HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1470ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE·
ROUTE SELECTION REPORT
I '~ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY-----'
JANUARY 1982
(
I
~er'Je~~~'f9A,JV.I~8A
\ANCHORAdi!)"O.:g~
"Est.1997
ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
ROUTE SELECTION REPORT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
Prepared at the Offices of:
Commonwealth Associates Inc.
209 East Washington Avenue
Jackson,Michigan 49201
January 1982
ARLIS
Alaska Resources Library &Information Services
Library Building,Suite III
3211 Providence Drive
Anchorage,AK 99508-4614
1982
ue~:lQY
cm~t &l tlM Im!erior
Irt-
~
il Lfh.
f;S ;J
"AY$?
fPJ~1 ire
___~GilbertlCommonwe..lth engineers/consultants/architects
COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES INC.,209 E.Washington Avenue,Jackson,MI 49201/Tel.517 788-3000
January 29,1982
r
{
l
Mr.David D.Wozniak
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage,Alaska 99501
Dear Mr.Wozniak:
This will confirm the transmittal of the Anchorage/Fairbanks
Intertie Route Selection Report (Final)to the Alaska Power
Authority.
The report lidS been amended to include material addressing
the proposed access for construction and maintenance of the
Intertie.This information was requested by the Alaska
Power Authority Board of Directors in our presentation to
them on November 13,1981,and presented during the Board
Meeting on November 19,1981.
During these two meetings,the Board solicited and heard
extensive testimony from concerned citizens,affected land-
owners,utilities,and federal and state resource agencies.
During the meeting of November 19,1981,Commonwealth Associates
Inc.consultants,Dr.Harry Kornberg and Dr.Sol Michaelson,
presented,and the Alaska Power Authority accepted,expert
testimony to the effect that the project presents no health
hazards.
The Board accepted the recommendations that the line be con-
structed for 345 kV,initially operated at 138 kV (System
Configuration IB)and that the line be constructed overhead
along the eastern line route including Moody-Montana (Line
Configuration 19)with the following two provisions:
Gilbert/Commonwealth Family of Companies
Readino.PA Jackson.MI New York.NY Rio de Janeiro.Brazil
Mr.David D.Wozniak
January 29,1982
Page 2r-
\
['~GilbertI Commonwealth
V 209 E.Washington Avenue,Jackson,MI 49201
[-
\--
I -
\
I
r
-'
-~
[:
I'L
a)that Alaska Power Authority staff and the consul-
tant make a good faith effort to completely avoid
Denali State Park and
b)work with the National Park Service to substitute
the northern routing by line segments 10 and 11
instead of 12,if this can be done without delay-
ing the project.
The Board requested that the staff and consultants continue
to involve and inform landowners directly affected in the
final location of the line.
Thirty-five copies of this amended report (final)are being
transmitted for your files and distribution.
Yours very truly,~£1JtL
Ie G.Miller,P.E.
roject Manager
L
L
r~~
l,
L
LGM/kb
Enclosures
!-
L~
L
L
~...,.
,'_J
L.
r:;
-u
~~
t::::tcO'
[
['
~
r--'
l
r -
L~
[-
l "
L
r~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.PROJECT BACKGROUND
o Economic Benefits
o Relation to the Susitna Project
o Configurations
o Conceptual Studies
II.ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
o Route Selection Methodology
o Environmental Overview
o Conclusion
III.ENGINEERING AND OPERATING CONSIDERATIONS
o Meteorology
o Topography
o Soils and Geophysical Aspects
o Maintainability
o Realiability
o Conceptual Access Plan
IV.ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
o Project Cost Comparisons
o Life Cycle Cost Analysis
V.SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
i
Page No.
1
1
2
2
10
19
29
31
33
34
35
37
38
42
110
115
r----,
~---
'--"'·.1
r··..
L
L
G
r
L
I~~I
[
l_~
l.~
l
r -
l _
Figure
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
LIST OF FIGURES
Present Concept of Configuration IB
Present Concept of Configuration 2B
345 kV Tangent Structure
345 kV Angle Structure
345 kV Double Circuit Tangent Pole
345 kV Double Circuit Angle Pole
Route Selection Process
Corridor and Final Network
Land Ownership
Land Use
Areas and Species of Concern
Visual Resources
Meteorology and Geology
Access
Conceptual Access Plan
Comparative Cost by Method of Construction -
Labor and Equipment Only
Construction Costs by Superlink
Preferred Line Route
ii
Page
3
4
6
7
8
9
11
14
20
22
24
27
32
36
41
46
51
117
-,
-"
..-.;
[:_7
I .~'
.:::;
L~
rIl ~
TABLE
1.
2.
3 •
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
LIST OF TABLES
Route Alignment Segments (Superlinks)
Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage-Fairbanks
Intertie,Construction Cost Comparison-Labor
and Equipment Only
Superlink -345 kV Estimated Construction
Costs
Superlink -138 kV Estimated Construction
Costs
Project Cost Estimate -Configuration lAl
138/138
Project Cost Estimate -Configuration lBl
138/345
Project Cost Estimate -Configuration 2Bl
230/345
Summary Cost Comparison with Susitna
Life Cycle Costs and Benefits,Including
Future Need for 345 kV Interconnection
Life Cycle Costs and Benefits,Excluding
Future Need for 345 kV Interconnection
Sensitivity Analysis of Life Cycle Costs
and Benefits of the Anchorage-Fairbanks
Intertie
iii
PAGE
18
45
47
49
52
71
90
109
112
113
114
,.""""'1
~
~
~
c,..._":"
I.PROJECT BACKGROUND
Economic Benefits
The following section reviews the economic benefits which
can be derived from the intertie between Anchorage and Fair-
banks.The numbers given below are taken from Commonwealth's
Feasibility Report submitted on May 1,1981.No reason to
revise these numbers has since been disclosed.
The first benefit of the intertie will be to permit economy
energy interchange between Anchorage and Fairbanks.It is
estimated that by 1984 the cost of energy generation by
oil-fired combustion turbines in Fairbanks will cost roughly
four times that produced by gas-fired units in Anchorage.
By 1993,this ratio is predicted to drop to about 2.5.
Substantial savings can be achieved by shipping off-peak
energy potential in Anchorage to Fairbanks so that the
latter can correspondingly reduce its usage of the more
expensive oil.The resulting savings is estimated at $160
million for the period 1984 to 1993.
The second benefit of the intertie is to allow reserve
sharing.When Anchorage and Fairbanks are isolated,one
from another,each should have installed reserve generating
capacity approximately equal to the two largest generating
units.When joined,each can provide the same quality
service as before by carrying reserve equal to its single
largest unit,and relying upon the intertie to back up its
second largest unit.This will avoid the need to install as
much new ge~erating capacity in the future as would otherwise
be the case.It is estimated that by reserve sharing Anchorage
can reduce its need for new generating capacity by 70 MW by
1993,and Fairbanks can reduce its need by 55 MW,bringing the
total reduction to 125 MW.This will save an additional $14
million in the 1984-1993 time frame.Thus,the total saving
in the 1983-1994 period is roughly $174 million.
Relation to the Susitna Project
If the intertie is built for future 345 kV operation as a
part of the Susitna Project,the question arises whether a
portion of the Susitna transmission system should be install-
ed ten years early in order to gain the benefits noted
above.The cost of installing the intertie early is only a
fraction of the cost for its total life cycle cost.Thus,
there is opportunity to achieve the $174 million saving
noted earlier at an attractive ratio of benefit to costs.
2
Configurations
As a result of the May 1 Feasibility Study,Commonwealth
recommended that the intertie be designed for 138 kV initial
operation and 345 kV future operation.At that time,it was
not recognized that the existing 138 kV transmiss~on line
from Point MacKenzie to Teeland would be raised to 230 kV.
This line,owned by Chugach Electric Association,is a vital
connection point for the intertie.It has since been decided
that this line will be changed to 230 kV by the time the
intertie is tentatively planned to go in service.This
event reopened the possibility of operating the intertie at
230 kV,but still being constructed for 345 kV operation as
a future part of the Susitna Project.
Thus,there are under consideration two alternative system
configurations at this time:
lB -138 kV initial operation,designed for future
345 kV operation
2B -230 kV initial operation,designed for future
345 kV operation.
These two configurations are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2
attached.Later in this report,a cost comparison ot these
alternatives will be presented.
There is additionally a third possibility that is incidentally
shown in the attached diagrams and treated in the cost
comparison.This alternative is designated configuration lA
and is idential to lB except that the intertie would be
designed for 138 kV operation only.This third configuration
is included only to reconfirm the decision to design for
future 345 kV operation.
Conceptual Studies
A design criteria study was prepared to establish the criteria
for line component alternative studies and the line design.
The study included electrical,mechanical,and structural
parameters.Nortec,Dowl Engineers,Dryden &LaRue of
Anchorage and Shannon &Wilson of Fairbanks provided basic
meteorological and geophysical data on the Alaska environment.
The preliminary Design Criteria Study was distributed to
Alaska Power Authority (APA)and the Alaska Utilities for
comments.Comments were received and are now being incor-
porated into the final study.
PRESENT CONCEPT OF CONFIGURATION 1B
GOLD HILL
~23KV
69 KV
12/16/20 MVA
60/80/100 MVA
4-1(/)
138 KV
230KV
f
138 KV
138 KV
I'A"..If •••"
lIB"
POINT MACKENZIE
HEALY----------....
••NENANA
WILLOW
~~I r 5.5 MILES 60/80/100 MVA
'I"""II ~----4."----4.,--
TEELAND
0<0MNN
00<0
M LO
'I"""
00""",
Mo::;t
'I"""
>~
LO
o::;t
Mel)
Wwa:....I=>-1-:2=>LO
LL""",
''I''''">~
00
M
'I"""
REACTORS CAPACITORS
NO.MVAR TOTAL NO.MVAR TOTALEACHEACH
I'A "1 (a)5 5 6 5 30
.f'B"3 5 15 4 5 20
I'C"4 5 20 4 5 20
FIGURE 1
(a)EXISTING
PRESENT CONCEPT OF CONFIGURATION 28
TGOLD HILL
6·9KV
0),....
M~
'l""".~'-"AAJ
II A"..160/80~~10:MVA
NENANA
m ~j 138 KV
M 10'l"""
HEALY
138 KV
T L "82"
Q)~60/80/100 MVA
T230KV
"B1"
>~
10
~
Men
WwD:-I::>-I-~
::J'l"""U-o
'N>~
o
M
N
>~c.o
ON
M
N
TEELAND ------.:~..
POINT MACKENZIE
"e"
115 KV
1
230KV
REACTORS CAPACITORS
NO.MVAR TOTAL NO.MVAR TOTALEACHEACH
"A"1(a)5 5 6 5 30
"81"1 (a)5 5 - - -
"82"6 5 30 3 5 15
I'C"6 5 30 ---
FIGURE 2
(a)EXISTING
l ~
r-~
['
[
[
[
l-::FL~
~
[;
r ~
l
r'
I
L
[,
L
r =
l~
r -
IL.J
l
5
The preliminary Structure Study was prepared which evaluated
seven 345 kV single-circuit structures.This preliminary
Structure Study was distributed in Alaska for comments.
Based on the comments received,the following additions were
made:aluminum structures were studied,bringing the total
structures to 10,screw anchors were considered,shield
wires were added and a life cycle analysis was prepared.
The revised structure study recommends the Corten,or equal,
guyed pole "X"for the Intertie Project.Illustrations of
the structures,Figures 3,4,5 and 6,follow this discus-
sion.
The phase conductors selected for the 345 kV project are
nonspecular twin bundle 954 kcmil "ACSR."
Lightning outage calculations based on no shield wires and
on an isokeraunic level of eight thunderstorm days per year,
indicate 12.9 line outages per 100 miles per year would
occur on this intertie.With two shield wires protecting
the line,the line outages would reduce to 0.82 per 100
miles per year.
In conclusion,the intertie life cycle costs to compare
fifty-seven project alternatives are based on:design
criteria which is essentially approved;the guyed pole "X"
structure;supporting nonspecular twin bundle "Rain"conduc-
tors;and two shield wires.
--~
~
1 28
'
m
-..,
In
M.-
l-..
33'
.-J
\
I
\
--
=
In \
=
ex>
I
I I I
j-22.5 'T22.5 '-.\
'-'I FIGURE 3
:Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
l-..-J
r -:
345kV
Tangent Structure
~Gilbert Commonwealth
r--"
1,-,
['
[
r:::::c..:::::::
1 '
l~_a
rc:
[
r'b
I~
L
r .
L~
~,...,•"
r-1O '-J ~~-
J."l,\lil ~\
\~i\------\/.\\/\\/\\~\/\\\\~\\\
\\\
:31 '-44'\31 '-44 '\I \
\\./f
\\\
t-tv \t"\
(Alaska PowerAUtfiOrity IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
l~
Lo
[~{i Gdbert.Commonwealth
I FIGURE 4
345kV
Angle Structure
r 23 '--1
-L!)
,-.'-
r-,
L~
[
F
l_.....'
c
LJ
c:;
l~;
r -
I
h
,-
'<t
,--co
N
,-
-L!)
.-o.-
-L!)
r--
r--2 2 '-----..LI
I
.l
.I.
1
r'
'-'
L;I FIGURE 5
I'
LJ
(AlaskaPOwerAuth-ority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
345kV Double Circuit
Tangent Pole
(J Gilbert/Commonwealth
'-...-;
,-..J
, ,"r..J_...,(,~-/I!!/Cil Transmission Line
)FIGURE 6
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
345kV Double Circuit
Angle Pole
(I Gilbert'Commonwealth
I~
r~
I
!
I
f'
I
I~
L
~,
~-,
L
R
[
r '
1---;
r;
i _~
r-~
10
II.ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Route Selection Methodology
Formulate Study Process -The initial phase of the route
selection process was to define a study approach most suit-
able to the Intertie Project.It was determined that selec-
tion of an acceptable route would be made with respect to
three important goals:
1.Satisfy regulatory and permit requirements
2.Respond to concerns expressed through the Public
Participation Program
3.Achieve routing objectives
In order to satisfactorily initiate the route selection
process,a methodology was adapted for the Intertie Project
based on the network theory.This process involves the
identification of corridors,establishes a network of
potential line route segments within them and evaluates
alternative routes based on specific criteria.Figure 7
graphically depicts the overall route selection process and
should be referenced throughout this introduction.
Several objectives were agree9 upon by Commonwealth Associates
Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority to assist in the routing
process.They were:
-Minimize Impact on Land Use
-Minimize Conflict with Existing Life Styles
-Minimize Impact on Natural Systems
-Minimize Visual Impact
-Minimize Impact on Cultural Resources
-Maximize Sharing of Existing Rights-of-Way
-Optimize Construction and Opertional Costs
The alignments selected for study were evaluated with respect
to these objectives so that a route would be selected which
balances environmental resources,public concerns,construc-
tion and maintenance feasibility,and reliability.
Develop Data -Upon selection of a routing methodology,data
collection was initiated to obtain available and published
data.Existing aerial photography for the project area was
acquired to assist in the analysis of existing conditions.
