The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA3127-3130 etc3')::r'55{5(lC>LI73Ig/....NCASTLEMOUNTAINFAULTTKI(.j25,SJ'It23,112')--31St')untainandDenalifaultsarenownIts.inchequals13.3miles•lesY\f)13\;;;2,1ineindicatesfaultdiedtodeterminerinactivity.~'i"'(62miles)isstandardradiusforstudy.'~;'.~~~~"~rf"~~:'~''!~~'';-'~'::~~'.~,+.~~:''r,Beneaththeupper15to20milesoftheearth'scrustistheBenioffZone.Thisisalsoanactivefaultzone.ThedepthtotheBenioffZonebeneaththeSusitnadamsitesisabout34miles.•roStuesUSltnaZ\'.I,''rW..'.~,'-.~.?;"Y'.ff~J~;:,,,~...It,~,.'~r,...r...1-( iJ1;'1.:''\~'(',i...'l.j.,V..t',t.I.'5i"';'j.~'.(1;,-'?,',.";;~,/f<'""",,i".:t#.~....,~__,~/'~I,f~'~Ji..-¢)!~.,..(~~y·:t~:!1;'~::'~f'<"::~r'J",,i.,'"""C'.•.•~,.,/•j""-,,.?.''~.',•..",:,1.,:1,'".'"'f','1IIi<~'/'Jf':2."~,J.l:t.',,!.')..-",...,$':"'t',"1/';to<If'o:-_;'.,".""~oJ.\'\!:-,:I:;M'k_FortheSusitnaprojectallfaultsandlineaments(possiblefaults)withinapproximately62milesofthedamswhicharejudgedtowithin100km(62miles)ofeitherdamhavebeencompiledfrombeactivearetheDenalifaultandtheCastleMountainfault.publishedandunpublishedreferencematerials,satelliteim·agery,radarimagery,high·altltudeaerialphotography,andlowaltitudeaerialphotography.Basedonthiswork,theonlyfaultsintheNorthAmericanPlateTalkeetna.."ARLISAICiskaResourcesLibrarv&InformationServicesAnchorageAlaska4.Withinthesiteregion,13faultsandlineaments(potentialfaults)arereceivingadditionalstudyinsummer1981tobetterdefinetheirpotentialeffectondamdesign.FourofthesefaultsandlineamentsareneartheWatanasiteandnineareintheareaoftheDevilCanyonsite.PreliminaryfindingsavailableonSusitnabasinseismicityThisissuegivesinformationabouttheseismicityoftheupperSusitnaRiverbasinanddiscussesthequestionofbuildingsafedamsinseismicareas.FaultDenaliCastleMountainBenioffZonePreliminaryClosestDistanceofFaultMaximumCredibletoSite(miles)EarthquakeMagnitudeWatanaDevilCanyon8.543407.465718.53137Thefollowingarethepreliminaryseismicconclusions.1.Nofaultswithknownrecentmovement(movementinthelast100,000years)passthroughorneartheproposedSusitnadamsites.2.Theknownfaultswithrecentmovementare:theDenalifault(northofthesites),theCastleMountainfault(southofthesites)andtheBenioffZone(about34milesbeneaththesites).3.TheclosestdistancesofthesefaultsfromeachsiteandthepreliminarYmaximumcredibleearthquakemagnitudesforthefaultsarethefollowing:5.Atpresent,the13featuresarenotknowntobefaultswithre-centmovement.Ifpresentstudiesshowanyrecentmove-ment,thenthepotentialforsurfacerupturethrougheitherdamsiteandthegroundmotionsassociatedwithearth-quakesonthefaultwillneedtobeevaluated.6.PreliminaryestimatesofgroundmotionsatthesitesweremadefortheDenaliandCastleMountainfaultsandtheBenioffZone.Ofthesesources,anearthquakeofmagnitude8.5occurringwithintheBenioffZonewouldcreatethemax-imumgroundshakingatthedamsites.Source:InterimReportontheSeismicStudiesfor(the)SusitnaHydroelectricProject,December1980,preparedbyWoodward·ClydeConsultantsforAcresAmerican,Inc.andtheAlaskaPowerAuthority. 2thesusitnahydrostudies/september1981».(")r\»»ztJl»~\~/--"-c-z::::.§<;,~'".h••.•"••~c5Earthquakesinthisregion9c)constitutetheBenioffZoneTALKEETNATERRAIN_._'......e,OlennaHe•~!:£-eI""".,_.MOUNTAINS.......,s:::>ze>TodatenoactivefaultshavebeenidentifiedintheTalkeetnaTerrainitself.Studiesin1981arefurtherevaluating13faultsandlineaments(potentialfaults)inthevicinityoftheWatanaandDevilCanyondamsitestodeterminewhetherornotthefaultsandlineamentsmaybeactive.OneofthosereceivingadditionalstudyistheTalkeetnaThrustFault.This2inchesofmovementgetsabsorbedalongafeatureintheGulfofAlaskacalledtheAleutianTrench.Hereoneplateisthrustbelowtheother(inaprocesscalledsubduction)asshowninthediagram.ThezoneofseismicityassociatedwiththesubductionisreferredtoastheBenioffZone.EarthquakescanoccuralongtheBenioffZonewherethetwoplatesareincontact.Thisiswherethe1964earthquakeoccurredasshowninthediagram.Earthquakesarealsocausedwithintheplatesthemselves.Movementoftheplatecausesstressestobuildupandtheenergyisreleasedbyrapidmovementalongplanesofweakness(faults).Alaskaispartofalargecontinentallandmass(theNorthAmericanPlate)whichliesadjacenttoanoceanicmass(thePacificPlate).ThePacificPlateismovingnorthwestatarateofabout2inchesperyear.curatthepointontheOneisamagnitude8.5TheSusitnadamsitesliefaultclosesttoaproposedearthquakeontheDenaliwithinaregionthatisproject,suchasadamfault,40milesfromthebelievedtoberelativelysite.dams;theotherisastable.Thisregionismagnitude8.5earthquakeknownastheTalkeetnaItisbasedongeologicalintheBenioffZone,aboutTerrain.andhistoricaldata,andis34milesbelowthesurfaceusuallyofamagnitudeoftheearthatthedams.TheboundariesoftheTer-greaterthanhistoricalrainaretheDenalifault,earthquakes.6.HowmuchgroundshakingtheCastleMountainfault,wouldthatcause?andtheBenioffZone4.Howreliableisit?(whichisabout34milesTheMaximumCredibleThegroundshakingthatbelowthesurfaceoftheEarthquakeisconsideredwouldoccuratthedamsearth).Theseareallactivetobeareliableparameterfromamagnitude8.5faultareas.tousefordamdesign.earthquakeontheDenaliThereareover11,000faultisconsideredtohaveEnergyreleaseappearstodamsworldwide.Someofanaveragepeakaccelera-beoccurringprimarilythesehavebeenbuiltintionof20%g.alongtheboundariesofmoderatetohighseismictheTalkeetnaTerrainareassuchasOrovilledamThegroundshakingthatratherthanwithinit.inCaliforniaandseveralwouldoccuratthedamsdamsintheSanFranciscofromamagnitude8.5WithintheTerrain,noBayAreaalongtheSanearthquakeintheBenioffevidenceofactivefaultsAndreasfault.Zoneisconsideredtohavehasbeenobserved.Someanaveragepeakaccelera-earthquakeactivityisoc-Severaldamshavebeentionof40%g.curringandhasoccurreddamagedduringearth-withintheTerrain,butthequakes,suchasKoynain7.HowdoesthatcomparetoearthquakesaretypicallyIndiaandHsinfengkianginthe1964earthquake?smalltomoderateinsize.thePeople'sRepublicofChina.ThisdamagewasAsacomparison,theTodatenoactivefaultsdueinlargeparttotheaveragepeakaccelerationhavebeenidentifiedintheabsenceofdesigncon-estimatedatSusitnaTalkeetnaTerrainitself.siderationsforreservoir-wouldbe1/3to1/2asStudiesin1981arefurtherinducedseismicity.muchastheaveragepeakevaluating13faultsandaccelerationestimatedatlineaments(potential5.WhatareyourestimatesValdezduring the1964faults)inthevicinityoftheforthelargestearth·earthquake.WatanaandDevilCanyonquakesthatcouldoccurindamsitestodeterminetheareaoftheproposed8.Justhowseismicallyac-whetherornotthefaultsdams?tiveistheareawheretheandlineamentsmaybeproposeddamsitesare?active.•Thefollowingareresponsestofrequentlyaskedquestions.TheinformationwasdevelopedbyJonR.Lovegreen,SeniorProjectGeologist,Woodward-ClydeConsultants.1.Doearthquakesoccuronlyalongfaults?No.Therearefourgeneralcategoriesofearthquakes.Thesecategoriesarecol-Lovegreenlapseearthquakes,volcanicearthquakes,ex-plosionearthquakes,andtectonicearthquakes.TetonicearthquakesarethemostcommontypeofearthquakesandaretheearthquakespertinenttothedesignoftheSusitnaproject.Tectonicearthquakesresultwhenstresseswithintheearthbuilduptothepointthatthestrengthoftherockisexceeded.Relativelyinstantaneousreleaseofstrainenergytakesplacealongazoneofweakness.Theenergyreleasecausestheground./shakingoftheearthquakeandthezoneofweaknessisthefault.2.Howdoyouensurethatyouareidentifyingvirtual-lyallsourcesofearth-quakesthatcouldaffectthedam?TheidentificationofsourcesforearthquakesinAlaskaisbasedonex-periencewithfaultsandearthquakesinAlaskaandworldwide.Fromthisex-perience,itispossibletomakejudgementsaboutthepotentialsourcesofearthquakesinaregionsuchastheTalkeetnaMountains.Thesejudgementsdonotensurethatallsourcesareiden-tified,rather,thejudgementsidentifyallsourcesofearthquakeswhichexperiencehasshowncouldbepossible.ForlargeprojectssuchastheSusitnahydroelectricproject,aconservativeap-proachisused.Thisap-proachincludesthestudyoffaultswhichareonlyremotelypossiblesourcesofearthquakes.Thepastexperienceofthefirmwhichisstudyingthefaultsandearthquakes(Woodward-ClydeCon-sultants)includesex-aminationofactivefaultsandearthquakesinAlaska,California,Nevada,Utah,CentralandSouthAmerica,Europe,Africa,theMiddleEast,Australia,NewZealand,andJapan.3.Youusetheterm"max·imumcredibleearthquake."Whatisthat?AMaximumCredibleEar-thquakeisconsideredtobethemostsevereearth-quakeassociatedwithafaultandisassumedtooc- thesusitnahydrostudies/september19813ThreewaystomeasuretheforceofanearthquakeAccelerations'"..'"'"MOdifiedMercalli",'E'"IntensityScaleNc:"0'"&~"2E(1931.WoodandNeumann)'"~.Q.-::>>-~~.;:tic:~OlWOl-Q;E'"'"'"'"ut5u:::;;~c:W~1014_1.DetectedonlybysensitiveI-instruments-22.Feltbyfewpersonsatrest,1015_especiallyonupperfloors;delicatelysuspendedobjects....I-mayswingl-I-3.Feltnoticeably,butnotI-alwaysrecognizedasearthquake;1-31016_standingautosrockslightly.l-I-vibrationlikepassingtruck0.01g-I--I-4.Feltindoorsbymany.outdoorsbyI--few;atnightsomeawaken;I-1017-I-dishes,windows,doorsdisturbed;I-motorcarsrocknoticeablyI--I--45.Feltbymostpeople.someI-breakageofdishes,windows,I-1018_I-andplaster;disturbanceofI--tallobjects50I--~0.05g-~6.Feltbyall,manyfrightenedandrunoutdoors;fallingI-1019-plasterandchimneys,I-5damagesmallI-7.Everybodyrunsoutdoors;damagel-tobuildingsvariesdependingonl-I-qualityofconstruction;noticed200I-1020-bydriversofautomobilesI-0.2g-I--I--8.Panelwallsthrownoutofframes;f-~6fallofwalls,monuments.I--chimneys;sandandmudejected;I-1021-driversofautosdisturbed.500I--I-0.5g-=-9.Buildingsshiftedofffoundation,-cracked,thrownoutofplumb;-groundcracked;underground-1022-pipesbroken--710.Mostmasonryandframe=structuresdestroyed;ground600=cracked;railsbent;I-0.6g-pipesbroken-102311.Fewstructuresremainstanding;--bridgesdestroyed;fissuresinI-ground;pipesbroken,landslides,I--8railsbentI-1024-l-I-12.Damagetotal;wavesseenonI-0groundsurface;linesofsight~andleveldistorted;objectsthrownupinairI-1025_9.Howcantherebenoac-tivefaultsintheareaofthedamsiteswhenhistoricrecordsshowmanyearthquakesoccur-ringthere?IntheareaoftheproposedSusitnadamsitesearth-quakesoccurwithintheNorthAmericanPlate(whichincludestheupper15to20milesoftheearth'scrust)andinthePacificPlate(whichisbe-ingsubducted,ordrawndownward,beneaththeNorthAmericanPlate).Preliminaryevaluationoftheseismicityinthesetwoplates,withintheTalkeet-naTerrain,suggeststhatmanyoftheearthquakes,includingvirtuallyallofthemoderatetolargeearthquakesareoccurringinthePacificPlateatdep-thsofatleast34milesbeneaththedamsites.ActivityoccurringintheNorthAmericanPlateisassociatedwithenergyreleaseonsmallfaultplaneswhicharetoodeepandtoosmalltocausedisplacementattheearth'ssurface.10.Whydoyourstudiesnotconsiderfaultsthatarein-active?Allfaultsandpossiblefaultswithinabout100km(62miles)oftheSusitnadamsiteshavebeenevaluatedtodeterminewhetherornottheyareac-tivefaults.Thosefaultswhichhavenothaddisplacementinrecentgeologictimearecon-sideredtobeinactive.Faultswhichareinactivearenotimportantforseismicdesignofadambecauseearthquakesarenotexpectedtooccuralonginactivefaults.11.Whatisconsideredanac-tivefault?Variousgovernmentalandregulatoryagencieshavedefinedactivefaultsinordertoassesstheimpor-tanceoffaultstothedesignofcriticalfacilitiessuchasdams.Initiallythesedefinitionswerebasedonhowrecentlytherehasbeenmovementalongafault.Forexample,theU.S.BureauofReclamationdefinesafaultwhichhasmovedinthelast100,000yearsasactive.TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersuses35,000years.Recentlytherehasdevelopedanincreasingconsensusthattheactivi-tyofafaultshouldbecon-sideredbyhowoftenitmoves,howmuchmove-mentislikelytooccurandwhattypeofmovementwilloccur.Fromthisinfor-mationthelikelihoodoffaultmovementcanbemadeandincorporatedin-todamdesign.12.Whenyourefertoactivefaults,howlongaperiodoftimeareyoureferringto?AsaguidelinefortheSusitnaproject,AcresAmerican,Inc.hasdefinedanactivefaultasonewhichhashadmovement,ordisplacement,inthelast100,000years.~n~~ff.{\:ReportonSeismicStudiesforSusltnaAydroelectrlcPro/ecl,December1980,pre-paredbyWoOdward-ClYdeConsultantsforAcresAmerican.Inc.andtheAlaskaPowerAuthority.InAnchorage,caplesareavailableattheAlaskaResourcesLibraryintheFederalBuilding;attheUniversityofAlaskaConsor-tiumLibrary;attheArcticEnvironmentalIn-formationandDataCenter;andattheZ.J.LoussacLibrary.InFairbanks,coplpsareavailableattheElmerE.RasmusonLibrary.UniversityofAlaska;andattheNoelWienLibrary.InTalkeetna,acopyisavailableattheTalkeet-naPublicLibrary.ModifiedMercalliscaleThisscalevernallydescribestheeffectsofearthquakes.AccelerationEngineersoltenuseac·celerationtomeasuretheseverity01earthquakemo·tions.Therelationshipofac·celerationtomagnitudemustincludeaconsidera-tionforthedistancefromtheearthquakesource.M!!gnitudeandamount01energy!!.!!illThesetwocolumnsshowthateachincreaseinmagnitude(lorexample,Irom5to6)isapproximatelya30·loldincreaseinenergyrelease.Source:ModifiedfromEarth-RockDams,EngineeringProbiemsofDesignandConstruction,J.L.Sherard,R.J.Woodward,S.F.Gizienskl,W.A.Clevenger,JohnWileyandSons,Inc.,NewYork.\yhataboutreservoir-inducedseismicity(RIS)?1.WhatIsreservoir-Inducedaseismiceventthatwouldsultantshasestimatedbothinducedseismicityiscur·seismicity(RIS)?haveoccurredsoonerortheprobabilityofRISoccur-rentlybeingdone,laterIsInducedtooccurreneeandthepotentialReservoir-inducedseismicl-sooner."magnitudeoftheresulting4,IsthepotentialforRISty(RIS)referstoearth-earthquake.takenintoaccountindamquakeswhicharetriggered"If,atthetimeofthefillingdesign?bythefillingofareservoir.ofthereservoir,theac-PreliminaryresultssuggestTypicallytheseearth-cumulatedstrainenergyisamoderatereservoir-Yes.Thedesigncriteriaforquakesoccurbeneaththesmall,thecorrespondingInducedearthquakecouldthedamactuaHyexceedsreservoirarea.RecentseismiceventcouldbeoccurattheWatanasite.designcriteriafora-'studiessuggestedthatRISsmall.Conversely,Iftheac·Theestimatedmagnitudereservoir-inducedearth·earthquakesaretriggeredcumulatedstrainenergyisofsuchanearthquakeis5.5quake.incertaingeologicandhigh,theresultingeventorless,becauserioactiveseismologicterrainsbythecouldbelarge,butnotfaultshavebeenfoundinDamdesigncriteriawillin·weightofthewaterInthelargerthanwhatwouldtheimmediateareaofthecorporateboththeeffects,reservoirandbythereonaturallyoccursoonerorWatanareservoir.Theprob·ofearthquakesonmoredis·ducedfrictionalongfrac-later."abilityofoccurrencewastantactivefaults(theDenali.tures(causedbywaterbe-estimatedbycomparingtheFaultandBenioffZone)asingforcedIntothefrac-3.WhatisthepotentialforWatanareservoirwithotherwellasearthquakeswhichtures.)RISatWatanaandDevilverylargeandverydeepoccurnearthesitesin·:«....-Canyondamsites?reservoirsthathaveex-cludingthosewhichateDr.HarrySeed2.DoesthatmeanreservoirsperlencedRISworldwIde.reservoir-induced.cancauseearthquakes?ThepotentialforRISislargelyafunctionofthePreliminaryresultsindicateSour<:e:"AreservoircannotInducesizeanddepthofthereser·asimilarlikelihoodo~HISatDr.HarrySeed.moreseismicactivitythanvokSincetheWatanaDevilCanyon.Sjl9clallstInEartnquake-ReslstantDesign.anareacouldhaveproduc-reservoirwouldbebothUniversityofCallfor'jla.Berkeley.edifthereservoirhadnotverylargeandverydeep,Additionalevaluationofthebeenthere.Inotherwords,Woodward-ClydeCon-HkeHhoodofreservoir-~ 4thesusitnahydrostudies/september1981DesigningDamsinEarthquakeCountry-AnInterviewWithDr.HarrySeedDr.H.Bolton(Harry)Seed,isaspecialistinearthquake-resistantdesignandprofessorofcivilengineeringattheUniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley_Healsoserves ontheSusitnaExternalReviewPanelwhichismadeupofsixeminentengineersandscientistswhoprovideindependentreviewoftheSusitnahydroelectricfeasibilitystudy.Dr.Seedhasbeenaconsultantonsoilmechanicsandseismicdesignproblemssince1953.Overtheyears,hehasworkedextensivelywithavarietyofclients,includingtheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,theExecutiveOfficeofthePresidentofthe UnitedStates,theWorldBank,theFederalPowerCommission,BechtelCorporation,Woodward·Clyde,theMetropolitanWaterDistrictofLosAngeles,theCanadianMinistryoftheEnvironment,andmanyforeigngovernmentagencies.Hehasworkedonabout80damsworldwide,mostofwhichwereinseismicareas.AfteradamfailureinCaliforniaintheearly70's,Dr.SeedauthoreddesignproceduresforCalifor-niasothatdamfailureswouldnothappenagain.Theseproceduresarenowusedthroughouttheworldtoproducesafe,seismicdesignsfordams.FollowingareexcerptsfromaninterviewconductedbyNancyBlunck,DirectorofPublicPar-ticipation,theAlaskaPowerAuthority.Thecompletetextisavailableuponrequest.QUESTION:Whatisyourper-sonalexperiencewithdamdesign?SEED:SinceIamaspecialistinearthquakes,Itendtogetin-volvedmorewithdamsinhighlyseismicregionsthanotherareas.So,forexample,I'veworkedonalotmoredamsinCaliforniathanwithdamsinTexasorFlorida,whicharenqnseismicregions.Myex-perienceincludesthedesignofperhaps80dams-50or80damsforearthquakeproblemsofonekindoranother.IsuspectthatIhaveworkedonmoreearthquakeproblemsrelatedtodamsthananybodyelseintheworld.QUESTION:Whataboutthequestionofbuildingsafedamsinaseismicarea?SEED:Firstofall,itiscomfort-ingthatatthepresentlevelofknowledgeoftheSusitnapro-jecttheintensityofshakingwhichcanbeanticipatedateitherdamsiteisconsiderablylessthanthoseinareasforwhichwehavealreadydesign-eddams.Secondly,thepeopleinAlaskashouldknowthatdamshavebeen·proposedtobebuiltinsomeextremelycriticalareas.QUESTION:Whatmustdamdesigninhighlyseismicareastakeintoaccount?SEED:Thefirstthinginahighlyseismicareaistostudythedamsiteandfindoutifthereisafaultinthefounda-tionofthedamorveryclosetothedam.Weprefernottobuilddamsdirectlyoverfaults,althoughonceinawhilewehavedonethatwhenthereisnowaytoavoidit.Evenifyouavoidthefaultsinahighlyseismicregion,thatdoesn'teliminatetheproblemofthedambeingsubjectedtoextremelystronggroundshak-ingintheeventofamajorearthquake...Sothesecondaspectoftheproblemistodesignthedamtoremainstableeventhoughitisshakenbyverystrongmo-tionsfromanearthquake.Therearevariouswaysinwhichthatiseffected.Oneisbycontrollingthematerialsofwhichthedamisbuilt.WhenIsaycontrollingthem,Imeanselectingmaterialswhicharecapableofwithstandingearth-quakesbetterthanothers.Also,placingtheminthedamusingconstructiontechniqueswhichenhancetheirnaturalability,andprovidingafinish-edproductwhichcansafelywithstandtheeffectsoftheearthquakeshaking.Theprimaryconstructionpro-cedureinvolvedinplacingearthmaterialsindamsisincompactingthematerialtoahighenoughdensitytomakeitstrongenoughtowithstandtheearthquakeshaking.Thathasbeendoneinmanyareas,butfirstyoumustcarefullypredicttheeffectsofearth-quakeshakingonthedamandhowdensethematerialneedstobetowithstandagivenlevelofearthquakemotions.QUESTION:WhatprojectsareyoufamiliarwiththatresembletheSusitnaproject?SEED:OrovilleDaminCalifor-niaisacobbleandgravelfilldam700feethigh.AuburndaminCaliforniaisaconcretedamabout600feethigh...TheUribante-CaparoprojectinVenezuelaisacomplexoffourdamsandthreepowerhouses,with400to500foothighdams.TheAlicuraprojectinArgen-tinaisacomplexofthreedamsabout400feethigh...ThePueblo-ViejodaminGuatamala isarockfilldam500feethigh...Andmanyothers."IsuspectthatIhaveworkedonmoreearth·quakeproblemsrelatedtodamsthananybodyelseintheworld."QUESTION:Howdothesepro-jectsresembleSusitna,andaretheregreaterorlesserproblems?SEED:TheOrovilledamisinCalifornia.Theregioninwhichitwasbuiltwassupposedlynonseismic,butin1965theyhadanearthquakeverynearthedam.Sothedesignearth-quakeforOrovilleisnowamagnitude6.5(ontheRichterscale)earthquakeoccurringdirectlyunderthedamsite,whichisaverystrongearth-quake.OrovilleisaboutthesameheightastheproposedWatanadamand,asamatteroffact,wastheonewesug-gestedinourfirstreportasprobablybeingthebestmodelforthatparticulardam.Ihavebeenontheconsultingboardforthatdamsinceitbecameanearthquakeproblem,whichmeanshavingresponsibilityfordeterminingtheadequacyoftheseismicdesign.TheAuburndaminCaliforniaisahighlycontroversialdam.Again,thedesignearthquakeisamagnitude6.5eventdirect-lyatthedamsite.Thecom-plicatingfeatureofthatdamisthatthereismuchdebateaboutthepossibilityofafaultgoingthroughthefoundationofthedamand,therefore,directlythroughthedam.TheConsultantBoardonwhichIserveddeterminedthatthedamoughttobedesignedforafaultoffsetinthefounda-tionofabout6inches.Thatrecommendationledtoredesignofthedamfromthethinarchdamtoaconcretegravitydam...'TheUribante-CaparoprojectinVenezuelainvolvesfourdamsandthreepowerhousesandsomepartsofthisprojectarebuiltabout1"5milesfromtheBoconofault,whichisoneofthelargestfaultsintheworld.Theseismicdesignofthepro-jectinVenezuelaisanimpor·tantcontrollingaspectoftheproject.Thematerialsavailableforbuildingthedamstherearenotthebestintheworld.Thereisalotoffriablesandstone(friablemeansbreakseasily,fromsolidtosand),andsoitturnsoutthatdesigningthedamtobeseismicallystableisacriticalaspectofthedesign...Oneofthedesignearthquakesisamagnitude7.5eventoccurringaboutsevenmilesfromthedam.ThisisalmostidenticalwithoneofthepossibledesignearthquakesfortheWatanadamunlessAcresissuccessfulinprovingthattheTalkeetnathrustisnotactive...TheTalkeetnathrustisafaultneartheWatanadamsitewhoseactivityisquestionable,butitisbelievedtobeinactive.Ifitremainsintheinactivecategory,thentheseverityofshakingforWatanawillbelessthanthatforUribante-Caparoprojectingeneral.ThePuebloViejoprojectinGuatemala isdesignedforamagnitude7.75earthquakepassingdirectlythroughtheprojectsite-notthesiteofthedam,buttheoverallpro-jectsite.Thefaultpassesthroughapowertunnelveryclosetothedamsite.Theshakingthereisoftheorderof0.7gacceleration,lastingformaybe45seconds-oneofthemostsevereseismicen-vironmentsofanydamintheworld.Nevertheless,asafedesignhasbeenworkedoutforthatproject.Incidentally,onallthesedams,designshavebeenpro-ducedwhichhavebeenade-quatetoaccommodatethemotionsproducedbytheearthquakes.Itisamatterofhowyoubuildthedam,howyouarrangethedam,whatmaterialsyouuseinthedam,andhowyouplacethematerialsinthedam.Thesefactorswilldeterminewhetherthedamwilladequatelywith-standtheeffectsoftheearth-quake."