000
1984 1220.000 1200.000 11.066 153.200 2 72.000
't 1985 12 60.000 1240.000 4. 692 158.000 295.000
c· 1986 1350.000 1350.000 1.990 163.456 315.650
1987 1430.000 1450.000 0.844 169.101 337.745
1988 1500.000 1520.000 0.358 174.940 361.387
1989 1380.000 1650.000 o. 152 180.981 386.684 r 1990 1420.000 1710.000 0.064 187.231 413.751
~~ 1991 1230.000 1570.000 0.027 244.697 442.714
1992 1150.000 1550.000 0.012 25 3.385 473.704
r 1993 1110.000 1520.000 0.005 334.305 506.863
l 1994 1090.000 1500.000 0.002 360~464 542.343
1995 1000.000 1410.000 0.001 372.870 580.306
h 1996 910.000 12 90.000 0.000 386.531 620.92 7
1997 930.000 1330.000 0.000 399.458 664.392
~ 1998 910.000 1340.000 0.000 412.658 710.899
1999 860.000 1350.000 0.000 425.141 760.662 c 2000 843.918 1370.384 0.000 438.917 813.907
2001 828.136 1391.076 0.000 452.996 870.881
2002 812.65Q 1412.081 0.000 465.389 931.842
E 2003 797.453 1433.402 0.000 480.106 997.070
2004 782.541 1455.046 0.000 494.158 1066.865
2005 767.907 1477.016 0.000 506.558 1141.545
2006 753.54 7 1499.318 0.000 519.317 1221.453
G 2007 739.456 1521.957 0.000 530.447 1306.954
2008 725.628 1544.938 0.000 542.962 1398.440
2009 712.058 1568.266 0.000 554.874 1496.331
[. 2010 698.743 1591.946 0.000 564.198 1601.073
[ SOURCE: SCENARIOSB87.3--CREATED 4/83
I= UBRA-RY L USFWS
r~ Anchorage
L
F 21
'· "·
Impact Cases Assumptions
We examined OCS impacts for two different "cases, .. which we refer to
as the "3. 0 BBBL Case.. and the "2. 2 BBBL Case." These names refer
to the amount of oil which we assumed to be discovered and
developed. We assumed that no gas resources are developed.
Tables 4 and 5 sununarize the employment which we assumed for each
case. The employment assumptions were provided to us by the
Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS office. We did not adjust
these employment figures for Alaska residency as we have done in
some previous studies because the model does so internally on the
basis of the historical data used to estimate model relationships.
We calculated the property tax revenue assumptions using figures
provided to us by the Alaska OCS office for the value and timing of
onshore investments in each case.
,,··
-~::... :~, 22
[
[
[
-r L
f'
L:
[
r L
[
[
r~
L
f~
L
[
[
r
[
n
I
L~
r,
I
I '---"
r--,
'-~
r L.J
r~.
L
r
6
5
D -
c
B
C·
[
r L
r
L
[.
TABLE 4. EMPLOYMENT AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS
3.0 BBBL CASE
(Thousands of Employees,
High Wage
Exog Con-Mining
struction Employment
Employment
1980 0.000 0.000
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.341 0.375
1986 0.208 0.3 75
1987 0.416 0.535
1988 0.468 o. 5 75
1989 1.080 0.575
1990 1.824 0.546
1991 0.340 0.568
1992 0.952 1.001
1993 0. 32 7 0.980
1994 0.873 1.265
1995 0.2 61 1.203
1996 0.2 68 1.448
1997 0.268 1. 720
1998 0.035 1.484
1999 0.035 1.350
2000 0.035 1.341
2001 0.035 1.350
2002 0.035 1.341
2003 0.035 1.490
2004 0.035 1.490
2005 0.035 1.490
2006 0.035 1.490
2007 0.035 1.490
2008 0.035 1.490
2009 0.028 1.315
2010 o. 028 1.315
SOURCE: K~P MODEL CASE OCS.G20
VARIABLES: EMCNXl EMP9 EMT9X RPPS
23
Millions of Current
Exog
Trans-
portation
Employment
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.052
0.052
0.104
0.117
0.384
o. 713
0.230
0.501
0.387
o. 912
0.651
0.'728
0.788
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.860
0.788
0.788
$)
State
Property
Tax
Revenue
o.ooo
0.000
O.QOO
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
o.ooo
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
160.534
166.801
173.134
179.468
185.801
192.068
198.068
204.201
210.001
215.468
220.601
225.268
. 22 9.401
232.934
235.668
237.535
238.335
237.868
[
-. TABLE 5. ' EMPLOYMENT AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS [
'· 3.0 BBBL CASE
(Thousands of Employees, Millions of Current $) [
High Wage Exog State r Exog Con-Mining Trans-Property
struction Employment portation Tax
Employment Employment Revenue r
L." 1980 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.ooo
1981 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 [ 1982 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.ooo
1983 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 r 1985 0.237 0.295 0.026 0.000
1986 0.208 0.3 75 0.052 o.ooo L
1987 o. 312 0.455 0.078 0.000
1988 0.364 0.495 0.091 o.ooo r 1989 0.924 0.455 0.345 0.000 L-i
1990 1.108 0.466 0.420 o.ooo
1991 0.340 0.623 0.230 0.000 [ 1992 1.032 0.812 0.521 o.ooo
1993 0.247 0.603 0.332 116.001 L_,
1994 0.254 0.872 0.464 12 o. 534
1995 0.334 0.936 t~ 0.544 125.134 L 1996 o. 021 0.982 0.616 12 9 .• 667
1997 0.021 1.150 0.616 134.267
1998 0.021 o. 989 o. 616 138.801 [ 1999 0.021 1.003 0.616 143.201
2000 0.021 0.994 0.616 14 7. 534
2001 0.021 0.994 0.616 151.734 [ 2002 0.021 0.994 0.616 155.734
2003 0.021 0.994 0.616 159.401
2004 0.021 0.994 0.616 162.801
2005 0.021 0.994 0.616 165.801 c 2006 0.021 0.994 0.616 168.334
2007 0.021 0.994 0.616 170.334
2008 0.021 0.994 0.616 171.668 ~ 2009 0.021 0.994 0.516 172.201
2010 0.021 0.994 0.516 171.934
c
SOURCE: MA.P MODEL CASE OCS.G02
VARIABLES: EMCNX1 EMP9 EMT9X RPPS [ .
r
L
r
f :
L-•
24 r L
[
[
IV. BASE CASE PROJECTIONS
L __ _, Statewide Base Case Projections
Table 6 summarizes the MAP model statewide base case projections.
The complete set of statewide base case projections is given in
Appendix A.
As shown in Table 6, total population is projected to rise from 421
r thousand 1n 1981 to 556 thousand in 1990, 614 thousand in 2000, and
'-J 700 thousand in 2010. This 1s a 3.1 percent rate of growth during
[ the 1980s, a 1.0 percent rate of growth during the 1990s, and a
1.3 percent rate of growth during the period 2000-2010. The marked
r1
b decline in the rate of growth during the 1990s is due to the
5 combined effects of a number of factors. Most important among these
is a decline in state government expenditures after 1990 (see
D Table A-7). This decline is assumed to occur because state revenues
fall below the •current spending· limit. Other factors include a c leveling off of exogenous minin.g employment and a decline in high
B
wage construction employment following major North Slope
construction activity associated with onshore and offshore (Sale 71)
c. development.
[ .The pattern for statewide employment 1s similar to that for
P: population, but shows an even more marked slowdown 1n the 1990s.
L Employment rises from 220 thousand in 1981 to 285 thousand in 1990
I'
L
[ 25
Table 6:
[
HAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
Summary [,
"-.
[
l""'
PER CAPITA PER CAPITA PER CAPITA L TOTAL TOTAL a GENERAL GENERAL COMBINED
POPULATION EMPLOYMENT FUNDb FUND FUNDS [' (000) (000) REVENUES EXPENDIT. BALANCE
(1982 $) (1982 $) (1982 $) ~-~
--------------------------------------------------
1981 421.616 220.618 9732.110 7313.160 6950.723 [ 1982 439.408 234.180 9988.530 9540.580 7657.105
1983 459.496 243.4 76 7711.156 6726.574 9079.840
198L.. 483.907 256.726 6335.766 7242.512 8263.500 r 198-5 506.712 272.279 5958.191 7264.953 7148.824 L 1986 531.707 288.404 5722.973 7286.813 5860.363
1987 "539.347 284.822 5544.461 5544.457 6381.090 r 1988 544.750 285.481 5452.270 5452.2 77 6873.355 ' .
1989 551.366 286.088 5447.961 5447.961 7330.113 1.....<
1990 556.608 285.896 5741.832 5741.828 6974.461
1991 562.370 287.240 5235.328 5235.320 6904.2 97 [
1992 572.708 293.538. 4950.422 4950.418 6785.211 L
1993 580.2 07 2 96.312 4758.109 4758.102 6684.078
1994 583.670 295.624 4745.848 4745.848 6594.902 [' 1995 588.058 296.699 4472.391 4472.387 6458.734
1996 592.657 297.945 4210.367 4210.359 "6296.332
1997 597.577 299.750 4131.109 4131.098 6131.281 [ 1998 602.92 7 302.109 4011.679 4011.670 5961.156 ..
1999 608.689 304.818 3882.674 3882.663 5788.156
2000 614.695 307.754 3785.658 3785.649 5614.820
2001 620.514 310.429 3695.475 3695.461·..,. 5445.039 c 2002 62 6.J74 313.496 3608.264 3608.257 5274.090
2003 633.859 317.242 3524.806 3524.797 5100·. 586
2004 641.582 321.430 3446.179 3446.171 492 7.098 [ 2005 649.922 326.011 3370.911 3370.899 4754.160
2006 658.857 330.915 3298.831 3298.821 4582.484
2007 668.494 336.226 3229.019 3229.009 4411.770 ~ 2008 678.767 341.837 3161.938 3161.928 4242.930
2009 689.502 347.548 3097.284 3097.2 75 4077.076
2010 700.975 353.690 303 3.869 303 3.861 3913.189 [
alncludes military employment. [
brncludes some restricted funds (primarily federal
trc;.nsfers). ,~
L
r
L
26 [
[
[
(a 2.9 p'ercent rate of growth), 307 thousand in 2000 (a 0.6 percent
rate of growth), and 353 thousand in 2010 (a 1.5 percent of growth).
[ The final three columns of Table 6 show a dramatic decline in
per capita government revenues, per capita general fund
I. ~ expenditures, and per capita balance on the combined general and
permanent funds. These declines are due to the fact that population
is rising while total revenues--primarily petroleum--are falling.
The predominance of petroleum revenues and the effect of their
r· ._,
decline on total revenues is shown in Table 7. Over the projection
period, petroleum revenues fall from 89 percent of total revenues to r, only 43 percent. The rapid decline in petroleum revenues causes
L
total revenues in 2010 to fall to 52 percent of their 1981 level.
r~
I
b
[j
Anchorage Base Case Projections
Table 8 presents the regional model base case population projections
c •'
for Anchorage. Other base case projections for Anchorage are shown
in Tables C.2TC.5. Total Anchorage population rises from
c 181 thousand in 1981 to 237 thousand in 1990 (a 3.0 percent rate of
B
growth), 273 thousand in 2000 (a 1. 4 percent rate of growth}, and
322 thousand in 2010 (a 1. 7 percent rate of growth). The growth
c. rates are similar to those observed for the state as a whole except
that the growth rates are higher after 1990. The slowdown in state
L growth is offset in part in Anchorage by continuing expansion of the
support sectot'. Over the period 1981-2010, support sector
~= L employment grows at a rate of 2. 7 pet'cent compat'ed to a rate of
r~
L
[ 27
'· "·
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
.1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Table 7: HAP Hodel StateHide Base Case Projections
State Government Revenues
(Millions of 1982 Dollars)
PETROLE~ FEDERAL INTERESTb OTHER TOTALC
REVE"NlJES GRANTS EARNINGS REVE"t-.TUES REVENUES
3667.440
4152.020
3334.305
2 731.156
2686.458
2 745.014
2 733.268
2697.272
2567.749
2 384.311
2074.623
1929.205
1812.836
1801.484
1641.566
1483.053
1449.048
1387.834
1319.559
12 71.383
U25.879
1182.991
114t2.767
1105.061
1069.628
1036.2 95
1004.886
975.244
94 7.149
920.545
2 71.845
196.849
200.456
204.704
210.512
216.440
220.124
223.080
226.094
218.397
222.023
226.703
231.828
236.522·
241.083
245.742
250.426
255.266
260.306
265.482
270.774
2 76.2 06
281.836
287.681
293.729
2 99.984
306.439
313.095
319.921
326.939
275.213
241.010
308.861
381.772
377.860 •
348.664
322.149
327.902
354.375
359.9.33
364.910
363.833
364.682
361.867
357.660
348.5 80
342.02 6
335.579
329.016
322.285
315.474
308.629
301.82 9
295.095
288.421
281.812
2 7 5.266
268.785
262.350
255.983
204.064
207.218
2_22.051
228.408
233.835
243.265
249.100
242.028
389.269
503.891
516.637
533.812
554.128
559.180
557.656
563.438
568.753
574.836
582.770
590.950
599.03-1
·607.008
616.496· -~
627.516
639.249
651.607
664.440
677.930
691.52 7
705.236
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3019.090
3042.944
2990.393
2 970.126
3003.821
3195.949
2944.194
2 835. 149
2760.691
2770.010
2630.026
2495.307
2468.659
2418.750
2363.341
2327.02,3 ..
2293.094
2261.568
2234.232
2211.006
2190 .• 82 9
2173.459
2158.579
2146.220
2135.585
2126.667
SOURCE:· M.l\P MODEL SlliULATION MAP87. 3B--CREATED 4/19/83
VARIABLES: DF.RP9S, DF.RSFD, DF.RSIN, DF.RSEN, AND DF.RSGF
arncludes peroanent fund contributions.
brnc l•ldes earnings on the general and permanent funds.
crncludes restricted and unrestricted general fund revenues.
Does· not include permanent fund contributions or retained earnings.
28
r
[
[
[
[
r L-'
c
L
[
[
L
,~
L
n t : ......
L
[
[
[
[
[
'-~
D
[
b
5
C_
E
B
C-
L
r
L
Table 8
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995.
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
BASE CASE
181.514
192.439
200.416
208.784
218.558·
228.850
233.251
233.412
235.429'
237.668
241_.004
245.766
250.899
254.019
256.667
259.672
262.902
266.209
269.790
273.450
277.002
280.833
284.955
289.402
294.154
299.237
304.626
310.346
316.292
322.619
2.2 BBBL
CASE
181.514
192.439
200.416
208.784
219.030
229.742
234.584
235.071
238.017
240.997
243.953
249.745
254.555
·258.098
261.303
264.428
267.979
271.504
275. 2·95
279.162
282.916
286.932
291.240
295.868
300.799
306.056
311.620
317.514
323.563
330.025
3.0 BBBL
CASE
181.514
192.439
200.416
208.784
219.213
229.893
234.844
235.418
238.503
242.276
244.612
250.222
255.397
·260.043
262.726
266.224
270.162
273.672 .. -.
277.415
281o:329
285.161
289.233
293.705
298.474
303.516
308.883
314.559
320.557
326.573
333.033
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.02
29
1.9 percent for total employment (Table C.4). Support sector
employment as a share of total employment increases from 46 percent
to 58 percent.
Fairbanks Base Case Projections
Table 9 presents the regional model base case projections for
Fairbanks. Other base case projections for Fairbanks are shown in
Tables C. 6-C .10. Total population increases from 57.8 thousand in
1981 to 74.0 thousand in 1990 (a rate of 2.8 percent), 81.1 thousand
in 2000 (a rate of 0.9 percent), and 93.9 thousand in 2010 (a rate
of 1.5 percent). This pattern of growth is more similar to that of
the total statewide economy than that of Anchorage, with a sharp
decline in the rate of growth during the 1990s. Fairbanks, like
Anchorage, exhibits an increasing share of the support sector in
total economic activity, with support employment rising from
37.3 percent of total employment in 1981 to 48.4 percent of total
employment
employment
in 2010
remains
I
(Table C.9). However,
lower in Fairbanks than
the share of support
in Anchorage. Thus,
Fairbanks, as a smaller community than Anchorage, is likely to
import more of its support services from other areas.
30
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
n
L
L
[
[ Table 9
MAP Hodel Regional Projections,
"' Base Case and Impact Cases
I,
[ FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
,.,.
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 57.887 57.887 57.887
1982 . 61.256 61.256 61.256
1983 62.533 62.533 62.533
·-~ 1984 65.444 65.444 65.444
1985 68.513 63.605 68.641
l 1986 71.773 71.988 72.034
1987 12.597 72.909 72.966
1988 72.837 73.239 73.323 r 1989 73.301 73.913 74.028
1990 74.003 74.807 75.089 L__. 1991 74_.346 75.107 75.303
"' 1992 74.136 75.105 75.236
l 1993 74.996 76.008 76.236
1994 76.559 77.617 78:063
1995 77.079 . 78.246 78.631 u 1996 77.715 78.914 79.347
1997 78.499 79.752 80.278
1998 79.272 80.583 81.120
c 1999 80.112 81.4-67 . 81.998
,_ 2000 81.065 82.468 83;.:010 .'
2001 82.082 83.527 84.087
r:: 2002 83.105 84.589 85.160
2003 84.134 85.656 86.250 b 2004 85.260 86.819 87.444
2005 86.473 88.068 88.717
M 89.422 90.095 h 2006 87.793
l:::l 2007 89.190 90.852 91.550
2008 90.680 92.375 93.094 c 2009 92.259 93.982 94.709
2010 93.923 95.669 96.392
[
SOURCE: REGIONAL HODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CRRATED r-' 4/21/83
L VARIABLE: P.09
r~
L..,
31
p
'\.._
32
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
r' L
[
l_:
[
[
[
[
Lj
c
r '-~
r
L
[
[
[
[
(•
I ~-~
C
r
L
r
L
b
c
E
c
[.
[
~= L
n
L,
t
V. IMPACT CASE PROJECTIONS
Statewide Impact Projections
The MAP model statewide impact projections for population and
employment are summarized in Tables 10 and 11 for the 3.0 BBBL case,
and Tables 12 and 13 for the 2.2 BBBL case. Appendix B provides a
full set of impact tables for a number of other variables.
In general, impacts for the 2.2 BBBL case are somewhat smaller than
for the 3.0 BBBL case. This was to be expected since we assumed
lower levels of employment and revenues for the 2.2 BBBL case. We
will focus our discussion of impacts upon the 3.0 BBBL case.
Impacts for the 2.2 BBBL case may be found by referring to the
corresponding tables.
As shown in Table 9, the impacts of Sale 87 upon total population
•'
'
are projected tb rise over time. With the sale, in the 3.0 BBBL
case, statewide population is projected to be 9.6 thousand higher in
1990, 16.3 thousand higher in 2000, and 20.7 thousand higher in 2010
than it would have been without the sale. At first glance, this
result seems somewhat surprising, since direct employment associated
with the sale is highest ~n 1990, with subsequent smaller peaks in
· 1994 and 1997 (see Table 4). The reason that total impacts of the
sale continue to rise after 1990, even though direct impacts fall,
is that the Alaska economy is growing over time. The structure of
33
[
Table 10 [ MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
' "
ocs SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE [
TOTAL POPULATION
(Thousands) [
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT /[' BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 421.616 421.616 0.000 0.000
1982 439.408 439.408 0.000 0.000 r·
1S83 459.496 459.496 0.000 0.000 L
1984 483.907 483.907 0.000 0.000
1985 506.712 508.098 1.385 0.273 c 1986 531.707 533.959 2.252 0.424 _,
1987 539.347 542.694 3.346 0.620
1988 544.750 548.986 4.236 0. 778 r 1989 551.366 557.825 6.459 1.171
1990 556.608 566.212 9.604 1. 725 1.---'
1991 562.370 569.987 7.616 1.354 E 1992 572.708 582.138 9.429 1.646
1993 580.207 590.229 10.022 1. 727
1994 583.670 596.609 12.939 2.217
1995 588.058 600.914 12.857 2.186 ,.,
1996 592.657 606.481 13."823 2·.332 L
1997 597.577 612.812 15.234' 2.549
1998 602.927 618.508 15.581 2.584 [ 1999 608.689 624.549 15.860 2.606
2000 614.695 631.043 16.349 2 .. ~60
2001 620.514 637.383 16.869 . 2.719 [ 2002 626.774 644.071 17.297 2.760
2003 633.859 651.792 17.933 2.829
2004 64i.582 660.073 18.491 2.882
2005 649.922 668.909 18.988 2.922 c 2006 658.857 678.331 19.474 2.956
2007 668.494 688.453 19.959 2.986
2008 678.767 699.189 20.422 3.009 [ 2009 689.502 709.978 20.475 2.970
2010 700.975 721.643 20.668 2.948
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND c
¥~87.HN--CREATED 4/21183
VARIABLE: POP [
r ;
L
n
I ~ 34 ......
l
[
[ Table 11
MAP Hodel Statewide Impact Projections
c-.
I " ocs SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
[ (Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 220.618 r--, 220.618 0~000 0.000
l982 234.180 234.180 0.000 0.000
1983 243.476 243.476 0.000 0.000
1984 256.726 256.726 0.000 0.000
~. 1985 272.279 273.729 1.450 0.532
:986 288.404 289.911 1.506 0. 522
1987 284.822 287.184 2.362 0.829
l 1988 285.481 288.310 2.829 0.991
1989 286.088 290.862 4.774 1.669
1990 285.896 293.114 7.218 2.525
r~ 1991 287.240 291.231 3.992 1.390
1992 293.538 299.709 6.171 2.102
L" 1993 296.312 302.273 5.960 2.012
1994 295.624 304.353 8.729 2.953 r-__, 1995 296.699 304.298 7,599 2. 561 b 1996 297.945 306.255 8.310 2. 789
1997 299.750 308.923 9.172 3.060
G 1998 302.109 310.966 8.857 2.932
1999 304.818 313.577 8.759 2.873
2000 307.754 316.587 8.833 2.870
2001 310.429 319.373 8.943.: 2.881 c .' 2002 313.496 322.476 8.981 2.865
" 2003 31{.242 326.521 9.278 2.925
2004 321.430 330.892 9.461 2.944
E 2005 326.011 335.648. 9.637 2.956 .·•
2006 330.915 340.734 9.819 2.967
2007 336.226 346.244 10.018 2.980
(J 2008 341.837 352.047 10.209 2.987
u 2009 347.548 357.536 9.988 2.874
2010 353.690 363.725 10.035 2.837
[·
SOURCE: Y..AP HODEL SII:illLATIONS HAP87.3B AND MAP87.HN--
[
CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: EM99
(:
L
rc
L 35
E
[
Table 12 [ --
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Project1ons
'
:· ... [ ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL POPULATION
[ (Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT L BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 421.616 421.616 0.000 0.000 r .