In the general absence of the mapped data,this data source
,-~
l I I ~L~L rr--,rt:L1 ~no r-:~cr,,1,[>UI...........~
!----'-,--""""'~r----~,!~,----"1 J ~~1
J
Route Selection Process
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
FORMULATE STUDY
PROCESS
DEVELOP
DATA IDENTIFY CORRIDOR(S)
DETERMINE ALTERNATIVE
ROUTE LOCATIONS
EVALUATE ROUTE
ALTERNATIVES
SELECT FINAL
ROUTE ALIGNMENT
DEFINE
STUDY
APPROACH
SELECT
ROUTING
METHODOLOGY
"T1
15c
::tlm.....
COLLECT AND
ANALYZE EXISTING
DATA
SELECT CORRIDOR(S}
FOR MORE IN-
DEPTH STUDY
AGENCY REVIEW ~,
AND COMMENT :\
INVENTORY AND
ANALYSIS (update datal
PUBLIC WORKSHOPS I
COMMUNITY MEETINGS I
FIELD INSPECTION
,-------,1 I
l---.--
I i
'--__---Ji I
IDENTIFY
PREFERRED
AND
ALTERNATE
ROUTES
SUBMITTAL
DFROUTE
H TO
PERMITTING
AGENCIES
r~
l
r
l
\
l .
[-
t '
f
l'~
L'
[~
l~
l~
I"
I'
E
[
[~
r
L,
i
L
12
became an important tool;photographic sources included
color infrared (NASA U-2 Photography,1977),true color
photography (Alaska Railroad,1979)and black and white
photography (Lower Susitna River Basin,1980).Later in the
evaluation of alignments,project photography was also made
available (North Pacific Aerial Surveys,Inc.,1981).
Agency contacts were an essential aspect of data collection.
In obtaining existing literature,agency interests and
concerns were also discussed to identify significant issues
or problem areas.
Agencies contacted during the course of the project have in~
eluded:
FEDERAL
U.S.Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers
U.S.Department of Agriculture
Soil Conservation Service
U.S.Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
National Park Service
Fish and Wildlif~A~rvic~
U.S.Department of Transportation
Alaska Railroad
STATE
Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
Division of Forest,Land and Water Management
Division of Parks
Division of Research and Development
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facili-
ties
University of Alaska
REGIONAL
Ahtna,Inc.
Matanuska -Susitna Borough,Inc.
Identify Corridors -Identification of transmission line
cOLridoLs was the initial step in the route selection process
for the Anchorage-Fairbanks Transmission Intertie.The
corridors were delineated to generally outline the project
study area,providing the basis from which more detailed
~~
\
~>
l-'
[
[.
L
[
L
[
r
t
I "
l_
h
i
l>
! -
13
studies would be conducted.Corridors were defined in broad
terms with variabl'e widths in order to accommodate a number
of alternative route segments within them.For the Anchorage-
Fairbanks Transmission Intertie,corridors were thus deline-
ated between the Willow Substation to the south and Healy
Substation to the north.Figure 8 depicts the general
location of the corridors selected.
Preliminary alignment of corridors was based on the identifi-
cation of potentially feasible line locations.Corridors
were initially selected which satisfied two fundamental
objectives:
1.Technically acceptable corridors which posed
reasonable engineering constraints and afforded
reliable and maintainable service.
2.Environmentally acceptable corridors which combined
transportation and utility facilities to avoid
establishing dispersed rights-of-way.
A review of corridor locations then commenced,utilizing u.S.
Geological Survey maps (1:63360),various aerial photographic
data,and previously assembled information for the study
~re~.Major geologic~l fe~tl1reR,Revere topogr~phy or
evaluations,principal river courses,and other natural
features which would preclude use for transmission corridors
were avoided to the extent possible.Additional considera-
tion was given to existing land use developments,utility
rights-of-way,and transportation systems.Based on this
data,corridors were delineated which offered potentially
feasible alignments,although varying in width from over
four miles in Broad Pass to less than one mile in the Nenana
Gorge and Windy Pass.Further description of these corridors
provides a more detailed rationale for their alignment.
Corridor Description -Alignment of the corridor north of
the Willow Substation was facilitated by the presence of an
existing Matanuska Electric Association right-of-way.This
180 foot right-of-way will be paralleled in part by the
Intertie,enabling joint use of access and a net reduction
in total land requirements.Proceeding north for approxi-
mately 22 miles the corridor then splits into two alternative
alignments:a)a western corridor essentially parallel to
the Parks Highway,and b)a more easterly corridor situated
east of Talkeetna and later parallel to the Alaska Railroad.
The western corridor at its point of beginning was located
west and south of the Parks Highway,avoiding more inten-
sive development near the intersection of the Talkeetna Spur
o 10 20 MileSJ'i I I I
o 10 20 Kilometers
~Gilbert/Commonwealth North
I I AGURE8
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Corridor &
Final Network
r-"
l
1_,
Il >
l_'
[~
["
l~
[~
~
I
\..j
c~
[~
I"
15
Road and the Parks Highway,while allowing for a reasonably
narrow crossing ot the Susitna River.At this point,the
corridor widened to include both sides of the Parks Highway.
Near Petersville Road,the corridor was generally confined
by Sawmill and Scotty Lakes and wetland areas to the west
and the Chulitna River along the east.After crossing the
Chulitna River near Mile Post 126,the corridor continued to
parallel both sides of the Parks Highway bounded by the
Chulitna River on its boundary and avoiding steep topography
along Curry Ridge to the east.It varied from 1-1/2 to 3
miles in width.
The alternative eastern corridor was situated approximately
3 miles east of the Talkeetna Spur Road at its closest point
to avoid numerous lakes and associated small tracts in the
vicinity of Sunshine and Answer Creeks and Bartlett Hills.
After crossing the Talkeetna River near its confluence with
Chunilna Creek,the corridor widened to more than four miles
in the vicinity of Chase.North of Chase the corridor
becomes more closely aligned with the Alaska Railroad right-
of-way,being bounded by the Susitna River on the west and
steep topography associated with the Talkeetna Mountains on
the east.The corridor width did not exceed one or two miles
in this area as it crossed Gold Creek,the Susitna River and
Indian River.The corridor then merged with the Parks
Highway corridor near Chulitna Pass,generally being aligned
along the Chulitna River.
At this juncture there was a single corridor bounded by the
Chulitna River to the west and Indian Hills (near Chulitna
Butte)to the east.As the corridor proceeded north crossing
Hurricane Gulch,Honolulu Creek and the East Fork Chulitna
River,it was narrowly confined by steep topography to the
east and lowland areas associated with the Chulitna River to
the west.In the vicinity of Mile Post 194,the corridor
widened considerably to accommodate numerous routing alterna-
tives in Broad Pass.North of Cantwell the corridor was
narrowly constricted through Windy Pass.Panorama Mountain,
Reindeer Hills and mountain ranges in excess of 5,000 feet
(MSL)limited consideration of other corridors in this
locale.North of Carlo Creek,the corridor was extended to
the west near Riley Creek and to the east,where topography
becomes less severe in the vicinity of the Yanert Fork.
Near Montana Creek north of the Yanert Fork,the second
corridor major option was delineated.The western alterna-
tive proceeds north through Nenana Gorge with the corridor
confined to widths approximating one-half mile,while the
second alternative is aligned with the Montana and Moody
Creek drainages.Both corridor options converge at the
Healy Substation north of Healy Creek.
r"
r-'
I
r-'
l..
r~
l .
I~
[i
[,~
[
fl ;
U
l ::,
L--;;
E
l -
r_
E
L _,-'
!•
L"
I .•
16
Public workshops were conducted on January 19-21,1981,at
Anchorage,Talkeetna,Cantwell,and Fairbanks to receive
comments on the project's overall feasibility and preliminary
corridor locations.
Determine Alternative Route Locations -Within the corridors
a preliminary network of route segments or links was deline-
ated.The links were located using the USGS topographic
maps as a base and aligned where most suited to existing
study area conditions.Initial selection of alignments was
based on use of acceptable terrain and topographic conditions,
avoidance of private tracts,as well as excessive stream and
river crossings,use of vegetation edges,and property and
section lines.Additional consideration was given to effects
on scenic quality and existing land use development.A
network consisting of 89 links and 58 nodes,or points of
intersection,was originally prepared on March 27,1981.
Evaluate Route Alternatives -The first revision to the
network occurred during the period April and May 1981 and
resulted in numerous additional links and nodes.Impetus
was provided by agency meetings and field reconnaissance
conducted in late May and early June 1981.Additions to the
network were incorporated during this time and included
alignments:1)east of Chulitna Butt,2)woat of tho Parka
Highway in Broad Pass,3)in the vicinity of the entrance to
Denali National Park,and 4)west side of Nenana Gorge.The
network,as modified,consisted of 115 links and 69 notes
and was issued June 3,1981.
A second series of public workshops was held to incorporate
comments on the network previously described.Meetings were
held in Talkeetna,Cantwell and McKinley Village June 9-11,
1981.
Response during these sessions prompted two major changes in
the network:1)provision for crossover segment south of
Denali State Park to connect east and west corridors,and 2)
addition of a "near east"alignment east of the original
route near Talkeetna and extending north across the upper
elevations of the Talkeetna Mountains to merge with original
eastern route near Gold Creek.This second revision of the
network resulted in a new total of 123 links and 76 nodes
and was issued on June 26,1981.
Informal "brown bag lunch"meetings were conducted on July
7,1981 in Anchorage and July 10,1981 in Fairbanks to
assure that these principal communities in the vicinity of
the project were kept informed of the project's status.An
interagency meeting was also conducted on July 9 to review
l:
r~"'"
l
l~
l '
[0'
r~
t"
[
l
r',
~~
I 0
17
current status of the network;agencies included the Alaska
Department of Natural Resources,Alaska Department of Fish
and Game,and u.s.Fish and Wildlife Service.
A third and final revision of the network was made on July
17,1981 in order to accommodate:1)interconnection of near
east and railroad alignments,and 2)addition of route
segment west of Parks Highway in the vicinity of the Middle
Fork Chulitna River.This revised network yielded 125 links
and 78 nodes and is shown in Figure 8.
An examination of the network commenced in.order to refine
the 125 link segments to a more effectively manageable
number,with respect to engineering,environmental and
economic concerns.The links remaining were then combined
into larger route segments or "superlinks"and formed the
basis for detailed engineering and economic analyses describ-
ed in the following sections.The superlinks and their
respective lengths are described in Table 1.
r--"
"I
l .
,-'
l
l.
l'
l~
[
",
.~
[
18
TABLE 1
ROUTE ALIGNMENT SEGMENTS
(SUPERLINKS)
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE PROJECT
Length
Superlink Nodes Links (Miles)
IS · ·
·A-B 1 .·· ·
·· · ··· · · ·
···21.6
2S · · ·
B-I 2,4,5,7,11,·········· ·
31.6
3S .· ·
B-YYY 33,34,36,120,121,124 · · ····41.4
4S ···I-YYY 13,15,16,45,46,47 · ·
· · ····17.5
5S •··I-LL 14,18,20,22,23,26,29,30,32,54,58.45.3
6S · · ·
YYY-LL 47a,48,50,52 · · ·
·· · · · ·
·28.5
7S .· ·
LL-OO 59,62 ········ · · · · ·
·5.1
8S .· ·
Oo-zzz 125 · ·
········ · · · ··19.6
9S •··OO-PP 63 ·· ·
······ · · · · ·
·14.9
lOB pp-zzz 65 · ····· · · ·
······4.2
lIS ···zzz-UU 65a,70 ·· · · · · ·
······18.4
12S •··PP-UU 66,68,71,72 ······· · · ·
·22.4
13S ···UU-FFF 74,77,80,85,87 · · · · · · ·
··19.9
14S .··FFF-UUU 105,107,105,111,112,114,116,117 ·13.1
15S · · ·
FFF-UUU 106,109 ······· · ·
····14.9
16S ···UUu-vvv 118 ·· · · · · · · ······ ·
0.9
l.
,--~
~
Reference:Commonwealth Associates Inc.,Anchorage-Fairbanks
Intertie Project,Preliminary Network Maps,June 26,
1981 (Sheets 3,4 and 5,revised July 17,1981).
l'
\
f'
l_~
L
L
[
r-,
t_~
[
f"
L.r •
FL~
r'~
t~
[~
C
l"
L..
Il.__,
l~
19
Environmental Overview
A brief description of the various superlinks is provided
with respect to significant environmental features.The
subjects addressed are:1)Land Ownership,2)Land Use,3)
Areas and Species of Concern and 4)Aesthetics.The data
presented is abbreviated and will be more thoroughly and
comprehensively described in the Environmental Analysis
Report.
Land Ownership -Land ownership along superlink 1 is shown
in Figure 9.The land is predominately state-owned south of
the Kashwitna River and privately owned north of the river.
Borough lands are generally located along the Kashwitna
River.
Land is primarily borough-owned along superlink 2.State
lands are located in the vicinity of the Susitna River,
while private lands are present in the Montana Creek and
Trappers Creek areas.
Land along.superlink 3 is predominantly'state-owned north of
the Talkeetna River and private,borough or state-owned
south of the river.The state lands are primarily tentative-
ly approved.Some private lands are along Montana Creek and
in the Emil Lake area;the remainder are in the Talkeetna
agricultural lands.Borough lands lie immediately south and
adjacent the Talkeetna River.
Land ownership along superlink 4 is evenly distributed
between borough,state and federal.
Land associated with superlink 5 is predominantly state-
owned tentatively approved within Denali State Park.
Private ownership lands crossed,including the Indian Hills
subdivision,are native allotment lands and private lands in
the Mountain Haus-Ruth Glacier Overlook area.Borough lands
exist adjacent the Denali State Park southern boundary.
State (tentatively approved)lands encompass almost all of
superlink 6.A few private lands are crossed in the Chunilna
and Gold Creek areas.
Land is either state-owned,tentatively approved,or federally
owned along superlink 7,while it is predominantly state-owned,
tentatively approved,along superlink 8.State selected lands
are also present.Some private native allotments are crossed.
o 10 20 MileS 4IIII'
o 10 20 Kilometers
(i Gilbert/Commonwealth North
(I FIGURE 9
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
land Ownership
II _
21
Land is primarily state-owned,tentatively approved,south
of the East Fork Chulitna River.North of the Chulitna
River lands are principally owned by the borough or by the
federal government.
Superlinks 12 and 13 are primarily located on village selec-
tion lands.Both links also cross small stretches of native
allotments.
l-~
Land
link
11.
Park
ownership is entirely village selection along super-
10 and predominantly village selection along superlink
Two areas of superlink 11 lie within Denali National
and Preserve.
r-........
L~
[.~.,
l_~
~--j
~;:7'
[;
L-
Land is primarily state-owned,tentatively approved,along
superlinks 14 and 16,and solely state-owned tentatively ap-
proved,along superlink 15.There are Bureau of Land Manage-
ment lands within the Gorge along superlink 14.