...onallthesedams,designshavebeenpro·ducedwhichhavebeenadequatetoac·commodatethemo-tionsproducedbytheearthquakes.Itisamatterofhowyoubuildthedam,howyouarrangethedam,whatmaterialsyouuseinthedam,andhowyouplacethematerialsinthedam."QUESTION:Whatknottypro-blemshaveyouencounteredonotherhydroelectricprojects?SEED:Anyproblemsthatyouenc'bunterareessentiallyrelatedtothreemajorones-theamountofwatertobestoredandthe amountoffloodingwaterthathastobestoredatanygiventime;thestabilityofthefoundationmaterials;andthepossibleef-fectsoffaultsinthefounda-tion.Thefirstisnotmyareaofexpertise.Itisahydrologicalproblemandthereareotherspecialistswhocanhandlethatpartoftheproblem.Iwouldsaythemostdifficultproblems,intheearthquakesense,areprimarilythoseofevaluatingthestabilityofthefoundationmaterialsonwhichdamsaretobebuilt.Forexample,therewasmuchdebateaboutthesafetyduringearthquakesofRevelstokeDaminCanadaandwhattheyshoulddoaboutthefounda·tion.Iwasinvitedtobeacon·sultantonthatprojectbecauseofthedifferentpoints thesusitnahydrostudies/september19815ThedesignoftheOrovilledaminCaliforniahasbeensuggestedasanappropriatemodelforpreliminarydesignoftheWatanadam.ItisanearthfilldamlikeWatanaisproposedtobe,isinaseismicarea,andisofasimilarheight(Orovilleis770feet,Watanaisproposedtobe880feet).ThedesignearthquakeforOrovillewasamagnitude6.5earthquakeoccurringdirectlyunderthedamsite.TheOroville damdesigncanaccommodatestronggroundmotionsverynearthedamforarelativelylargeearthquake.ofviewaboutthesafetyofthedam...Theyweredealingwithaverydifficultfoundationsoil.Asamatteroffact,ItoldthemthatthefoundationsoilsinsomepartsofthedamfoundationboreagreatresemblancetothoseatTurnagainHeightsinAlaska(thesoilsthatfailedinthe1964earthquake).SomeofthefoundationmaterialforRevelstokeDamremindedmealotofBootleggerCoveclay.Itoldthemthatitwasanunstablematerial,especiallyatthelevelofshakingtheyweredesigningfor.Iadvisedthemtoexcavatethematerialout,andthat'swhattheyelectedtodo.Iwouldsaythatwasaknottyproblem.Otherknottyproblemsinvolvefaultsinthefoundation.AftertheSanFernandodamnearlyfailedintheSanFernandoearthquakeinCalifornia,thepeoplelivingdownstreamdidnotwantanotherdamtobebuiltatthatsite,butitturnsouttobeacriticalpointofen-tranceforwaterintoCaliforniaforthecityofLosAngeles.Therefore,theDepartmentofWaterandPowerinLosAngelesconsidereditessen-tialtohaveareservoirinthatarea,anditwasnecessarytorebuildthedamatthatloca-tion.Therewasapossibilityofafaultmovementinthefoun-dation,sowehadtodevisedspecialdesignwhichcouldac-commodateaveryhighlevelofshakingandthepossibilityofafaultmovementinthefoun-dationbothoccurringatthesametime.Thatwassuc-cessfullydone."...itisacomfortingfactthatatthepresentlevelofknowledgeoftheSusitnaproject,theintensityofshakoingwhichcanbean·ticipatedateitherdamsiteisconsiderablylessthanthoseareasforwhichwehavealreadydesigneddams."TheTetondaminvolvedpro-blemswithhighlyerodiblesoils.Thedamfailed,butIbelievethatifthedesignhadbeenmodified,asafedamcouldhavebeenbuiltatthatsite.Theknottyproblemtherewasassessingtheeffectofthejointingoftherockandthesimultaneouserodibilityofthesoilsusedtobuildthedamonthesafetyofthedam.Thatwasatrickyproblem.Theengineerswhomadethedesignthoughttheyhadsolv-edit,butaseventseventuallyproved,theyhadnot.Thedamfailed.Ibelieveweknowenoughaboutitnowthatwecouldrebuildthedamverysafely...Totellyouthetruth,Idon'tknowofanydamwhichdoesn'tinvolveoneortwoknottyproblems.QUESTION:HowdoestheseismicityoftheSusitnaareacomparetotheseismicityofotherregionswhereyouhaveworked?SEED:Iwould·saythattheseismicityoftheSusitnaareaasitispresentlyunderstood(andif itisestablished)issomewhatlessthant~atwhichIhaveencounteredinotherpartsoftheworld.ThereareanumberoffaultswhoseactivityhasnotyetbeenestablishedintheSusitnaarea.Theyarebelievedtobeinactivefaults,buttheyareonrecordforbeinginvestigatedverycarefullyduringthe1981summer.TheTalkeetnathrustfaultisoneoftheseandpro-bablythemostimportantofthem.Ifallthefaultsthatarepresentlynotclearlyrecogniz-edasactivearefoundtobein-active,thentheseismicityoftheSusitnaarea(ortheinten-sityofgroundshakingthatwoulddevelop)wouldnotbeasstrongasmanyofthedamsthatwehavealreadydesigned.QUESTION:Andwhatiftheop-positeweretrue?ANSWER:Iftheoppositeweretrue,iftheTalkeetnatrustturnsouttobeanactivefault,thenthelevelofshakingatSusitnawouldbecomparabletothatofsomeofthestrongestseismicregionswheredamshavebeenbuilt.Sincewehavebeenabletobuildanddesigndamswhichcanbeshowntobeseismical-lystableinthoseregions,thenIbelievethatthesametechni-queswouldbecapableofdemonstratingthesamethingforthedamsoftheSusitnaproject.Thedesigninanycasewillre-quiregreatcare,butitwouldrequireevenmorecareifthosefaultsliketheTalkeetnathrustturnouttobeactivefaults...Therehasbeentremendousprogressinthefieldofearth-quakeengineering,andtheearthquake-resistantdesignofdamshasbeentotallyrevolu-tionizedinthelast10years.Itisalmostlikethedevelopmentsofspacetechnology.Thingswecandonow,ourunderstandingoftheproblemsnow,aresoverymuchgreaterthantheywere10yearsagothatwecanfeelenormousconfidencenowincomparison.Inthosedayspeoplefeltconfidentbecausetheydidn'treallyunderstandtheproblems.Nowwefeelconfidentbecausewehaveaverygoodunderstandingoftheproblems.QUESTION:Canyougivesomeexamplesofwhyyoucanbesoconfident?SEED:Wecanpointtovirtuallydozensofdamswhichhavewithstoodverystrongearth-quakeshaking,eventhestrongestimaginableearth-quakeshaking.InCalifornia,in1906therewereatleast15damswithin5milesoftheSanAndreasfaultonwhichamagnitude8.3earthquakeoc-curred,andtheywerebuiltbytheratherprimitivepre-1900constructionmethods.Therewasn'tasingleoneofthemthatsufferedanymajordamageduetotheearthquake.Duringthelast10yearswehavelearnedwhattheproper·tiesofthosedamsarethatenabledthemtodothat.Wecanalsopointtoafewdamsthathavefailedduringearth-quakesandwhatwehavelearnedoverthelast10yearsiswhatmadethosedamsfailascomparedwiththeotheronesthathaven'tfailed."...theearthquake·resistantdesignofdamshasbeentotallyrevolutionizedinthelast10years."Therecordisverypositive.Therehavebeenliterallyhun-dredsofdamswhichhavewithstoodstrongearthquakemotions.InthetotalhistoryoftheUnitedStates,sofarasIknow,Ithinkthereareonlyfourorfiveknownfailuresofdamsduringearthquakes,andsomeofthosewerequitesmalldams...Webetterunderstandwhichonesarelikelytobevulnerableandwhichonesarelikelytobesafeandhowtotransformtheunsafeonesintosafeones...InthemostrecentsurveyofthesafetyofdamsinCalifor-nia,theconclusionwasthattherearenodamsinCaliforniawhichareathreattothepublic...lnthelast10yearstherehavebeenanumberofdamsinCaliforniawhichhavebeenrecognizedasearth-quakehazardsthathaveeitherbeentakenoutofserviceorrebuiltormodifiedinsomewaytoeliminatethethreattothepublic.CaliforniaisobviouslyoneofthemoreseismicallyactivestatesintheUnitedStates,alongwithAlaska,andifwecandoithere,youcandoitinAlaska,too. 6thesusitnahydrostudies/september1981EarthdamscombinenaturalmaterialsandcarefulconstructionEarth/rockfilldam:"Anydamconstructedofexcavatedmaterialsplacedwithoutadditionofbindingmaterialsotherthanthoseinherentinthenaturalmaterial.Thematerialsareusuallyobtainedatornearthedamsite."-TheInternationalCommissiononLargeDamsEarth/rockfilldamscontainabout25percentearthtore-tainthewaterand75percentrocktoholdtheearthupandensurestability.Inseismicallyactiveregionsitisnotunusualtoflattentheslopesofthedammorethaninnon-seismicareas.Theactualslopeandproportionsatapar-ticularsiteisdependentonthematerialsavailableforcon-structionandthesizeofthedesignearthquake.Oneofthemostimportantre-quirementsforearthdamsisthatthematerialsbeselectedandcompacted-andthefoun-dationstabilized-sothatset-tlementoftheearthandrockisminimized.Fordamsinhighseismicregions,anyriverbedmaterialsunderthedamwhichwouldbeunstableduringearthquakesiseitherremovedorimproved.ThecoreThecoreisamembranebuiltwithinanearthdamtoformanimpermeablebarrier.Itmaybeofnaturalmaterials(clays,sands,etc.)orpreparedmaterials(cementorasphalticconcrete),orofmetal,plastic,orrubber.InthecaseofWatana,thecoreisproposedtobeofglacialtill(amixtureofgravels,sands,silts,andclays).Itwouldbemorethan400feetthickattheriverbedlevel,andtaperedtoabout30feetinthicknessatthecrestofthedam.Unlikeconcrete,earthcorescannotsupporttheirownweighteventhoughtheyareaseffectiveasconcreteatim-poundingwater.Gentlyslop-ingman-mademountainsofcompactedsand,gravel,androckfillareneededtosupportthedam'scoreandkeepitinposition.LocationofcoreIngeneral,acentrallylocatedcoreprovidesthebestsecurityunderearthquakeconditions.AcentralcoreisillustratedinthediagramoftheWatanacross-section.DesignEachearth/rockfilldamisuni-que-itswatertightnessandstablilityaredirectlyrelatedtothematerialsusedforitscon-structionandthematerialsuponwhichitisfounded.Earth/rockfilldamsareusuallyconstructedinzones.Theprimarypurposeofthisistoensuresafetyintermsofstrength,controlofseepage,andprotectionagainstcrack·ing.Earthquake-resistantfeaturesinearthlrockfllldams:SomeoftheseprovisionsarebeingconsideredfortheWatanadam.Allearth/rockfllldamsarecompactedtomakethemdense.Inearthquakeareastheprocessofcompactionisnodifferentbutmorecompactionisdonebecausedenserrockprovidesmorestability.Mostmaterialscanbecompactedby3to8passeswithheavymachinery.Testsaremadeinthefieldasthedamisbeingconstructedtoensurethatmaximumcompactionisachieved.Alldamsalsohavefreeboard.Thisistheheightabovenor·malwaterlevelanditallowsforwaves,floods,andice.Inearthquakeareas,additionalheightisaddedtoallowforsettlement.Ifthereisapotentialforwavespassingoverthecrestofearth/rockfilldams,thecrestcanbetreatedsothatthewavespasssafely.Suchawavecouldresultfromaseismicdisturbanceoraland-slideintothereservoir.Preliminarystudiesindicatethereisnopotentialforland-slidesintheWatanareservoirbecauseofthetopographiccharacterofthevalley.Earth/rockfilldamsareusuallyzonedforstrengthandstability.Inearthquakeareas,widerfilterzonesareprovidedtoin·creasestability.Inaddition,thematerialsinthefilterzonesareselectedtoprovideself-healingofcracks.Thisconservativeapproachin-creasesthelevelofconfidenceinthedesign.Thedamisdesignednottocrackandalsodesignedtoself-healifitdidcrack.SlopeProtectionBothfacesofanearthdammustbeprotectedagainststructuraldamage.Thedownstreamfaceneedsprotectionagainstnaturalerosionandmaybecoveredwithgrassedsoilorrock.Theupstreamfacemustbeprotectedagainstdamagebywaveaction,ice,orfloatingdebris.Variousmethodsincluderock(rip·rap),precastconcreteforms,soilcement,orthewaterproofingmembraneofthedam.Source:TheEngineeringofLargeDamsPartII,HenryH.Thomas,1976,JohnWiley&SonsPublishers,NewYork,AWiley-IntersciencePublication.Cross-sectionview0__~.'m,'N"'''O''[I]C~,,,"Il"ofproposedWatana~~-,Jtb';'\?"__~S,ml-,'N'O''''"'mRock&,,,",,,,"IIearthdam.:,\0:':":'·-:.:·".8,~:"o.:C?'?:t?.c:-;...r':"~(HFinefilterr.:iI'ISlopeprotection.,t'.C""'\.U. __•._.t..:.p~).~Source:DevelopmentSelectionReport,Task6,DesignDeveiop-ment,SecondDraft,June1981,preparedbyAcresAmerican,Inc.fortheAlaskaPowerAuthority.SusitnaconstructionnotassuredbySB25The1981AlaskaLegislatureauthoredafar-reachingbillthatrelatescloselytotheevaluationoftheSusitnaproject'sfeasibili-tyandtoth.epossibledevelopmentoftheproject.SB25providesfordirectStatefundingofatleastaportionoftheconstructioncostsofcertainpowerprojectsanditprovidesforasinglewholesalerateforpowerfromallprojectsthatarepartoftheStateprogram.ThefollowingdiscussionanswerssomequestionsaboutSB25andtheSusitnastudies.WhatS825DoesDo1.thenewlaw,alongwithacompanionappropriationbill(SB,26),DOESindicateadesireonthepartofthe1981LegislaturetolowerthecostofpowertoAlaskans.TheportionoftheSusitnaconstructioncostfundedbytheStatewouldnothavetoberecoveredthroughpowersales.Theratesforthepowerwould,however,havetobesetsufficientlyhightocoverthecostsofprojectoperation,maintenance,andinspectionandhighenoughtoalsocoverthedebtserviceassociatedwithanyborrowedconstructioncostsnotfundedbytheState.2.SB25DOESmeanthattheSusitnaprojectwillbeeasiertofinanceIfthedecisionismadetobuildit.ItIsrecognizedthatWallStreetishesitanttobuyrevenuebondsforthefullcostofAlaskant)ydroelectricpowerprojects.TheprimaryproblemisWall'Street'sperceptionthatAlaskanprojectsareextreme-lyexpensiveinrelationtothesizeofthepopulationthatwillusethepower.3.SB2500ESindicateanintentbythe1981Legislaturetoap-propriateasmuchas$5billionfortheconstructionofpowerprojectsoverthenextfiveyears.Basedonverypreliminarye.stimates,thisamountwouldbeenoughtofundmostoftheconstructioncostsofallthepowerprojectspresentlyunderserious'considerationthroughouttheState,includingtheSusttnaproject.Severalprojectshavealreadybeenfundedunderthisprogram,butSusltna/snotoneofthem.4.SB25DOESdlfferentiatebetweenpowerratestoutilitiesandthoseto1ndustrialconsumers.Accordingtothelegislation,theratetorindustrialconsumersmaynotbelessthantheratechargedresidentialconsumersanditmaybehigher.WhatS825DoesNotDo1.ThenewlawDOESNOTmean,atleastasfarastheAlaskaPowerAuthorityisconcerned,thatadecisionhasalreadybeenmadetobuildtheSusltnaproject.Severalpointsshouldbekeptinmind.Theyare:•AccordingtoSB25,Statemoneycanonlybeusedforapowerprojectthatwillprovidethelowestpowercosttoutilitycustomers.IthasnotbeendeterminedthattheSusit-naprojectis,infact,thelowestcostalternativefortheRailbelt.TheSusltnaprojectfeasibilitystudyandthepom·panionBattellealternativesstudywillprovidethisrelativecostinformationduringthefirstthreemonthsof1982.• AdecisionhasnotyetbeenmadebytheAlaskaPowerAuthoritytorecommendthepreparationandsubmittalofalicenseapplicationtotheFederalEnergyRegulatoryCom·mission(FERC).ThatdecisionwillbemadeinlateApril1982.•ConstructionoftheprojectcannotbeginuntiltheFERCpreparesanenvironmentalimpactstatementandgrantsalicense.2.SB25DOESNOTaffectthedeterminationofprojectfeasiblll·ty,eitherintheSusitnafeasibilitystudyprogramorintheIn·dependentBattellepoweralternativesstudy.ThebasicapproachbeingusedInbothstudiesinvolvesacomparisonofRailbeltelectricalsystempowerproductioncostswithvariouscombinationsofpoweralternatives.Thecostsassociatedwithanyalternativewillreflecttheactualfull·costofconstruction,operation,andmaintenancewithoutanyconsiderationofsubsidies.Thisapproachisdesignedtoensurethat,iftheStateIsgoingtocontributefundstopowerprojectconstruction,thosefundswillgotowardsthe'mosteconomicalandpreferredalternatives. thesusitnahydrostudies/september19817Backgroundinformation>lon'proposedSusitnaproject1II1IJII1,'~\,,--\,\TheSusitnahydroelectricpro-jectascurrentlyproposedin·volvestwodamsandreser·voirsontheSusitnaRiverintheTalkeetnaMountainsofsouthcentralAlaska.Theprojectareaisabout50milesnortheastofTalkeetna,Alaskaand118milesnorth-northeastofAnchorage,Alaska.Theupstreamdam,Watana,isproposedtobedevelopedfirst.Itiscurrentlybeingcon-sideredasanearth/rockfilldam,approximately880feethigh.ThiswouldmakeitthefifthhighestdamintheworldandthehighestinNorthAmerica.Itwouldimpounda54-miIe-longreservoir.ThedownstreamdamatDevilCanyoniscurrentlybeingcon·sideredasaconcretearchdamapproximately635feethigh.Itwouldimpounda28-milelongreservoir.Thesedimensionsareapprox-imateandsubjecttochangeduringdetaileddesign.ThefeasibilitystudyisbeingmanagedandconductedbyAcresAmerican,Inc.fortheAlaskaPowerAuthority.Thestudiesconductedtodaterepresentthefirstyearofaplannedtwo-yearstudy(1980and1981).Adraftfeasibilityreportdetailingresearchef-fortsin10differentareasin-cludingeconomics,engineer-ing,andenvironmentalaspectsoftheproposedpowerprojectisdueinMarchnextyear.HowproposedHeightabovelowestRated RatedYearofSusitnaprojectsYearRiverStatefounda·CrestReservoircapacitycapacityinitialcom·orNearestorDamtionlengthcapacitynowplannedopera·NamepletedBasincityProvinceCountrytypemmm3x10·(MW) (MW)tioncomparewith'Bonneville1943ColumbiaPortlandOregon·WashingtonUSAconcrete322775881,0761938gravityexisting dams'GlenCanyon1964ColoradoPageArizonaUSAconcrete21647533,3051,0211,4311964arch'GrandCoulee1942ColumbiaCouleeCityWashingtonUSAconcre.te1681,27211,7957.46010,8301942gravity·Hoover1936ColoradoBoulderCityNevada·ArizonaUSAconcrete22137936,7031,3451.3451936arch/gravity°Mica1973ColumbiaRevelstokeBritishColumbiaCanadaearth/24579224,6701,7362.6101976rockfilleOroville1968FeatherOrovilleCaliforniaUSAearth2352,3164,299679 6791967'DevilCanyon(Proposed)SusitnaTalkeetnaAlaskaUSAconcrete2003781,2350400(Proposed)(2000)arch(2000)·Watana(Proposed)SusitnaTalkeetnaAlaskaUSAearth/2711,66212,3470800(Proposed)(1993)rockfill(1993)Sources:'CorpsofEngineers.Portland.Oregon~l"M.jorDamsollheWorld."T.W.Mermel,InternationalWalerPower·CivilDesign,SlateotCalifornia.Oroyille.Calitornin'W.slernAre.PowerOltice.Golden,Colorado..ojandDamConstruction.SpecialIssueMay1981,PublishedbyIPC'AcresAmerican,Inc.,Anchorage.Alaska1Meter=3.25Feet5)Electrical.ElectronicPressLId.,QuadrantHouse,TheQuadrant.MAcresAmerican,Inc.,Anchorage,AlaskaSulton,Surre)'SM25AS,EnglandConstructiontimedtomatchpowerdemand2010-ExlatlngandcommittedStage3 -DevilCanyon400MWzooo-Stage1 -Watana400MWStage2 -Watana400MW1990 1993 1995L_ndGNaturalgasG]CooloHydroelectric;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:~:~:;:;:;:;:;:;:~:~:~:;:;'.Zipill[]]198010~~6~I~~~......43)theDevilCanyondamwithits400MWiscompletedintheyear2000.2)theadditional400MWofcapacityatWatanaisreadyforoperationin1995;and1)TheWatanadamwith400MWwouldbecompletedin1993,whichistheearliestpossibledatebecauseoftimeperiodsinvolvedinprojectevaluation,permitting,andconstruction;Possiblestaging01'SusitnaprojectThisdiagramshowshowtheSusitnadevelopmentwouldbestagedunderthemediumforecastoffutureenergyreoquirements.Withthisenergydemandandensuringthatade·quategeneratingreservesaremaintained,powercostswouldbeminimizedif:State[I]readytobuyit.Theenergyconsumptionforecastspro-videestimatesofhowmuchpowercanbesoldintheyearsahead.ThePowerAuthority'sap-proach,then,istopostponespendingmoneyforthenextstageaslongaspossibletoensurethatthereisthede-mandforpurchasingthepro-ject'spower.Moneyspentonaprojectwhosepowercannotbesoldismoneywasted.Waitingtoolongtoconstructthenextstage,however,isunacceptablebecausetherewouldbeanincreasinglikelihoodofnotbeingabletomeetthepeakdemands.Ifthisoccurred,customerswouldhavetogowithoutelectricityduringhighusederiods.Thus,abalancehasto'~estruckbe-tweenpostponingadditionalinvestmentsandensuringade-quategenerationtomeetpeakloads.Meanwhile,thebalancinghastobedoneinth~midstofagreatdealofuncrtaintyaboutwhattheactualemandforpowerisgoingtobeinthefuture.Astimeg,oesonandfuturepowerdemandsbecomemorecertain, theplan-nedstagingwouldbeadjustedtosuitactualconpitions.NameI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IMailingIIiiIiiiIiiiiiiiiiI I iAddressCity2)anadditiontotheWatanacapacityofanother400MW;and3)theDevilCanyondamwithaninstalledcapacityofabout400MW.1)theWatanadamwithin-stalledcapacityof400MW;Thisstagingprovidessomeflexibilityinthesequenceandtimingofconstruction.Atthesametime,therearecertainconstraintsonthatflexibility.InstagingtheSusitnadevelop-ment,theprimaryobjectiveistokeepthecostofpoweraslowaspossible.Thisisdonebyminimizingexpenditureswhilesellingasmuchoftheavailablepoweraspossible.Butthepowercannotbesoldiftherearen'tconsumersBoththeWatanacapacityad-ditionandtheDevilCanyonprojectcouldbebroughtonlineearlieroratthesametime,ifneeded,whileallthreestagescouldbepostponedifdemandturnedouttobelessthananticipated.TheproposedSusitnadevelop-mentispresentlyenvisionedashavingthreedistinctsta-g"es:III-------------•ThispUblicinformationdocumentontheSusitnahydropowerprojectwasdevelopedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityPublicParticipationOffice,NancyBlunck,Director.Commentsonthe substanceofthisnewsletterandideasforfuturepublicationsshouldbeforwardedtothePublicParticipationOfficebywayofthefollowingcoupon.LastFirstInitialiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiI I iIfyouwanttogetfuturenewsletters (\1\LD;5I~:::,vvUl/.:5{'6IARLIS831~7.AJ:~k~rResource~thesusitnahydrostudies/september1981LrbralyII01matJOfiervwc8IndependentpanelreviewingAnchorage,Alaska'j>SusitnafeasibilitystudiesDamatDevilCanyonY\(recommendedovertunnelExternalReviewPanelMembers:SixleadingscientistsandgovernmentworkonAmericanFollowing2,500manhoursofseverelydepletedbecausetheengineershavebeennamedtodams,hehasextensivecon-study(inexcessofonemanwaterwouldbeflowinganindependentexternalsuitingexperiencewithCana-yearofeffort)atwinpowertun-throughthetunnelinstead.reviewpanelbytheAlaskadianhydroelectricprojects.nelplanhasbeeneliminatedPowerAuthorityBoardofasanalternativetoadamatThekayakingexperienceatDirectors.Thespecialists,whoDr.A.StarkerLeopoldisaDevilCanyon.DevilCanyoncouldbepre-collectivelyhavemorethandistinguishedzoologistwhoserved,butnotinthesame200years'experienceintheirhasbeenassociatedwiththeThetunnels,15mileslongandwaythatitexistsnow.Withafields,arereviewingtheSusit-UniversityofCaliforniasince30feetindiameter,weretunnel,kayakingwouldbenafeasibilitystudiescon-1946.Aone-timevice-eliminatedfromfurthercon-dependentuponthecontrolledductedbyAcresAmericanandpresidentoftheS,~rraClub,siderationwhenitbecamereleaseofwaterthroughtheotherresearchcontractors.hehasservedonmanywildlifeclearthattheywouldgeneratecanyon.andconservationorganiza-26%lesselectricityandwouldInterviewwithmembersofthetionsandhasconductedex-cost$637millionmorethanaInaddition,byvirtueofsizereviewpanelwillbeavailabletensiveresearcharoundthedamatDeviICanyon.alone,constructionoftheinfuturepublicationsastheworld.smallerre-regulationdam(245specialistscommentonThedifferenceinenergyout-feet)wouldhavelessen-generalplansfortheSusitnaDr.AndrewH.Merrittisaput,primarilyduetofrictionvironmentalimpactthanthedevelopmentandspecificgeologistwhohasbeeninvolv-lossesalongthelengthoftheDevilCanyondam.Theriverfeasibilitystudies.edintheresearch,design,andtunnel,isequivalenttoaboutmilesfloodedandthereservoirreviewofmajorconstruction30%ofthetotalenergyareacreatedbythere-Exerptsfromaninterviewwithprojecsaroundtheworld.Ageneratedin1980bybothAn-regulationdamforthetunnelDr.Seedappearinthisspecialistintunnelsandrockchorageutilities(Municipalwouldbeabouthalfthoseofnewsletter.work,hehasextensiveex-LightandPowerandChugachtheDevilCanyondam,therebyperiencewithhydroelectricElectricAssociation).reducingneg~tiveconse-MerlinD.Copenisanexpertandnuclearpowerprojects.quencessuchas.lossofonconcretedams.HehashadInthelongterm,anadditionalwildlifehabitatandpossiblemajorresponsibilityfortheDr.H.BoltonSeedisaformergeneratingplantwouldhavetoarcheologicalsitesinthedesignoftheGlennCanyonchairmanoftheDepartmentofbeaddedtofillthisgapandreservoirarea.DamontheColoradoRiver,CivilEngineeringatthethiscouldcreateanadditionalCalifornia'sAuburnDam(pro-Berkeleycampusofthesourceofenvironmentalim-Withthetunnel,therecouldposedasoneofthelongestUniversityofCalifornia.Apactwhichhasnotbeenin-conceivablybeararemitiga-concretearchdamsinthespecialistinearthquakeeludedinthecomparisonattionopportunityofcreatingworld),andmanyothers.Heengineeringproblems,hehasthistime.newsalmonspawninghabitathasconsultedonnumerousin-consultedondozensoftheinan11-milesectionoftheternationalprojectsaswellasworld'slargestdamprojects.ExcludingconsiderationofriveraboveDevilCanyon.otherAlaskandevelopments.thisadditionalgenerationtoPresently,DevilCanyonDr.DennisM.Rohanisanmakeuptheshortfall,thetun-presentsaphysicalbarriertoJacobH.DoumaservedaseconomistwiththeStanfordnels'main advantageswerefishmigration.chiefoftheHydraulicDesignResearchInstitutewhoenvironmental.Theadverseef-BranchoftheU.S.ArmyCorpsspecializesinenergymatters.fectsupontheaestheticvalueSource:ofEngineerspriortohisretire-HehasbeeninvolvedinanduniquenessofDevilCan-"SusitnaHydroelectricProject,TunnelAlter-mentfromactivegovernmenteconomicanalysesofallyonwouldbelessenedwithanativesReport.Task6,DesignDevelopment,"preparedbyAcresAmerican,Inc.fortheserviceaftermorethan40phasesofenergyproductiontunnel,althoughtheflowsAlaskaPowerAuthority.July1980.years.Inadditiontohisandconsumption.throughthecanyonwouldbeDouma~._,/IMerrittRohanLeopoldSeedCopenthesusitnahydrostudiesINTHIS'ISSUE:TtJ:iSistnese·OMdof$eVera}'l78<Ws!e·tter.sp.vbNsbefibytheAla'SkaPOwetAuNrori(ytor£itiZM/ioftheuti/belt..thepurpose:istopr;esehtpbjeefiveiJ1fdrtrl(~lionon·-thepragressr>ftheSus/t-riahydrQelef;tricfeasibilitystudiesso.thatrea.d'fJ.C:Sms-gmaketbe/rQJ/iReonclusionsbasedon.aCJ;w:tUf]'in'ormation~E'ricP.Yould,E:xecl;ltive.DitectoJNan~y·8Iunb.k,!Difectofof'Public,'Parti<:;ipaOO'nAlaskaPow.erAmhoflty$33W~4th·S.uile31Aflcf-lQrage,,M'a$ka9gS0,tphone:(9Q7)276..0.00'1Th.esta'teofAla;iktJ:lsan~qtJatopportunlty.§lri)pI9yer.preUm,inaryseis'micconclusions".~'.'..:',page1qu&s:Uonsanda:lJswerso,neart.hquakestutJ:i'&s.,pa,ge2reserv·oir..induoeds.eis:mi.city..,,....•...,...,.".••.page:Sdesigning-dams.inea1rt'l1quake'COUA·try..~••.~.••.•page4ea,rfhdams..•. .... ....,..,. ....•. ...","......~'~..•"..page,:6th,eSus:itn:astudiesa'ndS'B25...'.,••."..,.'..,.pa'ge6comparison.ofSusi.tna'iwti·thexisti'ngdams.,.'.page7st'aging·ofSus.lnaproposed..•".......,...,...,'.page.,ind1epend'entteviiewofSu:silna,$·tucfi,es..•...,. ....page8damrecomme,Rded,overlu.nnel.,..~..~........•0,••0,'page8ALASKAPOWERAUTHORITYPUBLICPARTICIPATIONOFFICE333West4th-Suite31Anchorage,Alaska99501(907)276-0001SHEPHARD,MAPTPA701CSTBX36ANCHOR1\GEAK(1002016,299g513.C::~~~{j~..iff?f:fkj~~~R.,?iSf"'1o;:::5tr~'7!:i'r......gf;;o'?O"Y~~BULKRATEU.S.POSTAGEPAIDPERMITNO.272ANCH.AK.99502 3?'l~)O()OCf1.5/••lesjune1982rf(ILf;)-5.Sg/1;)3nO,6)'21t-~C'~Ol3\30eSUSltnaARLISAlaskaResourcesLibrary&InformationSeIVicesAnchorageAlaskaj".'i!,..,ImpactsonAmajorconstructionprojectsuchasSusitnacancausefun-damentalchangesinnearbycommunitiesandaffectthelivesoftheresidentsofthosecommunities.PeopleintheMatanuska-SusitnaBorough,particularlyintheTalkeetnaandTrapperCreekareas,havethehighestpotentialforbeingdirectlyimpactedifS"sitnaweretobeconstructed.PreviousissuesofthisnewsletterdiscussedthetechnicalandenvironmentalaspectsoftheproposedSusit-naproject.ThisissuefocusesontheeffecttheproposedSusitnaprojectmayhaveonpeople,especiallythoselivingnearesttheproject. •'2PeterRogers,"the'su~itha'hydrostudiesljune'1982HowwouldSusitnaaffectgrowthintheMatanuska-SusitnaBorough?AdiscussionwithPeterRogersWe'vebeenaskedquestions2.The"basecase"projectsresourcedevelopmentsinten-workandinanticipationofad-aboutthesocioeconomicim-that69,000peoplewillliveinsifyduringthe1980'smoreditionalemploymentoppor-pactsoftheproposedSusitnatheBoroughintheyear2000.peoplewillbeattractedtoandtunitieswhenconstructionac-hydroelectricproject.TheWhatisthisbasedon?settleinthearea.Whileitistivitiesaccelerateinthelateresponsesaretakenfromandifficulttoforecastpopulation1980's.interviewwithPeterRogers,Theestimateofpopulationsofarinadvance,itisfeltthatVice-PresidentofFrankOrth&withouttheprojectisbasedontheestimatesarereasonable.Over85percentofthepeopleAssociates.assumptionsofmoderatemovingintotheBoroughasagrowthinthecentralRailbelt5.HowmanypeoplemightberesultofSusitnawouldoccurForthemostpart,ifSusitnaRegionandofthecontinuedmovingintoBoroughcom·between1987and1990,Aboutwereconstructed,AnchoragegrowthoftheMat-SuBoroughmunitiesasaresultofthe200peopleareexpectedtoandFairbankswouldhardlyasapercentofthetotalSusitnaproject?leavetheBoroughintheearlynoticeanyincreaseinworkersregionalpopulation.1990'sasconstructionontheorrelatedactivitybecausetheSpecifically,thisforecastAsmentionedpreviously,theWatanadamwindsdown.expectedincreasesaresoassumesconstructionofthetotalpopulationoftheEmploymentonthesecondsmall.Mostofthepopulationnaturalgaspipeline,comple-Boroughwouldincreasebyap-phaseoftheprojectisex-increase(andrelatedimpacts)tionoftheKnikArmcrossingproximately1,110people.Be-pectedtobefilledbypeopleinwouldbefeltintheby1991,andnocapitalmove.tween1983and1990,abouttheBorough(includingMatanuska-SusitnaBorough,HoustonandBigLakeareex-340projectrelatedpeopleareworkersthatstayed)sothatnoespeciallyintheTalkeetnaandpectedtogrowduetothecon-expectedtosettleinTrapperfurthersignificantpopulationTrapperCreekareas.structionoftheKnikArmCreek,totheextentthereisincreasesareexpected.crossing.Boroughofficialsin-housingavailable.Asaresult1.WhatwouldbetheimpactsdicatedduringDecember1981oftheproject,260people8.WhatisgoingtohappentoontheMatanuska·SusitnathatthesefiguresareslightlyareexpectedtosettleinTalkeetnaiftheSusitnapro-Boroughduringtheconstrue·lowerthanotherprojectionsTalkeetna.Between40to50jectisbuilt?tionoftheSusitnaproject?withwhichtheyarefamiliar.projectrelatedpeoplewillset-TheimpactsontheBoroughMostofthepopulationgrowthtieineachoftheincorporatedAnumberofconstructionthatisprojectedforthecities:Palmer,Wasilla,andworkersandtheirfamilies,couldtakeanumberofforms.BoroughisnotrelatedtotheHouston.Closeto400morewouldrelocatetoTalkeetnaTherewouldbeconstructionSusitnaproject,butrathertopeoplecanbeexpectedtolivefromotherpartsoftheofanaccessroadthatcouldthetendenciesthathaveelsewhereintheBoroughasaRailbelt,otherareasofAlaska,openupthenorthern..partofcausedtheBorough'spopula·resultofSusitna,especiallyandfromOutside.MostofthistheBoroughandaconstruc-tiontoincreasesorapidlyinnearIndianRiver,intherelocationwouldoccurduringtioncampthatwouldcontainthepast10years.Montana-Willo~area,and1985·1990.AsTalkeetnaabout4,000constructionaroundWasilla.residentsbecomeemployedworkersandfamilymembers3.Howwasitdeterminedthatontheproject,andasnewatthepeakofconstructionac-1,000peoplewillliveinworkersrelocatetoTalkeetna,tivity(1990).TherewouldbeaTalkeetnaand320inTrapper6.WhatdotheseestimatesadditionalincomewouldbelargeincreaseinactivityinCreekbytheyear199O?include?spentinTalkeetna.Thiswouldsupportareassuchasprojectincreasebusinessactivity.supplies,restaurants,gassta-ThesefiguresrefertothetotalTheseestimatesincludedirectDemandsonfacilitiesandtions,andretailstores.Anpopulationincreasesthatconstructionworkforce,theirservices,schools,healthcare,estimatedincreaseof1,110wouldoccurinTalkeetnaanddependents,andtwootheretc.wouldalsoincrease.Therepeoplein_thepopulation_oLtheTrapperCreekiftheSusitna_cateaories_of~mplo-ymeot._couldbetemporaryshortagesBoroughwouldoccurbetweenprojectisnotundertaken.ThisOnecategoryisjobsthatwillifplanningisinadequateorif1983,and1990.Thelargestgrowthisbasedonamoderateresultinlocalindustryasathepopulationinfluxturnsoutpopulation-relatedimpactsgrowthassumptionintheresultofSusitnainsuchareaswouldoccurinTrapperCreekRailbeltregionandcontinuedaslocalsheetmetalshopsortobesignificantlygreaterthanandTalkeetna.ThiswouldbegrowthoftheMat-SuBoroughwholesalehardwarestores.anticipated.duetothenumberofpeopleasapercentofthetotalTheothercategoryisjobsthatmovingintotheareainorderregion.Basedonfuturegrowthwouldbecreatedintheservice9.Whatwouldhappentotoliveclosetothesite.assumptionsandobservationsrelatedareabythespendingTrapperCreek?ofpastgrowthtrends,itisex-patternsoftheworkers.TheseTheeffectsofconstructingpectedthatTrapperCreek'sjobswouldbeinsuper-TheeffectsonTrapperCreektheSusitnaprojectonpublicpopulationwillincreasebyap-markets,gasstations,wouldbemuchthesameasfacilitiesintheBoroughproximatelyfourpercentrestaurants,andthelike.theeffectsonTalkeetna,ex-would,tosomeextent,DeannuallyandTalkeetnabyceptmoreso.TrapperCreeklimitedbytheprovisionofaapproximatelyfivepercentIntheRailbelt,itisestimatedwouldhaveconsiderablymorefullserviceconstructionannually.thatanaverageof82second-trafficandbusinessactivitycamp.Inthecasesofeduca-aryjobswouldbecreatedforalongthehighway.Additional-tion,healthcare,policeand4.Howcanthatmanypeopleevery100directconstructionIy,becausetheinfluxofpeo-fireprotection,andtransporta-moveintotheTrapperCreekjobsonSusitna.Themajoritypieisanticipatedtobeabouttion,thepopulationincreaseandTalkeetnaareasintheyearofpeoplemovingtotheequaltothepopulationsizeassociatedwiththeproject1990withoutSusitna?ItBoroughwouldbeinservicewithouttheproject,Trapperwouldspeeduptheneedforseemsquitehigh.relatedjobs.CreekcouldexperiencemorenewfacilitiesbyacoupleofacuteimpactsthanTalkeetna.years.EvenwithoutSusitnaWehaveobservedthatpeople7.Whenwouldthesepeoplethepopulationgrowthinthetendtosettleintheareainbecoming?.Mat-SuBoroughwillbesignifi-spiteofthegenerallackof10.Wouldschools·intheMat-cantandresultinsubstantialemploymentopportunities.AIftheStatedecidestocon·SuBoroughbeovercrowded?increasesinthedemandforconsiderablenumberofthesestructSusitnaandthepresentpublicservices.personsmustobtainseasonalscheduleisfollowed,limitedMostschoolsintheBoroughorotheremploymentoutsideconstructionrelatedactivitieswillexperiencemajorgrowthoftheimmediatearea(forex-wouldbeginabout1985.Someinenrollmentsasaresultofample,ontheNorthSlope).AspeoplecouldmoveintothepopulationgrowthwithoutoilandgasandothernaturalBoroughatthistimeforthisSusitna.ThiswillbefarmoreChartcomparespopulationgrowthwithandwithoutSusitnaGeographicarea1981populationExpectedpopulationAdditionalpeople1990intheyear1990withSusitnapopulationwithoutSusltna(duringpeakwithconstruction1990)SusltnaEntireMatanuska-22,30043,0001,10044,100SusitnaBoroughAnchorage174,700225,2001,100226,300Fairbanks/North54,60071,2009071,290StarBoroughKenaiPeninsula22,90035,600insignificant35,600CommunityTrapperCreek225320340660Talkeetna6401,0002601,260Wasilla2,1684,150504,200Palmer2,5674,500404,540Houston6001,400401,440 ParkinglotnearrailroadstationinTalkeetna.TheKenaiPeninsulawillex-perience·aninsignificantamountofprojectinducedgrowthduringtheinitialyearsofconstructionandafter1987therewillbeanetoutmigra-tionofpopulationforthesamereasonsasinAnchorageandFairbanks-increasedemploy-mentopportunitiesintheMat-SuBoroughassociatedwithSusitna.AlthoughCantwellseemstowanttoencouragegrowth,thearea'slackofservicesandlandavailableforhousingwilllimittheabilityofprojectworkerstosettlethere.netoutmigrationofapprox-imately100personsbytheyear2005.Source:SusitnaHydroelectricProjectEnvironmentalReportSocioeconomicAnalysisPhaseIReport.April1982.preparedbyFrankOrth&Associates.willbeapproximatelytwoyears.Thecostwouldbecoveredbypropertytaxes,staterevenues,anduserfees.22.WouldtheSusltnaprojectcausemuchgrowthInAn-chorage,Fairbanks,orotherpartsoftheRallbelt?Teeland'sCountryStoreinWasilla.21.WouldPalmerorWasillagetmuchgrowthasaresultoftheSusltnaProject?PopulationgrowthinFair-banksrelatedtotheprojectwouldbeslightlylessthan100atthepeak(1990)and,asisthecaseinAnchorage,theFair-banksregionwillexperienceNo.WithoutSusitna,Palmerisexpectedtogrowfromitspre-sentpopulationofapprox-imately2,600to6,400bytheyear2000andWasillaispro-jectedtogrowfromapprox-imately2,200to8,500.ThepopulationincreasestothesecommunitiesassociatedwiththeSusitnaprojectareapprox-imately50attheconstructionpeakin1990.Thiswoulddecreasetoapproximately25by2005.AlthoughWasillaandPalmerarecurrentlythemajorpopulationcentersintheBorough,mostconstructionworkersareexpectedtosettleinthemorenortherncom-munitiesclosertothesite.TrapperCreekElementarySchool,Mile2.5PetersvilleRoad.·-3No.Anchorageisexpectedtogrowfromitspresentpopula-tionofapproximately179,000to253,000by2000,withouttheSusitnaproject.Populationin-creasesassociatedwithSusit-nawouldtotalapproximately1,000personsby1990;andbytheyear2005approximately300ofthesepersonswouldleave.Abouttwo-thirdsofthecon-structionworkforceisex-pectedtobemadeupofgenerallaborersandtradessuchasdrillingandblasting,pumping,excavation,steel,andcementworkers.Therewillalsobepositionsfortruckdrivers,mechanics,welders,sheetmetalworkers,carpenters,engineers,andassortedotherpositions.16.WouldtheworkerslivingintheMat-Sucommutetothesiteonadailybasis?20.WilltheMat-SuBoroughadministrationhaveadditionalexpendituresforservicestothenewresidents?Yes.Intheshort-term,theMat-SuBoroughAdministrationwillincuradditionalcostsinprovidingareawideandnon-areawideservices;however,inthelongtermrevenuesfromlocalpropertytaxes,usercharges,andStatefundswillincreasetocoverthesecosts.Theshort-termlaginrevenuesOn·siteemploymentoppor-tunitiesduringtheconstruc-tionwillreachapeakof3,500in1990,anditisestimatedatleast200peopleintheBoroughwouldbeabletogetjobs.Thereis,ofcourse,nohardandfastlimitonthisnumber.Inaddition,itisex-pectedthatbusinesscreatedbytheprojectwillresultinanother335jobsinotherin-dustriesandservice/retailbusinesses.About25percent,or85,ofthesejobswouldbelocatedintheTrapperCreekfTalkeetnaarea.17.Whatsizetownwouldreomainatthedamsites?18.HowmanypeoplethatliveintheMat-SuBoroughnowwillbeabletogetjobsonSusltnaifitwerebuilt?Severalfactorswoulddiscouragetherelocationofworkerstolocalcommunities.Themajoronesare:thelongcommutingdistance;con-structionworkers'preferences;mobile/transientlifestyle;theplannedwork-schedule;andthelackofavailablehousinginthesecommunities.Givenwhattheworkschedulesarelikelytobeandthedistancestothesite,itisunlikelythattheMat-Suworkerswouldcommuteonadailybasis.Workerswouldprobablycommuteweekly,bi-weekly,orlessfrequentlydependingonthefinalworkschedule.InanyeventtherewouldbemuchlesstrafficthaniftheyweretocommutedailyAsthehydroelectricfacilitiesbecomeoperational,theoperationsandmaintenanceworkforceisproposedtomoveintoanewpermanenttownconstructedoneortwomileswestoftheWatanacon-structioncamp.Thistowncouldeventuallyaccom-modate170operationsworkersplustheirfamiliesandprovideallthenecessaryserv-ices.ApreliminarydesignofthistownsitewasprovidedintheMarch1982feasibilityreport.19.Whatkindofjobswouldbeavailable?15.Whywouldworkersandfamiliesliveintheconstruc-tioncampratherthanrelocatinginthelocalcom·munities?isthenatureofconstructioncamps.Presentlythereareplansforafull-servicefacilityateachdamsitewithfamilyprovisionsataseparatevillageforengineersandprofes-sionals,andsinglestatusac-commodationsforconstruc-tionworkers.Thefull-servicefacilitywouldincludeschools,stores,abank,andavarietyofrecreationalfacilities.Thema-jorityoftheworkforceontheprojectwouldbeAlaskaresidentsandtheywould,inmostcases,liveattheworkcamp.Engineersandprofes-sionalswouldhavetheoptionofrelocatingtheirfamiliestotheconstructionvillage,butconstructionworkerswouldnot.MorepeoplewouldsettleinTalkeetnaandTrapperCreek,butitisdifficulttosayhowmanymore.Currently,AcresAmerican,Inc.hasanticipatedtheneedforatemporarycon-structiontownsitethatwouldaccommodateupto350familiesaswellasasinglestatuscampforconstructionworkers.Iftheseaccommoda-tionsarenotprovided,asignificantnumberofthesefamiliesmightchoosetoset-tleatTalkeetnaorTrapperCreek.Althoughnodetailedestimatewasmade,factorsthatwouldinfluencesettle-mentdecisionsincludeworkschedules(e.g.fourweekson,oneweekoff,orsevenweekson,twoweeksoff),commutingmodes(Whetherpersonalvehiclesandprivate/commer-cialplanesareallowedattheconstructionsites),availabilityofmasstransit(e.g.bus)tothesites,andsoforth.FurtherpopulationincreaseswouldoccurfromsecondaryemploymentopportunitiesasaresultofSusitna.Thesein-dividualswouldworkatjobsthatcloselyparalleltheex-istingservice-orientedjobs.Here,too,apercentageofjobswouldbefilledbyout-of-staters.Manyofthoseout-of-staterswouldberelatedtotheconstructionworkers(wife,child,etc.).ManyworkerscomingfromotherareasofAlaska(primari-lyAnchorage)wouldviewtheiremploymentontheprojectasanopportunitytomovetotheMat-Su.Therefore,mostofthepeoplemovingtotheBoroughwillbeAlaskaresidentswithlifestylessimilartothoseofcurrentresidentsoftheBorough.Itislikelymoston·siteconstructionworkerswhomoveintotheBoroughcom-munitieswouldhavefamiliesandwouldremainoncetheSusitnaconstructioniscom·pleted.14.Ifthefull-serviceconstrue·tlonfacilities(withfamilies,schools,banks,stores,recrea-tionfacilities)arenotprovld·ed,howmuchworsecouldItbefortheTalkeetnalTrapperarea?11.Wouldtaxesforeducationincreasetocoverthecostsofbuildingnewschools?Ingeneral,no.Capitalim-provementsforeducationarecurrentlyfundedbytheState.Inorganizedboroughs,theStatereimbursestheschooldistrictfor80percentoftheschooldebt.12.Wouldtherebeadequatehousing?ThepressureonhousingwouldbegreatestinTrapperCreekandTalkeetna,duetotheprojectedlackofvacanthousing.Therecouldbeasignificantamountoftem-poraryhousingutilizedduringtheperiodofgreatestimmigra-tion(1987-1990).Thiswouldtakeseveralforms:stayinginlodgesandmotels,purchaseofmobilehomesonindividuallots,aswellastheuseoftrailers.Intheinitialyearsofthecon-structionproject,thepredomi-nanttypeofpeopletomovein-totheBoroughwouldbecon-structionworkersandtheirfamilies,originatingfromotherareasofAlaska.Thesinglegreatestfactorindeter-mininghowmanyandwhattypeofpeoplewouldrelocateHowever,itispossiblethatthelongleadtimebetweenthestartofconstructionandthepeakofactivityin1990mayresultinspeculativehousingconstructionwhichwouldpro-videadditionalhousing.13.WhatkindsofpeoplewouldbemovingtoMat-SuasaresultoftheSusltnaproject?Theprojectwouldalsoin-creasetheenrollmentofSusit-naValleyHighbyabout75studentsoverthebaselineforecastlevelby1990.Theschoolwouldprobablyhavetobeexpandedtoaccommodatetheincrease.significantthantheincreaseinenrollmentassociatedwithSusitna.Projectinducedpopulationinfluxwouldmostaffecttheschoolsinthenorth-ernpartoftheBorough.WithSusitna,TrapperCreek'selementaryschoolwouldin-creasebyabout60-70studentsbetween1983and1990overthebaselineprojec-tionof80students.Talkeetna'selementaryschoolpopulationwouldincreasebyabout40studentsoverthebaselineforecastof126duringthesametime.TheplannedTrapperCreekelementarywillhaveacapacityfor100students.AlthoughitmaynotneedtobeexpandedwithoutSusitna,additionalclassroomspacewouldbenecessarywithSusitna.TheTalkeetnaelementaryschoolwillhavereacheditscapacitywithoutSusitnaaround1990andwouldneedtobeexpanded.thesusitnahydrostudies/june1982 