1982 439.408 439.408 0.000 0.000 Lo 1983 459.496 459.496 0.000 0.000
1984 483.907 483.907 0.000 0.000
1985 506.712 507.711 0.999 0.197 L 1986 531.707 533.632 1.925 0.362
1987 539.347 542.150 2.803 0.520
1988 544.750 548.257 3.507 0.644 [ 1989 551.366 556.804 5.439 0.986
1990 556.608 563.573 6.966 1.251
1991 562.370 568.619 6.249 1.111 [ 1992 572.708 581.088 8.379 1.463
1993 580.207 588.269 8.062 1.389 L
1994 583.670 592.486 8.815 1. 510 .~,
1995 588.058 597.911 9 .. 854 1.676 L 1996 592.657 602.732 10.074 1.700
1997 597.577 608.266 10.689 1. 789
1998 602.927 613.984 11.057 1.834 [ 1999 608.689 620.136 11.447 1.881
2000 614.695 626.528 11.834 1.925
2001 620.514 632.712 12.198 . : 1. 966 [ 2002 626.774 639.303 12.528 1.999'
2003 634.859 646.711 12.851 2.027
2004 641.582 654.744 13.162 2.052 [ 2005 649.922 663.385 13.-463 2.071
2006 658.857 672.611 13.754' 2.088
2007 668.494 682.532 14.039 2-.100
2008 678.767 693.085 14.318 2.109 ~ 2009 689.502 703.954 14.452 2.096
2010 700.975 715.633 14.657 2.091 c
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS .HAP87.3B AND [ MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: POP
f'
L
r
I :
"--<-"
36
L
,.,
·.
~ Table 12 i :
zr .. AP Hodel Statewide Impact Projections
ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 220.618 220.618 0.000 0.000
1982 234.180 234.180 0.000 0.000
1983 243.476 243.476 0.000 0.000
1984 256.726 256.726 0.000 0.000
1985 272.279 273.324 1.045 0.384
1986 288.404 289.808 1.404 0.487
1987 284.822 286.731 1.909 0.670 p 1988 285.481 287.805 2.325 0.814
L 1989 286.088 290. J:-29 4.041 1.412
1990 285.896 290.807 4.911 1. 718 r--1991 287.240 290.785 3.545 1.234
1992 293.538 299.305 5.767 1.965
L-""
1993 296.312 300.910 4.598 1. 552
1994 295.624 300.957 5.333 1.804
1995 296.699 302.669 5.970 2.012
1996 29.7. 94"5 303.685 5.740 1.926
1997 299.750 305.877 6.127 2.044
1998 302.109 308.224 6.115 2.024
-1999 304.818 311.049 6.231 2.044 '"-'
2000 307.754 314.069 6.315 2 .. 0.52
""' 2001 310.429 316.833 6.404 .. 2.063
~ 2002 313.496 319.965 6.469 2.064· .:
2003 31~.242 323.791 6.549 2.064
2004 321.430 328.065 6.635 2.064
2005 326.011 332.739 . 6.727 2.064
~ 2006 330.915 337.741 6.827 2.063
~. 2007 336.226 343.159 6.934 2.062
2008 341.837 348.886 7.049 2.062
J 2009 . 347.548 354.572 7.024 2.021
2010 353.690 360.801 7.111 2.010
[.
r·· SOURCE: HAP HODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
c_,
VARIABLE: EH99
r-, r--
L ..
r-
37
f--C
L.
[
' the economy changes, with more support activity taking place within
'·
[
the state. During the period of highest direct impacts from ocs, [
this growth is accelerated. Once new support activities are
established as a result of the sale, they do not disappear, even [
though the direct employment associated with the sale may decline.
In effect, the growth of the economy which will occur in any case is [
shifted forward by approximately two years. Without OCS Sale 87,
the population reaches 700 thousand in 2010. With OCS Sale 87, it
reaches this level in 2008.
In relative terms, the percentage impact of Sale 87 upon population
also increases over time, reaching a maximum of 3.0 percent in 2008.
The impacts of Sale 87 upon statewide employment are similar to [
those upon population. The maximum impact of 10,000 jobs occurs 1n
[ 2008. In general, base case employment levels are reached about two
years earlier. [
Anchorage and Fairbanks Impact Projections
The MAP model projections of Sale 87 impacts upon Anchorage are very
similar to the statewide projections. As shown in Tables 14 and 15,
impacts upon total population rise sharply until 1990, and then c continue to rise, although more gradually, in subsequent years.
Tables 8 and 9 (pages 2 9 and 31) permit a comparison of total c
population between the base case and impact case levels. In the
n
L
38 L
[
[
[
[
r~
L
c.
[
r~
L
r
L
Table 14
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
{000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.471
0.891
-1.333
1.658
2.588
3.329
2.949
3.980
3.656
4.079
4.637
4.756
5.077
5.294
5.505
5.712
5.914
6.099
6;286
6.466
6.645
6.819
6.994
7.167
7.271
7.406
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.655
1.043
1.593
2.005
3.074
4.608
3.608
4.456
4.499
6.025
6.060
6.552
7.260
7.463
7 ;625~
7.878
8.158
8.400
8. 750
9.071
9.362
9.646
9.933
10.210
10.281
10.413
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.02
39
[
[
3. 0 BBBL case, the effect of Sale 8 7, in the years after 1990, a
that any given level of population is reached approximately two
[
years earlier.
Appendix C provides additional tables showing regional projections
for the base case and impact cases together. Appendix D provides
tables of absolute impacts, and Appendix E provides tables of
percent impacts.
r~
'-'
r
L.
r-...
l_:
6
c
c:;
ld
,..._,
I
:.3
C·
[
[=:'
L
r
L
l: 41
' ~ ..
42
r
L
r~
. L___;
[
c
(
~
[
[
[
[
I
L
n
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Figures 3, 4, and 5 illustrate the impacts of OCS Sale 87 for the
3.0 BBBL case upon statewide population, Anchorage population, and
Fairbanks population.
OCS Sale 87 would occur against a base case backdrop of continuing
growth in the statewide economy and population. This growth is most
rapid in the period prior to 1990 and slows considerably after 1990
due to a decline in state expenditures. However, growth continues
due to support sector expansion. Anchorage and Fairbanks, as
support centers for the state, mirror these statewide trends.
The effect of OCS Sale 87 would be to speed up the rate of growth in
the statewide and regional economies during the years of maximum
direct sale-related employment, so that the 1990 statewide base case
population woula be reached by 1989, and the 1995 base case
population would be reached by 1993. Subsequently, the rate of
growth would decline to approximately the base case level, with the
economy following a path similar to that of the base case, but
reaching any given level approximately two years earlier.
43
'
Figure 2. Base Case and Impact Case Projections, Statewide Population
~ ..
BASE CASE
700 IMPACT ·cASE
40~
POPULATION IN THOUSANDS
1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 Zkilll
[
[
[
[
"[
[
[
r' '-'
r
L
" L
[
c
C
Q
c
[
f'
2005 2ZB9 L
r~
L
[
[
[
f-,
[
n
l
L;
6
c ~
[.
[
BASE CASE
IMPACi.CASE
Figure 3. Base Case and Impact Case Projections, Anchorage Population
POPULATION IN THOUSANDS
100
1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 . ~01
45
' "-
8}.SE CASE
IMPACT·CASE
Figure 4. Base Case and Impact Case Projections, Fairbanks Population
POPIJLA T I ON IN THOUSANDS
73
sa
. 1981 1985 . 1989 1993 1997 2.001
46
[
·r
[
[
r
L.
[
[
[
c
. [~
Q
c
[
2009 [
r I -
~
[
[
[
r
I_.
, __ _)
[
[
[
REFERENCES
Goldsmith, Scott. 1983. Man in the Arctic Program (MAP) Technical
Documentation Report. Institute for Social and Economic
Research, July.
Huskey, Lee, et al. 1982. Economic and Demographic Structural
Change in Alaska. Social and Economic Studies Program Technical
Report Number 73 (Anchorage, BLM Alaska OCS office, June).
Knapp, Gunnar. "Impact Analysis of the Barrow Arch Lease Offering
(October 1984)." Draft Study ~y Institute for Social and
Economic Research for Minerals Management Service, Alaska OCS
office, Social and Economic Studies Program (forthcoming).
Kruse,. et al. A Description of the Socioeonomics of the North Slope
Borough for Minerals Management Service, OCS office
(forthcoming, 1983).
Nebesky, Will and Lee H~skey. 1981. Statewide and Regional
Economic and Demographic Systems, Beaufort Sea (71) Impact
Analysis. Social and Economic Studies Program Technical Report
Number 62 (Anchorage, BLM Alaska OCS office, August).
47
~
'--"
APPENDIX A
MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
TABLE A-1
SUMMARY
~
PER CAPITA PER CAPITA PER CAPITA
TOTAL TOTAL a GENERAL GENERAL COMBINED
POPULATION EMPLOYMENT FUNDb FUND FUNDS "-(000) (000) REVENUES EXPENDIT. BALANCE
(1982 $) (1982 s) (1982 $)
--------------------------------------------------
1981 421.616 220.618 9732.110 7313.160 6950.723
1982 439.408 234.180 9988.530 9540.580 7657.105
1983 459.496 243.4 76 7711.156 6726.574 9079.840
1984 483.907 256.726 6335.766 7242.512 8263.500
1985 506.712 272.279 5958.191 7264.953 7148.824
E 1986 531.707 288.404 5722.973 7286.813 5860.363
f 1987 539.347 284.822 5544.461 5544.457 6381.090
~ 1988 544.750 285.481 5452.2 70 5452.277 6873.355
r 1989 551.366 286.088 5447.961 5447.961 7330.113
1990 556.608 285.896 5741.832 5741.828 6974.461
~J 1991 562.370 287.2 40 5235.328 5235.320 6904.2 97
1992 572.708 293.538 4950.422 4950.418 6785.211
" 1993 580.207 2 96.312 4758.109 4758.102 6684.078
1994 583.670 295.624 4 745.848 4745.848 6594.902
1995 588~·058. 296.699 4472.391 44 72.387 6458.734
"1996 592.657 297.945 4210.367 4210.359 6296.332
1997 597.577 299.750 4131.109 4131.098 6131.281 __. 1998 602.92 7 302.109 4011.679 4011.670 5961.156
1999 608.689 304.818 3882.674 3882.663 57.88.156
9
2000 614.695 307.754 3785.658 3785.649 5614.820 l :!." •' 3695.461 5445.039 ,_ ~. 2001 620.514 310.429 3695.4 75 =
2002 626.774 313.496 3608.264 3608.25 7 5274.090
2003 633.859 317.242 3524.806 3524.797 5100.586
d 2004 641.582 321.430 3446.179 3446.171 492 7.098
2005 649.922 326.011 3370.911 3370.899 4754.160
.-.., 2006 658.857 330.915 3298.831 3298.821 4582.484
~ 2007 668.494 336.2 26 3229.019 3229.009 4411.770
3 2008 678.767 341.837 3161.938 3161.928 4242.930
2009 689.502 347.548 3097.2 84 3097.275 4077.076
[. 2010 700.975 353.690. 3033.869 3033.861 3913.189
[ aincludes military employment.
~~ brncludes some restricted funds (primarily federal
t.ransfers). ~
I'
'
l A-1
[
•. , APPENDIX A
[
'· MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
TABLE A-2 ~
POPULATION AND COMPONENTS OF CHANGE
(Thousands) [
TOTAL CHANGE IN NET NATURAL [ POPULATION POPULATION MIGRATION INCREASE
----------------------------------------
1981 421.616 11.368 6.599
1982 43 9.408 17.792 10.756 7.045 [ 1983 459.496 20.089 12.715 7.389
1984 483.907 24.410 16.660 7.766
1985 506.712 22.806 14.586 8.231 [ 1986 531.707 24.994 16.397 8.613
1987 539.347 7. 641 -1.380 9.037
1988 544.750 5.403 -3.556 8.94 7
1989 551.366 6. 615 -2.237 8.836 r 1990 556.608 5.242 -3.549 8. 77 9 L_,
1991 562.3 70 5. 763 -2.952 8. 694
1992 572.708 10.338 1.677 8.643 [ 1993 580.207 7.499 -1.246 8.732
1994 583.670 3.463 -5.283 8. 738
1995 588.058 4.387 -4.2 83 8.644 ,-..,
1996 592.657 4.600 -4.024 8.597 L 1997 597.577 4.920 -3.672 8. 565'
1998 602.927 5.350 -3.22 7 8.551
1999 608.689 5. 7 62 -2.821 8.556 [ 2000 614.695 6.006 -2.597 8.577
2001 620.514 5.820 -2.815 8.608
2002 62 6. 774 6.260 -2.402 8.636 [ 2003 633.859 7.085 -1.621 8. 680
2004 641.582 7. 722 -1.051 8. 748
2005 649.922 8.340 -0.515 8.832 6 2006 658.857 8.936 -0.020 8.932
2007 668.494 9. 636 0.569 9.046
2008 678.767 10.2 73 1.076 9.176
2009 689.502 10.735 1.395 9.321 b 2010 700.975 11.473 1.980 9.474
NOTE: TOTALS MAY NOT ADD DUE TO ROUNDING [
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATION MAP87.3B--CREATED 4/19/83
VARIABLES: POP, DELPOP, POPMIG, AND POPNI9 [
r
L
p
I .
LJ
A-2 [
[
I
I
=
[.
i ~
t
L~
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APPENDIX A
MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
TABLE A-3
EMPLOYMENT
(Thousands)
BASIC SERVICES GOVERNMENT TOTAL WAGE
SECTOR SECTORa SECTOR AND SALARY TOTAL
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
--------------------------------------------------
51.522 86.348 82.749 204.2 99 220.618
54.793 92.916 86.4 72 218.2 94 2 34.180
59.610 98.148 85.718 22 5.946 243.476
60.5 78 102.860 93.289 238.389 256.726
64.548 108.740 98.991 252.984 272.279
68.685 114.7 80 104.940 268.102 288.404
67.374 116.162 101.285 264.713 284.822
66.975 115.874 102.632 265.316 285.481
68.570 115.622 101.896 265.854 286.088
68.82 9 115.912 101.155 265.662 285.896
71.356 117.123 98.761 266.909 28 7.240
75.886 120.4 73 97.179 272.802 2 93.538
75.613 124.637 96.062 275.381 2 96.312
72.114 12 7. 740 95.769 274.704 295.624
71.792 130.405 94.503 275.675 296.699
71.516 133.124. 93.306 276.i96 297.945
71.254 135.745 92.751 278.428 299.750
71.544 138.549 92.016 280.5 64 302.109
71.872 141.621 91.326 283.009 304.818
72.112 144.821 90.821 285.712 3,07. 7 54
71.964 148. 102 90.363 288.221 310.42 9
72.032 151.511 89.953 2 91.096 313.496
72.480 155.163 '89.599 2 94.608 317.242
73.002 159.089 89.339 298~533 321.430
73.596 163.259 89. 156 302.825 326.011
74.193 167.672 89.049 307.419 330.915
74.922 172.314 88.989 312.393 336.226
75.694 177.175 88.968 317.647 341.837
76.367 182. 191 88.990 322.993 34 7.548
77.244 187.398 89.048 328.741 353.690
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATION MAP87.3B--CREATED 4/19/83
. VARIABLES: EMNS, EMSP, EMG9, EM98, AND EM99
aservices sector employment is the sum of employment in the
following industries: trade, services, finance-insurance-real
estate, transportation, communications, and public utilities.
A-3
[
'· APPENDIX A r
' " MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
•. r~ TABLE A-4
REAL PERSONAL INCOME
PERSONAL PER CAPITA
[
INCOME PERSONAL
(MILLIONS INCOME r·· OF 1982 S) (1982 $)
--------------------
1981 6375.613 15121.840 [ 1982 7418.441 16882.820
1983 7506.02 7 16335.330
1984 7816.973 16153.880 [ 1985 8139.223 16062.800
1986 8433.555 15861.2 90
. 1987 8209.242 15220.690
1988 8147.664 14956.700 r 1989 8338.42 6 1512 3.220 '==
1990 8425.320 15136.910
1991 8680.453 15435.470 ["' 1992 9071.880 15840.300
1993 9303.060 16034.020 L.:
1994 9418.770 1613 7. 130 " .1995 9615.370 16351.070 L 1996 . 9811.350 16554.840
1997 10015.620 16760.370
1998 10247.410 16996.100 [ 1999 10490.980 17235.380
2000 10742.130 17475.550
2001 10992.710 17715.480 [ 2002 11269.070 17979.4 70
2002 11574.550 18260.430
2004 11899.810 18547.610
. 2005 12244.130 18839.380 [ 2006 12605.850 19132.890
2007 12987.430 1942 7. 900
2008 13385.860 19720.840 [ 2009 13789.090 19998.610
2010 14221.100 20287.600
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIHULATION MAP87.3B--CREATED 4/19/83 c
VARIABLES: DF. PI AND DF. PIP
[
I.
L
f'
I . ...._,
A-4
L
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APPENDIX A
K~P Model Statewide Base Case Projections
'\
TABLE A-6
STATE GOVERNMENT REVENUES
(Millions of 1982 Dollars)
PETROLEUMa FEDE~~L INTERESTb OTHER TOTALc
REVENUES GR.I\NTS EARNINGS REVENUES REVENUES
3667.440
4152.020
3334.305
2731.156
2686.458
2745.014
2 733.268
2.697.272
2567.749
2 384.311
2074.623
1929.205
1812.836
1801.484
1641.566
1483.053
1449.048
1387.834
1319.559
12 71.383
122 5.879
1182.991
1142.767
1105.Q61
1069.628
1036.295
1004.886
975.244
947.149
920.545
2 71.845
196.849
200.456
204.704
210.512
216.440
220.124
223.080
226.094
218.397
222.023
226.703
2 31.828
2 36.522
241.083
245.7.42
250.426
255.2 66
260.306
2 65.4 82
270.774
2 76.2 06
281.836
287.681
293.729
2 99.984
306.439
313.095
319.921
326.939
275.213
241.010
308.861
381.772
377.860
348.664
322.149
327.902
354.375
359.933
364.910
363.833
364.682
361.867
357.660
348.580
342.026
335.579
32 9.016
322.285
315.474
308.629
301.82 9
295.095
288.421
281.812
275.266
268.785
262.350
255.983
204.064
207.218
222.051
228.408
233.835
243.2 65
249. 100
242.028
389.269
503.891
516.637
533.812
554. 12 8
559.180
557.656
563.438
568.753
574.836
582.770
590.950
599.031
607.008
616.496
62 7. 516
639.249
651.607
664.440
677.930
691.52 7
705.236
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3019.090
3042.944
2990.393
2 970. 126
3003.821
3195.949
2944.194
2 835. 149
2760.691
2 770.010
2630.026
2495.307
2468.659
2418.750
2363.341
2327.023
2293.094
2261.568
2234.232
2211.006
2190.82 9
2173.459
2158.579
2146.220
213 5.585
2126.667
SOURCE: K~P MODEL STI{ULA.TION l'fAP87.3B--CREATED 4/19/83
VARIABLES! DF.RP9S, DF.RSFD, DF.RSIN, DF.RSEN, AND DF.RSGF
aincludes permanent fund contributions.
brncludes earnings on the general and permanent funds.
c Includes rest ric ted and unrestricted general fund revenues.
Does not include permanent fund contributions or retained earnings.
A-6
[
r
[
[
[
L
r:
[
[
p
l
c
[
[
r ,
L
r~
L
L
APPENDIX A
MAP Model Statewide Base Case Projections
TABLE A-7
STATE GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
-,
TOTAL
(MILLIONS PER CAPITA
OF 1982 $) (1982 $)
--------------------
1981 3083.349 7313.160
1982 4192.207 9540.580
1983 3090.839 6726.574
1984 3504.701 7242.512
1985 3681.244 7264.953
1986 3874.449 7286.813
1987 2990.391 5544.45 7
~ 1988 2 970. 130 5452.277
1989 3003..821 5447.961
1990 3195.947 5741.828
1991 2 944. 191 5235.320
1992 2835.148 4950.418
1993 2760.687 4 758.102
1994 2 770.0ll 4745.848
1995 2 630.022 4472.387
1996 2495.301 4210.359
1997 2468.653 4131.098
1998 2 418.744 4011.670
1999 2363.334 3882.663
~ 2000 2327.018 3785.649
2001 2293.087 3695.461
=. 2002 2261.563 3608.2 57
0 2003 2234.22 6 3524.797 =
\ 2004 2211.000. 3446.171
2005 2190.821 3370.899
2006 2173.454 3298.821
~j 2007 2158.572 322 9.009
2008 2146.213 3161.928
2009 2135.580 3097.275
...J 2010 2126.661 3033.861
[ SOURCE: V..AP MODEL SIHULATION HAP87. 3B--CREATED 4/19/83
VARIABLES: DF.EXGF AND DF.EXGFP
I'
i
L--'
r-"'
I-
L
r·'
t,.,._.;:
. -.Cl.-1
L._~
[
APPENDIX A
[
' ~. HAP Hodel Statewide Base Case Projections
[ TABLE A-8
COMBINED FUNDS BALANCE
[
TOTAL
(MILLIONS PER CAPITA [ OF 1982 $) (1982 $)
--------------------
1981 2930.538 6950.723
1982 3364.593 7657.105 l' 1983 4172.152 9079.840
1984 3998.765 8263.500
1985 3622.399 7148.824 [' 1986 3115.998 5860.363
1987 3441.626 6381.090
1988 3 744.2 64 6873.355 I' 1989 4041.575 7330.113
1990 3882.039 6974.461 "-'
1991 3882.775 6904.297
1992 3885.951 6785.211 r~ 1993 3878.152 6684.078 l:
1994 3849.249 6594.902
1995 3798.108 6458.734 ,,
1996 3731.571 62 96.332. L 1997 3663.917 6131.281
1998 3594.144 5961.156
1999 3523.189 5 788.15 6 [ 2000 3451.400 5614.820
2001 3378.727 5445.039
2002 3305.667 5274.090 [ 2003 3233.055 5100.586
\ 2004. 3161.136 4927.098
2005 3089.836 4754.160 F 2006 3019.205 4582.484
2007 2 949.241 4411.770
2008 2879.963 4242.930
2 811.155 4077.076
,-,
2009 b 2010 2743.049 3913.189
SOURCE: M.A.P HODEL SHlliL.~TION HAP87.3B--CREATED 4/19/83 [
VARIABLES: DF.BAL99 A~D DF.BAL9P
[
r ,
L
r,
L
A-3 L
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE 8.1
ocs SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL POPULATION
(Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 421.616 421.616 0.000 0.000
1982 439.408 439.408 0.000 0.000
1983 459.496 459.496 0.000 0.000
1984 483.907 483.907 0.000 0.000
1985 506.712 508.098 1.385 0.273
1986 531.707 533.959 2.252 0.424
1987 539.347 542.694 3.346 0.620
1988 544.750 548.986 4.236 0. 778
1989 551.366 557.825 6.459 1.171
1990 556.608 566.212 9.604 1. 725
I 1991 562.370 569.987 7.616 1.354
1992 572.708 582.138 9.429 1.646
1993 580.207 590.229 10.022 1. 727
1994 583.670 596.609 12.939 2.217
1995 588.058 600.914 12.857 2.186
1996 592.657 606.481 13.823 2.332
1997 597.577 612.812 15.234 2.549
1998 602.927 618.508 15.581 2.584
1999 608.689 624.549 15.860 2.606 ,_,
2000 614.695 631.043 16.349 2.660
"= 2001 620.514 637.383 16.869 2. 719
2002 626.774 644.071 17.297 2.760
c=::; 2003 633.859 651.792 17.933 2.829
2004 641:582 660.073 18.491 2.882
2005 649.922 668.909 18.988 2.922
2006 658.857 678.331 19.474 2.956
2007 668.494 688.453 19.959 2.986
2008 678.767 699.189 20.422 3.009
2009 689.502 709.978 20.475 2.970
_j 2010 700.975 721.643 20.668 2.948
[· SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
l'..AP87. HN--CREATED 4/21/83
[ VARIABLE: POP
l'
I
L
r
I
L
B-1 r-
[___: l_
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE 8.2.