Land Use -Residential development associated with superlink
1 is depicted in Figure 10 and is located along Willow Creek
Road.Residential growth is also extending east from the
Parks Highway just south of Montana.Land use along super-
link 2 is predominantly residential.Residential growth is
located along the Parks Highway south of its jun~ture with
the Talkeetna Spur Road and again with commercial and resi-
dential development along Peters ville road west of Trappers
Creek.Numerous private and one FAA airstrips are situated
at the south end of this alignment.
Superlink 3 traverses the Talkeetna Bluffs West Division,
the Chase II,Unit IV subdivision and the Talkeetna agricul-
tural lands.There are few residences in the Emil Lake
area.Land use associated with superlink 4 consists of
scattered residences along Lane and MacKenzie Creeks.
Along superlink 5,land use development is dominated by the
Denali State Park.Some residential development occurs
along the Parks Highway near the Mountain Haus-Ruth Glacier
Overlook area and again along the Highway in the Pass Creek-
Division Creek area.Several campgrounds are also situated
along the Parks Highway in the immediate vicinity of super-
link 5 including Byers Lake State Campground and Troublesome
Creek and Indian Pass trailhead and picnic area.
The predominant land use associated with superlink 6 is
scattered residential growth along the Alaska Railroad.
Residential growth exists in Sherman,Gold Creek and Chulitna
and seems to be extending east from these locales along
MileSJ
20 Kilometers
~Gilbert/Commonwealth North
I I AGURE10
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
land Use
l-~
l
r--
l ~
1--
[
......J
L,
::.-....;;
23
water courses.The presently developed Indian Hills subdivi-
sion is bypassed east of Chulitna Butte,although additional
undeveloped lands are traversed.
No land use will be affected by superlinks 7,8,9 and 11.
Some residential development associated with superlink 10
exists near the railroad stops of Broad Pass and Colorado.
Superlink 12 bisects residential development east of Cantwell
along the Denali Highway,and could affect future growth
east of the highway.Residential lands are bypassed by
superlink 13 usage extending east along the Nenana River and
Carlo and Slime Creeks.This alignment avoids crossing of
federal park lands.Superlink 14 traverses near a residential
land use area across the Parks Highway from Denali National
Park.No developed land use is crossed by superlink 15 in
the Moody-Montana drainages.Residential land use will be
marginally affected in Healy by superlink 16.
Areas and Species of Concern -Certain wildlife species or
groups of species which occur in the project area o/ere
selected for special consideration during the route selection
process.These species were chosed because:1)their
populations provide a source of actual or economic subsis-
tence (i.e.big game);2)their populations indicate the,
ecological health of the environment (i.e.birds of prey);
or 3)their populations are in danger of expiration (i.e.
threatened and endangered species).It was assumed that
impacts of construction and maintenance of a transmission
line on these species would .be indicative of the impacts on
other species utilizing the project area.
Big game species,especially moose and caribou,occur through-
out the project area but tend to concentrate,at least
during some seasons,in certain locales.These areas of
concentration are shown in Figure 11 and include all or part
of the superlinks shown except 4,6,10,11 and 12 for moose
and 1,3 and 6 for caribou.
While brown bear reportedly occur throughout the project,
the only area of intensive spring use is along superlink 14.
The areas of intensive spring use provide an important
nutrition source for bears corning out of hibernation.
Dall sheep are found in
of Sugarloaf Mountain.
habitat for dall sheep.
Sugarloaf Mountain.
the project area only in the vicinity
This area provides year around
Superlinks 14,15 and 16 surround
MileSJ
20 Kilometers
-(i Gilbert/Commonwealth North
I I FIGURE 11
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Areas &
Species of Concern
25
Bald eagles are large birds of prey which feed primarily on
fish and carrion,although other foods are taken when avail-
able.Because of their position in the food web,the popula-
tions of this species are particularly reflective of the
health of the ecosystem.That is,contaminants entering the
food chain,whether naturally or artifically,would tend to
concentrate in these species.These contaminants frequently
affect the presence through a decrease in population levels.
The presence of eagle nests provides an important opportunity
to check on the health of food chain to which they belong.
Bald eagle nests have been recorded within two miles of
superlinks 2,3 and 6 and are shown in Figure 11.
Although the species is not listed as endangered or threaten-
ed,trumpeter swan populations have undergone severe deple-
tions in the past and have not recovered in recent years.
Known locations of trumpeter swan nests have been plotted on
Figure 11.These nests occur within 2 miles of superlinks
1,2,4,5 and 8,primarily along the western corridor.Two
nests have been recorded near superlink 1 and seven nests
have been found near superlink 5.Each of the other super-
links listed have one nest each.
Some endangered,threatened or provisionally listed plants
are known to utilize certain rock outcrops.Although the
plants were not found,the location of suitable habitat,
which is rock outcrop substrates,is shown in Figure 11
along superlinks 11,12, 13,14 and 15.
Watercourses used by anadromous and resident fish for their
migration and spawning activities are particularly sensitive
to sedimentation and siltation.These watercourses which
are sensitive occur throughout the project area and are
shown in Figure 11.
The Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission for
Alaska has complied a list of Ecological Reserves.The
purpose of these reserves is to provide sites for natural
science research and education.Five reserves are found in
the project area,as shown.In the South Central Region,
these are SC25-Susitna/Montana Creek,along superlinks 1
and 2,and SC27-Ruth Glacier Terminus near superlink 5.In
the Yukon Region,YU32-Nenana Canyon is near superlinks 12
and 13,YU33-Cantwell/Broad Pass Caribou Winter Range lies
across superlink 11,and YU34-Healy/Suntrana Mine Reveget-
ation Studies area is near superlinks 14 and 16.
26
Visual -Superlink 1 is located within the Susitna River
lowlands landscape type as shown in Figure 12.The eight
mile stretch between Willow Creek and two miles north of
Kashwitna Lake is characterized by very high scenic values.
View one represents this stretch.The view is oriented east
across open black spruce bogs and muskegs to the Talkeetna
Mountains.The remainder of the superlink is characterized
by moderate to low scenic values,although there are two
stretches of particularly high scenic values near the Kashwitna
River and Sheep Creek crossings.Views from the crossings
are oriented away from this alignment.Moderate visual
impact is expected along the superlink.
Superlink 2 is located within the Susitna River lowlands,
crossing the river at milepost 104.3 where view 2 origin-
ates.This stretch of the lowlands is characterized by high
visual absorption potential because of the dense birch-
spruce vegetation,allowing only occasional views to the
mountains.The stretch from the Montana Creek crossing
north to Sawmill Creek crossing is considered having very
high scenic values.The remainder of the superlink is located
in generally low quality landscape.View 3 is an aerial
photograph representing how the alignment would be perceived
from the residences along Petersville Road.Moderate visual
impact is generally expected along the superlink.
Superlink 3 is located in the Susitna River lowlands and the
Talkeetna Mountains.Visual absorption potential in the
lowlands is high because of the dense birch-spruce vegetation,
while the absorption potential of the mountains is low
because of the low shrub to barren vegetation.The link is
in a landscape of high scenic value.Low to moderate visual
impact is expected along the superlink.
Superlink 4 is in the Curry Ridge landscape type.The Curry
Ridge landscape is characterized by very high scenic values.
The visual absorption capabilities of the landscape is also
very high because of the dense birch-spruce-aspen vegetation,
therefore,visual impact is expected to be moderate along
the superlink.
Superlink 5 is located within the Curry Ridge landscape
characterized by very scenic values.A small stretch of the
link lies within the Chulitna River landscape and is charac-
terized by exceptionally high scenic values.The visual
absorption capabilities along the link are high because of
the dense birch-spruce-aspen stands in the Curry Ridge
landscape and the dense bottomland spruce-poplar stands in
the Chulitna River landscape.Views 4,6,7 and 8 are
representative of view impacts within the Curry Ridge land-
o 10 20 MileSJIIII '
o 10 20 Kilometers
~Gilbert/Commonwealth North
(I FIGURE 12
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Visual Resources
28
scape,which are expected to be moderate.Impacts could be
significant in the'Chulitna River landscape,represented by
view 9 and in the vicinity of Byers Lake State Campground at
view 5.
Superlink 6 generally parallels the Alaska Railroad within
the Curry Ridge landscape.The landscape is characterized
by very high potential for visual absorption because of the
dense spruce-birch-aspen vegetation.View 28 is associated
with superlink 6 and is expected to have low visual impact.
Superlink 7 is in that stretch of the Chulitna River land-
scape characterized as having exceptionally high scenic
values.The railroad and Parks Highway bridges over Hurricane
Gulch are a part of this stretch of the Chulitna River
landscape.Visual absorption potentials are low to moderate.
Visual impacts associated with views 10,11 and 12 are
expected to be moderate.
Superlinks 8 and 9 are located in the Chulitna River land-
scape,the Broad Pass landscape and a transitional landscape
type between these two primary landscape types.Visual
absorption capabilities along both superlinks are low to
moderate.Scenic values are characterized as moderately
high in the Chulitna River landscape,and exceptionally high
in Lhe Chuli Lna Hi ve.t.-.I:H:oad .\:lass lands<..:ape.Low to 1lloder:a Le
visual impacts are expected along both superlinks as repre-
sented by views 13 and 15.
Superlink 10 lies within the most scenic portion of the
Broad Pass landscape.The visual absorption potential is
low resulting in an expected significant visual impact.
See view l5a.
Superlinks 11 and 12 are located in the Broad Pass-Alaska
Range landscape type.Scenic values are characterized as
very high.The potential for visual absorption is low
through Broad Pass,because of the high visibility of almost
all foreground lands,and moderate to high north of the
Denali Highway.Views 14,15,16,17,18 and 19 are ex-
pected to receive moderate to significant visual impacts.
Superlink 13 is located within the Nenana Gorge landscape
which is characterized as having very high scenic values.
A small three mile stretch is in the Alaska Range where the
scenic value is considered moderate.Visual absorption is
generally very low in the Gorge and high in this stretch of
the Alaska Range while views 24 through 27 depict views
within the Gorge.Impacts are expected to be low in the
Alaska Range stretch but very significant within the Gorge.
29
Superlink 15 lies along Montana and Moody Creeks within the
Alaska Range landscape type.Visual absorption along the
two Creeks is low while the scenic value is high.Visual
impact is expected to be low because of the minimal number
of viewers.
Superlink 16 is located within the Nenana Uplands landscape
type in an area of low scenic value due to existing residen-
tial,commercial and industrial development.Visual impact
is expected to be low.
Conclusion
A review of the previous data has established major environ-
mental characteristics of the various superlinks.In the
recommendation of a preferred route an evaluation of the
network depicted in Figure 8 has established the following:
1.The eastern alignment (Superlinks 3 and 6)offers
less visual impact in its remote location than the
western alignment (Superlinks 2 and 5)along the
Parks Highway.
2.Land use impacts are also less evident in the
eastern alignment,where impacts on small tracts,
commercial development,and parks and recreation
(Denali State Park)can be better avoided.
3.Vegetation clearing and resulting impacts are
somewhat reduced along Superlinks 3 and 6,where
less acreage of low brush and muskeg-bog are
crossed.The incidence of bird collisions can
be somewhat lessened when compared to Superlinks
2 and 5 along the Susitna and Chulitna Rivers.
However,Superlinks 2 and 5 would have less over-
all impacts on natural systems by following an
existing corridor of human disturbance.
4.Superlink 9 affords less environmental affects
associated with its crossing of the East Fork
Chulitna,while Superlink 8's crossing of the
Middle Fork Chulitna will result in increased
impacts on bottomland forest.The remote location
of Superlink 8 reduces visual impacts but does
provide increased potential for bird collisions in
its location between the West Fork and Middle Fork
Chulitna.
30
5.In Broad Pass,Superlink 11 would result in somewhat
less visual impact than Superlink 10 by better
utilizing topography and vegetation associated
with Cantwell Creek.In addition,land use develop-
ment has occurred principally in the west along
the Parks Highway and an alignment in this loca-
tion will be less obtrusive in the expanse of ,
Broad Pass.However,this alignment does cross
the Denali National Park and Preserve South of
Cantwell and again at Windy Creek.
6.In approaching the Healy Substation along Super-
link 14,the Nenana Gorge should be recognized as
a valuable scenic resource unique in the project
study area.An overhead alignment through this
landscape feature will result in significant
visual impacts to both the Nenana Gorge and the
nearby entrance to Denali National Park and Pre-
serve.
The alternate alignment,Superlink 15,should also
be recognized for its ecological value in the dall
sheep and moose habitat it traverses.Given the
respective characteristics of each superlink,it
is recommended that consideration be given to
underground installation through the Nenana Gorge
and park entrance area for Superlink 14.Alterna-
tively,the use of Superlink 15 should be subject
to strict construction stipulations which should
include aerial construction (no ground access)and
seasonal constraints (April to August).
31
III.ENGINEERING AND OPERATING CONSIDERATIONS
Meteorology
Figure 13,"Meteorology and Geology,"illustrates many of
the subjects discussed in the next three sections.
The south end of the line,which includes superlinks 1,2
and 3 lies in the broad Susitna River Valley.Temperatures
have a much greater range than at Anchorage,as the area is
away from the moderating influence of Cook Inlet.In this
area the estimated temperature extremes are 103°F and
-93°F for a 50 year period of return.The record high
temperature at Willow is 90°F and the record low temperature
is -56°F.Records were first recorded in 1963.
Superlinks 4,5 and 6 lie in the Susitna and Chulitna River
valleys in relatively low terrain.Portions of superlink 6
are higher and subject to greater wind speeds.Temperatures
are expected to be similar to those on superlinks 1,2 and
3.The superline maximum wind speed for superlinks 1 through
6 is anticipated to be 54 mph.Some wind and icing can be
expected on the southern half of the line but wind will be
less than 40 mph and radial ice will be less than one-half
inch.NESC Heavy loading conditions will adequately design
for the expected combination of wind and ice.
Superlink 7 is in the vicinity of Chulitna Pass.This is
the southernmost area of unusual winds due to topographic
features.The location of superlink 7 minimized the exposure
to extreme winds.It is estimated that winds in this area
will not exceed 75 mph.Additional wind data is being
obtained by NORTEC at Hurricane.If higher design winds are
indicated from the NORTEC study,provision for the increased
velocities will be made during the detail design phase of
the project.NESC Heavy Loading will adequately satisfy the
combined ice and wind'loading for the line.
Superlinks 8,9,10,11 and 12 are in the area generally
known as Broad Pass.The temperature extremes are 107°F
and -68°F for a period of return of 50 years.The once
in 100 years wind is estimated to be 72 mph.A combination
of wind and ice is anticipated to be less than NESC Heavy
Loading of 40 mph and one-half inch of radial ice.Located
at the north end of Broad Pass are Cantwell and Windy Pass.
At this point there is a significant change in the wind
conditions on the project.
Superlink 13 traverses through Windy Pass to the intersection
of the Nenana River and Montana Creek.A unique meteorological
condition exists in this area and through Nenana Gorge
o 10 20 MileS 4IIII '
o 10 20 Kilometers
~Gilbert/Commonwealth North
I I AGURE13
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Meteorology
&Geology
33
due to the topography of Alaska.The Alaska Range forms a
barrier to the low 'level movement of air.Under certain
barometric conditions,wind is funneled through openings in
this barrier at a much greater speed than would occur over
flat terrain.Strong northerly winds can be expected when a
large high pressure center is located over the Fairbanks
area and a low pressure center is over the Anchorage area.