4thesusitnahydrostudies/june1982Howwouldpeople'sliveschangewithSusitna?AdiscussionwithStephenBraundStephenBraundWe'vebeenaskedquestionsaboutthepotentialsocioculturalimpactsfromtheproposedSusitnahydroelec-tricproject.TheresponsesaretakenfromaninterviewwithStephenA.Braund,ofStephenR.Braund&Associates.Braund'sworklookedattheconcerns,attitudes,andvaluesoflocalresidentslivingneartheproposedSusitnapro-ject.Severalcategorieswereinvolvedinthestudyin-cluding:settlementpatterns(whenandwhypeoplecometoacommunity);economiccon-ditionsandvalues;politioal,systems;communityresponsecapacity;andlocalattitudestowardgrowth,change,andeconomicdevelopment.1.Whichcommunitieswereincludedinthesocioculturalstudy?ThestudyincludedTalkeetna,TrapperCreek,therail-roadcommunitiesnorthofTalkeetna(Chase,Curry,Sherman,andGoldCreek),Cantwell,andtheMcKinleyParkarea.TheemphasiswaslessintheMcKinleyParkareabecauseofitsdistancefromtheproposeddamsites.CantwellwasstudiedfromtheperspectiveofeffectsfromthenorthernaccessroutefromtheDenaliHighway.Becausetherecom-mendedaccessroutewouldbetothesouthofCantwellandthepark,theimpactofSusitnaonCantwellandtheMcKinleyParkareawasdeter-minedtobeminimal.2.Wouldyoucharacterizethe"lifestyle"oftheareayoustudied?Thearea'sabundanceofnaturalresourcesisthebasicattractionformostoftheresidentswhocametotheseareas:somecameprimarilytodevelopandextractthoseresources;otherscameprimarilytoenjoytheresources.Insomewaysthesemotivesareextremesonacon-tinuumthatrepresentstheen-tirespectrumofthemotives,values,andattitudesofthearea'sresidents.Ononeextremethereisthemorepro-developmentat-titude;ontheotherextremethemorepro-recreationoren-joymentofthenaturalenviron-mentattitude.Inspiteofthesetwoextremeattitudesoropin-ions,theresidentsoftheareahaveonecommonalitythatmakesthemuniqueandthatisthedesiretoliveinanon-industrial,rural,undeveloped,semi-wildernessenvironment.3.Howwouldyoucharacterizethegeneralattitudesandvaluesofthetwogroupsyoujustdescribed?Basedonthiscontinuum,residentsononeendhaveadesiretoprotectrural,small-town,andwildernessat-mospheres,minimizechange,avoidindustrialdevelopmentinthearea,andtopreservethewildlifeandrecreationalcharacteristicsoftheenviron-ment.Manyresidentsinthisgrouptakeissuewiththechargethattheyareagainstgrowthandeconomicdevelop-mentperse.Rather,theypointoutthateconomicdevelop-mentfortheupperSusitnaValleydoesnotonlymeanin-dustrialgrowth(suchasmineralextractionorhydrodevelopment),butalsoitspotentialforvisualandrecrea-tionalenjoyment,bothsum-merandwinter.Theseresidentsarguethatarecrea-tional/touristeconomycaterstopeoplewhoenjoythelandwithoutdefacingit,whichispreferredtoacommercial,in-dustrialeconomywhichdoesscarthelandscape.TheytendtobeopposedtotheSusitnaHydroelectricProjectaswellasanyotherlarge-scaledevelopmentschemesforthearea.Onthepro-developmentendofthecontinuumareresidentswhodonotnecessarilydesireindustrialdevelopmentinthearea,buttheycannotidentifywithwhattheyfeelisano-growthattitude.Theseresidentsdonotgenerallydesiretoseetheircommunityradicallychanged,nordotheynecessarilywishforindustrialdevelopmenttobecometheeconomicbaseinthearea.Liketheirneighbors,theyen-joysmall-townqualitiesanddesiretoliveinanon-industrial,relativelyisolated,wildernessenvironment.Nevertheless,theyfeelthelocaleconomywillbenefitfrom development,andaslongasthereisnodangertolife,notnecessarilylifestyle,theSusitnaprojectisacceptable.Residentswithanextremedevelopmentviewtendtofavorroadstoopenupaddi-tionalcountryandbelievethatprogress(includinghydroelec-tricdams,morepeople,androads)willcomeregardlessofwhatthey,oranyoneelse,want.Generallylong-timeresidents,manyofwhomhavealreadywitnessedcon-siderablechangeinthearea,theydonotviewfuturedevelopmentsasnecessarilyundesirable.4.Isoneofthesegroupslargerthantheother?TrapperCreekandTalkeetnaarebasicallysplitintheseat·titudes.Therailroadcom·munitiesareverymuchontheendofthecontinuumthatdesirestomaintainawildernessenvironment.Theold-timeresidentsaretheoneswhohaveseenvariouschangesandtendtobeonthemorepro-developmentend,whereasthenewcomerwhohascometoescapedevelop-mentelsewheretendstobemorepreservationorientedtoward theenvironment.InrecentyearsmanypeoplehavemovedtoTalkeetna,Trap-perCreek,andtheareasnorthofTalkeetnabecausetheylikedthequalityoflifeorthewilderness,notspecificallytogoafteremploymentortomakemoney.Oncetheygotthere,theyfiguredoutsomewaytomakeendsmeetandtoliveatalowerstandardofliv-ingwherecashisnotthemotive.Apopulationincreasewouldmakethearealessdesirableforthesepeople,becauseitswildernessqualitywouldbedim;nished~5.HowwouldyoucharacterizethechangesthatcouldoccurintheTrapperCreekandTalkeetnaareasasaresultoftheSusitnaproject?InordertogetanideaofthemagnitudeofthechangesthatmightresultfromSusitna,itisbesttocompareittowhatcouldhappenwithoutthepro-ject.Onegoodindicationispopulation.ThefollowingfiguresweredevelopedbyFrankOrth&Associates.TrapperCreek,withagrowthrateofabout4%ayear,ispro-jectedtohaveapopulationof320bytheyear1990withoutSusitna.WithSusitnaanother340peoplewouldbeadded.InTrapperCreektheSusitnapro-jectwouldcauseadoublingofthe1990population.ThiswouldclassifyTrapperCreekasa"boomtown".Talkeetna,withagrowthrateofabout5%ayear,ispro-jectedtohaveapopulationof1,000bytheyear1990withoutSusitna.Thiswouldbea64%increasewithoutSusitna.WithSusitnaanother263peoplewouldbeadded.Thiswouldnothavethesamekindofim-pactforTalkeetnathattheSusitna-relatedincreaseinTrapperCreekwouldhave.Talkeetna'sgreatestimpactwouldseemtocomefromitsbasecasegrowth,notSusitna-relatedgrowth.6.Whatdoyoumeanby"boomtown"?Socialscientistshavedefineda"boomtown"as:1.acommunityexperi-encingaboveaverageeconomicandpopulationgrowth;2.whichresultsinbenefitsforthecommunity,suchasexpandedtaxbase,in-creasedemploymentoppor-tunities,andsocialandculturaldiversity;3.butwhichalsoplacesorresultsinstrainonexistingcommunityandsocietalin-stitutions(suchasfamily,education,political,economic).Notallimpactsassociatedwithboomtownsarenegative.Forexample,positiveconse-quencesincludesubstantialbenefitstothelocaleconomysuchasmorejobs,morebusinesses,higherpayscales,increasedprosperity,andanincreasedtaxbase.Generally,thepositivebenefitsassociatedwithrapidgrowthcausedbyalargedevelopmentprojectareprimarilyeconomic.InthecaseofTrap-perCreek,forthesegmentofthepopulationwhichisnotprimarilymotivatedbyeconomicadvancement,thenegativeeffectsofrapidgrowthwilllikelyovershadowanybenefits.7.WhattypesofproblemscouldhappeninTrapperCreekifitdoesbecomeaboomtown?Basedonitslackofinfrastruc-ture,itssmallruralnature,andthecharacteristicthatasignificantportionofitsresidentsarenotprimarilymotivatedbyeconomicad-vancement,manyoftheprob-lemsassociatedwithboomtownsseemtoapplytoTrapperCreek.Someoftheseproblemsare:•Existingfacilitiesandservices(schools,fireandpoliceprotection,waterandsewer,etc.)cannotmeettheincreasedde-mand. thesusitnahydrostudies/june1982t~•,5•Highinflationcausedbyincreaseddemandsoflarge,incomingpopula-tionandincreasedcostofliving,especiallyhousing•Newpayscalesbeyondthelimitsofsomelocalbusinesses•Hardshipsassociatedwithinflationonthosepeoplelivingonfixedincomes•Increaseincrimeand"peopleproblems"(childabuse,alcoholism,divorce,etc.)•Potentialconflictsbe-tweenlocalresidentsand"newcomers',•Localgovernmentisforcedtogrowandex-pand.Theseproblemsarecom-poundedbyalullin1995whenWatanawouldwinddownandasecondprojectpeakin1999whenDevilCanyonwouldbebuilt.Basedontheprojec-tions,TrapperCreekwouldex-perienceaboom(1986-1990),adownswing(1991-1995),anupswing(1996-1999),andaslowdeclineinproject-relatedpersonsbeginningin2000.Thelullinthe1990'scouldbeespeciallydifficultforpeoplewhosejobswerenotdirectlyrelatedtotheproject,suchasserviceandsupportbusinesses.Thisperiodwouldlikelybeeasierforprimaryconstructionworkersbecausetheywilllikelygoelsewheretowork.8.Doyouexpectmuchresistancefromlocalresid'entstonewcomers?Willthiscausemuchtensioninthecommunities?Localresidentswholiveinthesmallcommunitypriortoagrowth·tem:itoblame·the-'"-developerandthenewresidentsforproblemsassociatedwithpopulationin-fluxes.Theseproblemscanbecomeworseifthecommuni-tydoesnothavetheinfrastruc-turetoaccommodatethenewgrowth.Resentmentbetweencurrentresidentsandnewcomersmaydevelopbecausetheformeroftenbearstheburdenoftheex-pensefornewfacilitiesandservices,oftenintheformofhighertaxes.9.Whataretheconsequencesofthesmallcommunitiesbeingunorganized?Thedangeristhatacommuni·tymaybeveryineffectiveinimplementingorinfluencinganychangesthatmayaffectthecommunityoritsresidents.Bynotbeingorganized,thecommunityen-courageshigherlevelsofgovernmenttodealwithalotofdifferentvoices,differentattitudes,anddifferentcon-cerns.Governmentofficialsdon'treallyknowwhichvoicespeaksforthemajorityofthecitizens.Anorganizationthatrepresentscommunitycon-sensusistheonlyeffectivewaytogiveoutsidehigherlevelsofgovernmentameanstolistentothecommunity.10.Couldacommunityorganizationorstructuresolvesomeofthepotentialproblems?Acommunityorganizationcouldsolvesomeproblemsbutcouldcreateothers.Suc-cessfulresponsetothedevelopmentprojectwilllikelycompelpeoplewhowantedtogetawayfrompeopleandgovernmenttobandtogether.Ineffectresidentshavetoformgovernmenttofightgovernmentandindustry.Thisistime-consumingandgenerallyconflictswiththeruralvaluesofthestudyarea.Peoplemovedtotheareatoescapegovernmentanddon'twanttospendalltheirtimeatmeetingsandinpoliticalorganizations.Planningandcommunityorganizationtopreparefortheboombecomepartoftheprob-lem.Theplanningprocessmakespersonalrelationshipsmoreformalandcontractual,addsbureaucracy,andreducestheinformalmethodsofcommunicationthatcharacterizesmalltowns.11.You'vedescribedtheimpactsonTalkeetnaandTrapperCreek.WhatwouldbesomeoftheimpactsexpectedintherailroadcommunitiesnorthofTalkeetna?Althoughthereisanabun-danceoflandavailable,primarilyduetotheStatelanddisposals,itisunlikelythatthepermanentpopulationintheChase/Curryareawouldin-creasedramatically,eitherwithorwithoutSusitna.WithoutSusitna,themainat-tractiontotheareawouldcon-tinuetoberecreationalformostpeopleandresidentialforonlyafew.RecreationseekerswouldcontinuetousetheareaasTalkeetnacon-tinuestopromotetourism.Asmoreandmorepeoplevisitthisarea,thechancesin-creasethattheywouldapplyforsomeofthesurplusavailableStateland.WiththeSusitnaproject,recreationintheChase/Curryareawouldlikelyincreasemorethanwithouttheproject.Improvedaccesstoandin-creasedawarenessoftherailroadareaeastoftheSusit-naRiverwouldlikelyattractmorerecreationists.Theac-cessrbadinitiallyrecommend-edbyAcresAmericanwouldprovidevehicleaccesstotheGoldCreekandthereforemakethegeneralareamoreaccessibletomorepeople.(Ed.note:AsaresultofStateandFederalagencyandpubliccomment,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityisreviewingotheraccessroutesinadditiontothatrecommendedbyAcres.There-evaluationincludesanewoption,aroutenorthofbothGoldCreekandtheIn-dianRiverremoteparcels.Ifselected,thisoptionreducestheimpactsonGoldCreekandtheIndianRiverremoteparcels.)TheSusitnaprojectcouldalsoresultinincreasedemploy-mentopportunitiesforresidentsinthisarea.Atthesametime,theincreasedemploymentopportunitycreatedbytheprojectwouldattractmorepeopleintothegeneralarea.Thiswouldlikelyhaveanegativeeffectontheexistingsemi-wildernesswayoflifeforresidentswhovalueasemi-wildernessenviron-ment.12.Cantheruralsemi-wildernessnatureoftherailroadcommunitiesnorthofTalkeetnabepreserved?Ithinktherailroadcom-munities'rural,semi-wildernessnaturewillremainthesamesimplybecauseofthelimitedaccessintothem.ThethingthatmayinfluencetherailroadcommunitiesevenmorethanaccesstoSusitnaistheStatelanddisposalpro-grams.TheStatehasmanyparcelsreadyfordisposaltothepublicinthisarea.Ifthisoccursitwillslowlyerodethewildernessenvironment.Ruralyes.Wildernessno.Peoplecannottotallysubsistoffthelandastheymayhavebeenabletodotenyearsago,becauseittakesmorethanfiveacrestosubsistinthatarea.13.WithSusitna,GoldCreekcouldbetheareamostheavilyimpactedbythecurrentlyrecommendedaccess.Willyouexpandonthis?WithSusitna,theGoldCreekareawouldlikelybethemostheavilyimpactedifthecurrent-lyrecommendedaccessrouteischosen.GoldCreekwouldthenbeconnectedbyan18-mileroadtotheParksHighway.Ifvehicularaccessoccursinthisarea,localresidentsandabsenteelandownersbetweenHurricaneandGoldCreek,aswellasentrantsintheIndianRiverRemoteParcellanddisposalwouldbesubjectedtoincreasedtraffic,noise,andcongestion.Potentialdevelop-mentwouldmainlyaffectlocalminers,abouttenfull-timelocalresidents,andabsentee,recreationalpropertyowners,allofwhomvaluetheirwildernessretreat.Withouttherecommendedac-cessorarailheadatGoldCreek,theareawouldlikelyre-mainthewayitis.ThisistruefortheIndianRiverremoteparcelsaswellasGoldCreek.WithoutSusitnatherewouldprobablybenolargepopula-tioninflux..14.IfSusitnaisdeveloped,willTalkeetnaorTrapperCreekbecomemorelikeWasilla?Idon'tthinkTalkeetnawilleverbecomeastripdevelopmentalongahighway.TalkeetnaispartiallyprotectedbytheSpurroad,a15miledeadend.Itwillalwayshavethattoprotectit.That'swhatmakesTrapperCreeksovulnerabletotheSusitnaproject.It'salongthemaincorridoroftheParksHighway.Itwouldgetallthetrafficanditisquitepossiblethatcommercial,stripdevelopmentcouldoccurifpropertyisavailable.ThiscouldoccurwithorwithoutSusitnadependingonlocalplanningefforts.15.WhatcouldbetheeffectofhavinganewtowndevelopedattheWatanadamsite?Onthepositivesideitcouldtendtolocatemoreofthenewfamiliesinthenewtownandfewerintheexistingones.Itwouldalsotendtoopenupawholenewareathatisnowwilderness.Thiswouldbenegativeforthosepeoplewhovaluetheareaasawildernessarea.Itwouldbepositiveforthedevelopment-orientedpeo-pleinthosecommunitieswhovalueopeningitup,extractingtheresources,developingtheregion,providingaccessandroad,andmorerecreationalopportunities.16.Doyouexpectthatthepeo·piecomingtoworkonSusitnawouldhavesignificantlydif-ferentvaluesthantheoneswhoalreadyliveinTrapperCreekandTalkeetna?PeoplewhomoveintotheareaasaresultofSusitnaandlocatetheirfamiliesinTalkeet-naorTrapperCreekmayhavequitesimilarvaluestopeoplewhoarethere.They'llenjoythesemi-wilderness,thesmalltownenvironment,thegoodfishing,thecrosscountryski-ing,andotherrecreationalop-portunities.Butit'sthesameoldproblem:morepeopletendtodegradethequalityofthatexperience.Eventhoughthey'llallenjoyit,manypeoplemaytendtoviewthequalityoftheexperienceasdecliningasthepopulationincreases.Peo-plewhocomeinjusttoworkandliveintheconstructioncampsmayhavedifferentvaluesandattitudes.17.WhatcanbedonetoalleviatetheimpactsthatmayresultfromtheSusitnaproject?Generally,atownfacingrapidgrowthdesirestodevelopthelocalcapabilitytoensurethattheeffectsofgrowthwillbeasbeneficialaspossible.Notallimpactscanbealleviated,butmanycanbesuccessfullymitigated.Controllingtheim-pactsofrapidgrowthonsmall,ruraltownswithinthecontextoflocalvaluesbeginswithcommunityplanning,com·munityorganization,andresearch.Itisimportanttounderstandthaturbanplan-ningtechniquesmaynotapply;aruralcommunityneedsruralplanning.Thesuc-cessofanyplandependsoncommunitysupportandorganization.Inaddition,itre-quiresthedevelopertosharewiththecommunitydetailedinformationabouttheproject.Finally,acommunityrequirestime,atleast2years,forplan-ningandpreparationforrapidgrowth.Source:SusitnaHydroelectricProjectEn-vironmentalReport.SocioculturalReportFlna!Draft.March1982.preparedbySlephenRBraund&Associates.---_. 6thesusitnahydrostudies/june1982Designingdamsfor"Noah'sFlood"-AninterviewwithJacobDoumaBecausepeoplehavebeenconcernedaboutflooding,JacobDouma,amemberoftheExternalReviewPanel,wasaskedtodiscusshowthepro·poseddamsarebeingde·signedtosafelyaccommodateeverythingfromverysmalltoverylargefloods.JacobH.Douma,aninterna-tionallyrecognizedhydraulicsexpert,servedasChiefoftheHydraulicDesignBranchoftheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineerspriortohisretire·mentfromactivegovernmentserviceaftermorethan40years.InadditiontohisgovernmentworkonAmericandams,hehasextensivecon·suitingexperiencewithCana-dianhydroelectricprojects."....,':~:...:',".~.~~\~~~c~_-"Theprobablemax·imumfloodwouldbe408,000cfs,or4Y2timeslargerthanthelargestfloodofrecordwhichoccuredinJune1964."Question:Whatisanemergen-cyfuseplug?Douma:Anemergencyfuseplugisasmalldamplacedacrosstheentrancetoanemergencyspillway.It is"designedtofail"withfloodsaslargeastheprobablemax-imumflood.ThefuseplugsatWatanaandDevilCanyondamswouldbesmallearthdamsabout31.5feethigh.Fortheprobablemaximumtoppingthedams.Inadditiontotheconevalvesandservicespillwaysalreadymentioned,anemergencyfuseplugspillwaywillbeprovidedateachdamtopassalldischargesinexcessoftheone-in-1O,OOO-yearflooddischarges.Fortheprobablemaximumflood,thefuseplugspillwaywouldpass140,000cfsatWatanadamand160,000cfsatDevilCanyon-dam.,1'1,;.;.".:..",.,'.,,:"",..~~..'...~,..,~':.~'i.>,:l~,',>:,';:~~'<.',:I...,..~."'.'.',.,"j>Diagramshowsthesizeofconevalvethatwouldbeusedinbothdams.Theywouldbeplacednearthebaseofthedamtospraywateroutlikegardenhosenozzles,Thispreventsthefor·matlonofdeepplungepoolsandreducesthechanceofanitrogensupersaturationproblemforfish.Douma:Toensureagainstdamfailure,bothdamsarebeingdesignedwithenoughspillwaycapacitytopasstheprobablemaximumfloodwithoutover-Question:Istheprobablemax-imumfloodusedindamdesign?'j';';,••':;':-':,>.',::::.:.-~,.:.11··.·...:~~,,.------.,'U/':7,000cfswouldpassthroughthepowergeneratingfacilitiesand24,000cfswouldbereleasedthroughtunnelswithsix78-inchfixedconevalveslocatedinanabutmentofthedam.Theremaining114,000cfswouldpassoveraservicespillway.AtDevilCanyondam,atotalof42,000cfswouldbereleasedthroughacombina-tionofthepowerunitsandfive108-inchfixedconevalvesnearthebaseofthedam,while123,000cfswouldpassoveraservicespillway.Thefixedconevalvesatbothdamswouldbeusedfornor-maloperationduringmostyearswhensmallfloodsoccur.Theservicespillwayswouldbeusedinfrequentlyforshortdurationswhen,floodsexceedthecombinedreleasecapacityofthepowerunitsandthefixedconevalves.Douma:Yes.Question:How?."..::',..."".let"I~~<~S;;;...."-Y_'""'";~~'~.,t~~~"'···-Thepeakdischargeforthe100-yearfloodwouldbe104,500cubicfeetpersecond(cfs).Thisisaboutequaltothelargestfloodonrecord,whichwas90,700cfsattheGoldCreekStationinJune1964.Douma:BothWatanaandDevilCanyondamsarebeingdesignedwithsufficientspillwaycapacitytopasstheone-in-10,ooo-yearfloodwithnodamagetostructures.Question:Howisthisdone?Question:Whatarethepeakdischargesforthe100-year,500-year,10,OOO-year,andpro-bablemaximumfloodsintheSusitnaRiver?The500-yearfloodisestimatedtobe131,900cfs,or1V2timesgreaterthanthelargestrecordedflood.Question:Whatleveloffloodisbeingusedindesignofthedams?Douma:Thereservoir-routedflooddischargesatWatanaandDevilCanyondamsfortheone-in-10,000yearfloodare145,000cfsand165,000cfs,respectively.AtWatanadam,Douma:FloodpeakswereestimatedfortheSusitnaRiverattheGoldCreekgaugingsta-tion(about15milesdownstreamofDevilCanyon).amountofprecipitationandsnowmeltabsorbedbythesoil.Thecombinationofthesegeneratesthegreatestamountofrunoffpossibleataspecificlocation.The10,ooO-yearfloodisetimatedtobe198,000cfs,ormorethan2timesgreaterthanthelargestrecordedflood.Theprobablemaximumfloodwouldbe408,000cfs,or4V2timeslargerthanthelargestfloodofrecord.AcomputermodelwasusedtoderivetheprobablemaximumfloodontheSusitnaRiver.ThemodelwasdevelopedbytheNorthPacificDivisionCorpsofEngineersandiscalledtheStreamflowSynthesisandReservoirRegulation(SSARR)computermodel.Themodelwascalibratedusingobservedprecipitation,temperatures,anddischargesintheSusitnaRiverbasinforfourmajorfloodeventsintheperiodofrecordMaythroughAugust.Itwasverifiedbycomparingcomputerresultsandactualrecordeddata.Question:Howarethefre-quencyandintensityoflargefloodspredicted?Therearethreeprimaryfactorsthatcausetheprobablemax-imumfloodandtheremustbeareasonableprobabilityofthesethreefactorsoccurringsimultaneously.Bycombiningtheestimatedmeanannualflowderivedfromtheequationsalongwiththeregionalrelationshipsassociatedwithspecificfre-quencies,floodfrequencycurvesweredevelopedforthedamsites.Fromtheserela-tionships,instantaneousfloodpeaksatvariousrecurrencein-tervals,orfrequencies,couldbepredictedfortheSusitnaRiveratthedamsites.Thefrequenciesusedforthestudyarefloodsoccurringoncein100years,oncein500years,oncein10,000years,andtheprobablemaximumflood.Question:Whatdoestheterm"probablemaximumflood"mean?"Toensureagainstdamfailure,bothdamsarebeingdesignedwithenoughspillwaycapacitytopasstheprobablemaximumfloodwithoutover·toppingthedams."Douma:Theprobablemax-imumfloodisconsiderablylargerthantheone-in10,000-yearflood.Itsrecur-renceintervalisconsiderablylessoftenthanoncein10;000years.Thosefactorsare:1)thegreatestamountofprecipita-tionandsnowmeltpossible;2)themostsevereconcentrationofrunoff;and3)theleastDouma:InthecaseoftheSusitnaproject,floodfrequen-cyanalysesweremadefor12recordingstationslocatedwithinandadjacenttotheup-perSusitnaRiverBasin.Thesewerethenusedtodevelopregionalrelationshipsofin-stantaneousfloodpeakstomeanannualflowforvariousfloodfrequencies.Floodfre-quencyisrelatedtothesizeandprobabilityofafloodoc-curring.Inaddition,thedatafromthestationswereutilizedtodevelopequationswhichrelatethemeanannualflowtothelocation,geography,andclimateofthebasin. 't'he5lJsitna'hydrostudiesil~rie'1982flood,thefuseplugswouldbeovertopped.Thedownstreamsideofthefuseplugs(con·sistingofsmall·sizecrushedstoneorgravel)woulderodeasthewaterpassedover,allowingtheexcesswatertosafelypassdowntheemergen-cyspillways.Thefuseplugwouldberebuiltafterthefloodsubsided."Anemergencyfuseplugisasmalldamplacedacrosstheen·trancetoanemergen·cyspillway.Itis'designedtofail'withfloodsaslargeastheprobablemaximumflood,allowingwatertopasssafelydowntheemergencyspillway...thefuseplugwouldberebuiltafterthefloodsubsided."Question:Willthedamsreducetheeffectsoffloodingdownsteam?Douma:Yes,byreducingpeakdischargesforvarioussizedfloods.Thereservoirsareplannedtobeoperatedtoproducemax·imumhydroelectricpowerconsistentwithpowerdemandsanddownstreamflowrequirements.Bydrawingdownthereservoirsinwinter,asignificantamountofreser·voircapacitycanbeprovidedforstorageofsummerfloods.Thepeakdischarge.