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENTa
(Thousands)
IMPACT
CASE
ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE
51.522
54.793
59.610
60.578
64.548
68.685
67.374
66.975
68.570
68.829
71.356
75.886
75.613
72.114
71.792
71.516
71.254
71.544
71.872
72.112
71.964
72.032
72.480
73:oo2
73.596
74.193
74.922
75.694
76.367
77.244
51.522
54.793
59.610
60.578
65.493
69.525
68.683
68.445
70.972
72.408
72.966
78.735
77.838
75.598
74.424
74.411
74.515
74.252
74.402
74.638
74.510
74.572
75.207
75.751
76.366
76.987
77.742
78.538
79.000
79.885
IMPACT IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.945
0.840
1.309
1.470
2.402
3.579
1.611
2.849
2.225
3.483
2.632
2.896
3.261
2. 708
2.531
2.526
2.546
2.540
.2. 727
2.749
2. 771
2.794
2.820
2.845
2.633
2.641
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.464
1.223
1.943
2.194
3.503
5.200
2.257
3.755
2.942
4.830
3.666
4.049
4. 577
3.786
3.521
3.503
3.538
3.527
3. 762
3.765
3.765
3.766
3.763
3.758
3.447
3.419
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS ~illP87. 38
MAP87. HN--·CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: EMNS
AND
aBasic sector employment includes some endogenous
construction employment. As a result, basic employment
impacts are greater than direct OCS Sale 87 employment.
B-2
[
r
[
{'
L
[
L
[
[
L
f'
L
r
L
L
'
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B.3
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
SERVICES SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 86.348 86.348 0.000 0.000
1982 92.916 92.916 0.000 0.000
1983 98.148 98.148 0.000 0.000
1984 102.860 102.860 0.000 0.000
1985 108.740 109.158 0.417 0.384
1986 114.780 115.305 0.526 0.458
1987 116.162 117.066 0.904 0. 778
[ 1988 115.874 117.003 1.129 0.975
1989 115.622 117.617 1.995 1. 725
1990 115.912 119.020 3.108 2.682
~ 1991 117.123 119.058 1.935 1.652
L-1992 120.473 123.237 2.764 2.294
1993 124.637 127.200 2.563 2.056
n 1994 127.740 131.702 3.962 3.101
L 1995 130.405 134.099 3.694 2.833
1996 133.124 137.212 4.088 3.'071
1997 135.745 140.264 4. 519 3.329
6 1998 138.549 143.284 4.734 3.417
1999 141.621 146.436 4.815 3.400
2000 144.821 149.723 4.902 3.385
c 2001 148.102 153.111 5.009 3.382
2002 151..511 156.596 5.086 3.357
2003 155.163 160.388 5.225 3.368
t
r: 2004 159.089 164.492 5.404 3.397
2005 163.259 168.828 5.569 3.411
6 2006 167.672 173.407 5.735 3.420
2007 172.314 178.227 5.913 3.432
r 2008 177.175 183.261 6.086 3.435 L;
L3 2009 182.191 188.286 6.095 3.345
2010 187.398 193.548 6.150 3.282
[
l SOURCE: ~.AP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
~.AP87.HN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: EMSP
r-=
L
r
L
[ B-3
[
r
APPENDIX B I .
·~ .. MAP Model Statewide Projections ' Impact "·
' [-" TABLE 8.4
ocs SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT [ (Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT [ BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 82.749 82.749 0.000 0.000 [ -1982 86.472 86.472 0.000 0.000
1983 85.718 85.718 0.000 0.000
1984 93.289 93.289 0.000 0.000 l-1985 98.991 99.078 0.087 0.088
1986 104.940 105.081 0.141 0.134
1987 101.285 101.434 0.149 0.147
1988 102.632 102.862 0.230 0.225 r 1989 101.896 102.273 0.377 0.370 L__,
1990 101.155 101.685 0.531 0.525
1991 98.761 99~207 0.446 0.451 r-,
1992 97.179 97.737 0.558 0.574
1993 96.062 97.235 1.173 1.221 L:
1994 95.769 97.053 1.283 1.340 ..--
1995 94.503 95.776 1.273 1.347 L 1996 93.306 94.632 1.326 1.421
1997 92.751 94.143 1.392 1.501
1998 92.016 93.430 1.414 1. 537 [ 1999 91.326 92.738 1.413 1. 547
2000 90.821 92.226 1.405 1. 547
2001 90.363 91. 752 1.389 1. 537 [ 2002 89.953 91.308 1.355 1. 506
2003 89.599 90.925 1.326 1.480
l 2004 89.339 90.649 1.309 1.465
2005 89.156 90.454 1.297 1.455 C 2006 89.049 90.340 1.290 1.449 -
2007 88.989 90.275 1.286 1.445
2008 88.968 90.247 1.279 1.438 c 2009 88.990 90.250 1.261 1.417
2010 89.048 90.291 1.243 1.396
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
[
MAP87.HN--CREATED 4/21183
VARIABLE: EMG9 [
,-
L
r ,
L
B-4
L
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B.5
ocs SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMP ACT .CASE
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 220.618 220.618 0.000 0.000
1982 234.180 234.180 0.000 0.000
1983 243.476 243.476 0.000 0.000
1984 256.726 256.726 0.000 0.000
1985 272.279 273.729 1.450 0.532
1986 288.404 289.911 1.506 0.522
1987 284.822 287.184 2.362 0.829
1988 285.481 288.310 2.829 0.991
1989 286.088 290.862 4. 774 1.669
1990 285.896 293.114 7.218 2.525
1991 287.240 291.231 3.992 1.390
1992 293.538 299.709 6.171 2.102
1993 296.312 302.273 5.960 2.012
1994 295.624 304.353 8. 729 2.953
1995 296.699 304.298 7.599 2.561
1996 297.945 306:255 8.310 2 .'789
1997 299.750 308.923 9.172 3.060
1998 302.109 310.966 8.857 2.932
1999 304.818 313.577 8.759 2.873
2000 307.754 316.587 8.833 2.870
2001 310.429 319.373 8.943 2.881
2002 313.496 322.476 8.981 2.865
2003 317.242 326.521 9.278 2.925
\ 2004 321.430 330.892 9.461 2.944
2005 326.011 335.648 9.637 2.956
2006 330.915 340.734 9.819 2.967
2007 336.226 346.244 10.018 2.980
2008 341.837 352.047 10.209 2.987
2009 347.548 357.536 9.988 2.874
2010 353.690 363.725 10.035 2.837
[ SOURCE: P'.AP MODEL SIMULATIONS 11A.P87.3B AND MAP87.HN--
CREATED 4/21183
[ VARIABLE: EM99
B-5
L
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
TABLE 8.6
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT
REAL PERSONAL INCOME
Millions of 1982 $
BASE CASE
6375.613
7418.441
7506.027
7816.973
8139.223
8433.555
8209.242
8147.664
8338.426
8425.320
8680.453
9071.880
9303.060
9418.770
9615.370
IMPACT
CASE
6375.613
7418.441
7506.027
7816.973
8180.598
8477.949
8271.004
8223.324
8456.051
8598.613
8803.715
9252.550
9497.880
9696.310
9875.910
9811.350 10103.830
10015.620 10348.400
10247.410 10575.200
10490.980 10817.750
10742.130 11078.350
10992.710 11339.930
11269.070 11624.470
11574.550 11952.740
\
11899.810 12292.250
12244.130 12651.160
12605.850 13028.040
12987.430 13425.790
13385.860 13840.400
13789.090 14236.860
14221.100 14680.640
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
41.375
44.395
61.762
75.660
117.625
173.293
123.262
180.668
194.820
277.547
260.543
292.477
332.785
327.789
326.770
336.223
347.219
355.398
378.191
392.445
407.027
422.188
438.355
454.543
447.766
459.543
CASE
PERCENT
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 508
0.526
o. 752
0.929
1.411
2.057
1.420
1.992
2.094
2.947
2. 710
2.981
3.323
3.199
3.115
3.130
3.159
3.154
3.267
3.298
3.324
3.349
3.375
3.396
3.247
3.231
SOURCE: ~.AP MODEL SIMULATIONS l-".AP8 7. 38 AND MAP87. HN--
CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.PI
B-6
I.
L
[
L
[
[
[
L
[
E
[
[
L
,--
L
r
L
L
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE 8.7
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 15121.84 15121.84 0.00 0.00
1982 16882.82 16882.82 0.00 0.00
1983 16335.33 16335.33 0.00 0.00
1984 16153.88 16153.88 0.00 0.00
1985 16062.80 16100.44 37.64 0.23
1986 15861.29 15877.53 16.24 0.10
[ 1987 15220.69 15240.64 19.95 0.13
1988 14956.70 14979.10 22.41 0.15
1989 15123.22 15158.96 35.75 0.24
1990 15136.91 15186.21 49.30 0.33
~~ 1991 15435.47 15445.47 10.00 0.06
l, 1992 15840.30 15894.08 53.77 0.34
1993 16034.02 16091.85 57.83 0.36
I 1994 16137.13 16252.36 115.23 0. 71
L 1995 16351.07 16434.81 83.75 . 0. 51
1996 16.554.84 16659.77 104.93 o·. 63
1997 16760.37 16886.75 126.39 0.75
h 1998 16996.10 17097.93 101.83 0.60
1999 17235.38 17320.89 85.52 0.50
2000 17475.55 17555.61 80.05 0.46
c 2001 17715.48 17791.39 75.90 0.43
2002 17979.47 18048.42 68.95 0.38
2003 18260.43 18338.27 77.84 0.43
\
r 2004 18547.61 18622.58 74.96 0.40
I 2005 18839.38 18913.11 73.72 0.39
!_, 2006 19132.89 19206.01 73.12 0.38
2007 19427.90 19501.38 73.48 0.38
I'C 2008 19720.84 19794.94 74.10 0.38 i
u 2009 19998.61 20052.55 53.93 0.27
2010 20287.60 20343.36 55.76 0.27
[
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
[~ MAP87.HN--CREATED 4/21183
VARIABLE: DF.PIP
rc
L~
r
!_,
l~ B-7
[
APPENDIX B [
'· MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections "·
TABLE B.8 ~ OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
BASIC SECTOR REAL WAGE RATE
1982 $ [
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT [ BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 40206.34 40206.34 0.00 0.00 [~ 1982 43423.27 43423.27 0.00 0.00
1983 44243.50 44243.50 0.00 0.00
1984 41641.10 41641.10 0.00 0.00
1985 39852.76 40162.32 309.56 0. 78 l ~,
1986 38510.40 38699.58 189.18 0.49
1987 36475.46 36801.46 326.00 0.89
1988 .37218.03 37593.57 375.54 1.01 [ 1989 38160.23 38860.62 700.39 1.84
1990 38861.02 39966.78 1105.76 2.85
1991 39892.08 40194.11. 302.02 0. 76 " 1992. 40941.54 41598.10 656.55 1.60
1993 41782.38 42148.13 365.75 0.88 L
1994 42714.04 43466.28 752.24 1. 76
1995 43645.56 44076.83 431.27 0.99 I
1996 44548.86 45061.89 513.03 1.15 L
1997 45341.66 45955.29 613.63 1.35
1998 46230.05 46668.93 438.88 0.95 L 1999 47092.24 47515.84 423.60 0.90
2000 47899.11 48346.31 447.20 0.93
2001 48857.58 49332.81 475.23 0.97 [ 2002 49971.02 50462.47 491.45 0.98
2003 51073.94 51637.35 563.41 1.10
2004 52202.75 52785.96 583.20 1.12
2005 53358.16 53961.10 602.94 1.13 p
2006 54559.95 55182.48 622.54 1.14 L
2007 55754.02 56396.75 642.73 1.15
2008 56974.43 57637.55 663.12 1.16 ~ 2009 58160.50 58764.52 604.02 1.04
2010 59437.79 60060.17 622.38 1.05
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS t'JAP8.7. 38 AND MAP87.HN--c
CREATED 4i21/83
VARIABLE: DF.WRNS [
I ,
L
rs
L
B-8
[
,. ... ,.
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B.9
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT .CASE
SERVICES SECTOR REAL WAGE RATE
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 23008.58 23008.58 0.00 0.00
1982 22837.82 22837.82 0.00 0.00
1983 22972.05 22972 .OS 0.00 0.00
1984 22495.00 22495.00 0.00 0.00
1985 21964.23 21970.36 6.13 0.03
1986 21493.09 21495.47 2.38 0.01
1987 21027.84 21034.79 6.96 0.03 p, 1988 21270.93 21278.20 7.27 0.03
1989 21497.68 21529.45 31.77 0.15
1990 21718.34 21780.67 62.33 0.29
r 1991 21940.29 21953.68 13.38 0.06
1992 22163.70 22202.50 38.80 0.18
L" 1993 22399.93 22421.45 21.51 0.10
1994 22654.00 22718.02 64.02 0.28
I; 1995 22898.27 22932.45 34.18 0.15 L' 1996 23128.65 23169.01 40.36 0·.17 ·' 1997 23363.87 23406.90 43.03 0.18
b 1998 23601.96 23647.45 45.49 0.19
1999 23841.26 23887.21 45.95 0.19
2000 24083.43 24130.39 46.96 0.19
c 2001 24328.76 24375.93 47.17 0.19
2002 245 77.95 24625.23 47.29 0.19
2003 24828.67 24876.22 47.55 0.19
2004 25080.98 25127.59 46.61 0.19
<'< 2005 25335.84 25382.32 46.48 0.18 [ 2006 25593.45 25639.64 46.20 0.18
2007 25853.93 25899.82 45.90 0.18
I" 2008 26117.23 26162.75 45.52 0.17
b 2009 26383.80 26422.59 38.79 0.15
2010 26654.48 26694.54 40.06 0.15
[ SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.38 AND MAP87.HN--
CREATED 4/21/83
L VARIABLE: DF.WRSP
r" -
L
r
L
8-9
t
r
APPENDIX B
r:
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections " ,-:-------:
TABLE B.10 I ' L.
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
GOVERNMENT SECTOR RR~.L WAGE R.A .. TE ~ .
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT I BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT L
1981 24186.88 24186.88 0.00 0.00 I 1982 24831.79 24831.79 0.00 0.00 L. 1983 25169.81 25169.81 0.00 0.00
1984 24984.79 24984.79 0.00 0.00 [ 1985 24485.29 24489.11 3.82 0.02
1986 23951.95 23956.85 4.89 0.02
1987 23056.53 23058.14 1. 61 0.01
1988 "23482. 34 23484.71 2.37 0.01 ,-,
l 1989 23853.63 23859.05 5.42 0.02
1990 24294.87 24305.21 10.35 0.04
1991 24565.99 24575.13 9.14 0.04 ! 0 1992 24891.96 24901.33 9.38 0.04
1993 25228.00 25275.95 47.95 0.19 L::
1994 25603.99 25656.13 52.13 0.20
1995 25913.06 25968.45 55.39 0.21 r
1996 26224.37 26281.70 57.33 -0.22 L
1997 26592.64 26653.55 60.91 0.23
1998 2-6951.17 27014.91 63.73 0.24 L 1999 27310.35 27375.38 65.04 0.24
2000 27684.13 27750.87 66.74 0.24
2001 28062.57 28131.19 68.62 0.24 [ 2002 28446.14 28516.35 70.21 0.25
2003 28836.86 28908.76 ·71.90 0.25
2004 29238.77 29312.73 73.95 0.25
2005 29649.71 29725.32 75.61 0.25 [ 2006 30069.80 30147.03 77.23 0.26
2007 30496.47 30575.32 78.85 0.26
2008 30929.76 31010.08 80.32 0.26 c 2009 31371.35 31452.24 80.89 0.26
2010 31821.12 31902.12 81.00 0.25
SOURCE:MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND MAP87.HN--c
CREATED 4/21183
VARIABLE: DF.WRG9 [
:r· )f
L
r ,
L
B-10
[
[
r
c
[
L·
L
r~
L
f"
L
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-11
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT ~ASE
TOTAL REAL STATE GOVERNMENT REVENUES
Millions of 1982 $
BASE CASE
IMPACT
CASE
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
PERCENT
IMPACT
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3019.090
3042.944
2990.393
2970.126
3003.821
3195.949
2944.194
2835.149
2760.691
2770.010
2630.026
2495.307
2468.659
2418.750
2363.341
2327.023
2293.094
2261.568
2234.232
22u:oo6
2190.829
2173.459
2158.579
2146.220
2135.585
2126.667
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3022.207
3048.298
2997.349
2979.696
3022.571
3228.653
2970:003
2860.212
2872.350
2887.691
2747.206
2608.868
2583.806
2533.148
2473.765
2434.883
2398.945
2365.193
2336.030
2311.510
2289.369
2269.984
2253.043
2238.535
2224.696
2211.965
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.117
5.354
6.957
9. 570
18.750
32.705
25.809
25.063
111.658
117.681
117.180
113.561
115.147
114.397
110.424
107.859
105.850
103.625
.101.798
100.504
98.540
96.524
94.465
92.315
89.110
85.298
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.103
0.176
0.233
0.322
0.624
1.023
0.877
0.884
4.045
4.248
4.455
4.·551
4.664
4. 730
4.672
4.635
4.616
4.582
4.556
4.546
4.498
4.441
4.376
4.301
4.173
4.011
SOURCE: YillP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B
MAP87.HN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.RSGF
8-11
AND
[
,f-1
APPENDIX B L
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections '··
';,. r-TABLE B-12 I • _1
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL STATE GOVERNMENT GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES f_ Millions of 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT r BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT l_,
1981 3083.349 3083.349 0.000 0.000 c 1982 4192.207 4192.207 0.000 0.000
1983 3090.839 3090.839 0.000 0.000
1984 3504.701 3504.701 0.000 0.000 r-1985 3681.244 3690.259 9.015 0.245
1986 3874.449 3889.007 14.558 0.376
1987 2990.391 2997.349 6.958 0.233
1988 '2970 .130 2979.700 9. 570 0.322 r 1989 3003.821 3022.569 18.748 0.624 I . , _ __.
1990 3195.947 3228.653 32.706 1.023
1991 2944.191 2970.001 25.810 0.877 [ 1992 2835.148 2860.209 25.062 0.884 l 0
1993 2760.687 2872.346 111.658 4.045 L
1994 2770.011 2887.682 117.671 4.248
1995 2630.022 2747.198 117.176 4.455 " L 1996 2495.301 2608.861 113.560 4.551
1997 2468.653 2583.799 115.147 4.664
1998 2418.744 2533.142 114.397 4. 730 L 1999 2363.334 2473.757 110.423 4.672
2000 2327.018 2434.878 107.860 4.635
2001 2293.087 2398.938 105.852 4.616 [ 2002 2261.563 2365.186 103.622 4.582
2003 2234.226 2336.021 101.795 4.556
2004 2211 :ooo 2311.503 100.502 4.546
E 2005 2190.821 2289.361 98.540 4.498
2006 2173.454 2269.978 96.524 4.441
2007 2158.572 2253.037 94.465 4.376
2008 2146.213 2238.529 92.316 4.301 L 2009 2135.580 2224.689 89.110 4.173
2010 2126.661 2211.959 85.298 4.011
r (L
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
MAP87. HN---CREATED 4/21/83 L VARIABLE: DF.EXGF
r=
L
r l
L
B-12 t
--.
APPENDIX B
HAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-13.
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT .CASE
REAL PER CAPITA STATE GOVERNMENT
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT.
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
-,
1981 7313.16 7313.16 0.00 0.00
1982 9540.58 9540.58 0.00 0.00
1983 6726.57 6726.57 0.00 0.00
1984 7242.51 7242.51 0.00 0.00
1985 7264.95 7262.89 -2.06 -0.03
1986 7286.81 7283.34 -3.47 -0.05
c::; 1987 5544.46 5523.09 -21.36 -0.39
i 1988 5452.28 5427.64 -24.64 -0.45
~,
1989 5447.96 5418.49 -29.47 -0.54
·--' 1990 5741.83 5702.20 -39.63 -0.69
1991 5235.32 5210.64 -24.68 -0.47
l. 1992 4950.42 4913.28 -37.14 -0.75
1993 4758.10 4866.49 108.39 2.28 r 1994 4745.85 4840.15 94.30 1. 99 I
1995 4472.39 45 71.70 99.31 2'.22
1996 4210.36 4301.64 91.28 2.17
I 1997 4131.10 4216.30 85.20 2.06
~ 1998 4011.67 4095.57 83.90 2.09
1999 3882.66 3960.87 78.20 2.01
r 2000 3785.65 3858.49 72.85 1. 92
~ 2001 3695.46 3763.73 68.27 1.85
2002 3608.26 3672.24 63.98 1.77
2003 3524.80 3584.00 59.20 1.68 r 2004 3446.17 3501.89 55.72 1.62
b 2005 3370.90 3422.53 51.63 1. 53
2006 3298.82 3346.41 47.59 1.44
n 2007 3229.01 3272.61 43.60 1.35 8 2008 3161.93 3201.61 39.68 1.25
2009 3097.28 3133.46 36.19 1.17
l~\ 2010 3033.86 3065.1.7 31.31 1.03
~·
L SOURCE: f:l.AP MODEL SIMULATIONS ~.AP87. 3B AND
!1AP87. HN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.EXGFP
J'
L
r
L
B-13
L
[
APPENDIX B
ri
I .
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections '·· r TABLE B-14.
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL COMBINED FUNDS BALANCE L~ Millions of 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
,~
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT •1 -·
1981 2930.538 2930.538 0.000 0.000 r ,
1982 3364.593 3364.593 0.000 0.000 L.
1983 4172.152 4172.152 0.000 0.000
1984 3998.765 3998.765 0.000 0.000 [ 1985 3622.399 3620.804 -1.595 -0.044
1986 3115.998 3106.620 -9.378 -0.301
1987 3441.626 3436.336 -5.291 -0.154
1988 3744.264 3742.192 -2.072 -0.055 r· 1989 4041.575 4048.528 6.953 0.172 t~
1990 3882.039 3897.456 15.417 0.397
1991 3882.775 3889.330 6.555 0.169 [ 1992 3885.951 3899.276 13.325 0.343 t
1993 3878.152 3889.788 11.636 0.300
1994 3849.249 3871.37'5 22.127 0.575 ,.._,
1995 3798.108 3817.909 19.801 0.521 L 1996 3731.571 3753.658 22.087 0.592.