Strong southerly winds are expected when the pressure patterns
reverse.
The Nenana River Canyon from Windy to Healy,superlinks 14,
15 and 16,is the main wind funnel for a 100 mile stretch of
the Alaska Range.The canyon drops from an elevation of
2,000 feet near Windy to 1,300 feet at Healy,forming a 30
mile-long wind funnel bringing southeasterly Chinook winds
to Healy.Consequently,Healy has recorded the highest wind
speeds of any location along the project.The maximum
anticipated wind for the Healy area is 118.2 mph.Additional
wind speed measuring devices have been installed at Healy,
Carlo and Windy.The results of these additional measurements
will be incorporated into the final design of the structures.
NESC Heavy Loading will be adequate to design structures for
the combined wind and ice loading on the line.
Snow depths are generally not great along the project.No
special considerations for snow depth are being considered.
Generally,all rivers in the project area freeze over in the
winter time,making it possible to construct ice bridges,if
permitted by the terrain in the area of the crossing.
Topography
Superlink 1 is very level with poorly drained soils.Slopes
will not present any problem in this area.
Superlinks 2,4 and 5 are in rolling terrain with occasional
slopes too steep to traverse with construction equipment.
Access difficulty should generally be considered as moderate.
Superlinks 3 and 6 have slopes ranging from flat to greater than
50 percent slope.Slopes will increase the difficulty of
access for construction and maintenance.Additionally,
structures cannot be constructed on sideslopes greater than
approximately 45 percent.Final alignment of superlink 6
must be carefully evaluated because of these problems.
Superlinks 7,8,9,10,11 and 12 through Chulitna Pass and
Broad Pass do not have any severe constraints because of
topography.Generally the slopes in this area are less than
25 percent.
Superlink 13 contains the steep slopes of the Reindeer Hills
and Windy Pass.Topography severely restricts the location of
34
the line in the lowlands of the Jack and Nenana Rivers.
These rivers do have well-defined banks,however;and it
will not be necessary to locate any structures in the
floodplains.The slopes are severe in portions of this area
and earth or snow avalanches are possible.The final alignment
will minimize these hazards or the structures will be designed
to withstand the pressures and winds associated with an
avalanche.
Superlinks 14 and 15 both contain severe slopes.The remarks
regarding superlink 13 also apply here.Superlink 14 is in
an extremely narrow canyon with sharp slopes on both sides.
Very little flexibility exists regarding the location of the
line in this area.
Superlink 16 is the short,final connecting link to the Healy
Substation.The topography is level to rolling.No severe
terrain problems are anticipated along this segment.
Soils and Geophysical Aspects
Superlink 1 consists of a very high percentage of wetlands and
peat.There are also numerous small stream crossings.
Superlink 2 crosses the Susitna River at a point where structures
will not have to be located in the floodplain.Approximately
30-40 percent of the superlink is in wetlands and peat.Inter-
mittent permafrost may occur in areas where the ground cover
provides good insulation.
Superlinks 3 and 4 are located in an upland area that may con-
tain some intermittent permafrost but very little wetlands or
peat.The northern portion of superlink 4 contains some bedrock.
Superlinks 5 and 6 are also in upland well-drained areas.Ten
to twenty percent bedrock and discontinuous permafrost can be
expected.A mass movement area exists on superlink 6 approxi-
mately 6 miles north of Gold Creek.
Final exact alignment of superlink 6 is deferred because it is
not known if the mass movement area will cross the proposed
line.It is quite possible that the line can be located to
avoid this problem.
Superlink 7 is in an area that is mostly underlain by bedrock.
No other geotechnical condition is prominent on this section.
Superlinks 8,9,10,11 and 12 are underlain with permafrost
that varies from 50 percent to 100 percent coverage.There
are a few mass movement areas along the edges of Broad Pass but
they will not extend to the potential routes in this area.
35
Superlink 13 contains 50-95 percent permafrost and is about
50 percent underlain with bedrock.Mass movement areas also
exist that could cross the transmission line and damage the
structures.Exact alignment and structure locations must be
known to determine the final impact,but correct alignment
can minimize the problem to the maximum extent possible.
The sideslopes between Panorama Mountain north of Windy Pass
and the Parks Highway are quite vulnerable to avalanches.
After final alignment and structure locations are made,
further review of the potential problem is indicated to
determine if mitigating measures are required.
Superlinks 14,15 and 16 are underlain with 50-95 percent perma-
frost and almost entirely with bedrock.Potential avalanche
problems exist along the east and west facing slopes of
Nenana Gorge,a portion of Montana Creek and nearly all of
Moody Creek.The mountain on the west side of Nenana Gorge
is gradually shifting into the gorge.There is no known way
of inhibiting this movement and therefore location of the
line on the west side of the river is not recommended.
Exact alignment and structure locations will be critical in
this area.After final alignment and structure locations
are made,a further review of the avalanche problem will be
conducted to determine if mitigating measures are required.
Maintainability
The maintainability of the line is a function of line location
and the type of materials used during the initial construction
and/or maintenance of the line.The structures will be
designed to permit removal and installation of broken insulators
while the line is energized.Vandalism can be expected as
it is a problem on all transmission lines.The structures
should be designed to accommodate hot-line maintenance.
In general,maintainability is better if the line is accessible
from the ground,spare materials are available and the
maintenance crews are well trained.If the line is located
near the Parks Highway,it will be more maintainable.Both
maintenance and reliability favor the best possible access
to the line.Routes considering superlinks 2 and 5 are more
maintainable than 2,4 and 6 or 3 and 6.Superlink 14 is also
better than 15.Figure 14,"Access,"locates some of the
access problem areas along the Intertie.The other key
maintenance item relates to line operation in that spare
parts and trained crews must be available on a continuous
basis.
~Mile5J
Kilometers
I(j Gilbert/Commonwealth North
(I FIGURE 14
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Access
37
Reliability
Line reliability is a function of the hazards to which a
transmission line is exposed and the ability to restore
service after a hazard has caused a discontinuance of service.
Some of these hazards are not route-sensitive and they,
therefore,are not presently under consideration.The
route-sensitive items that will be considered are wind,ice,
earthslides,avalanches,frost heaving,and vandalism.
Superlink 1 can be constructed to be a reliable line without
any unusual considerations.Frost heaving and vandalism are
the only significant potential problems.Since this segment
is not adjacent to a transportation corridor,if an outage
should occur,repairs would be delayed due to access.Access
would be particularly difficult dqring the summer months.
Line outages would cre shortened if the maintenance crews were
equipped to perform maintenance and repair services by heli-
copter.
Superlinks 2 and 3 do have limited ground access and the re-
sponse time for repair should be better than superlink 1.
The northern portion of superlink 3 is quite inaccessible,
however;therefore superlink 2 should have a greater degree
of reliability.Superlinks 2 and 3 will be generally exposed
to the same hazards as superlink 1.
Superlink 4 will also be exposed to the same hazards as super-
line 1,but since access is so difficult it must be considered
a less reliable alternative since maintenance and repair time
would be extended.
Superlink 5 is generally exposed to the same hazards as super-
link 1 and therefore the same degree of reliability can be
expected.
Superlink 6,bed use of its remoteness and a mass movement
area,is less reliable than superlink 5.
Superlink 7 is exposed to higher winds in the Chulitna Pass area.
Design to consider the higher winds will mitigate the problem
but a certain degree of reliability is lost.No reasonable
alternative exists,therefore the only mitigative measure is
accomplished by design.This superlink is not easily accessible
by road and outages can be expected to be of a longer duration.
Superlinks 8,9,10,11 and 12 have approximately the same
degree of reliability as superlink 1,with the same hazards as
superlink 1.Access,again,would be moderately difficult.
38
Superlink 13 will be exposed to very high winds and poten-
tial avalanches.It is relatively close to the Parks Highway,
which should shorten an outage,but the exposure in this
area is great.The best mitigative measure is familiarity
with the hazards that exist and consideration of those
hazards during design.
Superlinks 14 and 15 are both subject to avalanches that would
reduce their reliability.Superlink 14 is also subject to ex-
tremely high winds.Outages could be expected to be more fre-
quent on superlink 14 but of shorter duration than on superlink
15 because of access problems.
Superlink 16 is also subject to high winds but it is quite ac-
cessible,therefoB any outage should be of a shorter duration.
In general it can be concluded that the most reliable line
is one that is competently designed and is located as close
as possible to existing open-year-round transportation
corridors.Vandalism can be eApected to be about the same
on any of the superlinks.Weather will playa significant
role in reliability both because it is the most prominent
cause of outages and the most significant problem during
maintenance and repair.
Conceptual Access Plan
Need For Access -The construction of the Anchorage-Fairbanks
Intertie will be a major extra high voltage electrical
transmission line project.This project will have a construction
force of approximately one hundred to one hundred fifty
construction specialists actively employed and working on
one hundred and seventy miles of right-of-way through a
spectrum of topography.This force of workers will be
responsible for receiving,assembling and installing ap-
proximately twelve thousand tons of material fabricated and
shipped from suppliers.
Materials will be delivered by truck or by railroad to
selected marshalling yards along the Parks Highway or the
Alaska Railroad.This material as well as the contractor's
equipment,tools and supplies must then be transported from
the marshalling yards to the line right-of-way,then along the
line right-of-way to the installation locations.In addition
the contractor's work force must travel daily from work camps
or assembly points along the Parks Highway or the Alaska
Railroad to the right-af-way.
39
Access to the right-of-way from established transportation
corridors and marshalling yards will be required on a daily
basis.Construction activities will require five distinct
requirements for access to and travel on the right-of-way:
1)clearing,2)delivery of materials,3)installation of
foundations,4)assembly and erection of structures and,5)
stringing of conductor and static wires.
Ideally,the machines and equipment required for foundations,
structures and wire stringing activities are brought onto
the right-of-way at the point of access and travel down the
right-of-way until job completion.Where natural obstacles
to continuous construction such as rivers,canyons or steep
slopes prevents this,then exit from the right-of-way must
be planned in advance 3nd another access established.
Nature Of The Access -During the planning of this project
careful consideration has been given to the use of helicopters
for transport of men,materials and equipment.The helicopter
has proven to be a very useful tool on many transmission
construction projects and it is expected that it will be
used to a great extent on this project.However,the size,
weight and volume of equipment and material required for
this project,coupled with the limitations of helicopters as
transportation vehicles,makes it impractical to specify them
as the sole means of access except in very limited locations
where difficult terrain or environmental impacts make their
use imperative.The limitations of helicopters include high
cost,limited load carrying capacity,availability and
operational limitations due to weather,temperature and
available daylight.In addition,prudent planning for
maintenance and restoration of the line to service following
natural disasters requires provisions for ground access to
the line.Such natural disasters most frequently occur
during periods of severe weather.Being forced to depend
solely on helicopters as the means of transport for service
restoration presents an unacceptable risk.A carefully
planned construction access plan can therefore enhance the
maintainability and reliability of the line with the least
possible impact on the environment and land use.
40
Proposed Access Plan - A conceptual access plan has been
presented based on the following criteria:
1.Existing and planned roads and trails will be used
to the maximum extent possible.
2.The contractors will be permitted to build construction
trails from existing roads and trails or from
proposed marshalling yards to the line right-of-
way and on the right-of-way so that they have
ground access to the entire line right-of-way
except as noted below.
3.The contractors will be required to construct the
Moody Creek -Montana Creek portion of the line by
helicopter.
4.The contractors will be required to accept the
conceptual access plan or obtain the approval of
APA and the review of the permitting agencies on
an alternate plan prior to the start of construction.
5.The contractors adherence to the approved access
plan will be monitored by APA,their Engineer and
Construction Manager.
To limit right-of-way traffic and to provide for minimal
"haul time",a series of marshalling yards are proposed on
or adjacent to the right-of-way.The distance between these
yards and individual location is determined by nearness to
established transportation facilities,site availability,line
length and limitations of access.The Conceptual Access
Plan shown in Figure 15 provides for 15 marshalling yards
that are on or adjacent to the Alaska Railroad or Parks
Highway right-of-way where storage facilities can be made
available.With these locations,the materials can be
loaded on trucks or rail cars and directly shipped to a
selected yard with a minimum of handling resulting,in
minimal damage and/or loss.
Environmental considerations have been incorporated in the
preparation of the conceptual access plan.Proposed access
has been recommended to utilize rights-of-way,trails and
other existing means of access to the extent possible.
Introduction of access into areas where none previously
existed has been planned to minimize stream crossings,
extensive switchbacks on steep topography and heavy clearing
of vegetation.The location of residences and private
property will be taken into account as more detailed studies
are initiated to determine the final location of access
into the right-of-way.
(I AGURE15
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Mile5J
20 Kilometers
(i Gilbert/Commonwealth North
Conceptual Access Plan
42
IV.ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
The environmental,engineering and operating considerations
along each line route have been explained in parts I and II
and now economic considerations of various line routes follow.
Capital investment and life-cycle costs are tabulated for
the three system configurations under consideration.
Nineteen route options were estimated for each of the three
configurations resulting in a total of fifty-seven options
to compare.The construction estimates methodology will be
described before project cost comparisons are presented.
Project Cost Comparisons
In presenting these cost comparisons,we must first differentiate
between PROJECT (capital)COSTS and CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
For purposes of discussion,the sum of the construction
costs coupled with additional costs,such as contingencies,
inflation,engineering and management,result in a Project
Cost.These costs are listed separately on each of the
estimates calculated for each of the line routes being
considered.The initial data presented will be for "Construction
Costs"only.The costs presented will be identified as to
inclusions.The summary will reflect Project Costs.
In developing these costs,several departure points or
a~sumptions were made.All estimates are based on the same
assumptions--any changes to these will reflect a change in
Project Costs.
The assumptions are:
o
o
o
the transmission line route will be a combination
of the established superlinks.
the structure used for comparisons is the tubular
steel "X"for tangent and light angle locations,
and the three pole design will be used at heavy
angle and dead-end locations,except steel poles
will be used in Nenana Gorge and Windy Pass.
CAI engineering data will be used for each superlink,
i.e.,number and type of structures and number and
type of foundations.
o
o
o
o
o
o
43
foundations will be the driven pile or rock anchor
design for all "X"structures.
access to and travel on the right-of-way will be
permitted except where prevented by topography and
in the Moody-Montana area.
the all helicopter method construction will require
some special equipment for erection and wire
stringing that does not exceed 10,000 pounds in
component weight.
construction in the wetlands will be performed
when the earth is frozen.
three crew camps will be established by the contractor.
all construction costs are in 1981 dollars.
In developing each of the cost estimates,certain standards,
such as labor rates,equipment rates,and contractor furnished
material were developed to reflect conditions that are site
specific to the State of Alaska.
In addition,allowances were made for travel time from the
hase camp to the alignment,topography,geotechnical and
seasonal constraints.Cost comparisons were made with recent
transmission line construction in Alaska.