(90,700cfs)forthefloodofrecordintheSusitnaRiveratGoldCreekwouldbereducedtoabout45,000cfswiththedamsinoperation.Thegeneraleffectofthereser·voirswouldbetomoderatetheflowsestablishingamorecon·sistentflowpatternratherthanthewiderangeofflowsthathavetraditionallyoccurred.Question:Willspillwayopera·tioncauseanitrogensuper·saturationconditioninflowsdownstreamofthedamswhichwouldbeharmfultosalmon?Douma:Wheneverair·entrained,high-velocityspillwayflowsplungeintoadeeppoolorstillingbasin,anexcessamountofairisabosorbedinthewater.Thispro·ducesanitrogensupersatura·tionconditionharmfultofish.Thepossibilitythataharmfulnitrogensupersaturationcon·ditionwilloccurintheSusitnaRiverdownstreamofthedamsissmallbecause:1)Normalfloodflows(uptoone·in·50·yearfloods)atthetwodamswillbereleasedthroughlow·levelconevalves,whichwillnotproducedeepplungepools;2)Servicespillways,whichwouldonlybeneededforfloodswitharecurringin·tervaloflessthanoncein50years,wouldhaveflipbucketsdesignedtominimizethedepthoftheplungepool;3)Therockbelowthedams,particularlyatDevilCan·yon,isquitehardandwillnoterodeenoughtocauseadeepplungepooltoform;4)Anynitrogensupersatura·tionresultingfromusingtheservicespillwayatWatanadamwouldbelargelydispersedintheDevilCanyonreservoir;5)Muchofthenitrogensupersaturationthatmayoccurbyspillwayopera-tionatDevilCanyondamwouldbedispersedinthesteep,roughriverchanneldownstreamofDevilCan·yondam.Ifaharmfulnitrogensuper-saturationconditionshouldresultfromDevilCanyonspillwayoperation,Itwouldnotoccurmoreoftenthanoncein50years,asthatisasoftenasthespillwaywouldoperate.Question:Arethereservoirslikelytofillupwithsilt?Douma:No.Lessthan5per·centoftheWatanareservoirandlessthan10percentoftheDevilCanyonreservoirwouldbefilledupin100years.Thisisbasedonaconservativeap·proachthatassumeshighestimatesfortheamountofsedimentcomingintothereservoirsandthesubsequentamountofsiltthatwillsettle.out.Alargepercentageofdepositedsedimentwouldbeinwhatiscalledthedeadstorageportionofthereser·voir.Deadstorageisthatpor·tionofthereservoirnotneed-edforpowerproduction.Operationoftheprojectwould.notbeaffectedbyadecreaseinthedeadstoragevolumeduetosiltation.SincealargepartoftheSusit·naRivertotalsedimentloadwoulddepositintheWatanareservoir,sedimentstorageinDevilCanyonisestimatedtobelessthan25%ofthatintheWatanareservoir.Question:HowmuchwaterlevelchangeisexpectedonthelowerSusitnaRiver(belowtheTalkeetnaconfluence)?Douma:Analysesofpre·andpostprojectwaterlevelsinthelowerSusitnaRiverindicatethatsummerwaterdepthswillbe1.5to3.5feetlower,de·pendingonwhichreachoftheriverisbeingconsidered.Thiswouldbeabout10·25%lowerthantheriverisnowforcorrespondingflows."Lessthan5%oftheWatanareservoirandlessthan10%oftheDevilCanyonreservoirwouldbefilledupin100years."Question:Whataretheim-pactsonthelowerriverwhichcouldresultfromsedimenta-tion?Douma:Sedimentanalysisin-dicatesthatsedimentloadsinthelowerSusitnaRiverwillbeessentiallythesameforbothpre·andpostprojectcondi-tions.Thisisduetotwofac-tors:1)theextremelylargevolumesofsedimentinthelong,widegravelfloodplainbelowtheconfluenceoftheSusitnaRiverwiththeTalkeet·naRiver;and2)thelargesedi-mentloadcontributionfromtheTalkeetnaRiver.BetweenTalkeetnaandtheDeltaIslands,atrendtowardsrelativestabilizationofthefloodplainfeaturesshouldoc·curoveralongperiodoftime.RenderingofDevilCanyondamshowslocationofconevalves,servicespillway,emergencyspillway,andfuseplug.Thesestructureswouldallowwaterfromvarioussizedfloodstopasssafelyoverthedam.Themainchannelandmajorsubchannelscoulddevelopamoreuniformmeanderingpat-tern.Avegetativecovercoulddeveloponthegravelfloodplainandtheminorsub-channelscouldbegintofillin.ItshouldberecognizedthatanextremefloodgeneratedbyeithertheChulitna,theTalkeetna,orbothcoulddisruptthisprocessanddelayobservablechangesforseveralyears..BelowtheDeltaIslands,thechangeswouldbeminimal.c_.7PotentialrivernavigationimpactidentifiedlIIavtgatlonalUS4ts:pastandpresentusesoftheriverfortransportationbyboatsandfloatplanesbetweenMay1andOctober31.Navigability:thelowerlimitofflowdepthwhichstillpermitsnavigationbywaterbornevessels.DuringPhaseIstudies,arequireddepth.of2.5feetwastheprimarycriteriausedforidentlfyingproblemareasIntheSusitnaAlver.MapshowsareasofpossiblenavigationaldifflcultiesSherman:IftheSusitna projectwereoperatedformaximumpowerpro·duction,navigationaldifficultiesmayoccurnearShermanaboutoneyearoutofthreeinAugust,andoneyearoutoftwoinSeptember.IftheSusitnaprojectwereoperatedforminimalimpactonfisheries,navigationaldifficultiesmayoccurnearShermanaboutoneyearoutof10duringJune.AlexanderSlough:Atpresentthereisnotenoughdatatodetermineifnaviga-tionaldifficultieswouldoccurattheupstreamaccesstoAlexanderSlough(alsoknownastheWestChannel.)Onepotentialnavigationalproblemareahasbeeniden·tifiedthatcouldresultfromconstructionoftheproposedSusitnahydroelectricproject.Thislocation,asshownonthemapis:•upstreamofTalkeetnanearSherman(aboutRiverMile128to130).Inaddition,asecondlocationcurrentlydoesnothaveenoughdatatodetermineifnavigationalproblemswould'occur.ThislocationprovidesaccesstoAlexanderCreekfromupstreamofAlexanderSlough.Furtherworkwillbedoneinsummer1982inordertodefinethemagnitudeofproblemswhichmaydevelop,aswellasrecommendedmitigationoptions.Source:"APreliminaryAnalysisofPotentialNavigationalProblemsDownstreamofthePro-posedHydroelectricDamsontheSusitnaRiver"byPaulJanke,AlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResources.DivisionofLandandWaterManage-ment.March5,1982.DefinitionsDevilCanyonsite Fromleft,BoardofDirectorsRobertWard,ChuckWebber,ChuckConway,ErnstMueller,RobertWeeden,JohnSchaeffer.~~{...J..,.jUUJ1/.:xCJ(sl3l)"}thesusitnahydrostudies/june1982IlI'fVlspecializesinpowerpro-ductionfacilities,includinghydroelectricandwaterresourcedevelopment.TheEbascoestimatewasmadewithoutknowledgeofAcres'finalcostestimate.Itwasbasedon:projectdraw-ings,feasibilitystudyinfor-mation,andquantitiesfur-nishedbyAcres;avisittothedamsites;manufacturerandvendorquotations;andEbascoexperience.Ebasco'sestimatefortheSusitnaprojectwas$5.487billion,or7%higherthanAcres'estimateof$5.127billion.Thiscostdifferenceisconsideredtobewellwithinthelimitsofaccept·ability.Bywayofcom-parison,theU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineerscon-sidersbidsthatare15%abovecostestimatesongovernmentwork(suchasworkonmilitarybases)and25%abovecostestimatesforcivilworks(suchashydroelectricprojects)tobeacceptable.It isthepolicyoftheAlaskaPowerAuthoritytoobtainsecondpartycostestimatesonallfeasibilitylevelstudies.Thisdoesnotpreventcostoverruns;itdoes,however,reducethechanceofthem.Byobtain-ingasecondcostestimate,theconfidenceintheoriginalcostestimatecanbestrengthenedbyidentify-ingandresolvingspecificdifferences.ThePowerAuthoritycur-rentlyhasacontractwithEbascoServicestoprovideindependentcostestimatingonitsprojects.Ebascoisalargeinterna-tionalconsultingfirmthatIndependentcostestimatereduceschanceofcostoverrunsARLISTheBoardalsorecommendedthattheLegislaturefundtwoalternativepowergenerationoptionstudies.First,itwasrecommendedthat$200,000beappropriatedtoassesstheuseofNorthSlopegasgenera-tionintheRailbelt.Second,$3.3millionwasrecommendedtocontinuestudiesofthepro-posedChakachamnahydro-electricproject.TheBoardconsideredboththesepro-jectsasoptionsthatshouldbepursuedintheeventtheSusit-nadevelopmentdoesnotpro-ceedasscheduled,foronereasonoranother.continuetheSusitnadevelopmentalactivitieswasnotanendorsementofAcresAmerican'srecommendationsregardingspecificprojectdetails.AnexampleisAcres'recommendedaccessplan.AccordingtoConway,"Theengineer'splanforaccesstotheprojectsiteisthesubjectofreanalysisandwillberecon-sideredbytheAuthorityatanappropriatefuturetime."Source:LettersenttoGovernorHammond,SenatePresidentKerttula,andHouseSpeakerHayes,April26,1982,fromCharlesConway,Chairman,AlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectors.theSusitnaHydroelectricProjectshouldcontinue.•TheAlask,aLegislatureshouldauthorizethePowerAuthoritytosubmitaFederalEnergyRegulatoryCommission(FERC)licenseapplicationatatimedeemedap-propriatebytheAuthority.Theissueoflicenseap-plicationtimingwillberesolvednotlaterthanJune30,1982.•Fundsintheamountof$25.6millionshouldbeap-propriatedtothePowerAuthorityinFY83forthecontinuationandinten-sificationofenvironmen-talstudies,forsiteex-plorationactivities,andfortheinitiationofprojectdesign."Conway'sletteralsomadeitclearthattheBoard'sactiontoTheserecommendationswerebasedonthepotentialforlong-termbenefitsandbecause"noinformationhascometolighttosuggestthatenvironmentalandsocialim-pacts,aftermitigation,wouldbeunacceptable".Intheletter,BoardChairmanChuckConwayconcludedthat"TheSusitnaprojectoffersapotentialoflong-termbenefitstotheState."Thelettercon-tinuedtosay"Whilethispotentialexists,therealizationofthosebenefitsisdependentuponcertainassumptionsaboutthefuturethatarefarfromcertain:uponproperpro-jectdevelopmenttiming;anduponveryskillfulprojectmanagement.Becauseoftheseuncertaintiesandthetimebeforeanyactualcon-structiondecisionisnecessary,theAuthoritybelievesitisprematuretomakeanycommitment,atthistime,toactualprojectcon-struction."TheBoard'srecommendationswere:•"Pre-constructiondevelopmentaleffortsonInlateApril,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectorsformulatedtheirrecommenda-tionsconcerningtheSusitnahydroelectricproject.TherecommendationsweresentinaletterdatedApril26toGovernorHammond,SenatePresidentKerttulaandHouseSpeakerHayes.8BoardofdirectorsconcludesSusitna"offerspotentiallong-termbenefits",butnot'without'riskthesusitnajune1982INTHISISSUE:hydrostudiesThisisthefifthnewsletterpublishedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorItyforcitizensoftherai/belt.Thepur·poseistopresentobjectiveInformationonthepro-gressofSusitnahydroelectricfeasibilitystudiessothatreadersmaymaketheirownconclusionsbasedonaccurateinform~tion.EricP.Youfd,ExecutiveDirectorNancyBlunck,DirectorofPublicParticipationAlaskaPowerAuthority334W.5thAvenueAnchorage,Alaska99501phone(907)276~1ThestateofAlaskaisanequalopportunityemployer.howwouldSusitnaaffectgrowthinMat·SuBorough?.. .... . . .~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .pages2.3howwouldpeople'sliveschangewithSusitna?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..pages4·5designingdamsfor"Noah'sI7lood'~.-,'-'I•••••••••pages6·7potentialrivernavigational',problemsidentified1~page7boardofdirectors'recommer!'Igovernorandlegislature. . . . . . . . ..I,..........page8independentcostestimaterE~rceofcostoverruns1Cf\.•••• • • • •••page8ICf\,ALASKAPOWERAUTHORITYPUBLICPARTICIPATIONOFFICE334W.5thAvenueAnchorage,Alaska99501phone(907)276-0001--IDI:GHex:..J(f.)WUc::W..-l:::J.....(!)MO(f.)<r;r<JV)O::C\Iwuooc:::I.:<\iMUO~t:JZoex:,....,,:1:0BULKRATEU.s.POSTAGEPAIDPERMITNO.272ANCH.AK.99502 •33-fSSD()01.{·1){11(\'\(h·6)lei-.TKjiftS,58A23Y)I).'5)•lesnovember1980eSUSltnaARLISAlaskaResourcesLibrarv&InformationServicesAnchorageAlaskaThestateisalsofundingarelatedbutseparate$1millionstudytoconsideralternativestoSusitnahydroelectricpower.Thatstudy,contractedbythegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommittee,isbeingconductedbyBattelle-PacificNorthwestLaboratories.Itwillbecompletedinthespringof1982,concurrentwiththeSusitnafeasibilitystudies.Thoseexplorations,neveradequatelyundertakenbefore,arenow10monthsintoa30-monthexaminationperiod.AcresAmerican,Inc.(Acres)hasbeenretainedbythePowerAuthoritytomanagethe$30millioneffort.potentialoftheupperportionoftheSusitnaRiver.InitialfundingwasprovidedinJuly1979,andtheexplorationswereinitiatedinJanuary1980.ABRIEFHISTORYINDEPENDENTREVIEWBYEXTERNALCONSULTANTSAsapartoftheSusitnaexplorations,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityisThepurposeofthisnewsletter,thefirstofseveral,istopresentappointinganexternalreviewboardcomposedofeminentwhatisgoingonwiththeSusitnastudiesthatarenowunderway.engineers,scientists,andeconomiststoreviewthefeasibilityTheintentistopresenttheinformationobjectivelysothatreadersstudiesperformedbyAcres.Approximately$1millionhasbeenmaymaketheirownconclusionsbasedonfacts..budgetedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityforthisreview,whichwillincludeanindependentcostestimateofconstructingtheSusitnaproject.InformationontheenergyalternativesstudycanbeanticipatedfromtheOfficeoftheGovernor.Fairbanks,AnchorageandRailbeltfacemajorenergyd··ecISIon~i;i~:~~inthe"railbeltregion"willfaceamajorenergydecisionAtthattime,thefeasibilitystudiesontheproposedSusitnahydroelectricprojectandastudyofthefeasibilityofavarietyofotherenergyalternativeswillbothconcludewiththeirfindings.TherehasbeenagreatdealofinterestformanyyearsinthebuildingofahydroelectricprojectontheSusitnaRiver.ThepreviousassessmentsindicatedthattheSusitnaprojectwaseconomicallyfeasibleandthatanticipatedenvironmentalimpactswouldnotbeofsuchamagnitudeastowarrantitundesirable.Con-sequently,in1976theAlaskaStateLegislaturecreatedtheAlaskaPowerAuthorityandaskedthenewstatecorporationtobegindetailedfeasibilitystudiesonthedevelopmentofthehydroelectricTHESUSITNAHYDROSTUDIESTheSusitnainvestigationsfallinto10generalcategories.Notallthestudiesaregoingonatthistime,norarealldescribedinthisItwasinitiallylookedatinthe1940'sbytheU.S.Bureauofnewsletter.Theyinclude:ReclamationandlaterstudiedbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers.-forecastsoffutureelectricalneedsintherailbeltareabetweentheKenaiPeninsulaandFairbanksfrom1990through2010-hydrologicanalysisoftheSusitnaRiver-seismicexamination-geotechnicalexplorationnearthedamsites-engineeringdesigndevelopment-environmentaldatacollectionandimpactassessment-transmissionlineanalysiscontinuedonpage3 2thesusitnahydro studies/november1980Firmbringsextensivecoldregionexperiencetohydrostudies.•:.;.;,;:;;:;::.;:~?.;.:JimGill,ResidentManager,AnchorageofficeofAcresAmerican,Inc.InNovember1979,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirec-torsselectedAcresAmerican,Inc.,aninternationalconsultingengineeringfirm,toconductthefeasibilitystudiesontheSusitnahydroelectricproject.Reasonsfortheselectionin-cludedAcres'pastexperiencewithhydroelectricprojectsinsub-arcticregions.Also importantwasAcres'deci-siontoutilizeAlaskanexpertiseinthefieldwork(whichwouldmaximizetheexpenditureofmonieswithinthestate),anditsproposaltoprovideforanextensiveanddirectpublicparticipationprocess.TheselectionwasmadewithsupportfromboththepublicandtheStateHousePowerAlternativesStudyCommittee,alegislativesubcommitteesetuptooverseethefeasibilitywork.TheAcres organizationisactiveindiversifiedfieldsofplanning,engineering,feasibilitystudies,environmentalassessment,andprojectmanagement.Amongotherenergytechnologies,thecompanyhasmorethanfiftyyearsofexperiencewithlargeandsmallhydroelectricdevelopment.IncludedinthesearetheChurchillFallsprojectinLabradorandtheNelsonRiverprojectinCanada,bothofwhicharelocatedinnorthernclimatesandpresentedproblemssimilartothosetheproposedSusitnaprojectmayencounter.TheSusitnaprojectismanagedbyAcresoutofitsmainofficeinBuffalo,NewYork.ItsresidentofficeisinAnchorageandthefieldcampisintheupperSusitnabasinclosetoDeadmanCreek.~xpertiseappliedtosocioeconomicquestionsTheconstructionandoperationofahydroelectricprojectintheSusitnaRiverbasinmightaffectthelivesofAlaskans,inbothpositiveandadverseways.WhileRailbeltresidentsgenerallymightexperienceenergyindependenceandlowercostsforelectricity(relativetootheralternatives),certaingroupsofpeoplemightex-periencepopulationshifts,changesinservicerequire-ments,taxrateandrevenuechanges,andchangesinthegeneralqualityoflife.FrankOrth&Associates,Inc.,afirmwithexperienceinconductingsocioeconomicanalyses,particularlyinAlaska,ispresentlyconductingthefirstphaseofatwo-phasestudythatwillidentifyandanalyzepoten-tialchangesinsocioeconomicconditions.Betweennowandspringof1981,thefirmisdevelopingsocioeconomicprofilesforlocal,regional,andtosomeex-tent,statewideareas.Theseprofilesaredescriptionsofex-istingconditionssuchaspopulationlevels,availabilityandtypeofhousing,employ-mentandincomelevels,businessactivity,educationenrollmentandcost,transporta-tionfacilities,andlandusepatterns.Later,betweenlatespringandearlyfall1981,thesesamecon-ditionswillthenbedescribedforafuturewithouttheSusitnaproject.Theresultwillbeabaselinefromwhichcom-parisonscanbemade.ApreliminaryassessmentofsocioeconomicimpactsthatcouldresultfromaSusitnadevelopmentwillbemadepriortoastatedecisiononSusitnain1982.Ifthestatedecidestofilealicenseapplicationin1982,adetailedanalysisofwhataffectconstructionandoperationoftheSusitnaprojectmighthaveonsocialandeconomiccondi-tionswillthenbeconducted.FrankOrth&Associateswillidentifyandexaminechangesinsocioeconomicconditionssothatpeoplecanmaketheirownevaluationsofhowsuchchangescouldaffecttheirlifestyles.BackgroundinformationonproposedSusitnaproject------~No20miIIo040km\...r>.r>./',\ALASKA'.r--'-'--)'0'''''~'---JMIMcKInley,,-/../'~-/'SUSITNAALTERNATIVESBetweentheDenaliHighwayupstreamandGoldCreekdownstream,twelvedamsitesandtwoprimarytunnelplansarebeingconsideredaspos-siblebuildingblocksintheformulationofapreferreddevelopmentplan.LANDOWNERSHIPThemajorlandownershipisbyCookInletRegion,Inc.,anditsNativevillagecorporations.Therearealsosomeinholdingswithintheprojectarea,suchasminingclaims,Nativeallot-ments,open-to-entryparcels,andhomesteads.POTENTIALPOWERForayearwithtypicalprecipita-tionandclimaticconditions,theaverageenergypotentialofthebasinisabout7billionKwh.Thisisabouttwicewhattherailbeltgenerationwasin1979.Thereareanumberofdevelop-mentconceptsthatcanbedesignedtousealloraportionofthisenergypotential.PRESENTLANDUSETheprojectareaispresentlyusedbyguidedhuntersoperatingprincipallyoutoftheStephanLakearea,withscat-teredprivatecabinsbeingpre-sentonmostofthelargerlakesintheupperSusitnabasin.Inaddition,miningclaimshavebeenfiledonmanyofthetributarystreamswithinthedrainage.Accesstotheareaispredominentlybyaircraft,althoughthereislimitedaccessbyriverfromtheeast.LOCATIONTheproposedSusitnaRiverhydroelectricprojectislocatedontheupperSusitnaRiver,ap-proximately125airmilesnorthofAnchorage,150airmilessouthofFairbanks,and70milesnortheastofTalkeetna.~~- 3thesusltnahydro studies/november1980continuedfrompage1.costestimating.preparationofFERC(FederalEnergyRegulatoryCommis-sion)licensingdocuments,ifappropriate.marketingandfinancinganalysisTHESUSITNAWORKTHUSFARLastsummer,scientistsandengineerswentintothefieldtobegintheSusitnawork.Anex-planationandfirstexaminationofthisworkisthetextthatfollowsontheinsidepagesofthisnewsletter.Furtherinfor-mationwillfollowinsubse-quentreports.FINALRECOMMENDATIONSONPOWERDEVELOPMENTInApril1982thefive-memberAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectorswillformulateitsrecommendationtothegover-norandthelegislatureinregardtopowerdevelopmentalongtherailbelt.Atapproximatelythesametime,thegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommitteewillbeforwardingitsindependentrecommendation.THEDECISIONFinaldeterminationonthesub-jectrestswiththestatein1982.Ifthedecisionismadetopro-ceedwiththedevelopmentofSusitna,alicenseapplicationforconstructionwillbefiledwiththeFederalEnergyRegulatoryCommissioninWashington,D.C.WhoistheAlaskaPowerAuthorityTheAlaskaPowerAuthorityisapubliccorporationfundedbythestateandheadedbyafive-memberboardofdirectorsappointedbythegovernorandapprovedbythelegislature.Itsday-to-daybusinessiscon-ductedbyasixteen-memberstafflocatedinAnchorage.ThepurposeofthePowerAuthorityistoassisttheresidentsofAlaskainbothurbanandruralareasincon-structing,acquiring,financing,andoperatingpowerproductionfacilitiesofvarioustypes.Thosetypesincludefossilfuel,windpower,tidal,geothermal,hydroelectric,solarenergypro-duction,andwasteenergycon-servationfacilities.ThePowerAuthorityiscurrentlydevelop-inganumberofhydropowerandalternativeenergyprojectsstatewide.AlternativeenergystudygoestoBattelleWardSwiftofBattelleNorthwestexplainshisfirm'sproposaltomembersofthepublicandthegovernor'sPolicyReviewCom-mitteethisfall.Battellewasselectedtoconducttheenergyalternativesstudy.Battelle'sworkisexpectedtobecompletedatthesametimeastheSusitnafeasibilitystudiesinspring1982.Dmf;)~rDglIet&iToassuresufficientchecksandbalances,the1980statelegislaturedeterminedthatanindependentconsultingfirmshouldconducttheRailbeltpoweralternativesstudy.IntheoriginalplanofstudypresentedtotheAlaskaPowerAuthoritybyAcresAmerican,Inc.,AcreswastoconductthealternativesstudyinparallelwithfeasibilitylevelstudiesoftheSusitnahydroelectricproject.Thisfallthegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommitteeselectedBattelle-PacificNorthwestLaboratoriestomakethealter-nativesstudy.Afinalreportisexpectedinthespringof1982.Battelle-PacificLaboratories,aRichland,Washington,researchanddevelopmentfirm,isthenewestinanumberofBattelleofficesintheUnitedStatesandEurope.Thecompany,foundedin1929,hasastafftodayof6,000.ResearchintheNorth-westofficefocusesprimarilyonthetechnologicalandenviron-mentalissuesofenergyproduc-tionanduse.RecentstudiesbyBattellehaveincludedanationalcoalutiliza-tionassessmentandanassess-mentoftheeffectsofthermalpowerplantsiteanddesignalternativesonthecostofelec-tricpower,bothforthefederalgovernment."Battellehasalotofexperiencedoingexactlywhatthisrequestforproposalcallsfor,andthey.haveagreatamountofex-periencedoingprojectsinAlaska,"saidFranUlmer,chair-womanofthePolicyReviewCommitteeanddirectorofPolicyDevelopmentandPlan-ninginthegovernor'soffice.InadditiontoUlmer,membersoftheReviewCommitteein-cludeClarissaQuinlan,directoroftheDivisionofEnergyandPowerDevelopment;RonLehr,directoroftheDivisionofBudgetandManagement;andCharlesConway,chairmanoftheAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectors.WhileAcresAmerican,Inc.reportstotheAlaskaPowerAuthorityfortheSusitnastudies,BattellewillreportdirectlytothePolicyReviewCommittee.OBJECTIVEICOSTTheobjectiveofthealternativesstudyistodetermineiftherearemorecosteffectivewaystomeettheenergyneedsoftheAnchorage-Fairbanksrailbeltareathanthroughthedevelop-mentoftheSusitnaRiver'shydroelectricpotential.Costofthe18-monthstudyis$1million.WHATABOUTTHERECOMMENDATION?WhentheBattellestudyiscom-pletedinApril,1982,thePolicyReviewCommitteeandtheAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectorswillconsidertheresultsinformulatingtheirrespectiverecommendationsforRailbeltpowerdevelop-mentstothegovernorandthelegislature.WHERE QUESTIONSSHOULDGOQuestionsregardingthealter-nativesstudyshouldbedirectedtoFranUlmer,DirectoroftheDivisionofPolicyDevelopmentandPlanning(DPDP),PouchAD,Juneau,Alaska99811,phone(907)465-3577.QuestionsregardingtheSusitnahydroelectricexplorationshouldbesenttoEricYould,ExecutiveDirectoroftheAlaskaPowerAuthority,333West4thAvenue,Suite31,Anchorage,Alaska99501,phone(907)276-0001.ISERexpectsmorethandoublingofelectricityneedsdespiteslowergrowthrateDr.ScottGoldsmith,InstituteofSocialandEconomicResearch.InitialforecastsfromtheInstituteofSocialandEconomicResearch(ISER)in-dicatethatfuturegrowthofelectricutilitysalesisexpectedtobeslowerthanthehistoricalAlaskangrowthrate.Becauseofanticipatedhighratesofeconomicgrowth,however,utilitysaleswillequalorexceedrecentnationalelec-tricityconsumptiongrowthratetimeswhatitisintherailbeltprojections.today.SI f t dTherailbeltregiongenerallyin-everaorecassweremae.tflttht. teludestheseareas:Fairbanks,oreeceunceramy.d· bthf tTalkeetna,PalmerlWasllla,surroun.mg.o.uure.Anchorage,theKenaiPenin-ec.onomlcactivityandrelativesulaGlenallenandValdez.pncesofenergy.ISER's"most' ,likely"forecastindicatesthatTheISERforecastsarecon-electricalutilitysalesintheyearsiderablylowerthanprevious2000arelikelytobeabout2.4forecaststhatservedasabasisofearlierstudiesoftheSusitnahydroelectricprojectbytheCorpsofEngineers.Historically,theannualgrowthratefrom1965to1975wasabout14%.Duringthelastfiveyears,ithasbeen7%.Theprojectedannualgrowthrateoverthenext20yearsaverages4V2%.NORTH....pacts,safetyandreliability.NORTHTUNNELOPTION......................................................................