1997 3663.917 3688.364 24.446 0.667
• 1998 3594.144 3619.313 25.170 0. 700 [ 1999 3523.189 3548.103 24.914 0. 707
2000 3451.400 3476.048 24.648 0. 714
2001 3378.727 3403.183 24.457 0. 724 [· 2002 3305.667 3329.726 24.058 o. 728
2003 3233.055 3257.018 23.963 o. 741
\
-2004 3161.136 3185.141 24.004 0.759 L 2005 3089.836 3113.746 23.910 0. 774
2006 3019.205 3042.965 23.760 0. 787
2007 2949.241 2972.860 23.619 0.801
2008 2879.963 2903.366 23.403 0.813 ~ 2009 2811.155 2833.620 22.465 0. 799
2010 2743.049 2764.786 21.738 0.792
r :L
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND r ~..AP87. HN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.BAL99 "l .. ~
J'
L
n
I ......
B-14 L
[
[
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
I'
I ) TABLE B-15.
OCS SALE 87 3.0 BBBL IMPACT CASE
[ REAL PER CAPITA COMBINED FUNDS BALANCE
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
' BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT c -"
1"~"-::1 1981 6950.72 6950.72 0.00 0.00
I .~ 1982 7657.11 7657.11 0.00 0.00
1983 9079.84 9079.84 0.00 0.00
~-~ 1984 8263.50 8263.50 0.00 0.00
I ' 1985 7148.82 7126.20 -22.63 -0.32 !
1986 5860.36 5818.09 -42.28 -0.72
1987 6381.09 6331.99 -49.10 -0.77 r 1988 6873.36 6816.54 -56.81 -0.83
1989 7330.11 7257.70 -72.41 -0.99
1990 6974.46 6883.39 -91.07 -1.31
( 1991 6904.30 6823.54 -80.75 -1.17
1992 . 6785.21 6698.20 -87.01 -1.28
-~ 1993 6684.08 6590.30 -93.78 -1.40
,~ 1994 6594.90 6488.96 -105.94 -1.61
L 1995 6458.73 6353.50 -105.24 -1.63
1996 6296.33 6189.24 -107.09 -L70
1997 6131.28 6018.75 -112.53 -1.84
5 1998 5961.16 5851.68 -109.47 -1.84
1999 5788.16 5681.06 -107.10 -1.85
2000 5614.82 5508.41 -106.41 -1.90 c 2001 5445.04 5339.30 -105.73 -1.94
2002 5274.09 5169.80 -104.29 -1.98
2003 5100.59 4997.02 --103.57 -2.03
\ 2004 4927.10 4825.44 -101.66 -2.06
[ 2005 4754.16 4654.96 -99.20 -2.09
2006 4582.48 4485.96 -96.53 -2.11
2007 4411.77 4318.17 -93.60 -2.12
b 2008 4242.93 4152.48 -90.45 -2.13
2009 4077.08 3991.14 -85.94 -2.11
2010 3913.19 3831.24 -81.95 -2.09
[
L
SOURCE: ~lAP MODEL SIMULATIONS KAP87. 3B AND
MAP87.HN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.BAL9P
r
L
f'~
L,
L
B-15
r
APPENDIX B
r~
""· MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections ' ....
TABLE B-16.
['
l..l.. ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL POPULATION r (Thousands)
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT r BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT It
1981 421.616 421.616 0.000 0.000 1-,
1982 439.408 439.408 0.000 0.000 l . 1983 459.496 459.496 0.000 0.000
1984 483.907 483.907 0.000 0.000 r 1985 506.712 507.711 0.999 0.197
1986 531.707 533.632 1.925 0.362
1987 539.347 542.150 2.803 0.520
1988 544.750 548.257 3.507 0.644 r 1989 551.366 556.804 5.439 0.986 .~
1990 556.608 563.573 6.966 1.251
1991 562.370 568.619 6.249 1.111 c 1992 572.708 581.088 8.379 1.463
1993 580.207 588.269 8.062 1.389 t
1994 583.670 592.486 8.815 1. 510 r~
1995 588.058 597.911 9.854 1.676 L 1996 592.657 602.732 10.074 1. 700
1997 597.577 608.266 10.689 1. 789
1998 602.927 613.984 11. OS 7 1.834 L 1999 608.689 620.136 11.447 1.881
2000 614.695 626.528 11.834 1.925
2001 620.514 632.712 12.198 1.966 [ 2002 626.774 639.303 12.528 1.999
2003 633.859 646.711 12.851 2.027 -'
2004 641:582 654.744 13.162 2.052
2005 649.922 663.385 13.463 2.071 c 2006 658.857 672.611 13.754 2.088
2007 668.494 682.532 14.039 2.100
2008 678.767 693.085 14.318 2.109 [ 2009 689.502 703.954 14.452 2.096
2010 700.975 715.633 14.657 2.091
[ . -
SOURCE; MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87 .38 AND
MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21183 L VARIABLE: POP , -
L
r::~
L...:
8-16 [
e_-,
I
l.-~
[.
[
APPENDIX B
HAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
TABLE B-17.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(Thousands)
BASE CASE
51.522
54.793
59.610
60.578
64.548
68.685
67.374
66.975
68.570
68.829
71.356
75.886
75.613
72.114
71.792
71.516
71.254
71.544
71.872
72.112
71.964
72.032
72.480
73:002
73.596
74.193
74.922
75.694
76.367
77.244
IMPACT
CASE
51.522
54.793
59.610
60.578
65.244
69.499
68.432
68.179
70.579
71.224
72.894
7.8.591
77.198
74.040
73.941
73.323
73.236
73.357
73.711
73.950
73.811
73.885
74.343
74.875
75.480
76.091
76.834
77.620
78.293
79.183
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.696
0.814
1.057
1.204
2.009
2.395
1. 538
2.705
1. 585
1.925
2.150
1.808
1.982
1.814
1.839
1.837
1.847
1.853
1.863
1.873
1.885
1.898
1.912
1.927
1.926
1. 939
PERCENT
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.078
1.185
1. 569
1. 797
2.930
3.479
2.156
3.564
2.097
2.670
2.994
2,528
2.781
2.535
2.559
2.548
2.566
2.573
2.570
2.566
2.561
2.558
2.551
2.546
2.522
2.510
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87. 38 AND
P~P87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: EMNS
8-17
[
APPENDIX B [
• .. Statewide Impact Projections ' MAP Model '·
TABLE B-18. r·\
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE •I j
SERVICES SECTOR EMPLOY¥£NT
(Thousands) [
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT r·~
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT L
1981 86.348 86.348 0.000 0.000 I , 1982 92.916 92.916 0.000 0.000
1983 98.148 98.148 0.000 0.000 \..
1984 102.860 102.860 0.000 0.000
1985 108.740 109.028 0.287 0.264 r 1986 114.780 115.248 0.468 0.408
1987 116.162 116.894 0. 732 0.630 IJ/
1988 ·115.874 116.803 0.930 0.802 n 1989 115.622 117.330 1. 708 1.477
1990 115.912 118.035 2.123 1.831 '\----'
1991 117.123 118.763 1.639 1.400
1992 120.473 123.051 2.579 2.140 ['
1993 124.637 126.749 2.112 1.694 c
1994 127.740 130.221 2.481 1.942
1995 130.405 133.261 2.857 2.191 r~
1996. 133.124 136.087 2.963 2 .226. L. 1997 135.745 138.903 3.158 2.326
1998 138.549 141.852 . 3.303 2.384 L 1999 141.621 145.013 3.392 2.395
2000 144.821 148.305 3.484 2.406
2001 148.102 151.677 3.575 2.414
2002 151.511 155.161 3.650 2.409 [ 2003 155.163 158.900 3.737 2.408
2004 159~089 162.914 3.826 2.405
2005 163.259 167.179 3.919 2.401 t:
2006 167.672 171.690 4.018 2.396 c 2007 172.314 176.435 4.121 2.391
2008 177.175 181.405 4.230 2.388 L 2009 182.191 186.411 4.220 2.316
2010 187.398 191.701 4.303 2.296
r L
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83 L VARIABLE: EMSP
I :
L
r~
L
B-18
L
[
· ..... APPENDIX B r
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections ~.
TABLE B-20. [,
ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT t·• (Thousands) L
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT r· BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT 1 ~
1981 220.618 220.618 0.000 0.000 l~ 1982 234.180 234.180 0.000 0.000
1983 243.476 243.476 0.000 0.000
1984 256.726 256.726 0.000 0.000
1985 272.279 273.324 1.045 0.384 r
1986 288.404 289.808 1.404 0.487 l'
1987 284.822 286.731 1.909 0.670
1988 285.481 287.805 2.325 0.814 [ 1989 286.088 290.129 4.041 1.412
1990 285.896 290.807 4.911 1. 718
1991 287.240 290.785 3.545 1.234 L 1992 293.538 299.305 5.767 1.965
1993 296.312 300.910 4.598 1.552 t:
1994 295.624 300.957 5.333 1.804
1995 296.699 302.669 5.970 2.012 r··
1996 297.945 303.685 S.740 1..926 L.
1997 299.750 305.877 6.127 2.044
1998 302.109 308.224 6.115 2.024 [ 1999 304.818 311.049 6.231 2.044
2000 307.754 314.069 6.315 2.052
2001 310.429 316.833 6.404 2.063
[. 2002 313.496 319.965 6.469 2.064
2003 317.242 323.791 6.549 2.064
\
2004 321.430 328.065 6.635 2.064
2005 326.0ll 332.739 6.727 2.064 [ 2006 330.915 337.741 6.827 2.063
2007 336.226 343.159 6.934 2.062
2008 341.837 348.886 7.049 2.062 L 2009 347.548 354.572 7.024 2.021
2010 353.690 360.801 7.111 2.010
.
r~ ., :
-'
SOURCE: MAP HODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
Y~P87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83 L VARIABLE: EM99
r
L
r:
L;
B-20
t
[
r-·
i
I" APPENDIX B
r-. MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-21.
ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
r-" REAL PERSONAL INCOME
Millions of 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 6375.613 6375.613 0.000 0.000
1982 7418.441 7418.441 0.000 0.000
1983 7506.027 7506.027 0.000 0.000
1984 7816.973 7816.973 0.000 0.000
\ 1985 8139.223 8169.648 30.426 0.374
·~-1986 8433.555 8474.781 41.227 0.489
t 1987 8209.242 8260.230 50.988 0.621
1988 8147.664 8210.574 62.910 0. 772
1989 8338.426 8437.227 98.801 1.185
1990 8425.320 8548.508 123.188 1.462 r. 1991 8680.453 8789.797 109.344 1.260
l' 1992 9071.880 9235.050 163.176 1. 799
1993 9303.060 9451.270 148.207 1. 593
(' 1994 9418.770 9596.630 177.859 1.888
l. 1995 9615.370" 9816.320 200.945 2.090
1996 9811.350 10017.600 ·206. 246 2.102
1997 10015.620 10240.990 225.371 2.250
b 1998 10247.410 10472.780 225.367 2.199
1999 10490.980 10725.420 234.438 2.235
2000 10742.130 10983.930 241.805 2.251 c 2001 10992.710 11242.610 249.902 2.273
2002 11269.070 11526.520 257.445 2.285
2003 11574.550 11840.300 -265.750 2. 296.
\
2i4.441 r 2004 11899.810 12174.250 2.306
2005 12244.130 12527.750 283.617 2.316 !
'-' 2006 12605.850 12899.080 293.230 2.326
2007 12987.430 13290.770 303.344 2.336
r' 2008 13385.860 13699.850 313.992 2.346 b 2009 13789.090 14108.010 318.914 2.313
2010 14221.100 14550.230 329.133 2.314
[
L
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
P~P87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.PI
~~
L
r~
L.;
l=
B-21
L
APPENDIX B [
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections '
TABLE B-22. r-
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME L 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT { : BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 15121.84 15121.84 0.00 0.00 \
1982 16882.82 16882.82 0.00 0.00 L. 1983 16335.33 16335.33 0.00 0.00
1984 16153.88 16153.88 0.00 0.00 r 1985 16062.80 16091.13 28.33 0.18
1986 15861.29 15881.33 20.05 0.13 ·L.
1987 15220.69 15236.05 15.36 0.10
1988 .14956.70 14975.77 19.07 0.13 [ 1989 15123.22 15152.94 29.72 0.20
1990 15136.91 15168.39 31.49 0.21
1991 15435.47 15458.13 22.66 0.15 r· 1992 15840.30 15892.70 52.40 0.33
1993 16034.02 16066.23 32.21 0.20 t:
1994 161:'37.13 16197.23 60.09 0.37 { .
1995 16351.07 16417.68 66.62 0.41 L, 1996 16554.84 16620.32 65 .. 48 0.40
1997 16760.37 16836.35 75.98 0.45
1998 16996.10 17057.09 60.98 0.36 L 1999 17235.38 17295.27 59.89 0.35
2000 17475.55 17531.42 55.87 0.32
2001 17715.48 17768.92 53.44 0.30 [ 2002 17979.47 18029.83 50.36 0.28
2003 18260.43 18308.49 48.06 0.26
\
2004 18547.61 18593.92 46.30 0.25
2005 18839.38 18884.57 45.19 0.24 t 2006 19132.89 19177.61 44.72 0.23
2007 19427.90 19472.73 44.83 0.23
2008 19720.84 19766.47 45.64 0.23 L 2009 19998.61 20041.09 42.47 0.21
2010 20287.60 20331.99 44.39 0.22
L
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83 f' VARIABLE: DF.PIP ~-~
(
L
~~
L
B-22
L
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Pt"ojections
TABLE B-23.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT C~SE
'~ BASIC SECTOR REAL WAGE RATE
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
___ "\ BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 40206.34 40206.34 0.00 0.00
1982 43423.27 43423.27 0.00 0.00
1983 44243.50 44243.50 0.00 0.00
1984 41641.10 41641.10 0.00 0.00
1985 39852.76 40076.35 223.59 0. 56
1986 38510.40 38698.96 188.56 0.49
1987 36475.46 36730.70 255.24 0. 70
[ 1988 37218.03 37520.37 302.34 0.81
1989 38160.23 38756.56 596.33 1. 56
1990 38861.02 39573.94 712.92 1.83
~~ 1991 39892.08 40202.54 310.45 o. 78
1992 40941.54 41604.45 662.91 1.62 Lc :/ 1993 41782.38 42034.38 252.00 0.60
r-':) 1994 42714.04 43052.12 338.08 0.79
I 1995 43645.56 44056.52 410.95 0.94
I -1996 44548.86 44808.79 259.93 0·; 58 '---..
1997 45341.66 45664.63 322.98 0. 71
[ 1998 46230.05 46524.45 294.39 0.64
c---i 1999 47092.24 47407.41 315.16 0.67
2000 47899.11 48231.17 332.06 0.69
q 2001 48857.58 49208.33 350.75 0.72
I 2002 49971.02 I ~ 50336.13 365.11 0. 73
I=.} 2003 51073.94 51452.45 378.51 0. 74
2004 52202.75 52594.57 391.81 0. 75
F' 2005 53358.16 53763.21 405.05 0.76
2006 54559.95 54978.21 418.27 0. 77
2007 55754.02 56185.92 431.90 o. 77
r-s 2008 56974.43 57420.04 445.60 0. 78
i' 2009 58160.50 58623.54 463.04 0.80 ~--=
~
2010 59437.79 59914.74 476.95 0.80
[
SOURCE: MAP XODEL SIMULATIONS ~..A.P87. 38 AND
[ ~1AP87. LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.WRNS
~~
L
r=
u
t B-23
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
.1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
TABLE B-24
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
SERVICES SECTOR REAL WAGE RATE
1982 $
BASE CASE
23008.58
22837.82
22972.05
22495.00
21964.23
21493.09
21027.84
"21270.93
21497.68
21718.34
21940.29
22163.70
22399.93
22654.00
22898.27
23128.65
23363.87
23601.96
23841.26
24083.43
24328.76
24577.95
24828.67
25080.98
25335.84
25593.45
25853.93
26117.23
26383.80
26654.48
IMPACT
CASE
23008.58
22837.82
22972.05
22495.00
21967.60
21496.11
21032.46
21276.29
21526.34
21754.00
21955.23
22205.79
22418.79
22681.66
22930.36
23164.10
23397.89
23635.04
23875.21
24117.29
24362.77
24612.02
24862.84
25115.15
25369.97
25627.46
25887.84
26150.95
26408.32
26679.20
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.37
3.02
4.63
5.36
28.66
35.66
14.93
42.09
18.86
27.66
32.09
35.45
34.02
33.08
33.95
33.86
34.02
34.07
34.16
34.17
34.13
34.02
33.91
33.71
24.52
24.72
PERCENT
IMPACT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.13
0.16
0.07
0.19
0.08
0.12
0.14
0.15.
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.09
0.09
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B
~..AP87. LN---CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.WRSP
B-24
AND
I ,
l
[
('
L
[
[
L
r
L
L
L
-·,
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-25.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT C~SE
GOVERNMENT SECTOR REAL WAGE RATE
1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 24186.88 24186.88 0.00 0.00
1982 24831.79 24831.79 0.00 0.00
1983 25169.81 25169.81 0.00 0.00
1984 24984.79 24984.79 0.00 0.00
1985 24485.29 24488.04 2.75 0.01
1986 23951.95 23956.13 4.17 0.02
-~ 1987 23056.53 23057.98 1.45 0.01
1988 23482.34 23484.28 1.93 0.01
1989 23853.63 23858.22 4.59 0.02
1990 24294.87 24302.25 7.39 0.03
1991 24565.99 24572.91 6.92 0.03
-:;,1 1992 . 24891.96 24900.90 8.95 0.04
1993 25228.00 25264.32 36.32 0.14
1994 25603.99 25640.47 36.48 0.14
1995 25913.06 25952.75 39.69 0.15
1996. 26224.37 26266.17 41.80 0·.16
1997 26592.64 26635.85 43.21 0.16
1998 26951.17 26996.29 45.12 0.17
=-.j 1999 27310.35 27356.88 46.53 0.17
2000 27684.13 27732.16 48.04 0.17
~ 2001 28062.57 28111.97 49.40 0.18
' . 2002 28446.14 28496.81 50.67 0.18
2003 28836.86 28888.68 51.83 0.18
I
52.94 -2004 29238.77 29291.71 0.18 -
2005 29649.71 29703.68 53.97 0.18
2006 30069.80 30124.74 54.94 0.18
2007 30496.47 30552.36 55.88 0.18 -,
2008 30929.76 30986.49 56.73 0.18
.J 2009 31371.35 31428.50 57.14 0.18
2010 31821.12 31878.75 57.63 0.18
~,
SOURCE:MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS Y.&AP87. 38 AND
V~P87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.WRG9
8-25
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
TABLE 8-26.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 888L IMPACT CASE
TOTAL REAL STATE GOVERNMENT REVENUES
Millions of 1982 $
BASE CASE
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3019.090
3042.944
2990.393
"2970.126
3003.821
3195.949
2944.194
2835.149
2760.691
2770.010
2630.026
2495.307
2468.659
2418. 750"
2363.341
2327.023
2293.094
2261.568
2234.232
2211:oo6
2190.829
2173.459
2158.579
2146.220
2135.585
2126.667
IMPACT
CASE
4103.215
4389.039
3543.250
3065.921
3021.239
3047.449
2996.328
2977.976
3019.757
3219.450
2964.000
2858.742
2845.085
2852.084
2713.651
2577.813
2549.982
2499.395
2442.095
2404.529
2369.216
2336.206
2307.357
2282.632
2260.924
2241.991
2225.520
2211.533
2198.756
2187.706
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
2.149
4.505
5.935
7.850
15.936
23.501
19.806
23.593
84.394
82.074
83.625
82;506
81.323
80.645
78.754
77.505
76.121
74.638
73.125
71.626
70.095
68.532
66.941
65.313
63.171
61.039
PERCENT
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.071
0.148
0.198
0.264
0. 531
0.735
0.673
0.832
3.057
2.963
3.180
3.306
3.294
3.334
3.332
3.331
3.320
3.300
3.273
3.240
3.199
3.153
3.101
3.043
2.958
2.870
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS ¥..AP87 .38
~~P87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.RSGF
B-26
AND
[
f :
I'
l
l~,
L
r .
L
[
r b
c
L
L
[
[
L
"")
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-27.
ocs SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL STATE GOVERNMENT GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
Millions of 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 3083.349 3083.349 0.000 0.000
1982 4192.207 4192.207 0.000 0.000
1983 3090.839 3090.839 0.000 0.000
1984 3504.701 3504.701 0.000 0.000
1985 3681.244 3687.723 6.479 0.176
1986 3874.449 3886.909 12.460 0.322
1987 2990.391 2996.328 5.937 0.199
1988 2970.130 2977.980 7.850 0.264
-1989 3003.821 3019.755 15.934 0.530
1990 3195.947 3219.445 23.498 0.735
1991 2944.191 2963.997 19.806 0.673
1992 2835.148 2858.737 23.590 0.832
1993 2760.687 2845.082 84.395 3.057
1994 2770.011 2852.075 82.063 2.963
1995 2630.022 2713.643 83.621 3.179
~\ 1996 2495.301 2577.807 82; 506 3.306
1997 2468.653 2549.977 81.325 3.294
1998 2418.744 2499.389 80.645 3.334
-~ 1999 2363.334 2442.089 78.755 3.332
2000 2327.018 2404.525 77.507 3.331
~ 2001 2293.087 2369.210 76.123 3.320
2002 2261.563 2336.199 74.636 3.300
o::;; 2003 2234.226 2307.350 73.124 3.273
2004 2211:000 2282.625 71.625 3.239 = 2005 2190.821 2260.918 70.097 3.200
2006 2173.454 2241.986 68.532 3.153
2007 2158.572 2225.514 66.942 3.101
2008 2146.213 2211.527 65.314 3.043
2009 2135.580 2198.751 63.171 2.958 ;;
2010 2126.661 2187.700 61.038 2.870
~"
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
MAP87.LN--CREATED 4/21/83
-~; VARIABLE: DF.EXGF
B-27
r
APPENDIX B ['
' MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections "
TABLE B-28. r~
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE I .
REAL PER CAPITA STATE GOVERNMENT
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES [ 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE PERCENT r BASE CASE CASE IMPACT IMPACT
1981 7313.16 7313.16 0.00 0.00 i '
1982 9540.58 9540.58 0.00 0.00
1983 6726.57 6726.57 0.00 0.00
1984 7242.51 7242.51 0.00 0.00 [
1985 7264.95 7263.42 -1.53 -0.02 L
1986 7286.81 7283.88 -2.93 -0.04
1987 '5544.46 5526.74 -17.71 -0.32 c 1988 5452.28 5431.72 -20.56 -0.38
1989 5447.96 5423.36 -24.60 -0.45
1990 5741.83 5712.55 -29.27 -0.51
1991 5235.32 5212.62 -22.70 -0.43 f~!
1992 4950.42 4919.63 -30.79 -0.62 L~
1993 4758.10 4836.36 78.26 1.64
1994 4745.85 4813.74 67.89 1.43 r-.