To provide a latitude in costs as a factor in route selection,
three methods of transmission line construction were estimated.
Separate cost estimates were accomplished for:
o
o
o
conventional land construction methods
helicopter transport of work crews to and from the
base camps with conventional construction methods
helicopter transport of labor,equipment,and
materials with helicopter assist to all operations
Labor and equipment forces were mobilized for each specific
job work unit to be accomplished and costed on a per hour
basis.Then,each work unit was given a time to accomplish
value.The time value of each work unit times the crew and
equipment cost per hour produced a cost for each specific
work unit.Work units included yard work,hauling materials,
driving and cleanup.These costs were developed for both
conventional and helicopter assisted construction.Where
estimates were made for helicopter crew transport only,the
conventional time values for specific jobs were used.
44
To determine inplace costs for each work unit,a time for
travel and access 'factor was established for each super-
link.Travel and access time was established for the mean
distance of the superlink from the base camp.With this
base established,then computations began to emerge that
when completed,provided a cost estimate for each of the
selected routes.These computations are provided in Tables
2 through 8 and are reflected in Figures 15 and 16.
Table 2 is a cost comparison of the three methods of construction
applied to each superlink and reflects a labor and equipment
cost to construct one mile of 345 kV transmission line.
Figure 16 reflects the same information but the costs have
been rounded to the nearest one thousand dollars.The
asterisk (*)denotes the least costly or most efficient
method of construction.
Tables 3 and 4 reflect the same information for each super-
link with various underground and overhead construction
options,but are specific to 138 kV and 345 kV construction.
These attachments are more definitive as they include,in
addition to labor and equipment,tree clearing and material
costs.The data presented on these tables is for the Most
Economical method of construction,i.e.conventional,
helicopter or helicopter assisted.
Figure 17 illustrates each of the superlinks being considered
with a dollar value applied.This dollar value reflects the
costs for labor and equipment,material and tree clearing,
accomplished by the most economical method of construction.
The variations cost per mile reflect the difficulty factor
in constructing the transmission line at some distance from
highways and roads.On this network of superlinks,several
have been identified by bold line--when added together they
represent Configuration lB19,which,when compared to all
other lB Configurations,becomes the least costly line route
to construct for 345 kV transmission.
With computations of Tables 3 and 4 applied to each of the
three configurations in each of the nineteen routes selected
for cost estimation,then Project Costs emerge in useable
form as a tool in a final route selection and are presented
in Tables 5,6 and 7.
Table 8 provides a Summary Cost Comparison of each of the
nineteen selected routes in each of the three configurations.
It is interesting to note that the most economical route in
all three configurations is Route 19.
TABLE 2
ALASKA POWER AUTIIORITY
A:~CIIORAGE-FAI RBANKS INTERT IE
CONSTRUCTION COST COMPARISONS
LABOR &EQUIPMENT ONLY
Superlink Helicopter/Crew
lie 1icopter Conventional Transport
N(;).Length Miles Cost/Mile Cost/r1i1 e Cost/f1i1e-
1 21.6 194,530 164,742 173,613
2 31.6 193,855 153,872 170,061
3 41.4 184,924 191,902 182,102
4 17 .5 186,026 199,809 180,904
5 45.3 184,655 161~372 168,942
6 28.5 185,484 185,696 181,054 .
7 5.1 184,812 156,054 172,985
8 19.6 184,851 179,435 173-,492
9 14.9 180,347 161,303 170,096.
10 4.2 188,808 177,724 175,849
1'1 18.4 182,032 167,196.178,185
12 22.4 187,873 166,021 182,476 .
13 19.9 n/a 162,249 179,339
14 13.1 n/a 230,645 .223,649
15 14.9 189,955 223,250 189,751
16 .9 224,184 211 ,257 203,844 "'"U1
C-211
16S *HA-204
Healy .J.H 224
C-231 \)-C-223
*HA-224 14S 15S HA-190
H-NA _:+-H-190
*,C-162
13S --HA-179
H-NA
Conventional
Helicopter Crew
Transport
Helicopter
Most Economical
Super Link
Legend:
Note:
1.Cost of labor and
equipment in thousands
per mile.
2.138!345kV
3.ConfiguratIon 1B
C
HA
H
*15
C-192
3S *HA-182
H-185
*C-165
1S HA-174
H-195
Willow
*C-167
HA-178 "r:1S
*C-166H-182 12S HA-182
C-178 .H-188
*HA-176 1?-SI
H-189 0 *C-161
C-179 9s---HA-170
*HA-173 8S H-180
H-185 "~C-156
J7S HA-173
;
01 H-185
*C-161
HA-169 5S f C-186
H-185 /6S *HA-181
H-185
*~:~~1 Lsi
H-186 f/
*C-1 54
HA-170--2S
H-194
J FIGURE 16
(Alaska Power Alithority JANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
I()Gllbert'Commonwealth ~""Comparative Cost By
Method of Construction
~
TABLE 3
SUPERLINK -345 kV ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
Page 1 of 2
SUPERLINK LENGTH METHOD TREE MATERIAL EQUIPMENT TOTAL
NUMBER MILES OF CLEARING AND
CONSTRUCTION LABOR
1 21.6 Conventional 317,952 2,863,987 3,565,000 6,747,000
2 31.6 II 825,645 4,166,807 4,866,000 9,859,000
3 41.4 Conventional Heli.A st.1,239,536 5.279.742 7.535.000 14.055.000
4 17.5 II II II 612,000 2,142,717 3,168,000 5,923,000
5 45.3 Conventional 1,400,314 5,850,857 7,293,000 14,544,000
6 28.!i Conventional Heli.A st.957,000 3,596,557 5,159,000 9,713,000
7 5."1 Conventional 26,275 605,002 795,600 1,427,000
8 19.6 Conventional Heli.A st.411 ,130 2,484,300 3,390,800 6,286,000
9 14.9 Conventional 389,307 1,851,802 2,398,900 4,640,000
10 4.2 Conventional Heli.A st.77 ,380 581,890 739,200 1,398,000
11 18.4 Conventional 250,534 2,302,116 ~,072,800 5,625,000
11 with 13 UG 17.4 II 236,918 2,177 ,001 2,905,800 5,320,000
12 22.4 II 164,864 2,911,171 3,718,400 6,794,000
13 OH 19.9 II 161,110 3,578.935 3,223,800 6,964,000
13/13 UG 11.6 II 93.913 3.086.213 1.879.200 4.059.000
13 UG 6.0 Underground 0 8,069,000 .5,651,000 13,720,000
13/14 UG 21.4 Conventional 173,254 3,848,704 3,466,800 7,489,000
PREPARED BY COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES INC.
JACKSON,MICHIGAN
,j:>.
-....I
TABLE 3 (Continued)
SUPERLINK -345 kV ESTIMATED Cm~STRUCTION COSTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
Page 2 of 2
SUPERLINK LENGTH METHOD TREE MATERIAL EQUIPMENT TOTAL
NUMBER MILES OF CLEARING AND
CONSTRUCTION LABOR
13/13 &14 UG 13.1 Conventional 106,057 2,355,982 2,122,200 4,584,000
14 OH 13.1 Conventional Heli.As t.143,000 2,551,435 2,934,400 5,629,000
14 OH/14 UG 3.6 II II II 35,770 701,158 806,400 1,543,000/
14 UG 10.0 Underground °11 ,151 ,000 8,226,000 19,377,000
15 14.9 Helicopter 116,056 1,812,123 2,831,000 4,759,000
16 0.9 Conventional He1i.Ass .0 144,645 183,600 328,000
TW 26.0 Conventional 382,720 3,447,392 4,440,200 7,888,000
TW 5.5 II 41 1fifi 383 570 704 451 1 129 000
,
PREPARED BY COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES INC.
JACKSON,MICHIGAN
K::>
00
TABLE 4 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
SUPERLINK -138 kV ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
COST ESTIMATE
Page 1 of 2
SUPERLINK LENGTH METHOD TREE MATERIAL EQUIPMENT TOTAL
NUMBER MILES OF CLEARING AND
CONSTRUCTION LABOR
1.21.6 Conventional 162,432 1,294,300 2,673,750 4,130,000
2 31.6 II 421,797 1 ,877 ,170 3,649,500 5,949,000
3 41.4 Conventional Heli.As st.633,241 2,244,420 5,651,250 8,529,000
4 17.!5 II II II 312,652 927,245 2,376,000 3,616,000
5 45.3 Conventional 715,378 2,569,845 5,469,750 8,755,000
6 28.!5 Conventional Heli.As st.488,900 1,559,025 3,869,250 5,917,175
7 5.1 Conventional 13,423 264,265 596,700 874,000
8 19.6 Conventional Heli.As st.210,034 1,094,730 2,543,100 3,848,000
9 14.9 Conventional 198,885 805,085 1,799,175 2,803,000
10 4.2 Conventional Heli.As st.39,480 260,080 554,400 854,000
11 18.4 Conventional 127,990 1 ,001 ,340 2,304,600 3,434,000
11 w/13 UG 17.4 II 121,034 950,790 2,179,350 3,251,000
12 22.4 II 84,224 1,270,860 2,788,800 4,144,000
13 19.9 II 82,306 1 ,776,055 2,417,850 4,276,000
13/13 UG 11.6 II 47,977 649,680 1,409,400 2,107,000
13 UG 6.0 Underground -0-4,365,000 4,802,000 9,167,000
13/14 UG 21.4 Conventional 88,510 1,292,140 2,600,100 3,981,000
"'"1.0
PREPARED BY COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES INC.
JACKSON,MICHIGAN
TABLE 4 (Continued)
SUPERLINK -138 kV ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS INTERITE
COST ESTIMATE
Page 2 of 2
SUPERLINK LENGTH METHOD TREE MATERIAL EQUIPMENT TOTAL
NUMBER MILES OF CLEARING AND
CONSTRUCTION LABOR
13/13 .&14 UG 13.1 Conventional 54,182 759,555 1 ,591 ,650 2,405,000
14 13.1 Conventional Heli.As t.66,496 1,019,195 2,200,800 3,287,000
14 OH/14 UG 3.6 II II II 18,274 224,910 604,800 81l8,000
14 UG 10.0 Underground -0-5,774,000 7,144,000 12,918,000
15 14.9 Helicopter 36,416 774,995 2,123,250 2,935,000
16 0.9 Conventional Heli.As t.-0-65,475 137,700 203,000
TW 5.5 Conventional 41,360 383,570 704,451 1,129,000
PREPARED BY COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATES INC.
JACKSON,MICHIGAN
U1o
Healy 15 $328
$5,629 14S \:Iss $4,759
135 $6,964
$5,625-----
---$6,794
$1,398----
Total Cost =$55,427
Cost/Mile =$326.8
Total Miles =169.6
-----$9,713
$6,286 85'/95 $4,640
)75 $1,427
$5,923 \
$14,544-----
35 $14,955
$9,859 25
15 $6,747
Willow
Legend:
----Least Cost Route
~Super Link
Note:
1.Cost includes clearing.
material,and labor and
equipment only
2.Cost in thousands
3.138/345kV
4.Configuration 1B19
I FIGURE 17
(Alaska f>owerAuthority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
~GIlbert/Commonwealth ~O"h Construction Cost
By Super link
8£T/8£T TVT NOliliV~nDldNOJ
3iliVWliliS3 iliSOJ iliJ3~O~d
S 3'H1Vili
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Descri .e.ti on:~~estern -100%Overhead
TABLE 5
52
Total Cost
4,130
5,949
B...l5.5
Bl!l
2JiQl
854
3,1434
4,1276
3,1287
203
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.0
5.5
180.5,
34,1565
11 129
35,694
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
45,143
7,000
2,257
3,100
2,709
2,257
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
62,466
15,617
78,083
94 ,480
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western -Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge
53
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
177 .0
5.5
182.5
44 1 749
1.1 129
45,878
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Hile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
55,327
7,080
2,766
3,100
3,320
2,766
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
74,359
18,590
92,949
]]2,468
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Overhead Except Take Moody-Montana
54
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
ill.....a
5.5
182.3
34~213
1~129
35,342
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
44,791
7,072
2,240
3,100
2,687
2,240
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
62,130
15,533
77 ,663
93,972
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass
55
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
171.7
5.5
177 .2
41,380
1 ,129
42,509
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
51 ,958
6,868
2,598
3,100
3,117
2,598
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
70,239
17,560
87,799
106,237
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
56
Route Description:Western-Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge and Windy
Pass
Configuration:lA5 138/138
SUE,er Link No.
1
2
5
1
9
10
11/13 UG
13/13 &14 UG
l~UG
14 OHLUG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
31.6
45.3
5 £1
lU
4.2
17.4
13.1
6.0
3.6
10.0
0.9
173.7
5.5
179.2
Total Cost
4,130
5,949
8 1 755
874
21 803
854
3,251
2,405
9,167
848
12,918
203
52,157
1,129
53,286
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
62,735
6-94B
.4llZ
:4lilll
1..1.6.4
3..J1Z
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
82,821
20",705
103",526
125,266
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
57
Route Description:Western Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass and Take
Moody-t1ontana
Configuration:
Super Link No.
1
2
5
1
9
La
ill13 UG
lli13 UG
13 UG
15
16
lA6 138/138-
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 4,130
31.6 5,949--
45,3 8,755
5.1 874
14.9 2,803
4.2 854
17.4 3,251
11.6 2,107
6.0 9,167
14.9 2,935
0.9 203
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Tota 1 Line
Total Substation Cost
173.5
5.5
179.0
41,028
1 ,129
42,157
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
51,606
6,940
2,580
3,100
3,096
2,580
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
69,902
17,476
87~378
105,}27
Route Descrigtion:
Configuration:
Suger Li nk No.
3
6
7
9
10
11
13
14
16
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Eastern-100%Overhead Take Nenana Gorge
lA7 138L138
Miles Total Cost
21.6 4,130
41.4 8,529
28.5 5,917
5.1 874
14.9 2,803
4.2 854
18.4 3,434
19.9 4,276
13 .1 3,287
0.9 203
58
Subtotal Intertie ~
Teeland-Willow ~
Total Line 173.5
Total Substation Cost
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
34,307
W2.9
35,436
~
44 1 885
61 720
21 244
3,100
2,693
2,244
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
61 ,886
15,472
77 ,358
93,603
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-Overhead Except UG Thru Nenana Gorge
59
Subtotal Intertie
Tee1and-Wil1ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
170.0
5.5
175.5
44,491
1 ,129
45,620
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
55,069
6,800
2,753
3,100
3,304
2,753
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
73.779
18.445
92.224
1]],591
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-100%Overhead
Confi~uration:lA9 138/138
60
SUE,er Link No.
3
6
7
9
lD.
lJ
13
15
J..fi
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
41.4
28.5
5.1
14.9
4..2
J..8.d
~
1.4.9
0.,9
169.8
5.5
175.3
Total Cost
4,130
8,529
5,917
874
2,803
8M
M3A
4~
2~5
203
33".955
1".129
35:084
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
44,533
6,792
2,227
3,100
2,672
2,227
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
61 ,551
15,388
76,939
93,096
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
61
Route Description:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass and Take
Nenana Gorge
Configuration:1A10
Su.e.er Link No.