•••••••••-DevilCanyonSite•PreviousplansindicatedabasinThesitesandtunnelsshowndopreferredconceptplanwillbedevelopmentpreferencerang-notimplyallwouldbebasedonsuchthingsasan-ingfromafour-dambasindeveloped.Usingamulti-ticipatedpowerneeds,costs,Thepreferredconceptplanisdevelopmentplantothemoredisciplinaryapproach,theenvironmentalandsocialim-expectedinMarch1981.recentpreferencefortwodamsIIlocatedatDevilCanyonandWatana.Tunnelsarealsobeingcon-sideredintheoptionsfordevelopmentofpowerwithintheupperSusitna.Twoconcep-tualtunnelplansareshowninthemaptotheright,alongwiththreeofthepptentialdamsites.Designoptionsincludetunnels Themicroearthquakedataandgeologicaldataarestudiedbybothgeologistsandseismol-ogists.Thisinterdisciplinaryap-proachprovidesscientistswithinformationtoevaluatetheseismicdesigncriteriaforthedamsites.mometerwastransmittedfromradiotorecordingseismo-graphsthatwereinstalledattheWatanabasecamp.thesusltnahydrostudies/november1980Microearthquakestudiesreviewolddata,collectnewThesignalfromeachseis-TheseismometersmeasuregroundmotionsforearthquakesassmallasRichtermagnitudezero(magnitude3orlargerearthquakesusuallycanbefelt).SeismicactivityintheprojectareaisbeingstudiedbyWoodward-ClydeConsultants'seismologists.Inadditiontoreviewinghis-Analysisoftherecords(seis-toricalearthquakes,seis-Imograms)fromtheseismo-]!mologistshavebeenmonitoringgraphsprovidesinformationonmicroearthquakeactivityinthemicroearthquakesinthevicinityvicinityofthedamsites.Duringofthedamsites.Thisinforma-thisyear10verysensitivetionincludesthesize,location,seismometerswereinstalledinanddepthofeachmicroearth-shallowholeswithina25-milequake.radiusofthedamsites.MICROEARTHQUAKEMEASURES2.0:PortableseismographslikethisonehavebeensetupattheWatanabasecamptoregistermicroearthquakeactivity.Thisparticularmicroearthquake,withanepicenterinthesouthwestcor·nerofMt.McKinleyPark,measured2.0ontheRichterscalelastAugust27th.Microearthquakesusuallyarenotfeltbyhumanbeings.Theyoccurconstantlythroughouttherailbelt.4ThefigureaboveshowsaportionoftheareaaroundtheDevilCanyondamsite.Thelocationofamappedfaultandseverallineamentsareshownonahlgh·altitudeaerialphotographtakenbyaU·2aircraft.ThesefeaturesalongwithothersInthevicinityoftwodamsitesarebeinganalyzedbygeologistsandseismologistsfromWoodward·ClydeConsultants.Inaddition,theAlaskaPowerAuthoritywillretainIndependentexpertstoreviewtheworkdonebyWoodward·Clyde,aconser·vativepolleymuchlike"gettingasecondopinion"withinthemedicalprofession.HowtostudyearthquakepotentialGeologicandseismologicstudiesareconductedtoobtainanunderstandingoftheseismicactivitywithinanarea.Thesestudiesbeginwithacom-prehensivereviewoftheliteratureandaerialphotographytoidentifyallfaultsandlineaments.Faultsandlineamentsthatmaybepotentiallyimportanttodamdesignarethenstudiedinthefield.Alineamentisastraightlinefeatureobservedonaerialphotographs,mapsorfromanaircraft.Alineamentmaybepro-ducedbyglacialice,byfaults,orbyotherearthshapingforces.Alllineamentsarenotnecessarilyfaults.FortheSusitnaproject,allpotentiallyimportantfaultsandlineamentswithinapproxi-mately60milesofeitherdamsitehavebeenstudied.Duringthepastyear,thesepreliminarystudieshaveincludedaerialreconnaissancewithheli-coptersandsmallairplanes,alongwithinvestigationsontheground.Featuresthatareconsideredtobeofpotentialimportancearescheduledtobestudiedindetailnextyear.Theobjectiveofthesestudiesistodetermineifthelineamentsarefaultsandtoestimatehowrecentlythefaultsmayhavemoved.Activefaults,thosethathavemovedduringrecentgeologicaltime,areimportanttodamdesign.TheDenaliFaultisanexampleofafaultwhichhashadmove·mentduringrecentgeologictime.Thefaultis40milesnorthofboththeDevilCanyonandWatanadamsites.TheDenaliFaultismorethan800mileslongasitrunsingenerallyaneast-westdirectionthroughtheAlaskaRange.Studiesbyanumberofgeolo-gistsshowthatmovementhasoccurredalongvarioussectionsoftheDenalifaultduringlargeearthquakesthathaveoccurredoverseveralhundredthousandtoseveralmillionyears.Theaveragerateofmovementhasbeenapproximatelyone·halfinchperyear.Woodward-ClydeConsultantsareworkingundercontracttoAcresAmerican,Inc.,toevaluatepotentialseismicactivity.ThefirstdatafromWoodward-ClydeConsultantsisexpectedbytheendof1980.Itwillincludeinformationobtainedtodateandadiscussionoflineamentsandfaultsthatneedtobestudiedinmoredetailtounderstandtheirpotentialsignificancetothedesignofprojectfacilities.TheAlaskaPowerAuthoritywillschedulemeetingsinSpring1981andinformationcollectedandanalyzedbytheconsultantswillbepresentedtothepublic.Collinsalsonotesthattheplantstudieswillhavealastingvaluebeyondth.eimmediateroletheyareplayingaspartofthefeasibilitystudiesontheSusitnahydroelectricproject.PlantstudyconsidersaffectsonmoosehabitatWilliamCollinsoftheUniversityinchindiameter,areexcellentofAlaska'sAgriculturalExperi·forageformoose,sincethementStationinPalmernotesanimalscannotbreaklargethatplantecologystudieswillbrancheswiththeirmouths.supportandassistthestudiesHowwillthedisruptionofriverbeingmadeonwildlifewithinflowsandfloodingaffectnewtheSusitnaRiverbasin.Forplantgrowththatmooserelyoninstance,mooseeattheleaves,foradequatefoodsupplies?twigs,andbarkofbirch,cotton-wood,andwillow.Whenthesetreesgrowbyrivers,theyaresubjecttoflooding,whichexposesnewsites forthetreestogrow.Youngtrees,withbranchesnothickerthanoneForinstance,fewdescriptionsofvegetationhavebeenmadeforthearea.Therefore,thespecieslistofvegetationandthefirstdetailedvegetationmapswillbetwoimportantpro-ductsofthecurrentSusitnastudies.Thespecificgoalsofthetwo-yearplantecologystudiesaretoforecastwhateffectcon-structionofthedamswouldhaveonplantlifewithinthearea,toidentifythewetlandareas,andtoidentifyplantsthatareendangered,rare,orthreatened.Collinsandhisassistantswillaccomplishthisbystudyingoldandnewaerialphotographs,andbyobservingtheareaonfoot,notingsuchfindingsastheageofvegeta-tionandtheeffectofseasonalfloodingontheestablishmentandmaintenanceofplantsthatareimportantasforageformoose.TheirfirstvegetationmapswillbecompletedbyDecemberofthisyear. thesusltnahydrostudies/november19805SusitnaStation-Tributaries1%ThisisaschematicdiagramoftheSusltnaRiversystem.Animpor-tantaspectofthissystemIsthattheupperSusltna(theareaunderconsiderationforhydroelectricdevelopment)contributeslessthan20percentoftheriver'saveragetotalflow.Othertributaries,In-cludingtheYentna,Chulitna,andTalkeetnaRivers,contributetheother80percent.OCTOCTGOLDCREEK70~<;j,.~g;1Ot.a2"J~~'400'1 , , , ,! ,! ,OCTJAN"'",.JULMONTHOFYEAAA'RJUlMONTHOFYEAA;;!"i,,,.g~40i~"~~,.~~10OCTJANA"AJUL511'rMONTHOfYEAAPARKSHIGHWAYBRIDGESUSITNASTATION"Thedevelopmentofanyhydro-electricschemeontheupperSusitnawillresultinseasonalchangesindownstreamflowpatterns.Takingthetwo-damproposalasanexample,thethreegraphsshowthedifferencebetweennaturalseasonalflowpatternsandpro-jectseasonalflowpatternsatthreepointsalongtheSusitnaRiver.Asonegoesdownstream,thedifferencebetweennaturalandprojectflowsbeginstodissipateastheeffectsaredilutedbythenormalflowsfromtheothertributaries.Changesinflowpatternscanhaveapositiveornegativeimpactonsuchthingsasfisheries,moosehabitat,flooding,andnavigation.Fisheriesdirectlydependonwaterflow.Sincetheeffectsofflowaregreaterontheup-streamportionoftheriver,theinitialemphasisofstudyeffortsismostintensiveupstream.Followingthereviewofthebasicriverhydraulics,Acreswilldeterminetherequiredextentofassessmentofdownstreamresources.GENERALFlowstudiesareoneofanumberoftypesofhydrologicinvestigations.Alsoincludedareassessmentsofreservoiroperation,sedimentyield,rivermorphology,glacialcontribu-tionandiceformation.StudiesidentifychangeindownstreamwaterflowRadiocollaringusedtostudywildlifeWhateffectwouldtheconstruc-tionofalargehydroelectricpro-jecthaveonthewildlifethatin-habitstheupperSusitnabasinanddownstreamareas?Sincethisisaquestionofseriousconcerntothosestudyingthefeasibilityofbuildingthepro-jectintheSusitnaRiverbasin,anumberofrespectedscientistshavebeenhiredtofindtheanswer.willcontinuethiswinterastheresearchersnoteanimaldistribution,abundance,habitatpreference,andmovementpat-terns.Itiseasiertostudymostanimals duringthewintermonths,becausetheyaremorevisibleanditiseasiertofollowtheirtracks.ThegroupofscientistsheadedbyGipsonhasbegunatwo-yearstudyofthefurbearinganimalsthatlivewithinthearea.Again,thepurposeistoidentifyandcountthem,observetheirseasonalhabits,anddeterminewhatkindofhabitattheyneedinordertolive.Inviewofexistingfodder,howlargearange,forinstance,doesaredfoxneed?Gipsonandhiscol-leaguesarestudyingtheanimalsbytrackingtheminthesnowandbyradiocollaring.Surveylinesareestablishedinrepresentativetypesofvegeta-tionandtracksoffurbearersareidentifiedineachvegetationtype."Itisimportantthatpeopleknowwearenotpoliticians,thatwearenotheretodecideiftheSusitnaprojectshouldbebuiltinthefirstplace,"saidDr.PhilGipsonoftheUniversityofAlaska,Fairbanks,CooperativeWildlifeResearchUnit."Weareheretostudytheareaandtodeterminetheimpactontheanimallifeifconstructiontakesplace.Thepurposeofallthestudiesistogivethedeci-sionmakersthefactssothattheycanmakethebestdecisionwithfullknowledgeofthepositiveandnegativeconse-quences."hesaid.TherearevastnumbersofanimalsthatlivewithintheSusitnabasin.Bears,wolves,caribou,moose,fox,otter,andminkallliveinabundance.Whydotheylivethere?Andcouldtheylivesomewhereelsejustaswell?AspartofthePowerAuthorityinvestigations,theAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamebeganmonitoringbiggameanimalslastsummerbyairplanefollowingearliertaggingandradiocollaringefforts.StudiesKarlSchneideroftheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameputsaradiocollaronmoosenumber38.AnIridescentorangeeartagmakesthemoosemorevisiblefromtheair.SchneiderheadsateamofresearcherswhohaveidentifiedbiggameanimalswithintheSusltnabasin.Thescientistsbeganmonitoringtheanimalslastsummerbyairplanefollowingearliertaggingandradiocollaringefforts. 6thesusltnahydrostudies/november1980$3millionbudgetedtostudy'.Susitnafish~,------_~<~::._.AlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameWildlifeNotebookSeriesThefishpopulationsintheSusitnaRiversystemaremajorcontributorstocommercialandrecreationalfisheriesintheCookInletbasin.Susitnasalmon,forexample,occurincommercialfisherycatchesfromtheentranceofCookInlettothemouthoftheSusitnaRiver.Someofthesalmonforrecrea-tionalfisheriesusetheSusitnaRiverformigration,spawningandrearing.TheSusitnasalmoninhabitanareaasfarsouthasDeepCreekontheKenaiPenin-sulaandasfarnorthasPortageCreek,whichisashortdistancebelowtheDevilCanyonsite.Residentfishspecies,suchasgraylingandrainbowtrout,alsocontributetorecreationalfisheriesthroughouttheSusitnasystem,fromitsmouthtoitsheadwaters.ThevalueofthesefisheriestotheStateofAlaskarequiresthatthepotentialforhydroimpactsonresidentandanadromousfish(suchassalmon)beassessed.TheAlaskaPowerAuthorityhasbudgetedabout3milliondollarsforthestudyofthefisheriesoftheSusitnaRiver.Fielddataonthefishpopula-tionsandhabitatoftheSusitnaRiverwillbecollectedbybiologistsoftheAlaskaDepart-mentofFishandGame(ADF&G).UtilizingdatasuppliedbyADF&G,existingfisheriesin-formation,andpastexperience,theprivateconsultingfirmofTerrestrialEnvironmentalSpecialists(TES)willassessthepositiveornegativeimpactsofdevelopmentandoperationoftheproposedhydroelectricpro-jectandsuggestmeasurestoavoid,minimize,orcompensateforpossibleadverseaffects.Comparisonswillbemadetosimilarsystemsfoundinothercoldregionsoftheworld(forin-stance,SwedenandRussia).TESwillbeassistedbynotedspecialistsfromtheUniversityofWashington,Dr.ClintonAtkinsonandDr.MiloBell.ClintAtkinsonhasextensiveex-periencewithAlaskasalmonfisheries,includingthoseintheSusitnabasin,whileMiloBellhas50yearsofexperienceworkingonrelatedengineeringproblemsthroughoutNorthAmericaonhydropowerprojects.TheDepartmentofFishandGames'responsibilityduringthefieldstudieswillbetodeter-mineexistingfisheriescondi-tionsintheSusitnaRiver.ThisincludesidentifyingthedistributionandabundanceofsalmonandresidentfishesinthesystemaswellastheJseasonalimportanceoftherivertotheirmigration,spawning,andrearing.Initialfieldworkforthesestudieswillbeginlatein1980andcontinuesfor15months.IftheprojectgoestotheFederalgovernmentforlicenseap-proval,studieswillcontinuethroughthepostlicenseapplicationperiod.AmajorquestioninthefisheriesstudyiswhatwouldhappentotheSusitnaRiverfisheriesifthedamswerebuilt.Forexample,willimportantfishhabitatsformigration,spawn-ing,andrearingbefavorablyorunfavorablyaltered?Iftheim-pactsarenegative,cantheybeminimizedoroffsetinsomemannersuchasbyhatcherypro-pagationoffishorthroughaschemeofregulationofriverflowsanddischargethroughthedams?TomTrent,oneofthestudycoordinatorsfromtheDepart-mentofFishandGame,em-phasizesthatstudyeffortsofthoseconductingriverhydrologyandwaterqualitystudiesmustbecloselycoor-dinated.Mr.Trentalsonotedthat,"TheDepartmentofFishandGameconductedverylimitedassess-mentworkduringtheyears1973to1978,buttheintensityanddesignforthenextfifteenmonthsandbeyondwillbeaim-edatcollectinginformationenablingtheStatetomakeob-jectivejudgementsofprobableprojectimpactsontheSusitnaRiverfisheryresources."EnvironmentalstudiesuseAlaskaexpertsTerrestialEnvironmentalSpecialists(TES),thecon-sultingfirmretainedbyAcresAmerican,Inc.,toconducttheenvironmentalstudiesontheproposedSusitnaproject,hascontractedwiththeUniversityofAlaskaonanumberofthestudies.Theyinclude:furbearers,birdsandsmallmammals,landuseandrecreation,culturalresources,andplantecology."WechosetheuniversitybecauseexpertstherearefamiliarwithenvironmentalconditionsinAlaska,"JeffreyO.Barnes,TESpresident,said.TESisheadquarteredinPhoenix,NewYork.Drillingprogramcompletesfirstyear'Deepdrilling(over700feetperhole)intotheareasaroundtheproposeddamsitesdeterminesthetypesofrock,therockstruc-ture,itsstrength,andthestabilityofthebedrockonwhichdamswouldsitorthroughwhichatunnelwouldpass.Coresamplesarethenretrievedandstudiedbyge~I.ogists.R & MConsultantsisthesub-contractorconductingthedrill-ingprogramattheWatanaandDevilCanyonsites.KeystoupperSusitnaprehistorymaybefound"Beforeanyland-disturbanceactivitiesmaytakeplaceonfederalorstatelands,aninven-toryofculturalresourcesitesmustbemadeandrecommen-dationsdevelopedtolessenoravoidtheimpactoftheprojectonthem,"GeorgeSmith,anarchaeologistwiththeUniver-sityofAlaskaMuseuminFairbanks,notedlastsummer.Inotherwords,beforethecon-structionofahydroelectricpro-jectintheSusitnaRiverbasinmaybegin,theremustbeanarchaeologicalsurveytolocatesiteswithinthearea.Lastsummerarchaeologistsex-amined55samplingsites,deter-miningthat33ofthemwereofarchaeologicalimportance.Nextsummerthemuseumwillsendseveralcrewsintothefieldtosystematicallytestandanalyzeaportionofeachsiteinordertoevaluateitssignificanceandtothenmakerecommendationstominimizepossibleadverseeffects.Sitesthatmightbeadverselyim-pactedbyprojectconstructionwillbeexcavatedifthedecisiontoconstructthehydroelectricprojectismade.Duringtheextensivetestingscheduledfor1981,eachsitewillbedividedintoachecker-boardofsquaresonemeterinsize.ArtifactsfoundinthesampledsquareswillbecataloguedandbecomeapartoftheUniversityofAlaskaMuseum'sarcheologicalcollec-tion,wheretheywillbeavailablefordisplayandresearch.Althoughitmaybeprematuretoassessthesignificanceofarti-factsbeforetheiranalysisiscomplete,DixonandSmithareexcitedabouttheresultsofthesurvey.Theyhavediscoveredseveralsiteswhichwillhelpunravelthepoorlyunderstoodprehistoryofthisareaofthestateandwhichwillprovideim-portantinformationaboutthewaypeoplelivedintheupperSusitnathousandsofyearsago.UniversityofAlaska·FalrbanksPhotographDr.E.JamesDixonandMr.GeorgeS.SmithoftheUniversityMuseumheadateamofscientistswhowillinvestigatetheareaforevidenceofhumanactivitywhich,theysay,mayextendback10,000years.ShownaboveareLesBaxterandGeorgeSmith.Theyarelookingatburiedanimalbonefragments. \,.7Universitysurveyseekspubliccommentonrecreationpotential[l]11:t~I]:[(.iwJ:l1~~I•••IftheSusitnaprojectisbuilt,theareassurroundingitmaybedevelopedforrecreationaluse.WhatkindofuseisthesubjectofaquestionnairebeingsentthisfalltoresidentsofAnchorage,Fairbanks,andthesmallercommunitiesalongtherailbelt(Talkeetna,Palmer,Wasilla,Willow).Morethan2,000people,randomlyselectedintheselocations,willbeaskedbytheUniversityofAlaska,Fairbanks,todescribethekindoffacilitiestheywouldliketoseedeveloped.Fromtheiranswers,Dr.AlanJubenvilleandMs.J.K.Feyhlattheuniversitywilldeterminewhichoffiveconceptplanspresentedtotherespondentsismostacceptable.InMay,theAlaskaPowerAuthoritytentativelywillholdcommunitymeetingsandrecreationwillbeoneofthetopics.Commentsfromboththemeetingsandfromtheques-tionnairewillbeanalyzedbytheUniversityofAlaskaandasecondsurveyonthesubjectwillfollow.AreportwillbemadetotheAlaskaPowerAuthorityin1981,eventhoughatthattimethequestionofwhethertodeveloptheprojectwillnothaveoeenoecloeo..Inbrief,peoplearebeingaskediftheywouldpreferminimumormaximumrecreationdevelop-ment(orsomethinginbetween)intheareasofthetwoproposeddamsites.Oneconceptplancallsforminimaldevelopmentandmanagement.Itassumesthatpublicaccessbyroadintothereservoirareasisrestrictedornotpermitted.Developmentwouldbelimitedtoavisitorin-formationcenterontheParksHighway.However,accessbyfloatplanewouldbepossibleonthereservoirsandaccessbycanoeandkayakontheupperriverswouldcontinueasitdoesatthepresent.Anotherplansuggeststhatac-cessbyroadtobothreservoirsispossible.Asaresult,primitivecampgroundsandsim-pleboatrampswouldbecon-structedatthedamsites.AtourboatserviceofthereservoirwouldbeofferedattheDevilCanyonsite.Athirdapproachcallsforexten-sivedevelopmentattheWatanadamsiteandonlyminimaldevelopmentattheDevilCanyonlocation.Simpleback-countrycampsiteswouldbeprovidedatselectedlocationsaroundWatana.Additionalser-viceswouldincludeaboatrampanddocking.facility,storeandservicestationandfloatplanetie-downs.Inafourthconceptplan,thedevelopmentwouldbeatreversedlocations,withhighly-developedfacilitiesprovidedattheDevilCanyonreservoiranddamsiteandonlyminimalfacilitiesatWatana.Inthefifthconceptplan,bothdamsiteswouldbeextensivelydevelopedtoincludecompletevisitorfacilitieswithback-countryboat-incampsitesbuiltatfivelocations.Facilities,inadditiontothosesuggestedasextensivedevelopmentinthethirdandfourthplans,wouldin-cludelodging,suchasmotels,andrestaurantswithminimalorfullservice."Thesurveyswearemakingaremorethoroughthananymadepreviouslyinregardtorecrea-tionplansassociatedwiththedevelopmentofahydroelectricproject,"Jubenvillesaid.Henotedtherewerenogoodplansatthefederalleveltoassisthim."Wearesurveyingthepeoplewholiveintheareawherethedamsareproposedtobebuiltaswellasthosewholiveintheurbanareasbothnorthandsouth,andwearesurveyingmorethanonce."