1995 4472.39 4538.54 66.15 1.48 L
1996 4210.36 4276.87 66.51 1. 58
1997 4131.10 4192.20 . 61.11 1.48 r-
1998 4011.67 4070.77 59.10 1.47 L 1999 3882.66 3937.99 55.33 1.42
2000 3785.65 3837.85 52.20 1.38
2001 3695.46 3744.53 49.07 1.33 [ 2002 3608.26 3654.29 46.04 1.28
2003 3524.80 3567.82 43.03 1.22
2004 3446.17 3486.29 40.12 1.16 c 2005 3370.90 3408.15 37.25 1.11
2006 3298.82 3333.25 34.43 1.04
2007 3229.01 3260.67 31.66 0.98
w 2008 3161.93 3190.84 28.92 0.91
2009 3097.28 3123.43 26.15 0.84
'
2010 3033.86 3057.01 23.15 0.76
L
SOURCE: ~..AP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B AND
~..AP87. LN--CREATED 4/21183 [ VARIABLE: DF.EXGFP
r-
L
r:
L"
B-28
L
\
--,
""
= -
'
""
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-29.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL COMBINED FUNDS BALANCE
Millions of 1982 $
IMPACT ABSOLUTE
BASE CASE CASE IMPACT
1981 2930.538 2930.538 0.000
1982 3364.593 3364.593 0.000
1983 4172.152 4172.152 0.000
1984 3998.765 3998.765 0.000
1985 3622.399 3621.029 -1.371
1986 3115.998 3108.637 -7.361
1987 3441.626 3437.290 -4.337
1988 3744.264 3742.663 -1.602
1989 4041.575 4047.991 6.417
1990 3882.039 3891.373 9.334
1991 3882.775 3888.612 5.837
1992 3885.951 3899.406 13.456.
1993 3878.152 3887.813 9.662
1994 3849:249 3861.681 12.433
1995 3798.108 3813.098 14.990
1996 3731.571 3746.956 15.385
1997 3663.917 3680.258 16.340
1998 3594.144 3610.999 16.855
1999 3523.189 3540.109 16.920
2000 3451.400 3468.351 16.951
2001 3378.727 3395.660 16.934
2002 3305.667 3322.460 16.792
2003 3233.055 3249.731 16.676
2004 3161~136 3177.666 16.529
2005 3089.836 3106.205 16.369
2006 3019.205 3035.403 16.198
2007 2949.241 2965.264 16.023
2008 2879.963 2895.810 15.847
2009 2811.155 2826.299 15.144
2010 2743.049 2757.891 14.842
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS
Y.AP87. LN---CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.BAL99
B-29
PERCENT
IMPACT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
-0.038
-0.236
-0.126
-0.043
0.159
0.240
0.150
0.346
0.249
0.323
0.395
0.412
0.446
0.469
0.480
0.491
0. 501
0. 508
0.516
0. 523
0.530
0.536
o. 543
0. 550
0.539
0. 541
MAP87.3B AND
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APPENDIX B
MAP Model Statewide Impact Projections
TABLE B-30.
OCS SALE 87 2.2 BBBL IMPACT CASE
REAL PER CAPITA COMBINED FUNDS BALANCE
1982 $
BASE CASE
IMPACT
CASE
ABSOLUTE
IMPACT
PERCENT
IMPACT
6950.72
7657.11
9079.84
8263.50
7148.82
5860.36
6381.09
6873.36
7330.11
6974.46
6904.30
6785.21
6684.08
6594.90
6458.73
6296.33
6131.28
5961.16
5788.16
5614.82
5445.04
5274.09
5109.59
4927.10
4754.16
4582.48
4411.77
4242.93
4077.08
3913.19
6950.72
7657.11
9079.84
8263.50
7132.06
5825.43
6340.10
6826.47
7270.04
6904.82
6838.69
6710.53
6608.90
6517.76
6377.36
6216.62
6050.40
5881.26
5708.60
5535.82
5366.83
5197.00
5025.01
4853.29
4682.35
4512.86
4344.50
4178.14
4014.89
3853.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-16.76
-34.93
-40.99
-46.89
-60.07
-69.64
-65.61
-74.68
-75.18
-77.14
-81.37
-79.71·
-80.88
-79.90
-79.56
-79.00
-78.21
-77.09
-75.57
-73.80
-71.81
-69.63
-67.27
-64.79
-62.19
-59.41
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.23
-0.60
-0.64
-0.68
-0.82
-1.00
-0.95
-1.10
-1.12
-1.17
-1.26
-1.27
-1.32
-1.34
-1.37
-1.41
-1.44
-1.46
-1.48
-1.50
-1.51
-1.52
-1.52
-1.53
-1.53
-1.52
SOURCE: MAP MODEL SIMULATIONS MAP87.3B
Y..AP87. LN--CREATED 4/21/83
VARIABLE: DF.BAL9P
8-30
AND
[
r·
l .
[
r
L
[
[
[
c
L
L
r
L
L
-,
.,.,
~
-~.j
=--
-,
I -
APPENDIX C
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
OCS Sale 87
TABLE C.l.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 181.514 181.514 181.514
1982 192.439 192.439 192.439
1983 200.416 200.416 200.416
1984 208.784 208.784 208.784
1985 218.558 219.030 219.213
1986 228.850 229.742 229.893
1987 233.251 234.584 234.844
1988 233.412 235.071 235.418
1989 235.429 238.017 238.503
1990 237.668 240.997 242.276
1991 241.004 243.953 244.612
1992 245. 7'66 249.745 250.222
1993 250.899 254.555 255.397
1994 254.019 258.098 260.043.
1995 256.667 261.303 262.726
1996 259.672 264.428 266.224
1997 262.902 267.979 270.162
1998 266.209 271.504 273.672
1999 269.790 275.295 277.415 .
2000 273.450 279.162 281.329
2001 277.002. 282.916 285.161
2002 280.833 286.932 289.233
2003 284.955 291.240 293.705
2004 289.402 295.868 298.474
2005 294.154 300.799 303.516
2006 299.237 306.056 308.883
2007 304.626 311.620 314.559
2008 310.346 317.514 320.557
2009 316.292 323.563 326.573
2010 322.619 330.025 333.033
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.02
C-1
r
APPENDIX C [
· ....
HAP Model Regional Projections, ' '·· Base Case and Impact Cases c ocs Sale 87
TABLE C.2. [-' ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT •/
(000) r·
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE f .
100.002 100.002 1981 100.002
1982 108.092 108.092 108.092
L 1983 111.531 111.531 111.531
1984 116.916 116.916 116.916
1985 124.194 124.524 124.654
1986 131.094 131.579 131.633 [ 1987 129.963 130.651 130.809
1988 129.226 130.084 130.269
1989 128.889 130.345 130.610 f~ 1990 128.773 130.592 131.388
1991 129.237 130.648 130.915 l. .i
1992 131.501 133.629 133.804
1993 133.753 135.630 136.104 r-,
I 1994 134.825 136.980 138.195 L
1995 135.898 138.346 139.089
1996 137.071 139.491 140.536 [ 1997 138.563 141.145 142.385
1998 140.186 142.848 144.020
1999 142.019 144.756 145.875 c 2000 143.972 146.772 147.887
2001 145.851 148.714 149.843
2002 147.945 150.860 151.985
2003 150.267 153.243 154.438 f~ 2004 152.825 155.866 157.123
2005 155.590 158.699 160.010
2006 158.558 161.739 163.102 [ 2007 161.708 164.965 166.387
2008 165.029 168.369 169.839
2009 168.449 171.832 173.257 [ 2010 172.062 175.510 176.916
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIO!.ZS L
CD87 .38, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r~ VARIABLE: M.02 L
p
t._;
C-2
L
~
~
~
-
=
APPENDIX C
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
OCS Sale 87
TABLE C.3.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 18.782 18.782 18.782
1982 21.551 21.551 21.551
1983 22.447 22.447 22.447
1984 23.284 23.284 23.284
1985 25.535 25.621 25.655
1986 27-.463 27.585 27.599
1987 26.833 26.985 27.020
1988 26.389 26.569 26.612
1989 26.668 26.999 27.060
1990 26.866 27.300 27.505
1991 27.251 27.560 27.630
1992 27.548 28.006 28.025
1993 27.782 28.180 28.276
1994 27.915 28.379 28.678
1995 28.110 28.638 28.807
1996 28.218 28.714 28.929
1997 28.437 28.942 29.205
1998 28.779 29.288 29.511.
1999 29.151 29.670 29.864
2000 29.537. 30.059 30.252
2001 29.838 30.364 30.557
2002 30.202 30.731 30.923
2003 30.611 31.145 31.351
2004 31.057 31.596 31.808
2005 31.535 32.079 32.296
2006 32.039 32.590 32.812
2007 32.572 33.130 33.357
2008 33.126 33.691 33.923
2009 33.688 34.253 34.470
2010 34.286 34.857 35.072
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: 8.02
C-3
--,
.:;
.,.
"'
~
-
~
APPENDIX C
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
OCS Sale 87
TABLE C.5.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 35.621 35.621 35.621
1982 37.005 37.005 37.005
1983 36.769 36.769 36.769
1984 39.351 39.351 39.351
1985 41.301 41.322 41.331
1986 43.334 43.376 43.382
1987 42.116 42.157 42.167
1988 42.591 42.656 42.669
1989 42.362 42.471 42.489
1990 42.130 42.263 42.310
1991 41.339 41.464 41.490
1992 40.823 40.987 41.012
1993 40.465 40.770 40.862
1994 40.385 40.699 40.820
1995 39.976 40.303 40.407
1996 39.591 . 39.919 40.040
1997 39.424 39.758 39.895
1998 39.195 39.533 39.674
1999 38.982 39.320 39.460·
2000 38.831 39.168 39.307
2001 38.697 39.029 39.167
2002 38.578 38.905 39.037
2003 38.47.9 38.801 38.928
2004 38.412 38.729 38.856
2005 38.371 38.684 38.810
2006 38.356 38.665 38.793
2007 38.357 38.662 38.792
2008 38.371 38.673 38.804
2009 38.400 38.697 38.827
2010 38.441 38.735 38.862
SOURCE: REGIOf-IAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21183
VARIABLE: G.02
C-5
l,
APPENDIX C L
\ •. MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases [ OCS Sale 87
TABLE C.6
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION L TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
t'
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 57.887 57.887 57.887 t
1982 61.256 61.256 61.256
1983 62.533 62.533 62.533 ( 1984 65.444 65.444 65.444
1985 68.513 68.605 68.641
1986 71.773 71.988 72.034 [ 1987 72.597 72.909 72.966
1988 72.837 73.239 73.323
1989 73.301 73.913 74.028
1990 74.003 74.807 75.089 r~ 1991 74.346 75.107 75.303 \ '
1992 74.136 75.105 75.236
1993 74.996 76.008 76.236 .-~
1994 76.559 77.617 78.063 L 1995 77.079 78.246 78.631
1996 77.715 78.914 79.347 ,--,
1997 78.499 79.752 80.278 L 1998 79.272 80.583 81.120
1999 80.112 81.46 7 81.998
2000 81.065 82.468 83.010 [ 2001 82.082 83.527 84.087
2002 83.105 84.589 85.160
2003 84.134 85.656 86.250 [ 2004 85.260 86.819 87.444
2005 86.473 88.068 88.717
2006 87.793 89.422 90.095 r' 2007 89.190 90.852 91.550 L 2008 90.680 92.375 93.094
2009 92.259 93.982 94.709
2010 93.923 95.669 96.392 L
SOURCE: REGIO!JAL MODEL SIMULATIONS l '
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.09 r ,
L
C-6 r-
'-'
L
-,
_j
="
~
~
-
~
-'
APPENDIX C
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
ocs Sale 87
TABLE C. 7
FAIRBANKS CENSU;:; DIVISION
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 29.341 29.341 29.341
1982 31.539 31.539 31.539
1983 31.870 31.870 31.870
1984 33.615 33.615 33.615
1985 35.727 35.753 35.764
1986 37.701 37.761 37 .776
1987 37.109 37.191 37.209
1988 37.005 37.123 37.148
1989 36.794 36.986 37.021
1990 36.739 36.997 37.085
1991 36.421 36.659 36.735
1992 36.317 36.609 36.645
1993 36.684 37.069 37.148
1994 ·37.257 37.650 37.804
1995 37.461 37.889 38.051
1996 37.673 38.106 38 .·278
1997 38.015 38.459 38.660
1998 38.354 38.830 39.038
1999 38.740 39.226 39.436.
2000 39.202 39.698 39.906
2001 39.691. 40.195 40.403
2002 40.204 40.715 40.919
2003 40.74.4 41.262 41.461
2004 41.348 41.875 42.085
2005 42.007 42.543 42.763
2006 42.724 43.271 43.500
2007 43.485 44.043 44.283
2008 44.290 44.860 45.109
2009 45.142 45.731 45.990
2010 46.022 46.619 46.871
SOURCE: REGIONAL HODEL SIMULATIONS
CD8 7 . 3 B, CD8 7 . LN, AND CD8 7 . HN---CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: M.09
C-7
r
APPENDIX C [
' MAP Model Regional Projections, "-. Base Case and Impact Cases c ocs Sale 87
TABLE C. 8 [ FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
[
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE f 1981 4.928 4.928 4.928
1982 5.654 5.654 5.654 ( 1983 5.780 5.780 5.780 L 1984 5.919 5-.919 5.919
1985 6.498 6.522 6.531
1986 6.999 7.034 7.038 [ 1987 6.831 6.873 6.883
1988 6.713 6.763 6. 775
1989 6.802 6.894 6.911 L 1990 6.873 6.994 7.050
1991 6.972 7.056 7.076 Lee
1992 7.074 7.199 7.204
1993 7.162 7. 271 7.297 r-,
1994 7.222 7 ._339 7.419 L
1995 7.298 7.426 7.469
1996 7.356 7.473 7.528 L 1997 7.445 7.563 7.630
1998 7.563 7.679 7.735
1999 7.685 7.802 7.850 [ 2000 7.820 7.939 7.986
2001 7.938 8.058 8.106
2002 8.068 8.189 8.236
2003 8.210 8.333 8.384 f' 2004 8.364 8.488 8. 541 =
2005 8.528 8.654 8.708
2006 8.700 8.828 8.884 f'
2007 8.882 9.012 9.069 l 2008 9.071 9.203 9.262
2009 9.264 9.396 9.451 L 2010 9.467 9._601 9.655
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODE.L SIMULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r,
VARIABLE: 8.09 L
C-8
r~
LJ
L
-,
~·
-
~
·•
~
-"
.,
.,
~
"
~.;
APPENDIX C
MAP Model Regional Projections,
Base Case and Impact Cases
ocs Sale 87
TABLE C.9
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE
1981 10.955 10.955 10.955
1982 11.930 11.930 11.930
1983 12.237 12.237 12.237
1984 12.829 12.829 12.829
1985 13.598 13.591 13.590
1986 14.274 14.284 14.292
1987 14.341 14.364 14.368
1988 14.175 14.217 14.225
1989 13.974 14.030 14.041
1990 13.947 14.032 14.045
1991 13.852 13.956 14.001
1992 13.858 13.960 13.981
1993 14.287 14.443 14.459
1994 14.840 14.992 15.018
1995 15.138 15.309 15.386
1996 15.452 15.639 15.709
1997 15.780 15.975 16.053
1998 16.101 16.327 16.424
1999 16.458 16.692 16.799.
2000 16.852 17.097 17.202
2001 17.285· 17.538 17.643
2002 17.724 17.984 18.089
2003 18.169 18.438 18.535
2004 18.655 18.932 19.039
2005 19.174 19.461 19.577
2006 19.735 20.032 20.155
2007 20.322 20.630 20.761
2008 20.941 21.260 21.399
2009 21..598 21.93 7 22.090
2010 22.268 22.615 22.762
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: S.09
C-9
c
APPENDIX C r
' MAP Model Regional Projections, "· · .. Base Case and Impact Cases [ OCS Sale 87
TABLE C .l 0 r FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
[
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
BASE CASE CASE CASE f '
1981 13.459 13.459 13.459
1982 13.955 13.955 13.955 r-1983 13.853 13.853 13.853
1984 14.867 14.867 14.867
1985 15.631 15.639 15.643
1986 16.428 16.444 16.447 [ 1987 15.938 15.954 15.958
1988 16.118 16.143 16.148
1989 16.019 16.062 16.069 [ 1990 15.919 15.972 15.990
1991 15.598 15.647 15.657 t.c~
1992 15.385 15.450 15.460
1993 15.235 15.356 15.392 r-
1994 15.195 15.319 15.367 L
1995 15.025 15.154 15.196
1996 14.864 14.994 15.042 [ 1997 14.790 14.922 14.976
~
1998 14.691 14.824 14.880
1999 14.598 14.732 14.787 [ 2000 14.529 14.663 14.718
-
2001 14.468 14.599 14.654
2002 14.412 14.542 14.594
2003 14.364 14.492 14.542 [ 2004 14.329 14.454 14.505
2005 14.304 14.428 14.478
2006 14.289 14.411 14.462 c 2007 14.281 14.401 14.453
2008 14.277 14.397 14.449
2009 14.280 14.397 14.449 [ 2010 14.287 14.403 14.454
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS -[
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r· VARIABLE: G.09 L
C-10 r·
L
L
'
.,..,
~
="
~
-
,,
'
APPENDIX D
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D.l.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.471 0.655
1986 0.891 1.043
1987 -1.333 1. 593
1988 1.658 2.005
1989 2.588 3.074
1990 3.329 4.608
1991 2.949 3.608
1992 3.980 4.456
1993 3_656 4.499
1994 4.079 6.025
1995 4.637 6.060
1996 4.756 6.552
1997 5.077 7.260
1998 5.294 7.463
1999 5.505 7.625
2000 5. 712 7.878
2001 5.914 8.158
2002 6.099 8.400
2003 6.2.86 8.750
2004 6.466 9.071
2005 6.645 9.362
2006 6.819 9.646
2007 6.994 9.933
2008 7.167 10.210
2009 7. 271 10.281
2010 7.406 10.413
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.02
0-1
[
· .. APPENDIX D ['
' MAP Model Regional Absolute " Impact Projections [~
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D.2. [ }~CHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL EMPLOYHENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE l.
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000 [ 1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.330 0.460
1986 0.485 0. 539 6 1987 0.688 0.846
1988 0.858 1.043
1989 1.456 1.721 r· 1990 1.819 2.615
1991 1.411 1.678 Lo
1992 2.128 2.303 r··
1993 1.878 2.351 L 1994 2.155 . 3.370
1995 2.449 3.192
1996 2.420 3.466 r· 1997 2.582 3.822
1998 2.662 3.834
1999 2.736 3.856 [ 2000 2.800 3.915
2001 2.864 3.992
2002 2.916 4.041
2003 2.977 4.171 f 2004 3.041 4.298
2005 3.109 4.420
2006 3.181 4.544 r~
2007 3.258 4.679 (
2008 3.340 4.810
2009 3.383 4.808 L 2010 3.448 4.854
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD8 7 . HN'--CREATED
4/21/83 ['
VARIABLE: M.02 L
r·
t__,
D-2 L
-,
'
::;
""
J
J
~ -
l
;;
_,
APPENDIX D
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D.3.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.086 0.120
1986 0.122 0.136
1987 -o .152 0.187
1988 0.180 0.223
1989 0.331 0.392
1990 0.434 0.639
1991 0.308 0.379
1992 0.458 0.477
1993 0.398 0.495 -
1994 0.464 0.763
1995 0. 528 0.697
1996 0.496 0. 711
1997 0.505 0.769
1998 o. 508 0.732
1999 0.519 0. 713
2000 0.522 0. 715
2001 0.526 0. 720
2002 0. 530 0. 721
2003 0. 534 0. 740
2004 0.539 0.751
2005 0.544 0.761
2006 0.551 0. 772
2007 0.558 0.785
2008 0. 565 0.797
2009 0.565 0.782
2010 o. 571 0. 786
SOURCE: REGIONAL ~ODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21183
VARIABLE: 8.02
D-3
[
APPENDIX D I'
' MAP Model Regional Absolute " Impact Projections c OCS Sale 87
TABLE D.4. [ ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
r··
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE f .
1981 0.000 0.000 l
1982 0.000 0.000
[ 1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.223 0.310
1986 0.322 0.356 /'
1987 0.495 0.608 L
1988 0.613 0.742
1989 1.016 1.201 [ 1990 1. 252 1.797
1991 0.978 1.148 L·
1992 1.506 1.637
1993 1.175 1.459 r··
1994 1.378 2.173 L
1995 1. 595 2.063
1996 1. 596 2.306 [ 1997 1. 743 2.582
1998 1.816 2.624
1999 1.879 2.664 [ 2000 1.941 2. 725
2001 2.005 2.802
2002 2.059 2.861
2003 2.121 2.982 [ 2004 2.185 3.104
2005 2.252 3.219
2006 2.322 3.335 [ 2007 2.395 3.459
2008 2.473 3.580
2009 2.521 3.600 L 2010 2.583 3.647
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r· VARIABLE: S.02 L
,-
L..;
D-4
L
-,
_j
~
~
~
-
'
APPENDIX D
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D.5.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERJ.TMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.-000
1985 0.021 0.030
1986 0.041 0.048
1987 -o .041 0.051
1988 0.065 0.078
1989 0.109 0.128
1990 0.133 0.180
1991 0.125 0.151
1992 0.164 0.189
1993 0.305 0.397
1994 0.314 0.434
1995 0.326 0.431
1996 0.328 0.449
1997 0.334 0.471
1998 0.338 0.479
1999 0.338 0.478
2000 0.337 0.476
2001 0.333 0.470
2002 0.327 0.459
2003 0.321 0.449
2004 0.317 0.443
2005 0.313 0.439
2006 0.309 0.437
2007 0.305 0.435
2008 0.302 0.433
2009 0.297 0.427
2010 0.294 0.421
SOURCE: REGIOf-l'AL MODEL_ SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: G.02
0-5
[
APPENDIX D [
' MAP Model Regional Absolute " Impact Projections [ OCS Sale 87
TABLE D. 6_-
FAIRBANKS CEl~SUS DIVISION [ TOTAL POPULATION
(000) r·
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE c 1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000 [ 1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.092 0.128
1986 0.215 0.261 [ 1987 0.313 0.370
1988 0.403 0.486
1989 0.612 0. 728 [ 1990 0.804 1.086
1991 0. 761 0.957 L_,
1992 0.969 1.100
1993 1.012 1.241 r·
1994 1.058 1. 505 L
1995 1.167 1. 551
1996 1.199 1.632 [ 1997 1.254 1. 779
1998 1.311 1.848
1999 1.355 1.886
2000 1.402 1.945 [ 2001 1.445 2.005
2002 1.484 2.055
2003 1.523 2.116 [ 2004 1. 559 2.184
2005 1. 595 2.243
2006 1.629 2.301 c 2007 1.662 2.359
2008 1.695 2.414
2009 1.722 2.450
2010 1. 745 2.469 c
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL S H-fULATIGr-lS L CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r, VARIABLE: P.09
L
D-6
r·
L;
L
-,
,.