1
3
Q
7
9
10
11L13 UG
13L13 UG
13 UG
14
12
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 4,130-
41.4 8,529
28.5 5,917
5.1 874
14.9 2,803
4.2 854
17.4 3,251
11.6 2,107
6.0 9,167
13.1 3,287
0.9 203
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
164.7
5.5
170.2
41 ,122
1 ,129
42,251
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
51,700
6,588
2,585
3-J.Q.Q
l,.lQ2
2,:1.585
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
69,:1.660
17,:1.415
87,:1.075
105,.361
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
62
Route Description:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass anQ Nenana
Gorge
Configuration:lA11 138/138
Su.eer Li nk No.
3
6
7
9
10
lJ /13 IIG;
13/]3 &]4 IIG
l3-.UG
14 QH/IIG
lLU.G
1.6
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
41.4
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
lL..4
l3...J
.6....Q
3.....6
lfl.Jl
D...9.
lQ.6...l
5.5
172.2
Total Cost
4,130
8,529
5,917
874
2,803
854
3-..2.5J
2...ilil5
9..J.fi1
.M8
12,918
2.0.3.
51~
1.1 129
53~028
9,449
Subtota 1
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/t1i1e)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
62,477
6,668
3,124
3,100
3,749
3,124
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
82,242
20,561
102,803
124,392
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass
63
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
166.5
5.5
172.0
40,770
1 ,129
41 ,899
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
51,348
6,660
2,567
3,100
3,081
2,567
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
69,323
17,331
86,654
104,851
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-100%Overhead
64
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.7
5.5
181 .2
35~343
1 1 129
36,472
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
45,921
7,028
2,296
3,100
2,755
2,296
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
63,396
15,849
79,245
95,886
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
65
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG Windy Pass
Configuration:1A14 138/138
SUEer Li nk No.
1
2
4
6
z
9
1.0
11 IJ 3 UG
13/13 UG
ll....U.G
14
16
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5...J
~
4.2
17.4
11.6
6.0
13.1
0.9
172.4
5.5
177 .9
Total Cost
4,130
5,949
3,616
5,917
874
2~803
854
31 251
2.2,107
9,167
3,287
203
42,158
1 ,129
43,287
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
52,736
6,896
2,637
3,100
3,164
2,637
Subtota 1
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25~~
71,170
17,793
88,963
107~645
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
66
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG Nenana Gorge
Configuration:lA15 138/138
SUE,er Li nk No.
1
2
4
6
1
.9
lQ
11
13L14 UG
14 OHLUG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5...J
14.9
4.2
18.4
21.4
3.6
10.0
0.9
177.7
5.5
183.2
Total Cost
4,130
5,949
3,616
5,917
ill
2~803
854
3:434
3,981
848
12,918
203
45,527
1 ,129
46,656
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
56,105
7,108
2,805
3,100
3,366
2,805
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
75,289
18,822
94,II 1
113,874
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 67
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead Except Underground
in Nenana Gor.ge and Windy Pass
Configuration:lA16 138/138
SUEer Link No.
2
.4
Q
7
9
10
llLl3 UG
13Ll3 &14 UG
13 UG
14 OH/UG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
2.l.....6
.31.6
lL5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
17.4
13.1
6.0
3.6
10.0
0.9
174.4
5.5
179.9
Total Cost
hUQ
5.1 949
3.1 616
5.1 917
874
2,803
854
3,251
2,405
9,167
848
12,918
203
52,935
1 ,129
54,064
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
63,513
6,976
3,176
3,100
3,811
3,176
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
83.1 752
20.1 938
104.1 690
126.1 675
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
68
Route DescriEtion:
in Windy Pass
Confi9.uration:
Western-Avoid State Park-Overnead
and Take Moody-Montana
lA17 138/138
Except Underground
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
52,384
6,968
2,619
3,100
3,143
2,619
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
70,833
17,708
88,541
107.1 135
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBAt;KS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
69
Route DescriEtion:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead and Take Moody-
Montana
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
4
fi
z
~
10
11
13
15
16
1A18 138/138
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 4,130
31.6 5,949
17.5 3,616-
28.5 5,917
5.1 874
14.9 2,803
4.2 854
18.4 3,434
19.9 4,276
14.9 2,935
0.9 203
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Wi11ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
177 .5
5.5
1.8.l:..Q
34,991
1 ,129
36,,120
9",449
SO/
10
6%
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/~ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
45,569
7,100
2,278
3,100
2,734
2,278
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
63,059
15,765
78,824
95,,377
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-100%Overhead with Broad Pass East
Configuration:lA19 138/138
Super Link No.Mil es Total Cost
1 21.6 4,130
3 41.4 8,529
6 28.5 5,917
7 5.1 874
9 14.9 2,803
12 22.4 4,144
13 19.9 4,276
15 14.9 2,935
16 0.9 203
70
50/
/0
6%
Subtotal Intertie 169.6
Tee1and-Wi11ow 5.5
Total Line 175.1
Total Substation Cost
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
33,811
1 ,129
34,:1940
91,449
44,389
6,784
2,219
3,100
2,663
2,219
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
61 .374
15,344
7Q2lB
92,:1829
SV£/8£T TaT NOI~VHnDldNOJ
3~VWI~S3 ~SOJ ~J3rOHd
9 3'laV~
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Descriotion:Western-100%Overhead•
TABLE 6
71
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
14,544
1,427
4,640
1,398
h62.5
~
5",629
328
Subtotal Intertie
Tee1and-Wi11ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.0
5.5
Jlill...5
57,161
1 ,129
58,290
U4.9
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/~ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management~5%
67",739
U2.Q
3",387
3 1 100
4,064
3,387
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
88,897
22,224
111,121
134,456
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
72
Route Description:Western-Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
111..Jl
u
182.5
72.977
L.lli
74,1106
91 449
Subtotal
R/\~Acquisition ($40,OOO/~lile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
83,555
7,080
4,178
3,100
5,013
4,178
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
107,104
26,776
133,880
161,995
ALASY~POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
73
Route DescriEtion:Western-Overhead Except Take Moody Montana'
Configuration:
SUEer Link No,
1
2
5
1
.9
10
u
"13
15
16.
1B3 138/345
Miles Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
45,3 14 ,544
5,1 1,427
]4,9 4,640
4,2 1,398
18,4 5,625
19,9 6,964
]4,9 4,759
D....2 328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
176,8
5.5
182,3
56 1 291
1,129
57,420
9,449
6 0/
/0
5%
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Hile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
66,869
7,072
3,343
3,100
4,012
3,343
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
87,739
21 ,935
109,674
132,706
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
74
Route DescriEtion:Western-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
171 .7
5.5
177 .2
67,671
1 ,129
68,800
9,449
501
10
601
/0
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
78,249
6,868
3",912
3",100
4 1 695
31 912
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
100,736
25,184
125,920
152,363
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
75
Route DescriptioA:Western-Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge and
Windy Pass
Confi2uration:1B5 138/345
Su,eer Link No.
1
2
5
7
9
10
11 /13 llGi
13/13 &]4 IIG
l3..llG.
]4 OH/UG
1A....1lli
~
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
31.6
45.3
5.1
14.9
.4...2
lL..4
ll...J
6.Q
3.6
10.0
0.9
173.7
5.5
179.2
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
14,544
1,427
4,640
ld.9.a
5",320
4",584
13",720
1,1543
19,1377
328
83,487
1,129
84,616
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
94,065
6,948
4,703
3,100
5,644
4,703
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
119,163
29,791
148,954
180,234
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBAIiKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
76
Route Descriptio~:
Moody-~~ontana
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
5
1
9
10
llL13 UG
13L13 UG
13 UG
15
16
Western-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass and Take
186 138/345
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
45.3 14,544
5.1 1 ,427
14.9 4,640
4.2 1,398
17.4 5,320
11.6 4,059
6.0 13,720
14.9 4,759
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
173.5
5.5
179.0
66,801
1 ,129
67,930
9,449
501
/0
6%
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
77 ,379
6,940
3,869
3,100
4,643
~
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
99,800
24~
124~750
150~948
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIR8A~KS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern 100%Overhead Take Nenana Gorge
Confi.9,uration:187 138/345
Super Link No.Mil es Total Cost
1 21.6 6,747
3 41.4 14,055-
6 28.5 9,713
7 5.1 1,427
9 14.9 4,640
10 4.2 1,398
11 18.4 5,625
13 19.9 6,964
14 13.1 5,629
16 0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie 168.0 56,526
Teeland-Wil1ow 5.5 1 ,129
Total Line 173.5 57,655
Total Substation Cost 9,449
Subtota 1 67,104
R/W Acquisition (S40,OOO/~ile)6,720
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%3,355
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%4,026
Construction Management 5%3,355
Subtotal 87,660
Contingencies 25%21,915
Total September 1981 Dollars 109,575
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years J 32 ,586
77
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-Overhead Except UG Thru Nenana Gorge
78
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
3
fi
z
9
10
1J
13/14 lIG
14 OH/UG
l4...J.lli
]6
lB8 138/345
Miles Total Cost
21.6 6,747
41.4 14,055-
28,5 9,713
5,1 1,427
J 4,9 4,640
4,2 1,398
18,4 5,625
21.4 7,489
3,6 1,543
10,0 19,377
0,9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
TotaJ Substation Cost
170,0
5,5
175,5
72 ,342
1,129
74,471
9,449
501
10
60/
10
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
82,920
6,800
4,146
3,100
4,975
4,146
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25~~
106,087
26,522
132,609
160,457
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Descr;~tiori:Eastern-100%Overhead
Total Cost
6,747
14,055
9,713
1,427
4,640
~
5",625
6~964
4~759
328
79
Subtotal Intertie 169.8 55,656
Teel and-Will ow 5.5 1 ,129
Tota 1 Li ne 175.3 56,785
Total Substation Cost 9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition (S40,OOO/~ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
66 1 234
61 792
3,312
3,100
3,974
3,312
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
86,724
21 ,681
108,405
131,170
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Subtotal Intertie 164.7 67,036
Teeland-Willow 5.5 1,129
Total Li ne 170.2 68,165
Total Substation Cost 9,449
Subtotal 77 ,614
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)6,588
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%3,881
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%4,657
Construction Management 5%3.881
Subtotal 99.721
Contingencies 25%24.930
Total September 1981 Dollars 124.651
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years 150,828
80
ALAsr~POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
81
Route Description:
Gorge
Configuration:
Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass and Nenana
lB11 138/345
Su.eer Link No.
1
3
.6
z
9
10
11 /13 UG
13/13 &14 UG
l.3.-lill
14 OH/UG
lA....U.G
l.6
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-vJi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
41.4
2.8....5
5..J
~
u
17.4
lJ .1
6.Q
3.6
lQ.O
.!l.Y
166.7
5.5
172.2
Total Cost
6,747
14,055
Ul3
l..d.2.Z
~
1.1 398
5.1 320
4.1 584
13 1 720
1.1 543
19.1 377
~Le
82 2 852
1 1 129
83,981
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
93,430
6,668
4,672
3,100
5,606
4,672
Subtotal
Conti ngencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
118,148
29,537
147,685
178.699
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy pass
Subtotal Intertie 166.5 66.266
Teeland-Willow 5.5 1.1 129
Total Line 172 .0 67.395
Total Substation Cost 9,449
Subtotal 76,844
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)6,66Q
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%3,842
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%4,611
Construction Management 5°/3,84210
Subtotal 98,899
Contingencies 25%24,725
Total September 1981 Dollars 123,624
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years ]49,58 5
82
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-l00%Overhead
Configuration:1813 138/345
Super Link No.Mil es Total Cost
1 21.6 6,747
2 31.6 9,859
4 17.5 5,923-
6 28.5 9,71 3
7 5,1 1,427
9 14.9 4,640
10 4.2 1,398
11 18.4 5,625
13 19.9 6,964
14 13.1 5,629
16 0.9 328
83
Subtotal Intertie
ieeland-Wil1ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.7
5.5
181 .2
58,253
1,129
59,382
9,449
50/
10
60/
10
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mi1e)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
68,831
7,028
3,442
3,100
4,130
3,442
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
89,973
22,493
1l2~466
136",084
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
84
Route Description:
Windy pass
Configuration:
Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG
1614 138/345
SUEer Link No.
]
2
4
6
7
9
10
11 /13 UG
13/13 UG
13 UG
14
16
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
17.4
11.6
6.0
13.1
0.9
172.4
5.5
177.9
Total Cost
6,)47
9,1859
5,923
9,713
1 ,427
4,640
1,398
5,320
4,059
13,720
5,629
J2D
68,763
1,129
69,892
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
79,341
fi...8.9fi
:L..9.6l
ll.Q.Q
4~
3.1 967
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
102:l031
25:l508
127:l539
154,1322
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBAriKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
85
Route Descriptio~:Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG Nenana
Gorge
Confi~uration:lB15 138/345
SUEer Link No.
1
2
4
6
7
9
10
11
13L14 UG
14 OH/UG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
18.4
21.4
3.6
10.0
0.9
177 .7
5.5
183.2
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
5~
9 ",713
11 427
4,1640
1 1 398
5,625
7,489
1 ,543
19,377
328
74,169
1 ,129
75,298
9,449
501
10
6%
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
84,747
7,108
4,237
3,100
5,085
4..2.1Z
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
108.514
27.129
135.643
164,128
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
86
Route Description:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead Except UndergrounQ
in Nenana Gor~e and Windy Pass
Configuration:lB16 138/345
SUEer Li nk No.
1
2
4
6
7
9
10
11 /13 UG
13/13 &14 IIG
llJlG.
14 /OH /14 lIG;
1U.IG.
1.6.
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
17.4
l..3.....1
.6....Q
3.....6
lO..Jl
...9
l.Z.4...A
5.5
179.9
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
5,923
9,713
1,427
4,640
1,398
5,320
UM
13,720
l...5A.3
J 9 ,377
32.8
84.579
l.ili.2
85 1 708
91 449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
95,157
6,976
4,758
3,100
5,709
4,758
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
120,458
30,115
150,573
182,193
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead
in Windy Pass and Take Moody-Montana
Configuration:1817 138/345
87
Except Underground
Su,eer Link No.
1
2
4
6
7
9
10
11/13 UG
13/13 UG
13 UG
15
16
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Miles
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
17 .4
11.6
6.0
14.9
0.9
174.2
5.5
l2.9...1
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
5,923
9,713
1,427
4,640
1,398
5,320
4,059
13,720
4,759
328
67,893
1 ,129
69,022
9...M9
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
7.a."4 71
7 ,188
l...ill
3~0
!i,708
l.,.924
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
101.1 315
25.1 329
126~644
153,239
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIR8AtIKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead and Take
Moody ~1ontana
88
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
4
.6
1
9
1Q
11
1,3
15
16
1818 138/345
Mil es Total Cost
2]6 6,74.7
31.6 9,859-
17 5 5.923
28 5 9.713
5,1 1.427
14 .9 4,640
4.2 1 ,398
18.4 5,625
19.9 6.964
14.9 4.759
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
177 .5
5.5
183.0
57,383
1 .129
58.512
9.449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
67,961
7,320
3,398
3.1 00
4,078
3.,Z9S
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
89,255
22,3]4
1]1 .569
134,998
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-100%Overhead with Broad Pass East
89
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
3
.6
z
~
12
13
15
16
1B19 138/345
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 6,747
41.4 14,055-
28.5 9,713
5.1 1,427
14.9 4,640
22.4 6,794
19.9 6,964
14.9 4,759
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Tee1and-Wi11ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
169.6
5.5
175.1
55,427
1 ,129
56 1 556
9,449
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition (S40,OOO/~ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
66,005
6,784
3,300
3,100
3,960 .