~IIII-~Thegoalistoidentifyspeciesthatoccur,theirabundance,andwhathabitatsthebirdsutilize.Answerswillenablethescien-tiststopredicttheimpactthatconstructionoftheSusitnahydroelectricprojectwouldhaveontheexistingbirdlife.Kesselbeganafieldstudylastsummer,observingbirdsbysightandsound,andbyusingaerialsurveystosearchforevidenceofthelargernesters.Birdhabitatswillbevisitedonaregularbasisthroughoutthemigrationandsummerperiodsoverthecourseofthetwo-yearperiod.ZipITIIJ]TwoyearstudyonbirdsunderwayAnumberofbirdspeciesusetheupperSusitnaRiverbasinduringthesummerandduringmigration.Theyincludelargebirdssuchaseagles,hawks,andswans,andanumberofsmallerspecies.Dr.BrinaKesseloftheUniversi-tyofAlaska,Fairbanks,ispro-jectleaderforagroupofscien-tistsstudyingbirdlifewithintheSusitnaRiverbasin.mammal,itsabundance,andhabits.Here,McDonaldbaitsamousetrapinanefforttodeter-minethekindsandnumbersofmicepresentinthedifferenthabitatsofthestudyarea.Sincemiceandothersmallmammalsarepartofthenatural"foodchain,"theirnumbersandcon-ditionareofcrucialimportanceindeterminingthehealthoftheprojectareaecosystem.StephenO.McDonald,Univer-sityofAlaskabiologist,isdirec-tingatwo-yearstudyofsmallmammalsthatlivewithintheprojectarea.Amongthesmallmammalsunderobservationatpresentaremice,shrews,redsquirrels,snowshoehares,arc-ticgroundsquirrels,por-cupines,andhoarymarmots.ThescientistssetupsamplinglinestoaidthemincollectingsuchinformationasthetypeofMiceimportantinfoodchain~-------,ThispublicInformationdocumentontheSusltnahydropowerprojectwasdevelopedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityIPublicParticipationOffice,NancyBlunck,Director.CommentsonthesubstanceofthisnewsletterandIdeasforfuturepublicationsshouldbeforwardedtothe PublicParticipationOfficebywayofthefollowingcoupon.LastFirstInitialiiii ,iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiI INameIMailingAddressICityStateCDandmailto:AlaskaPowerAuthorityIPublicParticipationOffice333W.4th·Suite31.Anchorage,AK99501'-THANKYOUFORYO~I~E~S~_Ifyouwanttogetfuturenewsletters Communitymeetings(likethisoneinAnchorageinApril)willbeheldinspring1981.Theyareten·tativelyscheduledforFairbanks,Talkeetna,KenailSoldotna,andAnchorage.Anothersetofmeetingswillbeheldinspring1982,justpriortothedecisiononSusitna.TheACTIONSYSTEMisameansofsuggestingchangestotheplanofstudy.SendcommentstothePublicPar-ticipationOfficeforreviewandcommentbyAcresandPowerAuthoritystaff.NEWSLETTERSarewidelydistributedtothepublicandreportfactualinformationaboutthestudies.Thisnewsletteristhefirstofseveral.Toreceivefuturenewsletters,clipandmailthecoupononpage7.WORKSHOPSareheldasneededinindividualrailbeltcommunities.Workshopsarenarrowerinscopethancom-munitymeetingsandserveasaforumforpresentingin-depthin---formationonalimitednumberofsubjects.ARI.lJ~33?5S000'713/8-1-".AlaskaResources3:>'0<bIL8Llbr~:~:~~i1'.I~tii"«~~ostudies/november1980.:How¥OUCOMMUNITYMEETINGSare,,\~,!,,~,-"'(~;):1,W,,'>,,"$k'"P~"":::;$~'~"(~'~§.~':-":?~~'::::heldpriortoimportantstudy"~$0',;i("-",.•~"".'l,t"""::-..,,,\~,«.:-:,.<decisionsatfourlocations;$%.',.,.~.'.~~lcanbethroughouttherailbeltarea.H,N·.«~,....,...,,"'"-x·'w.i{\Meetingsreviewtheprogressof•-nvolvedstudiesand~rovidepeoplewith___anopportunitytomakecom-mentsandhavequestionsanswered.PublicconcernsbringchangesinstudyplanForaboutayear,individualsandagencieshavehadanumberofopportunitiestocommentontheadequacyoftheSusitnastudyplan.Theircommentshavesteadilyimprovedthedocument.Forinstance,the1980legislatureappropriatedanadditional$1,365,000toaddmoreresourcesandtakemoretimeinconductingtheenergyalternativesstUdy.Anindepen-den.tfirmwasalsohiredtoconaucttnestuay.Anotherexamplebeganwithaconcernexpressedlastspring.OnepersonfromTalkeetnaarticulatedaconcernforan·ticipatedimpactsonlifestylewiththefollowingcomment:"Whenthisplanspeaksofsocialorhumanimpacts,itcon·sistentlylabelsthis'socio·economic.'Whenitspeaksofcu)\I\Jralimpact,ItdcessoirttermsOl"arCnaeoTogv"anhistoricalInvestigation.eludedthatanadditionallookshouldbemadeonthesubject"Ifeelthatitisdesirableandtowhichthecommentspoke:timelythattheplanrecognizehowwouldtheconstructionoftheexistenceofthatconcepttheSusitnap~ojectaffectthewhichissocio-cultural,Inacon·currentlifestyleofthepeopletemporarysense.ThePk'I'wholiveintheimmediatedam·Studyisdeficientinthat,",,'..;....sitevicinity?not."Thestudywillbeginin1981,andAsaresultofthiscommentandwillbecoordinatedwithFranksimilarcommentsfromotherOrth'sworkontheidentificationresidentsoftheT.'llkeetnaarea,andanalysisofsocio-economicmeATlfSl(a-P6werAtJth6ritycon·conaJTiOri'S.thesusitnahydrostudiesThisIsthefirstofseveralnewslettersR,ublishedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityforcitizensoftherailbelt.Thepurposeistopre-sentobjectiveinformationontheprogressoftheSusitnahydroelectricfeasibilitystudiessothatreadersmaymaketheirownconclusionsbasedonaccurateInformation.EricP.Yould,executiveDirectorNancyBlunck,DirectorofPublicParticipationAlaskaPowerAuthority333W.4th·Suite31Anchorage,Alaska99501phone(907)276-0001ThestateofAlaskaIsanequalopportunityemployer.INTHIS·/SSUE:railbeltfacesenergydecision.. . . . . . . . ....page1socialandeconomicimpacts.. . . . . . . . ....page2susitnavicinitymap.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page2energyalternativesstudy. . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page3energyneedstodouble.. . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page.3tunneloption.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page3earthquakestudiesexplained.. . . . . . . . ....page4wUdlifeandwaterflow.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page5susitnafishstudies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...page6potentialrecreation,birds,smallmammals. .page7howtobeinvolved. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page8publiccommentbringschange. . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . .page8ItltALASKAPOWERAUTHORITYIIIi1..PUBLICPARTICIPATIONOFFICE-__333West4th-Suite31II. .Anchorage,Alaska99501(907)276-0001BULKRATEU.S.POSTAGEPAIDPERMITNO.272ANCH.AK.99502AKRE.SOURC[SLIB701CSTAf-.IC1'1ORAGEAKgq5:30;)202311 33?SSoCJO7318Inovember1980•lesARLISno3·::L~~AlekaR£soureesILibrary&.In.fonnatlOnServlC'-rKAnchorage.Ataqt.:··\Lr:2.~\S1)f1d-.3'1\0,'JJ27-~j•roStueSUSltnaARLISAlaskaResources1-ihran&InformationServicesAnchorageAlaskaThestateisalsofundingarelatedbutseparate$1millionstudytoconsideralternativestoSusitnahydroelectricpower.Thatstudy,contractedbythegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommittee,isbeingconductedbyBattelle-PacificNorthwestLaboratories.Itwillbecompletedinthespringof1982,concurrentwiththeSusitnafeasibilitystudies.Thoseexplorations,neveradequatelyundertakenbefore,arenow10monthsintoa30-monthexaminationperiod.AcresAmerican,Inc.(Acres)hasbeenretainedbythePowerAuthoritytomanagethe$30millioneffort.potentialoftheupperportionoftheSusitnaRiver.InitialfundingwasprovidedinJuly1979,andtheexplorationswereinitiatedinJanuary1980.ABRIEFHISTORYINDEPENDENTREVIEWBYEXTERNALCONSULTANTSAsapartoftheSusitnaexplorations,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityisThepurposeofthisnewsletter,thefirstofseveral,istopresentappointinganexternalreviewboardcomposedofeminentwhatisgoingonwiththeSusitnastudiesthatarenowunderway.engineers,scientists,andeconomiststoreviewthefeasibilityTheintentistopresenttheinformationobjectivelysothatreadersstudiesperformedbyAcres.Approximately$1millionhasbeenmaymaketheirownconclusionsbasedonfacts.budgetedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityforthisreview,whichwillincludeanindependentcostestimateofconstructingtheSusitnaproject.InformationontheenergyalternativesstudycanbeanticipatedfromtheOfficeoftheGovernor.Fairbanks,AnchorageandRailbeltfacemajorenergydecision~i;i~~~~inthe"railbeltregion"willfaceamajorenergydecisionAtthattime,thefeasibilitystudiesontheproposedSusitnahydroelectricprojectandastudyofthefeasibilityofavarietyofotherenergyalternativeswillbothconcludewiththeirfindings.TherehasbeenagreatdealofinterestformanyyearsinthebuildingofahydroelectricprojectontheSusitnaRiver.ThepreviousassessmentsindicatedthattheSusitnaprojectwaseconomicallyfeasibleandthatanticipatedenvironmentalimpactswouldnotbeofsuchamagnitudeastowarrantitundesirable.Con-sequently,in1976theAlaskaStateLegislaturecreatedtheAlaskaPowerAuthorityandaskedthenewstatecorporationtobegindetailedfeasibilitystudiesonthedevelopmentofthehydroelectricTHESUSITNAHYDROSTUDIESTheSusitnainvestigationsfallinto10generalcategories.Notallthestudiesaregoingonatthistime,norarealldescribedinthisILwasinitiallylookedatil"\the1940'sbytheU.S-Bureauof!lewsletter.Jheyinclude:ReclamationandlaterstudiedbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers.-forecastsoffutureelectricalneedsintherailbeltareabetweentheKenaiPeninsulaandFairbanksfrom1990through2010-hydrologicanalysisoftheSusitnaRiver-seismicexamination-geotechnicalexplorationnearthedamsites-engineeringdesigndevelopment-environmentaldatacollectionandimpactassessment-transmissionlineanalysiscontinuedonpage3 ;FU~m:brings;extensivecoldregionexperiencetohydrostudiesExpertiseappliedtosocioeconomicquestionsthesusitnahydrostudies/november19801982.Ifthestatedecidestofilealicenseapplicationin1982,adetailedanalysisofwhataffectconstructionandoperationoftheSusitnaprojectmighthaveonsocialandeconomiccondi-tionswillthenbeconducted.FrankOrth&Associateswillidentifyandexaminechangesinsocioeconomicconditionssothatpeoplecanmaketheirownevaluationsofhowsuchchangescouldaffecttheirlifestyles.arelocatedinnorthernclimatesandpresentedproblemssimilartothosetheproposedSusitnaprojectmayencounter.TheSusitnaprojectismanagedbyAcresoutofitsmainofficeinBuffalo,NewYork.ItsresidentofficeisinAnchorageandthefieldcampisintheupperSusitnabasinclosetoDeadmanCreek.TheAcresorganizationisactiveindiversifiedfieldsofplanning,engineering,feasibilitystudies,environmentalassessment,andprojectmanagement.Amongotherenergytechnologies,thecompanyhasmorethanfiftyyearsofexperiencewithlargeandsmallhydroelectricdevelopment.IncludedinthesearetheChurchillFallsprojectinLabradorandtheNelsonRiverprojectinCanada,bothofwhichmentandincomelevels,businessactivity,educationenrollmentandcost,transporta-tionfacilities,andlandusepatterns.Later,betweenlatespringandearlyfall1981,thesesamecon-ditionswillthenbedescribedforafuturewithouttheSusitnaproject.Theresultwillbeabaselinefromwhichcom-parisonscanbemade.ApreliminaryassessmentofsocioeconomicimpactsthatcouldresultfromaSusitnadevelopmentwillbemadepriortoastatedecisiononSusitnaininthefieldwork(whichwouldmaximizetheexpenditureofmonieswithinthestate),anditsproposaltoprovideforanextensiveanddirectpublicparticipationprocess.TheselectionwasmadewithsupportfromboththepublicandtheStateHousePowerAlternativesStudyCommittee,alegislativesubcommitteesetuptooverseethefeasibilitywork.afirmwithexperienceinconductingsocioeconomicanalyses,particularlyinAlaska,ispresentlyconductingthefirstphaseofatwo-phasestudythatwillidentifyandanalyzepoten-tialchangesinsocioeconomicconditions.Betweennowandspringof1981,thefirmisdevelopingsocioeconomicprofilesforlocal,regional,andtosomeex-tent,statewideareas.Theseprofilesaredescriptionsofex-istingconditionssuchaspopulationlevels,availabilityandtypeofhousing,employ-FrankOrth&Associates,Inc.,Reasonsfortheselectionin-cludedAcres'pastexperiencewithhydroelectricprojectsinsub-arcticregions.AlsoimportantwasAcres'deci-siontoutilizeAlaskanexpertiseTheconstructionandoperationofahydroelectricprojectintheSusitnaRiverbasinmightaffectthelivesofAlaskans,inbothpositiveandadverseways.WhileRailbeltresidentsgenerallymightexperienceenergyindependenceandlowercostsforelectricity(relativetootheralternatives),certaingroupsofpeoplemightex-periencepopulationshifts,changesinservicerequire-ments,taxrateandrevenuechanges,andchangesinthegeneralqualityoflife.InNovember1979,theAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirec-torsselectedAcresAmerican,Inc.,aninternationalconsultingengineeringfirm,toconductthefeasibilitystudiesontheSusitnahydroelectricproject.2..----tNo2amjIIo40kmFOirbonk~\...II-II-~,,ALASKA"r--'-'--)'V00...."--/~~MtMcKinley/..~-~."·"'''.0----~SUSITNAALTERNATIVESBetweentheDenaliHighwayupstreamandGoldCreekdownstream,twelvedamsitesandtwoprimarytunnelplansarebeingconsideredaspos-siblebuildingblocksintheformulationofapreferreddevelopmentplan.POTENTIALPOWERForayearwithtypicalprecipita-tionandclimaticconditions,theaverageenergypotentialofthebasinisabout7billionKwh.Thisisabouttwicewhattherailbeltgenerationwasin1979.Thereareanumberofdevelop-mentconceptsthatcanbedesignedtousealloraportionofthisenergypotential.LANDOWNERSHIPThemajorlandownershipisbyCookInletRegion,Inc.,anditsNativevillagecorporations.Therearealsosomeinholdingswithintheprojectarea,suchasminingclaims,Nativeallot-ments,open·to-entryparcels,andhomesteads.PRESENTLANDUSETheprojectareaispresentlyusedbyguidedhuntersoperatingprincipally outoftheStephanLakearea,withscat-teredprivatecabinsbeingpre-sentonmostofthelargerlakesintheupperSusitnabasin.Inaddition,miningclaimshavebeenfiledonmanyofthetributarystreamswithinthedrainage.Accesstotheareaispredominentlybyaircraft,althoughthereislimitedaccessbyriverfromtheeast.LOCATIONTheproposedSusitnaRiverhydroelectricprojectislocatedontheupperSusitnaRiver,ap-proximately125airmilesnorthofAnchorage,150airmilessouthofFairbanks,and70milesnortheastofTalkeetna.~~-BackgroundinformationonproposedSusitnaprojecti, thesusltnahydrostudies/november19803continuedfrompage1.costestimating.preparationofFERC(FederalEnergyRegulatoryCommis-sion)licensingdocuments,ifappropriate.marketingandfinancinganalysisTHESUSITNAWORKTHUSFARLastsummer,scientistsandengineerswentintothefieldtobegintheSusitnawork.Anex-planationandfirstexaminationofthisworkisthetextthatfollowsontheinsidepagesofthisnewsletter.Furtherinfor-mationwillfollowinsubse-quentreports.FINALRECOMMENDATIONSONPOWERDEVELOPMENTInApril1982thefive-memberAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectorswillformulateitsrecommendationtothegover-norandthelegislatureinregardtopowerdevelopmentalongtherailbelt.Atapproximatelythesametime,thegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommitteewillbeforwardingitsindependentrecommendation.THEDECISIONFinaldeterminationonthesub-jectrestswiththestatein1982.Ifthedecisionismadetopro-ceedwiththedevelopmentofSusitna,alicenseapplicationforconstructionwillbefiledwiththeFederalEnergyRegulatoryCommissioninWashington,D.C.WhoistheAlaskaPowerAuthorityTheAlaskaPowerAuthorityisapubliccorporationfundedbythestateandheadedbyafive-memberboardofdirectorsappointedbythegovernorandapprovedbythelegislature.Itsday-to-daybusinessiscon-ductedbyasixteen-memberstafflocatedinAnchorage.ThepurposeofthePowerAuthorityistoassisttheresidentsofAlaskainbothurbanandruralareasincon-structing,acquiring,financing,andoperatingpowerproductionfacilitiesofvarioustypes.Thosetypesincludefossilfuel,windpower,tidal,geothermal,hydroelectric,solarenergypro-duction,andwasteenergycon-servationfacilities.ThePowerAuthorityiscurrentlydevelop-inganumberofhydropowerandalternativeenergyprojectsstatewide.AlternativeenergystudygoestoBattelleWardSwiftofBattelleNorthwestexplainshisfirm'sproposaltomembersofthepublicandthegovernor'sPolicyReviewCom-mitteethisfall.Battellewasselectedtoconducttheenergyalternativesstudy.Battelle'sworkisexpectedtobecompletedatthesametimeastheSusitnafeasibilitystudiesinspring1982.cm[;!~lDgIIr:lElJToassuresufficientchecksandbalances,the1980statelegislaturedeterminedthatanindependentconsultingfirmshouldconducttheRailbeltpoweralternativesstudy.IntheoriginalplanofstudypresentedtotheAlaskaPowerAuthoritybyAcresAmerican,Inc.,AcreswastoconductthealternativesstudyinparallelwithfeasibilitylevelstudiesoftheSusitnahydroelectricproject.Thisfallthegovernor'sPolicyReviewCommitteeselectedBattelle-PacificNorthwestLaboratoriestomakethe alter-nativesstu-ely.AfinalreportISexpectedinthespringof1982.Battelle-PacificLaboratories,aRichland,Washington,researchanddevelopmentfirm,isthenewestinanumberofBattelleofficesintheUnitedStatesandEurope.Thecompany,foundedin1929,hasastafftodayof6,000.ResearchintheNorth-westofficefocusesprimarilyonthetechnologicalandenviron-mentalissuesofenergyproduc-tionanduse.RecentstudiesbyBattellehaveincludedanationalcoalutiliza-tionassessmentandanassess-mentoftheeffectsofthermalpowerplantsiteanddesignalternativesonthecostofelec-tricpower,bothforthefederalgovernment."Battellehasalotofexperiencedoingexactlywhatthisrequestforproposalcallsfor,andthey.haveagreatamountofex-periencedoingprojectsinAlaska,"saidFranUlmer,chair-womanofthePolicyReviewCommitteeanddirectorofPolicyDevelopmentandPlan-ninginthegovernor'soffice.rfladtliliontolJImer,memberS"oftheReviewCommitteein-cludeClarissaQuinlan,directoroftheDivisionofEnergyandPowerDevelopment;RonLehr,directoroftheDivisionofBudgetandManagement;andCharlesConway,chairmanoftheAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectors.WhileAcresAmerican,Inc.reportstotheAlaskaPowerAuthorityfortheSusitnastudies,BattellewillreportdirectlytothePolicyReviewCommittee.OBJECTIVEICOSTTheobjectiveofthealternativesstudyistodetermineiftherearemorecosteffectivewaystomeettheenergyneedsoftheAnchorage-Fairbanksrailbeltareathanthroughthedevelop-mentoftheSusitnaRiver'shydroelectricpotential.Costofthe18-monthstudyis$1million.WHATABOUTTHERECOMMENDATION?WhentheBattellestudyiscom-pletedinApril,1982,thePolicyReviewCommitteeandtheAlaskaPowerAuthorityBoardofDirectorswillconsidertheesuIts-'n-rormulaung-ttTeIrrespectiverecommendationsforRailbeltpowerdevelop-mentstothegovernorandthelegislature.WHEREQUESTIONSSHOULDGOQuestionsregardingthealter-nativesstudyshouldbedirectedtoFranUlmer,DirectoroftheDivisionofPolicyDevelopmentandPlanning(DPDP),PouchAD,Juneau,Alaska99811,phone(907)465-3577.QuestionsregardingtheSusitnahydroelectricexplorationshouldbesenttoEricYould,ExecutiveDirectoroftheAlaskaPowerAuthority,333West4thAvenue,Suite-31,Anchorage,Alaska99501,phone(907)276-0001.ISERexpectsmorethandoublingofelectricityneedsdespiteslowergrowthrateInitialforecastsfromtheInstituteofSocialandEconomicResearch(ISER)in-dicatethatfuturegrowthofelectricutilitysalesisexpectedtobeslowerthanthehistoricalAlaskangrowthrate.Becauseofanticipatedhighratesofeconomicgrowth,Dr.ScottGoldsmith,Instituteofhowever,utilitysaleswillequalSocialandEconomicResearch.orexceedrecentnationalelec-tricityconsumptiongrowthratetimeswhatitisintherailbeltprojections.today.Therailbeltregiongenerallyin-Severalforecastswe~emadecludestheseareas:Fairbanks,toreflect.theuncertaintyTalkeetna,Palmer/Wasilla,surroun~lng~o~hfuture.Anchorage,theKenaiPenin-ec.onomlcactivityandrelativesulaGlenallenandValdez.pncesofenergy.ISER's"most' ,likely"forecastindicatesthatTheISERforecastsarecon-electricalutilitysalesintheyearsiderablylowerthanprevious2000arelikelytobeabout2.4forecaststhatservedasabasisofearlierstudiesoftheSusitnahydroelectricprojectbytheCorpsofEngineers.Historically,theannualgrowthratefrom1965to1975wasabout14%.Duringthelastfiveyears,ithasbeen7%.Theprojectedannualgrowthrateoverthenext20yearsaverages4112%.WatanaSiteNORTH....pacts,safetyandreliability.NORTHTUNNELOPTION...................................................................\•.•••.•·"'1••••••-0-""*•••••/~~•DevilCanyonSite~_i\M_:..~~•••••••••U4-SOUr:•••••ft7:UIVIVt:t..........