~
~
~
-
""
APPENDIX D
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D. 7
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.025 0.037
1986 0.060 0.075
1987 -o. 082 0.099
1988 0.118 0.143
1989 0.192 0.227
1990 0.258 0.346
1991 0.238 0.314
1992 0.292 0.327
1993 0.385 0.464
1994 0.393 0.547
1995 0.428 0.589
1996 0.434 0.606
1997 0.445 0.645
1998 0.476 0.684
1999 0.485 0.696
2000 0.496 0. 704
2001 0.505 o. 712
2002 0.511 0. 715
2003 0.518 0. 717
2004 0. 527 0.737
2005 0. 536 0.756
2006 0.547 0.776
2007 0.558 0.798
2008 0.570 0.820
2009 0.588 0.847
2010 0.597 0.849
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: M.09
D-7
~
APPENDIX D [
' MAP Model Regional Absolute '<
Impact Projections r' OCS Sale 87
TABLE D. 8 r FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
[
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
I 1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000 [ 1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.024 0.034
1986 0.034 0.038 L 1987 0.042 0.052
1988 0.050 0.062
1989 0.092 0.109 f' 1990 0.121 0.178
1991 0.085 0.104 l:
1992 0.125 0.130
1993 0.108 0.134 [ 1994 0.117· 0.197
1995 0.128 0.171
1996 0.117 0.172 L 1997 0.117 0.185
1998 0.116 0.172
1999 0.118 0.165 [ 2000 0.119 0.166
2001 0.120 0.168
2002 0.121 0.168
2003 0.123 0.174 [ 2004 0.124 0.177
2005 0.126 0.180
2006 0.128 0.184 r~
2007 0.130 0.187 l 2008 0.132 0.191
2009 0.132 0.187
[ 2010 0.134 0.188
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SH1ULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, M~D CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21183 r 0 VARIABLE: 8.09 L
r·
D-8 L;
L
[
L
r ' I L__:
I
L~
L
APPENDIX D
MAP Model Regional Absolute
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE D. 9
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
-0.007
0.010
-0.024
0.042
0.057
0.084
0.104
0.102
0.156
0.152
0.170
0.187
0.195
0.226
0.234
0.244
0.25~
0.260
0.2.69
0.278
0.287
0.297
0.307
0.319
0.339
0.347
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
-0.009
0.018
0.027
0.050
0.067
0.097
0.149
·0.123
0.172
0.178
0.247
0.257
0.274
0.323
0.341
0.350
0.359
0.366
0.365
0.385
0.402
0.420
0.439
0.457
0.492
0.495
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.38, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: S.09
D-9
r:
APPENDIX D [
· •.
' MAP Model Regional Absolute '· Impact Projections [ OCS Sale 87
TABLE D. 10 r FAIRB/t..NKS CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000) c
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE ~~
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000 l. 1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.008 0.012
1986 0.016 0.019 ~-,
1987 0.016 0.020
1988 0.026 0.031
1989 0.043 0.051 L 1990 0.053 0.071
1991 0.049 0.060 Lee
1992 0.065 0.075 r-
19-93 0.121 0.157 L 1994 0.124 0.172
1995 0.129 0.171
1996 0.130 0.178 [ 1997 0.132 0.187
1998 0.134 0.190
1999 0.134 0.189 [ 2000 0.133 0.188
2001 0.132 0.186
2002 0.129 0.182
2003 0.127 0.178 [ 2004 0.125 0.175
2005 0.124 0.174
2006 0.122 0.173 r·~.
2007 0.121 0.172 l
2008 0.120 0.171
2009 0.118 0.169 [ 2010 0.116 0.167
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 ro
VARIABLE: G.09 L
,~
D-10 I__;
L
:::.,j
-,
~
""'
~
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
ocs Sale 87
TABLE E.l.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.216 0.300
1986 0.389 0.456
1987 -o. 511 0.683
1988 o. 710 0.859
1989 1.099 1.306
1990 1.401 1.939
1991 1. 224 1.497
1992 1.619 1.813
1993 1.457 1. 793
1994 1.606 2.372
1995 1.807 2.361
1996 • 1. 832 2.523
1997 1.931 2.761
1998 1.989 2.803
1999 2.041 2.826
2000 2.089 2.881
2001 2.135 2.945
2002 2.172 2.991
2003 2 .2.06 3.071
2004 2.234 3.134
2005 2.259 3.183
2006 2.279 3.223
2007 2.296 3.261
2008 2.309 3.290
2009 2.299 3.251
2010 2.296 3.228
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87 .38, CD87 .LN, AND CD87 .HN-·-CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: P.02
E-1
[~
APPENDIX E [
·--MAP Model Regional Percent ' ..._
Impact Projections r· OCS Sale 87
TABLE E.2.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION [ TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(000) l.,
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
L 1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000 r·· 1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.266 0.371
1986 0.370 0.411 [ 1987 0.529 0.651
1988 0.664 0.807
1989 1.130 1:335
1990 1.413 2.031 [ 1991 1.092 1.299
1992 1.618 1.751
1993 1.404 1. 758 r··
1994 1. 599 2. 500 L
1995 1.802 2.348
1996 1. 766 2.528 [ 1997 1.864 2.759
1998 1.899 2.735
1999 1.927 2. 715
2000 1.945 2. 719 c 2001 1.963 2.737
2002 1.971 2.731
2003 1.981 2. 776 [ 2004 1.990 2.813
2005 1.998 2.841
2006 2.006 2.866 r 2007 2.015 2.894 L 2008 2.024 2.915
2009 2.008 2.854
2010 2.004 2.821 [
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS [
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83 r· VARIABLE: M.02
L
r;
L
E--2
L
--,
-,
""'
=4
~
= -
""'
~
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E.3.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.336 0.471
1986 0.443 0.495
1987 -0.566 0.698
1988 0.682 0.846
1989 1.241 1.471
1990 1.614 2.377
1991 1.132 1.391
1992 1.664 1. 733
1993 1.432 1.780
1994 1.661 2.732
1995 1.877 2.480
1996 1. 758 2 .S19
1997 1.777 2. 703
1998 1.767 2.542
1999 1. 779 2.446
2000 1. 767 2.420
2001 1. 764 2.412
2002 1. 753 2.388
2003 1. 7.44 2.417
2004 1. 735 2.417
2005 1. 726 2.414
2006 1. 719 2.411
2007 1. 712 2.410
2008 1. 706 2.407
2009 1.676 2.321
2010 1.665 2.291
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: 8.02
E-3
' ,_
APPENDIX E
Y~P Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E.4.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2.2 BBBL
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0;000
0.389
0.534
0.812
1.018
1.697
2.095
1.613
2.385
1. 794
2.072
2.352
2.305
2.465
2.515
2.543
2.567
2. 593
2.601
2.613
2.621
2.628
2.633
2.638
2.644
2.617
2.600
3.0 BBBL
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 541
0. 590
0.997
1.231
2.007
3.006
1.894
2.593
2.228
3.267
3.043
3.329
3.653
3.634
3.606
3.604
3.624
3.614
3.674
3.724
3.757
3.783
3.810
3.827
3.735
3.672
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: S.02
E-4
[
[
[
[
[
L
L
'
'
~
-,
=l
~ -
~
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E.5.
ANCHORAGE CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.051 0.072
1986 0.095 0.110
1987 -o. o96 0.120
1988 0.152 0.183
198.9 0.258 0.301
1990 0.316 0.427
1991 0.301 0.365
1992 0.401 0.463
1993 0.753 0.981
1994 0. 777 1.076
1995 0.816 1.078
1996 0.828 1.134
1997 0.848 1.195
1998 0.863 1.222
1999 0.868 1.227
2000 0.867 1.225
2001 0.859 1.215
2002 0.848 1.189
2003 0.835 1.167
2004 0.825 1.154
2005 0.815 1.145
2006 0.805 1.139
2007 0.796 1.135
2008 o. 787 1.129
2009 0. 774 1.112
2010 o. 765 1.095
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD8 7. 38, CD8 7. LN, AND CD8 7. HN---CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: G.02
l!:-5
1:
APPENDIX E [
' MAP Model Regional Percent "·
Impact Projections [ OCS Sale 87
TABLE E. 6
FAIRBM~KS CENSUS DIVISION [ TOTAL POPULATION
(000)
r-
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE [ 1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000 l--
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.134 0.187
1986 0.300 0.363 L 1987 0.431 0. 509
1988 0. 553 0.667
1989 0.835 0.993 r-1990 1.087 1.467
1991 1.024 1. 287 Li
1992 1.307 1.483
1993 1.350 1.654 r--
1994 1.382 1.965 L
1995 1.514 2.013
1996 1.543 2.100 [ 1997 1.597 2.266
1998 1.654 2.331
1999 1.692 2.354
2000 1. 730 2.399 [ 2001 1. 761 2.442
2002 1. 786 2.473
2003 1.810 2.515 [ 2004 1.829 2.561
2005 1.844 2.594
2006 1.855 2.621 r-~
2007 1.864 2.645 L 2008 1.869 2.662
2009 1.867 2.655
2010 1.858 2.629 L
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SII:WLATIOl.J"S L CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21183 f" VARIABLE: P.09
L
r-
E-6 L
L
--, .
--·
....,
-
---' -'
. ....,
-:o
,.,;Jl
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E. 7
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.071 0.103
1986 0.159 0.198
1987 0.221 0.268
1988 -0.318 0.386
1989 0. 522 0.616
1990 o. 701 0.942
1991 0.653 0.861
1992 0.804 0.901
1993 1.050 1.265
L994 1.054 1.467
1995 1.142 1. 573
1996 1.152 1.608
1997 1.169 1.697
1998 1.240 1. 785
1999 1.253 1. 796
2000 1. 265 1. 795
2001 1.272 1.795
2002 1.270 1. 779
2003 1.272 1. 759
2004 1.275 1. 782
2005 1.277 1.800
2006 1.279 1.817
2007 1. 283 1.836
2008 1.288 1.850
2009 1.303 1.877
2010 1.298 1.845
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, P~D CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: M.09
E-7
· ...
'· "·
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E.8
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.370
0.487
0.620
0. 747
1.352
1. 757
1.215
1. 770
1.511
1.618
1. 760
1. 592
1. 574
1. 535
1.532
1.519
1.513
1.501
1.492
1.483
1.475
1.467
1.461
1. 455
1.425
1.415
CASE
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.518
0. 544
0.764
0.927
1.603
2.584
1.497
1.838
1.878
2.728
2.349
2.333
2.485
2.277
2.151
2.123
2.111
2.084
2.116
2.115
2.112
2.109
2.108
2.105
2.013
1.984
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: B.09
E-8
[
[
I'
--Lo
[
[
E
L
I
L
L
-
,
='
--
~
~
APPENDIX E
MAP Model Regional Percent
Impact Projections
OCS Sale 87
TABLE E. 9
FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 -0.051 -0.064
1986 0.067 0.124
1987 -0.165 0.189
1988 0.296 0.351
1989 0.406 0.480
1990 0.603 0.699
1991 0. 749 1.079
1992 0. 736 0.885
1993 1. 094 -1.207
1994 1.023 1.198
1995 1.124 1.634
1996 1.211 1.661
1997 1.236 1.735
1998 1.403 2.004
1999 1.420 2.072
2000 1.448 2.074
2001 1.465 2.076
2002 1.468 2.063
2003 1.479 2.011
2004 1.488 2.062
2005 1.497 2.097
2006 1. 504 2.127
2007 1. 512 2.160
2008 1. 522 2.184
2009 1. 568 2. 277
2010 1. 558 2.222
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS
CD87.3B, CD87.LN, MJD CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21/83
VARIABLE: S.09
:::-9
[
APPENDIX E [
' MAP Model Regional Percent "
<. Impact Projections ["" OCS Sale 87
TABLE F..lO [ FAIRBANKS CENSUS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(000)
l ~
2.2 BBBL 3.0 BBBL
CASE CASE l_~
1981 0.000 0.000
1982 0.000 0.000 [ 1983 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000
1985 0.053 0.075
1986 0.099 0.115 [ 1987 0.101 0.126
1988 0.159 0.192
1989 0.271 0.315 [ 1990 0.331 0.447
1991 0.316 0.383
1992 0.421 0.486
1993 0.792 1.032 I
L 1994 0.817 1.132
1995 0.859 1.135
1996 0.873 1.195 [ 1997 0.895 1. 261
1998 0.911 1.290
1999 0.918 1.297 [ 2000 0.917 1.296
2001 0.910 1.286
2002 0.898 1.260
2003 0.886 1.237 [ 2004 0.875 1.224
2005 0.865 1.215
2006 0.855 1.210 L 2007 0.846 1.206
2008 0.837 1. 201
2009 0.823 1.183 [ 2010 0.814 1.166
SOURCE: REGIONAL MODEL SIMULATIONS L
CD87.38, CD87.LN, AND CD87.HN--CREATED
4/21183 r,
VARIABLE: G.09 L
E-10
r-
L:
L
APPENDIX F: MAP MODEL BASE CASE EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
In this appendix, we discuss the exogenous employment assumptions
which we used for the MAP model base case. Below, we briefly review
the employment assumptions for different projects and industries.
The tables which follow show the specific employment assumptions for
the entire projection period.
Trans-Alaska Pipeline (Table F-1)
Additional construction employment of 90 ~s assumed ~n connection
with construction of new pump stations. Constant operating
employment of 1,500 is assumed.
North Slope Petroleum Production (Table F-2)
Oil-related construction employment on the North Slope peaks at
2,400 in 1983 and 1986, falling to a steady level of 1,000 by 1991.
Operating employment grows to 2, 502 by 1983 and remains at this
level until 2010.
Upper Cook Inlet Petroleum Production (Table F-3)
Employment begins to gradually decline in 1983, falling to half of
the current level by 2010.
F-1
\ OCS Development (Tables F-4 -F-10)
Prior to the scheduled date of OCS Sale 83, eight other OCS sales
will have occurred, as follows:
Sale Location Date
46 Gulf of Alaska 1976
CI Lower Cook Inlet 1977
BF Beaufort Sea 1979
55 Gulf of Alaska 1980
60 Lower Cook Inlet 1981
71 Beaufort Sea 1982
57 Bering-Norton 1983
70 St. George 1983
83 Navarin Basin 1984
The first Gulf of Alaska sale (Sale 46) resulted in the drilling of
ten dry holes, and exploration has ended in these tracts.
Disappointing results of exploration on tracts leased in Lower Cook
tnlet (Sale CI) ·in 1977 also resulted, at least temporarily, in a
halt to exploration there.
In the base case, no future employment is assumed to result from
Sale 46. In add'ition, it is assumed that no recoverable resources
are discovered on tracts leased in Sales CI, 55, 57, 60 and 70; that
~s, such sales are assumed to generate only exploration employment.
We assumed development of oil resources for the remaining three
sales as shown below:
Oil (Billions Gas (Trillion
Sale Location Of Barrels) Cubic Ft.)
BF Beaufort Sea .75 1.625
71 Eeaufort Sea 2.38 1. 78
83 Navarin Basin 1.20 0
F-2
[
[_
[
L
[
n b;
[
[.
L
r ~
L
[
The assumption of gas development for sales BF and 71 ~s
inconsistent with the assumption that no gas pipeline is developed,
with North Slope gas being used instead for tertiary oil recovery.
However, the resulting overestimate of employment assumed for OCS
development would have a very small effect upon our base case
projections, and even less of an effect upon the projected impacts.
Exploration in 1982 on Sale CI is assumed to provide 38 jobs in
mining and 9 jobs in transportation. No su-bsequent employment is
provided by Sale CI. The levels of employment assumed for the
remaining six OCS sales are shown in Tables F-4 through F-10.
~-~
North Slope Gas (Table F-11)
A tertiary oil recovery project utilizing North. Slope natural gas
occurs in the early 1990s, with employment peaking at 2,000 in 1991
_j
and 1992.
Beluga Coal (Table F-12)
A coal export program from the Beluga fields is implemented
beginning in 1985. Construction employment peaks at 400 in 1987.
Long-run operations employment is 524.
[
Hydroelectric Projects (Tables F-13 and F-14)
Emplo:~ent in the Tyee and Terror Lake hydro~lectric projects peaks
at 520 ~n 1983. Ewp1oyment on other hydroelectric projects peaks at
725 i~ 1989-1992 .
. -·:-
' U.S. Borax Mine (Table F-15) ~--
·,Construction employment at the U.S. Borax Mine reaches a maximum of
500 in 1985. Long-run operating employment is 790.
Greens Creek Mine (Table F-16)
Employment is 315 for the period 1986-1996.
Red Dog Mine (Table F-17)
Construction employment at the Red Dog Mine near Kotzebue reaches a
maximum of 200 in 1986. Long-run mining employment is 448.
Other Mining (Table F-18)
Other mining employment is assumed to grow at a constant rate of one
percent per year, from 3,171 in.l980 to 4,274 in 2010.
Agriculture (Table F-19)
Agriculture grows at a moderate rate, with total employment
expanding from 183 in 1980 to 308 in 2000.
Logging and Sawmills (Table F-20)
Employment peaks at 3,222 in 1999 and then gradually declines to
2,776 by 2000.
Pulp Mills (Table F-21)
Employment declines gradually, at a rate of 1 percent per year, from
981 in 1981 to 747 in 2010.
F-4
[
L
l
L J
r
L
r
L
[
L
r·
L
r
L
[
L
r
L
Commercial Fishing -Other than Bottomfish (Table F-22)
Fishing employment remains constant at 7,123. Fish harvesting
employment remains constant at 6,363.
Commercial Fishing -Bottomfish (Table F-23)
The total U.S. bottomfish catch rises at a constant rate, rising to
the allowable catch by 2000. Most bottomfish processing takes place
offshore. Harvesting employment for Alaskans rises to only 733 by
2000, while processing employment rises to 971.
Federal Civilian and Hilitary Employment (Tables F-24, F-25)
Federal military employment remains constant at 23,323. Federal
civilian employment grows at .6 percent per year, from 17,800 in
1980 to 21,042 in 2000.
?.-5
' '
1-?:::o
1 '?·:: 1
1 :<::;2
19·:::~:
1'390
1'3'~ 1
1992
1 '3~?-~:
1 '3'3~
1997
1'?'3:::
1'399
2000
2 001
~002
2004
2005
2 ooo::.
200?
TABLE F-1.
TR~\S ALASKA PIPELINE
-T"._.------
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
....................... ....................
~I~H 0AGE EXDG
EXDG CON-TRANS-
STRUCTION PORTATION
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
0.090
0. 090
o. o·? o
0. 000
o. 000
0. 000
0. 000
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
O.OOCi
0. 000
0. 0 00
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
;) • 0 0 0
(1, 000
. o. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
c~. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. 000
i~/. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
1. 50 0
1.500
1a 5 I)(!
1. 50 0
1. 5 00
1 .. 5 00
1.500
1. 5 00
1. 50 0
1. 500
1. 500
1. 5 00
1. 5.00
1. 50 0
1. 50 0
1. 5 00
1. 50 0
1. 50 0
1. 50 0
1. 5 00
1.500
1. 5 00
1. 50 0
1. 50 0
1a50(1
1. 5 00
1. s 0 0
1. 50 0
1.'500
1.500
1. 50 0
r'
'I .
r
L
( ..
I
L
r h~
[
c
r b
[
L
r L
r~
L
[
c
F
[
[
1 9!::~:
1934
19:::5
1 ~:::9
1 ~9{1
1991
1 '3'32
1 '=.t'j3
1994
19'~5
19'36
1997'
1999
2000
2001
2002
2 004
.::0 OS
::oo-:.
::oo?
=· 01 0
TABLE F-2.
~OR1H SLOPE PETROLEill-l
TIIOUSAl\i'DS OF EMPLOYeES
......................
........................
>-1 I ::;H J..iAGE
E\OG CON-MINING
STRUCTIDN EMPLOYMENT
E1·1PLD'r'P1Et·~T
0.700
1. ~: 00
2. 000-
.::.400
1. :::0 0
2. 000
2.400
1.:::oo
1. 500
1. 500
1. 5 (I 0
1.000
1. 000
1.000
1. 0 00
1.000
1. 0 0 0
1. 0 0 (I
1. 0 00
1. 0 00
1. 0 00
1. 0 0 0
1.000
1.000
1. 0 00
1.000
1.000
i. 000
l. 0 0 0
1 • (i 0 0
l. (! 0 0
1.900
2. 1 0 0
2 .. ~: 0 0
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502 ----c:. ~~ uc
2.502
;~. 5 02
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502
2.502 ----c. :~uc
2. SOC'
2.502
2.502
2. so:.=:
2.502
2.502
~. ~ :-. ;-; ,-, .-. -.
i.,-;_..:. '-' ~:::.
1'?;::o
1'3::: 1
19:::2
1·9:::3
TABLE F-3.
UPPER COOK IXLET PETP.OLEUM
11-lOUSA ~TIS OF UlPLOYEES
:·] I Ti I f"11:3
:::r·1~='LO\'r·1 Er·iT
0. 7?:::
0. ??:=:
0. ?f:::
0. 75'~
0.740
........................ ......................
1 ;~ :::5 0 I 7 2 1
1 ·:;.:::6
1'3:::?
1 ·~::::::
i '3:::·:;.
1990
1991
19~2
1'~·:;.:~:
1994
19'?5
19'?.::.
1 '?9?
1 '?9:::
199'? I
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
.200'?
2010
o.? 0.3
0. :~·52
0. ~::~:5
o . .::.19
0. 504
o. 5:::9
0.574
0.560
i). 546
0.51'3
0. 5 06
0.493
0.4:::1
0.469
0.457
0.446
o. 4:::5
0.424
0.413
0.40:::
C:. 393
F-8
[
r L:
r ! .
r··
../
p
L
r
L
I ,
L
L
r
u
r.
=
L
TABLE F-4.
OCS FEDEF.:AL.,.··::;:TATE LEASE SALE O:::E:EAUFORT SEA)
··~···~·++~~···········~···~·····~••++++
1 '31::: 0
1 '3:?. 1
19:::2
1 '?:3:3
19:::4
1 9:?.5
. 19::;,;:,
1"?:::7
1 '?::::3
. 1 '?:::'?
13'?0
1991
1992
1·:;.·;..:;: t
1994
1995
1'3'?6
1'?97
1 '3'?:::
1'?99
2000
2001
2 002
200::::
2004
2005
200E.
2007
2 oo:::
2 010
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
······~·············· THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
·~•++++++••·········· .............
++++++++
HIGH l.o.IAGE
MINING EXOG CON-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION
Er·1PLO'·r'~1E~1T
0. 0 0 0
o. 066
0. 197
I). 1'37
0.230
o. 066
0. 112
0. 27E.
0.479
0.616
0.595
0.524
o.5cr.:::
0.4::::2
o. 43.5
0. 4:~::3
0.440
0.417
o. ::::·~:3
0. ::::9~3
0.394
1).::::1:::·
0. 2:::7
o. 25::::
0.224
o. 201
0. 157
(i. 13:::
(!. (11)(1
(1. 000
0.000
0.062
0. 1 ==::=:
0.135.
0. 211
0.150
0.::::05
0. ::::::::.:::
0. 466
0. 466
0. 155
0.155
0. 077
0.155
o. 155
0.077
0.022
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
' ~ ..
1 ·;.;::: 0
1'3f:1
1 9::::2
1 '?f:3
1984
1 '?:::5
1 .::,.:;..-. --· ·-·0
1 ·;,.::::'?
1 '?'? 0
1 '?'? 1
1'?'?2
1'?93
1'?94
1'?'?5
1 '396
1'?'?7
1'?98
2000
2 0 01
2002
2i)03
E: 0 04
2 Cr 1).5
2006
c:· 0 07
2 0 1):3
2 0 0'?
2010
TABLE F-5.