3,300
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
86,449
21.612
108,06]
130,754
SV£/O£G TaG NOI~VEnDldNOJ
3~VWI~S3 ~SOJ ~J3rO~d
L 3'1aV~
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-100%Overhead
Configuration:2B1 230/345
Super Link No.Miles
1 21.6
2 31.6
5 45.3
7 5.1
9 14.9
10 4.2
JJ 18.4
13 19.9
14 13.1
16 0.9
TABLE 7
90
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
14,544
1,427
4,640
1:398
5:625
6:1,964
5,1629
328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.0
26.0
201 .0
57,161
7,888
65,049
8~440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
73,1489
8,1040
3,674
3,100
4,409
3,674
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year -2 Years
25%
96,386
24,097
120,483
145.784
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge
91
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total-Substation Cost
177 .0
26.0
203.0
72,977
7,888
80,865
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/P.ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
89,305
8,120
4,465
3,100
5,358
4,465
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
114,813
28,703
143,516
173,1654
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Western-Overhead Except Take Moody-Montana
92
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
2
5
7
9
10
11
13
15
16
263 230/345
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
45.3 14,544
5.1 1.,427
14.9 4,640
4.2 1,398
18.4 5,625
19.9 6,964
14.9 4,759
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
176.8
26.0
202.8
56,291
7,888
64,179
8,440
SO/
10
6%
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering
Construction Management
72,619
8,112
3,631
3,100
4,357
3,631
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
95,450
23,863
119,313
144,369
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass
93
Subtotal Intertie 171 .7 67,671
Teeland-Willow 26.0 7,888
Total Line 197.7 75,559
Total Substation Cost 8:440
Subtotal 83,999
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)7,908
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%4,200
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%5,040
Construction Management 5%4,200
Subtotal 108,447
Contingencies 25%27,112
Total September 1981 Dollars 135,559
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years 16.1..:026
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
94
Route DescriEtion:
Pass
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
5
z
2
10
llL13 UG
13/13 &14 UG
13 UG
14 OH/UG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Western-Overhead Except UG in Nenana Gorge and Windy
285 230/345
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
45.3 14,544--
5.1 1 ,427
14.9 4,640
4.2 1 ,398
17.4 5,320
13.1 4,584
6.0 13,720
3.6 1 ,543
10.0 19,377
0.9 328
173.7 83,487
26.0 7,888
Total Line 199.7 91 ,375
Total Substation Cost 8,440
Subtotal 99,815
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)7,988
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%4,991
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6°'5,989/0
Construction Management 5%4,991
Subtotal 126,874
Contingencies 25%31 ,719
Total September 1981 Dollars 158,593
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years 191,898
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
173.5
26.0
66,801
7,888
95
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
199.5 74,689
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
83,129
7,980
4,156
3,100
~
!J.2.Q
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
107~509
26:,877
134:,386
162,607
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-100%Overhead Take Nenana Gorge
96
Subtotal Intertie
Tee1and-Wil1ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
168.0
26.0
194.0
56,526
7,888
64,414
8",440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition (S40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
72,854
7,760
3,643
3,100
4,371
3,643
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
95,371
23,843
119.214
144,249
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-Overhead Exceet UG Thru Nenana Gorge
Confi,9uration:2B8 230/345
Super Link No.Miles Total Cost
1 21.6 6,747
3 41.4 14,055
6 28.5 9,713
7 5.1 1 ,427
9 14.9 4,640
10 4.2 1,398
11 18.4 5,625
13/14 UG 21.4 7,489
14 OH/UG 3.6 1,543
14 UG 10.0 19,377
16 0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie 170.0 72 ,342
Teeland-Willow 26.0 7,888
Total Line 196.0 80,230
Total Substation Cost 8:\440
Subtotal 88,670
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)7,840
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%4,434
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%5,320
Construction Management 5%4,434
Subtotal 113,798
Contingencies 25%28,450
Total September 1981 Dollars 142,248
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years 172:\120
97
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBA~KS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-100%Overhead
98
Configuration:
SUEer Li nk No.
1
3
6
7
9
10
11
13
15
1.Q
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Wi 11 ow
289 230/345
Mil es
21.6
41.4
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
18.4
19.9
14.9
0.9
169.8
26.0
Total Cost
6,747
14,055
9,713
1 ,427
4,640
1,398
5,625
6,1964
4,759
328
55,656
7,888
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
195.8 63,544
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/~i1e)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
71,1984
7.2,832
3,1599
3,100
4,319
3,599
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
94,433
23,608
118,041
142~830
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
99
Route DescriEtion:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass and Take
Nenana Gor9,e
Configuration:
Super Link No.
3
6
7
.9
1.Q
llL13 UG
13L13 UG
13 UG
14
16
2B10 230/345
Mil es Total Cost
21.6 6,747
41.4 14,055
28.5 9,713
5.1 1,427--
14.9 4.640
4.2 1,398
17.4 5,320
11.6 4,059
6.0 13,720
13.1 5,629
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
164.7
26.0
llD..:..Z
67,036
7,888
74 1 924
8 1 440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
83,364
7,628
4,168
3,100
5,002
4,168
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
]07 .430
~8
134 1 288
162 1 488
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
100
Total Line 192,7 90,740
Total Substation Cost 8,,440
Subtotal 99,180
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/~ile)7,708
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%4,959
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%5,951
Construction Management 5%4,959
Subtotal 125,857
Contingencies 25%31,464
Total September 1981 Dollars 157,321
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years 190,358
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route Description:Eastern-Overhead Except UG in Windy Pass
101
Subtotal Intertie 166.5 66,266
Teeland-Willow 26.0 7,888
Total Line 192.5 74,154
Total Substation Cost 8 1 440
Subtotal 82,594
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mi1e)7,700
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%4,130
Surveying 3,100
Engineering 6%4,956
Construction Management S°/4,13010
Subtotal 106,610
Contingencies 25%26,653
Total September 1981 Dollars 133,263
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years l.§L248
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Avoid St.Park-l00%Overhead
102
Subtotal Intertie
Tee 1and-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
175.7
26.0
201.7
58,253
7,888
66~141
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
74,581
8,068
3,729
3,100
4,475
3,729
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
97,682
24,421
122,103
147 1 745
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
103
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG Windy Pass
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
104
Route Description:Western-Avoid St.Park-Overhead Except UG Nenana Gorge
Configuration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
4
Q
z
9
10
11
13/14 UG
14 OH/UG
14 UG
16
2B15 230/345
Miles Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
17.5 5,923-
28.5 9,713
5.1 1,427
14.9 4,640
4.2 1,398
18.4 5,625
21.4 7,489
3.6 1,543
10.0 19,377
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
1ll....1.
26.0
203.7
74.1 169
71 888
82,057
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
90,497
8,148
4,525
3,100
5,430
4,525
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
116.1 225
29 1 056
145,281
175,790
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
105
Route Description:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead Except Underground
in Nenana Gorge and Windy Pass
Configuration:2B16 230/345
Su,eer Link No.
2
4
6
7
9
10
llL13 UG
13L13 &14 UG
13 UG
14/0H/14 UG
14 UG
16
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
Mil es
21.6
31.6
17.5
28.5
5.1
14.9
4.2
17.4
13.1
6.0
3.6
10.0
.9
174.4
26.0
2..O.Q..j
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
5,923
9,713
1,427
4,640
1,398
5,320
4,584
13,720
1 ,543
19,377
328
84,579
7,888
92,467
8d1Q
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/~ile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
100 1 907
81 016
5,045
3,100
6,054
5,045
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
128,167
32,042
160,209
193 ",853
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
Route DescriEtion:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead
in Windy Pass and take Moody-Montana
Configuration:2817 230/345
106
Except Underground
Total Cost
6,747
9,859
5,923
9".713
1,1427
4,640
1 ,398
5,320
4,059
13,720
4,759
328
67,893
7,888
Total Line 200.2
Total Substation Cost
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
75,1781
8,1440
84,221
8,008
4,211
3,100
5,053
4,211
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lOX/Year - 2 Years
25%
108,804
2L.£Ql
136.1 005
164,566
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
107
Route DescriEtion:Western-Avoid State Park-Overhead and Take Moody-
Montana
Confi£luration:
SUEer Link No.
1
2
4
6
7
9
10
11
13
15
16
2818 230/345
Miles Total Cost
21.6 6,747
31.6 9,859
17.5 5,923
28.5 9,713
5.1 1,427
14.9 4,640-
4.2 1 ,398
18.4 5,625
19.9 6,964
14.9 4,759
0.9 328
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Wil1ow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
177 .5
26.0
2.Q3....5
57,383
7,888
65.271
8...lli
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
73,1711
8,1140
3,686
3,100
4,423
3,686
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ 10%/Year - 2 Years
25%
96,746
24,187
120.933
146,329
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
(Thousands of Dollars)
108
Route Descriotion:Eastern-100%Overhead with Broad Pass East•
Subtotal Intertie
Teeland-Willow
Total Line
Total Substation Cost
169.6
26.0
195.6
55,427
7,888
63,315
8,440
Subtotal
R/W Acquisition ($40,OOO/Mile)
Mobilization-Demobilization 5%
Surveying
Engineering 6%
Construction Management 5%
71,755
7,824
3,588
3,100
4,305
3,588
Subtotal
Contingencies
Total September 1981 Dollars
Inflation @ lO%/Year - 2 Years
25%
94",160
23 1 540
117 1 700
142,417
*Includes 5.5 Miles 138 kV Teeland-Willow
**Includes 26.0 Miles 230/345 kV Pt.Mackenzie-Willow
110
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
A prominent feature of Commonwealth's Feasibility Study
Report that was submitted on May 1,1981 is an analysis of
the life-cycle costs and benefits of the intertie alternatives
then under consideration.That analysis has been updated
and expanded for purposes of this report,and the results
are shown on pages following.
These are the specific similarities and contrasts between
the original and the updated life cycle cost -benefit
analysis:
1.The methodologies and purely economic parameters
employed are identical;
2.The benefits are of identical value since examination
disclosed no reason for change since May 1,1981;
3.The analysis is expanded to deal with each of
nineteen line construction and routing options
described earlier in this report;
4.Whereas the previous analysis dealt with five
possible intertie configurations,the updated
analysis deals with only the three that still have
significant interest namely:
a)Configuration lA -138 kV initial operation,
138 kV future operation,
b)Configuration lB -138 kV initial operation,
345 kV future operation,
c)Configuration 2B -230 kV initial operation,
345 kV future operation;
5.Capital costs are revised upward according to
Commonwealth's most recent technical findings and
cost estimates,and the life cycle costs are
raised proportionately;
6.As before,the analysis is presented in the light
of three scenarios,namely:
a)Excluding or ignoring the future need for 345
kV transmission voltage,
b)Including or recognizing the need for future
345 kV transmission voltage,
c)Sensitivity analysis considering change in a
variety of parameters and assumptions that
affect the results of the analysis.
III
Based on the results of the new analysis as displayed in
Tables 9,10 and ll,these following conclusions are drawn:
1.The line construction and routing options rank in
the same economic order under all three system
configurations.Thus,line route selection could
proceed independent of the configuration selection,
if that were necessary.
2.Line construction/route option number 19 involves
least capital,least life cycle cost and highest
ratio of benefits to costs under all configurations
and assumptions.
3.There are six other line construction/routing
options that rank closely behind option 19.These
are options 1,3,7,9,13 and 18.
4.The reason that the seven options noted above rank
above the rest from an economic standpoint is that
those listed do not involve underground cable sections
while the remainder do.
5.The economic choice between Configuration lA and
lB depends upon what one assumes regarding future
need for voltages above 138 kV.Since Commonwealth
is persuaded that there will be future need for
345 kV,and compares the two alternatives in this
context,Configuration lB appears preferrable.
6.In comparing Configurations 2B and lB,it will be
observed that the former involves approximately
$11.6 million more capital investment while yielding
essentially the same ratio of benefits to costs.
On this basis,Configuration lB appears to be the
better choice.