\...DeY~1CreekSileOP7:/OIV~................PreviousplansindicatedabasinThesitesandtunnelsshowndo preferredconceptplanwillbedevelopmentpreferencerang-notimplyallwouldbebasedonsuchthingsasan-ingfromafour-dambasindeveloped.Usingamulti-ticipatedpowerneeds,costs,Thepreferredconceptplanisdevelopmentplantothemoredisciplinaryapproach,theenvironmentalandsocialim-expectedinMarch1981.recentpreferencefortwodamsIIlocatedatDevilCanyonandWatana.Tunnelsarealsobeingcon-sideredintheoptionsfordevelopmentofpowerwithintheupperSusitna.Twoconcep-tualtunnelplansareshowninthemaptotheright,alongwiththreeofthepotentialdamsites.Designoptionsincludetunnels thesusltnahydrostudies/november1980Microearthquakestudiesreviewolddata,collectnewInadditiontoreviewinghis-Analysisoftherecords(seis-toricalearthquakes,seis-,mograms)fromtheseismo-mologistshavebeenmonitoringgraphsprovidesinformationonmicroearthquakeactivityinthemicroearthquakesinthevicinityvicinityofthedamsites.Duringofthedamsites.Thisinforma-thisyear10verysensitivetionincludesthesize,location,seismometerswereinstalledinanddepthofeachmicroearth·shallowholeswithina25-milequake.radiusofthedamsites.mometerwastransmittedfromradiotorecordingseismo-graphsthatwereinstalledattheWatanabasecamp.Themicroearthquakedataandgeologicaldataarestudiedbybothgeologistsandseismol-ogists.Thisinterdisciplinaryap-proachprovidesscientistswithinformationtoevaluatetheseismicdesigncriteriaforthedamsites.SeismicactivityintheprojectareaisbeingstudiedbyWoodward-ClydeConsultants'seismologists.TheseismometersmeasuregroundmotionsforearthquakesassmallasRichtermagnitudezero(magnitude3orlargerearthquakesusuallycanbefelt).Thesignalfromeachseis-MICROEARTHQUAKEMEASURES2.0:PortableseismographslikethisonehavebeensetupattheWatanabasecamptoregistermlcroearthquakeactivity.Thisparticularmlcroearthquake,withanepicenterinthesouthwestcor-nerofMt.McKinleyPark,measured2.0ontheRichterscalelastAugust27th.Microearthquakesusuallyarenotfeltbyhumanbeings.Theyoccurconstantlythroughoutthe railbelt.4ThefigureaboveshowsaportionoftheareaaroundtheDevilCanyondamsite.Thelocationofamappedfaultandseverallineamentsareshownonahlgh·altltudeaerialphotographtakenbyaU·2aircraft.Thesefeaturesalongwithothers InthevicinityoftwodamsitesarebeinganalyzedbygeologistsandseismologistsfromWoodward·ClydeConsultants.Inaddition,theAlaskaPowerAuthoritywillretainIndependentexpertstoreviewtheworkdonebyWoodward·Clyde,aconser-vativepolicymuchlike"gettingasecondopinion"withinthe medicalprofession.HowtostudyearthquakepotentialGeologicandseismologicstudiesareconductedtoobtainanunderstandingoftheseismicactivitywithinanarea.Thesestudiesbeginwithacom-prehensivereviewoftheliteratureandaerialphotographytoidentifyallfaultsandlineaments.Faultsandlineamentsthatmaybepotentiallyimportanttodamdesignarethenstudiedinthefield.Alineamentisastraightlinefeatureobservedonaerialphotographs,mapsorfromanaircraft.Alineamentmaybepro-ducedbyglacialice,byfaults,orbyotherearthshapingforces.Alllineamentsarenotnecessarilyfaults.FortheSusitnaproject,allpotentiallyimportantfaultsandlineamentswithinapproxi·mately60milesofeitherdamsitehavebeenstudied.Duringthepastyear,thesepreliminarystudieshaveincludedaerialreconnaissancewithheli·coptersandsmallairplanes,alongwithinvestigationsontheground.Featuresthatareconsideredtobeofpotentialimportancearescheduledtobestudiedindetailnextyear.Theobjectiveofthesestudiesistodetermineifthelineamentsare'faultsandtoestimatehowrecentlythefaultsmayhavemoved.Activefaults,thosethathavemovedduringrecentgeologicaltime,areimportanttodamdesign.TheDenaliFaultisanexampleofafaultwhichhashadmove-mentduringrecentgeologictime.Thefaultis40milesnorthofboththeDevilCanyonandWatanadamsites.TheDenaliFaultismorethan800mileslongasitrunsingenerallyaneast-westdirectionthroughtheAlaskaRange.Studiesbyanumberofgeolo-gistsshowthatmovementhasoccurredalongvarioussectionsoftheDenalifaultduringlargeearthquakesthathaveoccurredoverseveralhundredthousandtoseveralmillionyears.Theaveragerateofmovementhasbeenapproximatelyone·halfinchperyear.Woodward-ClydeConsultantsareworkingundercontracttoAcresAmerican,Inc.,toevaluatepotentialseismicactivity.ThefirstdatafromWoodward-ClydeConsultantsisexpectedbytheendof1980.Itwillincludeinformationobtainedtodateandadiscussionoflineamentsandfaultsthatneedtobestudiedinmoredetailtounderstandtheirpotentialsignificancetothedesignofprojectfacilities.TheAlaskaPowerAuthoritywillschedulemeetingsinSpring1981andinformationcollectedandanalyzedbytheconsultantswillbepresentedtothepublic.CollinsalsonotesthattheplantstudieswillhavealastingvaluebeyondtheimmediateroletheyareplayingaspartofthefeasibilitystudiesontheSusitnahydroelectricproject.PlantstudyconsidersaffectsonmoosehabitatWilliamCollinsoftheUniversityinchindiameter,areexcellentofAlaska'sAgriculturalExperi-forageformoose,sincethementStationinPalmernotesanimalscannotbreaklargethatplantecologystudieswillbrancheswiththeirmouths.supportandassistthestudiesHowwillthedisruptionofriverbeingmadeonwildlifewithinflowsandfloodingaffectnewtheSusitnaRiverbasin.Forplantgrowththatmooserelyoninstance,mooseeattheleaves,foradequatefoodsupplies?twigs,andbarkofbirch,cotton-wood,andwillow.Whenthesetreesgrowbyrivers,theyaresubjecttoflooding,whichexposesnewsitesforthetreestogrow.Youngtrees,withbranchesnothickerthanoneForinstance,fewdescriptionsofvegetationhavebeenmadeforthearea.Therefore,thespecieslistofvegetationandthefirstdetailedvegetationmapswillbetwoimportantpro-ductsofthecurrentSusitnastudies.Thespecificgoalsofthetwo-yearplantecologystudiesaretoforecastwhateffectcon·structionofthedamswouldhaveonplantlifewithinthearea,toidentifythewetlandareas,andtoidentifyplantsthatareendangered,rare,orthreatened.Collinsandhisassistantswillaccomplishthisbystudyingoldandnewaerialphotographs,andbyobservingtheareaonfoot,notingsuchfindingsastheageofvegeta·tionandtheeffectofseasonalfloodingontheestablishmentandmaintenanceofplantsthatareimportantasforageformoose.TheirfirstvegetationmapswillbecompletedbyDecemberofthisyear. thesusitnahydrostudies/november19805SusitnaStation-Tributaries2%-Tributaries1%ThisisaschematicdiagramoftheSusitnaRiversystem.Animpor·tantaspectofthissystemisthattheupperSusitna(theareaunderconsiderationforhydroelectricdevelopment)contributeslessthan20percentoftheriver'saveragetotalflow.Othertributaries,in·eludingtheYentna,Chulitna,andTalkeetnaRivers,contributetheother80percent.OCTOCTJULto50to"20':~J........I.-".J.......J...'...J.......JOCTJANAPRJULMONTHOfYEAROCTJANAltllJULSEPTMONTH01"YEARMONTHOFYEARGOLDCREEK~~~20Ico~l°La_/:.,.-~PARKSHIGHWAYBRIDGESUSITNASTATION"Changesinflowpatternscanhaveapositiveornegativeimpactonsuchthingsasfisheries,moosehabitat,flooding,andnavigation.Fisheriesdirectlydependonwaterflow.Sincetheeffectsofflowaregreaterontheup-streamportionoftheriver,theinitialemphasisofstudyeffortsismostintensiveupstream.Followingthereviewofthebasicriverhydraulics,Acreswilldeterminetherequiredextentofassessmentofdownstreamresources.Thedevelopmentofanyhydro-electricschemeontheupperSusitnawillresultinseasonalchangesindownstreamflowpatterns.Takingthetwo-damproposalasanexample,thethreegraphsshowthedifferencebetweennaturalseasonalflowpatternsandpro-jectseasonalflowpatternsatthreepointsalongtheSusitnaRiver.Asonegoesdownstream,thedifferencebetweennaturalandprojectflowsbeginstodissipateastheeffectsaredilutedbythenormalflowsfromtheothertributaries.GENERALFlowstudiesareoneofanumberoftypesofhydrologicinvestigations.Alsoincludedareassessmentsofreservoiroperation,sedimentyield,rivermorphology,glacialcontribu-tionandiceformation.StudiesidentifychangeindownstreamwaterflowRadiocollaringusedtostudywildlifeWhateffectwouldtheconstruc-tionofalargehydroelectricpro-jecthaveonthewildlifethatin-habitstheupperSusitnabasinanddownstreamareas?Sincethisisaquestionofseriousconcerntothosestudyingthefeasibilityofbuildingthepro-jectintheSusitnaRiverbasin,anumberofrespectedscientistshavebeenhiredtofindtheanswer.willcontinuethiswinterastheresearchersnoteanimaldistribution,abundance,habitatpreference,andmovementpat-terns.Itiseasiertostudymostanimalsduringthewintermonths,becausetheyaremorevisible~nditiseasiertofollowtheirtracks.ThegroupofscientistsheadedbyGipsonhasbegunatwo-yearstudyofthefurbearinganimalsthatlivewithinthearea.Again,thepurposeistoidentifyandcountthem,observetheirseasonalhabits,anddeterminewhatkindofhabitattheyneedinordertolive.Inviewofexistingfodder,howlargearange,forinstance,doesaredfoxneed?Gipsonandhiscol-leaguesarestudyingtheanimalsbytrackingtheminthesnowandbyradiocollaring.Surveylinesareestablishedinrepresentativetypesofvegeta-tionandtracksoffurbearersareidentifiedineachvegetationtype."Itisimportantthatpeopleknowwearenotpoliticians,thatwearenotheretodecideiftheSusitnaprojectshouldbebuiltinthefirstplace,"saidDr.PhilGipsonoftheUniversityofAlaska,Fairbanks,CooperativeWildlifeResearchUnit."Weareheretostudytheareaandtodeterminetheimpactontheanimallifeifconstructiontakesplace.Thepurposeofallthestudiesistogivethedeci-sionmakersthefactssothattheycanmakethebestdecisionwithfullknowledgeofthepositiveandnegativeconse-quences."hesaid.TherearevastnumbersofanimalsthatlivewithintheSusitnabasin.Bears,wolves,caribou,moose,fox,otter,andminkallliveinabundance.Whydotheylivethere?Andcouldtheylivesomewhereelsejustaswell?AspartofthePowerAuthorityinvestigations,theAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamebeganmonitoringbiggameanimalslastsummerbyairplanefollowingearliertaggingandradiocollaringefforts.StudiesKarlSchneideroftheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameputsaradiocollaronmoosenumber38.Aniridescentorangeeartagmakesthemoosemorevisiblefromtheair.SchneiderheadsateamofresearcherswhohaveidentifiedbiggameanimalswithintheSusitnabasin.Thescientistsbeganmonitoringtheanimalslastsummerbyairplanefollowingearliertaggingandradiocollaringefforts. 6thesusltnahydrostudies/november1980$3millionbudgetedtostody':Susitnafish-_._~-_........,;-..-.--.,'.....--AlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameWildlifeNotebookSeriesThefishpopulationsintheSusitnaRiversystemaremajorcontributorstocommercialandrecreationalfisheriesintheCookInletbasin.Susitnasalmon,forexample,occurincommercialfisherycatchesfromtheentranceofCookInlettothemouthoftheSusitnaRiver.Someofthesalmonforrecrea-tionalfisheriesusetheSusitnaRiverformigration,spawningandrearing.TheSusitnasalmoninhabitanareaasfarsouthasDeepCreekontheKenaiPenin-sulaandasfarnorthasPortageCreek,whichisashortdistancebelowtheDevilCanyonsite.Residentfishspecies,suchasgraylingandrainbowtrout,alsocontributetorecreationalfisheriesthroughouttheSusitnasystem,fromitsmouthtoitsheadwaters.ThevalueofthesefisheriestotheStateofAlaskarequiresthatthepotentialforhydroimpactsonresidentandanadromousfish(suchassalmon)beassessed.TheAlaskaPowerAuthorityhasbudgetedabout3milliondollarsforthestudyofthefisheriesoftheSusitnaRiver.Fielddataonthefishpopula-tionsandhabitatoftheSusitnaRiverwillbecollectedbybiologistsoftheAlaskaDepart-mentofFishandGame(ADF&G).UtilizingdatasuppliedbyADF&G,existingfisheriesin·formation,andpastexperience,theprivateconsultingfirmofTerrestrialEnvironmentalSpecialists(TES)willassessthepositiveornegativeimpactsofdevelopmentandoperationoftheproposedhydroelectricpro-jectandsuggestmeasurestoavoid,minimize,orcompensateforpossibleadverseaffects.'Comparisonswillbemadetosimilarsystemsfoundinothercoldregionsoftheworld(forin-stance,SwedenandRussia).TESwillbeassistedbynotedspecialistsfromtheUniversityofWashington,Dr.ClintonAtkinsonandDr.MiloBell.ClintAtkinsonhasextensiveex-periencewithAlaskasalmonfisheries,includingthoseintheSusitnabasin,whileMiloBellhas50yearsofexperienceworkingonrelatedengineeringproblemsthroughoutNorthAmericaonhydropowerprojects.TheDepartmentofFishandGames'responsibilityduringthefieldstudieswillbetodeter·mineexistingfisheriescondi-tionsintheSusitnaRiver.Thisincludesidentifyingthedistributionandabundanceofsalmonandresidentfishesinthesystemaswellastheseasonalimportanceoftherivertotheirmigration,spawning,andrearing.Initialfieldworkforthesestudieswillbeginlatein1980andcontinuesfor15months.IftheprojectgoestotheFederalgovernmentforlicenseapeproval,studieswillcontinuethroughthepostlicenseapplicationperiod.AmajorquestioninthefisheriesstudyiswhatwouldhappentotheSusitnaRiverfisheriesifthedamswerebuilt.Forexample,willimportantfishhabitatsformigration,spawn-ing,andrearingbefavorablyorunfavorablyaltered?Iftheim-pactsarenegative,cantheybeminimizedoroffsetinsomemannersuchasbyhatcherypro-pagationoffishorthroughaschemeofregulationofriverflowsanddischargethroughthedams?TomTrent,oneofthestudycoordinatorsfromtheDepart·mentofFishandGame,em-phasizesthatstudyeffortsofthoseconductingriverhydrologyandwaterqualitystudiesmustbecloselycoor-dinated.Mr.Trentalsonotedthat,"TheDepartmentofFishandGameconductedverylimitedassess-mentworkduring theyears1973to1978,buttheintensityanddesignforthenextfifteenmonthsandbeyondwillbeaim-edatcollectinginformationenablingtheStatetomakeob-jectivejudgementsofprobableprojectimpactsontheSusitnaRiverfisheryresources."EnvironmentalstudiesuseAlaskaexpertsTerrestialEnvironmentalSpecialists(TES),thecon-sultingfirmretainedbyAcresAmerican,Inc.,toconducttheenvironmentalstudiesontheproposedSusitnaproject,hascontractedwiththeUniversityofAlaskaonanumberofthestudies.Theyinclude:furbearers,birdsandsmallmammals,landuseandrecreation,culturalresources,andplantecology."WechosetheuniversitybecauseexpertstherearefamiliarwithenvironmentalconditionsinAlaska,"JeffreyO.Barnes,TESpresident,said.TESisheadquarteredinPhoenix,NewYork.DrillingprogramcompletesfirstyearDeepdrilling(over700feetperhole)intotheareasaroundtheproposeddamsitesdeterminesthetypesofrock,therockstruc-ture,itsstrength,andthestabilityofthebedrockonwhichdamswouldsitorthroughwhichatunnelwouldpass.Coresamplesarethenretrievedandstudiedbygeologists.R & MConsultantsisthesub-contractorconductingthedrill-ingprogramattheWatanaandDevilCanyonsites.KeystoupperSusitnaprehistorymaybefound"Beforeanyland-disturbanceactivitiesmaytakeplaceonfederalorstatelands,aninven-toryofculturalresourcesitesmustbemadeandrecommen-dationsdevelopedtolessenoravoidtheimpactoftheprojectonthem,"GeorgeSmith,anarchaeologistwiththeUniver-sityofAlaskaMuseuminFairbanks,notedlastsummer.Inotherwords,beforethecon-structionofahydroelectricpro-jectintheSusitnaRiverbasinmaybegin,theremustbeanarchaeologicalsurveytolocatesiteswithinthearea.Lastsummerarchaeologistsex-amined55samplingsites,deter-miningthat33ofthemwereofarchaeologicalimportance.Nextsummerthemuseumwillsendseveralcrewsintothefieldtosystematicallytestandanalyzeaportionofeachsiteinordertoevaluateitssignificanceandtothenmakerecommendationstominimizepossibleadverseeffects.Sitesthatmightbeadverselyim-pactedbyprojectconstructionwillbeexcavatedifthedecisiontoconstructthehydroelectricprojectismade.Duringtheextensivetestingscheduledfor1981,eachsitewillbedividedintoachecker-boardofsquaresonemeterinsize.ArtifactsfoundinthesampledsquareswillbecataloguedandbecomeapartoftheUniversityofAlaskaMuseum'sarcheologicalcollec-tion,wheretheywillbeavailablefordisplayandresearch,Althoughitmaybeprematuretoassessthesignificanceofarti-factsbeforetheiranalysisiscomplete,DixonandSmithareexcitedabouttheresultsofthesurvey.Theyhavediscoveredseveralsiteswhichwillhelpunravelthepoorlyunderstoodprehistoryofthisareaofthestateandwhichwillprovideim-portantinformationaboutthewaypeoplelivedintheupperSusitnathousandsofyearsago.",-',-~,UniversityofAlaska·FairbanksPhotographDr.E.JamesDixonandMr.GeorgeS.SmithoftheUniversityMuseumheadateamofscientistswhowillinvestigatetheareaforevidenceofhumanactivitywhich,theysay,mayextendback10,000years.ShownaboveareLesBaxterandGeorgeSmith.Theyarelookingatburiedanimalbonefragments. thesusltnahydrostudies/november19807Universitysurveyseekspubliccommentonrecreationpotential[l]II:I~1]:1,:r"j(I]:Ir""."..IftheSusitnaprojectisbuilt,theareassurroundingitmaybedevelopedforrecreationaluse.WhatkindofuseisthesubjectofaquestionnairebeingsentthisfalltoresidentsofAnchorage,Fairbanks,andthesmallercommunitiesalongtherailbelt(Talkeetna,Palmer,Wasilla,Willow).Morethan2,000people,randomlyselectedintheselocations,willbeaskedbytheUniversityofAlaska,Fairbanks,todescribethekindoffacilitiestheywouldliketoseedeveloped.Fromtheiranswers,Dr.AlanJubenvilleandMs.J.K.Feyhlattheuniversitywilldeterminewhichoffiveconceptplanspresentedtotherespondentsismostacceptable.InMay,theAlaskaPowerAuthoritytentativelywillholdcommunitymeetingsandrecreationwillbeoneofthetopics.Commentsfromboththemeetingsandfromtheques-tionnairewillbeanalyzedbytheUniversityofAlaskaandasecondsurveyonthesubjectwillfollow.AreportwillbemadetotheAlaskaPowerAuthorityin1981,eventhoughatthattimethequestionofwhethertodeveloptheprojectwillnothavebeendecided.Inbrief,peoplearebeingaskediftheywouldpreferminimumormaximumrecreationdevelop-ment(orsomethinginbetween)intheareasofthetwoproposeddamsites.Oneconceptplancallsforminimaldevelopmentandmanagement.Itassumesthatpublicaccessbyroadintothereservoirareasisrestrictedornotpermitted.Developmentwouldbelimitedtoavisitorin-formationcenterontheParksHighway.However,accessbyfloatplanewouldbepossibleonthereservoirsandaccessbycanoeandkayakontheupperriverswouldcontinueasitdoesatthepresent.Anotherplansuggeststhatac-cessbyroadtobothreservoirsispossible.Asaresult,primitivecampgroundsandsim-pleboatrampswouldbecon-structedatthedamsites.AtourboatserviceofthereservoirwouldbeofferedattheDevilCanyonsite.Athirdapproachcallsforexten-sivedevelopmentattheWatanadamsiteandonlyminimaldevelopmentattheDevilCanyonlocation.Simpleback-countrycampsiteswouldbeprovidedatselectedlocationsaroundWatana.Additionalser-viceswouldincludeaboatrampanddockingfacility,storeandservicestationandfloatplanetie-downs.Inafourthconceptplan,thedevelopmentwouldbeatreversedlocations,withhighly-developedfacilitiesprovidedattheDevilCanyonreservoiranddamsiteandonlyminimalfacilitiesatWatana.Inthefifthconceptplan,bothdamsiteswouldbeextensivelydevelopedtoincludecompletevisitorfacilitieswithback-countryboat-incampsitesbuiltatfivelocations.Facilities,inadditiontothosesuggestedasextensivedevelopmentinthethirdandfourthplans,wouldin-cludelodging,suchasmotels,andrestaurantswithminimalorfullservice."Thesurveyswearemakingaremorethoroughthananymadepreviouslyinregardtorecrea-tionplansassociatedwiththedevelopmentofahydroelectricproject,"Jubenvillesaid.Henotedtherewerenogoodplansatthefederalleveltoassisthim."Wearesurveyingthepeoplewholiveintheareawherethedamsareproposedtobebuiltaswellasthosewholiveintheurbanareasbothnorthandsouth,andwearesurveyingmorethanonce."~IIII",-Thegoalistoidentifyspeciesthatoccur,theirabundance,andwhathabitatsthebirdsutilize.Answerswillenablethescien·tiststopredicttheimpactthatconstructionoftheSusitnahydroelectricprojectwouldhaveontheexistingbirdlife.Kesselbeganafieldstudylastsummer,observingbirdsbysightandsound,andbyusingaerialsurveystosearchforevidenceofthelargernesters.Birdhabitatswillbevisitedonaregular basisthroughoutthemigrationandsummerperiodsoverthecourseofthetwo-yearperiod.Zip[[[[]]TwoyearstudyonbirdsunderwayAnumberofbirdspeciesusetheupperSusitnaRiverbasinduringthesummerandduringmigration.Theyincludelargebirdssuchaseagles,hawks,andswans,andanumberofsmallerspecies.Dr.BrinaKesseloftheUniversi-tyofAlaska,Fairbanks,ispro-jectleaderforagroupofscien-tistsstudyingbirdlifewithintheSusitnaRiverbasin.mammal,itsabundance,andhabits.Here,McDonaldbaitsamousetrapinanefforttodeter-minethekindsandnumbersofmicepresentinthedifferenthabitatsofthestudyarea.Sincemiceandothersmallmammalsarepartofthenatural"foodchain,"theirnumbersandcon-ditionareofcrucialimportanceindeterminingthehealthoftheprojectareaecosystem.StephenO.McDonald,Univer·sityofAlaskabiologist,isdirec-tingatwo-yearstudyofsmallmammalsthatlivewithintheprojectarea.Amongthesmallmammalsunderobservationatpresentaremice,shrews,redsquirrels,snowshoehares,arc-ticgroundsquirrels,por-cupines,andhoarymarmots.ThescientistssetupsamplinglinestoaidthemincollectingsuchinformationasthetypeofMiceimportantinfoodchain~-------,ThispublicinformationdocumentontheSusitnahydropowerprojectwasdevelopedbytheAlaskaPowerAuthorityIPublicParticipationOffice,NancyBlunck,Director.CommentsonthesubstanceofthisnewsletterandideasforfuturepublicationsshouldbeforwardedtothePublicParticipationOfficebywayofthefollowingcoupon.LastFirstInitialiiiIiiiii,IiiIiiIiiiiiIName,I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I IIMailingi I I Iiiiiiii I I Iiii, I , iAddressICityStateOJandmailto:AlaskaPowerAuthorityIPublicParticipationOffice333W.4th·Suite31.Anchorage,AK99501~THANKYOUFORYOURINTEREST......-------Ifyouwanttogetfuturenewsletters 8HowYOUcanbeinvolved...COMMUNITYMEETINGSareheldpriortoimportantstudydecisionsatfourlocationsthroughouttherailbeltarea.Meetingsreviewtheprogressofstudiesandprovidepeoplewithanopportunitytomakecom-mentsandhavequestionsanswered.WORKSHOPSareheldasneededinindividual railbeltcommunities.Workshopsarenarrowerinscopethancom-munitymeetingsandserveasaforumforpresentingin-depthin-formationonalimitednumberofsubjects.NEWSLETIERSarewidelydistributedtothepublicandreportfactualinformationaboutthestudies.Thisnewsletteristhefirstofseveral.Toreceivefuturenewsletters,clipandmailthecoupononpage7.TheACTIONSYSTEMisameansofsuggestingchangestotheplanofstudy.SendcommentstothePublicPar-ticipationOfficeforreviewandcommentbyAcresandPowerAuthoritystaff.thesusitnahydrostudies/november1980Communitymeetings(likethisoneinAnchorageinApril)willbeheldinspring1981.Theyareten-tativelyscheduledforFairbanks,Talkeetna,Kenai/Soldotna,andAnchorage.Anothersetofmeetingswillbeheldinspring1982,justpriortothedecisiononSusitna.Thestudywillbeginin1981,andAsaresultofthiscommentandwillbecoordinatedwithFranksimilarcommentsfromotherOrth'sworkontheidentificationresidentsoftheTalkeetnaarea,andanalysisofsocio-economictheAlasKaPowerAu!hor:it¥con-conditions.PublicconcernsbringchangesinstudyplanForaboutayear,individualsandagencieshavehadanumberofopportunitiestocommentontheadequacyoftheSusitnastudyplan.Theircommentshavesteadilyimprovedthedocument.Forinstance,the1980legislatureappropriatedanadditional$1,365,000toaddmoreresourcesandtakemoretimeinconductingtheenergyalternativesstudy.Anindepen-dentfirmwasalsohiredtoconductthestudy.Anotherexamplebeganwithaconcernexpressedlastspring.OnepersonfromTalkeetnaarticulatedaconcernforan-ticipatedimpactsonlifestylewiththefollowingcomment:"Whenthisplanspeaksofsocialorhumanimpacts,itcon-sistentlylabelsthis'socio-economic.'Whenitspeaksofcu.lturalimpact,itdoessointermsofarchaeologyandhistoricalinvestigation."Ifeelthatitisdesirableandtimelythattheplanrecognizetheexistenceofthatconceptwhichissocio-cultural,inacon-temporarysense.ThePlanofStudyisdeficientinthatitdoesnot."cludedthatanadditionallookshouldbemadeonthesubjecttowhichthecommentspoke:howwouldtheconstructionoftheSusitnaprojectaffectthecurrentlifestyleofthepeoplewholiveintheimmediatedam-sitevicinity?T.hisisthefirstofseveralne,ws/eUerspublishedbytheA/askaPowerAuthorityforcitizensattheraifbett.Thepurp0seistopre-senfbbjectlve1nformatlonon theprogressoftheSlJsitnahydroelectricfeasibilitystudiessothatreadersmaymaketheitownconclus}&'n$,basedonaccurate'Information.EricP~Yould\<:ExecutlveDirectorNancyalunck,DirectorofPublicParticipationAlaskaP'owerAt:lthority333W.4th·Suite3'\1Anchorage,Alaska99501phone(907)276~OO1TheslateofAlaskaIsanequalopportunityemploysr."NTHISISSUE:railbeltfacese.nergydecision,..'..'..page1socialand,~coraomicimpacts..'... . . . . ..........•...,page2susitnavicinitymap. . .'..'....,. . . ...'..'..~,'.. .". . . . . ...' .page2..energyalternatives$.tudy','..'....Co••••••••••••page3energyneedstodouble,. . . . .•.'page,3tunneloption........•............'..•...,<,page3earthquakestudiesexplained'.'•. . . ....page4wildlifeandwatel'flow,..";..page5susitnafishstudies..'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....page6potentia'recreation,birds,smallmammals. .•....•.......page7howtobe'involved. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...•.•............page8publiccommentbrings,change.........•",page8ALASKAPOWERAUTHORITYPUBLICPARTICIPATIONOFFICE333West4th-Suite31Anchorage,Alaska99501(907)276-0001BULKRATEU.S.POSTAGEPAIDPERMITNO.272ANCH.AK.99502