DCS S:t=:L E 55 <(;ULF OF RLP.:~:~:P.-)
~••+++-~+++~~·~··; ·~~
E~PLbYME~T ASSUMPTIONS
THCUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
E>::OG
MINING TRANS-
EMPLOYMENT PORT~TION
Et·1PLO'/i'1ENT
0. 000 0. 000
0.030 0.01:3
0. o:::: I) 0. 02::::
0. o::::o 0. 02::::
0. o::::o 0. 020
0.000 0.007
0. 00(1 0. 000
·o.-croo o.ooo
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. (1(1(1
0. 1)(11) 0. 000
o. 000 0. 000
0. (1(1(1 0. (1{10
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. 000
0. (1(1(1 0. 000
0. 000 0. 000
0. (r(rl) 0. 000
o. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. 000
0. (1(1(1 0. 000
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. (1(1(1
0. (1(1(1 0. 000
0. 000 0. (1(10
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000 0. (1(1(1
0. 000 0. 000
0. 000
Cr. 000
0. 0 C; 0
0. (1(1(1
oc S. SSX:
F-lO
r
[
I
~~
L
r ··'""
[
l
L
L
~-
. '
[
1 '3=::: 0
1 '?:::: 1
1 '?::::2
1 '?::::::::
1 9::::4
1'3=:::5
1·?::::6
1·::.:=:7
1'?::::·?
1 '?90
1 '?'31
1'?92
199:3
'1 994
1'~·~~
1'?97
1 99::::
1'~·~·~
2000
2001
:':002
2003
2 (I 04
2005
2006
2 0 07
2 o o::::
2 o o·:,.
2010
TABLE F-6.
DCS SA[E 57 <BERING/NORTON)
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS ...........................................
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
....................... +++ ........ +++ ................. ..................
LQI..J I .• JAGE
MINING EXOG CON-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION
E f•1PL 0\'1'1E f'i T
E>=:OJ3
Tt:;:Af'fS:-
F·OfHAT IOI"~
Er'1PLO'r'MENT
0. 0 00
0. 000
0. 0 00
0. 026
0. 056
o.o::::o
0. 000
0. 00'0
0. 0 00
I). 0 0 0
0. 00'(1
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 (I 0
0. 0 00
0. 000
o. 000
0. (1(1(1
0. 0 00
0. (!00
0. 000
o. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
I). 000
0. 000
0. 000
Cr. (1 I) 0
0. i:: I) 0
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 0 0 I)
o. 0 05.
0. 005
o. 000
0. 0 i) 0
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
·o.ooo
0. 000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
o. 0 0 I)
0. 000
0. (1(!(1
(!. 000
0. (1 0 (!
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.015
0. 0:31
0.016
0.000
-o. ooo
0.000
0.000
0. 00 0
0.000
0. 000
0.000
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 00 0
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 00 0
0. 00 0
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
ocs. 57X
.C-ll
1 '?::: 0
19:::1
19:::2
1 ·?:::::::
19:::4
19:::6
19:::7
1 '?:::'?
1 '?'? 0
1 '?'? 1
1'?'?2
1'?'?3
1'?'34
19'?5
1'?'?6
19'?7
1'?'?'3
2000
2001
2002
2Cuj:3
2004
2005
2006
2007
2(10'?
2 01 0
TABLE F-7.
DCS SALE 60 <LOWER COOK INLET>
·····~·~·~· .. ~······~~ .......
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS ....... ~··~·~··~ .....
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
······~••++++++++ .. ++
++++++++
·~··••++
LOW WAGE EXOG
~INING EXOG CON-TRA~S-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION PORTATION
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
0. 0 00
o. 000
o.o::::::::
o. o::n
0. 0'? 0
0. 075
0. 0:3:::
0. 0 0 0
o. 0 00
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
o. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
o. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
o. 000
o. 0 00
o. 000
o. 000
0.000
o. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
(1. 000
(l. 000
0. c 0 0
o. 0 0 0
0. 02:3
0. 0 0 0
o. oo6
0.000
o •. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 0 00
0.000
o. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0.000
0.(1(1(1
o. 000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 00'?
0.026
o. o:~:~:
0. 017
J). 00'3
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 00 0
0. 00 0
0. (I 0 0
0. 00 0
1). 000
0. 00 0
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 00 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 00 0
0. 000
('CS.bo;<.
~--12
[
C
c
L
L
r L
~-
L
_.J
1 '?.:::(I
1'?.::: 1
1 1?:::2
1 '?::::~:
1 '?:34
1·?:::5
J. ·:.·:?,f ..
1 "?:::?
1 '?.::::::
• '?:::·? !
1 '?'? i)
1 '?.'?. 1
1 ·:. .:; ·=· .... .. ·L...
1 . .:, . .:::; ·:.
-· ... ·_.1
1 S".?-4
1 ·::: .:, c:-
... -· ._1
1 .-.. -....
~ ~'=·
1'?'37
1 ·:. ·:. .::, .. · -· ·-·
1 '?'?'?
c:OOO
2 001
2 (1(12
2003
2(104
2005
2006-
2007
~ .. oo:::
..::00'?
2 01 0
TABLE F-8.
OCS SALE 70 <ST.GEORfE)
..................... -........ ~ • I lo 4 ,·..: .,_._+-++-+-~
~MPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
•+-+-+++++••! I~~ ( li I I It
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES. . .
f'1In1t-1G
E t·1 P L 0 'r' 1'1 E t'i T
0. 000
0. (1 0 0
0. 000
0. 050
0. 064
0. 072
Cr. 06-5
0. 044
0. 000
I) • 000
0. 000
0. 000
0 . 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0 . 000
1). Cr 0 0
0. (II) (I
0. 000
0. 000
o~ 000
0. 000
(I • 000
0. 000
C! • C:OO
1). (1(:(!
(I • (! (1 (I
0. 000
E>=:OG
TF.:ANS-
F'DRTRTIOH
E r·1F' L 0 'r' t1 E l'iT
-0 .• (!(I (I
0. 000
0. 000
0. 02::::
0. 037
0. 046
0. j··j·~ _r._ .... ·.
0. 0 o:::
0. 000
0 . 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0~ 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
,-,
'··· 00(1
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 0 (1 0
0. 0 (l (I
0. (I (l 0
0. 000
0 CS".?~·L.
'\ .. TABLE F-9.
THOUS~NDS OF EMPLOYEES
+++++++~+-+++-+--++ ••• ' j ..
.............. ~.......-
LOW WAGE EXOG
MINING EXOG CON-TRANS-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION PORTATIDN
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
------------------------------
1 ·:;: :::: 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . (I 0 0 0 . (I 0 0
1 ·:;.-;::: 1 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 I) 0 0 . 0 0 0
1 '? :::: 2 0 . (I 0 0 (I • 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0
1983 0.000 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.037 0.000
1~85 0.032 0.000 0.007
1·?.::::s. o.o.s2 o.oocr o.o17
1987 0. 053 0.000 0.018
1 ·?. :::: :3 0 • G ~· 2 0 • 0 0 0 0 • 0 1 7
1 ·?.::::·;. 0. 0 0 (I 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 (I
1'?':?0 0. 000 0. 076· 0. 000
1 '? '? 1 1 . 2 0 5 0 • 0 7 7 0 . 0 0 (I
1992 1.353 0.035 0.090
1993 1.393 0.000 0.247
1~~4 1.393 0.000 0.363
1995 1.408 0.000 0.363
1 9 9 6 1 • 1 7:::: 0 . 0 0 0 0 . :;: 6 3
1997 0.970 0.000 0.363
1998 ·0.970 0.000 0.363
1999 0.985 0.000 0.363
2000 0.996 o. 000 0.363
2001 0.99~ 0.000 0.363
2002 0.996 0.000 0.363
2003 0.996 0. 000 0.363
2004 0.996 0.000 0.363
2005 0.996 0.000 0.363
200.-:. 0. 9'?6 o. 000 0. 363
2007
2008
·200~
2 01 0
:"'\ c \ ~,, ,' {/! ._,/ _, • I
0. '?.'?6
0. ·;;.·?-::.
0. ·;:·:.:.:.
0. ·;.;·:;.-.:;.
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
F-14
(I • :::: .:. ::::
0. ::::.:.3
0. :;:.:.3
r~
I .
[
[
[
L
[
L
.I'
L
I -
I
L
L
~-
,-~
~
~
__;j
~-""-
--~
Table F-10
OCS Sale 83 (Navarin Basin)
Employment and Revenue Assumptions
(Thou~ands of Employees, Millions of Current $)
LOW WAGE EXOG STATE
EXOG COt'.!-MINING TRANS-PROPERTY
STRUCTION EMPLOYMENT PORTfHION TAX
EMPLOYt1ENT EMPLOYI.1ENT RE\/ENUE ----------------------------------------
1980 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1981 0.000 0.000 o.ooo o.ooo
1982 0.000 0.000 o.ooo 0.000
1983 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1984 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1985 0.210 -0.000 0.000 0.000
1986 0.000 0.120 0.293 0.287
1987 0.000 0.320 0.380 0.309
1988 0.000 0.360 0.398 0.332
1989 0.263 0.360 0.398 0.357
1990 0.131 0.240 0.345 0.383
1991 0.593 0.330 0.393 0.412
1992 4.371 0.789 o;5o9 .0 .443
1993 4.668 1. 506 0. 7-52 0.476
1994 0.890 2.534 0.933 173.610
1995 0.297 3.114 0.983 178.877
1996 0.000 3.367 0.983 183.958
1997 0.000 3.39f 0.983 188.795
1998 0.000 3.196 0.983 193.323
1999 0.000 2.906 0.983 197.468
2000 \ 0.000 2.480 0.983 201. 147
2001 0.000 2,152 0.983 204.267
2002 0.000 2.040 0.983 206.724
2003 0.000 2.040 0.983 208.401
2004 0.000 2.040 0.983 209.166
2005 0.000 2.040 0.983 208.873
2006 0.000 2.040 0.983 207.360
2007 0.000 2.040 0.983 204.446
2008 0.000 2. OL!·O 0.983 199.927
2009 0.000 2. 040 0.983 193.581
2010 0.000 2.040 0.983 185.158
SOURCE: l"iAP t10DEL CASE OCS.83M
t./A~:IABLES: EI'·KNX2 E!"iP9 Et·iT9X F:PPS
F-15
' "·
1'3:30
1 '3:::: 1
1 '3::::]
1 3::::4
1 '?::::::::
1 '_?::::'?
1'3'30
1 '3'? 1
1'?'32
1'?93
1'?'?4
1'3'?5
1'396
1'?9::::
1'?9·~
2000
2001
2.002
2 0 0:3
2004
2005
2 oot::,
200?
:=: oo::::
:::oo'?
2 010
TABLE F-11.
:\OR1B SLOPE GAS
T'rlOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
f'1 I r-1 I r-~G
E l·i F' L 0 \' r·1 E t·1 T
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 0 0
(1. 000
C!. 000
0. 000
0. 000
o. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
0.500
1. 0 00
2. 000
2. 0 00
1. 0 0 0
0.500
o. 000
0. 0 00
o. 000
o. 000
o. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0.00(1
0. 0 00
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
o. 000
o. 000
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
......... ~.
••••••••
SC0~CE: MAP ~JDEL CASE NSO.TRC
F-16
[
r I .
[
r·-
·t L
L
[-
r·
L
r·
L
L
1 ·?.:::: 0
1 ·?:::: 1
1 '?:::2
1 ·?::::~~!
1 ·:.-·:=:4
1 ·~:::5
1 '?:::f,
1 .-.... -. ..., ::-vr
1 '?::::=:
1 ·:.-~=:·?
1 '?'?. 0
1 '?. '? 1
1 .:, ·:. ·::. .. -.. -L-
1 -~·?::::
1 ·:.·::....1 ..... · .
1 '?'?5
1'3'?.6
1 ·~"?7
1 ·?·j:=:
1 '?'?'?
2:)(11)
2001
c·oo2
2 (I 0:::
2 (I 04 -005 -:_
___ ; . (I (16 .:::
::, 007 .... . 0 (t:=: '--0(1'~ .:. . (! 1 0 .:.
,.,_ r 1 ... '
TABLE F-12.
BELUGA COAL DEVELOPMENT
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
~·-~ ................. ' ' '· ' • ' •• '-+-+-
T 1-: Qi_l"~: Firm:~~ 0 F E r. P L 0 'r' E E S
+ .................... ~ .. +~ ~~++--+-+++++-
+ ++ +-+ + +-+-
++•+-++++-
LOi.r.l i.o.IAGE
· MINING EXOG CON-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION
E><OG
TF.:A t"fS:-
POF.:TATION
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
---· -------------~-------------
0. (I 0 !)
0. 0 (!(I
0. I) (li)
0. 000
0. (1(!(1
0. 00(1
0. 000
0. 000
Ci. 000
0. 0 00
0. ·=· 1 '--0
cr. 4 1'?
o. A 1 '? ....
0. 4 1 '3
0. 4 1 '?
0. 41 9
0. 4 1 9
0. 41 '?
0. 4 1'?
0. .. l 9 ...
0. .. 1 9
(1. . • 1 '3 -
0 • ... . ·~ ...,. J. -·
(I .. . '3 ..,. l
1). ~ l 9
0. .., l ?.
(i. 4 1 '? ,·, ·'. 4 1 .::,
(1 • ... 1 ·::J ..
(! • ~ . .::, ' .
C; ~ l '3 .
. O"~T
-0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. (1 (1 0
0. 1 50
0. ::::oo
0. 400
0. :;:so
0. 200
0. 1 00
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0.-000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. l)(i(l
0 . 000
0 . (r 00
0. 00 0
0 . 0 (1 (I
0. (II) 0
0. (J 00
0. (I (1 0
0. (I (1(1
;·, ·-·· (I 1:! 0
0 . (! (: (I
._," (i (i (I
;:::"_.,;
0. (1(1(1
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
·o. o o o
. o·. o o o
0.000
0. 0 0 0
0. 05:2:
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 1 05
0. 105
0.105
0. 1 05
0.1o:,
0. 1 05
0.105
0.105
0 .. 1 05
I). 1 (15
C!. 105
0.105
··, TABLE F-13. '
9~-\LL HYTIRO PROJECTS
~HOU:ANDS JF EMPLOYEES ................................
: r;;·ucr ron
cf•1F' L 0 \' r·1 En T
++-+-<>++++ ..........
1 ·3::;: 0 0. 0 Et 0
1 9:::: 1 !) • 0 0 0
i '?:::?
1 '?e:::
1 '?30
1'?'31
1 ·~92
1'393
1994
1996
1997,
1 '39:::
1 '39'?
2000
..:: 001
2002
2 oo:::
2004
.=: 005
2006
. 2007
2 010
o. 125
0.250
0.21:3
0.250
o. 163
0. 4 01
• ~, -,..-11:"
1_1. 1' ~--·
0. '?25
0.725
0.?25
0. ;:r:.:::::
o. 000
(!. 000
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
o. 0 00
Ct. 000
o. 0 00
o. 0 00
0.000
0. 0 00
Cr. 000
0. 000
c. 000
0. 0 (I 0
u. 0 00
MODEL CASE SHP. 082
F-13
r· l '
1 ._-
,-.
L
[
[
L
L
r
L
L
~·
[
TABLE F-14.
TIEE A"<'D TERROR LAKE HYDRO. PROJECTS
............................................................
T~DUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
.......................................... .............. ............
>-i E;ri ;_,_iAGE
E.=<JG C!Jr-l-
S:TPUCT IOt-1
Et·1PLO\'t·1Er-JT
1 9:::: 0 0. 0 1 0
1 9::::1 0 0 043
i9e2 o.1?9
l '?-::::3 0. 52 0
1 9::::4 0. 1 '35
i 9::::5 0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
1 '3:::::::: 0. 000
19::::'3 0.000
1 '3'3 0
1 '?91
1'?92
19'33
1994
1 '3'35
1996
1 '?9? l
199::::
19'39
2000
2001
2002
-, , .. , z•:·-,
.:. I) 1_1.;.
0. 000
0. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
2 004 0. 0 00
.::005
2006
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
2 0 07 (i. 0 (! 0
:::0 Cl':::
200'3
2 01 u 0. 000
F-:19
' '\
TABLE F-15.
U. S. E:OF.:S:o<
~MPLDYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
+++++~++~~~. '' '·~
THOUSANnS OF EMPLOYEES.
+++•-+-•+-+++--<--+-~~· • ' j ' t-
++-+-+ + +++..·
•+-+--+-+~-
LO!J.I l.·.IAI:::E
MI0ING EXOG CON-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION
E r·W L 0 \'ME 1'1 f.
1 ·:::::.: ,-, 0. 01 2 I). 0 0 0
1 ·? :~: 1 0 • 0:::: 0 I) • 0 0 0
1 ·::-e 2 o . o 4 1 o . o o o
1 '? :~: :3 0 . 0 4 l . 0 . 04 0
1 ·?:::4 0. 05:3 0. ::::.s 0
1·?:::5 o.os:=: o.5oo·
1 ·;,-::: 6 0 • 0 5 ::: 0 • 4 0 0
1987 0.428 0.300
1988 0.790 0.000
1989 0. 790 0.000
1990 0.790 0.000
1 "?'? 1 (1. 7 '? 0 0. 0 0 0
1992 0.790 0.000
1993 0.790 0.000
1 '?'?4 t
1'?'?.5
1 '?'?f.
1"?'?7
1 '?'?:::
2000
2 !) (i 1
2002
c: c: o ::::
2004
2 (1 (15
200~.
2 (1 07
.:· (1 (l :?.
2 (: (:•?
0.790
0. ?'?I)
0. ?'? 0
0.790
0.790
0. ?'? 0
0.7'?0
0. 7'?0
(!. 7 '? 0
0. 7'? (1
(i. 7'?0
0. ?·? 0
0.790
0. 7'? 1)
0. 7'?0
0. 7'?0
F-20
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
o. 000
0.000
0. 000
0. 0 0 0
(1. (1 0 0
0. 0 0 0
0. 000
0. (I (i (l
(1. (1 (1 0
I). (i (I 0
0. 000
(! • (! (: (I
(1 • (: (! (!
0. (: (1 (I
0. C;(i(i
[
r·
I
t
,.
L
[
[
t
L
[
[
r·
L
L
-~-
TABLE F-16.
GRES"JS CREEK MINE.
•••••••••••••••••
f~OUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
•••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••• ••••••••
r·1 I ti I ti G
C:t·1F'L 0'/t·lEI'iT
1'3!30 0. 000
1 '3:::: 1 0 • 0 0 0
1'382 0.000
1 '?:::::3 0. 0 0 0
1 ·?::::4 0. 0 00
1 '3::::5 0. 0 0 0 -
19::::6 o. 315
1 ·?!:::? 0. 315
1'388 0.315
1 ?::::·;:« 0 • .:: 15
1'3'30 0.315
i '3 9 1 0 • ::: 1 5
19'32 0.315
13'33 0. 315
1'?'34 o~315
1 '3'35
1'3'36
199:3
19'3'3
2000
2001
0.315
0. :::15
0. 000
0. 0 00
0. 0 00
0. 0 0 0
0.01)0
2002 0. 000
2003 0. 000
2004 1}. 000
:.:::005 0. 0 00
~OOE. 0.000
2007 C!. 000
2 00:3 0. 000
2 0 0'3 0. 0 0 0
2010 0. 000
OURCE: MAP MODEL CPS~ ~rM noo
F-:21
'· "·
1 ·?:::o
1 '.? ::: 1
1 ·;:::2
1 '.?!:::4
19:::5
1·'.?:::6.
1'?:.::7
1 '?:::·_::.
1 ·:;.·:: n
1 '?'? 1
1 ·~·:,;~ -· ... .
1 .-.,-.r;::
~~--· 1 ·~·:.,::,
1 '?'?7
1 '3·?:.::
E:OOO
2 (! 01
2002
21)0:~:
2 0 (:4
2 (i 05
2 oo.:.
2007
2 (I (I :j
2 01 0
TABLE F-17.
::::r~FL.. G\'iiENT A:S:SUMPT I OHS
.... _.._........._ .. ' I • ' t ' ' E ' ••• j ..
TH~USANDS OF EMPLOYEES
LD!JJ :_._lAG£
MI~ING EXOG CON-
EMPLOYMENT STRUCTION
E r·i;:·L 0'/t'iE l""i T
0.025 0.000
0.025 0.000
0. 025 0. 000
0.025 0.000
0 • (1 :;: 5 0 • 1 0 (I
0. (121 0. 1 50
0.026 0.200
0. 021 0. 15 0
0.44:?. 0.000
0 . 4 4 ::: 0 • 0 0 0
(1 • ~ ...; ::: 0 • (! 0 0
(! • .:; 4 ::: (I • 0 (l 0
0 • 4 4 ::: (r • !) (I (l
0 • 4 4 ::: 0 • 0 0 0
0.44::: 0.000
0 • 4 4 ::: 0 . 0 0 0
0.448 0.00(1
(I • 4 4 ::: 0 . 0 0 0
0.44::: 0.000
o . "'" 4 ::: o . o ci o
(I • 4 4 ::: 0 • 0 (l (I
(i • 4 "' ::: 0 • 0 0 0
0 . ~ 4 ::: 0 • 0 0 0
0 • .:; 4 ::: 0 • 0 0 0
0 • ..; 4 ::: 0 • 0 0 0
0.44:?. 0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 0(1(1
0. 01)0
0. 0 0 0
:~-2 2.
r·
L
[
[
r·
L
L
["
r
L
L
__ ;
1'?:::2
1 -:=--::::.::
1'?:::4
1 ·:=-==:s
1'?:::6
1'?::::3
1 '?:::'?
1'?'?0
1 '?'?1
1'?'?2
1'?'?:3
1 '?'?4
1'~'?5
1·::;.·::;~
1'?'?7
1 '?'?:::
1'?'?'?
2000
2001
2002
::· (li) 3
2 OC14
2 (! o.s
2 o o~.
2 0 i)7
2 (' (r"?
2 (i: (I
TABLE F-18.
!JTHEP MINHiG.
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
THOUSA~DS dF EMPLOYEES
........ ~. I ' ' •• I ' ..... I I ..
. t·i I t·{ I n 1:;
El"lPLO'r'HENT
·~:. 1 71
::::. 20:3
:3. ;:_·:~:s
·:::. ::::(I 0
·:· ·:· ·:··:· ·-· . ·-· ·-· ·-'
·:::. 4 0 0
:3 .. 4E··~
::.50:3
-. , ""c
·-=· • '=·..,. ·-·
::::. 71'?
~3. 756
4. 107
4.1'?(1
.:; .. C:74
?-_2 3
' ~.
1 -;;::: 0
1'?::: 1
1 ·?:::::::
1 '?:?.4
1 -;;:::.;:.
1'?:37
1 ·::::::-?
1 ·:; .:; n
1 ?'? 1
or ·:.· .::; "':• ~ .-· •. ·-·
1'?'?4
TABLE F-19.
Af3F.: I CUL TUP.AL
E~~LDYMENT ASiUMPTIONS
THOUS~NDS OF EMPLOYEES
P.GRI-
CUL TUF.:E
Et~PLO\'HEr~T
I). 1 :;:::;:
0. 1 :;:::::
0. 1'?4
0.20:3
0.211
0.21'?
0 • ;;: ::;: '3
0.250
0. 2E.3
0. c.·?~.