TABLE 9
LXFE-CYCLE COSTS AND BENEFXTS C~
OF THE ANCHORAOE -FAXRBANKS INTERTXE
X NCLUD X NO FUTURE NEED FOR 3431<",I NTERCONNECT X ON Cb)
112
COSTS C$Mi I lions)BENEFITS C$Mi I lions)
INTERTIE VOLTAGE Cl<V)LINE CAPITAL RATIO OF
CONST."INVESTMENT FIXED RETI REMENT REDEDICATION OPERATION &ECONOM'T'RESERVE BENEFITS
CONFIG.OPERATION ~~C$Hi I lions)~Cc)CREDITCd)CREDITC ..)MAINTENANCE ~I NTERCHAHC>E SHARINGCT)~~
IA 138 138 I 94.5 142.1 -27.8 8.8 5.5 119.8 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.2
2 112.5 169.2 -33.1 8.8 5.8 141.9 138.9 "11.3 142.2-1.0
3 94.8 141.4 -27.7 8.8 5.5 119.2 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.2
4 186.2 159.7 -31.3 8.8 5.6 134.1 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.1
5 125.3 188.5 -36.9 8.8 5.9 157.4 138.9 11.3 142.2 0.9
6 185.7 159.8 -31.1 8.8 5.6 133.5 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.1
7 93.6 148.8 -27.6 8.8 5.5 118.7 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.2
8 111.6 167.9 -32.9 8.8 5.7 148.7 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.0
9 93.1 148.8 -27.4 8.8 5.5 118.1 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.2
18 185.4 158.5 -31.8 8.8 5.6 133.1 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.1
11 124.4 187.1 -36.6 8.8 5.8 156.3 138.9 11.3 142.2 9.9
12 184.9 157.8 -38.9 8.8 5.6 132.5 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.1
13 95.9 144.2 -28.2 8.8 5.7 121.7 138.9 11.3 142;2 1.2
14 187.6 161.8 -31.7 8.8 5.8 135.9 138.9 11.3 142.2 1.8
15 113.9 171.3 -33.5 8.9 5.9 143.7 139.9 11.3 142.2 1.8
16 126.7 190.6 -37.3 9.9 6.9 159.3 138.9 11.3 142.2 0.9
17 197.1 161.1 -31.5 9.9 5.8 135.3 139.9 11.3 142.2 1.1
18 95.4 143.5 -28.1 9.9 5.7 121.1 138.9 11;3 142.2 1.2
19 92.8 139.6 -27.3 9.9 5.6 117.8 139.9 11.3 142.2 1.2
IB 138 345 1 134.5 292.3 -6.4 -126.9 5.8 75.6 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
2 162.8 243.7 -6.3 -157.2 6.9 86.1 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
3 132.7 199.6 -6.3 -124.5 5.7 74.5 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
4 152.4 229.2 -6.4 -146.4 5.9 82.3 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
5 189.2 271.8 -6..3 -177.6 6.1 93.2 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.5
6 158.9 227.8 -6.3 -144.8 5.8 81.7 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.8
7 132.6 199.4 -6.4 -124.2 5.8 74.7 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
8 160.5 241.4 -6.4 -155.5 6.1 85.7 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
9 131.2 197.3 -6.4 -122.7 5.8 74.1 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
18 150.8 226.8 -6.4 -144.6 5.9 81.8 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.8
11 178.7 268.8 -6.4 -175.8 6.2 92.8 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.5
12 149.6 225.0 -6.4 -143.3 5.9 81.3 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.8
13 136.1 204.7 -6.3 -128.3 5.9 76.0 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
14 154.3 232.1 -6.3 -148.6 6.0 83.1 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
15 164.1 246.8 -6.3 -159.6 6.2 87.1 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
16 182.2 274.8 -6.3 -179.9 6.3 94.2 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.5
17 153.2 238.4 -6.3 -147.5 6.0 82.6 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.7
18 135.0 203.1 -6.3 -127.1 5.9 75.5 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
19 138.8 196.7 -6.4 -122.2 5.8 74.0 132.5 11.3 143.8 1.9
2B 238 345 1 145.8 219.3 -5.4 -142.6 5.9 77.2 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
2 173.7 261.3 -5.4 -173.8 6.2 89.2 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.7
:3 144.4 217.2 -5.4 -141.9 5.9 76.7 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
4 164.9 246.7 -5.4 -163.1 6.9 84.3 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.7
5 191.9 288.6 -5.4 -194.3 6.3 95.3 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.5
6 162.6 244.6 -5.4 -161.5 6.9 83.7 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.8
7 144.2 216.9 -5.4 -148.8 6.9 76.7 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
8 172.1 258.9 -5.4 -172.9 6.3 87.7 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.7
9 142.8 214.8 -5.4 -139.2 6.0 76.1 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
10 162.5 244.4 -5.4 -161.3 6.1 83.8 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.8
11 190.4 286.4 -5.4 -192.5 6.4 94.9 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.5
12 161.2 242.5 -5.4 -159.8 6.1 83.3 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.8
13 147.7 222.2 -5.4 -144.8 6.1 78.8 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
14 166.9 249.7 -5.4 -165.2 6.2 85.3 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.7
15 175.8 264.4 -5.4 -176.3 6.4 89.1 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.6
16 193.9 291.6 -5.4 -196.4 6.5 96.3 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.5
17 164.6 247.6 -5.3 -164.1 6.2 84.4 135.'5 11.3 146.9 1.7
18 146.3 228.8 -5.3 -143.7 6.1 77.1 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
19 142.4 214.2 -5.4 -138.8 6.8 76.8 135.6 11.3 146.9 1.9
"C~Pr"Sl'n"t .."."th M addi"tional 1II'lrlU&\l'XIOl'nSl'S lind
tl--"i"ts ca.rimo "thl'.....iod 1984 to 1993,inc lusiV<'.
Cb)Ass...i""that in 1994 it IIi 11 btl nl'e"ss",""to rai...
"thl'int.rti ..vo Ita...to 34Sl<Y in ordl'r to providl'Tor
tr.ansaission 0-1 POUIft'.prOM Susi tna or otMr nHI ,.,........atin,
plants ..i"thin th"Rai 1bl'lt,aneVor providl'_al s"st....s ....owth.
Cc)For a 35 -"..ar aJIlOrtization p.,-iod.
Cd)D4Iduction Tor Taci li ti..r ..tirl'd in 1994.
C..)Deduction Tor Taci Iities rl'dl'dicated to 345l<V trans..ission in 1994.
CT)Inc Iud in..the advanta""s oT load div.,-si t,..
COIIlIllOnIIl'alth Associat..Inc.
11/2/81
TABLE 10
113
~IFE-CYCLE COSTS AND BENEFITS (~
OF THE ANCHORAGE -FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
EXCLUDING FUTURE NEED FOR 34~kV INTERCONNECTION (b)
COSTS ($Mi II ions)BEHEFITS ($Mi I lions)
IHTERTI E VOLTAGE (l<V)LIHE CAPITAL RATIO OF
CONST.INVESTMENT FIXED OPERATION &ECOHOMV RESERVE BENEFITS
COHFIG.OPERATION ~Qf.!.!.Q!:!($Mi I lions)~MAINTEHANCE ~INTERCHAHGE SHARING(c)TOTAL ~
IA 139 139 1 94.5 142.1 13.9 156.1 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.8
2 112.5 169.2 14.5 183.8 229.3 45.3 274.6 1.5
3 94.9 141.4 13.9 155.3 229.3 45.3 274.6 1.8
4 196.2 159.7 14.2 173.9 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
5 125.3 188.5 14.8 2Il3.2 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.4
6 195.7 159.9 14.1 173.1 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
7 93.6 149.8 13.9 154.6 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.8
8 111.6 167.9 14.5 182.3 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.5-
9 93.1 149.9 13.8 153.8 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.8
19 195.4 158.5 14.1 172.6 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
11 124.4 187.1 14.7 291.8 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.4
12 194.9 157.8 14.1 171.8 229.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
13 95.9 144.2 14.3 158.6 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.7
14 197.6 161.8 14.5 176.4 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
15 113.9 171.3 14.9 186.2 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.5
16 126.7 199.6 15.1 295.7 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.3
17 197.1 161.1 14.5 175.6 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.6
18 95.4 143.5 14.3 157.8 229.3 45.3 274.6 1.7
19 92.8 139.6 14.1 153.6 223.3 45.3 274.6 1.8
IB 138 345 1 134.5 292.3 14.5 216.8 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
2 162.9 243.7 15.2 258.9 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
3 132.7 199.6 14.5 214.1 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
4 152.4 229.2 14.8 244.9 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
5 188.2 271.0 15.4 286.5 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.0
6 159.9 227.0 14.7 241.7 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
7 132.6 199.4 14.7 214.1 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
8 169.5 241.4 15.4 256.8 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
9 131.1 197.2 '14.7 211.8 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
19 1513.8 226.8 15.13 241.8 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
11 178.7 268.8 15.7 294.4 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.0
12 149.6 225.0 14.9 239.9 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.2
13 136.1 204.7 14.9 219.6 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
14 154.3 232.1 15.2 247.3 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
15 164.1 246.8 15.6 262.4 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
16 182.2 274.8 15.9 289.9 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.0
17 153.2 238.4 15.1 245.6 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.1
18 135.0 283.1 14.8 217.9 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
19 138.8 196.7 14.6 211.4 232.2 45.3 277.5 1.3
2B 239 345 1 145.8 219.3 15.9 234.3 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
2 173.7 261.3 15.6 276.9 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.0
3 144.4 217.2 14.9 232.1 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
4 164.8 246.7 15.2 261.9 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.1
5 191.9 288.6 15.9 394.6 237.6 45.3 282.9 8.9
6 162.6 244.6 15.2 259.8 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.1
7 144.2 216.9 15.1 232.8 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
8 172.1 258.9 15.9 274.7 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.9
9 142.8 214.8 15.1 229.9 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
19 162.5 244.4 15.4 259.8 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.1
11 199.4 286.4 16.1 392.5 237.6 45.3 282.9 8.9
12 161.2 242.5 15.4 257.8 237.6 45.3 262.9 1.1
13 147.7 222.2 15.3 237.5 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
14 166.8 249.7 15.6 265.3 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.1
15 175.8 264.4 16.1 289.5 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.8
16 193.9 291.6 16.3 398.9 237.6 45.3 282.9 8.9
17 164.6 247.6 15.6 263.2 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.1
18 146.3 229.9 15.3 235.3 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
19 142.4 214.2 15.1 229.3 237.6 45.3 282.9 1.2
(a)Pr.s""t worth 0"additional annual .XPltnSU and
b_.,its throu..nout a 35-_..-......iod 0"a.t>t MOI"tization.
(b)I !WlOI"in,an",."".ct that s"'st....x..ansion ...".h_UJ>on tM
olC>4H"a:tion .-nd l)$~"v l~$f:o-f-i:~in1:I!M"'''ti!!'~
(c)Inc ludin,th.advanta_s 0+load cliversi t".
C""",,e>r>tMalth Associatu Inc.
11/2/81
114
TABLE 11
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
OF LIFE-CYCLE COSTS AND BENEFITS
OF THE ANCHORAGE-FAIRBANKS INTERTIE
Excluding Need for Future 345 kV 'IncludinS Need for Future 345 kV
CostS(a)Benef~ts Rat~o of Costs ( )Benef~ts Rat~o of
($In ($In Benefits ($In ($In Benefits
Hillions)~illions)To Costs Millions)Millions)To Costs
Configuration lA-19 (138/138 kV)(c)
1.Base Case 153.6 274.6 1.8 117.8 142.2 1.2
2.Energy Consumption
High Growth 153.6 315.9 2.1 117.8 169.9 1.4
Low Growth 153.6 231.1 1.5 117.8 114.9 1.0
3.Additional Power Sources
Military Generation-Fairbanks 153.6 234.0 1.5 117.8 118.4 1.0
Bradley Lake Hydro 153.6 279.0 1.8 117.8 143.3 1.2
Military and Bradley Lake Hydro .153.6 237.6 1.5 117.8 119.0 1.0
4.New Coal Fueled Power Plants 153.6 635.6 4.1 117.8 232.0 2.0
5.Alternative Fuels in Fairbanks
North Slope Gas 153.6 145.1 0.9 117.8 69.7 0.6
LNG Gas 153.6 221.3 1.4 117.8 111.9 0.9
Configuration lB-19 (345/138 kV)(d)
1.Base Case 211.4 277.5 1.3 74.0 143.8 1.9
2.Energy Consumption
High Growth 211.4 320.2 1.5 74.0 172.3 2.3
Low Growth 211.4 233.0 1.1 74.0 115.9 1.6
3.Additional Power Sources
Military Generation-Fairbanks 211.4 236.3 1.1 74.0 119.7 1.6
Bradley Lake Hydro 211.4 282.0 1.3 74.0 145.0 2.0
Military and Bradley Lake Hydro 211.4 239.9 1.1 74.0 120.3 1.6
4.New Coal Fueled Power Plants 211.4 638.5 3.0 74.0 233.6 3.2
5.Alternative Fuels in Fairbanks
North Slope Gas 211.4 147.8 0.7 74.0 71.3 1.0
LNG Gas 211.4 224.1 1.1 74.0 113.5 1.5
Configuration 2B-19 (345/230 kV)(e)
1.Base Case 229.3 282.9 1.2 76.0 146.9 1.9
2.Energy Consumption
High Growth 229.3 326.4 1.4 76.0 176.0 2.3
Low Growth 229.3 237.5 1.0 76.0 118.4 1.6
3.Additional Power Sources
Military Generation-Fairbanks 229.3 240.9 1.1 76.0 122.3 1.6
Bradley Lake Hydro 229.3 287.5 1.3 76.0 148.1 1.9
Military and Bradley Lake Hydro 229.3 244.6 1.1 76.0 122.9 1.6
4.New Coal Fueled Power Plants 229.3 643.9 2.8 76.0 236.7 3.1
5.Alternative Fuels in Fairbanks
North Slope Gas 229.3 150.2 0.7 76.0 72.7 1.0
LNG Gas 229.3 228.3 1.0 76.0 115.9 1.5
(a)Present worth of additional annual expenses and benefits throughout a 35-year period of debt amortization.
(b)Present worth of additional annual expenses and benefits during the period 1984 to 1993,inclusive.
(c)138 kV construction and operation.
(d)345 kV construction,138 kV initial operation.
(e)345 kV construction,230 kV initial operation.
Commonwealth Associates Inc.
11/2/81
115
V.SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commonwealth has carefully examined all of the factors
affecting the selection of a line route for the Intertie
Project,including environmental,engineering and operating
concerns and costs.
During the evaluation,we have given consideration to various
modes of constructing each of the major line segments (super-
links);the environmental impacts,the constructability,
maintainability and reliability,and the total cost.It has
been concluded that several combinations of the line route
segments could be selected to provide an environmentally
acceptable line route from Willow to Healy,and of those
several combinations,the line route described as Configura-
tion IB-19 (Eastern Route 100%overhead with Broadpass east
consisting of superlinks 1,3,6, 7,9,12,13,15 and 16)
would have the least environmental impact (refer to Figure
18).
Careful evaluation of the various line route alternatives
indicates that a line route parallelling the Parks Highway
as close by as possible would be the easiest line to con-
struct and maintain,however,we believe it is possible to
construct and maintain a reliable line by several of the
line route alternatives.
The total project capital costs have been estimated for each
of three system configurations and all line route alterna-
tives including costs for labor,materials,equipment,
right-of-way clearing,and all other capital costs.
Life cycle costs including capital investment,fixed charges,
retirement credit,Susitna rededication credit and operation,
and maintenance costs have been estimated for each of the
above-mentioned combinations.
For each of the system configurations considered,the line
route alternative which was concluded to have the least
environmental impact also has the lowest estimated capital
investment,and lowest life cycle cost,and ranks among the
highest in benefit to cost ratio.
The estimated benefit to cost ratios shows marginal ratios
for System Configuration lA (138 kV construction).
116
The estimated benefit to cost ratios for both System Con-
figuration lB (345 kV construction with 138 kV initial
operation)and 2B (345 kV construction with 230 kV initial
operation)ranges from 1.5 to 1.9.
By agreement with APA project manager,the cost estimates
include the cost of 5.5 miles of 138 kV construction between
Willow and Teeland although at this time it is assumed that
portion of line will be financed and constructed by Matanuska
Electric Association.
Also by agreement with APA project manager,we have assumed
that the line construction contractor would be permitted
land access at reasonable intervals of all line route segments
except Moody-Montana pass.The construction cost has been
estimated for each line segment or superlink by three con-
struction modes.In calculating the capital cost for each
line route alternative,the lowest cost construction mode
was chosen except Moody-Montana pass which was assumed to be
constructed without land access.
Based on the conclusions reached we recommend:
1.That the line Configuration lB-19 be selected and that
the result of the evaluation be presented to participat-
ing utilities and to the permitting agencies and barring
any major dissent,that permits for construction of an
overhead 345 kV line be initiated.
2.No further consideration be given to System Configura-
tion lA (138 kV construction between Willow and Healy).
3.APA should decide as quickly as possible whether they
wish to give further consideration to System Configura-
tion 2B in view of the $11.56 million additional capital
costs associated with this configuration as compared
with Configuration lB.
(._-_m I FIGURE 18
(Alaska Power Authority IANCHORAGE FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
o 10 20 MileSJIiII:
o 10 20 Kilometers
(I Gilbert/Commonwealth North
Preferred line Route