0. 2'? 1
0.306
0. ~~:25
0. ~;.:;:=:
1 .-.. -.c '
::'" ~--' 0. ::::~.5
0. -:;::;:;:·?
0. 414
1 '?'?6
1 '?'??
1 ·:=t·=::·~
0.442
0.474
~-, C"' ~~·=·
'•'. -· · ... ··-·
2 (~ f) 1 0 • 5 2 7
2 0 (;2
2005
2 c~o~.
2007
0 .. Sf.:::
0 .. s :::·?
1) • .:. 1 1
0 0 ,:.~;:4
(!. 6. ~. 0
I) • .:. :;:: -=·
C.772
(I.(;:)
;: -..:.:.-+
[
[
[
L;
r L~
[
r
L
L
--,
r~-;
I
r--~
1 ·?::: 1
1"3:::2
. 1 '3'? 0
1'3'31
1·~·~;=·
TABLE F-20.
LOGGDJG A \1) SAivf.-1ILLS
********************
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
********************** .........
LQi_,J :_,JAGE
E><0 1:3 r·1At-1U-
FACTUF.: I t-113
Et·1PLO\'r·1ENT
1. 654
2. 1).37
2.325
2.657
3.11'3
3.214
~:. 214
~:. 21:::
3.21:::
••••••••
1 '?'34 :::. 21 :::
1 ~·~c::; 3. 21 '?
1'396
1'3'37
19'3:::
1'3'3'3
2000
2 001
2002
2 oo:;:
200?
2 00'?
2 01 0
:::.21'3
3.21'3
3.221
~:. 222
:=:. 2 02
3. 106
2. '303
2. ·::;::o
2.??0
.::.~70
-::. 7?4
C:. 77.:-
r--25
'· ......
i '3:::: (I
1'?:::: 1
i •::0•:• :r
L -··=-•·-•
1'3::::4
1'3::::5
1 '?::::::;:
1 "?::::"?
1'?90
19'?1
1 '3'32
1·~·~:::
1 9'?5
1996
TABLE F-21.
PULP MILLS
7HOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEE~
~··············~· .. ··· ..................
::>=: 0':3 ''1 A !·iU-
~Fie TUF.: I 1·1(;
!::t·1F'LO\'t·1ENT
0.9::::2
0. ?·::: 1
0. '? :::o
0.9~:::0
o. '?70
0.960
0.951
0.'?13
0.'?04
o. ~=:~~s
..........
1 ·~·~? ~ -· -· I 1.
0. ::::60
0. ::::51
1 ·3·:;·~
2000
2 001
2 002
.:::oo-3
2004
=:oos
.:::006
2 (107
2 C10::;:
2010
-------..·.-'----
0. :::::::4
0. ::::1 ::;:
(1.::::10
0. :::02
j~f. 770
0.?47
r-:: s
[
L
[
[
[
L
L
~-
TABLE F-22.
COr1 r-1 EF:C I F.L F I ::HI t-~1 3 <r·mri-.E:OT T OMF I :S:H)
~+-•~~---~~ f 1•1 I ••~ I If I(+++~~
EMPCOYMENT.ASSUMPTIDN±
..._..._.._.._~ t I f I I f I j I I j • ( ~
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
+ ••++~ f • f • t ( ••• ( • ( ....
+++-+++++-
. LOI.t.l !_,_!AGE
1 ·;::::: 0
1 ·:;:::: 1
1 ·::·:::2
1 ·:;· ::: :~:
1 .:.,.:;,c:-... ·-· ·-'
1 ·;:::::?
1 ·:::::::3
1 ·;:.-:::9
1'?'? 0
1 ·:.:·:;-1
1'3'?3
1'?'?4
1 ·::-:.-.:.
1 ·:;·??
1'::<'?:::
~·ooo
;:· (1 0 1
;:.·(rOC'
2 (! o::::
2 (!04
~· 005
2 (l (:~.
c..·(: 07
201(1
EXDG MANU-FISH
FACTURING HARVESTING
EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
';" oil .-,.-.
... ..!. c.-:.·
"7 011! ·:··':·
t • ..!. L-·-·
""":' oil .-•• -. , •• .!.. c_.;.
? • 12:~:
7. 12:~:
7. 12:~:
7. 12::::
7. 12:3
7. 12:~:
'7 • ·:··:· J.lL-·-·
7. 123
7. 1 c::~:
';" ~ .-.. -. ,· • J. c_.;.
~ . ·:··:·
I • .!_ 1._ ·-'
7. 12:~;
~ ... -,.-,
( . ~ ~.;.
~ . ·:··:·
I a ~ L-·-•
~ 1 =··:· I • ""' :,__ ·-'
;-. -. -. , .. ;, ::_._:.
7. :2::::
~ 'I .-.--. , .• ~ c.._:.
7. 123
f,. :~:~.:~:
,:. . :::: ~· :~:
6. :~:.:.:;:
~ .• ·:;:6:3
r:. . :~: r:. :::
~ .. ::::~.:;:
-: .. :~: r::. :;:
r--L. 7
\...
~ ·:: ·=· ·:· .... -·-··-·
., .-.. -,.-,
..L ::'·:· ·=·
1'?'?0
1?'?1
1'?'~7 \
1 ·~·?~=:
1 '?'3'~
2000
2 001
2002
2 (:1)4
_=: C'05
.= 010
TABLE F-2 3.
.......................
~~JUSANDS 3F EMPLOYEES
................................................ .................. ................
LC:i .. .i , .. .!At:3E
=r>-~ E':<Oi3 r·1Ar·JU-
~ARVESTING FACTURING
~MPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT
0. 000
1). (I :3 0
0. o::: 1
!) • 1 o:::
o. 136
0. lEA
o. u::1
0.216
o. 22'31
Oa245
0. 2E.E.
0. 2'32
0.421
(1. 4::::::
0.5?2
0. ~.7:=:
0. 7::::::::
0. 7 .::::;:
!).7::::::
(i. ?:;::~:
!-I ~ :•·:•
,_. • I ·-• -'
0. 7.::::;:
0. 7::::.;:
0.000
o. 0 02
0. 0 04
0. 005
o. 006
0. 00'3
0. 012
0. 016
0. 022
o. 02?
0.042
0. os:::
o. 07 1~
0. 1 o:::
0.14:::
!) • 2 02
0~~ 27E.
0. ::=:?:::
0.517
0.971
0. '?71
0.9?1
o. '?? 1
0.'?71
0.9?1
0. 97.1
0.971
0.911
U.'?71
--• -· ¥ - -• ,-··"I T -. l__j C'" :0.-' i·< · ... • =•
r
r :
[:
[
['
l
L
\
L
L
[_'
L
L
_ _;
1 '3::: 0
19:::1
l9:::J
13;::4
19::::::
+ -;:.:::'?
1 ·;·::. rt
1'3'31
1 '3'?2
1 '? '?·~:
1 ·~'34
1·~·~5
1 ·~·~t==.
1 '3'37
1 99:::
19'39
2000
2 0 (11
2002
2 0(' ~;
2004
-=: c i=js
2 oc~.
TABLE F-24.
FEDERJ.\1 MILITARY
THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES .............................. ............ ..............
HCT I ··/E
DUT\'
r·1 I L I TAP'/
E1·1F' L 0\' t·1 E t·i T
·:· -=· ·:··=··:· .__ ·-· . ·-· ~ __ ,
=··"":: ·:··=··-=· '-·-· • ·-· =---·
·=··-=· ·:··=··:: ---·. -•i-.·-·
·=· ·:· ·:· ·=· ·:· ,__ __ ,. _ . ._._.
23. 32-3
.-, .-, --, .-.. -. .=.-.:• • -.:•C-.:•
2·:::. -32::::
=··:· ·:··=··:· t....·-·. ·-''--'-'
---- -_,. -· . -· ._, . _,
:__ ·-· . --· ;__ ·-·
=· ·:· :· . =· ·:· --·. -'l-·-· =· ·:· :· ·=· ·:·
-_, • ·-· l-·-· =· :. ·:· ·:· ·:·
!...-·-· • ·-· i-·-·
23.323
2::::.-323
2·:::. :;:23
.-, .-, -, .-, .-,
,=...,: •• :.•C.-:.•
=· :· ·:· ·=· ·:· '--_,. ·-· L...·-·
:· :: :. =· ·:· .__ -·. -·L....·-·
=· :-:· =··:· .__ _,. _, L....·-·
:: :: ·:· ·=· ·:· ._ _,. -· i.....·-·
:. :~ :r :: ·::
i..... -'. -'i.....·-·
TABLE F-25
FEDERAL CIVILI~~
..................... <!> ..................... ...
f~OUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES
................................................................ ...................... ......................
=~r:Er:::AL
E!"·1 F' L O\'r·1 EN T
17.::::00
17.700
1'::.300
1 ::. ~:91
E: • ;:; .s 6
J. :;;:::'3 E:. 95 0
19'30 1?. 045
19'31 1'?. 14 0
19'?2 1?.236
19'3:3 1 '?. :3:~:2
1 '3'?4 1'3. 429
13'?5 1?.526
1 '3'?7
19'?:::
1 ?'?9
2000
2 001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2 (I 06
2 007
. 2 0 o:::
2 00'3
2 Oi 0
19.?21
19.:::20
1-?. '? 1 '?
20. 019
=:o. 119
20.21'?
20. ~:21
20.422
.::0.524
.=:0.627
.=:o. 730
=: 0. ::: 34
E1. 042
:-·c-~-c
-i·...;-
L
['
r·
L.
[
[
L
f '
l :
L
APPENDIX G
HISTORIC...<\1 OVERVIEW OF ALASKA ECONOMY
By Scott Goldsmith
The pattern of economic growth of Alaska is shown in Figure G.l,
and is measured by four categories of employment. The growth since
statehood in 1959 has been dramatic, particularly in the 1970s. The
average annual growth rate measured between 1961 and 1980 has been
4. 3 percent, more than double the national average over the same
. d 1 per1.o •
Of particular interest 1.n understanding the possible future
direction of the Alaska economy is the information about past
sources of growth which can be obtained from an examination of the
past behavior of the different categories of employment.
Conventional wisdom 1s that the economic growth of a region l.S
dependent upon the growth of its basic sector industries--those
industries for which the reg1.on has a comparative ~dvantage 1.n
producing goods and services for export ;utside the region, such as
manufactured goods. Around these industries cluster support
industries both for the basic sector and for the labor force
employed in those industries. Basic sec tor employment (defined to
include mining, petroleum, fish harvesting, timber harvesting,
manu.facturing for export, tourism, agriculture, pipeline construction
construction, operations, and federal government--civilian and
lrhe annualized gro\vth 1n total civilian employment between
1959 and 1980 ,,·as 2.0 percent. Valerie Personick, "Industry Output
and ::mploym2nt: oLS Projections to 1990," :·1onthly Labor Review·,
April 1979, p. 10.
G-1
' "·
225
175
150
125
75
sa
25
Figure G.l
ALASKA EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
<THOUSANDS)
r-
1-............. ....... ~--
" -
1--
r-l
r-I
f-I
1-/t1 .,./' .........
I'-.. ! ...............
f-....-c pUP PC RT / ~I ....... . '
L --// l----, 1-...........
1-T ~ .. + --............. --.../"
r--~ I _L-------rVE,N~~ T /
..........-' ,.. ----) . ---x ~--r . -----.---rf-1ER A d;-RI lr irr IR!=" ~
~---------I 1 [7 1'-----[....--
l
SAt II I --1-
1--
I
I I I
y
I I 1
1951 19'-:3 Js--:S 1957 i959 Jg'Jl 1973 1975 1977 1979
G-2
r~
[
l
[
t
Total l Employment
l"
r~
r L_;
["'
[
[
c
r··
L
r·
r·
r
L
r·
L~
L
military) has grown since statehood, but only by an annualized rate
of 1.2 percent per year, and displayed practically no growth during
the decade of the 1960s. Basic secto·r employment growth has
contributed to growth in the overall economy both directly and
indirectly through the multiplier process, but clearly by itself it
has not been a significant factor ~n the rapid economic growth of
the past.
Two "important characteristics of basic sector employment in
Alaska are not indicated by the relatively stable level of this
sector during the last twenty years. The first ~s that the
stability is largely the result of the federal government, which is
the largest employer ~n the state and which dominates, in numbers,
basic sector employ~ent. In fact, federal employment in Anchorage
is surpassed only by Washington, D.C. (among the BEA Economics
Areas) as a proportion of total 2 employment. This component of
basic employment forms a large and stable anchor for the whole
sec tor.
This is particularly important because of the inherent
instability of the remainder of the basic sector ~n Alaska.
BecauseAlaska' s remote location and harsh climate result ~n high
production costs, basic sector activity has historically been
confined to the extraction of rich deposits (low average cost of
2Arlon Tussing, Lee Huskey, and Tom Singer, "The Place of
Support Sector Growth, Import Substitution, and Structural Change ~n
-\laska's Econo::ri.c J-=·-'elopr'lent," ISE~, February 1983, p. III.3.
:::-3
' production) of natural resources. The past pattern has been one of '\
exploitation of one resource after another--furs, gold, timber,
copper, fish--by nonresident labor and outside capital in a rush to
deplete each resource as rapidly as possible. The result has been
an economy dominated by a succession of booms and busts as new
resources were discovered, extracted, and depleted. Since the basic
sector held a more dominant position 1.n the total economy in past
times (for example, 63 percent of the total in 1961 versus
36 percent in 1980) than currently, the cyclical nature of basic
activity meant that the whole economy was subject to instability.
Even 1.n the best situations, the production of primary
com.llodities is highly cyclical. Although the smaller proportional
contribution of basic ·to tota 1· employment today tends to disguise
the cyclical influence of natural resource extraction, it is
important to keep 1.n mind for two reasons. First, the cyclical
nature of pr1.mary com.'11odity markets makes it difficult to project
future demand (and price levels); and second, the industries are
heavily dependent upon supplies which are highly uncertain. For
example, very little is known about mineral occurrences in the state
or the dynamics of the different fishery stocks.
The other three er:~ployment categories shmm 1.n Figure G.l have
all displayed much more rapid employment grm·;th since statehood than
the basic sector. The reasons for their growth reves.l 2uch at-out
the process of econo:71ic l.n the state. The i~f:-astructu-re
\ .. ::-...,.
fl
[
[
[
r ~
L
L
sector is loosely defined to include the transportation,
communication, public utility, and construction industries, as well
as business services. Annualized growth in this sector has been 5.5
percent since 1961 with a prominent "bulge" during the mid 1970s.
This growth is largely the result of the undeveloped conditions of
the economy prior to statehood combined with the scattered
distribution of population in a huge state with sparse population.
Thus, the level of infrastructure employment necessary to link the
population together is high, and the process of building the
infrastructure itself magnifies employment 1.n this sector 1.n the
short run. The building is both for the purpose of 11 catching up" to
the infrastructure levels of other regions, and also to meet the
needs of the rapidly expanding Alaskan population. This l.S
reflected in the fact that state and local gover~ent capital outlay
per capita have historically averaged three to five times the
. 1 3 nat1.ona average.
An important variable in the future economic growth of the state
is the extent tb which this process of infrastructure enrichment
will continue to occur independent of growth in the basic· sector.
The answer in large part depends upon two factors. The first is the
availability of public capital to fund infrastructure additions.
Particularly in the early years after statehood, the funds to
3u. s. Departrnent
Governnental Finances,
of Commerce,
annual.
C-5
Bureau of the Census,
\.. construe t infrastructures came primarily from the federal
government. D_uring the 1970s, state government had been able to
provide an increasing share of the funding for infrastructure as a
result of the receipt of substantial oil revenues.
The second is the future rate of population growth. The faster
this growth occurs, the more infrastructure development is required
and the higher will be construction activity on a per capita basis.
State and local government forms the third sector of the
economy. Employment growth in this sec tor has been particularly
dramatic since statehood growing at an annualized rate of
8.2 percent. Interestingly, the rate of increase during the first
decade after statehood-7"9.4 percent--exceeds that of the decade of
the 1970s when the state began to receive substantial amounts of
oilrevenues. State government revenues currently are derived almost
exclusively from petroleum, and a large proportion of local
government revenues are also dependent upon petroleum through state
transfers and taxes on petroleum property. Consequently, the future
size of this sector of the economy, which is second only to federal
government ~n numbers employed, is closely tied to the future
receipt of petroleum revenues.
The final category of employment ~s support, consisting of the
trade, finance, and serv1ce sectors of the economy. It has grown on
an annualized basis at approxi~ately the same rate, 8,3 percent, as
~-6
f :
[
r , L:
~~
L'
c
r' u
[
L
I
L
state and loca 1 government; and like state government, the growth
rate was slightly faster, at 8.6 percent, during the first decade
since statehood. The growth in this sec.tor is only partially in
response to the growth ~n the other three sectors of the economy.
In 1961, for example, there were nineteen jobs ~n this sector for
every 100 jobs
held in 1980,
~n the rest of the economy, and if the same ratio
there would be 27 thousand, rather than the
75 thousand support sector jobs which the economy actually provided
~n 1980. ·
This structural change of the economy can be characterized in
three dimensions. First, there has been a change over time in the
market basket of goods consumed within the state. Second, there has
been a change over time in the methods by which support sector goods
and services are produced within the state. Third, there has been a
change over time ~n the goods and services which are locally
available (import substitution).
These changes have primarily been the result of an ~ncrease ~n
the sue of the local market. First, and most obviously, the
population of the state nearly doubled in the first twenty years of
statehood--exhibiting a 2.9 percent annualized growth rat_e compared
to 1.0 percent for the United States as a whole. Less obvious, but
more inpo;:-tantly, has been the grmvth in income. Figure G.2 shows
the growth of the average annual wage, and personal ~ncome per
c<:pita; both have in.::-e:ased ruarkedly 1n real terms s1nce statehood.
12Z23
PER Cf.PITA 9203
--85~0
8 '1~1]
(.,IJcJ
---65Z3
55Z0
453~
3520
2223
1523
Figure G.2
AVG. ANNUAL WAGE & PER CAPITA INC.
(1957 u.s.$)
I I I I . I I
I 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 I I . l I \,...-
I I /I -
I I I I /""'~ I I I I ./
I I I . ·"' I v" '
I /
I I ~-v--I I I
I _J__/ I I I ., •.
I I I .·~·~1
\ I I I VI· ,~
I
I I I I -/, ..
I I I I v -I
l I~ VI I I I I I
I . I 1 I I I I 1
i958 1;;:3 1952 1954 i955 1958 1970 1972 1974 1975 1978 198Z
G-8
[
[
r--
L
L
r·
I.
[
[
.. {~
L
r··
L
[
[
f
r--
L
[
f
I L
I -
'
L
L
-,
'
Both have, ~n addition, increased in relation to the national
average. This is illustrated ~n Figure G.3, which shows that the
Alaska/United States ratio of real disposaole personal income, which
historically hovered around • 8, climbed above one briefly ~n the
mid-1970s. The future direction of this indicator of the strength
of the Alaskan market will be an important determinant of economic
growth.
Severai other factors have contributed to the structural change
characterized by support sec tor growth. One ~s the increasing
stability of the marketplace as measured both by the decreasing
importance of seasonal and cyclical (associated with natural
resource extraction activities) variations ~n economic activity, and
by increasing wealth of the population. This provides a cushion
'\olhich allows a region to support itself independent of wage and
salary income. Alaska's personal income ~s more dependent on wages
and salaries than most other states, but that dependence is
gradually falling as the proportion of ~ncome from other sources
increases. Between 1959 and 1980 that proportion more than doubled
from 9 to 19 percent. This increase in market stability makes
investment ~n suppor:t sector businesses less subject to the risks
associated with economic fluctuations.4
4An example of this ~ew wealth ~s the ANCSA tra~sfer of land
~nd money to the ~laska ~atives.
-..
' "
1.5
1.4
. I. 3_ .
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
3.6
0.5
~'--., __ .,. .,./
I I
Figure G.3
REAL DISPOSABLE PERSONAL INCOME
UV.SKMUS RA T1 0)
v .... "--' I ['-. ' I ' 'V I
I "' { I ' I ' .
-'
v I " "
I ' ---.,_ __ /
/
~--~--r---1'
I
1951 1%1 1955 1957 1959 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979
G.lO
r
~
r
[
-r
[
r
[
[
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
A second factor is indicated by Figure G. 4, which shows the
dramatic increase s~nce statehood in the proportion of the civilian
population which is 5 employed. Between 1961 and 1979, it
increased from 30 to 49 percent of the civilian population. This
accounts for the fact that personal income per capita has
historically grown more rapidly than the average wage rate
(Figure G.2). This trend reflects a more market-oriented,
consumption-oriented economy which can sustain a larger support
sector.
One additional factor contributing to the growth of the support
sector has been the downward trend in the ratio of the cost of doing
business in Alaska relative to the U.S. average. Figure G.S shows
that this. downward trend has heen historically. interrupted only
during the mid-1970s when Alyeska oil pipeline construction
generated local inflationary pressures in excess of the national
average.
In sum, the pattern of employment growth in Alaska is
characteristic of an underdeveloped economy undergoing structural
change and rapid growth from a large number of causes.
The problem of projecting future economic activity then becomes
one of sorting out those various factors contributing to past growth
and trying to deter~ine both how they will change ~n the future and
SThis measure LS only an indication of the trend because
employment is by place of work and population Ls residence-based.
G-11
' '·
10J
70
6B
52
33
12
1951
, I -~
' j_ I
1953
Figure G.4
. PERCENT OF CIVILIANS EMPLOYED
-
/-
I -· ·-· ...
l
' ' __!_ ' ' r
"'~9 J~D 1971 1973 1975
G-12
I ---..
I
1977 i979
c
r
[~
n
-L~
f_ ~
( ;
f ~
r~
L
,-
L·
[
c
E
c
[
u
Figure G.S
RATIO OF ANCHORAGE TO US CPI
1.50
1. 45 . 1.~
~
-,
-!
1. 4H
--,
_c 1.35
1. 33
,;; 1. 25
~ ~ -1\ I t---~
~ / -\ i\ _, ~
..
' .. -
' ~ 1.23
' ~
1.15
-,
~ 1.10 ""
I I ' I 1 I 1 I I
1.05
1978 198Z 1932
· G-13
'· "·
how those changes will affect the growth trajectory of the economy.
The exercise is complicated by the poor quality of the historical
record (which is a result of this underdevelopment and rapid
growth), which limits our understanding of the quantitative
dimensions of the growth in the past.
It should be clear from this short discussion that there is a
large degree of inherent uncertainty surrounding any projections of
the future size of the Alaskan economy, and that unanticipated rapid
economic c~ange can easily occur. This uncertainty can be reduced,
but not eliminated, by further analysis of the past.
This phenomenon is vividly demonstrated by the unprecedented
growth of the Alaskan economy_ between 1980 and 1982. Primarily in
response to a more than doubling of oil prices in 1979, employment
increased 14 percent, and population 15 percent over the ensuing
two-year period. The magnitude of the increase was similar to the
growth when th~ Alyeska pipeline was under construction. Few, if
any, analysts anticipated the rapidity and magnitude of the
conversion of petroleum revenues into economic activity. Most
importantly, this illustrates the dependence of the economy on
natural resource industries and the volatility that dependence
continues .to impart to the whole economy.
G-14
[
[
l
[
[
[
[
r :
L
L